DESOUQ Pipeline Integrity

Management System
Developed By / Ahmed Shaaban
Desouq Corrosion Engineer
 Objectives:

-Establish Pipeline Integrity Management System (PIMS)

-Harmonize & Integrate integrity processes
-Establish Roles & Responsibilities
-Establish Continuous Improvement Systems
-Establish Strategies for Mitigation, Monitoring and Inspection
Scope of Work :

Develop a PIMS
Develop technical manuals (corrosion protection, in-line inspection,
defect assessment & repair)
Develop risk assessment & risk based inspection (RBI) methodology
Perform the initial baseline risk assessment and produce inspection
& monitoring routines
Provide PIMS implementation training to the integrity responsible
persons
 Asset Scope:
Upstream pipelines (raw gas trunk lines )
TL1 (12 line) connect NWSG & SS wells to CTP
TL2 (8 line) connect NWK wells to CTP
TL3 (6 line) connect SSG wells to CTP
TL4 (6 line) connect NSG wells to CTP
Downstream pipelines ( treated gas and condensate)
16 Sales gas line transfer treated gas to GASCO network
6 Condensate pipeline (transfer condensate to PPC
network)
Notes
Pipelines pass through various terrains, population densities,
environmentally sensitive areas and utilities facilities.
Pipeline buried in agriculture soil with high water content and
low soil resistivity.
No systematic Pipeline Integrity Management System in place
had been established by field originator.
All pipelines are new constructed therefore no previous data
or history.
We will consider Upstream & Downstream are two entities
and operated separately
 Objectives:
Establish Pipeline Integrity Management System (PIMS)
Harmonize & Integrate integrity processes
Establish Roles & Responsibilities
Establish Continuous Improvement Systems
Establish Strategies for Mitigation, Monitoring and Inspection
Scope of Work:
Develop a PIMS
Develop technical manuals (corrosion protection, in-line inspection,
defect assessment & repair)
Develop risk assessment & risk based inspection (RBI) methodology
Perform the initial baseline risk assessment and produce inspection
& monitoring routines
PIMS Structure
Risk assessment and Integrity management Planning

Pipeline scope

Identify threat

Data collect

Data review

YES NO
OK

Estimate POF Estimate COF

Mitigation

Risk NO
OK
YES

Integrity Planning
YES
 The main task of Risk assessment and Integrity management Planning

Define equipment/item scope ( i.e. all equipment/item that can lead to a

failure)
For each equipment/item, identify all threats which can lead to a failure
For each threat; estimate risk
Consequence of failure (CoF)
Probability of failure (PoF)
Propose plans for:
Inspection, monitoring and testing (IMT)
Mitigation, intervention and repair (MIR)
Integrity assessment (IA)
 Integrity Assessment
Flow diagram illustrating the different activities the integrity assessment process consists of
 Technical Manuals
Pipeline Manuals
Corrosion Protection Manuals
In-line inspection Manuals
Defect Assessment & Repair Manuals
Structure of Manuals:
Objectives and Scope Boundaries
Relationship to Integrity System
Technical Premise
Review of Industry Best Practice
COMPANY Operational Requirements & Assessment Techniques
Conclusion on keeping the system live
 Corrosion Protection, Mitigation and Inspection procedures
Corrosion of pipeline can divided into two sections internal and external
corrosion and the mitigation and inspection plan establish according to this
concept.

External corrosion

Mitigation Direct inspection Indirect inspection

Material selection CP survey

In line inspection
/Design
Operational
Inspection
Coating system Direct CIPS
examination
DCVG
Cathodic protection
Stray current
interference

Current attenuation
survey
 Internal corrosion

Mitigation Inspection Monitoring

Material Direct
Inline inspection monitoring
selection /Design

Corrosion Direct inspection Indirect

Allowance monitoring

Line cleaning

Chemical
treatment
 Example: Monitoring (Internal Corrosion)

Work Processes Best Practice/ COMPANY Requirements

Industry Best Practice
Internal pipeline corrosion is typically monitored in the
industry by the use of one or a combination of the
following techniques;
- Direct Monitoring
- Indirect Monitoring

COMPANY Requirements (Design/Operational)

Monitoring The activities below are required to be done by the
(Internal COMPANY responsible person as instructed by the manual.
Corrosion) Direct Monitoring
The use and installation of direct monitoring devices
should be considered during original pipeline design or
where installation of a retrofit is considered necessary to
monitor areas of interest. This
Indirect Monitoring
Product samples should be taken regularly and analyzed by
a qualified chemist to determine the concentrations of
significant corrosive constituents in the products.
 Example Inline Inspection Program

Determining Inline
Inspection Goals and
Objectives

Determining Physical &

operational characteristic
e.g. pipe design, type of
fluid

Collection of ILI tool

specification e.g operational
limitation, historical success
rate of survey technique
 Example of Pipeline Defect Assessment
 Risk Assessment VS PIMS
A Risk Assessment is a structured process through which all the credible Threats to the
pipeline are examined and a consistent evaluation of the Risk of the associated Failure
Event is completed.
Once a consistent Risk Level is evaluated for the pipeline asset, the decision has to be
made as to what to do to manage the risk.

Risk Assessment is a Decision Support Tool

Risk Risk Based Integrity

Assessment Decision Program
 Example of Threat Evaluation
3rd Party Impact Corrosion Physical Environment As-Built Flaws Improper Operation
Description Description Description Description Description
The threat of 3rd Buried and submerged The pipeline should be Design and Manufacturing Operational misuse
party accidental or pipelines are exposed adequately designed flaws may be flaws in the arises as a failure event
deliberate impact on to both internal and to meet the fabrication of the steel itself, through incorrect
the pipeline is an external corrosive requirements of the out of specification material operating procedures
event-based environments. operating properties, a flaw in the or a failure to follow
scenario. This means environment. The construction process or it may the correct procedure
that there is a large operating be a problem in the coating or by company personnel.
uncertainty in environment implies CP system.
predicting both internal flow
occurrence with time regime and external
physical environment.
Sources Sources Sources Sources Sources
Construction CO2 Seam Weld (fabrication) Operator Error
Storm
Vandalism H2S Coating / CP (fabrication) Incorrect Procedures
Fire
Transport link MIC Out-of-Spec Material Poor Management of
Seismic
General External Girth Weld (construction) Change
Subsidence
Hydrogen Cracking Dents / Gouges (construction) Insufficient Training &
Landslide
Process Related Competence

Mitigations Mitigations Mitigations Mitigations

Depth of Burial Internal Depth of Burial Fabrication Specifications
Mitigations
Physical barriers Process Control Physical barriers Construction Specifications
Robust operating
Visibility and Corrosion Inhibition Maintenance of the Independent Verification
procedures
maintenance of the Regular Cleaning Pipeline Right-Of-Way Independent Audit
Adequate training and
Pipeline Right-Of- Pigging Proper Design Pressure Hydrotest
employment selection
Way (ROW) External
Independent Audit
Public Awareness Cathodic Protection
Regular Surveys Coating
Example of Integrity action based on risk category plan
Risk Category Integrity Action

Repair options to be considered as an immediate requirement, with mobilization of repair team as soon as possible.
Catastrophic Inspection team to be on site to monitor development of threat on a very frequent basis, as appropriate. Evaluation
and Justification to be clearly presented as to why the line can continue to operate.

Mitigation options to be considered in addition to increasing the inspection and monitoring requirements. Where
Severe detected as a Hotspot, consideration for further inspection using detailed investigation to be completed as soon as
possible, where repair or mitigation is not completed. Evaluation to be completed as to whether line can continue to
operate during inspection.

A change to the Inspection and Monitoring Routine frequency, to increase the inspection and monitoring
requirements for the pipeline is required. Sources of mitigation should be identified and applied where practicable to
reduce the risk to Moderate. Where detected as a Hotspot, consideration should be given to for further inspection
Major using detailed investigation to be completed as soon as practically possible. Evaluation to be completed as to whether
line can continue to operate during inspection, although anticipated that line can continue to operate. Change to
scheduled Inspection and Monitoring Routine should be made, to monitor the Hotspot area with an increased
frequency for two further inspection cycles, if repair or mitigation is not deemed appropriate to ensure risk
development does not continue.

Risks are generally understood and adequately characterized by the current inspection and monitoring routine. No
anticipated change in the Inspection and Monitoring Routine. No reduction in Inspection and Monitoring Routine is
deemed appropriate. Where detected as a Hotspot, consideration should be given to an increase in inspection and
Moderate monitoring efforts in this area for a single cycle of inspection to ensure that Hotspot area does not develop. Where
practicable, sources of mitigation may be employed to reduce the risk to a Minor category.

Generally the Inspection and Monitoring Routine is deemed more than adequate to characterize the risk to the
pipeline system. Where multiple integrity cycles have been seen to demonstrate a consistent minor risk rating,
Minor consideration can be made to reduce the Inspection and Monitoring requirements for the system. Where detected as
a Hotspot, generally a Minor risk will not require any further mitigating actions or examination
Example Inspection & Monitoring for Corrosion Threat using ILI inspection
Inspection Threats Risk
Frequency Comments
Type Covered Category
ILI Internal/ ILI is the most preferable method.
External N/A Consideration should be given to make pipeline
Corrosion/ General piggable.
Manufacturing Notes Unpiggable pipelines, use Direct Inspection
Flaws
Maximum inspection Repairs to be completed within 1 month or as soon as
intervals to be practically possible.
determined based on Evaluation and Justification to be clearly presented as to
Catastrophic
the degradation rates why the pipeline can continue to operate at current
and/ or condition existing operational parameters.
assessment .

Or inspection interval of half of remaining life whichever

Severe 2 yearly is smaller.
Verification Digs as per ILI manual.

Or inspection interval determined through of the

Major 3 yearly Corrosion Protection Manual
Verification Digs as per ILI manual

Moderate 5 yearly Verification Digs as per ILI manual

Minor 7 yearly Verification Digs as per ILI manual

Example Inspection & Monitoring for Corrosion Threat using Direct Inspection
Direct Internal Annual Minimum of 2 digs, For verification digs after an ILI run
Inspection / All
As Externa
alternative l Direct inspection can be time consuming and costly. For non-piggable pipeline (alternative to ILI),
to ILI for Corrosi General
non- on/ Notes
piggable Manufa
pipeline,or cturing Repairs to be completed within 1 month or as soon as practically possible.
verificatio Flaws Catastr Evaluation and Justification to be clearly presented as to why the line can continue to operate.
n of ILI ophic Make line piggable as soon as practically possible.
results
Gauge and Or inspection interval of half of remaining life as minimum.
UT At least 10 locations (length dependent) covering sample of low points, welded joints, areas susceptible to stray
measurem current interference, etc.
Severe
ent 2 Years For locations susceptible to internal corrosion, same locations are to be inspected again during future inspection.
For locations susceptible to external corrosion, locations have not been inspected are to be identified and selected
for future inspection

Or inspection interval of half of remaining life as minimum.

At least 10 locations (length dependent) covering sample of low points, welded joints, areas susceptible to stray
current interference, etc.
Major For locations susceptible to internal corrosion, same locations are to be inspected again during future inspections to
3 years
determine the degradation rates.
For locations susceptible to external corrosion, locations have not been inspected are to be identified and selected
for future inspection

At least 5 locations (length dependent) covering sample of low points, welded joints, areas susceptible to stray
current interference, etc.
For locations susceptible to internal corrosion, same locations are to be inspected again during future inspections to
Modera
5 years determine degradation rates.
te
For locations susceptible to external corrosion, locations have not been inspected are to be identified and selected
for future inspection

At least 5 locations (length dependent) covering sample of low points, welded joints, areas susceptible to stray
current interference.
For locations susceptible to internal corrosion, same locations are to be inspected again during future inspection.
Minor
7 years For locations susceptible to external corrosion, locations have not been inspected are to be identified and selected
for future inspection
Inspection & Monitoring User Manual Key Performance Indicators

Purpose: To ensure that the integrity management system remains relevant,

efficient, and up-to date at all times, its performance will be monitored and assessed
on a regular basis.

KPIs are performance measure aimed at all aspects of the integrity

management process.

Characteristics:
-Measurement of Plan vs Actual
-Indication of effectiveness of preventive measure
-Monitor Monthly, quarter, yearly
 KPIs Example Corrosion
Threat Performance Measurement scoring guidance

Compliance with Excellent 95% completed on time

inspection plans
(Including ILI, direct Fair 80% completed within 1 month of due date
inspection, all CP
inspections, CVI for BELOW 60% completed within 1 month of due date
flanges & fittings) AVERAGE
Corrosion

Poor 60% completed

ILI Excellent 100% data collected

Data collection
Fair >80% data collected

BELOW Between 50-80% of data collected

AVERAGE
Poor <50% data collected

ILI results compare Excellent All verification dig completed and

with verification digs ILI and verification dig results within 10% of each other.

Fair All verification dig completed and

Corrosion

ILI and verification dig results within 20% of each other

BELOW All verification dig completed and

AVERAGE ILI and verification dig results >20% of each other.

Poor No verification dig completed or

No match between ILI results and verification digs
 Example Of (Inspection/ Maintenace Routine (IMR) work sheet)

Desouq
Pipe line name
Field
 Example of IMR Inspection
Example of IMR Monitoring

Monitoring
 Conclusions Key benefits
Developed an integrity philosophy designed to meet regulatory
and corporate integrity requirements.
Highlighted the important a series of controlled documents
required to present an auditable and controlled integrity
process
A fit-for-purpose integrity organization, including defined roles
and responsibilities, to deliver the requirements of the integrity
philosophy
Developed working processes which are required to meet the
integrity objectives set out in the company integrity philosophy.