Saep 343 PDF

Engineering Procedure
SAEP-343 7 July 2015

Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards

Table of Contents
1 Scope................................................................... 2
2 Purpose................................................................ 2
3 Conflicts and Deviations....................................... 2
4 Applicable Documents.......................................... 3
5 Definitions and Abbreviations............................... 5
6 Instructions......................................................... 12
7 Responsibilities................................................... 22
Appendix 1 - Decision Tree for Performing RBI........ 27

Appendix 2 - RBI RASCI Chart................................. 28
Appendix 3 - RBI Process for
In-House Assessment.......................... 29
Appendix 4 - RBI Process for Service Providers....... 30
Appendix 5 - RBI Workflow for Tracking
Recommendations............................... 31
Appendix 6 - Corrosion Loop
Development Workflow........................ 32
Appendix 7 - RBI Task List........................................ 33
Appendix 8 - Description of RBI Tasks..................... 34
Appendix 9 - Sources of Site Specific
Data and Information........................... 46
Appendix 10 - Inspection Effectiveness Tables........ 48
Appendix 11 - RBI Validation Form........................... 68
Appendix 12 - RBI Validation Form Instructions....... 69
Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity................... 70
Index......................................................................... 72
Previous Issue: 21 August 2013 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018

Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772
Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.

Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343
Issue Date: 7 July 2015
Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
1 Scope
1.1 This engineering procedure provides minimum requirements for conducting risk
based inspection assessments on stationary equipment in all existing and planned
Saudi Aramco facilities based on API RP 580.
1.2 This procedure also provides guidelines to determine the type of RBI assessment
and process units that shall be covered by RBI assessment.
1.3 This procedure outlines when initial and evergreen RBI assessment shall be
conducted.
1.4 This SAEP applies to

1.2.1 In-plant static equipment
1.2.2 Piping
1.2.3 Storage tanks
1.2.4 Pressure relieving devices
1.2.5 Off-Plot Piping
1.2.6 Offshore facilities
2 Purpose
2.1 To assure that Saudi Aramco systematic evaluation process for Risk Based
Inspection (RBI) assessment is well defined.
2.2 Roles and responsibilities for RBI assessment activities in Saudi Aramco are
outlined and auditable.
2.3 RBI assessment recommendations and implementation are uniformly

documented for the purpose of corporate tracking and auditing.
2.4 Adequate resources are provided for RBI assessment.
2.5 Process and deliverables when utilizing Service Providers to perform RBI
assessment is clearly defined.
3 Conflicts and Deviations
3.1 Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco
Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Page 2 of 73
(SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi

Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms
shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of
Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2 Direct all requests for deviations from this Procedure in writing in accordance
with SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department
of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
4 Applicable Documents
Except as modified by this SAEP, applicable requirements in the latest issues of the
following industry Codes, Standards, and Practices shall be considered an integral part
of this procedure.
4.1 Saudi Aramco Documents
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures

SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-43 Corrosion Management Program Deployment for
Existing facilities
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory
Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-308 Plant Inspection Unit Assessments
SAEP-325 Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-372 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards

SAES-A-135 Establishment of On Stream Inspection
SAES-L-105 Piping Material Specifications
SAES-L-133 Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines,
Piping and Process Equipment
SAES-L-310 Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practice

SABP-A-033 Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual
Page 3 of 73
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report

SAER-5437 Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Loss Prevention Department

Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide
4.2 Industry Codes and Standards
American Petroleum Institute

API STD 510 Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-Service
Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
API STD 570 Piping Inspection Code - Inspection, Repair,
Alteration, & Rerating of In-service Piping Systems
API RP 571 Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in
the Refining Industry
API RP 580 Risk-Based Inspection
API RP 581 Risk-Based Inspection Technology
API RP 584 Integrity Operating Windows
API STD 653 Tank Inspection Repair, Alteration, and
Reconstruction
API RP 750 Management of Process Hazards
API RP 752 Management of Hazards Associated with Location
of Process Plant Buildings
API RP 1160 Managing System Integrity for Hazardous Liquid
Pipelines
American Society of Mechanical Engineers

ASME SEC V Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC VIII Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.3 Process Piping
ASME B31.4 Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid
Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8 Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems,
2012 Edition
ASME B31.8S Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipelines
Page 4 of 73
American Society of Testing Materials
ASTM G46 Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting

Corrosion
National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors

NB-23 National Board Inspection Code
U. S. Code of Federal Regulations

OSHA 29 CFR 1910.119 Process Safety Management
5 Definitions and Abbreviations
5.1 Definitions
Asset Integrity Management System: Modern management tool to ensure that

assets are safely performing their optimum planned functions over their life cycle
starting from the design phase up to the decommissioning phase. Thus, AIMS is a
proactive risk based holistic and integrated management system covering its entire
life cycle for effective implementation of coherent work processes ensuring
combined mechanical, functional and operational integrities.
Components: Parts that make up a piece of equipment or equipment item.

For example a pressure boundary may consist of components (pipe, elbows,
nipples, heads, shells, nozzles, stiffening rings, skirts, supports, etc.) that are
bolted or welded into assembles to make up equipment items.
Comprehensive OSI Review: Detailed review of On-stream Inspection (OSI)

program per SAEP-1135.
Consequence: Outcome from an event. There may be one or more consequences

from an event. Consequences may be positive or negative. However, for the
purpose of this document consequence will mean the negative outcome of any
event. Consequences may be expressed qualitatively or quantitatively.
Corrosion Loop: Section of a plant defined mainly on the basis of similar

process conditions, materials of construction, or similar active/potential damage
or fouling mechanisms.
Corrosion Management Program (CMP): A Risk-based, structured and

integrated program aimed at proactively preventing corrosion in operating
facilities without compromise to safety and the environment.
Damage Mechanism: A process that induces micro and/or macro material

changes over time that is harmful to the material condition or mechanical properties.
Page 5 of 73
Damage mechanisms are usually incremental, cumulative, and, in some instances,

unrecoverable. Common damage mechanisms include corrosion, stress corrosion
cracking, creep, erosion, fatigue, fracture, and thermal aging.
Deterioration: The reduction in a material's ability to perform its intended

purpose. This can be caused by various deterioration mechanisms (e.g., thinning,
cracking, mechanical). Damage or degradation may be used in place of
deterioration.
Degradation Mechanism: See Damage Mechanism.
Equipment: An individual item that is part of a system. Examples include

pressure vessels, relief devises, piping, boilers and heaters.
ES RBI Team: RBI team that includes members from Engineering Services led
by Inspection Department, performing QA/QC of RBI process in Saudi Aramco.
Event: Occurrence of a particular set of circumstances. The event can be

singular or multiple. The probability associated with the event can be estimated
for a given period of time.
Evergreening: Is the process of updating the initial RBI assessment due to

changes affecting the RBI results, e.g., additional inspections, process or
mechanical changes.
External Event: An event beyond the direct or indirect control of management

and staff at the facility. External events may result from forces of nature, acts of
God or sabotage, or such events as neighboring fires or explosions, neighboring
hazardous material releases, electrical power failures, tornadoes, lightening,
earthquakes, and intrusions of external transportation vehicles, such as aircraft,
ships, trains, trucks, or automobiles.
Failure: Termination of the ability of a system, structure, or component to

perform its required function. Failures may be unannounced and undetected until
the next inspection (unannounced failure), or they may be announced and detected
by any number of methods at the instance of occurrence (announced failure).
Failure Mode: The manner of failure. For Risk-Based Inspection, the failure of
concern is loss of containment of pressurized equipment items. Some examples
of failure modes are pinhole, crack and rupture.
Hazard: A physical condition or a release of a hazardous material that could

result from component failure and result in human injury or death, loss or damage,
or environmental degradation. The hazard is the source of harm. Components
that are used to transport, store, or process a hazardous material can be a source of
a hazard. Human error and external events may also create a hazard.
Page 6 of 73
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Assessment as per OSHA 29 CFR 1910.119

and SAER-5437: A HAZOP assessment is a Process Hazard Analysis (PHA)
form of failure mode and failure effect analysis. HAZOP studies, which were
originally developed for the process industry, use systematic techniques to
identify hazards and operability issues throughout an entire facility. They are
particularly useful in identifying latent hazards designed into facilities due to lack
of information, or introduced into existing facilities due to changes in process
conditions or operating procedures. The basic objectives of the techniques are:
 To systematically review every part of the facility or process to discover
how deviations from the intention of the design can occur; and
 To decide whether these deviations can lead to hazards or operability issues.
Initial RBI Assessment: The first comprehensive RBI assessment performed on

any asset or group of assets (Plant or Unit).
In-plant piping: Piping that is inside the boundary limits of the plant and is
generally, but not necessarily, designed to ASME B31.3 code except in area(s)
set aside for piping within other code or government regulations.
Inspection Engineer: For the purpose of this document an Inspection Engineer

can refer to Inspector, Sr. Inspector or Field Supervisor that works in the Plant
Inspection Unit.
Inspection Effectiveness: Is qualitatively evaluated by assigning the inspection

methods to one of five descriptive categories ranging from Highly Effective to
Ineffective.
Inspection Plan: based on risk analysis refers to the output of the planning
process of determining what to inspect (which equipment), how to inspect
(technique), the extent of inspection (coverage) and when to inspect the
equipment. The inspection plan should detail the unmitigated risk related to the
current operation. For risks considered unacceptable, the plan should contain
the mitigation actions that are recommended to reduce the unmitigated risk to
acceptable levels. It is recognized that some risks cannot be adequately
managed by inspection alone and other mitigation actions make be required in
such circumstances.
Inventory Group: Inventory of attached equipment that can realistically

contribute fluid mass to a leaking equipment item.
Integrity Operating Window: Established limits for process variables that can
affect the integrity of the equipment and plant if the process/operating variables
deviate from the established limits beyond a predetermined amount of time.
Integrity Operating Window may be categorized as Safety IOW, Operational
Page 7 of 73
IOW or Integrity IOW. Also referred to as Plant Integrity Window (PIW)#;

Changes in valid PIW's could be used for CMP in addition to RBI.
Management of Change: is a procedural system of control supported by

appropriate documentation to ensure that safeguards are in place to eliminate the
possibility of hazard introduction as a result of changes, other than replacement in
kind to equipment, fluid composition, operations, process parameters, control
parameters, trip and alarm set points as described in Loss Prevention Department
Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide and API RP 750.
In RBI context it is a procedure supported by documentation to ensure that all

key parameters, identified and used as a basis for the RBI assessment, are
controlled to be within the assessment defined ranges. It also specifies that any
change to those parameters requires a review by the appropriate expertise for
impact on equipment deterioration or consequences.
The review of the MOC shall be performed by a Saudi Aramco employee.

All MOC’s shall be reviewed and signed by the RBI facilitator in the inspection
unit.
Mitigation: Limitation of any negative consequences of a particular event.
Mechanical Integrity: the ability of the assets to withstand the design loads for
optimum operation and maintenance of the assets at best condition throughout
its life cycle.
Off-plot Piping: Piping that is outside the boundary limits of the plant and is
generally, but not necessarily, designed to ASME B31.4/B31.8 code except in
area(s) set aside for piping within other code or government regulations.
On-Stream Inspection (OSI): The use of any number of nondestructive testing

procedures to establish the suitability of equipment for continued operation.
The equipment may, or may not, be in operation while the inspection is performed.
Operational Cycle: An operational cycle is defined as the initiation and

establishment of new conditions followed by a return to the conditions that
prevailed at the beginning of the cycle. Three types of operational cycles are
considered: the startup-shutdown cycle, defined as any cycle that has
atmospheric temperature and/or pressure as one of its extremes and normal
operating conditions as its other extreme; the initiation of, and recovery from,
any emergency or upset condition that must be considered in the design; and the
normal operating cycle, defined as any cycle between startup and shutdown that
is required for the vessel to perform its intended purpose.
Page 8 of 73
Probability (Likelihood): The chance that a given event will occur.

The mathematical definition of a probability is “a real number in the scale 0 to 1
attached to a random event.” Probability can be related to a long-run relative
frequency of occurrence or to a degree of belief that an event will occur. For a
high degree of belief, the probability is near 1. Frequency rather than
probability may be used in describing risk.
Proponent: The customer who can undertake the assessment or for whom the
assessment is being undertaken by another party.
QA/QC: The combination of quality assurance, the process or set of

processes used to ensure the quality of a product or service, and quality control,
the process of validating products and services to specific requirements.
(Quality Assurance is process oriented focusing on defect prevention, while
quality control is product oriented and focuses on defect identification.)
Qualitative Risk Analysis (Assessment): Methods that use engineering

judgment and experience as the bases for the analysis of probabilities and
consequences of failure. The results of qualitative risk analyses are dependent on
the background and expertise of the analysts and the objectives of the analysis.
Quantitative Risk Assessment: An assessment that:

 Identifies and delineates the combinations of events that, if they occur, will
lead to a severe accident (e.g., major explosion) or any other undesired event.
 Estimates the frequency of occurrence for each combination, and
 Estimates the consequences.
 Estimates the risk of interest, which can be based on production loss, damage
to the facility, population, environment or a combination of risk types.
The quantitative risk assessment integrates into a uniform methodology the relevant
information about facility design, operating practices, operating history, component
reliability, human actions, the physical progression of accidents, and potential
environmental and health effects, usually in as realistic a manner as possible.
Quantitative risk assessment uses logic models depicting combinations of events

that could result in severe accidents and physical models depicting the
progression of accidents and the transport of a hazardous material to the
environment. The models are evaluated probabilistically to provide both
qualitative and quantitative insights about the level of risk and to identify the
design site or operational characteristics that are the most important to risk.
RASCI: A tool used to define roles and responsibilities during a process.
Page 9 of 73
RBI Team: A team of people with the requisite skills and background in RBI
to conduct an effective assessment. The team is made up of Plant Proponent
personnel and/or Service Provider personnel.
RBI Facilitator: A member of an RBI assessment team with the responsibility

of providing assistance, guidance or supervision to team members and to
facilitate the data collection and entry into the RBI software. This shall be a
Saudi Aramco proponent employee for in-house RBI assessment and
combination of SA employee and Service Provider for contracted RBI
assessment.
Risk: The combination of the probability of an event and its consequence.
Risk Analysis: Systematic use of information to identify sources and to

estimate the risk. Risk analysis provides a basis for risk evaluation, risk
mitigation and risk acceptance. Information can include historical data,
theoretical analysis, informed opinions, and concerns of stakeholders.
Risk Assessment: Overall process of risk analysis and risk evaluation, which
consists of deciding whether or not the risk is tolerable.
Risk Evaluation: Process used to compare the estimated risk against given risk
criteria to determine the significance of the risk. Risk evaluation may be used to
assist in the acceptance or mitigation decision.
Risk-Based Inspection (RBI): A risk assessment and management process that

is focused on loss of containment of pressurized equipment in processing
facilities, due to material deterioration. These risks are managed primarily
through equipment inspection.
Risk Management: Coordinated activities to direct and control an organization

with regard to risk. Risk management typically includes risk assessment, risk
mitigation, risk acceptance, and risk communication.
Risk Mitigation: Process of selection and implementation of measures to modify

risk. The term risk mitigation is sometimes used for measures themselves.
RBI Software Practitioner: An individual who has experience using the RBI
software (minimum of two assessments) and the knowledge to perform the
analysis required to develop an inspection plan based on the results.
Risk Tolerance: A decision to tolerate a risk. Risk acceptance depends on risk

criteria.
Semi-Quantitative Risk Analysis (Assessment): Refer to API 580.
Page 10 of 73
Source: Thing or activity with a potential for consequence. Source in a safety

context is a hazard.
Team Leader: Specialist or Engineer assigned to coordinate and manage all

activities involved in a RBI assessment. This could be a Saudi Aramco
employee or Service Provider.
Unmitigated Risk: The risks for which mitigation activities have yet to be
performed.
5.2 Abbreviations
API American Petroleum Institute
AIMS Asset Integrity Management System
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
COF Consequence of Failure
CML Condition Monitoring Location
CMP Corrosion Management Program
CSD Consulting Services Department (Dhahran)
CUI Corrosion under Insulation
EIS Equipment Inspection Schedule
ES Engineering Services
ETC Estimated Time of Completion
HAZOP Hazard and Operability Assessment
HIC Hydrogen Induced Cracking
ID Inspection Department (Dhahran)
LOF Likelihood of Failure
LPD Loss Prevention Department (Dhahran)
MOC Management of Change
MPY Mils per Year
NDT Nondestructive Testing
OSHA Occupational Health and Safety Administration
OSI On-Stream Inspection
PFD Process Flow Diagram
PHA Process Hazard Analysis
POF Probability of Failure
PRDs Pressure relieving Devices
PSM Process Safety Management
PWHT Post-Weld Heat Treatment
Page 11 of 73
P&ID Process & Instrumentation Diagram

QA/QC Quality Assurance and/or Quality Control
QRA Quantitative Risk Assessment
RASCI Responsible, Accountable, Supports, Consulted, Informed
RBI Risk-Based Inspection
RCM Reliability Centered Maintenance
ROI Return on Investment
RPO Release Purchase Order
SAER Saudi Aramco Engineering Report
SCC Stress Corrosion Cracking
SOHIC Stress Oriented Hydrogen Induced Cracking
SSC Sulfide Stress Cracking
SIS Safety Instruction Sheet
TIC Technical Information Center
UT Ultrasonic Testing
6 Instructions
6.1 RBI Methodology
6.1.1 The RBI methodology currently approved and implemented is the API
RBI from the American Petroleum Institute as described in API RP 580
and API RP 581.
6.1.2 The latest available version of the API RBI software shall be used
where applicable to perform assessments. The software custodian
within Saudi Aramco is Inspection Department.
6.1.3 Usage of other RBI methodologies and software for quantitative risk
assessment is permissible for assets not covered by API-RBI software.
These RBI methodologies and software shall be approved by the
Engineering Services (ES) RBI team, Inspection Department.
6.1.3 Each facility should prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit
based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating
risk.
6.1.4 Appendix 1 decision tree shall be used to determine if a quantitative

RBI assessment is required or only a comprehensive review of the OSI
program per 6.11.
Page 12 of 73
6.1.5 A fully integrated Risk Based Inspection process should be

implemented as shown in Appendix 6. Each Phase has a specific
timeline that shall be completed within the allotted time. If the time is
exceeded notifications of the delays are sent by ID to the proponent as
shown in Appendix 4.
6.1.6 Appendix 2 RASCI chart defines the roles and responsibilities of all
participants.
6.1.7 Appendix 3 is the workflow for in-house assessments.
6.1.8 Appendix 4 is the workflow for Service Providers assessments.
6.2 Equipment Grouping
6.2.1 Corrosion Loop
The corrosion loop shall consist of a drawing and description as defined

in this procedure.
The drawing shall be developed using a process flow diagram (PFD) or

piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) in Portable Document
Format (PDF) shall be color coded and include information about
metallurgy, process conditions and potential damage mechanisms for
each system.
The description of the corrosion loop shall include a brief summary of

the process, limits of the corrosion loop and list of damaged
mechanisms per equipment and piping circuit. Information to be
included in the corrosion loops description and drawings are addressed
further in Appendix 6.
Establish corrosion loops for the full unit under assessment. Each loop
shall include all main lines and associated piping/branches attached to
these main lines.
6.2.2 Piping
Piping systems which meet any of the following criteria shall at least
require a semi-quantitative risk analysis (comprehensive OSI review) or
full RBI assessment where applicable as addressed in Appendix 1:
a) Process piping containing hydrocarbon, toxic or corrosive fluid.
b) Piping failure that could present a hazard to humans, to the
environment, or where such failure could not be repaired without
Page 13 of 73
disrupting operation.
c) Piping known to exhibit a high probability of failure, e.g., piping
with injection point(s), dead leg(s) or vibrations.
d) Piping known to be susceptible to Corrosion under Insulation
(CUI) and environmental damage such as Stress Corrosion
Cracking (SCC) with failure consequences shown in item 2 above.
Commentary Note:
Criteria in this paragraph were developed for use in RBI assessments.

Piping not meeting the above criteria may not be exempted from being
monitored in the OSI program.
6.3 Inventory Group
6.3.1 A process flow diagram (PFD) or piping and instrumentation diagram

(P&ID) in Portable Document Format (PDF) shall be color coded to
identify the inventory group and name. The facility Process Engineer
shall concur on the inventory group using Appendix 9 Validation Form.
6.3.2 Separate Inventory Groups by highly reliable isolation valves can be

actuated remotely e.g., MOVs, ZVs, ESD, etc.
6.4 Equipment/Component Items in Plant Facilities
6.4.1 API RBI assessment shall be applied to all pressure containing equipment
(according to the RBI decision tree; Appendix 1) such as:
1) In-plant piping
2) Pressure vessels (reactors, columns, drums, etc.)
3) Heat exchangers and fin fans
4) Tanks
5) Pressure relieving devices (PRD)
6) Exchanger tube bundles
6.4.2 All equipment items which are not covered by API RBI but do meet the
requirements for RBI decision tree in Appendix 1 should be assessed by
RBI methodology approved by ID.
6.5 Off-Plot Piping
Off-plot piping should be included but the software used in the assessment shall
be approved by the Inspection Department before deployment.
Page 14 of 73
6.6 Utilities
Utilities may be included at the discretion of the proponent if there is a specific

reliability problem. An example would be a cooling water system with
corrosion and fouling problems. An RBI approach could assist in developing
the most effective combination of inspection, mitigation, monitoring, and
treatment for the entire facility.
6.7 Offshore Facilities
Software and methodology other than APIRBI shall be used with prior approval
by ID. The assessment shall cover top and subsea steel structures, risers and
subsea pipelines.
6.8 Above Ground Atmospheric Storage Tanks
Environmental sensitivity shall be determined by the list provided by Saudi

Aramco, Environmental Protection Department, Appendix 13. EPD shall be
consulted prior to start of assessment, for other areas not listed.
6.9 PRDs
6.9.1 Overpressure demand cases are critical in PRDs risk assessments.

P&CSD shall be consulted on appropriate value.
6.9.2 Fire demand case shall not be used for gas vessels with a liquid level
less than 10%.
6.10 RBI Documentation
6.10.1 Required Data – Sufficient information and data shall be captured to

fully document the RBI assessment including:
a) The level of the assessment as defined in this SAEP.
b) Team members performing the assessment.
c) Timeframe over which the assessment is applicable.
d) The inputs and sources used to determine risk.
e) Assumptions made during the assessment.
f) The risk assessment results and inspection plan.
g) Follow-up mitigation strategy, if applied, to manage risk.
h) The risk reduction if inspection plan is implemented.
i) The mitigated risk levels, i.e., residual risk after mitigation is
Page 15 of 73
implemented.
j) References to codes or standards that have jurisdiction over extent
or frequency of inspection.
6.10.2 Any methodology other than API RBI shall be thoroughly documented
indicating the level of assessment performed.
6.10.3 The specific software program and version used to perform the
assessment shall be documented.
6.10.4 Risk Based Inspection risk results should be documented as well as the
recommendations made for optimized inspection plans.
6.10.5 Projected risk results with implementing the inspection

recommendations and without implementing of the inspection
recommendations shall be documented for items that require mitigation.
6.10.6 Codes and Standards utilized shall be documented. Refer to Section 4

for a listing of relevant codes and standards.
Commentary Note:
Since various codes and standards cover the inspection for most pressure
equipment, it is important to reference these documents as part of the RBI
assessment. This is particularly important where implementation of RBI is
proposed to relax either the extent or frequency of inspection.
6.10.7 The final RBI assessment report shall be aligned with latest version of
the SA RBI assessment report template provided by ES RBI team
6.10.8 ES RBI team will provide a report number for new initial RBI
assessments, to maintain the track of all RBI reports.
6.10.9 Extension of T&I frequency shall be in accordance with SAEP-20.
6.11 Record Keeping
6.11.1 All data relevant to the RBI assessment including RBI software database
shall be captured and maintained such that the assessment can be
recreated or updated at a later time. The data shall be stored in
designated data management system as directed by the Inspection
Department.
6.11.2 Assurance that all RBI assessment-related data and reports are properly
preserved is the responsibility of the Plant RBI facilitator/Team Leader
during the assessment, and the Plant Inspection Unit Supervisor, after
the assessment is completed.
Page 16 of 73
6.11.3 Overall responsibility for updating RBI assessments, ensuring

implementation of the evergreening process, data storage and management
belongs to the proponent Inspection Unit, Supervisor. The evergreening
report number will be same as initial assessment report number with a
reference indicating evergreening revision iteration.
6.12 Degradation Mechanism
The following items shall be documented in the final report:
6.12.1 Identified active and potential damage mechanisms for each corrosion
loop shall be based on API RP 571 and/or Saudi Aramco Corrosion
Management Program (CMP) Manual SABP-A-033 or other industry
documents.
6.12.2 Damage or degradation mechanisms not listed in API RP 571 or

CMP shall be identified but no identification number is required.
The identification shall include, but not be limited to, the description of
damage type, affected materials, critical factors, affected units or
equipment, appearance or morphology of damage, prevention /
mitigation options, inspection/monitoring, related mechanisms,
references and any other description which might be required by the
proponent or ID.
6.12.3 Criteria used to judge the severity of each degradation mechanism.
6.12.4 Anticipated failure mode(s) (e.g., leak or rupture).
6.12.5 Key factors used to judge the severity of each failure mode.
6.12.6 Criteria used to evaluate the various consequence categories, including

safety, health, environmental and financial.
6.12.7 List the parameters to monitor for risk level control. Certain properties
of the process variables have a direct impact on the level of
susceptibility of the equipment to damage mechanisms.
This information shall be captured on the individual corrosion loop
under the name “Susceptible Threshold Values.”
6.12.8 Corrosion loop description shall be aligned with the last template
revision provided by ID or CMP Corrosion Control Document.
6.13 Inspection Effectiveness Tables
6.13.1 Relates to the capability of an inspection program in locating and sizing

deterioration, and thus for determining deterioration rates for a specific
Page 17 of 73
likely damage mechanism. The inspection technique may be a

combination of NDT methods such as visual, ultrasonic, radiographic
etc., frequency and coverage/location of inspections. Determination of
inspection effectiveness should include equipment type, active and
credible damage mechanism(s), rate of deterioration or susceptibility,
NDT methods, coverage and frequency and accessibility to expected
deterioration or damage areas.
6.13.2 Appendix 10 shall be used to identify the required amount and type of
inspections based on the identified damage mechanism.
6.14 Evergreening RBI Assessments are required:

1) To maintain and update all RBI programs.
2) To ensure the most recent inspection, process and maintenance
information are included.
3) After any changes in process conditions, hardware changes, damage
mechanisms or corrosion rates, premise changes (per API RP 580
Paragraph 15.2.4) and a change in mitigation strategies.
4) Immediately after a T&I, operational cycle or when changes occur.
5) After optimizing the OSI program based on the results of the initial RBI
assessment and/or SAEP-1135 requirements.
6) After Unit changes due to MOC or no longer than a maximum of
3 years. The governing inspection codes, such as API STD 510,
API STD 570 and API STD 653 and corporate procedures such as
SAEP-20 should be reviewed in this context.
6.15 Evergreening process shall include:
1) Keeping a record for all changes since the initial RBI assessment was
completed, that has the potential to affect the RBI results.
2) Updating of inspection history in the software.
3) Reviewing of operating variables and inventory groups by proponent
Process Engineering.
4) Reviewing and concurrence of corrosion loops and damage mechanism.
5) Reviewing and update of assumptions.
6) Updating the corrosion rate in the software.
7) Recalculating of the equipment risk and create an inspection plan for
mitigation.
Page 18 of 73
8) Issuing of a final report.

9) Presenting the results to proponent Management.
10) Completing the Validation Form.
6.16 Update of RBI Software Database

1) An update shall be performed to capture OSI updates including inspection
of small diameter fittings, chemical injection inspections and dead legs.
2) The database shall be renamed with a new RBI date in order to track
changes from the last formal RBI assessment.
6.17 Evergreening report shall include:

1) Executive Summary including the observations, conclusions and
recommendations
2) Documented assumptions
3) A list of all changes since completion of the initial RBI assessment
4) Review of corrosion loops and inventory groups
5) Review of process parameters
6) Assessment findings including inspection history review and risk analysis
7) The results of OSI optimization performed based on the initial RBI
assessment results and/or OSI optimization criteria per SAEP-1135
8) Financial benefit including the OSI optimization and risk reductions
9) Corrosion loop drawings and descriptions
10) Inventory group drawings
11) Associated piping list
12) Equipment inspection history (new only)
13) Risk summary and inspection plan
Commentary Note:
The evergreening report shall be aligned with the latest template provided by
ES RBI team.
6.18 Comprehensive Review of the OSI Program
A comprehensive review of the OSI program shall be performed per SAEP-1135

during RBI assessment, or in lieu of RBI assessment, if directed by Appendix 1
“Decision Tree for Performing RBI”.
Page 19 of 73
6.19 RBI Team Makeup
RBI requires data gathering from many sources, specialized assessment, and
then risk management decision-making. Generally, one individual does not
have the background or skills to conduct the entire assessment. RBI assessment
shall be conducted by a team of people with the required competencies.
Some team members may be part-time due to limited input needs. It is also
possible that not all the team members described in this SAEP may be required
if other team members have the required skill and knowledge of that discipline.
1) Team Leader
 The Team Leader shall be proposed by the Proponent's Management
for in-house assessments and service provider for contracts or RPO
assessments. This individual shall be a Sr. Inspection Engineer,
Materials/Corrosion Engineer or process engineer.
 RBI Contractors’ team leaders shall demonstrate to the ES RBI Team
their personnel are suitably qualified and experienced in RBI technology.
The qualifications of the RBI personnel shall be documented.
 If data is unavailable, the team leader should validate assumptions of
the current conditions, as provided by the team members.
 Validating data in the RBI software, controlling quality of data input /
output, calculating the measures of risk and displaying the results in an
inspection plan, and reviewing the final report, is required.
Team Leader qualifications:
o Demonstrated skills in team leadership and project management
o Degree in Engineering and minimum of 5 years’ experience in Oil and
Gas industry or 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas Industry.
o Adequate training in RBI methodology and software navigation,
i.e., having actively participated in a minimum of two RBI
assessments using the software approved for the assessment.
o Experience in NDT disciplines.
o Excellent report-writing skills
o Excellent presentation skills
2) RBI Facilitator
RBI facilitator should prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit
based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk.
Page 20 of 73
Proponent RBI facilitator selection criteria shall be:

 Competencies demonstrated and accepted to ES RBI team leader to run
or lead an RBI assessment.
 Participation in a minimum of three RBI assessments before qualification.
 Any qualified RBI Facilitator who has not performed, participated or
coordinated an assessment in a year's time shall require re-qualification
from ES RBI team.
 All qualified RBI Facilitator shall be orientated to any new version of
the software before they will be allowed to perform an assessment
using the new version.
 Contractors’ RBI facilitator selection criteria shall be:
Contractors shall demonstrate to the ES RBI Team that their RBI
facilitators are suitably qualified and experienced in RBI technology.
The qualifications of the RBI personnel shall be documented in the
CVs and references. Contractor personnel must meet the following
qualifications:
i. Degree in Engineering and minimum of 5 years’ experience in Oil
and Gas industry or 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas
Industry.
ii. Detailed training in the RBI methodology/software and participated
in at least three RBI assessments two of which involved using the
API RBI software.
3) Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer
Sr. Inspector Engineer or Inspection Engineer involved in RBI assessment

shall meet one of the following qualifications:
 A diploma or degree in a technical discipline.
 Minimum of 10 years inspection experience in the Oil and Gas Industry.
4) Materials and Corrosion Engineer
Materials/Corrosion Engineer involved in RBI assessment shall meet two

of the following qualifications:
 Have a B.S. Engineering (Chemical, Metallurgical or Mechanical)
Degree with 12 years minimum experience in the oil and Gas Industry.
Page 21 of 73
 Have 20 years of experience as a corrosion professional, NACE

specialist or equivalent certification with experience in corrosion
control in the Oil and Gas Industry.
 Demonstrate experience in corrosion risk assessment.
5) Process Engineer
Process Engineer shall meet the following qualifications:

 Degree in Chemical Engineering or other suitable Engineering major.
 Minimum of 7 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas industry.
6) RBI Software Practitioner
RBI Software Practitioner shall meet three of the following qualifications:

 Degree in Engineering and minimum of 7 years’ experience in Oil and
Gas industry.
 Have 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas Industry.
 Training and job experience using the RBI software in a minimum of
two RBI assessments in the last two years.
7) Operation Representative
Operations Personnel shall meet the following qualifications:

 Minimum of seven years in the Oil and Gas industry.
 Training in the process Unit under assessment.
8) Maintenance Engineer
9) Loss Prevention Engineer
7 Responsibilities
7.1 ES RBI Team

1) Assess Plants RBI program per SAEP-308 and SAEP-372 (ID).
2) Initiate the Inspection Department Manager’s escalation letter to the
proponent manager when the ETC of the RBI recommendations overdue.
Page 22 of 73
3) Monitor the implementation of the RBI assessment against the Project

Timeline. When the timeline Phases are not completed on the estimated
dates, ID/OID/IEU will issue a letter of non-conformance.
The non-conformance letter shall be issued progressively to higher level of
management per Appendix 5.
4) Provide guidance for RBI assessment recommendations against the ETC
submitted by the operating facility and concurred by ID. When the
recommendations are not completed on the estimated dates, ID/OID/IEU
could issue a letter of non-conformance. The non-conformance letter shall
be issued progressively to higher level of management per Appendix 4.
5) Validate the assessment per Appendix 11.
7.2 Team Leader

1) Prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit based on next T&I date
and integrity issues associated with operating risk
2) Participate in the formation of the team and ensuring that team members
have the necessary skills and knowledge.
3) Prepare a Gantt chart depicting assessment tasks, activities, appropriate
durations and assigned resources.
4) Ensure the assessment is conducted as per the project timeline, according
to requirements of this SAEP:
a) Gathered data is accurate.
b) Damage mechanism and corrosion loops are concurred by a service
provider corrosion engineer and/or proponent Materials/Corrosion
Specialist or CMP (Team.
c) Assumptions made are logical, documented and approved by ES RBI
Team.
d) Competent personnel provide required data and/or assumptions.
e) Check quality of data imported into the RBI software.
f) Prepare or review all reports (preliminary and final) on the RBI
assessment and ensuring the report is distributed to the appropriate
personnel and management.
g) Ensure the validation sheet (Appendix 11) has been completed and
signed by all parties upon completion of the assessments.
Page 23 of 73
5) Follow-up to ensure that the appropriate risk mitigation actions have been
implemented.
7.3 RBI Facilitator

1) Prioritize and schedule the implementation of initial RBI assessment for
each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with
operating risk.
2) Assemble all data required for the RBI assessment.
3) Define data required from other team members, verifying through quality
checks the validity of data and assumptions.
4) Import the data into the RBI software and run the calculations.
5) Analyze the risk results and prepare the final report.
6) Develop tracking system for implementing RBI recommendations.
7) All MOC’s shall be reviewed and signed by SA RBI facilitator in the
inspection unit.
7.4 Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer

1) Gather equipment data and inspection history included in the assessment.
The data should include, but not limited to, OSI report, T&I report, SISs,
manufacture record book, piping specification book, MFL report…etc.
If any of the data required is not available the Sr. Inspection Engineer or
Inspection Engineer, in conjunction with the Materials/Corrosion
Engineer, should provide assumptions of the current condition.
2) Assess effectiveness of past inspections.
3) Recommend inspections and implement recommendations derived from
the RBI assessment.
7.5 Materials/Corrosion Engineer

1) Develop the plants corrosion loops by identifying the active/potential
damage mechanisms and their applicability and severity to the equipment
and piping, considering the process conditions, environment, metallurgy,
age, etc., of the equipment. Refer to Appendix 6 Process Map for
development of corrosion loops and Damage mechanisms
2) Review and validate the outcome of the inspection plan for
appropriateness of the inspections in relation to the damage mechanism.
Page 24 of 73
3) Provide recommendations on methods of mitigating the likelihood of

failure (such as changes in metallurgy, addition of inhibition, addition of
coatings/linings, etc.).
4) Provide operating windows and ranges for the process parameters to be

monitored which can affect the potential and severity of damage
mechanism in a corrosion loop. These ranges of the parameters shall be
controlled through the facility's management of change (MoC) written
procedure. Changes that fall outside the range shall trigger an RBI
assessment update or review (Evergreening).
7.6 Plant Engineer

1) Provide process parameters such as pressure, temperature, flow stream
composition, etc.
2) Document variations in the process conditions due to normal occurrences
(such as start-ups and shutdowns) and abnormal occurrences.
3) Describe the composition and variability of all the process fluids as well as
their toxicity and flammability.
4) Provide information required for financial assessment such as equipment
replacement cost and production losses.
5) Evaluate and recommend methods of risk mitigation through changes in
process conditions.
6) Participate in the development of the Inventory Groups and sign off
concurrence.
7.7 RBI Software Practitioner

1) Input data into the RBI software.
2) Run the RBI software.
3) Extract and format the inspection plan from the software.
7.8 Operations Personnel

1) Verify that the facility/equipment is being operated within the parameters
set out in the process design.
2) Provide data on occurrences when the process deviated from the limits of
the process condition and for obtaining the number and causes of
emergency shutdowns and tripping of equipment.
Page 25 of 73
3) Assist in the development of the Inventory Groups.

4) Implement recommendations that pertain to process or equipment
modifications.
7.9 Proponent Management

1) Provide sponsorship and resources (personnel and funding) for the RBI
assessment.
2) Make decisions on risk management and/or provide framework and
mechanism for others to make these decisions based on the results of the
RBI assessment.
3) Provide the resources for implementing RBI recommendations and risk
mitigation decisions.
4) Ensure that MOC program is in place and effective to ensure validity of
RBI results.
5) Ensure operating limits which affect the RBI assessment results, are added
to the Integrity Operating window (IOW) limits/ ranges and controlled.
6) Serve as RBI Champion.
7) Appoint the Facility RBI Team Leader.
7.10 Loss Prevention Engineer
Address all consequence aspects and recommend methods to mitigate the

consequence of failures. Participation in the RBI assessment team is at the
discretion of the RBI Team Leader, on a part-time basis. Provide data on the
financial consequences such as production loss, environmental clean-up costs,
equipment replacement costs…etc.
7.11 T&I Engineer
Provide data on the T&I cost of the facility/equipment being analyzed and the
T&I duration.
Revision Summary
21 August 2013 Major revision.
7 July 2015 Minor revision to remove the requirement of utilizing Saudi Aramco Engineering Report
number (SAER) for the RBI final report.
Page 26 of 73
Appendix 1 – Decision Tree for Performing RBI
Develop Corrosion Loop
Mechanical and
Metallurgical Failure
Mechanisms per API 571
Section 4 (Not including Yes
corrosion)
Note 1: This decision tree

No
excludes above ground
Storage Tanks (API 650
and 12C).
Environment – Assisted
Yes
Cracking
Note 2: Excluding any
process unit from RBI
Program shall be approved
No
by ES RBI Team.
HTHA
Yes
Titantium Hydrating
No
Uniform, localized or high temperature

corrosion perform a comprehensive review of Yes
the OSI program (SAEP-1135)
Implement
recommendations of Perform
Robust No
the Comprehensive Quantitative RBI
Review
Yes
RBI methodology other than API/ RBI could be required
Page 27 of 73
Appendix 2 – RBI RASCI Chart
R Performs the Task

Department: Operating Facility A Accountable for the task being completed
Procedure: Perform RBI S Supports
Updated: C Consults prior to activity being performed
I Informed that the task has been performed
Division Team Software Process Corrosion ID LPD Ops

Step Task Facilitator Practitioner Engr
Inspector
Head Leader Engr. Rep Rep Rep
Phase 1, Task 1 Determine if RBI is required using SAEP-343 decision tree C A R S S S S S S S

Phase 1, Task 2 Develop RBI team A R I I I I I I I I
Phase 1, Task 3 Develop Gantt Chart I A R I I I I I I I
Phase 1, Task 4 Kick-off meeting C A R S S S S S I S
Phase 1, Task 5 Conduct RBI Workshop I A R S S S S I I S
Develop Corrosion Loops I A R S S S S S S S
Phase 1, Task 5a
Concur on the Corrosion loops I A A S S A S I I I
Phase 1, Task 5b Develop Inventory Groups I S R S A S S I I S
Phase 1, Task 6 Site Orientation Visit I A R S S S S I I S
Phase 2, Task 1 Collect required Data I A R S R R R I I I
Review and Mark Process Flow Diagrams with Process
Phase 2, Task 3 data, Damage Mechanisms and Materials of I A R S S S S I I S
Construction Information
Phase 2, Task 4 Define Likelihood Interview Questions I A R S S S S I I I
Phase 2, Task 5 Define Consequence Data and Interview Questions I A A R I I I I I I
Phase 2, Task 6 Populate the RBI Software I A R S S S S I I I
Phase 2, Task 7 Conduct Site Interviews and Collect Missing Data I A A R S S S I I S
Phase 2, Task 8 Review Collected Data with Likelihood Expert I A A S S S S I I S
Phase 2, Task 9 Review Collected Data with Consequence Expert I A A S S S S S I I
Phase 2, Task 10 Validate data in import spreadsheet I A A S S S S S I I
Phase 2, Task 11 Import Data into the API-RBI Software and update I A A S S S S S I I
Analyze Data inside the API RBI Software and ID validate
I A A S S S S R I I
Phase 3, Task 1 the database.
ID validate the database I A A S S S S S I I
Phase 3, Task 2 Prepare Inspection Plan I A A R I I I S I I
Phase 3, Task 3 Present Findings to Proponent (on-site) I A R R I I I S I I
Phase 4, Task 1 Prepare Final Report I A R S S S S S I I
Phase 4, Task 2 Presentation Meeting with Proponent Management I A R S S S S S I S
Page 28 of 73
Appendix 3 – RBI Process for In-House Assessment
Prioritize the Plants Units to determine the order of

performing RBI assessments.
RBI Team collects, sorts, formats, reviews and compiles draft RBI Team submits draft corrosion loop
corrosion loop drawings and descriptions and marks up the drawings and description for CSD or service
Inventory Group drawings provider for concurrence
RBI Team submits import spreadsheet to ID for approval
No
Accepted
Yes
RBI Team meets with ID on site to populate the database,

create the inspection plan and approve the RBI assessment
Submit Final report with Recommendation ETC for ID

concurrence.
Upload all RBI assessment documents to secured shared folder

(e.g. e-cabinet, e-way, etc..)
Optimize OSI program as per SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135
RBI facilitator develop tracking system for

implementing RBI recommendations Appendix 5
RBI facilitator implement the recommendations and send

status to ID.
Evergreen RBI by making a copy of the old database and

rename it using the RBI update date. Implement all
recommendations and send status to ID.
Page 29 of 73
Appendix 4 – RBI Process for Service Providers
Prioritize the Plants Units to determine the order of performing assessments.
Service Provider shall provide RBI process timeline to Saudi ARAMCO for concurrence.
Service Provider meets SA RBI team and provides a one to two day introductive workshop
(orientation for RBI team of their responsibilities and duties and description of RBI process)
No Service Provider Collects, Sorts, Formats, Reviews and compiles data and reviews or
Phase 1 Overdue
develops draft Corrosion Loops and description and Inventory Groups
Yes
Letter of nonconformance issued by ID

Phase 1, 3,4 Phase 2 Sent To
Yes No Yes
2 weeks 4 weeks Division Head Phase 2 Overdue Incomplete Data
4 weeks 8 weeks Manager
8 weeks 12 weeks Admin Head
No
Service Provider submits Draft Corrosion Loops and

Description, Inventory Groups and populated database to Contact SA RBI Facilitator
SA RBI Facilitator for review.
SA RBI Team Leader provides contact details of

Service Provider, proponent & ES RBI Teams meet on-site Plant Engineer, Corrosion Engineer, Inspector
to review and validate submitted documents and database. or other applicable person who may be able to
assist.
SA RBI Team Leader to review submissions for concurrence.

Service Provider submits corrosion loops and
description, inventory groups and populated
database to SA RBI Facilitator for review.
No Concur Create and document assumptions for missing

data and get concurrence from SA RBI
Facilitator.
Yes
Service Provider meets on site to perform analysis of the RBI

assessment with the proponent RBI Team and ID. Ensures
they are in correct final format for inclusion in report. No Incomplete Data
Yes
Yes
Results No
Phase 3 No No
Validated by ES RBI
Overdue
Team
Report accepted
Yes and validation sheet signed
off by ES RBI Team
Yes
Service Provider establishes or reviews CML’s for optimization
per SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135.
Service Provider gives presentation
to the proponent management.
Service Provider submits the draft report and presentation to SA
RBI Team Leader & ES RBI Team.
Service Provider returns all

Yes
Phase 4 Overdue No collected data and database when
assessment is complete.
Page 30 of 73
Appendix 5 – RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations
SA RBI Facilitator adds

RBI Report
Recommendations to Tracking System
RBI Team leader suggests ETC for

each Recommendation
No
ID Concur
Yes
RBI Facilitator inputs ETC into

Recommendation Tracking System
Yes
No Complete Recommendation(s) per

ID Concur?
ETC
Recommendation Yes Update RBI Software

Completed Database
No
No
Request Extension Overdue?
Yes
1st extension sent by Inspection Supv. ID sends out letter of non-

2nd extension sent by Division Head conformance based on escalation
3rd extension sent by Manager process
T&I Recommendation Overdue

Non-T&I Recommendation
1 month grace period per year of T&I interval Division head
1 month overdue Division head
Exceeding grace period Manager
3 month overdue Manager
Page 31 of 73
Appendix 6 - Corrosion Loop Development Workflow
Start
PE & CE
PFD’s, P&ID’s, Material Balance Review plant documents for design, feed composition & operating
Drawings & Operating Manuals parameters.
CE & PE
Verify corrosive elements in the streams and record expected
corrosion mechanisms.
Lab Data / Feed Data
CE & IE
Review and P&ID’s for all injection points, and impingement
areas from branch piping, injection nozzles, dead legs, etc.
Piping Instrument Drawings

CE
Verify equipment and piping materials.
Review Plant inspection data, history, corrosion monitoring CE & IE

SIS, Data Sheets failures / RCFA reports and record all damage mechanism
experience.
PE & CE
Review and record any operation parameters beyond design
Inspection & Cprrosion Data limit and list effect on corrosion.
Reports, Post T&I Reports,
Failure Analysis (RCFA)
Reports and SAIF.
CE & IE
Refer API 571 for generic damage mechanisms and confirmation
to list the applicable damage mechanism.
DCS Data, Operating Design &

Operating Parameters & Lab
Data CE & IE
List all applicable damage mechanisms in the Unit.
CE & IE
Mark all applicable & identified damage mechanisms on the Unit
API 571 PFD.
Group all piping and equipment together that have the same CE & IE
damage mechanisms, operating parameters and like material
with a color code in a sequential manner as a loop.
SAES-L133
CE & IE
Mark different loops for all applicable and identified damage
mechanisms on a PFD.
CE & IE
List is a spreadsheet all the loops by their damage mechanisms,
operating parameters, materials. CMP
Key: Complete a corrosion loop description that in a word document CE & IE RBI
PE Process Engineer that includes a short process description, table including each
CE Corrosion Engineer component with description in the loops, listing the specific
IE Inspection Engineer damage mechanism, PWHT status, Insulation type, material,
Page 32 of 73
Appendix 7 - RBI Task List
5% of Project Time 70% of Project Time 10% of Project Time 15% of Project Time
Phase 1: Pre-assessment Phase 4: Final Reporting &

Phase 2: Data Collection Phase 3: Analysis & Insp Planning
Preparation Presentation Meeting
Task 1: Analyze Data in the API RBI

Task 1: Form RBI Team Task 1: Gathered Required Data Task 1: Prepare Final Report
Software
Task 2: Review PFDs & Develop Task 2: Presentation Meeting with

Task 2: Develop Gantt Chart Task 2: Prepare Inspection Plan
Corrosion Loops & Inventory Groups Proponent Management
Task 3: Populate and Validate Data in Task 3: Perform/develop CML

Task 3: Kick-off Meeting
RBI Import Spreadsheet optimization
Task 4: Conduct RBI Workshop Task4: Conduct Site Interviews and Task 4: Present Findings to RBI Team
(for new members) Collect Missing Data Leader
Task 5: Review Collected Data with

Task 5: Site Orientation Visit
RBI Facilitator
Task 6: Review Collected Data with

RBI Team leader & Facilitator
Task 7: Import, Populate and Validate

Data in RBI Software
Page 33 of 73
Appendix 8 - Description of RBI Tasks
Phase 1 – Pre-Assessment Preparation
Task 1 – Form RBI Team
Responsibility for the formation of the team is assigned to the Team Leader.
This activity is accomplished by a formal written request to the appropriate Department
Managers. These requests should specify the following items:
1) The nature and objective of the assessment
2) The location of the assessment
3) The input and responsibilities required from the engineers/specialists requested to
participate in the assessment
4) The duration of the assessment.
The Team Leader shall also specify the extent of the involvement of the team members
requested, i.e., whether it is part-time or full-time and whether any additional
involvement is required before and after the assessment, e.g., for report writing, data
gathering, etc.
Proponent Champion is required to confirm the availability of the RBI team requested
(or suitable replacements) for the duration requested, by a formal written memorandum
to the Team Leader.
Task 2 – Develop Gantt Chart
The Team Leader shall compile a Gantt chart showing all assessment activities
described in the RBI Assessment Activities Section above. He shall specify the
required milestones, the assigned resource(s) and duration. This chart may be compiled
using software tools such as Microsoft Project. This document is to be submitted, in the
first instance, to the Proponent for approval, then to the team members for information.
When the assessment is performed by a Service Provider the schedule shall be
submitted to the ID RBI team.
Task 3 – Kick-off Meeting
The Team Leader will develop and agenda and organize a meeting grouping all
members of the RBI Assessment Team. It is the Team Leader's responsibility that all
necessary personnel are able to attend.
The scribe for the kick-off meeting shall be appointed by the Team Leader.
The minutes compiled shall be reviewed by the RBI Assessment Team members for
Page 34 of 73
completeness before submission to the proponent.
The meeting agenda should include the following issues:

1) RBI team, commitment of members, schedule and scope.
2) Data storage as directed by Inspection Department.
Task 4 – Conduct RBI Workshop (required for new members only)
Provide team members with an insight into RBI methodology.
Emphasize key features and expected benefits.
Define the responsibilities of each team member.
Task 5 – Site Orientation Visit
The RBI team should be given an orientation to the Unit using the process flow diagram
(PFD) then performing a walkthrough of the unit.
Phase 2 – Data Collection
Task 1 – Gather Required Data
The success of an RBI assessment depends strongly on the accuracy of the data and
information that is based on. It is the RBI Team's responsibility to clearly define the
data needed to analyze the equipment so that the results meet the assessment goals and
the proponent expectations.
Data required for the assessment can be found in Appendix 7.
Where possible, all data, including PFDs, should be made available to the Team Leader
in electronic format. Data in electronic format saves time when assembling the RBI
database and reduces the chances for data entry errors.
Assumptions should be made throughout the assessment and included in the final report.
Task 2 – Review and mark PFDs for development of the corrosion loops and inventory
groups.
Review the PFDs and understand the process system. If necessary, simplify these PFDs
to include only primary process piping (See 6.2.1 of this document).
Optimize the data gathering for in-plant piping using the following steps:
1) Establish corrosion loops for each individual system. Each loop shall include all
main lines and associated piping/branches attached to these main lines.
Page 35 of 73
2) From each corrosion loop, select one or more main (representative) line and include
it in the RBI assessment as a component. Include lines before and after equipment.
a) The corrosion loop description and drawing shall be developed using the
template supplied by ID.
b) The information required for submittal of concurrence of the corrosion loops
shall include the following as a minimum:
i) Corrosion Loop description
ii) Process stream properties
iii) Marked up corrosion loop description
iv) Inspection History
v) Corrosion loop number defining the relevant damage mechanism using
API RP 571 and/or Corrosion Monitoring Program including the
process fluid, type of material and cladding, toxic model and toxic
percentage, HIC resistant material and if stress relieved.
vi) Mark the operating temperatures and pressures and materials of
construction on the appropriate set of PFDs.
3) Recommendations/inspection guidelines derived for each main line shall also be
applicable to the entire corrosion loop piping (associated piping).
4) Using the PFD & P&IDs, mark the equipment and lines to be included in the
assessment and the isolation devices. Based on this, identify the equipment to be
included in each inventory group.
5) Create two working copies of the PFDs. Each working copy will be titled and
used for one of the following set of parameters:
a) Inventory group, representative fluids, phases, and the location and type (A,
B or C) of isolation devices per API RP 581.
b) Throughout the assessment, the RBI Engineers shall keep the redrawn PFDs
updated with the latest information, as well as the assumptions written on a
separate sheet of paper. The marked up PFDs and P&IDs, and the written
assumptions become essential RBI Assessment records. Outdated versions
of these assessment records should be discarded. It is noted all assessment
records are kept with the facility inspection unit who shall be responsible for
safekeeping and adequate filing of all RBI assessment documentation.
Task 3 – Populate and validate data in the RBI import spreadsheet
Create the component (equipment and piping) list in the latest version of the import
spreadsheet (RBIExport). The purpose of creating the equipment list is to define the
Page 36 of 73
boundaries of the systems included, and the actual equipment items to be analyzed.
From the information collected and assembled, fill in the required information for each
component in the import spreadsheet (RBIExport).
Equipment item issues:

1) In all cases, the component identities and descriptions should match those marked
up on the PFDs and P&IDs. To avoid cluttering the PFDs, the piping designation
and description do not have to be marked up on the PFDs.
2) Use the P&IDs and PFDs and list by process flow.
3) Note any discrepancies between the PFDs and P&IDs for future clarification.
4) Be consistent with the Equipment Type used. Remember that Equipment Type
assigns the generic failure frequency. The Heat Exchanger channel head is
designated as HEXTS (tube side) and the shell side as HEXSS. The length of the
channel head shall also include the length of the exchanger shell. FinFans are sub-
divided into E-XXXX-IH (inlet head), E-XXXX-RH (return header) or E-XXXX-
OH (other head) and E-XXXX-T (tubes) and modeled as Fin Fan components
using the circular diameter worksheet to calculate area. Columns can be divided
due to different corrosion loops and Knock Out Drums if the boot is weld
overlaid. If the ISS or datasheet does not specify the tmin or corrosion allownace
for the tubes use ½ the wall thickness for the Specified tmin and ¼ the wall
thickness for the CA.
5) Valves, flanges and reducers are not included in the assessment. However, they
may become important inspection objects in high-risk circuits, especially reducers.
6) In many cases, there will be inadequate records documenting when a piping
segment was replaced. On these situations, agree with the proponent on the best
number for years in service, and the best number, date and effectiveness of each
inspection to be applied globally for all piping.
7) Piping coming off the equipment is classed as a part of the piping to which it
connects.
8) Piping runs (including piping off the equipment) are classed as single components
for the assessment, provided that the material type is the same. The lengths for
piping can be estimated as 50’ for short runs but large diameter piping shall be
estimated for their full lengths. Do not create different components if the same
line has a reducer, use the diameter that produces the larger volume.
9) If the thickness changes but the pipe identification and diameter remain the same,
you may include only the one with the lowest thickness.
Page 37 of 73
10) Normally, the final inspection plan must consider all components and yet, there
may be occasions when this would make the data assembly process excessively
time consuming, making it necessary to make simplifications. An example of this
is a P&ID containing many small fuel gas lines; in this case instead of entering
each pipe, it is useful to enter a typical pipe for that P&ID or service.
11) Some equipment will be modeled in two or more parts to account for the large
differences in process conditions and damage mechanisms found between them.
This equipment is then broke down as components. For example, heat exchanger
tube and shell side, fin fan tubes, fin fan inlet header, and fin fan outlet header,
column top, middle and bottom, etc.
Documenting Assumptions:
1) With the available data, populate all applicable sheets and columns of the import
spreadsheet. If data is not available, make assumptions so that the final risk result
is on the conservative side. Document these assumptions in a word document as
an Appendix in the final report.
2) The assumptions shall be reviewed and approved by the proponent.
Task 4 – Conduct Site Interviews and Collect Missing Data
While at the plant, the following activities must be completed:

1) Complete the collection of basic data
2) Meet with plant personnel to collect detailed damage mechanisms, inspection and
consequence calculation input data needed. These meetings can be done
individually or in-groups depending on the issues that must be resolved.
Assignment of roles and duties shall be the responsibility of the Team Leader.
3) Collect missing data in the import spreadsheet.
4) Meet with the Operator/Process engineer to confirm the location of block valves
for inventory grouping, detection systems, injection points, type of toxic (H2S),
% of toxic, mitigation systems, representative fluids and phases, pH, contaminants
(H2S, Chlorine, Kp factors, velocities, etc.), temperatures and pressures.
5) Hold a meeting with the Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer and
Corrosion Engineer (together or individually) to review past inspection history,
repair/replace history, contaminants, damage mechanisms, and assumptions made.
6) Review the inspection files and collect the inspection information.
7) Collect the measured corrosion rates for piping and vessels. Before doing this
manually, consult with the proponent to see if this information is available in
electronic form.
Page 38 of 73
8) When reviewing the inspection files, it is important to record the nature of

inspection carried out on each piece of equipment. This shall include the type of
damage mechanism inspected for, the method of inspection applied, the number of
inspections, the coverage and the date of each inspection.
9) When assigning the inspection category, use the Inspection Effectiveness look up
tables found in Appendix 8.
Inspection History Reviews
Pitting - It is important to note the concentration (use standardized description of

pitting per ASTM G46 on certain vessel or pipe locations, etc.), and depth if these
have been recorded. The proponent and the Likelihood expert and/or Corrosion
Engineer should be consulted in this regard to determine an applicable corrosion
rate and determine if damage should be considered localized or general.
Corrosion Allowance
Use the design corrosion allowance (CA) per SAES-L-105 for piping and the Safety
Instruction Sheet (SIS) for equipment or data sheet values.
Measuring Corrosion Rate
This is measured in mils per year (MPY). 1 mil = 0.001”. Most condition
monitoring location (CML) are only read to two decimal places (10-mil accuracy),
i.e., a change in thickness from 0.50” to 0.49” is a 10-mil change in thickness.
The corrosion rate is usually derived from SAIF, the Saudi Aramco database.
The corrosion engineer together with the materials engineer and inspection engineer
shall carefully examine the historical data gathered and decide on the most
applicable corrosion rates being experienced by the various plant items.
Engineering judgment and historical plant experience shall both play a major role in
determining the applicable corrosion rates. Note that the selected rates will have a
significant effect on the criticality of the plant items under assessment. If the
measured corrosion rate is used it shall be the highest mpy for each CML in that
equipment circuit, always taking the worst case between the near and long term
corrosion rate (CR). If the highest CML selected has a CR higher than 15% of the
average of all the other CR’s in the circuit or the last measured thickness of that
specific CML it may be wrong and shall be field verified by Saudi Aramco.
Documenting Environmental Cracking Inspections
It is important to note the extent of environmental cracking inspection performed,

the location and the findings derived. Note that metallurgy, PWHT, and hardness
are all key factors in determining the susceptibility of plant equipment to SCC, SSC,
HIC and SOHIC. Temperature is a key factor in development of Amine cracking
Page 39 of 73
and guidelines from SAES-L-133 shall be followed. The corrosion and materials
engineers shall provide the required input with respect to environmental
susceptibility and shall pay due regard to current company standards, guidelines and
procedures relevant to these damage mechanisms.
Saudi Aramco material standards, procurement and construction procedures

mandate specifications to eliminate the occurrence of SSC in wet H2S service.
With the expectation these specifications are supplemented with a rigorous QA/QC
procedure, carbon steel piping shall not be considered susceptible to this particular
damage mechanism.
It is noted that H2S is usually quantified in ppm. Note also that 1% (mass or weight)
= 10,000 ppm or 0.1%=1000 ppm.
PFDs normally provide H2S and other components in moles (lb-mol/hr). To obtain
a mole % (volume %), divide the moles/hr of the specific component, e.g., H2S, by
the total moles/hr. To obtain a mass or weight % for H2S, use the formula:
Heat Exchanger Data
The length of tubing of Finfans for RBI is taken as tube length x # of tubes.
The inlet/outlet header box (IH), return header (RH) or other head (OH) size (area)
has to be converted to diameter and the length will be the depth of the box.
The exchanger channel length is taken as 2 x channel length (on U-1 or SIS) for
U-tube exchanger and 2 x the channel head length plus the shell length for straight
tube.
For plate and frame exchangers, it is advised to only model the nozzles.
Task 5 – Review Collected Data with Likelihood Expert
The corrosion, inspection and materials engineers shall jointly review the inspection,
corrosion rates and damage mechanism data collected from the files and interviews.
A decision will also be made by this group to set the import spreadsheet (RBIExport) to
measured or estimated corrosion rates. This may reduce the assessment time later in the
RBI software.
Task 6 – Review Collected Data with Consequence Expert
The Consequence Expert shall review any changes to the location of block valves for
inventory grouping, detection systems, injection points, type of toxic (H2S), % of toxic,
Page 40 of 73
mitigation systems, representative fluids and phases, pH, contaminants (H2S, Chlorine),
Kp factors, velocities, temperatures and pressures.
Task 7 – Import/Populate and Validate Data in the RBI software
A qualified RBI software practitioner shall review every column in the import
spreadsheet and verify the validity and accuracy of the data entered. Any assumptions
made are to be updated; if required, sensitivity to final results shall be evaluated.
Perform the following validity steps in the import spreadsheet:

1) Verify that there are no duplicate component names
2) Verify that all data entered match the pull down menus
3) Check that all data entered makes sense. Check for unusually large or small
operating temperatures, pressures, length, diameter, thickness, etc.
4) Check that the thickness and diameter of every pipe is in accordance with the
piping specifications.
5) Check for consistency with the Equipment Type used.
6) Check if the Design Temperature is greater than Operating.
7) Check if the Design Pressure is greater than Operating.
8) Run a filter for all items running at 400°F or higher. If Carbon or Low Alloy
Steels are used, investigate. Are these refractory lined? Clad? Is the corrosion
rate chosen high enough? Is the proponent using the wrong material for these
temperatures?
9) Run a filter for all items showing HIC/SOHIC. Use the Steam Tables and make
sure water is present, if not, there should be no HIC/SOHIC present.
10) Run a filter for all items showing no damage mechanisms and make sure you
agree with what you see. Is this in accordance with the inspection history and
findings?
11) Check that all the information written in the two sets of PFDs matches what was
written in the import spreadsheet.
12) Ensure the corrosion loop number (CL-?) is a suffix to the component name.
13) Change the name of the import spreadsheet to RBIExport and move to the Import
folder (C:\Apirbi_Installation\import).
Page 41 of 73
Phase 3 – Analysis and Inspection Planning
Task 1 – Analyze Data inside the API RBI Software
API RBI software functionality is covered in; API RP 581. The major steps to follow
when analyzing data in the RBI software are:
1) Update the Component Data table for ferritic and hi-alloy steels to meet the
requirements of SAES-L-310 for structural steel tmin. If structural tmin is greater
than pressure tmin put the thickness in the specified tmin cell in the software after
the batch calculation is run.
2) Use the new consequence modeler when performing the final analysis.
3) Saudi Aramco Inspection department will define the Area and Damage factor
Targets. The Risk Tolerance is variable depending on the facility under assessment.
4) List equipment by the equipment letter, then the number (example D-101) in the
equipment and component fields.
5) List piping by service letter first (example P-1111-6CS9F) in equipment field and
by the diameter (example 18-P-1111-6CS9F) in the component field.
6) Copy all inspection history by year in the comment section of the software for
inspection history.
6) If any parameters are altered as you review the applicable likelihood supplements
and consequence information inside the software, run the batch calculations.
7) Determine what is driving the high likelihood items. Is it the remaining wall
thickness? The age? The material of construction used? The lack of inspection?
This information shall be documented for inclusion in the final report.
8) Determine what is driving the high consequence items. Is it the representative
fluid used? Phase? Toxicity? Size of the inventory? This information shall be
documented for inclusion in the final report.
9) If the existing software does not properly model a certain damage mechanism or a
critical equipment item that the proponent wishes to address, then these shall be
analyzed outside the software. Any methodology used to address these issues
shall be adequately referenced and documented in the final report.
10) Inspection Department is required to validate the database.
Task 2 – Prepare Inspection Plan
There are several ways of mitigating risk effectively using the inspection plan that is
provided by the software. The likelihood aspect of risk may be reduced by:
Page 42 of 73
1) Adding an inspection.
2) Replacing equipment close to its end of life.
3) Removing the source of corrosion or damage mechanism.
4) Repairing the coating or insulation if CUI is a driver.
5) Improved monitoring, i.e., adding Hydrogen Probes or Key Process Monitoring if
SCC is a concern.
6) Modifications to the operating procedures may reduce the consequence side of
risk by:
7) Reducing the toxic and / or flammable inventory
8) Adding isolation devices
9) Improving detection systems
10) Reducing manning
11) Building blast walls or dykes (API RP 752)
12) It is cautioned that any mitigation measures considered for risk reduction shall be
reviewed by the relevant experts before implementation. It is noted that, for risk
reduction inside the software, an inspection may be required. The type and
effectiveness (as defined in API RP 581) of the inspection should be determined
using the inspection plan and API RP 571 damage mechanism tables. It is not
possible to treat the remainder of the mitigation measures inside the software.
Rather, these shall be addressed separately in the final report.
13) Prepare the Inspection Plan. Extensions of equipment should be evaluated on
whether or not the risk increases with time and with or without new inspections.
14) Discuss and agree with the proponent the cost savings derived from the RBI
Assessment.
15) Prepare the Cost Benefit Analysis of the RBI assessment.
16) Present the Inspection Plan and Cost Benefit Analysis to the proponent. Once the
proponent has accepted the Inspection Plan and Cost Benefit Analysis, these
should then be incorporated into the final report.
17) The cost savings from an RBI assessment may include the following:
a) Reduction of inspections costs as a result of equipment being removed from
upcoming scheduled T&Is.
Page 43 of 73
b) Reduction of maintenance costs as a result of equipment being removed

from upcoming scheduled T&Is.
c) Increased production time or run length as a result of inspecting less
equipment (i.e., shorter T&Is).
d) Use of non-intrusive inspections instead of intrusive ones.
e) Optimization of the CMLs.
f) The Cost Benefit Analysis should include the Return on Investment (ROI)
calculation for the assessment. The ROI represents the net financial benefit
calculated and expressed as a percent annual return on investment.
g) The cost benefit analysis should include optimization of inspection
resources. Determine the cost of condition monitoring locations (CML) and
review their number and locations for optimization.
h) The Cost Benefit Analysis may include a business interruption cost
calculated as shown below as an example using crude oil as the feedstock.
Task 3 CML selection and optimization shall be reviewed and implemented using the
criteria listed in SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135:
Task 4 – Present Findings to Proponent (on-site)
Provide the proponent with the findings from the assessment at the conclusion of the
assessment.
The Team Leader or another team member (assigned by the Team Leader) shall provide
a PowerPoint presentation to the proponent. This exercise shall be carried out prior to
the departure of the team from site and shall focus on the preliminary findings derived
from the assessment.
It is important that the proponent senior management attend this meeting.
Comments made by management and other attendees shall be documented and

considered for future incorporation in the Final Report as appropriate.
Phase 4 – Final Reporting and Presentation Meeting
Task 1 – Prepare Final Report
Preparation of this document shall be the responsibility of the Team Leader or Service
Provider Facilitator. This report shall incorporate all comments made during the
presentation meeting (Phase 3, Task 3) in addition to any other changes. The report
shall have a SAER number that is requested from the Technical Information Center.
Page 44 of 73
The report shall be submitted to the proponent and RBI team members for review.
A copy of the report (SAER) shall be submitted to the Technical Information Center.
A copy of the final RBI software files should be archived in the electronic storage area
identified by Inspection Department folders.
This folder is also divided into multiple sub-folders named after the proponent's facility,
e.g., Ras Tanura Refinery, Abqaiq Plants, etc.
All correspondence, databases, reports, etc., are to be stored in the respective subfolder.
The custodian of this folder shall be the RBI team, Operations Inspection Division, ID
who will assign access rights to the relevant RBI team members.
The team leader for each assessment is responsible for placing relevant assessment data
in the folders.
Task 2 – Presentation Meeting with Proponent Management
Upon submission of the Final Report (SAER), the Team Leader or Service Provider
Facilitator shall convene a presentation meeting at the proponent's offices. Participants
of this meeting shall include all team members, proponent management and/or ES
management. He shall be responsible for the preparation of this presentation. He shall
enlist the assistance of selected team members to compile this document and ensure all
assessment items are highlighted. It is important that any economic benefits derived
from the assessment are duly emphasized.
This presentation meeting should take place no later than one week following delivery
of the Final Report (SAER).
Page 45 of 73
Appendix 9 - Sources of Site Specific Data and Information
Information for RBI can be found in many places within a facility. It is important to stress
that the preciseness of the data should match the sophistication of the RBI method used.
The individual or team must understand the sensitivity of the data needed for the program
before gathering any data.
Specific potential sources of information include and are not limited to:
1. Design and Construction Records / Drawings
a) Safety Instruction Sheets (SIS)
b) P&IDs, PFDs, etc.
c) Piping Isometric Drawings
d) Engineering Specification Sheets
e) Materials of Construction Records
f) Construction QA/QC Records
g) Codes and Standards Used (ASME SEC VIII, NB-23, ASME B31.3, etc.)
h) Protective Instrument Systems
i) Leak Detection and Monitoring
j) Isolation Systems
k) Inventory
l) Emergency Depressurizing and Relief Systems
m) Safety Systems
n) Fire-Proofing and Fire Fighting Systems
o) Layout
p) Line Designation Tables
q) Piping specification drawings
r) Corrosion coupons
s) Corrosion Allowance – SAES-L-105
2. Inspection Records
a) Equipment Inspection Schedules (EISs)
b) Inspection Histories (OSI data, T&I reports, OSI reports, worksheets)
c) Repairs and Alterations
3. Process Data
a) Fluid composition analysis including contaminants or trace components
Page 46 of 73
b) Process flow diagrams

c) Distributed control system data
d) Operating Instruction Manuals (OIM)
e) Emergency procedures
f) Operating logs and process records
g) PSM, PHA, RCM and QRA data or reports
h) Process description
i) Production loss cost
j) Number of personnel in the unit per day (24 hr avg)
4. Management of Change (MOC) records
5. Off Site data and information - if consequence may affect off site areas
6. Failure Data
a) Generic failure frequency data. This data may have a significant effect on
likelihood of failure where it is used as a basis for calculation. In-house
generic failure frequency data may be developed and used.
b) Industry specific failure data
c) Plant and equipment specific failure data
d) Reliability and condition monitoring records
e) Company incident records
7. Site Conditions
a) Climate/Weather records
b) Seismic activity records
8. Equipment Replacement Costs
a) Project cost reports
b) Industry databases
c) T&I costs, maintenance costs
9. Hazards Data
a) PSM studies
b) PHA studies
c) QRA studies
d) Other site-specific risk or hazard studies
e) HAZOP
Page 47 of 73
Appendix 10 – Inspection Effectiveness Tables

Table 10.1 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – General Thinning
Inspection
Inspection 1-6 Non-intrusive Inspection
Effectiveness Intrusive Inspection Example 1-6
Category Example
Category
For the total surface area:
50% UTT or RT of CML’s.
A Highly Effective 100% visual examination with Profile radiography made also be
random UTT measurements of performed at selected locations.
suspect areas,
>25% UTT or RT of CML’s.
B Usually Effective >50% visual examination with Profile radiography made also be
random UTT measurements of performed at selected locations.
suspect areas,
>25% visual examination with
>10% UTT or RT of CML’s.
random UTT measurements of
C Fairly Effective Profile radiography made also be
suspect areas,
performed at selected locations.
Or 100% hydrostatic or pneumatic
test 6.
For the total surface area: <10% UTT or RT of CML’s.
D Poorly Effective <5% visual examination without Profile radiography made also be
thickness measurements. performed at selected locations.
No inspection or ineffective No inspection or ineffective
E Ineffective
inspection technique inspection technique used
Assumptions:
1. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2. Condition monitoring locations (CML’s) are set up by knowledgeable individuals
3. The number of CML’s and area for scanning, spot UTT or profile radiography) is one that will detect damage if occurring.
SAES-A-135 for guidelines.
4. Percentage refers to percent of established CML’s examined. Reference
5. Inspection Effectiveness for Heat Exchanger Bundles (Fin Fan Coolers & Shell/Tubes)
For Ferromagnetic Tubes:
“A” Effectiveness- >40% MFL and Visual Inspection of all accessible tubes. OR >25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection
“B” Effectiveness- 20-39% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR >15-25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection.
“C” Effectiveness- 10-19% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR 5-15% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection.
“D” Effectiveness- <10% MFL and/or Visual Inspection only. OR <5% IRIS and/or Visual Inspection only.
For Non-Ferromagnetic Tubes:

Use Eddy Current Testing and use the same percentage as IRIS Testing criteria above.
Note: Actual MFL wall losses greater than 20% shall be quantified. Wide wall loss range (e.g., 20%-40%;
40%-60%) is not acceptable
6. Only if specified by the EIS.
Page 48 of 73
Table 10.2 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Local Thinning
Inspection
Inspection Intrusive Inspection Non-intrusive Inspection
Effectiveness
Category Example1-9 Example1-9
Category
For the total area: For the total Suspect area:
100% visual examination 100% coverage of the CML’s using
A Highly Effective AND manual UTSW, AUT or profile
100% follow-up at locally radiography.
thinned areas
>75% visual examination >75% coverage of the CML’s using
B Usually Effective AND manual UTSW, AUT or profile
thinned areas.
AND manual UTSW, AUT or profile
C Fairly Effective 100% follow-up at locally radiography.
thinned areas.
Or 100% hydrostatic or
pneumatic test 6.
D Poorly Effective AND manual UTSW, AUT or profile
thinned areas.
No inspection, less than above For the total Suspect area:
E Ineffective recommendations or ineffective <20% coverage of the CML’s,
technique used. ineffective technique or no inspection
Assumptions:
2. Percentage coverage in non-intrusive inspection includes welds.
3. Follow-up inspection can be UT, pit gauge or suitable NDE techniques that can verify minimum wall thickness.
4. Profile radiography technique is sufficient to detect wall loss at all planes.
5. Suspect area is total surface area unless defined by knowledgeable individual.
6. Inspection Effectiveness for Heat Exchanger Bundles (Fin Fan Coolers & Shell/Tubes)
For Ferromagnetic Tubes:
“A” Effectiveness- >40% MFL and Visual Inspection of all accessible tubes. OR >25% IRIS Testing with Visual
Inspection
“B” Effectiveness- 20-39% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR >15-25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection.
“C” Effectiveness- 10-19% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR 5-15% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection.
“D” Effectiveness- <10% MFL and/or Visual Inspection only. OR <5% IRIS and/or Visual Inspection only.
Page 49 of 73
For Non-Ferromagnetic Tubes:

Use Eddy Current Testing and use the same percentage as IRIS Testing criteria above.
Note: Actual MFL wall losses greater than 20% shall be quantified. Wide wall loss range (e.g. 20%-40%;
40%-60%) is not acceptable
7. Only if specified by the EIS.
8. Give an inspection effectiveness of “C” for performing 10% MFL of tubes, “B” for >25% and “A” for >50%.
9. Any area not subject to visual inspection shall be inspected using non-intrusive inspection methods.
Page 50 of 73
Table 10.3 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection

Effectiveness Corrosion Resistant Liner-Non-Metallic
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category Example1 Example1
Category
For the total surface area: No inspection techniques yet
100% Visual inspection and 20% PT of the available.
welds.
AND
A Highly Effective
100% Holiday test
AND
100% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding
for bonded liners.
For the total surface area: For the total surface area:
>75% Visual inspection < 20% PT of >95% coverage of the CML’s
welds. using advanced or manual UTSW
Usually AND scanning.
B
Effective >75% Holiday test
AND
>75% UT or magnetic tester for
disbonding for bonded liners.
>35% Visual inspection and <20% PT of >67% coverage of the CML’s
welds. using advanced or manual UTSW
AND scanning.
C Fairly Effective
>35% Holiday test
AND
>35% UT or magnetic tester for
disbonding for bonded liners.
>4% Visual inspection <20% PT of welds. >34% coverage of the CML’s
AND using advanced or manual UTSW
scanning.
D Poorly Effective >5% Holiday test
AND
>5% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding
for bonded liners.
No inspection or ineffective inspection No inspection or ineffective
E Ineffective technique used inspection technique used
Assumption:
Page 51 of 73
Table 10.4 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Tank Bottoms
Inspection
Inspection
Effectiveness Soil Side Product Side
Category
Category
a. MFL Floor scan >90% & UT a. Commercial blast if required
follow-up b. Effective supplementary light
b. Include welds if warranted from c. Visual 100% (API STD 653)
the results on the plate scanning
d. Pit depth gauge
c. Manual UTSW scan of the critical
Highly e. 100% vacuum box testing of
A zone
Effective suspect welded joints
Coating or Liner:
a. Holiday test 100%
b. Adhesion test
c. Scrape test
a. MFL Floor scan >50% & UTSW a. Brush blast if required
follow-up b. Effective supplementary light
OR c. Visual 100% (API STD 653)
Usually b. EVA or other statistical method d. Pit depth gauge
B with Floor scan follow-up if
Effective Coating or Liner:
warranted by the result
a. Holiday test >75%
b. Adhesion test
c. Scrape test
a. Brush blast if required
a. MFL Floor scan >5% plates;
supplement with scanning near b. Effective supplementary light
Shell & UTSW follow-up; Scan c. Visual 100%
circle and X pattern d. Pit depth gauge
C Fairly Effective b. Progressively increase if damage Coating or Liner:
found during scanning
a. Holiday test >50%
c. Helium/Argon test
b. Adhesion test
d. Hammer test
c. Scrape test
e. Cut coupons
a. Spot UTT a. Brush blast if required

b. Flood test b. Effective supplementary light
Poorly
D c. Visual >25%
Effective
Coating or Liner:
 Holiday test <50
E Ineffective None None
1. Supplemental light shall meet the minimum light intensity per ASME SEC V, paragraph T-952.
2. EVA - Extreme Value Analysis
Page 52 of 73
Table 10.5 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Caustic Cracking
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
For the total weld area: For the total weld area:
>75% WFMPT or ACFM of welds >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
A Highly Effective
with manual UTSW follow-up of
relevant indications.
For selected welds: For selected welds:
>50 WFMPT or ACFM of welds >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
B Usually Effective with manual UTSW follow-up of OR
all relevant indications. AE testing with 100% follow-up of
>25% WFMPT or ACFM of welds >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
C Fairly Effective OR
with manual UTSW follow-up of
all relevant indications. 67% radiographic testing.
>5% WFMPT or ACFM of welds >5-% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
D Poorly Effective with manual UTSW follow-up of OR
all relevant indications or
>34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective No inspection or ineffective inspection
E Ineffective
inspection technique used technique used
Assumptions;
2. Cold bends may need inspection also for Caustic Cracking
3. Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
4. UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave
5. WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. WFMPT shall be used as the initial Intrusive inspection
technique for Caustic Cracking. If no cracking is detected, then ACFM may be used in lieu of WFMPT for future Caustic
Cracking inspection. If cracking is detected by WFMPT, then follow-up inspection must be the same technique. Non-PWHT
equipment and equipment subject to frequent steam-out requires WFMPT.
6. ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement. Can be used if equipment has already been WFMPT tested AND
provided no history of cracking.
7. AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
8. RT inspection can be used in lieu of UTSW for piping less than or equal to 3 NPS.
Page 53 of 73
Table 10.6 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Amine Cracking
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
>75% WFMPT or ACFM of >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
A Highly Effective welds with manual UTSW follow-
up of relevant indications.
>50% WFMPT or ACFM of >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
welds with manual UTSW follow- OR
B Usually Effective
up of all relevant indications. AE testing with 100% follow-up of
>25% WFMPT or ACFM of >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
C Fairly Effective welds with manual UTSW follow- OR
up of all relevant indications. >67% radiographic testing.

>5% WFMPT or ACFM of welds >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
D Poorly Effective with manual UTSW follow-up of OR
all relevant indications. >34% radiographic testing.

E Ineffective
Assumptions:
4. WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. WFMPT shall be used as the initial Intrusive inspection
technique for Caustic Cracking. If no cracking is detected, then ACFM may be used in lieu of WFMPT for future Caustic
Cracking inspection. If cracking is detected by WFMPT, then follow-up inspection must be the same technique. Non-PWHT
equipment and equipment subject to frequent steam-out requires WFMPT.
5. ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement. Can be used if equipment has already been WFMPT tested AND
provided no history of cracking.
7. RT inspection can be used in lieu of UTSW for piping less than or equal to 3 NPS.
Page 54 of 73
Table 10.7 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Sulfide Stress Cracking
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
>75% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of >75% AUT or manual UTSW
A Highly Effective welds with UTSW follow-up of scanning.
Perform random hardness testing.
For selected areas: For selected areas:
>50% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM with >67% AUT or manual UTSW
UTSW follow-up of all relevant scanning
B Usually Effective OR
indications.
AE testing with 100% follow-up of
>25% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of >34% AUT or manual UTSW
welds with UTSW follow-up of all scanning
>5% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
D Poorly Effective welds with manual UTSW follow-up OR
of all relevant indications. >34% radiographic testing.
E Ineffective
technique used inspection technique used
Assumptions:
4. WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. Initial testing for “SSC Intrusive inspection” shall
be WFMT.
5. FPT – Florescent penetrant testing
6. ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement
7. AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140,
Page 55 of 73
Table 10.8 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HIC/SOHIC-H2S Cracking
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ:
>75% manual UTSW and follow up
indications with TOFD or other
acceptable AUT technique.
acceptable AUT technique.
A Highly Effective HIC: Three 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW
HIC:100% Visual of total surface area
of the base metal on equipment each
AND random UTSW of the base
plate and the heads and on piping
metal, followed up using AUT for
selected locations, All suspect areas
suspect areas.
are to be followed up using AUT.
acceptable AUT technique
acceptable AUT technique
B Usually Effective HIC: Two ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW
HIC:100% Visual of total surface area
of the base metal on equipment each
AND random UTSW of the base
plate and the heads and on piping
metal, followed up using AUT for
selected locations, All suspect areas
suspect areas.
are to be followed up using AUT
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ:
>5% manual shear wave and follow >25% manual shear wave and
up indications with TOFD or other follow up indications with TOFD or
acceptable AUT technique. other acceptable AUT technique
C Fairly Effective HIC: 100% Visual of total surface HIC: One 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of
area the base metal on equipment each
AND random UTSW of the base plate and the heads and on piping
metal, followed up using AUT for selected locations, All suspect areas
suspect areas. are to be followed up using AUT
<5% manual shear wave and follow >5% manual shear wave and follow
up indications with TOFD or other up indications with TOFD or other
acceptable AUT technique. acceptable AUT technique.
D Poorly Effective HIC: 100% Visual of total surface HIC: One ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW
area of the base metal on equipment each
AND random UTSW of the base plate and the heads and on piping
metal, followed up using AUT for selected locations, All suspect areas
suspect areas. are to be followed up using AUT
No inspection or ineffective No inspection or ineffective
E Ineffective
inspection technique used inspection technique used
Assumptions:
2. Inspection Area; Welds and plates that are susceptible to the damage mechanism.
3. UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4. TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction
5. AUT - Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140,
6. HAZ – Heat affective zone
Page 56 of 73
Table 10.9 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Carbonate Cracking
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
>75% WFMPT or ACFM with >75% AUT or manual UTSW
A Highly Effective manual UTSW follow-up of scanning.

>50% WFMPT or ACFM with >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
manual UTSW follow-up of all OR
B Usually Effective
relevant indications. AE testing with 100% follow-up of

>25% WFMPT or ACFM with >34% AUT or manual UTSW
manual UTSW follow-up of all scanning

>5% WFMPT or ACFM with >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning
D Poorly Effective manual UTSW follow-up of all OR
relevant indications or >34% radiographic testing.

E Ineffective
Assumptions;
4. WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
5. ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140.
Page 57 of 73
Table 10.10 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – PTA Cracking
Inspection
Inspection Non-intrusive Inspection
Effectiveness Intrusive Inspection Example1-4
Category Example1-4
Category
For the total surface area: No inspection techniques yet available
100% Visual inspection and meet A requirements.
>95% dye penetrant or eddy
A Highly Effective current test with manual UTSW
follow-up of relevant
indications.

100% Visual inspection and >75% AUT or manual UTSW
>67% dye penetrant or eddy scanning
OR
B Usually Effective current testing with manual
UTSW follow-up of all relevant
indications.

OR
C Fairly Effective current testing with manual
indications.

D Poorly Effective current testing with manual OR
UTSW follow-up of all relevant >34% radiographic testing.
indications
E Ineffective
Assumptions:

Page 58 of 73
Table 10.11 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – ClSCC
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
For the total surface area: No inspection techniques yet available
100% Visual inspection and meet A requirements.
>75% Dye penetrant or eddy
A Highly Effective
current test with manual UTSW
follow-up of relevant
indications.
100% Visual inspection and >75% manual UTSW scanning and
>50% dye penetrant or eddy AUT
current testing with manual
indications.
C Fairly Effective current testing with manual OR
UTSW follow-up of all relevant >67-100% radiographic testing.
indications.

D Poorly Effective current testing with manual OR
UTSW follow-up of all relevant >25% radiographic testing.
indications

E Ineffective
Assumptions:
1. Areas selected by individual knowledgeable in mechanism of attack.
4. AE – Acoustic Emissions
5. AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
Page 59 of 73
Table 10.12 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HSC-HF
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
>75% WFMPT or ACFM with >75% AUT or manual ultrasonic
A Highly Effective scanning.
manual UTSW follow-up of
manual UTSW follow-up of all scanning
C Fairly Effective manual UTSW follow-up of all scanning
OR
D Poorly Effective manual UTSW follow-up of all scanning
relevant indications. OR
E Ineffective
Assumptions:

4. WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
5. ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement.
6. AE – Acoustic Emissions
Page 60 of 73
Table 10.13 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HIC/SOHIC-HF
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
up indications with TOFD or other follow up indications with TOFD
acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT or other acceptable AUT
A Highly Effective >50% of weld seams. technique.
HIC:100% Visual of total surface area HIC:Three 1 ft2 areas manual
AND random manual UTSW of the base UTSW of the base metal on each
metal with indications followed up on plate and the heads and indications
using AUT. followed up with using AUT.
up indications with TOFD or other follow up indications with TOFD
acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT or other acceptable AUT technique
B Usually Effective
>20 to 49% of weld seams. HIC: Two ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW
HIC:100% Visual of total surface area of the base on each piping circuit
AND random manual UTSW with or equipment and indications
indications followed up on using AUT. followed up with AUT.
>5% manual shear wave and follow up >25% manual shear wave and
indications with TOFD or other follow up indications with TOFD
acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT or other acceptable AUT technique
C Fairly Effective
<5 to 20% of the weld seams. HIC: One 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW
HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area of the base metal on each piping
AND random manual UTSW with circuit or equipment and
indications followed up on using AUT. indications followed up with AUT.
<5% manual shear wave and follow up >5% manual shear wave and
indications with TOFD or other follow up indications with TOFD
acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT or other acceptable AUT
D Poorly Effective <4% of the weldments. technique.
HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area HIC: One ½ ft2 areas manual
AND random manual UTSW with UTSW of the base on each piping
indications followed up on using AUT. circuit or equipment and indications
followed up with AUT.
E Ineffective
technique used inspection technique used
Assumptions:
2. Inspection Area - welds and plates that are susceptible to the damage mechanism.
3. UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
4. TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction
6. HAZ – Heat affective zone
Page 61 of 73
Table 10.14 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – External Corrosion
Inspection
Inspection
Effectiveness Inspection1
Category
Category
Highly Visual inspection of >95% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT,
A
Effective RT or pit gauge as required.
Usually Visual inspection of >60% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT,
B
Effective RT or pit gauge as required.
Visual inspection of >30% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT,
C Fairly Effective
RT or pit gauge as required.
Poorly Visual inspection of >5% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT
D
Effective or pit gauge as required.
Visual inspection of <5% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT
E Ineffective
or pit gauge as required.
Assumption:
Page 62 of 73
Table 10.15 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – CUI
Inspection
Inspection
Effectiveness Insulation Removed Insulation Not Removed
Category
Category
100% external visual inspection prior to 100% external visual inspection
removal of insulation AND
AND 100% profile or real-time radiography
Remove 100% of the insulation for of damaged or suspect area
A Highly Effective damaged or suspected areas. AND
AND Follow-up of corroded areas with
100% visual inspection of the exposed 100% visual inspection of the exposed
surface area with UTT, RT or pit gauge surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge.
follow-up of the selected corroded areas.
AND Follow-up with profile or real time
B Usually Effective Remove >51% of suspect areas radiography of >66% of suspect areas
AND AND
Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% Follow-up of corroded areas with
visual inspection of the exposed surface 100% visual inspection of the exposed
area with UTT, RT or pit gauge surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge.
C Fairly Effective Remove >24% of suspect areas radiography of >34% of suspect areas
AND AND
Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% Follow-up of corroded areas with
visual inspection of the exposed surface 100% visual inspection of the exposed
area with UT, RT or pit gauge surface with UT, RT or pit gauge
Remove >5% of total surface area of radiography of >5% of total surface
D Poorly Effective insulation including suspect areas area of insulation including suspect
AND areas
Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% AND
visual inspection of the exposed surface Follow-up of corroded areas with
area with UTT, RT or pit gauge 100% visual inspection of the exposed
surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge.
For the total surface area: No inspection or ineffective inspection
100% external visual inspection prior to technique used
removal of insulation
E Ineffective
AND
<5% insulation removal and inspection
of suspected areas
Page 63 of 73
Assumptions:
1. Suspect areas include damaged insulation, penetrations, terminations, etc.
3. Surface preparation is sufficient to detect minimum wall for the NDE technique used to measure thickness.
Page 64 of 73
Table 10.16 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – External ClSCC
Inspection
Inspection
Effectiveness Inspection1, 2
Category
Category
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and 100% dye
A Highly Effective
penetrant or eddy current test with UTT follow-up of relevant indications.
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and greater than 60%
B Usually Effective dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant
indications.
C Fairly Effective dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant
indications.
D Poorly Effective dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant
indications.
Less than “D” effectiveness or no inspection or ineffective inspection
E Ineffective
technique used.
Assumptions:
2. Suspected area is the area identified by knowledgeable individual or 100% Acoustic Emission testing maybe used to
identify suspect areas.
Page 65 of 73
Table 10.17 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – CUI ClSCC
Inspection
Inspection
Effectiveness Insulation Removed Insulation Not Removed
Category
Category
For the suspected area: No inspection techniques yet
100% external visual inspection available meet requirements
prior to removal of insulation
A Highly Effective AND

>100% dye penetrant or eddy
current test with manual UTSW
follow-up of relevant indications.

Usually
B AND
Effective
>60% dye penetrant or eddy current
testing with manual UTSW follow-
up of all relevant indications.
Fairly Effective AND
C
up of all relevant indications.
D Poorly Effective AND
up of all relevant indications
Less than “D” effectiveness or no No inspection techniques yet
E Ineffective inspection or ineffective inspection available meet requirements
technique used
Assumption:
Page 66 of 73
Table 10.18 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HTHA
Inspection
Inspection
Effectiveness Inspection1-9
Category
Category
Inspection techniques for HTHA are not available to qualify for a category A
A Highly Effective
inspection.
Inspection of susceptible areas with the following techniques:
AUBT for the base metal or in-situ metallography
For Equipment: Minimum one location of (24”x24”) AUBT scanning for
Usually
B each component (Shell and Heads).
Effective
For Piping: Two locations of (12”x12”) per 50 ft of piping.
ABSA, High Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat
affected zone,
C Fairly Effective For Equipment: Minimum one location of (12”x12”) AUBT scanning for
each component (Shell and Heads).
For Piping: One location of (12”x12”) per 50ft of piping. ABSA, High
Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat affected zone,
For Equipment: One location of (12”x12”) AUBT scanning.
D Poorly Effective For Piping: One location of (12”x12”) per 100 ft of piping.
ABSA, High Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat
affected zone,
Or Inspect less 75% WFMPT or FPT of susceptible areas.
E Ineffective No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions:
1. TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction; metallography or sampling can be used to confirm suspected indications.
2. Suspected Areas include all surfaces exposed to the HTHA environment, but corrosion or materials engineers shall
determine the most susceptible areas for monitoring
3. Selected areas are determined by individuals experienced in HTHA.
5. AUBT - Advanced Ultrasonic Backscatter Technique combined with spectrum analysis and velocity ratio.
6. ABSA - Angle-beam Spectrum Analysis
7. WFMPT – Wet Florescent Magnetic Particle Testing
8. FPT – Florescent Penetrant Testing
9. In-Situ Metallography- Samples shall be taken on the process side and should include the welds, HAZ and base metal.
Page 67 of 73
Appendix 11 - RBI Validation Form

RBI VALIDATION FORM Complete this form for every RBI initial and evergreen assessment
Saudi ARAMCO XXXX (6/2011) (Please read instructions printed on next page.)
Plant Name: Unit Name Number:
Saudi ARAMCO Name: Badge #: Telephone: email:

RBI Team Leader
RBI Facilitator Name: Company:
Corrosion Loops Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Developed by:
Corrosion Loops Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Concurrence by CSD/CMP Group
Inventory Groups Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Concurrence by Plt. Engr
Environmental Sensitivity Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Concurrence by EPD(for AST)
Assumptions Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:
Approved by SA Team Leader
Database Validation Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Approved by ID RBI Team
Inspection Plan Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Concurrence by ID RBI Team
RBI Assessment Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Approved by ID RBI Team
Last T&I Date _________ Current EIS Interval _______ Next T&I Date ________
EIS Deviation/Extension Proposed Yes ___ No___ Proposed T&I date ________
Comments:
Submit this form with all EIS deviation or revisions.
Page 68 of 73
Appendix 12 - RBI Validation Form Instructions
1. Complete this form every time an RBI assessment has been performed (both initial and
evergreen).
2. This form must accompany all requests for EIS deviation or revision application.
3. The RBI Team Leader is someone from the Proponent and is the single point contact for
the assessment.
4. The RBI Facilitator may be a Saudi Aramcon or Service Provider, depending on who
conducted the assessment.
5. After the Corrosion Loops (CLs) are developed by the Proponent or Service Provider
(SP) they require third party concurrence for both initial and evergreening. If the SP
develops the CLs the Proponent shall concur. If the Proponent develops the CL a
Service Provider or CSD/CMP Group shall concur.
Commentary Note:
Future RBI assessments shall be conducted in conjunction with CMP studies; this applies
whether the assessments are performed in-house or by a service provider; the service
provider shall be qualified for both RBI and CMP. CMP finding should be reflected on
completed RBI assessments and vice-versa
6. The inventory Loops shall be concurred to by the Plant Process Engineer.
7. If the assessment includes any API 650/620/12C tanks the environmental sensitivity
requires concurrence by the Environmental Protection Department.
8. The assumptions shall be concurred to by the SA RBI Team Leader.
9. All RBI Databases, Inspection Plans and Risk Analysis’s for initial or evergreened RBI
assessments require concurrence by an ID RBI Team member.
10. All RBI assessments for initial or evergreened require concurrence by a ID RBI Team
member
Page 69 of 73
Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity
Risk
FACILITY Ownership / Department
High Medium Low
Abandoned Chemical Storage
Material Planning & System Department x
Facilities
Abqaiq GOSP 2 North Ghwar Producing Department x
Abqaiq Pipelines Southern Area Pipeline Department x
Ain Dar GOSPs (1 & 2) North Ghwar Producing Department x
Ain Dar GOSPs (1 & 2) North Ghwar Producing Department x
Al-Hasa BP Eastern Region Distribution Department x
Al-Jouf BP Western Region Distribution x
Berri Gas Plant Berri Gas Plant x
Dhahran AFO Air Fueling Operations Department x
Dhahran BP E/C Region Distribution Department x
Dhahran Hills Water Wells Central Area Community Department x
Duba BP Western Region Distribution x
Haradh Southern Area Producing x
Hawiyah Southern Area Producing x
Jeddah Refinery Jeddah Refinery Department x
Jizan BP Western Region Distribution x
Ju’aymah Area(COT) Terminal Department x
Ju’aymah Gas Plant Juaymah NGL Fractionation Dept x
KAIA AFO Air Fueling Operations Department x
KFIA AFO Air Fueling Operations Department x
Khurais Khurais Producing Dept x
Khurasaniyah Producing Field Ras Tanura Producing Dept x
Najran BP Western Region Distribution Department x
North Jeddah BP Western Region Distribution Department x
Pump Station 1 East-West Pipelines Dept x
Page 70 of 73
Risk
FACILITY Ownership / Department
High Medium Low
Qassim BP C/E Region Distribution Department x
Qatif BP C/E Region Distribution Department x
Rabigh Bulk Plant Western Region Distribution Dept x
Ras Tanura N&S Terminals Terminal Department x
Ras Tanura Refinery Ras Tanura Refinery x
Riyadh Air Base Air Fueling Operations Department x
Riyadh Refinery & Bulk Plants Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals x
Safanyia & Tanajib Plants Northern Area Oil Operations x
Safanyia BP E/C Region Distribution Department x
Shedgum Southern Area Producing x
Sulayyil BP E/C Region Distribution Department x
Tabouk AFO Eastern Region Distribution Dept x
Tabouk BP Western Region Distribution Department x
Taif AFO Western Region Distribution Dept x
Turaif BP Western Region Distribution Dept x
Uthmaniyah Southern Area Producing x
Yanbu COT Terminal Department x
Yanbu Gas Plant Yanbu NGL Fractionation Dept x
Yanbu Refinery Yanby Refinery Department x
Page 71 of 73
Index
1 Scope ............................................................................................................................. 2
2 Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 2
3 Conflicts and Deviations ................................................................................................. 2
4 Applicable Documents .................................................................................................... 3
4.1 Saudi Aramco Documents................................................................................................... 3
4.2 Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................ 4
5 Definitions and Abbreviations ......................................................................................... 5
6 Instructions ................................................................................................................... 12
6.1 RBI Methodology ............................................................................................................... 12
6.2 Equipment Grouping ......................................................................................................... 13
6.3 Inventory Group ................................................................................................................. 14
6.4 Equipment/Component Items in Plant Facilities ............................................................... 14
6.5 Off-Plot Piping ................................................................................................................... 14
6.6 Utilities ............................................................................................................................... 15
6.7 Offshore Facilities .............................................................................................................. 15
6.8 Above Ground Atmospheric Storage Tanks...................................................................... 15
6.9 PRDs ................................................................................................................................. 15
6.10 RBI Documentation ........................................................................................................... 15
6.11 Record Keeping ................................................................................................................. 16
6.12 Degradation Mechanism ................................................................................................... 17
6.13 Inspection Effectiveness Tables ........................................................................................ 17
6.16 Update of RBI Software Database .................................................................................... 19
6.18 Comprehensive Review of the OSI Program .................................................................... 19
7 Responsibilities ............................................................................................................ 22
7.1 ES RBI Team .................................................................................................................... 22
7.2 Team Leader ..................................................................................................................... 23
7.3 RBI Facilitator .................................................................................................................... 24
7.4 Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer ................................................................ 24
7.5 Materials/Corrosion Engineer ............................................................................................ 24
7.6 Plant Engineer ................................................................................................................... 25
7.7 RBI Software Practitioner .................................................................................................. 25
Page 72 of 73
7.8 Operations Personnel........................................................................................................ 25

7.9 Proponent Management .................................................................................................... 26
7.10 Loss Prevention Engineer ................................................................................................. 26
7.11 T&I Engineer ..................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix 1 – Decision Tree for Performing RBI ..................................................................... 27

Appendix 2 – RBI RASCI Chart .............................................................................................. 28
Appendix 3 – RBI Process for In-House Assessment ............................................................. 29
Appendix 4 – RBI Process for Service Providers .................................................................... 30
Appendix 5 – RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations.................................................. 31
Appendix 6 – Corrosion Loop Development Workflow............................................................ 32
Appendix 7 – RBI Task List .................................................................................................... 33
Appendix 8 – Description of RBI Tasks .................................................................................. 34
Phase 1 – Pre-Assessment Preparation ....................................................................................... 34
Phase 2 – Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 35
Appendix 9 – Sources of Site Specific Data and Information .................................................. 46
Appendix 10 – Inspection Effectiveness Tables ..................................................................... 48
Appendix 11 – RBI Validation Form ....................................................................................... 68
Appendix 12 – RBI Validation Form Instructions .................................................................... 69
Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity ................................................................................ 70
Page 73 of 73

Saep 343 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Saep 343 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Procedure

SAEP-343 7 July 2015

Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards

Appendix 1 - Decision Tree for Performing RBI........ 27

Previous Issue: 21 August 2013 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018

Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.

1.4 This SAEP applies to

2.3 RBI assessment recommendations and implementation are uniformly

2.4 Adequate resources are provided for RBI assessment.

3 Conflicts and Deviations

(SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi

4.1 Saudi Aramco Documents

Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures

Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards

Saudi Aramco Best Practice

Saudi Aramco Engineering Report

Loss Prevention Department

4.2 Industry Codes and Standards

American Petroleum Institute

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

American Society of Testing Materials

ASTM G46 Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting

National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors

U. S. Code of Federal Regulations

5 Definitions and Abbreviations

Asset Integrity Management System: Modern management tool to ensure that

Components: Parts that make up a piece of equipment or equipment item.

Comprehensive OSI Review: Detailed review of On-stream Inspection (OSI)

Consequence: Outcome from an event. There may be one or more consequences

Corrosion Loop: Section of a plant defined mainly on the basis of similar

Corrosion Management Program (CMP): A Risk-based, structured and

Damage Mechanism: A process that induces micro and/or macro material

Damage mechanisms are usually incremental, cumulative, and, in some instances,

Deterioration: The reduction in a material's ability to perform its intended

Degradation Mechanism: See Damage Mechanism.

Equipment: An individual item that is part of a system. Examples include

Event: Occurrence of a particular set of circumstances. The event can be

Evergreening: Is the process of updating the initial RBI assessment due to

External Event: An event beyond the direct or indirect control of management

Failure: Termination of the ability of a system, structure, or component to

Hazard: A physical condition or a release of a hazardous material that could

Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Assessment as per OSHA 29 CFR 1910.119

Initial RBI Assessment: The first comprehensive RBI assessment performed on

Inspection Engineer: For the purpose of this document an Inspection Engineer

Inspection Effectiveness: Is qualitatively evaluated by assigning the inspection

Inventory Group: Inventory of attached equipment that can realistically

IOW or Integrity IOW. Also referred to as Plant Integrity Window (PIW)#;

Management of Change: is a procedural system of control supported by

In RBI context it is a procedure supported by documentation to ensure that all

The review of the MOC shall be performed by a Saudi Aramco employee.

Mitigation: Limitation of any negative consequences of a particular event.

On-Stream Inspection (OSI): The use of any number of nondestructive testing

Operational Cycle: An operational cycle is defined as the initiation and

Probability (Likelihood): The chance that a given event will occur.

QA/QC: The combination of quality assurance, the process or set of

Qualitative Risk Analysis (Assessment): Methods that use engineering

Quantitative Risk Assessment: An assessment that:

Quantitative risk assessment uses logic models depicting combinations of events

RASCI: A tool used to define roles and responsibilities during a process.

RBI Facilitator: A member of an RBI assessment team with the responsibility

Risk: The combination of the probability of an event and its consequence.

Risk Analysis: Systematic use of information to identify sources and to

Risk-Based Inspection (RBI): A risk assessment and management process that