APPENDIX N—EXTERNAL DAMAGE TECHNICAL MODULE N.1 Scope NA1.1 Extemal damage can occur on most process plant equipment. The result is a gradual thinning of some materials, ‘or may result in stress corrosion cracking of other materials. Perhaps the most serious cases of extemal damage involve ‘corrosion under insulation (CUD. This form is especially haz: ardous because insulation can become wet or contaminated, accelerating the corrosion. Another reason that CUT is partic ularly serious is that itis very difficult to detect. In any case, the problem can be reduced or eliminated by proper inspec tion for corrosion, proper installation and maintenance of insulation, or by proper selection, application, and mainte- ‘nance of protective coatings. N1.2_ External damage is evaluated separately for carbon/ low alloy steels (subject to thinning) and austenitic stainless steels (subject to sttess corrosion cracking). Each of these is 280 ° o ° Table N-4—Adjustments for Coatings Quality ‘Coating Quality Medium High Date = Date Installed Date = Coating Date +5 Date = Coating Date +15 Table N-5—Adjustments for Pipe Support Penalty Penalty applies Penalty does not epply Rate = Ratex 20 Rate ate «1.0 Table N-6—Adjustments for Interface Penalty Penalty applies Penalty does not apply Rate =Ratex20 Rate = Rate x LO Table N-7—Inspection Effectiveness Inspection Eifectiveness Category A B Inspection ‘Visual inspection of > 95% ofthe exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge a required Visual inspection of > 60% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as require. ‘Visual inspection of > 30% ofthe exposed surface zea with follow by UT, RT or pit gauge as required Visual inspection of> 56% of the expose surface ara wih ollow-up by UT, RM or pil gauge as required, Visual inspection of < 5% of the exposed surface area wit follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required,Fis Baseo InsPecTiON BASE RESOURCE DOCUMENT NS nn Determine Corasion Temperature ate om Saoens iver Pipe Support No Yes Penalty SoA _ verte Tables NS ato ana N'6 Tas * "x Trikes Ly L._} Mode Dato “able N's Inspecton Determine Efeciveness fe stem ‘rae N7 a = aay, estes Number o inspects TwsF Figure N-2—Flowchart of External Corrosion for Carbon and Low Alloy Steels As a general rule, plants located in areas with high annual rainfall or warmer, marine locations are more prone to CUL than plants located in cooler, drier, mid-continent locations. Regardless of the climate, units located near cooling towers and steam vents are highly susceptible to CUI, as are units whose operating temperatures cycle through the dew point on 2 regular basis. External inspection of insulated systems should include a review of the integrity of the insulation sys- tem for conditions that could lead to CUT and for signs of ongoing CUL, ie. rust stains or bulging. However, external indicators of CUL are not always present. ‘Mitigation of CUI is accomplished through good insula- tion practices and proper coatings. Proper installation and ‘maintenance of insulation simply prevents an ingress of large quantities of water. In recent years, a coating system is frequently specified for equipment/piping operating in the CUI temperature range, and where CUI has been a problem. A high quality immersion grade coating, like those used in hot water tanks, is recommended. For guid- ance refer to NACE Publication 6H189. A good coating system should last a minimum of 15 years. If the equip: ment/piping is over 5 years old and does not have an acceptable protective coating, an inspection should be scheduled for the next opportunity. Certain areas and systems are more susceptible to CUI than ‘thers. Specific locations and/or systems, such as penetraNS APLSB: tions and visually damaged insulation areas, are highly sus- pect and should be considered during inspection program development. Examples of highly suspect areas include, but are not limited 10, the following: a. Penetrations 1. All penetrations or breaches in the insulation jacketing systems, such as deadlegs (vents, drains, and other similar items), hangers and other supports, valves and fitings, bolted-on pipe shoes, ladders, and platforms, 2. Steam tracer tubing penetrations. 3. Termination of insulation at flanges and other ‘components. », Damaged Insulation Areas 1. Damaged or missing insulation jacketing 2. Termination of insulation ina vertical pipe or piece of equipment 3. Caulking that has hardened, has separated, or is missing 4, Bulges, staining of the jacketing system or missing ‘bands (bulges may indicate corrosion product build-up) 5. Low points in systems that have a known breach in the insulation system, including low points in long unstip- ported piping runs 6. Carbon or low alloy steel flanges, bolting, and other ‘components under insulation in high alloy piping ‘The following are some examples of other suspect areas that should be considered when performing inspection for CUE ‘a. Areas exposed to mist overspray from cooling towers. by, Areas exposed to steam vents. cc. Areas exposed to deluge systems. d. Areas subject to process spills, ingress of moisture, or acid, ‘vapors. . Carbon steel systems, including those insulated for per ‘sonnel protection, operating between 10°F and 250°F. CUL is, pparicularly aggressive where operating temperatures cause frequent of continuous condensation and re-evaporation of atmospheric moisture, £, Carbon steel systems that normally operate in-service above 250°F but ae in intermittent service or are subjected 10 frequent outages. {2 Deadlegs and attachments that protrude from the insula tion and operate a a different temperature than the operating, ‘temperature of the active line, ie. insulation support rings, piping/platform attachments. h, Systems in which vibration has a tendency to inflict dam- age to insulation jacketing providing paths for water ingress. i. Steam traced systems experiencing tracing leaks, espe- cially at tubing fittings beneath the insulation. |. Systems with deteriorated coating andjor wrappings. k. Cold service equipment consistently operating below the atmospheric dewpoint. Inspection ports or plugs which are removed to permit thickness measurements on. insulated systems represent & ‘major contributor to possible leaks in insulated systems. Spe- cial attention should be paid to these locations. Promptly replacing and resealing of these plugs is imperative. N41 BASIC DATA ‘The data listed in Tables N-8 through N-15 are required for the CUI for carbon and low alloy stels. N42 ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Suspect areas include damaged insulation, penetrations, terminations, ete. 2. Inspection quality is high. 3. Surface preparation is sufficient to detect minimum wall for the NDE technique used to measure thickness, 4, Safety note: Exercise caution when preparing surfaces for inspection. N43. DETERMINATION OF CUI FOR CARBON AND LOW ALLOY STEELS TECHNICAL MODULE SUBFACTOR, ‘A flow chart for determining the technical module subac- tor for CUI for carbon and lov alloy steels is illustrated in Figures N-3A and N-3B. "Note: Due to the complexity of extemal corrosion andthe variability ‘of such corosion itis suggested that atest case be caleulated on ‘some knowin cases of extemal corrosion ta determine the best it for all variables. ‘Step 1. Determine the driver for external corrosion in the plant or the portion of the plant under study. Step 2. Determine the corrosion rate based on the driver and the operating temperature Step 3. Adjust the time period over which extemal corosion ‘may have occurred based on the type and age of the coating Step 4. Adjust the extemal corrosion rate based on complex- ity of the system (number of branches, supports, etc. that ‘may allow water to enter insulated coverings. Step 5. Adjust the extemal corrosion rate based on a qualita- tive assessment of the condition of the insulation and weather barrier (if any). Step 6. Adjust the extemal corrosion rate based on the pipe support penalty (if applicable). Step 7. Adjust the extemal corrosion rate based on the inte- face penalty (if applicable). Step 8. Use the adjusted corrosion rate and number and type Of inspections in the Thinning Module to determine the TMS,Fisk-Baseo INSPECTION Base RESOURCE DocuMent NT ‘Table N-8—Basic Data Required for CUI for Carbon and Low Alloy Steels Variable Comments Driver Rate, in mpy Date Inspection Elfeciveness Inspection Number Coating Qu Coating Date Complexity Goo. Insulation Condition? Pipe Suppor Penalty (YIN) Ierface Penalty (YPN) ‘The drivers for extemal corrosion under insulation. This canbe the weather ata location (e.g. marine), the potestal for cooling tower dif the use of sprinkler systems, or other conrbutes. (Corrosion rate fr extemal cortosion. Based on temperature, and driver (Table N-9), or wer inp ‘Determines the time (in years) to be sent to the Thinning Technical Module, Defaults to date installed. Can change based on date of coating. ime since las complete stripping and reinsuaton. ‘The effectiveness of the CUI inspection program. See Table N-15. ‘The number of CUI inspections. Relates tothe 1ype of couing applied under the insulation: (Table N-10) ‘None, medium, or high Suggestions: 'None—No coating or primer only Medium-—Single coat epony. High—Mali coat epoxy oF filled epoxy. Determines the age ofthe coating. ‘The umber of branches (Table N-11), ete: Below Average, Average, Above Average Determine whether the insulation cndition is good based on extemal visual inspection of jaketing condition. Good insulation will show no signs of damage (ie. punctured, ten oF missing Water proofing, and missing caulking) or standing water (ie. brown, green, or black stains). Take care ote of areas where water can enter ito the insulation system, such as inspection ports and areas ‘where the insulation is penetrated (i.e. nozzles, ing supports and clips). Horizontal areas also aco- ‘mulate Water. [rany damage is noted, default to No.” See Table N-12, 1f piping is supported directly on beams or other such configuration that does not allow for propet coating maintenance, extemal corrosion can be more severe, See Table N-13, 1 the piping hasan interface where it enters either soil or water, this area is subject o increased cor- rosin. See Table N-14. ‘Table N-9—Basio Assumptions and Methods for CUI for Carbon and Low Alloy Steels Diner Operating Temperature, "Marine / Cooling Tower Drift Area “Temperate ‘Arid /Dry F oy) (py) Gupy) Woriess ° 0 0 wo 3 3 Il 616 120 2 1 ° 121 10 200 10 2 201 10 250 2 1 ° >250 o ° o Table N-10—Adjustments for Coatings ‘Coating Quality Medium High Da ‘ating Date + 5Ne API 581 Table N-11—Adjustments for Complexity Below Average Avenge “Above Average Rate = Ratex0.75| Rate = Ratex 10 Rate = Rate x 125 Table N-12—Adjust ments for Insulation Condition Below Average ‘Average ‘Above Average Rate = Rate x L0 Rate = Rate x05 Rate = Rate x025 Table N-13—Adjustments for Pipe Support Penalty Penalty applies Penalty does not apply Rate = Rate x20 Rate= Ratex 10 ‘Table N-14—Adjustments for Interface Penalty Penalty applies Penalty does not apply Rate = Rate x20 Rato= Rate x 10 N.5 External SCC of Austenitic Stainless Steels Mitigation of extemal CL-SCC is best accomplished by preventing chloride accumplation on the stainless steel sur- face. On uninsulated surfaces, C1 containing fluids, mists, or solids should be prevented from contacting the surface, Mark- crs, dyes, tape, etc. used on stainless steels should be certified suitable for such application. In rare cases, uninsulated stain- less steels could be protected externally by a coating N51 BASIC DATA ‘The data listed in Table N-16 are required forthe external SCC of Austenitic Steels Technical Module. N.5.2 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODS ‘See Tables N-17 through N-19. N53 DETERMINATION OF TECHNICAL MODULE SUBFACTOR ‘See Figure N-4 for a flow chart on determining the techni ‘cal module subfactor for external CL-SCC of austenitic stain less steels, Note: Dve tothe complexity of extemal corrosion and the variability of such corrosion itis suggested that a test case be calculated on some known cases of extemal corrosion to determine the best fit for all variables, Step 1. Determine the driver for extemal corrosion in the plant or the portion of the plant under study. Step 2. Determine the susceptibility based on the driver and the operating temperature. Step 3. Adjustment for existing cracking: If SCC has been detected in this equipment, then the susceptibility is consid- ered high. ‘Step 4. The severity index for CI-SCC is outlined in Table N20. ‘Step 5, Determine the time period over which extemal cor- rosion may have occurred based on the time since last inspection (if inspected), or type and age of the coating. Step 6. It is assumed that the likelihood for cracking would 1erease with time since the last inspection as a result of increased exposure to upset conditions and other non-nor- ‘mal conditions. Therefore, the TMSF should be increased by the following relationship: ‘Step 7. Final TMSF for cracking)! MSF x (years since last inspet ‘Step 8 As an example, a piece of equipment/piping with a "TMSF of 10 would increase to a Final TMSF of 58 in five ‘years without any inspection and would increase further to 125 afer ten years without inspection.Fisk BASED INSPECTION BASE RESOURCE DOCUMENT No Table N-15—CUI for Carbon and Low Alloy Steels Inspection Categories Inspection Effectiveness Category Insulation Removed Insulation Not Removed ‘A+ Remove 295% of the insulation Forte total surface area: AND + >95% profile or real-time radiography. *+ visual inspection ofthe exposed surface area with follow-up by UT. RT or pit gauge as required. B Forte total surface area: For the total surface area: ‘+ 95% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation; + > 95% extemal visual inspection; AND AND ‘+ remove >60% of total surface area of insulation including sus- + follow-up with profile or realtime radiography of pect areas: > 60% of total surface area of insulation including AND ‘suspect areas. ‘+ Visual inspection of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT RT or pit gauge as required. © Forte total surface area For the total surface area: ‘+ > 95%: extemal visual inspection prior o removal of insulation; + >95% external visual inspection; AND AND + remove > fs of toil surface area of insulation including sus- + follow-up with profile or real time radiography of pect areas: > 30% of total surface area of insulation including AND ‘suspect areas. *+ visual inspection of the exposed surface area with follow-up by LUT.RT or pit gauge as required. D+ >95% external visual inspection prior fo removal of insulation; Ror the total surface area: ‘AND + 056 external visual inspection; + remove > 5% of total surface area of insulation including sus AND pect areas, + follow-up with profile or rea time radiography of AND . 5% of toal surface area of insulation including ‘+ visual inspection ofthe exposed surface area with follow-up by suspect areas UT, RT or pit gauge as required, E+ 5% insolation emoval ad inspection 'No inspection or infective inspection technique or ‘OR << 95% visual inspection. ‘+ no inspection or ineffective inspection technique. Table N-16—Basic Data Required for External SCC of Austenitic Stainless Steels Variable ‘Comments Driver ‘The crivers for extemal corrosion. Tis can be the weather ata location (eg. marine), the potential for cuoling ower dri, the we of sprinkler systems, or other cOnEDULOS. Crack Severity Crack severity for extemal corosion cracking module ‘Based on susceptibility (temperature, and weather, see Table N-17) Date ‘Determines the time (years) 0 be wsed for calculation of the TMSF. Defaults to date installed. Can change based on date of coating, date of lst inspection. Inspection Effectiveness ‘The effectiveness of the extemal corosion inspection program. See Table N-19. Inspection Number Te numberof extemal corrosion inspections. Inspection Date The dat ofthe last external corrosion inspections. Coating Quality Relates to the typeof coating applied under the insulation None, medium, orhigh. See Table N-18, Coating Date Detesmines the age of the coating “Mast be supplied unless coating quality is none,N10 API Sat « Operating Determine Temperature Corrosion Rate ‘rom Table NS | Dever Pipe Suppor or SoilAir Tntertace Penalty? Yes Tables N13 Rate 2x Sd NG Rate 1%. Determine Complexity Factor Table N11 Rate 1.25x ate 0.75x Rate 1X Below Determine Above Average Insulation Average Condition Table N12 ate 1X ‘Average Rate 0.50 Rate 0.25x To Figure N-3B. Figure N-3A—Flowchart of CUI for Carbon and Low Alloy SteelsFick-Baseo INSPECTION Base RESOURCE DocuMeNT Nat From Figure N-3A Coating Quality TwsF Date exret Modiies Date installed Figure N-3B—Flowchart of CUI for Carbon and Low Alloy Steels Table N-17—SCC Susceptibility of Austenitic Stainless Steels, Driver ‘Operating Temperature, Marine /Cooling| °F Tower Drift Area “Temperate Arid = 180 ‘None ‘None None 140 10200 Medium Low None 200 1 300 Low Low None > 300 None None None Table N-18—Adjust ments for Coatings Coating Quality ‘None Medium High ‘Date = Dac installed or date of since last Date = Coating Date + Sor date of last ‘Date = Coating Date + 15 or date of last inspection (i the equipment has been inspection (if the equipment has been inspection (ifthe equipment has been inspected), Inspected). inspected) Table N-19—External SCC of Austenitic Stainless Steel Inspection Categories Tnspecion aTeciveness Category Irusive Inspection a For he total surface arear + 295% dye penetrant or eddy curent est with UT follow-up of relevant indications. B For the total surface are: + 60% dye penetrant or eddy curen testing with UT follow-up of al relevant indications. c For the total surface are: + 530% dye penetrant or eddy curent esting with UT follow-up ofall relevant indications, D For the tol surface area: + Ssh dye penewrant or eddy current testing with UT follow-up ofall relevant indications, E Less than “D” eflectiveness or no inspection or ineffective inspection technique used.ne API S81 +} Sass Determine SCC rare cea, $f ow a a ne =e aaa os ames fees | Figure N-4—Flowchart of External SCC for Austenitic Stainless Steals Table N-20—Severity Index for CLSCC Exiemal corosion for stainless Soscepibiliy steels (CISCO) High 0 Mediu 0 Low 1 N.6 External CUI SCC for Austenitic Stainless Steels Insulation can be a source of chlorides and/or cause the retention of water and chloride concentrating under the insu- lation, CSCC can be caused by the spray from sea water and cooling water towers carried by the prevailing winds. The spray soaks the insulation over the austenitic stainless steel ‘equipmentpiping, the chloride concentrates by evaporation, and cracking occurs in the areas with residual stresses (€.2. weld and bends). Other cases of cracking under insulation have resulted from water dripping on insulated pipe and Teaching chlorides from insulation. Mitigation of CI-SCC under insulation is best accom: plished by preventing chloride accumulation on the stain- less steel surface. This is best accomplished by first ‘maintaining the integrity of the insulation. Second, by pre~ venting chloride ions from contacting the stainless steel surface with a protective coating. An immersion grade coating suitable for stainless steel is the most practical and proven method of protection. However, wrapping of the stainless steel with aluminum foil which serves as both a barrier coating and a cathodic protection anode has also proven to be effective. 6.1 BASIC DATA ‘The data listed in Table N-21 are required for the external (CUISCC for austenitic stainless steels in technical module. N6.2 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODS, ‘See Tables N-22 through N-27, 6.3. DETERMINATION OF TECHNICAL MODULE SUBFACTOR ‘A flow chart for determining the technical module subfac- tor for extemal CUI SCC for austenitic stainless steels is illustrated in Figures N-SA and N-SB.Fisk-BASED INSPECTION BASE RESOURCE DOCUMENT naa Table N-21—Basic Data Required for External CU! SCC for Austenitic Stainless Steels Varable ‘Comments Dever The drivers for extemal corrosion, Complexity ‘The numberof branches, et: Below Average, Average, Above Average, See Table N ‘This can be the weather ata location (¢-, marine), the potential for cooling tower di, the use ‘of sprinkler systems, or other contributors, Crack Severity ‘Crack severity fr extemal corrosion cracking module. Based on susceptibility (temperature, and weather, see Table N-22). Date Determines the time (years) o be used fr calculation ofthe TMSE Defaults to date installed. Can change based on date of coating, date of last inspection, Inspection Effectiveness ‘The effectiveness of the external corosin inspection program, Inspection Number “The number of extemal corrosion inspections. Inspection Date ‘The date ofthe last external corrosion under insulation inspections. Coating Quality Relates tothe type of coating applied under the insulation: "None, medium, or high. See Table N-23 Coating Age The age of the coating ‘Most be supplied unless coating quality i none. Is the Condition of ‘Good insulation will show “No Signs” of éamage (Le. punctured, tom or missing water proofing, and missing Insulation System Good!? caulking) or standing water (i. bowa, green or back sans). Take earful note of areas where water can enter wn nto the insulation system, such as inspection ports and areas where the insulation is penetrated (ie. nozzles, ring supports and clips), Horizontal area also accumulate water Any damage noted—default “No”. See Table N-28. 24, Is insulation CI “Free”? (Y/N) Determine if he insulation is Cl fee. Ir unknown assume Clis present. See Table N-26, ‘Table N-22—For SCC Susceptibility of Austenitic Stainless Steels, (Operating Temperature, F Marine / Cooling Tower Da ‘Aad a None None 14010200 High Low 200 10 300 Medium None > 300 None None Table N-23—Adjustments for Coatings Coating Quality None Meum igh Date = Date installed or date of since last Date = Coating Date + Sor dato oflast Date = Coating Date + 15 or date of ast inypecton Gdn equipment has heen Inspection ire equipment’ hasbeen inspection i the equipment has bees inspected). inspected. inspected Table N-24—Adjustments for Complexity Below Average ‘Average “Above Average Decrease Susceptibility one level No change io Suseepbiliy: Tnerease Suscepibiity one level (2 Medium Low) (2, Medium to High) Table N-25—Adjustments for Insulation Condition Below Average heres ‘Above Avene Therease Suscepbiity one level No change to Suseepbiiy. Decrease Suscepibiliy one level (eg. Low to Medium) (eg. High wo Medium)API se1 Table N-26—Adjustments for Chloride Free insulation horde Free ‘Conan Chlorides Decrease Susceptibility one level (e.g. Medium to Low) No change to Susceptibility. Table N-27—CUI for Stainless Steels Inspection Categories, Inspection Elfeciveness Category Irsrasve Inspection [Nomintrusve Inspection ‘A Pordhe wl surface area: 'No inspection techniques yet avulable meet requirements ‘+ > 95% dye penetra or eddy curent test with UT oa" follow-up of relevant indications. B Forte total surface ares: Fr the woul surface area: + > 606% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with “* > 95% automated or manval ultrasonic seanning UT follow-up of all elevant indications. oR + AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications © For the total surface area: For te total surface are: + > 306 dye penetrant or eddy current testing with * 674 aulomated or manual ullrasonic scanning {UT follow-up ofall relevant indications. D Forte total surface area: For the total surface area ‘> 5% dye penetrant or eddy curtent testing with UT ‘> 30% automated or manual ultrasonic scanning follow-up ofall elevant nications ‘OR + > 60% radiographic test E —_Lessthan“D” effectiveness or no inspection orineffee- Less than “D” effectiveness or no inspection or ineffective tive inspection technique used Note: Dee othe complexity of extemal cormsion and the variability ‘of such corosion itis suggested that a tet eae be calculated on ‘some known cases of exteral corrosion to determine the bes fit for all arabes 1. Determine the driver for external corto the portion of the plant under study. inthe plant or 2. Determine the susceptibility based on the driver and the ‘operating temperature. 3. Adjustment for existing cracking: If SCC has been ‘detected in this equipment, then the susceptibility is consid- ered high. 4, The severity index for Cl-SCC is outlined in Table N-20. ‘Step 5. Determine the time period over which extemal cor- rosion may have occurred based on the time since last inspection (if inspected), or type and age of the coating. ‘Step 6. Adjust the susceptibility based on complexity of the system (number of branches, supports, etc. that may allow ‘water to enter insulated coverings. ‘inspection technique used Step 7. Adjust the susceptibility based on a qualitative assessment of the condition of the insulation and weather barter (if any). Step 8. Use the adjusted susceptibility and number and type Cf inspections in the SCC Module (see Table M-10) to determine the TMSF. ‘Step 9. It is assumed that the likelihood for cracking would increase with time since the last inspection ay a result of increased exposure to upset conditions and other non-nor- ‘mal conditions. Therefore, the TMSF should be increased by the following relationship: Step 10. Final TMS! for cracking)!! "TMSF x (years since last inspection Step 11. As an example, a piece of equipment/piping with a ‘TMSF of 10 would increase to a Final TMSF of 58 in five, years without any inspection and would increase further to 125 after ten years without inspection,Fisk Bast INSPECTION BASE RESOURCE DOCUMENT Nas Le Operating Determine Temperature sce Susceptiity Teen22 |, Diver Pipe Suppor or SollAir Yes No Rate 2x ate 1% Determine Compiexty Factor "Table N28 Rate 0.78% Rate 1.25% Rate 1X Determine inulaton Condition ate 1x Fate 0.25x. Fate 0.50X +f To Figure N-58 Figure N-5A—Flowchart of External CUI SCC for Austenitic Stainless SteelsAPI s81 Continued trom Figure N-SA Insulation Type “abe noe “ciness | —o ae “able N28 efecioness [=| Fraltse “ao N27 |. [ coating avaity - | “Table N23. Date installed Inepretore Figure N-58—Flowchart of External CUI SCC for Austenitic Stainless SteelsSerre cee TAP! Member 2000 Tag ay (teat Invoice To = LU Caceres Shi ‘Ship Yo = (UPS ater 20. Box ong: onpany Sane. amu sais sais or save or Staton ae cont a county Coxon Darin eon Case Dane gone o fax: faut ‘tonne OD mi ome O Payment Enclosed $C Pleo Bilt Mo 1 Payment By Charge Recount: Po fase ast american Express Carer Scout No count i. ‘State Sates Tax ~ Te ion hon itorh med wac mm paonw ald beluga eT De te ME MMA AE ‘ame (st 4ppens.on Cant MCR HL SH Wan Pree Salina | ee $$ _ rie npr cg Wp a xn at od platen Dae tne apf cues cmp one Sate erg Nee sve ‘API 510, Prossure Vessel Inspection Code: Maintenance Insp., Rating, Repair, & Alteration 52104 RP 521, Guide for Pressure-Relieving and $120.00 Depressuring Systems (¢57002 | API 570, Piping Inspection Code: Insp., Repair, $75.00 Alteration, & Rerating of In-Service Piping Systems (657901 RP 579, Fitness-ForService ‘$595.00 65302 | STD 653, Tank Inspeotion, Repair, Alteration and ‘$125.00 Reconstruction K75000 RP 750, Management of Process Hazards $42.00 94105 11, Steels for Hydrogen Service at Elevated $65.00 Temperatures and Pressures ‘Shipping ona Honatng— secs iva eisai des aca one Sale tate sety nal US aan perro ‘le cunepe rwoig nte sogona State Sales Tax (ec ctine) Rs Stiping Gharge = 510 ala cae ving Fx aur sane as Sens © Uist ay $10 pst cal shiping (13m). UFS Rush Shipping Charge (cel) Sig pista) Orders Rush Butk 9 ems $10, Over 9 ens aid exch forever) atonal tm, NOTE: Sawing Shipping ana Handling (el) (fori ors cae be usd ott Fe aroma ‘i Returns Potiey - Onl julio rnin damage coin oa sult of hp or posing ‘Total fn US. Dols) eros, untae face, mayb etm for replacement wii 45 ds ol eating invie dite. A cy ofthe nitaing ine must aerpany cach etm. ater which has nr eno. paca on Standing Onder fr ture eins of hie damage in shipment nor ship in ero equi prior anorzaton and may be suet 0 2 Spin and [pubtestion places check man nth space promod. hhnlighar All eturs must be shipped prepaid using third cass postage I returns are de to processing or shipping errors, API will refnd the third class postage ‘Pricing and aatuniy sect to ehange mio nto, ‘Mail Ones: American Petroleum te, Order Desk, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005-4070, USA Fax Onder: 202-962-4776 Phone Onder: 202-682-8375, ‘To better serve you, please refer to this code when ordering: [1] [A] [4] [8] [0] [9] [0] [2] [0] [0]‘The American Petroleum Institute provides additional resources and programs to industry which are based on API Standards. For more information, contact: © Training/Workshops Ph; 202-682-8490 Fax: 202-962-4797 © Inspector Certification Programs Ph: 202-682-8161 Fax: 202-962-4739 American Petroleum Institute Ph: 202-682-8574 Quality Registrar Fax: 202-682-8070 © Monogram Licensing Program Ph: 202-962-4791 Fax: 202-682-8070 © Engine Oil Licensing and Ph: 202-682-8233 Certification System Fax: 202-962-4739 To obtain a free copy of the API Publications, Programs, and Services Catalog, call 202-682-8375 or fax your request to 202-962-4776. Or see the online interactive version of the catalog on our web site at www.api.org/cat. American ) Petroleum Institute Helping You Get The Job Done Right: 012100‘Additional copies available trom AP! Publications and Distribution (202) 682-8375 Information about AP! Publications, Programs and Services is available on the World Wide Web at: htpi/www.api.org Petroleum —_ Washington, D.C. 20005-4070 Institute 202-682-8000 L American 1220 L Street, Northwest ‘Order No. C581001