Saep 343

Engineering Procedure
SAEP-343 24 January 2019

Risk-based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents
1 Scope .................................................................................. 2
2 Purpose ............................................................................... 2
3 Conflicts and Deviations ...................................................... 3
4 Applicable Documents ......................................................... 3
5 Definitions and Abbreviations .............................................. 5
6 Instructions ........................................................................ 12
7 Responsibilities .................................................................. 22
Revision Summary ................................................................... 26
Appendix A - Decision Tree for Performing RBI ....................... 27

Appendix B - RBI RASCI Chart ................................................ 28
Appendix C - RBI Process for in-House Assessment ............... 29
Appendix D - RBI Process for Service Providers ...................... 30
Appendix E - RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations.... 31
Appendix F - Corrosion Loop Development Workflow .............. 32
Appendix G - RBI Task List ...................................................... 33
Appendix H - Description and Guidance of RBI Tasks ............. 34
Appendix I - Sources of Site Specific Data and Information ..... 46
Appendix J - Inspection Effectiveness Tables .......................... 48
Appendix K - RBI Validation Form-I .......................................... 70
Appendix L - RBI Validation Form-II ......................................... 71
Appendix M - RBI Validation Form Instructions ........................ 72
Appendix N - Environmental Sensitivity .................................... 73
Previous Issue: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2022

Page 1 of 74
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan F (lodhizf) on phone +966-13-8804518
©Saudi Aramco 2019. All rights reserved.

Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343
Issue Date: 24 January 2019
Next Planned Update: 24 January 2022 Risk-based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
1 Scope
1.1 This engineering procedure provides minimum requirements for conducting

Risk-based Inspection (RBI) assessments on static equipment in all applicable
in-service and under construction Saudi Aramco facilities based on API RP 580
and API RP 581.
1.2 This procedure also provides guidelines to determine the process units that shall
be covered by RBI assessment.
1.3 This procedure also outlines when initial and evergreen RBI assessment shall be
conducted.
1.4 This SAEP applies to:

1.4.1 In-plant static equipment
1.4.2 Above-grade plant piping
1.4.3 Storage tanks
1.4.4 Pressure relieving devices
1.4.5 Off-plot Piping
1.4.6 Offshore facilities
1.4.7 Heat exchanger tube bundle.
2 Purpose
2.1 To assure that Saudi Aramco systematic evaluation process for RBI assessment
is well defined.
2.2 Roles and responsibilities for RBI assessment activities in Saudi Aramco are
outlined.
2.3 RBI assessment recommendations and implementation are uniformly

documented for the purpose of corporate tracking and implementation.
2.4 Adequate resources are provided for RBI assessment.
2.5 Process and deliverables when utilizing Service Providers (SP) to perform RBI
assessment are clearly defined.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

©Saudi Aramco 2019. All rights reserved. Page 2 of 74
3 Conflicts and Deviations
Any conflicts between this document and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco
Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be addressed to the EK&RD Coordinator.
Any deviation from the requirements herein shall follow internal company procedure
SAEP-302.
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-88 Development and Review of Corrosion Control
Documents
SAEP-302 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-393 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
SAEP-1135 On-stream Inspection Administration
SAEP-1140 Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards

SAES-A-133 Internal Corrosion Protection Requirements
SAES-A-135 Establishment of On Stream Inspection
SAES-L-105 Piping Material Specifications
SAES-L-310 Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practice

SABP-A-033 Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual

Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure

01-SAIP-02 Retirement Thickness of in-Plant Piping
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, and 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 650 Welded Tanks for Oil Storage
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 945 Avoiding Environmental Cracking in Amine Units
American Society of Mechanical Engineers

ASME SEC V Non-destructive 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
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
Components: Parts that make up a piece of equipment or equipment item.

For example a pressure boundary may consist of components (pipe, Top Column,
Bottom Column, inlet header, outer header, shells, , , , 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 s to be expressed quantitatively.
Corrosion Loop: A continuous section of a plant (piping and equipment)

defined on the basis of similar process conditions, preferably covering the same
materials of construction, or including similar active/potential damage mechanisms.
Corrosion Management Program (CMP): Refer to SAEP-88.
Damage Mechanism: A process that induces micro and/or macro material

changes over time that is harmful to the material condition or mechanical properties.
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 may be used in place of deterioration.
Equipment: An individual item that is part of a system. Examples include

pressure vessels, relief devises, piping, boilers, and heaters.
ID RBI Team: RBI team members from Inspection Department, performing

QA/QC of RBI program 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 previous (e.g. 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 piping 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.
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 at a plant.
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: The ability of the inspection activity to reduce the

uncertainty in the damage state of the equipment or component. Inspection
effectiveness categories are used to reduce uncertainty in the models for
calculating the probability of failure. Examples of the levels of inspection
effectiveness categories for various damage mechanisms and the associated
generic inspection plan (i.e., NDE techniques and coverage) for each damage
mechanism are provided in Appendix J.
Inspection Plan: 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. It is recognized that some risks
cannot be adequately managed by inspection alone and other mitigation actions
may 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: Refer to SAEP-393.
Management of Change: 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 RBI facilitator.
Mitigation: Decreasing the impact 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): Refer to SAES-A-135.
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.
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.
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 RBI SP personnel.
Commentary Note:
For new construction project, RBI team shall be comprised of the Proponent
inspection personnel, SA PMT, EPC contractor, and RBI SP.
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 RBI EPC/SP 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 and the knowledge to perform the analysis required to develop an
inspection plan based on the risk results.
Risk Tolerance: A decision to tolerate a risk. Risk acceptance depends on risk

criteria.
Semi-Quantitative Risk Analysis (Assessment): Refer to API RP 580.
Service Provider (SP): A qualified contractor by Saudi Aramco Inspection

Department RBI team to perform RBI assessment.
Source: Thing or activity with a potential for consequence. Source in a safety

context is a hazard.
Team Leader: Specialist or Engineer from the plant proponent assigned to

coordinate and manage all activities involved in RBI assessment.
Unmitigated Risk: The risks for which mitigation activities have yet to be
performed.
5.2 Abbreviations
API American Petroleum Institute
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
EPC Engineering, Procurement, and Construction
HAZOP Hazard and Operability Assessment
HIC Hydrogen Induced Cracking
ID Inspection Department (Dhahran)
LOF Likelihood of Failure
MOC Management of Change
MPY Mils per Year
NDT Non-destructive Testing
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health and 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
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
SP Service Provider
PMT Project Management Team
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 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 IDRBI
team.
6.1.4 Each facility should prioritize the implementation of RBI for each
Process Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated
with operational risk.
6.1.5 Appendix A decision tree shall be used for in-service plants to

determine if RBI assessment is required or only a comprehensive review
of the OSI program per 6.11. This decision tree is not applicable to
storage tanks.
For new construction project, it is at the discretion of the proponent

inspection unit, not to exempt any operating unit from RBI assessment
scope of work.
6.1.6 A fully integrated Risk Based Inspection process should be

implemented as shown in Appendix C or Appendix D. 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 D.
6.1.7 Appendix B RASCI chart defines the roles and responsibilities of all
RBI assessment participants.

6.1.8 Appendix C is the workflow for in-house RBI assessments.
6.1.9 Appendix D is the workflow for RBI assessments conducted by Service

Providers and/or EPC contractor.
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) that shall be color coded and include information about
material of construction, 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 F.
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 A:
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
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. The facility Process Engineer shall concur
on the inventory group using Appendix K Validation Form.
6.3.2 Separate Inventory Groups are established based on highly reliable

isolation valves can be actuated remotely e.g., MOVs, ZVs, ESD, etc.
6.4 Piping and Equipment
6.4.1 API RBI assessment shall be applied to all pressure containing equipment
(according to the RBI decision tree; Appendix A) 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 A to 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.
6.6 Pipeline
Software and methodology other than API RBI shall be used with prior approval
from ID RBI team.
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 API RBI shall be used with prior approval
by ID RBI team. The assessment shall cover top and subsea steel structures,
top-side equipment, piping, risers and subsea pipelines.
6.8 Above Ground 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 the 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 scope of the assessment.
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 assessment findings and observations.
g) The risk assessment results and inspection plan.
h) Follow-up mitigation strategy, if applied, to manage risk.
i) The risk reduction if inspection plan is implemented.
j) The mitigated risk levels, i.e., residual risk after mitigation is
implemented.
k) 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 in
the final report, with full details that allow reproducing the assessment by
third party.
6.10.3 The algorithm built in the software program and version used to
perform the assessment shall be fully documented with all sufficient
details as requested by ID RBI team.
6.10.4 RBI 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 The final RBI assessment report shall be aligned with latest version of
the SA RBI assessment report template provided by IDRBI team.
6.10.7 IDRBI team will provide a report number for new RBI assessments, to
maintain the track of all RBI reports.
6.10.8 Extensions of T&I frequency, if recommended, 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 a
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.
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.
6.11.4 The corporate RBI recommendations tracking system shall be updated with
the RBI assessment recommendations.
6.12 Damage 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, Saudi Aramco Corrosion Management
Program (CMP) Manual SABP-A-033 and other industry documents.
6.12.2 Damage 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 not
covered by the latest revision of API RP 581.
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 establish the risk matrix.
6.12.7 List of all process variables that 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/format
required by SAEP-88 and SABP-A-033.
6.13 Inspection Effectiveness Tables
6.13.1 Inspection effectiveness category is a quantification of the inspection

practice capability to locate and size the deterioration caused by specific
damage mechanisms. 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 category should include equipment type, active and
potential 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 J shall be used to assign the inspection effectiveness category

for the pervious inspection activities and identify the required amount
and type of inspections based on RBI assessment inspection plan.

6.14 Evergreening RBI Assessments

Evergreening RBI assessment is conducted to maintain and update RBI
assessment (including RBI software database, report, and records) by capturing
the most recent inspection, process, maintenance and risk mitigation
information. Evergreening RBI assessment shall be conducted:
1) After any changes in process conditions, hardware changes, potential
damage mechanisms or corrosion rates, significant findings from recent
inspection, premise changes, risk mitigation, or reduction strategies.
2) Immediately after a T&I, operational cycle or when changes occur.
3) After optimizing the OSI program based on the results of the initial RBI
assessment and/or SAEP-1135 requirements.
4) Before implementing any MOC request that might affect the RBI results.
5) No longer than a maximum of 3 years, if none of the above items are met.
In this case, only a concise evergreening assessment is needed.
This evergreening assessment does not require ID RBI team review and
validation. Validation Form-II to be filled in and maintained with the
proponent inspection unit.
6) No longer than 5 years, if none of item 1 to 4 above is met. In this case a
full evergreening assessment is needed. This evergreening assessment
require ID RBI team review and validation. Validation Form-I to be filled
in and maintained. ASTs are exempted from this requirements.
7) For ASTs, only items 1 to 5 are applicable.
8) Evergreening assessment is needed after major revision of API RP 581 or
RBI software version. In this case, ID RBI team will inform all inspection
units about the requirements of this special evergreening assessment.
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 database. The database shall
be renamed with a new RBI date in order to track changes from the last
formal RBI assessment.
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.
8) Issuing of a final report.
9) Presenting the results to proponent Management, if needed.
10) Completing the Validation Form.
6.16 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) Status of pervious RBI assessment recommendations
7) Assessment findings including inspection history review and risk analysis
8) The results of OSI optimization performed based on the initial RBI
assessment results and/or OSI optimization criteria per SAEP-1135
9) Financial benefit including the OSI optimization and risk reductions
10) Corrosion loop drawings and descriptions
11) Inventory group drawings
12) Associated piping list
13) Up-to-date Equipment inspection history
14) Risk summary and inspection plan
Commentary Note:
The evergreening report shall be aligned with the latest template provided by
ID RBI team.
6.17 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 A
“Decision Tree for Performing RBI”.

6.18 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
 In-house assessments Team Leader shall be proposed by the
Proponent's Management.
 RBI Contractors’ team leaders shall demonstrate to the ID RBI Team
their personnel are suitably qualified and experienced in RBI technology.
The qualifications of the RBI personnel shall be documented.
Team Leader qualifications:
o Demonstrated skills in team leadership or project management.
o Degree in Engineering and project management with minimum of
15 years’ experience in 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 initial RBI for the
Facility Process Units.
Proponent RBI Facilitator selection criteria shall be:

 Degree in Engineering and minimum of 7 years’ experience in
inspection of Oil and Gas facilities.
 Competencies demonstrated and accepted to ID RBI team 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 two-year time shall require re-qualification
from ID 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 ID 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 demonstrated 15 years’
experience in inspection filed of Oil and Gas facilities.
ii. Holds an API RP 580 RBI certification.
iii. Detailed training in the API RBI methodology/software and
participated in at least four successful RBI assessments of which
involved using the API RBI software. The contractor shall submit
the documented training program to ID RBI team for review and
references of previous RBI assessments.
3) Sr. Inspector or Inspection Engineer
Sr. Inspector or Inspection Engineer involved in RBI assessment shall

meet the following qualifications:
 A diploma or degree in engineering with a relevant technical
discipline.
 Minimum of 10 years inspection experience in the Oil and Gas Industry,
5 of which is in inspection field.
 Holds API STD 510, API STD 570, and API STD 653 inspection
certifications.
4) Materials and Corrosion Engineer
Materials/Corrosion Engineer involved in RBI assessment shall meet the

following qualifications:
 Holds an API RP 571 certification or equivalent.
 Have a B.S. Engineering (Chemical, Metallurgical, or Mechanical)

Degree with 15 years minimum experience in corrosion engineering 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 12 years’ process experience in the Oil and Gas Industry.
6) RBI Software Practitioner
RBI Software Practitioner shall meet all of the following qualifications:

 Degree in Engineering and minimum of 7 years’ experience in Oil and
Gas industry.
 Holds API RP 580 RBI certification (applicable for contracted RBI
assessment only).
 Training and job experience using the API RBI software in a minimum
of four successful RBI assessments in the last two years.
 Demonstrate experience in corrosion risk assessment.
7) Operation Representative
Operations Personnel shall meet the following qualifications:

 Minimum of 15 years in the Oil and Gas Industry.
 Minimum of 5 years of experience in the Process Unit under assessment.
6.19 Contracted RBI Assessment
The contract Scope of Work (specification) and the bidders’ technical proposals
shall be reviewed and evaluated by the proponent and ID RBI team.
7 Responsibilities
7.1 ID RBI Team

1) Assess Plants RBI Program per SAEP-308 and SAEP-372.
2) Monitor the implementation of the RBI assessment and recommendation
implementation.
3) Administer the corporate RBI recommendations tracking system.
4) Validate the assessment per Appendix K.
7.2 Team Leader

1) Prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Process Unit.
2) Form the RBI team and ensure that team members have the necessary skills
and qualifications.
3) Prepare a Gantt chart depicting assessment tasks, activities, appropriate
durations, and assigned resources.
4) Ensure the assessment is conducted 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.
c) Assumptions made are logical, and documented.
d) Only 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 ensure the report is distributed to the appropriate
personnel and management.
g) Ensure the validation sheet (Appendix K) has been completed and
signed by all parties upon completion of the assessments.
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 Process Unit.
2) Assemble all data required for the RBI assessment and provide
assumptions, when required.
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) Upload the recommendation of completed RBI assessments in corporate
RBI recommendations tracking system.

7) Assign a reasonable ETC to RBI recommendation.

8) Update the status of RBI recommendations and monitor the implementation
progress.
9) All MOC’s shall be reviewed and signed by SA RBI facilitator or
inspection/corrosion engineer in the inspection unit. In case that the facility
RBI facilitator is not part of Change Review Committee, he shall be notified
and consulted by the inspection/corrosion engineer signing off the MOC.
7.4 Sr. Inspector 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) Implement RBI recommendations and inspection plans derived from the
RBI assessment.
7.5 Materials/Corrosion Engineer

1) Lead the development of 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 F 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.
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 Process and Plant Engineers

1) Provide process parameters such as pressure, temperature, flow stream
composition, etc.
2) Document and provide an update on the 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, as required.
4) Provide information required for financial assessment such as equipment
replacement cost and production losses.
5) Participate in the development of the Inventory Groups and sign off
concurrence.
6) Verify that the facility/equipment is being operated within the parameters
set out in the process design.
7) Provide data on production losses
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.
3) Assist in the development of the Inventory Groups.
4) Implement recommendations that pertain to process or equipment
modifications.
5) Provide information required for financial assessment such as equipment
cost and production losses.
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) Appoint the Facility RBI Team Leader.
7.10 Loss Prevention Engineer
When required, 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.
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.
24 January 2019 Major revision to align the procedure with the international standards and clarify some of the
standards requirements. The document revision includes:
Summary of Change Form (24 January 2019)

Paragraph Change Type
No. Technical Change(s)
Number (New, Modification,..)
Addition of recommended qualitative risk based
6.1, 6.10, 6.18,
1 Addition screening assessment according to API RP 580 to
7.3
prioritize initial RBI assessments for process units.
Optimization of the RBI Evergreening interval from 3
2 6.14 (6) Modification
to 5 years.
Exclusion of off-plot piping and pipelines from
SAEP-343, as they will mostly be covered in a new
3 General Deletion
procedure covering the In service Inspection
Requirements for Pipelines.
Alignment with API RP 581 3rd Edition for the
4 6.12.3 Modification
Inspection Effectiveness categories.
5 6.9 Addition Inclusion of PRD inspection effectiveness table.
Addition of API RP 580 certification requirement for
6 1.1, 6.18 (2), 7.3 Addition
the RBI team and contractor RBI facilitator.
Appendix A - Decision Tree for Performing RBI
Develop Corrosion Loop
Mechanical and
Metallurgical Failure
Mechanisms per API 571
Section 4 (Not including Yes
corrosion)
No Note 1: This decision tree

excludes above ground Storage
Tanks (API 650 and 12C).
Environment – Assisted
Yes
Cracking
Note 2: Excluding any process

unit from RBI Program shall be
No approved by ID 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

Appendix B - 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

Appendix C - 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.

Appendix D - RBI Process for Service Providers
Refer to paragraph 6.1.5

Note 1: For new construction projects,
the proponent RBI team leader/ The scope of work and list of potential SPs to be concurred and approved by SA ID RBI team
facilitator is the single point of contact
between SA ID RBI team and SA PMT
For new construction projects, SP shall provide RBI assessment timeline to SA PMT
representative.
representative for concurrence.
For in-service facilities, SP shall provide RBI assessment timeline to SA proponent RBI team
Note 2: EPC contractor is responsible
leader for concurrence.
to review & validate all submissions
received from SP before seeking SA
review. Service Provider/EPC contractor meet SA PMT representative, SA proponent RBI team
leader/facilitator to provide a one to two day introductive workshop (orientation for RBI
team of their responsibilities and duties and description of RBI process)
Phase 1 Overdue No Service Provider/EPC contractor Collect, Sort, Format, Review and comply data and
review or develop draft Corrosion Loops and description and Inventory Groups
Yes
Letter of nonconformance issued by ID
Phase 1, 3,4 Phase 2 Sent To No Yes
2 weeks 4 weeks Division Head Yes Phase 2 Overdue Incomplete Data
4 weeks 8 weeks Manager
8 weeks 12 weeks Admin Head
No
Service Provider/EPC contractor submit Draft Corrosion Contact SA proponent RBI team leader
Loops and Description, Inventory Groups and populated
database to SA proponent RBI team leader for review.
SA proponent RBI team leader provides contact
SA proponent RBI Team Leader to review submissions for details of Plant Engineer, Corrosion Engineer,
concurrence. Inspector or other applicable person who may
be able to assist.
No
Concur Service Provider/EPC contractor submit
corrosion loops and description, inventory
groups and populated database to SA
Yes proponent RBI team leader/facilitator for
review.
Service Provider/EPC contractor, proponent & ID RBI Teams
meet to review and validate submitted documents and
Create and document assumptions for missing
database.
data and get concurrence from SA proponent
RBI team leader/facilitator.
No
Concur
No Incomplete Data
Yes
Service Provider/EPC contractor/SA PMT/ SA proponent RBI
team leader/ SA ID RBI team representatives meet to perform
analysis of the RBI assessment and Ensure they are in correct
final format for inclusion in report.
No
Yes
No Results Report accepted
Phase 3
Validated by ID RBI and validation sheet signed
Overdue No
Team off by ID RBI Team
Yes
Yes
Service Provider/EPC contractor establish or review CML’s for
optimization per SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135. Service Provider/EPC contractor
give presentation
to the proponent management.
Service Provider/EPC contractor submit the draft report and
presentation to SA proponent RBI Team Leader & ID RBI Team.
Service Provider/EPC contractor

return all
Yes
Phase 4 Overdue No collected data and database when
assessment is complete.

Appendix E - 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

Appendix F - 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,

Appendix G - 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

Appendix H - Description and Guidance 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 should be accomplished by a formal written request to the appropriate
supervisors. 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 should 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.
Task 2 – Develop Gantt Chart
The Team Leader will ensure a Gantt chart is developed showing all assessment phases,
tasks and detailed activities, as applicable.. He should 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
Proponent Engineering Division for the review and concurrence. Task 3 – Kick-off
Meeting
The Team Leader will develop an agenda and organize a meeting grouping all members
of the RBI Assessment Team.
The meeting agenda should include the following issues:

1) RBI team, commitment of members, schedule and scope.
2) Data storage.

Task 4 – Conduct RBI Workshop (required for new members only)
Provide team members with an insight into RBI methodology.
Emphasize on 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 typically required for the assessment can be found in Appendix I.
Where possible, all data, including PFDs, should be made available to the Team Leader
in electronic format.
Assumptions shall 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. 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.
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 a
template acceptable 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, applicable
corrosive/damaging stream components (e.g. H2S, CO2, H2O, etc) and
their volume and weight fractions, 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, as
applicable.
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 component list is to define the
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 and
Component Type assigns the generic failure frequency. The Heat Exchanger
channel head is designated as HEXTS (tube side) and as HEXSS (shell side).
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.
When necessary equipment can be divided into different corrosion loops. For
instance, 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 allowance 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.
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, velocities, etc.), temperatures and pressures.
5) Hold a meeting with the Sr. Inspector 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 equipment. Before doing this
manually, consult with the proponent to see if this information is available in
electronic form.
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 J.
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 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) from Safety Instruction Sheets, Line
Designation Table and SAES-L-105, as applicable.
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 SAP-SAIF, the Saudi Aramco Inspection
Data Management System. The corrosion engineer together with the Sr. Inspector
or 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). Field verification may be required to confirm measured
thickness for CML with questionable/abnormal CR.
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. Key factor in development of environmental cracking and
guidelines from SAES-A-133, API RP 945, API RP 571 and API RP 581 Part 2
shall be followed. The corrosion and materials engineers shall provide the required
input with respect to environmental susceptibility and shall pay due diligence with
regard to current standards, guidelines, procedures and publications 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:
34 × [𝐻2 𝑠]𝑙𝑏∙𝑚𝑜𝑙/ℎ
𝑀%𝐻2 𝑆 =
[𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙]𝑚𝑜𝑙 𝑤𝑡 × [𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙]𝑙𝑏∙𝑚𝑜𝑙/ℎ
Heat Exchanger Data
The length of tubing of Finfans for RBI is taken as tube length x # of tubes.
The inlet/outlet header boxes 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 and Sr. inspectors shall jointly review
the inspection, corrosion rates and damage mechanism data collected from the records
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 for Consequence of Failure
The RBI team shall review details and changes to 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),
velocities, temperatures and pressures.

Task 7 – Import/Populate and Validate Data in the RBI software
The RBI software practitioner shall complete 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/Component 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-xxx) is a suffix to the component name.

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 to meet the Safety Instruction Sheets, Line
Designation Tables, SAES-L-310, and 01-SAIP-02 for the minimum retirement
thickness, tmin. If the specified tmin is greater than the software calculated tmin,
use the specified tmin in the software.
3) Saudi Aramco Inspection department will define the Risk and Damage factor
Targets. The targets may be variable depending on the 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 the dominant damage mechanisms. Determine what is driving the
damage mechanisms. Is it the remaining wall thickness? The age?
Process parameters? 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 or recommended 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:
1) Adding an inspection.
2) Repairing, replacing or derating equipment close to its end of life.
3) Removing the source of corrosion or damage mechanism or applying barriers, e.g.
coating, cladding, etc.
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 population density.
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.
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.
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.
Task 3 CML selection and optimization shall be reviewed and implemented using the
criteria listed in 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) should
provide a PowerPoint presentation to the proponent. This exercise shall be carried out
prior to the departure of the team from site, as applicable, and shall focus on the
preliminary findings derived from the assessment.
Comments made by the proponent shall be documented and evaluated for incorporation
in the Final Report.

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 4) in addition to any other changes. The report
shall have a SAER number that is requested from the Technical Information Center.
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 an electronic storage
system acceptable to Inspection Department.
This folder is also divided into multiple sub-folders named after the proponent's facility
units, e.g., Ras Tanura Refinery Crude Distillation Unit, Hydrocracker, etc.
All correspondence, databases, reports, etc., are to be stored in the respective subfolder.
The custodian of this folder shall be the RBI team, Inspection Technical Support
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 representatives
and management, as required. It is important that any economic benefits derived from
the assessment are duly emphasized.
This presentation meeting should take place no later than three weeks following
delivery of the Final Report (SAER).

Appendix I - 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 accuracy and precision 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 (e.g., 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 History (OSI data, T&I reports, OSI reports, worksheets)
c) Repairs, Replacements, and Alterations
3. Process Data
a) Fluid composition analysis including contaminants or trace components
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 with approval of ES RBI team.
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

Appendix J – Inspection Effectiveness Tables

Table 10.1 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – General Thinning
Inspection
Inspection Non-intrusive Inspection
Effectiveness Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Category Example1-6
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 may 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 may 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.
Refer to 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.

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 corrosion engineer.
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.

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.

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:

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

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 corrosion engineer
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.

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
Usually welds with manual UTSW OR
B AE testing with 100% follow-up of
Effective follow-up of all relevant
indications. relevant indications.

welds with manual UTSW OR
C Fairly Effective
follow-up of all relevant >67% radiographic testing.
indications.
D Poorly Effective welds with manual UTSW OR
follow-up of all relevant >34% radiographic testing.
indications.
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.
6. AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2.
7. RT inspection can be used in lieu of UTSW for piping less than or equal to 3 NPS.

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 >67% AUT or manual UTSW
with 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
Assumptions:
2. Selected weld areas identified by corrosion engineer.
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.

Table 10.8 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HIC/SOHIC-H2S Cracking
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ:
>50% manual UTSW and follow >75% manual UTSW and follow up
up indications with TOFD or other indications with TOFD or other
acceptable AUT technique. acceptable AUT technique.
A Highly Effective HIC:100% Visual of total surface HIC: Three 1 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.
>25% manual UTSW and follow >50% manual UTSW and follow up
up indications with TOFD or other indications with TOFD or other
acceptable AUT technique acceptable AUT technique
B Usually Effective HIC:100% Visual of total surface HIC: Two 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
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ:
>5% manual shear wave and
>25% manual shear wave and
follow up indications with TOFD
follow up indications with TOFD or
or other acceptable AUT
other acceptable AUT technique
technique.
C Fairly Effective HIC: One 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of
HIC: 100% Visual of total surface
the base metal on equipment each
area
plate and the heads and on piping
AND random UTSW of the base
selected locations, All suspect areas
metal, followed up using AUT for
are to be followed up using AUT
suspect areas.
<5% manual shear wave and
>5% manual shear wave and follow
follow up indications with TOFD
up indications with TOFD or other
or other acceptable AUT
acceptable AUT technique.
technique.
D Poorly Effective HIC: One ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW
HIC: 100% Visual of total surface
of the base metal on equipment each
area
plate and the heads and on piping
AND random UTSW of the base
selected locations, All suspect areas
metal, followed up using AUT for
are to be followed up using AUT
suspect areas.
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.
4. TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction
6. HAZ – Heat affective zone
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
Usually manual UTSW follow-up of all OR
B
Effective relevant indications. AE testing with 100% follow-up of

manual UTSW follow-up of all scanning

D Poorly Effective relevant indications or OR

E Ineffective
Assumptions;
2. Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
4. WFMPT – Wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.

Table 10.10 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – PTA Cracking
Inspection
Inspection Intrusive Inspection Example1- Non-intrusive Inspection
Effectiveness 4
Category Example1-4
Category
For the total surface area: No inspection techniques yet available
100% Visual inspection and to meet category 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

OR
C Fairly Effective current testing with manual
UTSW follow-up of all

D Poorly Effective current testing with manual OR
UTSW follow-up of all >34% radiographic testing.
relevant indications
E Ineffective
Assumptions:
4. AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2.

Table 10.11 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – ClSCC
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
For the total surface area: No inspection techniques yet available to
100% Visual inspection and meet category 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
UTSW follow-up of all relevant
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 >25% radiographic testing.
relevant indications

E Ineffective
Assumptions:
1. Areas selected by corrosion engineer.
4. AE – Acoustic Emissions
5. AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2.

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
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:
2. Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual.
4. WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
6. AE – Acoustic Emissions

Table 10.13 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HIC/SOHIC-HF
Inspection
Effectiveness
Category
>50% manual shear wave and follow >75% manual shear wave and
up indications with TOFD or other follow up indications with TOFD
acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT or other acceptable AUT technique.
A Highly Effective >50% of weld seams. HIC: Three 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW
HIC:100% Visual of total surface area of the base metal on each plate and
AND random manual UTSW of the the heads and indications followed
base metal with indications followed up with using AUT.
up on using AUT.
up indications with TOFD or other follow up indications with TOFD or
acceptable AUT technique. other acceptable AUT technique
B Usually Effective
WFMPT >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 or
AND random manual UTSW with equipment and indications followed
indications followed up on using AUT. up with AUT.
up 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 of
HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area the base metal on each piping circuit
AND random manual UTSW with or equipment and indications
indications followed up on using followed up with AUT.
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. WFMPT acceptable AUT technique.
D Poorly Effective
<4% of the weldments. HIC: One ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW
HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area of the base on each piping circuit or
AND random manual UTSW with equipment and indications followed
indications followed up on using AUT. up with AUT.
No inspection or ineffective inspection No inspection or ineffective
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

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
Fairly Visual inspection of >30% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT,
C
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:

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
Highly Remove 100% of the insulation for of damaged or suspect area
A
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
Usually
B Remove >51% of suspect areas radiography of >66% of suspect areas
Effective
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.
Fairly
C Remove >24% of suspect areas radiography of >34% of suspect areas
Effective
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
Poorly
D insulation including suspect areas area of insulation including suspect
Effective
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

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.

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 corrosion engineer or 100% Acoustic Emission testing maybe used to
identify suspect areas.

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 available
100% external visual inspection 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:

Table 10.18 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HTHA
Inspection
Inspection
Effectiveness Inspection1-
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:
NDT using Phased Array Total Focusing Method (PAUT TFM), TOFD
Advanced Imaging, Wet Fluorescent MPT and in-situ metallography.
For Equipment: Minimum three locations of (24”x24”) in the parent metal
and three weld locations (24”) NDT scanning for each component (Shell and
Usually
B Heads).
Effective
For Piping: Two locations of (12”x12”) in the parent metal and two weld
locations (12”), per 50 ft of piping.
PAUT TFM for parent metal. ToFD Imaging for welds and heat affected
zone. Wet Fluorescent MPT and in-situ metallography to be used for parent
metal and weld locations.
NDT using AUBT, Phased Array, ToFD. Wet Fluorescent MPT and in-situ
metallography.
For Equipment: Minimum two locations of (24”x24”) in the parent metal
C Fairly Effective NDT scanning for each component (Shell and Heads). Wet Fluorescent MPT
and in-situ metallography to be used for parent metal and weld locations.
For Piping: two locations of (12”x12”) per 50 ft of piping NDT scanning.
AUBT for parent metal followed by Phased Array to verify indications,
TOFD for the weld and heat affected zone. Wet Fluorescent MPT and
in-situ metallography to be used for parent metal and weld locations.
NDT using AUBT, Phased Array and ToFD,.
For Equipment: One location of (24”x24”) NDT scanning for each
D Poorly Effective
component (Shell and Heads).
For Piping: One location of (12”x12”) per 50 ft of piping NDT scanning.
AUBT for parent metal followed by Phased Array to verify indications, TOFD
for the weld and heat affected zone
E Ineffective No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used

Assumptions:
1. PAUT, TOFD WFMPT and 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. PAUT TFM – Phased Array total focusing method
6. PAUT – Phased array ultrasonic test
7. ToFD AI – Time of Flight Diffraction Advanced Imaging
8. ToFD – Time of flight diffraction
9. AUBT – Advanced Ultrasonic Backscatter Technique
10. WFMPT – Wet Florescent Magnetic Particle Testing
11. In-Situ Metallography - Samples shall be taken on the process side and should include the welds, HAZ, and base metal.

Table 10.19 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness –

PRD, AST Shell Corrosion, and Buried Components
Please follow the effectiveness examples in API RP 581 3rd Edition, Annex 2.C

Appendix K - RBI Validation Form-I

RBI VALIDATION FORM Complete this form for every RBI initial and evergreen assessment
Saudi ARAMCO XXXX (6/2011) (Please read the instructions listed in Appendix M.)
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:

Concurrence by
Refer to Appendix 12 (4)
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 ID RBI Team
Database Validation Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Inspection Plan Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

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

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.

Appendix L - RBI Validation Form-II

RBI VALIDATION FORM Complete this form for concise / internal evergreen RBI assessment
Saudi ARAMCO XXXX (6/2011) (Please read the instructions listed in Appendix M.)
Plant Name: Unit Name Number:
Proponent Name: Badge #: Telephone: email:

RBI Team Leader
RBI Facilitator Name: Company:

Reviewed by: Proponent
Corosion Engineer
Inventory Groups Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:
Reviewed by: Plt./Operation Engr
Assumptions Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Reveiwed by: Proponent RBI
Team leader
Database Validation Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Reviewed by RBI Facilitator
Inspection Plan Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:

Reviewed by RBI Facilitator
RBI Re-assessment Name: Signature: Date: Badge #:
Concurred by Area Field Supervisor
Last T&I Date _________ Current EIS Interval _______ Next T&I Date ________
Next Full Evergreen date _________
Comments:

Appendix M - RBI Validation Form Instructions

1. Complete form-I every time an RBI assessment has been performed (both initial and
evergreen) and approved by ID RBI Team. Form-II shall be completed for all
concise/evergreen as per paragraph 6.14(5).
2. Only form-I shall 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 concurrence of the corrosion loops by CSD/CMP is only required for the new
construction projects. For in service plant, proponent corrosion engineer could concur
the corrosion loops.
5. The inventory Loops shall be concurred to by the Plant/operation Engineer from the
RBI team.
6. If the assessment includes any API STD 650/620/12C tanks the environmental
sensitivity requires concurrence by the Environmental Protection Department.
7. The assumptions shall be reviewed by the proponent RBI team and approved by the ID
RBI Team as per RBI validation Form-I and RBI validation Form-II.
8. RBI Databases, Inspection Plans, and Risk Analysis’s shall be reviewed by proponent
RBI facilitator and approved by the ID RBI Team as per RBI validation Form-I and
RBI validation Form-II.

Appendix N - Environmental Sensitivity
Risk
FACILITY Ownership / Department
High Medium Low
Abandoned Chemical Storage
Material Planning and 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
Jizan BP Western Region Distribution x
Ju’aymah Area(COT) Terminal Department x
Ju’aymah Gas Plant Juaymah NGL Fractionation Department x
KAIA AFO Air Fueling Operations Department x
KFIA AFO Air Fueling Operations Department x
Khurais Khurais Producing Department x
Khursaniyah Producing Field Ras Tanura Producing Department x
Najran BP Western Region Distribution Department x
North Jeddah BP Western Region Distribution Department x
Pump Station 1 East-West Pipelines Department x

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 Department 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 and Bulk Plants Pipelines, Distribution, and Terminals x
Safaniya & Tanajib Plants Northern Area Oil Operations x
Safaniya 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 Department x
Tabouk BP Western Region Distribution Department x
Taif AFO Western Region Distribution Department x
Turaif BP Western Region Distribution Department x
Uthmaniyah Southern Area Producing x
Yanbu COT Terminal Department x
Yanbu Gas Plant Yanbu NGL Fractionation Department x
Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Department x


Saep 343

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

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Procedure

SAEP-343 24 January 2019

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

Previous Issue: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2022

©Saudi Aramco 2019. All rights reserved.

1.1 This engineering procedure provides minimum requirements for conducting

1.4 This SAEP applies to:

2.3 RBI assessment recommendations and implementation are uniformly

2.4 Adequate resources are provided for RBI assessment.

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

3 Conflicts and Deviations

4.1 Saudi Aramco Documents

Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures

Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards

Saudi Aramco Best Practice

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure

Saudi Aramco Engineering Report

Loss Prevention Department

4.2 Industry Codes and Standards

American Petroleum Institute

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

ASME B31.8 Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems,

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

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: A continuous section of a plant (piping and equipment)

Corrosion Management Program (CMP): Refer to SAEP-88.

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

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

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

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

ID RBI Team: RBI team members from Inspection Department, performing

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

Evergreening: Is the process of updating the previous (e.g. initial) RBI

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

of information, or introduced into existing facilities due to changes in process

Initial RBI Assessment: The first comprehensive RBI assessment performed on

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

Inspection Effectiveness: The ability of the inspection activity to reduce the

Inspection Plan: The output of the planning process of determining what to

Inventory Group: Inventory of attached equipment that can realistically

Integrity Operating Window: Refer to SAEP-393.

Management of Change: A procedural system of control supported by

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

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

Mitigation: Decreasing the impact of any negative consequences of a particular

On-Stream Inspection (OSI): Refer to SAES-A-135.

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

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

consequences of failure. The results of qualitative risk analyses are dependent on

Quantitative Risk Assessment: An assessment that: