Draft Report RLA Pipeline PDF

PIPELINE REMAINING LIFE ASSESSMENT
10” LOADING LINE FROM JETTY TO STORAGE TANK

5000 KL
PT. PEC TECH SERVICE INDONESIA

PT DINAMIKA TEKNIK PERSADA

Golden Boulevard Blok K 1-2
Jl. Pahlawan Seribu, BSD City
Tangerang 15322 – Indonesia
Phone +62-21-50510600
Fax. +62-21-53150601
Email [email protected]
www.dtp-eng.com
PIPELINE REMAINING LIFE ASSESSMENT
10” LOADING LINE FROM JETTY TO STORAGE
TANK 5000 KL
PT. PEC TECH SERVICE INDONESIA
A 06-09-2019 Issued for Review LM IS

PRE CHK APP
REV DATE DESCRIPTION
DTP BKI

Document No. : DTP/201939/R.002
1

REVISION SHEET DESCRIPTION

NO DATE SUBJECT DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE REV

1 06-09-2019 All Draft Report A
2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PENDAHULUAN 6 1.INTRODUCTION 6
1.1 Ruang Lingkup Pekerjaan 6 1.1 Scope of Work 6
1.2 Tujuan 7 1.2 Objectives 7
1.3 Daftar Singkatan 7 1.3 Abbreviation 7
2. RINGKASAN HASIL 8 2. SUMMARY OF RESULT 8
3. METODOLOGI 9 3. METHODOLOGY 9
3.1 Penilaian Resiko 9 3.1 Risk Assessment 9
3.2 Penilaian Sisa Umur 18 3.2 Remaining Life Assessment 18
4. DATA PIPA PENYALUR 24 4. PIPELINE DATA 24
4.1 Desain dan Operasi 24 4.1 Design and Operation 24
4.2 Current Integrity 25 4.2 Current Integrity 25
5. MEKANISME KERUSAKAN 28 5. DAMAGE MECHANISM 28
6. PENILAIAN RESIKO 29 6 RISK ASSESSMENT 29
6.1 Asumsi 29 6.1 Assumption 29
6.2 Segmentasi 30 6.2 Segmentation 30
6.3 Peta Penilaian Resiko 31 6.3 Risk Assessment Mapping 31
7. PREDIKSI SISA UMUR 33 7. REMAINING LIFE PREDICTION 33
8. KESIMPULAN & REKOMENDASI 34 8. CONCLUTION & RECOMMENDATION 34
9. REFERENSI 36 9. REFERENCES 36
9.1 Peraturan Indonesia 36 9.1 Indonesia Regulation 36
8.2 Peraturan & Standar 36 8.2 Codes & Standard 36
8.3 Buku Pedoman 36 8.3 Handbook 36
8.4 Dokumen Pekerjaan 36 8.4 Work Document 36
Appendix A – Pipeline Risk Model Appendix A – Pipeline Risk Model

Appendix B – MAOP & Remaining Life Appendix B – MAOP & Remaining Life

3

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Risk Assessment Flowchart ................................................................................. 10

Figure 3.2 Probability of Failure Flowchart ........................................................................... 10
Figure 3.3 Consequence of Failure Flowchart ...................................................................... 14
Figure 3.4 Risk Matrix ........................................................................................................... 17
Figure 3.5 Remaining life and safe maximum pressure calculation flowchart ...................... 18
Figure 4.1 Good coating condition (Jetty). ............................................................................ 25
Figure 4.2 No warning sign installed ..................................................................................... 26
Figure 4.3 Pipe rack for crossing purpose ............................................................................ 26
4

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Result of Risk Analysis ........................................................................................... 8

Table 3.1 Probability of Failure Factor for Onshore Pipeline ................................................ 11
Table 3.2 Consequence of Failure Factor for Onshore Pipeline ........................................... 15
Table 4.1 Design Data. ......................................................................................................... 24
Table 4.2 Operational Data. .................................................................................................. 24
Table 4.3 Minimum Thickness .............................................................................................. 26
Table 5.1 Risk assessment assumption ............................................................................... 29
Table 5.2 Pipeline Segmentation .......................................................................................... 30
Table 6.1 Risk assessment assumption ............................................................................... 29
Table 6.2 Pipeline Segmentation .......................................................................................... 30
Table 6.3 Result of Risk Assessment for 10” Loading Line from Jetty to Storage Tank
5000KL.................................................................................................................................. 31
5

1. PENDAHULUAN 1. INTRODUCTION
PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia has a

memiliki fasilitas terminal loading di loading terminal facility in Siak district,
kabupaten Siak, propinsi Riau. Salah Riau province. One of the facilities is 10”
satu fasilitasnya adalah pipa penyalur loading line from Jetty to 5000 KL
loading 10” dari Jetty ke Storage Tank Storage Tank. This 10" loading line was
5000 KL. Pipa penyalur loading 10” ini built since 2012 and has never been used
dibangun sejak 2012 dan belum pernah until now.
digunakan sampai sekarang.
PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia has a

berencana mengaktifkan kembali pipa plan to re-activation 10” Loading Line
penyalur loading 10” dari Jetty ke from Jetty to Storage Tank 5000 KL.
Storage Tank 5000 KL.
1.1 Ruang Lingkup Pekerjaan 1.1 Scope of Work
Ruang lingkup pekerjaan pada laporan Scope of work of this report are
ini adalah: followings:
 Melakukan review dokumen pipa  Perform review of pipeline
penyalur dan hasil inspeksi pipa documents and inspection result
penyalur report.
 Melakukan penilaian qualitatitive dari  Perform qualitative assessment of
tingkat integritas pipa untuk the integrity level of pipeline to get
mendapatkan profil risiko. risk profile.
 Melakukan analisa mekanisme  Perform damage mechanism
kerusakan. analysis.
 Melakukan perhitungan teknik untuk  Perform engineering calculations to
mengestimasi sisa umur pipa penyalur estimate the remaining life of pipeline
berdasarkan data hasil inspeksi serta based on inspection result data and
dokumen pipa penyalur. pipeline documents.
6

1.2 Tujuan 1.2 Objectives
Tujuan dari laporan ini adalah sebagai The purposes of this report are
berikut: followings:
 Memenuhi Persyaratan Keselamatan  To comply the requirements of
Kerja Pipa Penyalur sesuai pipeline safety as per Decree of
Kepmentamben No. Ministry Energy and Mines No.
300K/38/M.PE/1997 pasal 29 yang 300K/38/M.PE/1997 clause 29,
berhubungan dengan persyaratan related to risk assessment
penilaian risiko. requirements.
 Untuk mendapatkan profil risiko pipa  To obtained risk profile of 10” Loading
penyalur loading 10” dari Jetty ke line from Jetty to Storage Tank 5000
Storage Tank 5000 KL. KL.
 Untuk menentukan pengendalian  To determine the risk controls
risiko yang diperlukan untuk menjaga necessary required to maintain safe
operasi pipa penyalur yang aman. operation of the pipelines.
 Untuk menentukan prediksi sisa umur  To determine the prediction of
pipa penyalur. pipeline remaining life.
1.3 Daftar Singkatan 1.3 Abbreviation
ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practical

API American Petroleum Institute
ASME American Society Mechanical Engineer
COF Consequence of Failure
CP Cathodic Protection
ERF Estimated Repair Factor
KP Kilometer Point
MAOP Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure
N/A Not Applicable
NACE National Association of Corrosion Engineers
OD Outer Diameter
POF Probability Of Failure
RBI Risk Based Inspection
ROW Right Of Way
SCC Stress Corrosion Cracking
SMYS Specified Minimum Yield Strength
UT Ultrasonic Testing
7

2. RINGKASAN HASIL 2. SUMMARY OF RESULT
Berdasarkan hasil analisa penilaian Based on the result of the risk
risiko, terlihat bahwa risiko pipa penyalur assessment, the risk of the pipelines
adalah “dapat diterima” dengan faktor consider “acceptable” with the dominan
kegagalan yang utama yaitu korosi dan likelyhood of failure is due to corrosion
kerusakan pihak ketiga. Untuk menjaga and third party damage factor. To keep
risiko tetap dapat diterima harus dengan the risk in acceptable level must consider
memperhatikan rekomendasi pada bab the recommendation in Chapter 8.
8.
Table 2.1 Result of Risk Analysis
LoF Key Driver CoF Key Driver

Risk
Segment Dominant
Dominant Factor Score Score Result
Factor
1 Environment
Third Party Damage 3 C Medium
(KP 00+000 – KP 00+100) & Economic
2 Environment
(KP 00+100 – KP 00+200) & Economic
3 Environment
(KP 00+200 – KP 00+300) & Economic
4 Environment
(KP 00+300 – KP 00+400) & Economic
5 Environment
(KP 00+400 – KP 00+500) & Economic
Berdasarkan hasil perhitungan ASME Based on ASME B31.4 calculation, the

B31.4, pipa penyalur loading 10” dari actual thickness of 10” Loading Line from
Jetty ke Storage Tank 5000 KL saat ini Jetty to Storage tank 5000 KL which was
aman digunakan sampai maximum suitable for it maximum allowable
allowable operating pressure 87 psig operating pressure up to 87 psig

Hasil perhitungan sisa umur pipeline The results of calculations using the
menggunakan corrosion rate jangka remaining life of pipeline long term
panjang, diperkirakan sisa umur pipa corrosion rate, estimated remaining life
penyalur lebih dari 20 tahun of the pipeline more than 20 tahun
8

3. METODOLOGI 3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Penilaian Resiko 3.1 Risk Assessment
3.1.1 Definisi 3.1.1 Definition

Risiko paling sering didefinisikan Risk is most commonly defined as the
sebagai probabilitas dari suatu peristiwa probability of an event that causes a loss
yang menyebabkan kerugian dan and the potential magnitude of that loss.
besarnya potensi kerugian itu. Dengan By this definition, risk is increased when
definisi ini, risiko meningkat ketika salah either the probability of the event
satu kemungkinan meningkat atau ketika increases or when the magnitude of the
potensi kerugian (konsekuensi) potential loss (the consequences of the
meningkat. Transportasi produk-produk event) increases. Transportation of
dengan menggunakan pipa berisiko products by pipeline is a risk because
karena ada beberapa kemungkinan pipa there is some probability of the pipeline
gagal, melepaskan isinya (bocor), dan failing, releasing its contents, and
menyebabkan kerusakan (di samping causing damage (in addition to the
potensi kerugian dari produk itu sendiri). potential loss of the product itself).
Definisi yang paling umum dari risiko The most commonly accepted definition
sering dinyatakan sebagai hubungan of risk is often expressed as a
matematis: mathematical relationship:
Risk = (Peluang) x (Konsekuensi) Risk = (probability) x (consequence)
Risiko sering dinyatakan dalam jumlah A risk is often expressed in measurable

yang terukur seperti frekuensi kematian, quantities such as the expected
cedera, atau kerugian ekonomi. Biaya frequency of fatalities, injuries, or
keuangan sering digunakan untuk economic loss. Monetary costs are often
menyatakan tingkat suatu risiko, tetapi, used as part of an overall expression of
kesulitan untuk memberikan nilai uang risk, however, the difficult task of
untuk hidup manusia dan kerusakan assigning a dollar value to human life or
lingkungan harus dilakukan agar dapat environmental damage is necessary in
digunakan dalam pengukuran. using this as a metric.
9

3.1.2 Langkah Kerja Penialian Resiko 3.1.2 Risk Assessment Work Step

Figure 3-1 Risk Assessment Flowchart

3.1.3 Peluang Kegagalan 3.1.3 Probability of Failure
Potensi kegagalan suatu pipa penyalur Probability mode for the onshore pipeline
darat dapat dibagi dalam 4 kelompok is divided in 4 major groups: Corrosion
utama: Faktor Korosi, Faktor Desain, Factor, Design Factor, Operation &
Faktor Operasi & Pemeliharaan, dan Maintenance Factor, and Third Party
Kerusakan akibat Pihak Ketiga. Damage.
Gambar 3-2 Menunjukkan diagram alir Figure 3-2 shows probability of Failure
peluang kegagalan pada pipa penyalur flowchart for onshore pipeline.
onshore.
Probability
Of Failure

Third Party Damage
Corrosion Factor Design Factor Operating Factor
Factor

Figure 3-2 Probability of Failure Flowchart

10

Tabel berikut menunjukkan faktor peluang Table below shows Probability of Failure
kegagalan pada penilaian risiko pipa factor for onshore pipeline risk assessment.
penyalur onshore.
Table 3.1 Probability of Failure Factor for Onshore Pipeline
No Factors Sub-Factors Criteria Score

1 Third Burial depth above 1m with additional protection 1
Party Burial depth above 1 m 2
Depth of
Damage Burial depth between 0.9 m and 1 m 3
Cover
Factor Burial depth less than 0.9 m, or unknown 4
Not burried 5
None: remote area, no chance of any digging, or other harmful
1
thirdparty activities near the line
Low: location class 1, rural, low population density, less digigng or
2
construction activities
Medium: location class 2, medium population density, few digging or
Activity Level 3
High: location class 3, residential/industrial areas, high digging or
4
Very High: location class 4, multistorey buildings with underground
5
utilities, heavy and dense traffics
No aboveground facilities 1
Above
Aboveground facilities inside fences / plant area, with warning signs
Ground 2
(i.e. hazards, no trespassing)
Facilities
Aboveground facilties > 15 m from roads, and separated by structures 3
Aboveground facilties, near roads, separated by tress, wall, other
4
structures, or ditch
Aboveground facilties near roads and/or easy to reach by public. 5
Accurate and update maps available, showing location and depths,
including adjacent / crossing pipelines; with detail markers of pipeline 1
location.
Accurate and update maps available, showing location and depths,
Line Locating 2
including adjacent / crossing pipelines
Maps (as-bulit surveys available 3
Alignment sheets, from construction, available 4
Location of burried pipe unknown 5
Excellent: clear ROW, signs and markers visible at road, railroads,
1
ditches, water crossings, all changes of direction are marked.
Good: clear ROW, well marked, no overgrown vegetations. 2
Right of Way Average: ROW not uniformly clear, more markers are needed for
3
Condition better identification.
Below average: ROW are overgrown by vegetation at some area,
4
poorly marked.
Poor: No or indistinguishable pipeline ROW, no markers present. 5
Daily patrol. 1
Weekly patrol. 2
Patrol
Monthly patrol. 3
Frequency
Quarterly patrol. 4
> 3 Months 5
Regular education programs for community nearby, officials,
Public 1
contractors / excavators
Awarness
Regular education programs for community nearby. 2
Program
Door to door contact with adjacent residences. 3
11

Reading materials (i.e pipeline safety brochures) for community
4
nearby.
None 5
2 Corrosion Pipeline has been in operation ≤ 4 years 1
Factor Pipeline has been in operation more than 4 years to 8 years 2
Pipeline Age Pipeline has been in operation more than 8 years to 12 years 3
Pipeline has been in operation more than 12 years to 16 years 4
Pipeline has been in operation for more than 16 years 5
Internal Corrosion
Low corrosion: reasonable material selected for tranport products, 1
normally product is not corrosive, low corrosion rate (<0.025 mm/y).
Medium corrosion: damage of pipeline is possible but in slower rate,
Product low percentage of acidic products, medium corrosion rate (0.025 - 3
Corrosivity 0.25 mm/y).
High corrosion: rapid corrosion is possible, material selected
incompatible with products, high percentage of H2S, CO2 and other 5
acidic products, high corrosion rate (>0.25 mm/y).
Not needed 1
Internal Internal coating 2
Corrosion Inhibitor injection 3
Prevention Internal corrosion monitoring 4
None 5
Atmospheric Condition
Not applicable. 1
Air, low humidity area. 2
Atmospheric
Marine, swamp, coastal, high humidity area. 3
Exposure
Air to water / soil interface, insulation. 4
Chemical, corrosive environment. 5
Excellent: high quality coating suitable for its environment, new
1
condition or recently repair; or not required.
Coating Good: high quality coating, in good condition, less than 10% damage. 2
Condition Fair: adequate coating, fair condition, less than 30% damage. 3
Poor: coating in-place, more than 30% damage 4
Absent: no coating 5
Sub-surface Condition
Progressively less corrosive (>10000 Ohm-cm) 1
Mildly corrosive (2000-10000 Ohm-cm) 2
Soil
Moderately corrosive (1000-2000 Ohm-cm) 3
Corrosivity
Corrosive (500-1000 Ohm-cm) 4
Very corrosive (<500 Ohm-cm) 5
Normal PH 1
Soil PH Lower PH (4-6) 3
Low PH (< 3) 5
Aerial, or no CP required 1
CP installed, providing very good protection (lower than -1,000 mv) 2
Catodic
CP installed, providing adequate protection (lower than -850 mv) 3
Protection
CP installed, but underprotection (higher than -850 mv) 4
No CP installed, broken or missing 5
No AC power within 300 m, or very low AC power 1
CP Potential AC power nearby but preventive measures are taken, or survey
3
Interference confirm no induction occuring
AC power nearby but no preventive actions are taken 5
Sub Surface Excellent: high quality coating suitable for its environment, new
1
Coating condition or recently repair
Condition Good: high quality coating, in good condition, less than 10% damage. 2
12

Fair: adequate coating, fair condition, less than 30% damage. 3
Poor: coating in-place, more than 30% damage 4
Absent: no coating 5
Excellent: A formal, thorough inspection is performed. Inspections
performed by qualified and experienced personel at appropriate
1
intervals. One or more indirect assesment techniques were used and
followed by direct assesment.
Good: A formal, thorough inspection is performed. Inspections
Sub Surface
performed by qualified and experienced personel at appropriate 2
Coating
intervals. One or more indirect assesment techniques were used.
Survey
Fair: Inspections are informal, but performed routinely by qualified
3
personel, using indirect technique.
Poor: Little inspection is done; reliance is on chance sighting of
4
problem areas by using visual inspection.
Absent: No inspection done. 5
Remaining Life > 16 years 1
12 < Remaining Life ≤ 16 years 2
Remaining
Life
Remaining Life ≤ 4 years 5
Damage Mechanism
Low 1
Susceptibility Medium 2
High 3
Highly effective 1
Usually effective 2
Inspection
Fairly effective 3
Effectiveness
Poorly effective 4
Ineffective 5
3 Design Design to MOP ratio > 2.0 1
Factor Design to MOP ratio: 1.5 - 2.0 2
Safety Factor Design to MOP ratio: 1.25 - 1.5 3
Design to MOP ratio: 1.0 - 1.25 4
Design to MOP ratio < 1.0 5
Seismic Zone 1 and 2 (0.03 g to 0.10 g) 1
Seismic Zone 3 (0.10 g to 0.15 g) 3
Seismic Seismic Zone 4 (0.15 g to 0.20 g) 5
No Ground Movement/Land Slide 1
Ground
Ground Movement/Land Slide across or under ROW 3
Movement
Ground Movement/Land Slide across or under pipeline 5
Pipeline support properly 1
Support damage recorded, assessed and no remediation required. 2
Support Support damage recorded, not assessed and remediation. 3
Support damage recorded, minor pipe deformation found. 4
Support damage recorded, major pipe deformation found. 5
No pipeline crossings with roads, railway or rivers, etc 1
Design of Pipeline Crossing is Correct 2
Crossings Design of Pipeline Crossing is Adequate 3
Design of Pipeline Crossing is Inadequate 4
Design of Pipeline Crossing Unknown 5
4 Operation Pressure Pressure cycles of >10% MAOP per year did not happen. 1
Factor Cycling Less than 10 pressure cycles of >10% MAOP per year. 2
Between 10 and 50 pressure cycles of >10% MAOP per year. 3
13

Between 50 and 100 pressure cycles of >10% MAOP per year. 4
More than 100 pressure cycles of >10% MAOP per year or no data 5
Safety systems not needed 1
Onsite, two or more levels Safety Systems 2
Safety
Onsite, one level safety system 3
System
Remote, observation and control 4
Remote, observation only, or no safety system 5
HSE Management System score ≥ 800 1
HSE HSE Management System score more than 600 to 800 2
Management HSE Management System score more than 400 to 600 3
System HSE Management System score more than 200 to 400 4
HSE Management System score ≤ 200 5
Pipeline cleaning pigged regularly, more than recommendation of
1
required frequency
Pipeline cleaning pigged regularly in line with a recommendation of
2
required frequency
Cleaning Pig Pipeline cleaning pigged regularly, but less than a recommended
3
frequency of pigging
Pipeline cleaning pig occasionally performed, but no
4
recommendation of required pigging frequency.
No pipeline cleaning pig ever performed. 5
No leak history 1
One leak caused by third party 2
Leak History One leak caused by corrosion 3
More than one leak caused by third party or corrosion 4
More than one leak, caused by both third party and corrosion 5

3.1.4 Konsekuensi Kegagalan 3.1.4 Consequences of Failure
Kebocoran fluida yang berbahaya dari Loss of containment of hazardous fluids
peralatan bertekanan dapat from pressurized processing equipment
mengakibatkan kerusakan peralatan di may result in damage to surrounding
sekitarnya, cedera serius pada personil, equipment, serious injury to personnel,
kerugian produksi, dan dampak production losses, and undesirable
lingkungan yang tidak diinginkan. environmental impacts.
Gambar 3-3 menunjukkan diagram alir Figure 3-3 shows Consequence of
konsekuensi kegagalan untuk penilaian Failure flowchart for onshore pipeline risk
risiko pipa penyalur onshore. assessment.

Consequence Of
Failure

Safety Impact Environmental Impact Reputation Impact Economic Impact

Figure 3-3 Consequence of Failure Flowchart
14

Catatan : Rules :
a. Setiap dampak di atas terdiri dari 5 (lima) a. Each type of impact above consists of 5
tingkatan konsekuensi. (five) levels of consequence.
b. Dampak konsekuensi tertinggi dari factor b. The highest consequence of the above
factor di atas akan digunakan sebagai mentioned impacts will be used as the
nilai dari Consequence of Failure. Consequence of Failure.
Tabel di bawah menunjukan factor Table below shows Consequence of Failure
konsekuensi kegagalan untuk penilaian risiko factor for onshore pipeline risk assessment.
pipeline onshore.
Table 3.2 Consequence of Failure Factor for Onshore Pipeline
Sub-
No Factors Criteria Score
Factors
Pipeline not in operation, having good preservation A
Product Loss Pipeline less than 6 inches diameter B
Pipeline 6 inches to 12 inches diameter C
Pipeline greater than 12 inches to 24 inches diameter D
Pipeline greater than 24 inches diameter E
Pressure less than 16 barg A
Pressure Pressure 16 barg to 40 barg B
Safety Impact Factor Pressure greater than 40 barg to 80 barg C
1 Pressure greater than 80 barg to 120 barg D
Pressure greater than 120 barg E
Non-combustible, Nf = 0 A
Flamability
FP > 200F, Nf = 1 B
100°F < FP < 200°F, Nf = 2 C
FP < 100°F and BP < 100°F, Nf = 3 D
FP < 73°F and BP < 100°F, Nf = 4 E
Nh = 0 No hazard beyond that of ordinary combustibles. A
Nh = 1 Only minor residual injury is likely. B
Nh = 2 Prompt medical attention required to avoid
C
Toxicity temporary incapacitation
Nh = 3 Materials causing serious temporary or residual
D
injury.
Nh = 4 Short exposure causes death or major injury. E
No lost time injury. Slight injury / illness first aid or medical
A
treatment case.
Single lost time injury without disability. B
Fatality Single lost time injury with disability or multiple lost time
C
injuries.
Single fatality or multiple lost time injuries with disabilities. D
Multiple fatalities of employees, contractors, or the public. E
2 Environmental Local Scale (Immediate area). Temporary impact (days).
Impact Area A
Impact For an oil spill offshore, response means available site.
Localized (<1 km2). Short term (weeks) impact. For an oil
B
spill offshore, response means available on site.
Medium scale impact (1-10 km2). Short term (months)
impact. For an oil spill offshore, regional assistance C
required.
15

Sub-
No Factors Criteria Score
Factors
Medium scale impact (1-10 km2). Medium term (years)
impact. For an oil spill offshore, international assistance D
required.
Large scale impact (> 10 km2). Long term (decades)
impact. For an oil spill offshore, international assistance E
required.
Water A
Product
Sweet natural gas B
Containment
Toxic and/or flammable gases, except sweet natural gas C
Produced water, condensate, and other flammable liquids
D
except crude oil
Crude oil and heavy fractionates E
Gas or water pipeline OR shut in (purged or filled water) A
Pipeline < 6 inches diameter OR produced water pipeline
Release B
OR shut in (product in line at ambient pressure)
Quantity
Pipeline 6-10 inches diameter C
Pipeline >= 12 in NB OR shut in (product line in low
D
pressure)
Oil pipeline greater than 24 inches diameter OR shut in
E
(product line in high pressure)
Minimal impact, up to 1% lost production, minor repair A
Economic
3 1-10% production loss, minor repair less than 3 days B
Impact
11-20% production loss, medium repair 3 – 7 days C
21-30% production, major repair 7-14 days D
31-50% production, pipeline and facilities repair more than
E
14 days
Reputation Local impacts, quickly forgotten A
4
Impact Regional press, short-term concern B
Regional press & TV coverage C
National press & TV coverage. D
International press or TV coverage. E

16

3.1.5 Matrik Resiko 3.1.5 Risk Matrix
Penyajian risiko dalam bentuk matriks Presenting the results in a risk matrix is
adalah cara yang efektif menunjukkan an effective way of showing the
pembagian risiko dengan komponen distribution of risks for different
yang berbeda tanpa nilai numerik. Pada components in a process unit without
matriks risiko, katagori konsekuensi dan numerical values. In the risk matrix, the
probabilitas tersebut diatur sedemikian consequence and probability categories
sehingga komponen risiko tertinggi are arranged such that the highest risk
berada di pojok kanan atas. Kategori components are toward the upper right-
risiko (Tinggi, Sedang dan Rendah) hand corner. Risk categories (i.e. High,
dapat dilihat pada kotak-kotak dalam Medium, and Low) are assigned to the
matriks risiko. boxes on the risk matrix.
Gambar 3-4 menunjukkan matriks risiko Figure 3-4 shows Risk matrix which is
yang digunakan untuk menentukan risiko used for determining and plotting pipeline
pipeline. related risk

Figure 3-4 Risk Matrix
17

3.2 Penilaian Sisa Umur 3.2 Remaining Life Assessment
Perhitungan remaining life assessment Remaining life assessment calculation

dilakukan untuk mengetahui sisa umur performed to determine pipeline
pipa penyalur dan membandingkan safe remaining life and compare it safe
maximum pressure pipa saat ini dengan maximum pressure with setting MAOP to
setting MAOP untuk mengetahui ascertain the maximum operating
kemampuan operasi maksimum pipa capability of the pipeline.
penyalur.
Metode perhitungan remaining life Remaining life assessment calculation

assessment dilakukan berdasarkan method conducted based on ASME
ASME B31.4, ASME B31.8 dan ASME B31.4, ASME B31.8 and ASME B31G
B31G tergantung pada ketersediaan data depend on availability of pipe thickness
ketebalan pipa. Berikut diagram alir data. The following flowchart shows the
perhitungan remaining life dan safe flow of remaining life and safe maximum
maximum pressure pipa. pressure calculation.
Figure 3-5 Remaining life and safe maximum pressure calculation flowchart
18

3.2.1 MAOP 3.2.1 MAOP
Perhitungan MAOP dilakukan berdasarkan MAOP calculation conducted based on

ASME B31.8 dan ASME B31G yang ASME B31.8 and ASME B31G which its use
penggunaan nya bergantung pada depend on availability of pipe actual
ketersediaan data ketebalan aktual pipa dan thickness and the fluid inside.
jenis fluida yang mengalir didalam nya.
ASME B31.8 digunakan apabila data ASME B31.8 used if pipe actual thickness
ketebalan aktual pipa yang tersedia berupa data available in the form of UT Thickness
data UT Thickness measurement dan fluida measurement result and the fluid in gas form.
yang mengalir di dalam nya berupa gas. ASME B31G used if the available data of pipe
ASME B31G digunakan apabila data thickness is from intelligent pigging result
ketebalan aktual yang tersedia berupa hasil regardless the fluid that flow inside.
intelegent pigging tanpa menghiraukan jenis
fluida yang mengalir didalam nya.
ASME B31.4 ASME B31.4

Untuk pipa penyalur yang berisi fluida Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure for
hidrokarbon cair, Maximum Allowable pipeline which contain liquid hydrocarbon is
Operating Pressure dihitung menggunakan calculated using the following formula:
rumus:
∙ ∙ ∙ , ∙
Dimana Where
P = Tekanan, psig P = Pressure, psig
D = Nominal diameter luar pipa, in D = Nominal outside diameter of pipe, in.
t = (t actual – 2 x Cr x tahun inspeksi t = (t actual – 2 x Cr x date of next inspection)
berikutnya) S = Specified Minimum Yield Strength, psi
S = Specified Minimum Yield Strength, psi E = Weld Joint factor
E = Weld Joint factor

ASME B31G ASME B31G
ASME B31G merupakan pelengkap dari ASME ASME B31G is a complementary from B31
B31 untuk pipa bertekanan. Metode ini for a pressure pipes. This method gives semi-
empiric method to analyzed corroded pipes.
19

memberikan prosedur semi empiris untuk
analisis pipa terkorosi.
Input parameter includes:
Parameter input mencakup:  Pipe outside diameter (D)
 Diameter luar pipa (D)  Pipe nominal thickness (t)
 Ketebalan nominal pipa (t)  Specific Minimum Yield Strength
 Kekuatan luluh minimum (SMYS) (SMYS)
 Tekanan operasi maksimum yang  Maximum Allowed Operating
diijinkan (MAOP) Pressure (MAOP)
 Panjang korosi (L)  Length of metal loss (L)
 Kedalaman korosi (d).  Depth of corrosion (d).
The maximum depth of corrosion measured
Kedalaman maksimum bagian korosi yang section (d) should be compared with nominal
terukur (d) harus dibandingkan dengan pipe thickness (t) then use the following
ketebalan nominal pipa (t) kemudian gunakan criteria.
kriteria berikut.  If (d/t) > 80% of pipe nominal thickness,
 jika (d/t) > 80 % ketebalan nominal pipa, pipes should be replace or repair
pipa harus diganti atau diperbaiki before it operates.
sebelum dioperasikan kembali.  If (d/t) < 10% of pipe nominal thickness,
 Jika (d/t) < 10 % ketebalan nominal pipa, pipes can be operated normally.
pipa boleh dioperasikan secara normal.  If 10% <(d/t)<80% of pipe nominal
 If 10 % < (d/t) < 80 % ketebalan nominal tickness, then analysis is continued to
pipa, analisis dilanjutkan ke langkah the next step.
selanjutnya.
The analysis can be carried out in 4 level
Analisa berdasarkan ASME B31G dapat (Level 0, level 1, level 2, level 3) depend on
dilakukan dalam 4 level (Level 0, level 1, level the quantity and quality of available data. A
2, level 3) berdasarkan kuantitas dan kualitas Level 0 evaluation relies on allowable defect
data yang tersedia. Evaluasi Level 0 length and depth (tables 3-1 to 3-12 ASME
berdasarkan panjang dan kedalaman cacat B31G), level 0 evaluation can be conducted
yang diijinkan (tables 3-1 to 3-12 ASME B31G), in the field without performing detailed
evaluasi ini dapat dilakukan di lapangan tanpa calculation.
perhitungan lebih lanjut.
Level 1 evaluation is a simple calculation
Evaluasi Level 1 merupakan perhitungan based on single measurement of the
berdasarkan pengukuran tunggal pada maximum depth and axial extent of metal
kedalaman maksimum dan sumbu axial dari loss. Level 2 evaluation used a detailed
20

metal loss. Evaluasi Level 2 dilakukan measurement of corroded surface profile,
menggunakan pengukuran detail dari profil distribution of metal loss using high
permukaan yang terkorosi, distribusi metal loss resolution inline inspection, this evaluation
menggunakan high resolution inline inspection, carried out using repetitive computation.
evaluasi ini dilakukan dengan perhitungan yang Level 3 evaluation is detailed analysis of
berulang. Evaluasi Level 3 merupakan analisa specific flaw.
mendetail terhadap cacat spesifik.
In this report, the evaluation conducted is
Pada laporan ini, evaluasi yang dilakukan yaitu evaluation Level 1. Level 1 evaluation carried
evaluasi Level 1. Evaluasi ini dilakukan dengan out by calculating the estimated failure stress
menghitung estimasi failure stress (SF) (SF) and then compare it with multiplication of
kemudian membandingkan dengan hasil hoop stress at operating pressure (SO) with
perkalian hoop stress pada tekanan operasi safety factor (SF). The flaw is acceptable if SF
dengan factor keamanan. Cacat dikatakan equal to or greater than SF x SO or if PF is
acceptable jika failure stress (SF) sama dengan equal to or greater than multiplication of
atau lebih besar dari SF x SO atau jika PF sama operating pressure (PO) with safety factor
dengan atau lebih besar dari perkalian tekanan (SF). If the flaw unacceptable, the pressure
operasi (PO) dan safety faktor (SF). Jika hasil can be reduced so that it is less than PF/SF.
perhitungan menunjukkan hasil unacceptable,
tekanan pipa dapat diturunkan hingga kurang
dari PF/SF.
The estimated failure stress calculated using
Estimasi failure stress dihitung berdasarkan below equation :
persamaan berikut :
Equation 3.1

Equation 3.2
/
1 / Equation 3.3
/
1 0.8 Equation 3.4
Jika hasil perhitungan z ≤ 20, gunakan If the results of z ≤ 20, use equation 3.2 to
persamaan 3.2 untuk mengitung estimasi calculate the estimated failure stress
failure stress jika tidak gunakan persamaan otherwise use equation 3.3.
3.3.
21

Sflow untuk plain carbon steel yang beroperasi Sflow for plain carbon steel operating
pada temperatur di bawah 250 °F dihitung temperature below 250 °F defined by Sflow =
dengan Sflow = 1.1 x SMYS 1.1 x SMYS
3.2.2 SISA UMUR 3.2.2 REMAINING LIFE
Perhitungan sisa umur pipa penyalur Remaining life calculation is highly

sangat dipengaruhi oleh laju korosi yang affected by corrosion rate which occurred
dialami pipa. Laju korosi didapat dengan at the pipeline. Corrosion rate obtained by
membandingkan data ketebalan pipa comparing previous pipe thickness with
terdahulu dengan kondisi ketebalan sisa the current thickness. Below is formula
pipa saat ini. Berikut persamaan yang used to calculate corrosion rate:
digunakan untuk menghitung laju korosi
pipa:
Dimana Where
tactual = ketebalan sekarang, in tactual = actual thickness, in
trequired = ketebalan yang dibutuhkan, in, trequired = required thickness, in, computed
dihitung dengan rumus desain by the design formulas before
sebelum corrosion allowance corrosion allowance and
dan toleransi manufaktur manufacturer’s tolerance are
ditambahkan. added.
ASME B31G ASME B31G

Pada ASME B31G, sisa umur pipa On ASME B31G, pipeline remaining life is
penyalur bergantung pada kriteria determined based on ASME B 31G
penerimaan ASME B31G yaitu: acceptance criteria which is:
 Jika nilai perbandingan kedalaman  If ratio of corrosion depth and nominal
korosi dan ketebalan nominal melebihi thickness exceeds 80%.
80% Current corrosion depth used to
Kedalaman korosi pipa saat ini predict future depth by interpolating
diinterpolasikan berdasarkan laju using corrosion rate.
korosi
22

 Atau jika nilai ERF (Estimated Repair  Or if the ERF (Estimated Repair
Factor) lebih besar atau sama dengan Factor) value is more or equal 1.0
1, yang mana yang lebih dahulu which ever come first.
terpenuhi.
ERF merupakan perbandingan antara ERF is a ration of MAOP set and the safe
MAOP set dan MAOP yang aman untuk maximum pressure of corroded pipe.
pipa terkorosi.

23

4. DATA PIPA PENYALUR 4. PIPELINE DATA
4.1 Desain dan Operasi 4.1 Design and Operation
4.1.1 Data Desain 4.1.1 Design Data
Data desain untuk pipa penyalur loading Design data for 10” Loading line from
10” dari Jetty ke Storage Tank 5000 KL Jetty to Storage Tank 5000 KL as follows.
adalah sebagai berikut.
Table 4.1 Design Data.
No Description Unit Data

1 Outside Diameter Inch/mm 10,750 / 273,0
2 Nominal Wall Thickness Inch/mm 0,365 / 9,27
3 Length of Pipe m 500
4 Material Spesification - API 5L Grade B, ERW
5 SMYS psi 35500
6 Hydrotect Pressure psig 130,5
7 Design Code ASME B31.4
8 Design Pressure psig 87
9 Design Temperature °F 100
10 Flowrate LPM 6666,6
11 Construction Type - Nearshore and Aboveground
12 Location Class - Class 2
13 External Coating Type - 3-Layer High Density Polyethylene
14 Corrosion Allowance Inch/mm 0,05 / 1,27
15 Safety Device - 2 Unit (Butterfly Valve)
16 Year Built - 2012
17 Year Operation - 2019
18 Fluid - Solar
19 ROW m 6
4.1.2 Data Operasi 4.1.2 Operational Data
Data operasi untuk pipa penyalur loading Operational data for 10” Loading line from
10” dari Jetty ke Storage Tank 5000 KL Jetty to Storage Tank 5000 KL as follows:
adalah sebagai berikut:
Table 4.2 Operational Data.
No Description Unit Value

24

1 Operating Pressure psig 58
2 Operating Temperature °F 40
4.2 Current Integrity 4.2 Current Integrity
Berdasarkan hasil inspeksi pada tahun Based on inspection result perform on

2019, kondisi pipa penyalur loading 10” January 2019, the condition of 8” Oil
dari Jetty ke Storage Tank 5000 KL pipeline from SP NKL to SP Site B as
adalah sebagai berikut: follows:
4.2.1 Survey Rute Pipa Penyalur 4.2.1 Pipeline Route Survey
Hasil survey rute pipa penyalur yang The result of pipeline route survey
dilakukan yaitu: performed as follows:
 Pipeline menyalurkan solar dari  The pipeline transport solar from
Jetty ke Storage Tank 5000 KL Jetty to Storage Tank 5000 KL for 500
sepanjang 500 m. m length.
 Pipa penyalur berada diatas  Pipeline are located on abovergound
permukaan tanah dengan section with support.
menggunakan support.
 Jalur ROW pipa penyalur sebagian  Pipeline ROW mostly located near
besar berada di dekat laut the sea (jetty).
(dermaga).
 Kondisi coating pipa penyalur dalam  Pipeline coating condition is in good
keadaan baik. condition.

Figure 4. 1 Good coating condition (Jetty).

 Perlindungan terhadap korosi pada  Pipeline external corrosion protection
pipa penyalur menggunakan 3-Layer using 3-Layer Polyethylene (3LPE).
Polyethylene (3LPE).
 Jarak antar support sekitar ±5 m  Support length about ±5 m along
pada sepanjang jalur pipa penyalur. pipeline route.
25

 Tidak terdapat warning sign yang  There are no warning sign installed
terpasang di sepanjang rute pipa. along pipeline route

Figure 4. 2 No warning sign installed
 Terdapat pipe rack untuk  There is pipe rack to accomodate

mengakomodasi perlintasan jalan. road crossing.

Figure 4. 3 Pipe rack for crossing purpose
 Terdapat 2 safety device di  There are 2 safety devices along

sepanjang rute pipa penyalur pipeline route (Butterfly Valve).
(Butterfly Valve).

4.2.4 Pengukuran Ketebalan Pipa 4.2.4 Pipeline Wall Thickness

Penyalur Measurement
Hasil pengukuran ketebalan pipa yang Based on thickness measurement
dilakukan oleh PT Biro Klasifikasi result perform in July 2019 by PT Biro
Indoneaia pada bulan Juli 2019 untuk Klasifikasi Indonesia for 10” Loading
pipa penyalur loading 10” dari Jetty ke line from Jetty to Storage Tank 5000 KL,
Storage Tank 5000 KL didapatkan. the minimum thickness are obtained.
Table 4. 3 Minimum Thickness
26

Nominal Minimum
OD
Section Thickness Thickness
(inch)
(mm) (mm)
8 Straight Pipe 8,18 7,85
10 Straight Pipe 9,11
9,27
10 Elbow 8,61

27

5. MEKANISME KERUSAKAN 5. DAMAGE MECHANISM
Pipa penyalur rentan terhadap berbagai Pipeline are susceptible to various types
jenis kerusakan yang dapat diakibatkan of damage that can be caused by several
oleh beberapa mekanisme. Mekanisme mechanisms. Damage mechanism are
kerusakan dipengaruhi oleh jenis influenced by the material type, operating
material, kondisi operasi, kondisi conditions, environmental conditions and
lingkungan dan komposisi fluida. fluid composition. Pipeline damage
Identifikasi mekanisme kerusakan pada mechanism determination using API 571
pipa penyalur dengan menggunakan and ASME PCC-3.
API 571 dan ASME PCC-3.
Berdasarkan hasil pemeriksaan pada Based on the results of current condition
kondisi pipa penyalur terakhir pipeline inspection, the susceptibility of
didapatkan kemungkinan mekanisme damage mechanism for pipeline as
kegagalan pada pipa penyalur sebagai follows:
berikut:
Table 5. 1 Damage Mechanism

Damage Susceptibility
No Damage Mechanism Remark
Mode (Y/N)
External Corrosion
May occur on entire pipeline due to located in
1 Atmospheric Corrosion Thinning Y marine (jetty) atmosphere zone (corrosive
area)
2 Galvanic Corrosion Thinning N Not found different material joint
May occur for aboveground pipeline between

3 Crevice Corrosion Thinning Y
pipeline and support (metal).
No external corrosion protection using catodic
4 Stray Current Corrosion Thinning N
protection
Internal Corrosion
No hystorical data about MIC, but need further
Microbiologically Induced analysis about SRB (colony/mm) due to
5 Thinning Y
Corrosion (MIC) stagnan flow when there are no loading
activities.
There is no CO2 content in the fluid
6 CO2 Corrosion Thinning N
composition
There is no H2S content in the fluid
7 H2S Corrosion Thinning N
composition
Erosion
Sales liquid (no debriss/solid particle), no
Errosion/Errosion
8 Thinning N hystorical data about erosion/errosion
Corrosion
corrosion
Non-Time Dependent Damage
There is no H2S content in the fluid
9 Wet H2S (HIC, SCC, SSC) Cracking N
composition
28

6. PENILAIAN RESIKO 6 RISK ASSESSMENT
6.1 Asumsi 6.1 Assumption
Dalam pelaksanaan analisa penilaian During risk assessment analysis for 10”
risiko pipa penyalur loading 10” dari Loading line from Jetty to Storage Tank
Jetty ke Storage Tank 5000 KL terdapat 5000 KL there are some assumptions
beberapa asumsi yang digunakan. Hal and judgement which taken into account.
ini dilakukan untuk menyederhanakan It is made to simplify the unavailable
data yang tidak tersedia. Asumsi data. The assumptions are tabulated on
tersebut tersusun pada tabel 6.1 berikut. table 6.1 below.
Table 6. 1 Risk assessment assumption
No Assumptions Judgments
1 No process upsets Kondisi operasi tidak pernah melebihi nilai
desain.
The operating condition never exceed the
design value.
2 Route is patrolled Patroli pipa dilakukan setiap bulan.
Pipeline maintenance is performed monthly.
3 Public Education Materi bacaan (seperti pipeline safety
brosur) untuk penduduk terdekat.
Reading materials (i.e pipeline safety
brochures) for community nearby.
4 Reputation Impact Pemberitaan daera, perhatian jangka
pendek.
Regional press, short-term concern.
5 Economic impact Kegagalan pipa penyalur memberikan akibat
ekonomi/finasial sedang kepada operator
pipa penyalur. Perbaikan dapat dilakukan 3 -
7 hari.
Failure of the pipeline results in medium
economic / financial impact to pipeline
operator. The repair should be done 3 - 7
days
29

6.2 Segmentasi 6.2 Segmentation
Untuk melakukan penilaian risiko, Commonly to perform risk analysis
dilakukan pembagian segmentasi segmentation is needed due to the risk is
karena potensial resiko disepanjang pipa unequal along the pipeline. For 10”
tidaklah sama. Untuk pipa penyalur Loading line from Jetty to Storage Tank
loading 10” dari Jetty ke Storage Tank 5000 KL, segmentation perform every
5000 KL, segmentasi dilakukan setiap 100m length.
100 m.
Table 6. 2 Pipeline Segmentation
Segment Condition
- Starting point at Jetty
- There are 2 diameter 8” and 10”
1
- No coating
(KP 00+000 – KP 00+100)
- Butterfly valve
- Near Shore area (jetty)
- Aboveground with support
2
- Pass over jetty
(KP 00+100 – KP 00+200)
- Coating is in good condition
- Pass over bush area
3
- Support in every ±5 m
(KP 00+200 – KP 00+300)
- Pass over bush area
4
- Pipe rack to accomodate road crossing
(KP 00+300 – KP 00+400)
- The end point of pipeline SP Site B
5 - Butterfly Valve
(KP 00+400 – KP 00+500) - Plant Area
30

6.3 Peta Penilaian Resiko 6.3 Risk Assessment Mapping
Hasil penilaian resiko terhadap pipa Detail result of risk assessment of 10” Loading
penyalur loading 10” dari Jetty ke line from Jetty to Storage Tank 5000 KL is
Storage Tank 5000 KL dijabarkan pada given in Appendix A. Table below gives
lampiran C, tabel berikut menjelaskan summary of the risk ratings for the each
ringkasan risk rating untuk tiap segment pipeline segment.
pipa penyalur.
Table 6. 3 Result of Risk Assessment for 10” Loading Line from Jetty to Storage Tank 5000KL
Probability of Failure
Third Party Damage Factor
Depth of Cover 5 5 5 5 5
Activity Level 2 2 2 2 2
Aboveground Facilities 4 4 4 4 4
Line Locating 3 3 3 3 3
Right of Way Condition 2 2 3 3 3
Patrol 3 3 3 3 3
Public Awarness Program 4 4 4 4 4
Score 3 3 3 3 3
Corrosion Factor
Pipeline Age 3 3 3 3 3
Internal Corrosion 4 4 4 4 4
Atmospheric Condition 3 3 2 2 2
Sub-surface Condition 1 1 1 1 1
Remaining Life 1 1 1 1 1
Score 2 2 2 2 2
Design and Construction Factor
Safety Factor 2 2 2 2 2
Seismic 1 1 1 1 1
Ground Movement 3 3 3 3 3
Support 1 1 1 1 1
Crossings 1 1 1 2 1
Score 2 2 2 2 2
Operation Factor
Pressure Cycling 1 1 1 1 1
Safety Systems 2 2 2 2 2
HSE Management System 3 3 3 3 3
Cleaning Pigging 5 5 5 5 5
Leak History 1 1 1 1 1
Score 2 2 2 2 2

1 2 3 4 5

31

Consequences of Failure
Safety Impact B B B B B
Environmental Impact C C C C C
Reputation Impact B B B B B
Economic Impact C C C C C

1 2 3 4 5

Risk Result Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium
Dominant PoF TPD TPD TPD TPD TPD

Dominant CoF ENV & ECO ENV & ECO ENV & ECO ENV & ECO ENV & ECO
Detil penilaian risiko dapat dilihat pada Detail risk assessment can be found in
Lampiran A. Appendix A.

32

7. PREDIKSI SISA UMUR 7. REMAINING LIFE PREDICTION
Perhitungan sisa umur dan maximum Remaining life and maximum allowable
allowable operating pressure pipa operating pressure calculation is perform
dilakukan berdasarkan ASME B31.4. based on ASME B31.4.
Berdasarkan hasil perhitungan ASME Based on ASME B31.4 calculation result

B31.4 untuk pipa penyalur loading 10” for 10” Loading line from Jetty to Storage
dari Jetty ke Storage Tank 5000 KL Tank 5000 KL using current thickness,
menggunakan ketebalan pipa saat ini, safe maximum pressure obtained is 87
didapat safe maximum pressure pipa psig.
penyalur 87 psig
Perhitungan sisa umur pipa penyalur Remaining life calculation performed

dilakukan menggunakan laju korosi using long term corrosion rate and
jangka panjang dan dengan assuming that the corrosion advance at
mengasumsikan corrosion rate melaju the constant rate. After performing
dengan kecepatan yang sama. Setelah calculation estimated remaining life of the
dilakukan perhitungan diperkirakan sisa pipeline in 2019 more than 20 years.
umur pipa penyalur pada tahun 2019
adalah lebih dari 20 tahun.

Detil Perhitungan MAOP & sisa umur Detail MAOP & Remaining life calculation
dapat dilihat pada Lampiran B. can be found in Appendix B.

33

8. KESIMPULAN & 8. CONCLUTION &
REKOMENDASI RECOMMENDATION
8.1 Kesimpulan 8.1 Conclution
Berdasarkan penilaian risiko dan sisa The result of risk and remaining life
umur pipa penyalur loading 10” dari Jetty assessment of 10” Loading line from Jetty
ke Storage Tank 5000 KL, didapatkan to Storage Tank 5000 KL is as follow.
hasil sebagai berikut.
a. Hasil perhitungan sisa umur a. Remaining life calculation shows that
menunjukkan bahwa sisa umur pipa pipeline still has more than 20 years of
penyalur lebih dari 20 tahun remaining life
b. Hasil penilaian risiko menunjukan b. Risk assessment suggest that the
bahwa risiko tertinggi pada pipa highest risk of the pipeline is Medium
penyalur adalah Medium Risk pada Risk on 4th & 5th segment (KP 00+300
segmen 4 & 5 (KP 00+300 – KP – KP 00+500) due to pipeline ROW
00+500) dikarenakan kondisi ROW condition which are overgrown by
yang banyak ditumbuhi oleh semak bushes and include in acceptable
dan masuk dalam kriteria dapat criteria.
diterima.
Sehingga dapat disimpulkan bahwa Pipa Therefor it can be concluded that 10”
penyalur loading 10” dari Jetty ke Storage Loading Line from Jetty to Storage Tank
Tank 5000 KL dalam keadaan baik. 5000 KL.
8.2 Rekomendasi 8.2 Recommendation

Berikut rekomendasi untuk menjaga agar Recommendation to keep the risk in
risiko tetap dapat diterima dengan acceptable level are to perform
melakukan pemeliharaan dan perbaikan maintenance and repair as required, such
yang diperlukan, antara lain: as following:
 Melakukan survey (patroli) dan  Perform ROW surveys (patrols) and
perawatan ROW sepanjang pipa maintenance along the pipeline route.
penyalur.
 Melakukan pengukuran ketebalan  Perform periodical wall thickness
secara rutin (misal tiap 4 tahun) measurement (i.e. every 4 years) by
dengan memperbanyak titik uji untuk added the number of test point to
memantau kondisi dan integritas pipa monitor pipeline condition and
penyalur. integrity.
34

 Melakukan pengukuran ketebalan  Perform wall thickness inspection in
pada titik yang sama (TML) pada the same spot (TML) for the next
interval inspeksi selanjutnya untuk inspection interval due to monitoring
mengetahui laju pertumbuhan korosi. short term corrosion rate.
 Memasang papan peringatan dan  Install warning sign along pipeline
marka di sepanjang jalur pipa. route.
 Melakukan monitoring kondisi  Perform monitoring pipeline support
support pada sepanjang jalur pipa along pipeline route.
penyalur.
 Menambahkan perlindungan korosi  Added internal corrosion protection if
internal jika pipa penyalur tidak the pipeline is not use (i.e. mothballed)
digunakan (misal mothballed).
 Disarankan untuk menyiapkan  It is recommended to prepare
rencana tanggap darurat bila terjadi emergency response plans in case of
kebocoran pada pipa penyalur. pipeline leaking.

35

9. REFERENSI 9. REFERENCES
9.1 Peraturan Indonesia 9.1 Indonesia Regulation
1. Peraturan Menteri Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral, No. 18 Tahun 2018, Pemeriksaan
Keselamatan Instalasi dan Peralatan Pada Kegiatan Usaha Minyak dan Gas Bumi.
2. Keputusan Menteri Pertambangan dan Energi, No. 300.K/38/M.PE/1997, Keselamatan
Kerja Pipa Penyalur Minyak Dan Gas Bumi.
9.2 Peraturan & Standar 9.2 Codes & Standard
1. ASME B 31.4, Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other
Liquids.
2. ASME B 31G, Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines
3. API 570, Piping Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
of Piping Systems.
4. API 574, Inspection Practices for Piping System Components.
5. API 581, Risk-Based Inspection Technology, 2008.
6. SNI 3473, Sistem transpotasi pipa penyalur untuk cairan hidrokarbon dan cairan lain.
9.3 Buku Pedoman 9.3 Handbook
1. Pipeline Risk Management Manual 3rd ed, Kent Muhlbauer, Gulf Publishing.
2. Pipeline Rules of Thumbs Handbook 5th ed, EW McAllister, Gulf Publishing.
9.4 Dokumen Pekerjaan 9.4 Work Document
1. Coordinate Jetty and Caustic Tank Drawing, PT Riau Andalan Pulp and Paper, Doc
No. 100S1270_5.
2. Mechanical Layout Drawing, PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia, Doc No. 1081-M-1005,
August 2019.
3. Pipe & Pump Installation for Fuel Blending System, PT Multi Fabrindo Gemilang, Doc
No. DWG-MF-S19038-1081-001, July 2019.
4. Piping Flow Diagram, PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia, 1081-F-1001-PVD, 2019.
5. Piping Identification Diagram Fuel Blending, PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia, 1081-F-
1001, 2019.
6. Thickness Measurement Report, PT Biro Klasifikasi Indonesia, July 2019.
36

Appendix A
Pipeline Risk Model
37

ONSHORE PIPELINE RISK MODEL
PT Dinamika Teknik Persada
Engineering Consultant
Asset : PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia
Area : Kab. Siak, Prop. Riau
Pipeline Name : 10"Loading Line from Jetty to Storage Tank 5000 KL
Section : Section 1 (KP 00+000 - KP 00+100) Medium
Commissioned Date : 2012 Hydrotest Pressure (Psig) : 130,5
Product : Solar Design Pressure (Psig) : 87
Design Life (Year) : 20 MAOP (Psig) : 87
Design Code : ASME B31.4 Nominal Thickness (mm) : 9,27
Length (m) : 0,500 Piggable : No
Probability of Failure 3
Third Party Damage Factor 3
Depth of Cover Not burried 5
Activity Level Low : Location class 1, rural, low population density, less digging or construction activities 2
Aboveground Facilities Aboveground facilities, near roads, separated by trees, wall, other structures, or ditch 4
Line Locating Maps (as-bulit surveys available 3
Right of Way Condition Good : Clear ROW, well marked, no overgrown vegetations 2
Patrol Monthly patrol 3
Public Awarness Program Reading materials (i.e. pipeline safety brochures) for community nearby 4
Corrosion Factor 2
Internal Corrosion 4
Medium corrosion: damage of pipeline is possible but in slower rate, low
Product Corrosivity 3
percentage of acidic products, medium corrosion rate (0.025 - 0.25 mm/y).
Internal Corrosion Prevention None 5
Atmospheric Condition 3
Atmospheric Exposure Marine, swamp, coastal, high humidity area 3
Coating Condition Fair : Adequate coating, fair condition, less than 30% damage 3
Sub-surface Condition 1
Soil Corrosivity Progressively less corrosive (>10000 Ohm-cm) 1
Soil PH Normal PH 1
Cathodic Protection Aerial, or no CP required 1
CP Potential Interference No AC power within 300 m, or very low AC power 1
Sub-surface Coating Condition Excellent : High quality coating suitable for its environment, new condition 1
Sub-surface Coating Survey Excellent : A formal, thorough inspection is performed. Inspections 1
Remaining Life Remaining Life > 16 years 1
Design and Construction Factor 2
Safety Factor Design to MOP ratio : 1.5 - 2.0 2
Seismic PGA < 0.10 g 1
Ground Movement Ground Movement/Land Slide across or under ROW 3
Support Pipeline supported properly 1
Crossings No pipeline crossings with roads, railway or rivers, etc. 1
Operation Factor 2
Pressure Cycling Pressure cycles of >10% MAOP per year did not happen. 1
Safety Systems Onsite, two or more levels safety systems 2
HSE Management System HSE Management System score more than 400 to 600 3
Cleaning Pigging No pipeline cleaning pig ever performed 5
Leak History No leak history 1
Consequences of Failure C
Safety Impact B 2,2
Product Loss Pipeline 6 to12 inches diameter C 3
Pressure Factor Pressure less than 16 barg A 1
Flamability FP < 100°F and BP < 100°F, Nf = 3 D 4
Toxicity Nh = 0 No hazard beyond that of ordinary combustibles. A 1
Fatality Single lost time injury without disability. B 2
Environmental Impact C 3,3
Medium scale, some dispersion, transport of the spill will occur but relatively slowly, away
Impact Area from environmental receptors C 3
Product Containment Produced water, condensate, and other flammable liquids except crude oil D 4
Release Quantity Pipeline 6 to12 inches diameter C 3
Reputation Impact Regional press, short-term concern B 2,0
Economic Impact 11-20% production loss, medium repair 3 – 7 days C 3,0
Comment
Date of Review : 06/09/2019

Reviewed by : LM
Checked by : ES
Approved by : IS
Right of Way Condition Good : Clear ROW, well marked, no overgrown vegetations 2
Corrosion Factor 2
Atmospheric Exposure Marine, swamp, coastal, high humidity area 3
Coating Condition Good : High quality coating, in good condition, less than 10% damage 2
Soil PH Normal PH 1
Sub-surface Coating Condition Excellent : High quality coating suitable for its environment, new condition or 1
Operation Factor 2
Safety Impact B 2,2
Comment

Reviewed by : LM
Checked by : ES
Approved by : IS
Right of Way Condition Average : ROW not uniformly clear, more markers are needed for better identification 3
Corrosion Factor 2
Atmospheric Exposure Air, low humidity area 2
Soil PH Normal PH 1
Operation Factor 2
Safety Impact B 2,2
Comment

Reviewed by : LM
Checked by : ES
Approved by : IS
Corrosion Factor 2
Soil PH Normal PH 1
Sub-surface Coating Condition Excellent : High quality coating suitable for its environment, new condition or 1
Crossings Design of pipeline crossing is correct 2
Operation Factor 2
Safety Impact B 2,2
Comment

Reviewed by : LM
Checked by : ES
Approved by : IS
Corrosion Factor 2
Soil PH Normal PH 1
Operation Factor 2
Safety Impact B 2,2
Comment

Reviewed by : LM
Checked by : ES
Approved by : IS
Appendix B
MAOP & Remaining Life
38

PT. Dinamika Teknik Persada
PROJECT : 10" Loading Line from Jetty to Storage tank 5000 KL

CLIENT : PT PEC TECH SERVICE INDONESIA
CALCULATION : MAOP & REMAINING LIFE
PREPARE BY : LM DATE : 06/09/2019
CHECKED BY : ES DATE : 06/09/2019
APPROVE BY : IS DATE : 06/09/2019
I DATA
Line Name : 10" Loading Line from Jetty to Storage Tank 5000 KL
Type of Services : Solar
Length of Pipe ( L ) : 0,500 km
Test pressure : 130,5 Psi
Design Pressure : 87 Psi
Design Temperature : 38 ̊C or ( 100 ) ̊F
Operating Pressure : 58 Psi
Operating Temperature : 4 ̊C or ( 40 ) ̊F
Nominal Pipe Diameter : 8,000 Inch
Outside Diameter : 8,625 Inch
Nominal Thickness ( t ) : 0,322 Inch 8,18 mm
Minimum Actual Thickness ( ta ) : 0,309 Inch 7,85 mm
Thickness Loss ( From Nom. ) : 4,02 %
Material Specification : API 5L Grade B
Spec. Minimum Yield Strength ( S ) : 35.500 Psi
Location Class : Class 1 Div. 2
Design Factor ( F ) : 0,72
Joint Factor ( E ) : 1,00
Temperature Factor ( T ) : 1,00
Corrosion Allowance : 0,05 Inch
Design Life : 20 Year
Commisionied Date : 2012 Year
Inspection Date : 2019 Year
II CALCULATION
A. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PRESSURE : (Refer to ASME B 31.4)
2 x t x 0,72 S E 2 x 35500 x 0,2943 x 0,72

P = ------------------------------ = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 1744 Psi
D 8,625
Maximum Allowable Pressure > Design Pressure or MAOP ? ==> YES, ACCEPTABLE
B. THICKNESS REQUIRED (Refer to ASME B 31.8)
PxD 87 x 8,625
Tr = -------------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 0,015 Inch
2 x S x FET 2 x 35500 x 0,72
= 0,373 mm
Thickness actual > Thickness Required ? ==> Yes, ACCEPTABLE
C. CORROSION RATE (Refer to API 570 Para 7.1.1)
t initial - t actual 0,322 - 0,309

CR = -------------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 0,0018 in/years
Time between t initial and t actual 2019 - 2012
= 0,0470 mm/years
D. REMAINING LIFE (Refer to API 570 Para 7.1.1)
t actual - t required 0,309 - 0,015

RL = -------------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 159 years
Corrosion Rate 0,0018
III CONCLUSION
 Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) is 87,00 Psig
 Remaining Life Pipeline is > 20 years

CALCULATION : MAOP & REMAINING LIFE
I DATA
Nominal Thickness ( t ) : 0,365 Inch 9,27 mm
Minimum Actual Thickness ( ta ) : 0,359 Inch 9,11 mm
Thickness Loss ( From Nom. ) : 1,74 %
Commisionied Date : 2012 Year
II CALCULATION
A. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PRESSURE : (Refer to ASME B 31.4)
2 x t x 0,72 S E 2 x 35500 x 0,3514 x 0,72

P = ------------------------------ = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 1671 Psi
D 10,750
B. THICKNESS REQUIRED (Refer to ASME B 31.8)
PxD 87 x 10,750
Tr = -------------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 0,018 Inch
2 x S x FET 2 x 35500 x 0,72
= 0,465 mm
t initial - t actual 0,365 - 0,359

CR = -------------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 0,0009 in/years
Time between t initial and t actual 2019 - 2012
= 0,0230 mm/years

RL = -------------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 376 years
III CONCLUSION

CALCULATION : MAOP & REMAINING LIFE CALCULATION FOR ELBOW
I DATA
Nominal Thickness : 0,365 Inch 9,27 mm
Actual Thickness ( t min ) : 0,339 Inch 8,61 mm
Thickness Loss ( From Max. ) : 7,13 %
Installation/Operation Date : 2012 Year
II CALCULATION
A. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PRESSURE : (Refer to API 574 Para 11.2)
2 x SE x t 2 x 35500 x 0,339
P = ------------------------------ = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 1.493 Psi
1,5 x D 16,125
B. THICKNESS REQUIRED (Refer to API 574 Para 11.2)
PxD 87,00 x 10,750

Tr = 1,5 -------------------------- = 1,5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 0,020 Inch
2 x SE 2 x 35500
= 0,502 mm
t nom - t minimum 0,365 - 0,339

CR = -------------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 0,0037 in/years
Time between t nom and t min 2019 - 2012
= 0,0944 mm/years

RL = -------------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 86 Years
III CONCLUSION

Draft Report RLA Pipeline PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft Report RLA Pipeline PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft Report RLA Pipeline PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PIPELINE REMAINING LIFE ASSESSMENT

10” LOADING LINE FROM JETTY TO STORAGE TANK

PT DINAMIKA TEKNIK PERSADA

A 06-09-2019 Issued for Review LM IS

Document No. : DTP/201939/R.002

NO DATE SUBJECT DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE REV

Appendix A – Pipeline Risk Model Appendix A – Pipeline Risk Model

Figure 3.1 Risk Assessment Flowchart ................................................................................. 10

Table 2.1 Result of Risk Analysis ........................................................................................... 8

PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia has a

PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia PT PEC Tech Service Indonesia has a

1.1 Ruang Lingkup Pekerjaan 1.1 Scope of Work

1.3 Daftar Singkatan 1.3 Abbreviation

ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practical

Table 2.1 Result of Risk Analysis

LoF Key Driver CoF Key Driver

Berdasarkan hasil perhitungan ASME Based on ASME B31.4 calculation, the

3.1 Penilaian Resiko 3.1 Risk Assessment

3.1.1 Definisi 3.1.1 Definition

Risk = (Peluang) x (Konsekuensi) Risk = (probability) x (consequence)

Risiko sering dinyatakan dalam jumlah A risk is often expressed in measurable

Figure 3-2 Probability of Failure Flowchart

Table 3.1 Probability of Failure Factor for Onshore Pipeline

No Factors Sub-Factors Criteria Score

Figure 3-3 Consequence of Failure Flowchart

Table 3.2 Consequence of Failure Factor for Onshore Pipeline

Perhitungan remaining life assessment Remaining life assessment calculation

Metode perhitungan remaining life Remaining life assessment calculation

Perhitungan MAOP dilakukan berdasarkan MAOP calculation conducted based on

ASME B31.4 ASME B31.4

3.2.2 SISA UMUR 3.2.2 REMAINING LIFE

Perhitungan sisa umur pipa penyalur Remaining life calculation is highly

ASME B31G ASME B31G

Table 4.1 Design Data.

No Description Unit Data

4.1.2 Data Operasi 4.1.2 Operational Data

Table 4.2 Operational Data.

No Description Unit Value

4.2 Current Integrity 4.2 Current Integrity

Berdasarkan hasil inspeksi pada tahun Based on inspection result perform on

keadaan baik. condition.

 Terdapat pipe rack untuk  There is pipe rack to accomodate

Figure 4. 3 Pipe rack for crossing purpose

 Terdapat 2 safety device di  There are 2 safety devices along

4.2.4 Pengukuran Ketebalan Pipa 4.2.4 Pipeline Wall Thickness

Table 4. 3 Minimum Thickness

Table 5. 1 Damage Mechanism

2 Galvanic Corrosion Thinning N Not found different material joint

May occur for aboveground pipeline between

6.1 Asumsi 6.1 Assumption

Table 6. 1 Risk assessment assumption

Table 6. 2 Pipeline Segmentation

Dominant PoF TPD TPD TPD TPD TPD

Berdasarkan hasil perhitungan ASME Based on ASME B31.4 calculation result

Perhitungan sisa umur pipa penyalur Remaining life calculation performed

8.2 Rekomendasi 8.2 Recommendation

9.1 Peraturan Indonesia 9.1 Indonesia Regulation

9.2 Peraturan & Standar 9.2 Codes & Standard

9.3 Buku Pedoman 9.3 Handbook