Corrosion Management

PETRONAS TECHNICAL STANDARDS
Corrosion Management
PTS 15.04.01
April 2019
© 2019 PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS)

All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form
or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the permission of the copyright
owner. PETRONAS Technical Standards are Company’s internal standards and meant for authorized users only.
1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

PTS 15.04.01
CORROSION MANAGEMENT April 2019
Page 2 of 52
FOREWORD
PETRONAS Technical Standards (PTS) has been developed based on the accumulated knowledge,
experience and best practices of the PETRONAS group supplementing National and International
standards where appropriate. The key objective of PTS is to ensure standard technical practice across
the PETRONAS group.
Compliance to PTS is compulsory for PETRONAS-operated facilities and Joint Ventures (JVs) where
PETRONAS has more than fifty percent (50%) shareholding and/or operational control, and includes all
phases of work activities.
Contractors/manufacturers/suppliers who use PTS are solely responsible in ensuring the quality of
work, goods and services meet the required design and engineering standards. In the case where
specific requirements are not covered in the PTS, it is the responsibility of the
Contractors/manufacturers/suppliers to propose other proven or internationally established standards
or practices of the same level of quality and integrity as reflected in the PTS.
In issuing and making the PTS available, PETRONAS is not making any warranty on the accuracy or
completeness of the information contained in PTS. The Contractors/manufacturers/suppliers shall
ensure accuracy and completeness of the PTS used for the intended design and engineering
requirement and shall inform the Owner for any conflicting requirement with other international codes
and technical standards before start of any work.
PETRONAS is the sole copyright holder of PTS. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, recording or
otherwise) or be disclosed by users to any company or person whomsoever, without the prior written
consent of PETRONAS.
The PTS shall be used exclusively for the authorised purpose. The users shall arrange for PTS to be kept
in safe custody and shall ensure its secrecy is maintained and provide satisfactory information to
PETRONAS that this requirement is met.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 3 of 52
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 5
1.1 SCOPE ............................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ....................................................................................................... 5
1.3 SUMMARY OF CHANGES .................................................................................................. 9
2.0 OVERVIEW OF CORROSION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CMS) ................................... 10
3.0 POLICY AND STRATEGY ......................................................................................... 12
3.1 POLICY ............................................................................................................................ 12
3.2 STRATEGY ....................................................................................................................... 12
4.0 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITIES ......................................... 13
4.1 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE ...................................................................................... 13
4.2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITY .......................................................................................... 13
4.3 CORROSION MANAGEMENT TEAM (CMT)..................................................................... 13
4.4 COMMUNICATION ......................................................................................................... 14
4.5 COMPETENCY AND TRAINING........................................................................................ 14
5.0 PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION ...................................................................... 16
5.1 CORROSION DESIGN BASIS MEMORANDUM (CDBM) ................................................... 16
5.2 PETRONAS RISK-BASED INSPECTION (PRBI) ................................................................... 18
5.3 CORROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP) ............................................................. 19
6.0 SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AND MONITORING ......................................................... 28
6.1 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICTOR (KPI) .............................................................................. 28
6.2 PERFORMANCE MONITORING ....................................................................................... 28
6.3 NON-CONFORMANCE, AND CORRECTIVE AND PREVENTIVE ACTION ........................... 28
7.0 AUDIT AND MANAGEMENT REVIEW ..................................................................... 29
7.1 AUDIT ............................................................................................................................. 29
7.2 PEER REVIEW AND SITUATIONAL ASSESSMENT ............................................................ 30
7.3 MANAGEMENT REVIEW ................................................................................................. 30
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................... 31
APPENDIX 1 – CORROSION MANAGEMENT TEAM (CMT) FOR OPERATIGN FACILITIES ....... 32
APPENDIX 2 – DOCUMENT AND DATA FOR CDBM AND CMP DEVELOPMENT .................... 35
APPENDIX 3 – BASIS OF CMMP DEVELOPMENT ................................................................ 38
APPENDIX 4 – TYPE OF IOW LIMIT.................................................................................... 39

PTS 15.04.01
Page 4 of 52
APPENDIX 5 – CORROSION MANAGEMENT KPI ................................................................ 41

APPENDIX 6 – CORROSION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SELF-ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST........... 42

PTS 15.04.01
Page 5 of 52
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This PTS specifies the minimum technical requirement to develop and implement Corrosion
Management System (CMS) for new and existing PETRONAS facilities.
The objective of this PTS is to ensure safe, reliable and cost effective operations of PETRONAS
assets through development and implementation of Corrosion Design Basis Memorandum
(CDBM) during design stage, and PETRONAS Risk Based Inspection (PRBI) and Corrosion
Management Program (CMP) during operation stage.
1.1 SCOPE
This PTS is only applicable for static equipment, piping and pipeline at PETRONAS:
i. Offshore facilities
ii. Onshore facilities
iii. Topside (i.e. process unit) of floaters
1.2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
1.2.1 General Definition of Terms & Abbreviations
Refer to PTS 00.01.03 for PTS Requirements, General Definition Of Terms, Abbreviations &
Reading Guide.
1.2.2 Specific Definitions of Terms
No Term Definition
1 Audit A systematic, independent and documented
process for obtaining relevant and verifiable
evidence which can be used to objectively
evaluate and determine the extent to which
the management system is suitable and viable
to meet its objective.
2 Corrosion The destruction of materials, usually a metal, or
its properties as a result of electrochemical,
chemical and physical reactions with its
immediate environment or surroundings.
3 Corrosion Control and Measures taken to eliminate, reduce or control
Mitigation the impact of corrosion or damage mechanism.
4 Corrosion Design Basis Document that specify the basis and
Memorandum (CDBM) requirement associated with material selection
including corrosion allowance, corrosion
control and mitigation, and corrosion
monitoring, to ensure the asset is designed and

PTS 15.04.01
Page 6 of 52
No Term Definition
constructed for safe and reliable operation
throughout the specified design life.
5 Corrosion Group (CG) Section of process units with similar corrosion
and damage mechanisms, similar operating
conditions, and similar materials of
construction.
6 Corrosion Management Process of identifying, assessing, evaluating,
mitigating, accepting and communicating risk
associated with corrosion and damage
mechanism.
7 Corrosion Management A comprehensive document that describes the
Program (CMP) critical information and requirement for
assessing and mitigating risk associated with
corrosion and damage mechanism.
8 Corrosion Management System The overall process that governed the
(CMS) assessment, planning, execution, and continual
improvement in managing corrosion and
damage mechanism related risks to ensure safe
and reliable operation of new and existing
assets.
9 Corrosion Monitoring and Corrosion risk mitigation plan that specify the
Mitigation Plan (CMMP) requirement associated to corrosion
monitoring and corrosion mitigation activities
including the action to be taken in the event of
deviation from defined IOW.
10 Corrosion Risk Assessment Systematic process of analysis and evaluation
of risk associated with corrosion and damage
mechanism through use of information to
identify and estimate the susceptibility,
potential, rate and degree of a corrosion or
damage mechanism.
11 Corrosion Risk Mitigation Process of selection and implementation of
measures to modify risk of failure due to
corrosion or damage mechanism.
12 Damage Mechanism (DM) A process that induces deleterious micro
and/or macro material changes over time that
is harmful to the material, condition or
mechanical properties that can affect the
integrity of asset. Common damage
mechanisms include corrosion, chemical attack,
creep, erosion, fatigue, fracture and thermal
aging.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 7 of 52
No Term Definition
13 Inspection Direct physical examination and measurement
of an equipment conditions such as internal
visual inspection, wall thickness measurement,
and non-destructive examination (NDE)
14 Integrity Operating Window Established limits for process variables and
(IOW) parameters that can affect the integrity of the
equipment if the process operation deviates
from the established limits for a predetermined
length of time.
Previously known as Asset Integrity Limit (AIL)

15 Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Analysis A tool or technique that enables comparative
cost assessments to be made over a specified
period of time, taking into account all relevant
economic factors both in terms of initial capital
costs and future operational and asset
replacement cost
16 Mechanical Integrity (MI) The management systems, work practices,
methods, and procedures established in order
to protect and preserve the integrity of
operating equipment and piping to avoid loss
of containment due to corrosion and damage
mechanisms
17 Monitoring Indirect measurement of the condition of the
system such as process condition, or corrosivity
of process fluid using representative sample or
electrochemical instrumentation.
18 Reassessment Process of reviewing and updating CMP to
include current information regarding corrosion
risk and corrosion risk mitigation actions.
19 Risk Based Inspection (RBI) A risk assessment and management process
that is focused on loss of containment of
pressurized equipment due to corrosion and
damage mechanism. These risks are managed
primarily through inspection.
20 Subject Matter Expert (SME) A person who has in-depth knowledge and
experience on a specific subject as it relates to
corrosion management.
Table 1.1: Specific Definitions of Terms

PTS 15.04.01
Page 8 of 52
1.2.3 Specific Abbreviations
No Abbreviation Description
1 ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practicable
2 CA Corrosion Allowance
3 CARAT Corrosion and Reliability Assessment Tools
4 CCD Corrosion Control Document
5 CDBM Corrosion Design Basis Memorandum
6 CG Corrosion Group
7 CI Corrosion Inhibitor
8 CMMP Corrosion Monitoring and Mitigation Plan
9 CMP Corrosion Management Program
10 CMS Corrosion Management System
11 CMT Corrosion Management Team
12 CO2 Carbon Dioxide
13 CoF Consequences of Failure
14 CP Cathodic Protection
15 CUI Corrosion Under Insulation
16 DBM Design Basis Memorandum
17 DM Damage Mechanism
18 FAC Flow Accelerated Corrosion
19 FFS Fitness For Service
20 FWS Full Well Stream
21 GA General Assembly
22 H&MB Heat and Material Balance
23 H2S Hydrogen Sulphide
24 HCl Hydrochloric Acid
Hydrogen Induced Cracking/Stress Oriented
25 HIC/SOHIC
Hydrogen Induced Cracking
26 HT Hydrostatic Test
27 IOW Integrity Operating Window
28 KPI Key Performance Indictor
29 LCC Life Cycle Cost
30 LIMS Laboratory Information Management System
31 LOPC Loss of Primary Containment
32 MCI Material, Corrosion and Inspection
33 MI Mechanical Integrity
34 MSD Material Selection Diagram
35 NCM Need Close Monitoring
36 NDE Non Destructive Examination
37 PCMP PETRONAS Corrosion Management Program
38 PHA Process Hazard Analysis
39 PI Process Information

PTS 15.04.01
Page 9 of 52
No Abbreviation Description
40 PRBI PETRONAS Risk Based Inspection
41 PSI Process Safety Information
42 PWHT Post Weld Heat Treatment
Responsibility, Accountability, Consult and
43 RACI
Inform
44 RBI Risk Based Inspection
45 RCFA Root Cause and Failure Analysis
46 RSI Ryznar Stability Index
47 SCC Stress Corrosion Cracking
48 SME Subject Matter Expert
49 UFD Utility Flow Diagram
Table 1.2: Specific Abbreviations
1.3 SUMMARY OF CHANGES
This PTS 15.04.01 (April 2019) replaces PTS 15.04.01 (September 2015).

PTS 15.04.01
Page 10 of 52
2.0 OVERVIEW OF CORROSION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CMS)
2.1 Corrosion Management System (CMS) is the overall process that governed the assessment,
planning, execution, and improvement in managing corrosion and DM related risks to ensure
safe and reliable operation of existing and new assets.
2.2 CMS shall be developed and implemented at all PETRONAS facilities throughout the life cycle
of the facilities to support the overall asset integrity management.
2.3 Element of CMS are as following:
i. Policy and Strategy
ii. Organizational Structure and Responsibilities
iii. Planning and Implementation
iv. System Performance and Monitoring
v. Audit and Management Review
Overall CMS framework is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Overall CMS Framework

PTS 15.04.01
Page 11 of 52
2.4 Three (3) major corrosion management activities specified in this PTS are CDBM, PRBI and
CMP. These corrosion management activities are developed and implemented to manage risk
of corrosion and DMs at every stage of the asset life. The scope and relationship between the
corrosion management activities are shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2: Simplified Scope and Relationship of CDBM, PRBI and CMP

PTS 15.04.01
Page 12 of 52
3.0 POLICY AND STRATEGY
3.1 POLICY
3.1.1 Policy on corrosion management shall be established to indicate the organization’s

commitment towards CMS implementation.
3.1.2 The corrosion management policy shall clearly state and address the following
i. Vision of the organisation on corrosion management
ii. Expectations and objectives of corrosion management in improving safety and

reducing risk, maximizing asset reliability and availability ensuring compliance to
statutory and regulatory requirement
iii. Strategies to achieve the objectives
iv. Necessary resources and organization to develop, implement, monitor and

improve the CMS
3.1.3 Policy on corrosion management shall be communicated and published to all personal in the
organization.
3.2 STRATEGY
3.2.1 A corrosion management strategy shall be developed and specifically derived from the policy.
Corrosion management strategy should be aligned and consistent with other Owner’s strategy
including business strategy and conformance to statutory requirements.
3.2.2 The developed corrosion management strategy should describe
i. Main activities or programs to be developed and implemented to achieve

corrosion management objectives
ii. The connection between all parties involve with corrosion management activities
especially between Owner, Contractor, Subcontractor and Consultant.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 13 of 52
4.0 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITIES
4.1 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE
4.1.1 The organisational structure shall be established and clearly stated upon the development and
implementation of corrosion management activities.
4.1.2 Sufficient, relevant and qualified resources shall be identified and allocated to execute
corrosion management activities.
4.2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITY
4.2.1 Roles and responsibilities shall be clearly defined and documented, preferably in RACI Matrix,
for all task defined in corrosion management activities. The RACI Matrix shall include all
management, technical, operation and contractor personnel involved in implementation of
CMS.
4.2.2 Owner shall clearly demarcate the scope and boundary of asset under responsibility of various
contractors involved in corrosion management (e.g. between drilling contractor and surface
facility contractor).
4.2.3 Roles and responsibility of each parties should be defined based on RACI category described in
Table 4.1 below.
Roles Definition
Those who perform the work to achieve the task and who have control
over something or someone and the task of taking care of it, him or her.
R – Responsible
There is typically one role with participation type of responsibility,
although others can be delegated to assist in the work required.
Those who are ultimately accountable for the correct and thorough
completion of the deliverable or task and the one to whom Responsible
A – Accountable
is answerable to. In other words, an Accountable must sign off (i.e.
Approve) on work that Responsible provides.
Those whose opinions are sought and with whom there is two-way
C – Consult
communication.
Those who are kept up-to-date on progress, often only on completion
I – Inform of the task or deliverable and with whom there is just one-way
communication
Table 4.1: RACI Category
4.2.4 All gaps and overlaps in responsibility should be identified and eliminated.
4.3 CORROSION MANAGEMENT TEAM (CMT)
4.3.1 CMT shall be established to manage the corrosion management activities in operating facilities.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 14 of 52
4.3.2 The CMT shall consist of experience and knowledgeable personnel from various discipline as
shown in Appendix 1.
4.4 COMMUNICATION
4.4.1 The interfaces and communication between all parties shall be clearly defined and
documented. The communication plan should at least consist of frequency, method, level of
communication, proper routes of communication and follow up system.
4.4.2 Internal communication within CMT shall include, but not limited to:
i. Communication between CMT and management on CMS implementation status

and issues such as review of corrosion management policy, resource for corrosion
management activities implementation, and review corrosion management KPI
ii. Communication and cascading on RACI and KPI to relevant parties
iii. Implementation of recommendation action as an outcome from inspection,

monitoring and/or audit findings
4.4.3 Any findings and action item related to corrosion management activities shall be provided to
relevant parties with clear written instruction for execution.
4.4.4 CMT meeting and discussion should be held periodically, at least once every quarter to ensure
effective implementation of corrosion management activities and to identify any issues.
4.5 COMPETENCY AND TRAINING
4.5.1 Owner shall define the competency and qualification requirement for all CMT members
including contractor involved in development and implementation of corrosion management
activities. Owner shall be responsible for managing and assuring competency of personnel
involve in corrosion management activities by means of a structured competency management
system.
4.5.2 Adequate training should be planned and implemented by Owner as part of training policy to
ensure all relevant personnel are competent to execute the corrosion management activities.
4.5.3 To ensure effective implementation of CMP, CMT members shall be trained and
knowledgeable on CMMP in their respective operating area or unit. The training should at least
include information on:
i. The basis, purpose and intent of each monitoring activities and parameters
including DM is being prevented or controlled by the CMMP established
ii. The monitoring parameters criticality type including the basis of selection,
difference between NCM, Standard and Trending parameter and difference in
response actions and timing.
iii. The basis and intent of the established IOW including IOW category.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 15 of 52
iv. Action or response to be taken when IOW is deviated including importance to take
the predetermined action within the specified timeframe and the undesirable
short and long term consequences of failing to take action within the specified
time frame
v. Communication plan when IOW is deviated including parties to be informed or

consulted and communication method or mechanism
vi. The difference between mechanical and process design conditions, and IOW.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 16 of 52
5.0 PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION
5.1 CORROSION DESIGN BASIS MEMORANDUM (CDBM)
5.1.1 The main objective of CDBM is to specify the corrosion risk mitigation to be implemented
during project detailed design and construction stage to ensure the constructed asset can be
safely and reliably operated throughout the design life. CDBM shall be a basis of minimum
requirement to be referred during project detailed design stage.
5.1.2 For all new facility, CDBM shall be developed during FEED stage or preferably as early as during
conceptual design stage and continuously reviewed until the construction stage.
5.1.3 CDBM shall be developed with reference to Project DBM document. Recommended document
to develop CDBM is listed in Appendix 2.
5.1.4 PMT shall be responsible for the development of CDBM. The CDBM shall be reviewed by the
Owner MCI engineer assigned to the PMT and endorsed by Technical Authority (MCI).
5.1.5 CDBM shall at least covers the following:
i. Code and standard to be referred for design and constructions
ii. Corrosion Risk Assessment to identify potential corrosion threats and DMs based
on design and operating condition
iii. Recommended material of constructions including CA, fabrication requirement

such as PWHT, and specific material testing and qualification
iv. Required corrosion mitigation and control such as CI, coating and lining, CP and
design layout e.g. type of elbow.
v. Recommended inspection and corrosion monitoring such as corrosion coupon,

corrosion probes and sampling point
vi. Any corrosion related requirement during construction and fabrication stage such
as chloride limit in HT medium
5.1.6 Corrosion Risk Assessment for CDBM Development

Corrosion risk assessment shall be conducted based on process design basis and H&MB.
Credible DM during normal, upset and special operating conditions shall be identified including
the expected corrosion rate and severity.
Corrosion prediction software such as Supercorp© can be utilised to determine the expected
corrosion rate.
5.1.7 Material and Design Selection Basis
Material of construction and design features shall be selected based on the result of corrosion
risk assessment. As minimum, the following factors should be considered in the material
selection process:

PTS 15.04.01
Page 17 of 52
i. Damage Mechanisms (DMs) – Materials shall be selected based on the corrosivity

of the environment that the materials are exposed to. This includes both internal
and external corrosion. Other degradations such as fatigue, SCC and brittle
fracture shall also be considered.
ii. Corrosion Control and Mitigation – The application of corrosion control and
mitigation may allow the use of inferior material or reduce the required CA.
However, the suitability, effectiveness and availability of the corrosion control and
mitigation should be properly evaluated as per section 5.1.8.
iii. Inspection and Maintenance – The selected material may require periodic
inspection and maintenance. Accessibility and cost for inspection and
maintenance shall be considered.
iv. Availability and Ease of Fabrication – Priority shall be given to materials that are
readily available in the market with proven fabrication capability including ease of
welding and forming.
v. Life Cycle Cost (LCC) – The selected material shall give the lowest LCC throughout
the facilities design life. Refer to Section 5.1.10 for discussion on LCC.
CA should be specified to manage general corrosion based on the expected corrosion rate and
the design life.
Other specific design and fabrication requirement such as the need for PWHT and injection
quill design shall be in accordance to specific design and fabrication code and standard
requirement.
MSD should be included in CDBM and developed in accordance to NACE SP0407.
5.1.8 Corrosion Control and Mitigation Basis
Based on the result of corrosion risk assessment, CDBM shall specify minimum requirement
for corrosion control and mitigation to complement the material and design selection.
Corrosion control and mitigation includes application of coating and lining, injection of CI or
application of CP system.
As minimum, the following factors should be considered in determining suitable corrosion

control and mitigation:
i. Damage Mechanisms (DMs) – Corrosion control and mitigation shall be selected

based on the type of DM and its severity. Corrosion control and mitigation is only
suitable or effective against specific DM such as CP for soil corrosion but not
effective against other DM.
ii. Design and Operating Condition - Suitability and effectiveness of corrosion control
is highly dependent on operating condition. For example, some coating or lining
system may be damaged at high temperature condition.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 18 of 52
iii. Inspection, Monitoring and Maintenance – Corrosion control and mitigation

system may require additional inspection, monitoring and maintenance during
operations. Accessibility and cost for inspection, monitoring and maintenance of
corrosion mitigation system shall be considered.
iv. Reliability and Availability During Operation – Sufficient design allowance should
be made to ensure reliability and availability of corrosion control system while the
facility is in operation. Consideration should also be made to accommodate for
potential operational challenges including the human factors. For example, to
ensure CI injection meet the availability target, redundant CI volume tank and/or
CI volume tank to be equipped with low level indicators and alarm.
v. Life Cycle Cost (LCC) – Corrosion control and mitigation may require additional
capital expenditure for hardware such as pump skid for CI and TRU for CP. In
addition, corrosion control and mitigation may impose additional operational
expenditure such as chemical cost for CI and electricity cost for impressed current
CP system. The operating expenditure should include the cost for inspection,
monitoring and maintenance of the corrosion control system. Therefore,
economic analysis shall be performed in determining the most economical options
in term of LCC. Refer to Section 5.1.10 for discussion of LCC.
5.1.9 Corrosion Testing and Monitoring Basis

Based on the result of corrosion risk assessment, corrosion monitoring and testing shall be
specified to ensure the facilities are not exposed to prolong increase in corrosivity during
operation and the facilities design life will be met with the selected material and CA.
As minimum, CDBM shall clearly state;
i. Method of monitoring such as sampling point, corrosion coupon and corrosion

probe
ii. Location of corrosion monitoring
5.1.10 Economic Analysis
Economic appraisal based on the LCC shall be carried out to evaluate multiple technically
acceptable options. As an example, the use of CS with CI and monitoring throughout the life of
the facility shall be evaluated in comparison to the use of corrosion resistance alloy. LCC
analysis should be conducted in reference to ISO 15663.
5.2 PETRONAS RISK-BASED INSPECTION (PRBI)
5.2.1 Development and implementation of PRBI shall be in accordance to PTS 15.40.01.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 19 of 52
5.3 CORROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP)
5.3.1 CMP is a comprehensive document that describes the critical information and requirement for
assessing and mitigating risk associated with corrosion and DM. The main outcome of CMP
study is CMMP.
5.3.2 A specific CMP shall be developed for each process unit, system and facility to address
requirements outlined in this document. CMP document shall at least specify:
i. Corrosion risk assessment outcome
ii. Corrosion risk mitigation plan, usually in form of CMMP
iii. CMS implementation including roles and responsibility of CMT members, usually
in form of RACI Matrix
iv. CMS performance monitoring, usually in from of corrosion management KPI
5.3.3 CMT shall establish written procedures or working guideline for development and
implementation of CMP.
5.3.4 CMP shall be developed as early as in construction stage by PMT and continuously be
implemented throughout the operation stage by Owner. For existing facility with no CMP
implementation, Owner shall develop and implement CMP accordingly.
5.3.5 CMP Development Process
Typical CMP development process is shown in Figure 3 below.
Steps in CMP development process is discussed in Section 5.3.6 to 5.3.13. Recommended

document for CMP development are listed in Appendix 2.
Figure 3: CMP Development Process

PTS 15.04.01
Page 20 of 52
5.3.6 Corrosion Risk Assessment for CMP Development
Corrosion risk assessment shall be carried out to identify expected corrosion and DM, critical
equipment, circuit or system, and potential hazards from loss of containment. The corrosion
risk assessment shall consider previous, current and anticipated future operating condition
during normal, upset, start-up, shutdown and special operating condition such as catalyst
regeneration, decoking and hydrogen stripping.
Corrosion risk assessment is usually conducted during the development of PRBI and shall be
reviewed during the development of CMP to validate the adequacy of existing corrosion risk
mitigation and the need for CMMP development for specific CG and DM. Examples of scenarios
and condition that require CMMP is provided in Appendix 3.
In the event of PRBI corrosion study is not available, the corrosion risk assessment for CMP
development should be conducted separately. Minimum output of corrosion risk assessment
for CMP development shall consist of;
i. CG including CG’s description that describe boundary of the CG and material of

construction
ii. Process descriptions along with operating parameters
iii. Active and potential DM including basis and justification for inclusion and/or
elimination of DM
iv. Internal and external corrosion rate for age related DM
v. Potential for non-age related DM
vi. Available corrosion monitoring facilities including applicable process monitoring

and sampling
vii. Available corrosion control and mitigation
viii. Corrosion risk rating
Any additional corrosion monitoring, and corrosion control and mitigation recommended by
SME shall be considered.
The corrosion risk assessment result should be part of CCD developed in accordance to API RP
970.
5.3.7 Corrosion Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (CMMP)
CMMP is a document that specifies structured monitoring plan and strategic action for the
respective limit.
The need for CMMP shall be based on the result of corrosion risk assessment and PRBI
corrosion study review and validation (Section 5.3.6).

PTS 15.04.01
Page 21 of 52
For each identified CG, CMMP shall be generated and shall consist of the following information:
i. CG
ii. DM
iii. Monitoring activities
iv. Monitoring locations
v. Monitoring frequency
vi. Monitoring parameters
vii. Parameters criticality i.e. NCM, Standard and Trending Parameter
viii. Type of IOW Limit i.e. upper limit, lower limit, upper-and-lower limit and lower-
and-upper limit
ix. IOW Limit Category i.e. Target, Warning and Critical Limit
x. Deviation Response action according to the respective IOW limit category
xi. Findings and Recommendations
The basis and justification for the selection CG and DM to be monitored and details of CMMP
shall be documented.
5.3.8 Monitoring Activities
Selection of suitable and appropriate corrosion monitoring activities or methods should be

based on the following considerations:
i. Able to detect, quantify or trends corrosivity of the fluids, sufficient for CMT to
make informed decisions.
ii. Able to provide monitoring data with sufficient accuracy and precision for
interpreting and understanding the corrosion status of the facilities.
iii. Able to provide data and information within an appropriate time frame to enable
the Operator to investigate the cause of deviation or adjust corrosion mitigation
measures before significant damage can occur.
iv. The need for deployment of combination of corrosion monitoring techniques in

order to capture a true picture of the corrosivity of the system being monitored.
The monitoring activities shall depend on the DM to be monitored, facilities design,

operational philosophy, the expected response time and flexibility to accommodate future
changes. For example:

PTS 15.04.01
Page 22 of 52
i. Monitoring of CO2 corrosion for Oil FWS is mainly focused on availability of CI

injection. On the other hand, CO2 corrosion monitoring for dry gas systems
focuses on removal of the electrolyte (water) via a dew point monitoring.
ii. The use of online sensors that are connected to DCS will enable a more dynamic
detection and response by the engineers to any operational upset.
iii. The use of an external non-intrusive sensors allows the sensors to be moved to
other locations that are deemed more corrosive based on inspection data and
process monitoring or sampling.
NACE Publication 3T199 should be referred to in determining the suitable monitoring activities.
5.3.9 Monitoring Locations
The monitoring location selection should be based on the expected DM and arrangement of
the equipment or piping of concern. Selection of the monitoring locations of corrosion
monitoring tools and sampling point should consider the location that is representative to the
corrosivity of the system which is typically the most corrosive location within a CG.
For in-service facilities, corrosion monitoring location should be selected, where applicable
based on existing instrumentation and/or sampling points to ensure practical implementation
of CMP and avoid extensive and unnecessary facilities modification. Where possible, after
considering of all other factors, locations that are accessible to Operators or Technicians to
collect data without employing scaffolding should be selected.
Any additional corrosion monitoring and sampling locations recommended by SME shall be
considered.
5.3.10 Monitoring Frequency
The monitoring frequency should be based on the monitoring activities and techniques,
corrosivity of the system, risk of the system and mode of operation of the facility. Monitoring
and sampling frequency normally vary from hourly for online data collection to yearly for
specialized sampling and testing.
Specific monitoring frequency established in the CMMP shall be based on the following
consideration:
i. Frequent enough to limit exposure to undesirable conditions and allow corrective

action to be taken
ii. Frequent enough to allow reasonable amount of data to be collected for trending
to make informed decision
iii. Sufficiently exposed to the fluid service to allow accurate, precise and meaningful
data collection.
If the monitoring frequency is no practicable, changes of monitoring activities techniques,

based on SME recommendation, shall be considered. For example, a platform designed for

PTS 15.04.01
Page 23 of 52
unmanned operation is not suitable to have a monitoring system that requires weekly manual
and on-site data collection and should be changed to automated and/or online system.
5.3.11 Monitoring Parameters
Parameters to be monitored shall be based on the DM and monitoring activities and

techniques. Monitoring parameters shall include, where applicable, the following:
i. Process parameters that directly affect corrosion behaviour (i.e. corrosion factor)
from online analyser, local indicator and process sampling. Examples of such
parameters includes temperature, pH, concentration of corrodent and flow rate
ii. Parameters that indicates effectiveness and availability of corrosion mitigation and
control to ensure corrosivity of the system is maintained within acceptable range.
Examples of such parameters includes CI availability and CP structure-to-
electrolyte potential
iii. Parameters, typically corrosion rate, collected from corrosion monitoring tools
such as corrosion probe and corrosion coupon.
Each monitoring parameter shall be evaluated and categorized as NCM, Standard or Trending
based on definition and criteria outlined below
i. NCM (i.e. Critical) Parameter is a parameter that require special attention due to
its criticality to the integrity of the equipment and piping within a CG. Generally,
NCM parameter requires a more frequent monitoring and more definitive and
predetermined deviation response with limited response time.
ii. Standard Parameter is a parameter which monitored to assist decision making in

determining action to be taken in event of a deviation. Standard parameter
includes parameters that used to calculate/determine corrosion rate, risk or other
parameter (e.g. RSI). Typically, deviation of standard parameters allows a longer
reaction time to return the process to within the IOW limits than NCM Parameter.
iii. Trending (i.e. informational) Parameter is a parameter to supplement the

monitored NCM and Standard parameter and inspection data whenever
verification is required and often only gives indirect impact to specific DM. A
trending parameter often does not have alarms or alerts associated with
deviations and does not have the control to return back the process variables.
Monitoring parameters shall be ranked to help in determination of the appropriate priority of

alarms, alerts and notifications to Operation personnel and SME, as needed and/or specified
by the IOW response action. The ranking will also help to determine what actions for operator
needs to take and how fast the operator needs to act before the process gets too far out of
control.
5.3.12 Integrity Operating Window (IOW)
IOW or limit shall be determined for each identified monitoring parameter.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 24 of 52
The IOW can be either upper limit, lower limit, upper-and-lower limit or lower-and-upper limit,
which are assigned to each monitoring parameters based on the DM. Examples of type of IOW
limit is provided in Appendix 4.
The IOW shall be categorized as Target, Warning and Critical Limit through the adoption of a
“traffic light”’ system based on potential for the DM to occur, facilities design life, operational
philosophy and turnaround strategy. Table 5.1 below describes the definition for each IOW
category.
IOW Category Color Definition
Limit to be maintained within to ensure compliance to
Target Limit Green
design life and acceptable risk
If exceeded can lead to increase in degradation rates or
Warning Limit Yellow
introduction of new DM
Critical Limit Red If exceeded can lead to rapid deterioration
Table 5.1: IOW Category
The specific definition for IOW category should be discussed and agreed with Owner at the
start of CMMP development.
For any monitoring parameters that individual data points have little meaning, the analysis
process should focus on data trending over a specified period. For these type of parameters,
IOW shall be set in term of changes in the trend instead of specific IOW value. For example,
monitoring of changes to iron count trend is more meaningful to indicates changes to the
system corrosivity that the value of individual data point.
Basis and the specific reference used to establish the IOW shall be stated and documented.
API RP 584 should be referred for establishing the IOW.
5.3.13 Deviation Response
Deviation Response is the suggested or typical actions to be taken when the monitored
parameters deviate into warning or critical IOW region.
The response towards the IOW deviation, including response time, shall be defined and level
of urgency of each response shall be properly differentiate in accordance to parameters
criticality and IOW category. For example, deviations to critical IOW limits for NCM parameters
will normally require an urgent specific and predetermined response by the operator to avoid
more rapid equipment degradation problems. On the other hand, deviations to warning limits
of standard or trending parameter will require less urgent response.
In some cases, to facilitate short response time, risk assessment should be conducted to
determine the need for alarm and/or automated deviation response.
Critical deviation responses that will affect operation or process of the facility should be
recorded in Cause & Effect Matrix. Examples of such scenario are process unit need to be shut
downed in the in the event of non-availability of CI system or steam boiler to be shut downed
when DO concentration in boiler feed water exceed maximum allowable limit.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 25 of 52
5.3.14 CMP Implementation and Analysis.
RACI Matrix shall be developed as per requirement of Section 4 to guide implementation of

task defined in CMP including:
i. Data collection
ii. Data trending
iii. Data analysis
iv. Response in the event of deviation
v. Reporting
Data analysis covers comparison of the monitored data against the defined IOW. Adoption of
software and intelligent modelling utilizing real time data should be considered for the
following benefits:
i. Enable proactive, predictive, data driven approach to quantifying corrosion

damage and risk.
ii. Allow incorporation of design data and operational conditions with the latest DM
knowledge to enhance predictive analytics
iii. Enable IOW monitoring of historical data as part of big data compilation for
machine learning.
Any anomaly or deviation shall be identified and highlighted to respective member of CMT for
necessary corrective action to be carried out.
5.3.15 Review and Reassessment
CMP is a live document and shall be regularly updated at defined intervals or as needed to
account for new or previously unknown information including
i. Latest corrosion monitoring data including deviation to defined IOW
ii. Inspection findings and results
iii. New information about DMs
iv. Changes in Risk rating
v. Planned or unplanned process and hardware changes
vi. Failure
Corrosion and DM review should be integrated with the periodic review of an RBI analysis,
where it has been implemented and any changes of the degradation rates or introducing of
new DM shall be incorporated and updated in PRBI corrosion study

PTS 15.04.01
Page 26 of 52
CMP review and reassessment shall be conducted by CMT as below:
i. After changes in process operating condition that lead to increase of corrosivity,

and
ii. At specified interval of not more than one (1) year
MOC process shall be applied whenever NCM or Standard Parameters are being revised or
changed.
5.3.16 CMP Optimisation
The effectiveness of established CMP shall be validated in term of its capability to:
i. Promptly detect high corrosion rate events and their locations;
ii. Warn the facilities of locations where inspection should be carried out;
iii. Warn the facilities of which equipment and piping sections that will not reach the
desired life;
iv. Adapt to changing operating conditions as well as varying corrosivity of processes;
v. Enable engineers to assess different mitigation strategies prior to their

implementation;
vi. Enable process engineers and operators to appreciate the impact of operation
conditions on asset integrity.
vii. Provide cost benefits and mitigations plan that positively impact continuous
operations.
Corrosion monitoring data, inspection data and operating experience shall be used as a basis
to optimize CMMP, for example,
i. Actual process monitoring data is useful to determine the right monitoring

frequency based on previous compliance. Parameters that recorded frequent
deviation from IOW should require more frequent monitoring.
ii. Inspection findings and results should be used to determine suitability of existing
monitoring location and the need for additional monitoring locations.
iii. Deviation response actions, where possible, can be detailed out based on
operating experience in managing deviations to IOW
iv. Inspection data should be used to evaluate effectiveness of existing CMMP to

manage corrosion. For instance, if inspection data indicates high corrosion rate
despite good compliance to IOW, further evaluation and investigation is required
to determine the suitability of existing IOW.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 27 of 52
The CMP work process should be optimized through integration with other MI program or
work process for example:
i. The CMP work process and documentation should be a resource for the RBI work
process and vice versa. CMP reassessment workshop and RBI reassessment
workshop could be combined where there is complete overlap in resources and
timing of the two programs.
ii. The analysis of IOW exceedances should be an input in RBI analysis and inspection
plans generated by RBI should be updated to incorporate changes in system
corrosivity
iii. The IOW list and documentation should be a resource for PHA. IOW exceedances
especially critical IOW exceedances of NCM parameters should be reviewed by the
PHA team to determine if actions or limits may need to be revised.
iv. MOC work process should be closely integrated with the CMP work process for
any changes, additions or deletions to be made to the CMMP or IOW.
5.3.17 Report
A routine report shall be produced by CMT at the end of each review and reassessment session
detailing the compliance status, deviation, corrective action taken and any anomaly.
On an annual basis, a summary report on overall status and performance of CMP shall be
produced for the Plant Head.
5.3.18 Data Handling and Storage
Respective facility shall utilize approved software and database system to manage and
organize the corrosion monitoring activity and data. Asset register, corrosion assessment and
shall be organized in PRBI program while CMMP shall be managed and implemented through
PCMP (previously known as CARAT). Any deviation from this requirement shall require Group
Technical Authority (Corrosion) endorsement.
Data shall be stored with adequate back-ups for the lifetime of the facility. The security and
integrity of information kept in electronic database system shall be maintained at all time as
per PTS 15.06.01 requirement.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 28 of 52
6.0 SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AND MONITORING
6.1 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICTOR (KPI)
6.1.1 In operating facilities, Corrosion Management KPI shall be clearly defined and documented to
monitor performance of CMS and identify improvement needed to achieve corrosion
management objectives.
6.1.2 Corrosion Management KPI should be:
i. Specific and clearly linked with corrosion management objective and strategy
ii. Measureable and consist of leading and lagging indicators
iii. Achievable with practicable preventive and corrective actions
iv. Relevant to corrosion risk and business objectives
v. Time-bound and have clear timeline to achieve the stated KPI
Examples of Corrosion Management KPI is provided in Appendix 5.
6.2 PERFORMANCE MONITORING
6.2.1 The compliance to and effectiveness of CMS shall be monitored and measured.
6.2.2 Proactive measures of performance shall be put in place to measure the implementation of
the CMS. Proactive measures should include periodic KPI review, site verification, self-
assessments and audit.
6.2.3 Each corrosion management tasks should be assigned to a specific CMT member who shall
regularly monitor and report the performance of the tasks based on the established KPI.
6.3 NON-CONFORMANCE, AND CORRECTIVE AND PREVENTIVE ACTION
6.3.1 Corrective or preventative action shall be taken to eliminate the causes of actual and potential
non-conformances.
6.3.2 The corrective or preventive actions taken shall be appropriate to the magnitude of problems
and commensurate with the corrosion risks encountered.
6.3.3 CMT shall implement and record any changes in the documented CMS resulting from
corrective and preventative action.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 29 of 52
7.0 AUDIT AND MANAGEMENT REVIEW
7.1 AUDIT
7.1.1 In operating facilities, CMS shall be audited via a systematic, independent and documented
process to obtain relevant and verifiable evidence in order to objectively evaluate and
determine the adequacy and effectiveness of CMS.
7.1.2 Internal audit program shall be established based on risk based approach. The audit program
should at least provide assurance that:
i. CMS is in accordance to this PTS and covers all essential elements
ii. All corrosion management activities are implemented in accordance with this PTS
elements
iii. The implemented corrosion management activities are adequate to overcome

identified corrosion risk elements
iv. Suitable monitoring is in place to measure performance of CMS
v. Previously identified gaps have been addressed and corrective action has been
effectively implemented
ISO 19011 should be referred to when establishing the audit program.
7.1.3 The frequency of internal audit activity shall be at least every three (3) years after CMS has
been implemented.
7.1.4 The auditor shall be independent from party that directly involves in the implementation of
the corrosion management activities.
7.1.5 Before each audit, a written audit plan shall be developed to enable the auditor and auditee
to have a common understanding of the audit’s purpose and shall cover at least the following:
i. Scope of the audit including risk area, unit or system, and activities to be audited
ii. Audit criteria such as corrosion management KPI and regulatory requirement
iii. Personnel to be interviewed
iv. Checklists or listing of documents to be reviewed
An example of CMS Self-Assessment Checklist is provided in Appendix 6 and should be referred

to while conducting the audit.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 30 of 52
7.1.6 Contractor and Owner shall jointly develop audit program to monitor and assess contractor
performance in supporting implementation of corrosion management activities.
7.1.7 In the event of any non-conformance, observation, or improvement opportunity is identified

during the audit, corrective action to address the findings shall be agreed with CMT. The
corrective action plan shall be recorded, tracked and reported to ensure effective action has
been taken.
7.2 PEER REVIEW AND SITUATIONAL ASSESSMENT
7.2.1 CMS Situational Assessment shall be conducted once to provide a baseline assessment from
an independent third party review to assess the adequacy and comprehensiveness of CMS.
7.2.2 CMS Situational Assessment shall be followed by periodic Peer Review to assess the
effectiveness and sustainability of CMS at least every five (5) years. The results from this Peer
Review can be used to benchmark CMS amongst the PETRONAS facilities to ensure
consistency, effectiveness and sustainability across the PETRONAS group wide.
7.3 MANAGEMENT REVIEW
7.3.1 The effectiveness of CMS shall be continually reviewed by Plant Head through formal and
systematic management review process.
7.3.2 The Plant Head shall responsible for CMS management review which to be conducted yearly.
The Plant Management Committee or designated committee, as representatives of the Plant
Head, shall review the effectiveness of CMS implementation of their facilities for the past one
(1) year.
7.3.3 The CMS management review shall discuss, but not limited to:
i. Corrosion management activities implementation status including gaps identified

and gap closure plans
ii. Main corrosion risk of the facilities including changes in corrosion risk or changes
in legislation requirement, if any
iii. Adequacy and competency of resources to sustain CMS
iv. Audit, situational assessment or peer review findings including corrective action
plan
v. Other opportunities for corrosion risk reduction and mitigation
7.3.4 During the management review, Management shall set suitable KPI for all CMT members to
ensure the effectiveness and sustainability of CMS implementation.
7.3.5 Outcome of management review shall be minuted and shall include proposed actions and
specific CMT member assigned for action item implementation and performance monitoring.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 31 of 52
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
In this PTS, reference is made to the following other Standards/Publication. Unless specifically
designated by date, the latest edition of each publication shall be used, together with any
supplements/revisions thereto:
PETRONAS STANDARDS
Index to PTS PTS 00.01.01
PTS Requirements, General Definition of Terms & Reading Guide PTS 00.01.03
PETRONAS Risk-Based Inspection (PRBI) PTS 15.40.01
Static Equipment History Record PTS 15.06.01
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
Integrity Operating Windows API RP 584
Corrosion Control Documents API RP 970
Guidelines for Auditing Management Systems ASQ/ANSI/ISO
19011:2018
Petroleum and natural gas industries -- Life-cycle costing ISO 15663:2001
Guidance for Corrosion Management in Oil and Gas Production & May 2008
Processing Energy Institute, Oil & Gas, London (UK)
Techniques for Monitoring Corrosion and Related Parameters in Field NACE Publication
Applications 3T199
Format, Content, and Guidelines for Developing a Materials Selection NACE SP0407
Diagram

PTS 15.04.01
Page 32 of 52
APPENDIX 1 – CORROSION MANAGEMENT TEAM (CMT) FOR OPERATIGN FACILITIES
In an operating facility, CMT shall consist of experience and knowledgeable personnel from various
discipline as shown in Table A1. It is also possible that not all the team members listed may be required
if other team members have the required skill and knowledge of multiple disciplines.
Mandatory
Roles Roles and Responsibility
Member
CMT Leader CMT Leader is responsible and accountable to; Yes
 Establish corrosion management strategy for the facilities and
promote consistent approach across the facility
 Lead the CMT and act as key personnel to manage CMT
members in providing support towards successful of corrosion
management activities development and implementation
 The corrosion management activities are carried out in a
timely manner.
 Monitor and ensure compliance to corrosion management KPI
 Communicate corrosion management performance and issue
to all stakeholder.
The CMT Leader, should be any one of the below mentioned

team members but typically a Corrosion SME.
Corrosion SME Corrosion SME or Technical Authority is responsible to Yes
or Technical  Act as key source of technical advice on corrosion related
Authority issue including lead corrosion risk assessment activities and
facilitate CMP reassessment
 Lead development of corrosion management activities
 Evaluate the effectiveness corrosion management strategies
including in term of cost.
 Provide recommendations on corrosion monitoring, control
and mitigation.
Corrosion Corrosion Engineer is responsible to Yes
Engineer  Lead implementation of corrosion management activities
 Provide input in developing CMMP including frequency of
monitoring and response in the event of deviations to IOW
 Review and analyze corrosion monitoring results
 Investigates, review and provide clarifications to corrosion
related matters such as impact of process changes to
materials degradation and DM
 Maintain database for corrosion related issue.
 Recommends and manage the related specialist services as
necessary.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 33 of 52
Mandatory
Member
Inspection Inspection Engineer is responsible to Yes
Engineer  Review, analyze and provide inspection data for development
of corrosion management activities including CMP.
 Contribute development of corrosion management activities
including provide recommended associated with inspection
and NDE
 Execute any identified inspection activities
 Adjusting inspection activities and plans as necessary when
deviations to IOW are reported
Operation Operation personnel or SME is responsible to Yes
 Advices and provide information on current and future
operating practices for development of corrosion
management activities.
 Ensure the facility is operating with the agreed IOW
 Monitor IOW, and collect process samples and data
 Response to any deviations to IOW
 Communicate any deviations to IOW in the designated
manner to identified stakeholders for their potential actions
Process Process personnel or SME is responsible to Yes
 Provide process design and engineering data CMT
 Provide commendation on best course of action to response
to any deviations to IOW
 Provide information and recommendations on process
improvement and changes
Laboratory Laboratory personnel or SME have a role in implementing, Yes
recording and reporting any required sample analyses used for
IOW monitoring in a timely manner as per the CMMP
Technicians or Technicians, such as Inspector, and Technical Assistant is No
Technical responsible to
Assistants  Perform skilled activities such as NDE, corrosion monitoring
data collection and servicing, and CP survey.
 Assist CMT with data entry and data management.
PSM personnel or SME is responsibility to No
Process Safety  Ensure CMP work process is adequate to meet the PSI
Management requirement of relevant PTS and regulations
(PSM)  Ensure MOC process is properly utilized when making changes
to CMMP
Engineering Engineer and Maintenance personnel or SME is responsible to No
and provide necessary support to corrosion management activities
Maintenance can be carried out in accordance to plan.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 34 of 52
Mandatory
Member
Management Owner or Plant Management Team is responsible to No
 Set corrosion management policy and KPI
 Ensure CMT is adequately staffed with knowledgeable,
experienced personnel and SME
 Ensure adequate resources is available to execute corrosion
management activities
 Conduct Management Review of CMS
Table A1: Roles and Responsibility Description of CMT Members

PTS 15.04.01
Page 35 of 52
APPENDIX 2 – DOCUMENT AND DATA FOR CDBM AND CMP DEVELOPMENT
Recommended document and data for CDBM development is provided in Table A2.1 below.
No. Category Document or Data Remarks

1 Design and Project DBM To determine basis of facilities design
Construction including design life, operational
Document philosophy and climate
PFD (or PFS) and UFD For process and system familiarization
Equipment and Piping List To determine scope of CDBM and
equipment and piping design basis (e.g.
design temperature)
2 Process Data H&MB1 To determine expected operating
condition, and fluid composition including
contaminants or trace components for
Corrosion Risk Assessment
Other process information, For specific information to be considered in
report and study such as Corrosion Risk Assessment
Well Test Report, Crude
Assay Report and Future
Souring Study1
NOTE(S):
1. In certain cases, corrodent concentration in hydrocarbon is very low and is not shown in H&MB. However, it is critical to conduct
study and assessment to determine presence of corrodent in the system especially if traces amount of corrodent (e.g. H2S) can lead
to potential asset integrity failure.
Table A2.1 – Document and Data for CDBM Development
Recommended document and data for CMP development is provided in Table A2.2 below.

1 Design and CDBM including Material To determine Corrosion risk considered
Construction Selection Report and MSD during design.
Document
CDBM is useful reference for Corrosion Risk
Assessment for CMP development.
PFD (or PFS), UFD and P&ID For CG development.
(or PEFS)
To identify locations of process monitoring,
corrosions monitoring tools (i.e. corrosion
coupon or point) and sampling locations.
Equipment GA drawings, Mainly required to determine material of
equipment datasheet and construction and fabrication practice such
design calculation as PWHT.
Piping list and specifications Piping class document provide useful
(i.e. Piping Class Document) information on piping material of
construction.

PTS 15.04.01
Page 36 of 52

Engineering specification To provide specific information to be
such as coating, linings and considered for Corrosion Risk Assessment
insulation specifications
CI injection facilities drawing Design basis of CI injection facilities such as
and specification, and CI target availability.
qualification report.
CI qualification report provide information
of the testing condition and/or operational
limit of the CI.
CP system datasheet, Provide information on CP design basis
calculation and drawing (e.g. anode material, anode design life) and
including locations of test test points.
points.
Corrosion probe and coupon Other than locations, corrosion probe and
datasheet, specification and coupon datasheet and specification
drawing indicating locations provides useful information to refine
of the corrosion probe and monitoring frequency and
coupons maintenance/replacement strategy.
2 Process Data Operating procedure and Provide information on operating condition
manual including to be considered in Corrosion Risk
commissioning, start-up and Assessment.
shutdown procedure
H&MB1 To bassline information on design and
operating condition, and fluid composition
including contaminants or trace
components for Corrosion Risk Assessment
Operating data from PI, LIMS Provide information on actual operating
or Operator Logbook. condition including concentration
corrodent and upset condition.
3 Inspection PRBI Database If available, used as main reference to
and determine main corrosion and DM risk.
Maintenance Inspection history and Provide information of equipment
Report findings. including FFS report condition, damage mode, measured
corrosion rate, and location of damage for
Corrosion Risk Assessment.
Information on location of damage is useful

to identify monitoring locations.
Measured corrosion rate provides useful

information on system corrosivity and
effectiveness of existing corrosion control
Corrosion monitoring Provide baseline information on
records including corrosion effectiveness of exiting corrosion

PTS 15.04.01
Page 37 of 52

coupon and probe reading, monitoring tools and corrosion control and
CI monitoring report and CP mitigation
survey report
Failure (i.e. LOPC) History To identify main corrosion risk, affected
with Bad actors records and system to prioritize corrosion monitoring
RCFA reports. and mitigation activities.
MOC Record Provide information on changes to
equipment design and operating condition
for update of Corrosion Risk Assessment.
4 Other Corrosion Management To assist development of Corrosion
Policy Management KPI
Organisation Chart and To assist development of RACI Matrix
Structure of Asset Owner
and Operator
NOTE(S) :
1. Refer to Note 1 of Table A2.1
Table A2.2 – Document and Data for CMP Development

PTS 15.04.01
Page 38 of 52
APPENDIX 3 – BASIS OF CMMP DEVELOPMENT
Examples of scenarios and conditions where CMMP is recommended to complement IRP in optimizing
asset integrity risk management includes:
 Damage or corrosion rate is sensitive to process condition thus monitoring allow early
detection to minimize exposure to corrosive environment
 Process upset or changes that will introduce new DM that the equipment or piping is not
designed for
 To ensure availability and effectiveness of corrosion control activities
 To optimize inspection program especially where inspection opportunity is limited or

inspection is costly
 ALARP demonstration for High or Very High Risk asset or system (i.e. CG) driven by CoF
 To establish baseline corrosion trending and data
Examples of scenarios or conditions where CMMP may not be necessary as the risk is considered
sufficiently addressed by PRBI IRP includes:
 Internal thinning mechanism with low and uniform corrosion rate
 External DMs such as atmospheric corrosion and CUI where monitoring is not practical or
inspection is more effective to manage the risk
 DMs has been designed out by material selection or fabrication process such as PWHT
 Supplied utilities where the quality is guaranteed by the supplier and variation in quality is
not expected or not damaging to the asset
 The corrosion risk is considered low such as plant drain system

PTS 15.04.01
Page 39 of 52
APPENDIX 4 – TYPE OF IOW LIMIT
Description and examples of various types of IOW limit are discussed in Table A4 below.
Type of IOW Limit Description and Examples
Lower Limit Operating parameter shall not be allowed
to drop below some defined value.
Examples of IOW with lower limit includes

 Minimum temperature limit from
brittle fracture
 CI availability for CO2 Corrosion
Upper Limit If operating parameter increases beyond

some defined value, the damage rate and
potential will increase.
Examples of IOW with upper limit includes

 Tube skin temperature for creep
 Chloride concentration for HCl
Corrosion

PTS 15.04.01
Page 40 of 52
Type of IOW Limit Description and Examples

Lower-and-Upper Limit Operating parameter shall be maintained
within certain range to avoid undesirable
degradation.
Examples of IOW with lower-and-upper

limit includes
 pH range of HIC/SOHIC-H2S Cracking
Upper-and-Lower Limit DM only occurs within certain range of

condition and operating within this
condition shall be avoided.
Examples of IOW with upper-and-lower

limit includes
 Temperature of Flow Accelerated
Corrosion (FAC)
 Velocity for Ammonium Bisulfide
Corrosion
Table A4 – Description and Examples of Type of IOW Limit

PTS 15.04.01
Page 41 of 52
APPENDIX 5 – CORROSION MANAGEMENT KPI
Examples of Corrosion Management KPI is provided in Table A5 below.

No. Objective Examples of KPI Examples of Target Type
Leak (i.e. LOPC) Major leak (i.e. LOPC) Zero Lagging
1 related to Less than previous year
Minor leak (i.e. LOPC) Lagging
integrity failure or Zero
Execution of monitoring activities
100% Leading
Execution of defined in CMMP
and Compliance > 90% within Target
to Corrosion Compliance to IOW Limit for NCM and Leading
2
Control & Standard Parameter
Monitoring Plan 100% within
Execution of response actions in
(CMMP) established response Lagging
the event of deviation
time
Review the compliance, adequacy
Annually Leading
Reassessment and effectiveness of CMP
and Review of Update of CMP in accordance to
3
CMP changes of process and Within 1 month on
Lagging
Performance procedure, and communicate change
changes to stakeholders
Internal Audit Annually Leading
Peer Review by external party
Every 5 years Leading
(e.g. GTS)
CMS Development of corrective action Within 1 month on
4 Performance plan based on Audit and/or Peer Audit and/or Peer Lagging
Monitoring Review Findings Review
Execution of corrective action Based on established
Lagging
plan timeline or schedule
Management Review Annually Leading
Table A5 – Examples of Corrosion Management KPI

PTS 15.04.01
Page 42 of 52
APPENDIX 6 – CORROSION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SELF-ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST
This self-assessment checklist is adopted with modification from Guidance for Corrosion Management
in Oil and Gas Production & Processing, Energy Institute, Oil & Gas, London (UK), May 2008.
The questions are organised based on elements of CMS. In total, there are 113 questions in the
checklist and the number of questions for each CMS elements are as follow:
1. Policy and Strategy – 13 questions

2. Organizational Structure and Responsibilities – 20 questions
3. Planning and Implementation – 55 questions
4. Performance Measure and Monitoring – 9 questions
5. Audit and Management Review – 16 questions.
This checklist and questionnaire is not exhaustive and Owner may expand or amend the checklist based
on risk focus area, previous audit findings and etc.
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
1.0 Policy and Strategy
Is there a documented CMS based on a defined
1.1
management model?
1.2 Is the scope of the CMS defined?
Is there a company policy for corrosion management
(or including corrosion management) that deals with
1.3
risk associated, health and safety and environmental
protection?
Does the policy clearly state objectives for corrosion
1.4
management?
Does it clearly state expectations and objectives by
1.5
which compliance with the policy is measured?
Does the policy demonstrate management
commitment to corrosion control?
1.6
Is the policy issued by the authority of the most senior
manager of the facility?
Is there evidence of an awareness of this policy at or by:
a. All levels within the organization?
1.7
b. Senior management?
c. Engineers and technicians including Offshore staff?
1.8 Are the personnel committed to the policy?
Is there a documented corrosion management strategy
for the asset?
1.9
Does it provide the method(s) by which the policy is
implemented?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 43 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
Does the corrosion management strategy has clearly
define the roles and responsibility for corrosion
management?
1.10 Does it define the links between all parties involved

which include:
a. Operations?
b. Discipline engineers?
c. Contractors and suppliers?
Does the corrosion strategy interface with other HSE
1.11 and operational requirement such as HSSE plan and
program?
Does the corrosion management strategy align with the
1.12 facility business and operation strategy such as the
facility life and regulatory requirement?
Are review periods for the corrosion management
1.13
strategy specified or established?
2.0 Organizational Structure and Responsibilities
Is the organizational structure for CMT has been fully
documented?
2.1
Does it reflect current organizational structure?
Are sufficient resources available to implement the
2.2
corrosion management strategy?
Are roles and responsibilities for individuals clearly
2.3
defined and documented?
Are authorities and reporting routes clear and
2.4
documented?
Are interfaces with other parts of the organization
2.5
visible?
Have gaps and overlaps in responsibility been identified
2.6
and eliminated?
Are the competency requirements for all key
2.7
operational and functional roles defined?
Are training requirements identified and implemented
2.8 for the development of technical competence and
behavioral skills?
Are the procedures in place to assess the competency
2.9
of staff assigned to corrosion management activities?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 44 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
Is authority given for key tasks in line with competency,
including:
a. Conducting Corrosion Risk Assessment?
2.10 b. Developing corrosion risk mitigation plan?
c. Assessing anomaly and deviation?
d. Proposing remedial actions and alternatives?
e. Approving changes to approved plan (i.e. MOC)?
Do all parties involved understand the risks, understand
the working practices, have awareness of their own role
2.11
and recognize their own limitations and the limitations
of those they supervise?
Do contracted bodies have appropriate competence,
demonstrated by accreditation or certification where
2.12
applicable, including possession of appropriate
methods, equipment and experience?
Is appropriate information shared including:
a. Information of hazards and preventive measures,
including lessons learnt from incidents elsewhere?
2.13
b. Procedures, instructions and guidelines?
c. The organization structure, the key players and the
accountable management?
Is training on corrosion awareness given to non-
2.14
specialist personnel that is appropriate to their role?
Are key players formed into a CMT that meets regularly
to review:
a. Implementation status?
b. Trends in deterioration and failures?
c. Status of corrective actions?
2.15
d. Planning and budgetary issues?
e. Performance against KPIs
Are contractors included in the review?

Did all CMT participate in the review?
Is the CMT
a. Effective in delivering improvements in corrosion
2.16
management?
b. Visible to senior management?
Are experiences shared with external bodies and other
2.17
facility teams?
Is appropriate input to the control of risks obtained
2.18
from relevant authority?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 45 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
Do change management procedures require review by
materials and corrosion specialists for:
a. Engineering change?
2.19
b. Operating changes?
c. Is the competent person consulted on pressure
system changes?
Are there clear written interface rules for co-ordination
2.20
with contracted bodies?
3 Planning and Implementation
Is a formal Corrosion Risk Assessment method used?
Is corrosion risk assessment result documented?

3.1
Has it been reviewed by SME to ensure that it always
provides rational results?
Are all significant corrosion and DM threats identified?
Does the Corrosion Risk Assessment methodology

assess the likelihood/rate of the identified DM?
Does the Corrosion Risk Assessment methodology

3.2
consider the level of the safety, environmental and
business consequences from corrosion threats?
Does it combine likelihood and consequence to provide

a criticality level (i.e. risk) on which appropriate action
can be based?
Are the operating conditions against which the
3.4
Corrosion Risk Assessment is carried out clearly stated?
Does the Corrosion Risk Assessment consider process
3.5
excursions out with the normal operating case?
Does the Corrosion Risk Assessment consider future
3.6
operational scenarios or “what if” cases?
Are the results from historic operational corrosion
3.7
monitoring and inspection used?
Is experience from other operations and facilities taken
3.8
into account?
Does a cross discipline peer group review and endorse
3.9
the Corrosion Risk Assessment results?
Is the Corrosion Risk Assessment subject to periodic
3.10 review and are the initiating factors for a review
documented?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 46 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
Is there a strategic plan for mitigation and monitoring
3.11 activities that makes failure risk As Low As Reasonably

Practicable?
Are measurable performance standards set for the
3.12
barriers to/mitigation of each threat?
Are methods of monitoring, inspection and
measurement of barrier/mitigation performance
defined?
3.13
Are there philosophies and guidelines to the choice of
methods?
3.14 Are the frequencies of monitoring defined?
Are the monitoring parameters rank based on criticality
3.15
(i.e.. NCM, Standard and Trending)?
Are the limit (i.e. IOW) defined for all monitoring
parameter?
3.16
Are the basis of the IOW clear and documented?
Is corrective action to be taken in the event of
3.17
nonconformity to the defined limit (i.e. IOW)?
Are the responsibilities for mitigation,
monitoring/measurement and corrective action
defined?
Is the plan published in a form, (e.g. a matrix), such that

all responsible parties can identify their roles and
activities?
3.18
Do they include roles in:
a. Process adjustment and control?
b. Chemical treatment management?
c. Online corrosion monitoring?
d. Inspection and testing?
e. Maintenance?
3.19 Does the plan recognize the role of statutory bodies?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 47 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
Are the strategic plan requirements translated into
tactical plans and schedules as generally used to control
3.20 activity in the implementing units, (e.g. planned
maintenance, schemes of examination, operating
instructions)?
Are drawings, schematics or pictures, (e.g. inspection
3.21 isometrics), used to uniquely identify locations for

monitoring?
Are appropriate methods of detection for the expected
3.22
deterioration methods documented?
Are CMMP updated after implementation and analysis?
3.23
Are monitoring confidence level reviewed?
Are written procedures produced to cover
3.24 implementation of mitigation and monitoring
activities?
Do the written procedures and work instructions define
3.25 actions to be taken in the case of non-conformity to the
performance standards?
Is the plan translated into practical instructions, (e.g.
work packs, planned maintenance routines (PMRs),
operating instructions)?
3.26
Are there standard formats that aid consistent
production?
Are locations for corrosion monitoring clearly identified
3.27
within the work packs?
If a non-conformance is identified do the procedure
define the reporting procedures?
3.28
Does this define time scales for action?
Are the physical means for implementation in place,
3.29
(e.g. on line monitoring, inhibitor injection plant)?
Are adequate manpower resources in place?
3.30
Are contracts in place for contracted resources?
Is there a material and corrosion damage reporting
3.31
procedure in place and operating?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 48 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
Are the limitations of the applied corrosion monitoring
3.32
and inspection techniques known?
Are the data to be gathered for corrosion management
requirements clearly defined and reported in a form
which enables appropriate assessment?
3.33
Are registers kept where data are transmitted on
documents?
Do reporting procedures address failure to undertake
planned activities in part or in whole?
3.34
Is it specifically reported?
Is it clear who should receive and evaluate reported
data?
3.35
Are they identified on the basis of their competence to
undertake analysis?
Are procedures in place to validate the gathered data?
3.36 Are the limitations of the applied corrosion monitoring

and inspection techniques known and taken into
account?
Are data stored and shared so that trends can be
identified over time?
3.37
Is the location where the mitigation, corrosion
monitoring and inspection data stored defined?
Are data from all sources, (process conditions,
inspection, and corrosion monitoring and chemical
data) collected and evaluated centrally to allow
3.38
conclusion to be drawn holistically?
Are the findings of the verification scheme included?

Are data analyzed against a predetermined time scale
3.39
that ensures timely corrective action is possible?
Are procedures in place for the urgent reporting and
evaluation of data that exceed allowable limits?
3.40
Does the procedure allow for urgent implementation of
corrective action?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 49 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
Does the holistic analysis of all data result in a clear
statement of continued suitability for use at both the
item and facility level?
3.41
Are these reviews carried out at the end of campaigns
or on a suitable frequency?
Can an up-to-date summary of facility condition be
provided to the facility manager and to an independent
3.42
verifier within a short time period following completion
of a work campaign or the set review period?
Are the results fed back into the review and
3.45
improvement of strategic and tactical plans?
3.46 Does operational experience get fed back into design?

Are corrective actions and their completion time scales
captured in an information system that allows
3.47
implementation and close out to be tracked and
verified?
Where corrective action is of a temporary nature, (e.g.
temporary repairs, temporary limitations), is it subject
3.48 to periodic review?
Is this tracked in the same way as permanent actions?

Are material and corrosion damage reports and
3.49 opportunity based inspection reports integrated into

the analyses?
Are investigations conducted to identify the root cause
3.50
of corrosion incidents?
Are the recipients of suitability, investigation and
3.51
corrective action reports defined?
Are results of routine analysis and root cause analysis
3.52 made available to the management performance

review?
Are lessons shared within the organization as a whole?
3.55
Are lessons shared externally?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 50 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
4 Performance Measure and Monitoring
Are the relevant KPIs of the success of the corrosion
management activities in place?
Do they measure:
4.1
a. How well the plan is implemented?
b. Proactive/leading indicators?
c. Achievement of the policy objectives
d. Reactive/lagging indicators?
Are the Performance Indicators aimed primarily at
4.2 demonstrating success or identifying trends toward

corrective action?
Are measures and targets set by those accountable for
meeting them together with the team responsible for
4.3 the measurement?
Are the measures approved by their management?

4.4 Are all measures share to the CMT for feedback?
Are measures made at a frequency that:
a. Allows corrective action before an undesirable
outcome occurs?
4.5
b. A meaningful magnitude of change?
Are changes made if these are not met?

Are results aggregated and reported more widely and
to senior management at an appropriate frequency by
the CMT?
4.6
Is a scheme to identify priority items used, e.g. traffic
light coding?
4.7
verified?
Are investigations conducted to identify the root cause
4.8
of serious or persistent failures to meet targets?
Is performance assessed routinely with corrective
4.9
provisions made?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 51 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
5 Audit and Management Review
Are the corrosion management system audited to
ensure:
5.1 a. The CMS includes all essential elements?
b. That the activities are implemented in accordance
with the plan and their documented procedures?
Are audits carried out:
a. Using a check list and on the basis of objective
5.2 evidence of compliance?
b. By competent auditors with an understanding of
corrosion management practice?
Are audits undertaken on a planned basis?
5.3
Does the CMT consider bringing forward an audit if
warranted by serious non-compliance?
5.4 verified?
Are corrective actions agreed with the auditee and

assigned to the auditee or an identified party?
Are contractors in the corrosion management process
5.5
audited?
Are audit reports made available to senior facility
5.6
management and to the CMT?
Are audit findings used to improve the policy and plan
5.7
and the implementation and analysis processes?
Are the corrosion management activities subject to a
5.8
formal review?
Are reviews carried out at a specified frequency that
5.9 allows for timely corrective action and is this
documented?
Do the reviews include all parties in the corrosion
management process and is this documented?
5.10
Does the review involve key contractors?
Is the review process being endorsed at a management
5.11
level with authority to implement changes?

PTS 15.04.01
Page 52 of 52
Supporting Evidence
No Question Yes/No
or References
Does the review consider:
a. The effectiveness of the processes and procedures
in meeting performance targets?
b. Shortcomings of facility and item suitability for
service?
5.12
c. Results of investigations into the root causes of
problems?
d. CMT and Contractor competency?
e. Findings from audit?
Does the review evaluate:

a. Lessons from other facilities and from external
5.13 sources?
b. Benefits to be gained from introducing new
techniques or technology?
Does the distribution of the findings include senior
5.14
facility management?
Are actions and their completion time scales captured
5.15 in an information system that allows implementation
and close out to be tracked and verified?
5.16 Does the review feedback into the corrosion strategy?

Corrosion Management

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

Corrosion Management

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PETRONAS TECHNICAL STANDARDS

© 2019 PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS)

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

APPENDIX 5 – CORROSION MANAGEMENT KPI ................................................................ 41

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

ii. Onshore facilities

iii. Topside (i.e. process unit) of floaters

1.2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS

1.2.1 General Definition of Terms & Abbreviations

1.2.2 Specific Definitions of Terms

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

Previously known as Asset Integrity Limit (AIL)

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

1.2.3 Specific Abbreviations

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

1.3 SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

2.0 OVERVIEW OF CORROSION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CMS)

2.3 Element of CMS are as following:

i. Policy and Strategy

ii. Organizational Structure and Responsibilities

iii. Planning and Implementation

iv. System Performance and Monitoring

v. Audit and Management Review

Overall CMS framework is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Overall CMS Framework

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

Figure 2: Simplified Scope and Relationship of CDBM, PRBI and CMP

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

3.0 POLICY AND STRATEGY

3.1.1 Policy on corrosion management shall be established to indicate the organization’s

i. Vision of the organisation on corrosion management

ii. Expectations and objectives of corrosion management in improving safety and

iii. Strategies to achieve the objectives

iv. Necessary resources and organization to develop, implement, monitor and

3.2.2 The developed corrosion management strategy should describe

i. Main activities or programs to be developed and implemented to achieve

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

4.0 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITIES

4.1 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE

4.2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITY

4.3 CORROSION MANAGEMENT TEAM (CMT)

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

i. Communication between CMT and management on CMS implementation status

ii. Communication and cascading on RACI and KPI to relevant parties

iii. Implementation of recommendation action as an outcome from inspection,

4.5 COMPETENCY AND TRAINING

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

v. Communication plan when IOW is deviated including parties to be informed or

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

5.0 PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION

5.1 CORROSION DESIGN BASIS MEMORANDUM (CDBM)

5.1.5 CDBM shall at least covers the following:

i. Code and standard to be referred for design and constructions

iii. Recommended material of constructions including CA, fabrication requirement

v. Recommended inspection and corrosion monitoring such as corrosion coupon,

5.1.6 Corrosion Risk Assessment for CDBM Development

5.1.7 Material and Design Selection Basis

1.245.202 nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com nurmainsetiaputeri88@gmail.com 07/09/2021 08:23:3

i. Damage Mechanisms (DMs) – Materials shall be selected based on the corrosivity