Nsspu-Gp 06-10-1

North Sea SPU (UK)
Site Technical Practice
Corrosion Management
Issuing Keith Floyd Document Catriona Smith

Authority: SPU EA Authority: SPU Corrosion and
Materials TA
Document Janet Ross Applicability: North Sea SPU (UK)
Administrator: OMS Advisor
Issuing Engineering Control Tier: 2
Department:
First Issue Date: December 2008 Revision No: Issue 1/AM01
Revision Date: August 2009 Review Required By: September 2010
Revision Summary: Addendum 13 Terms of Reference and Assurance Protocol added.
For further information contact DCC at ODL on 01224 628018 or [email protected].
Document Location: BP ETP Library
NSSPU-GP 06-10-1
Corrosion Management NSSPU-GP-06-10-01
Contents
Paragraph Page
1 Introduction 1
2 Use of Language 2
3 Scope 2
3.1 Topsides Facilities, Onshore Plant and Onshore and
Offshore Pipelines 3
4 Corrosion Management System 4

4.1 Flow Scheme Overview 4
4.2 Risk Assessment 4
4.3 Corrosion Control Programme 6
4.4 Implementation of the Corrosion Control Programme 6
4.5 Performance Assessment 10
4.6 Design/New Projects/Equipment Changes 12
4.7 Experience and Lessons Learned 12
Table
1 STP Conformance Terminology and Approval Levels
for Deviation 2
Figure
1 BP Corrosion Control System 13
2 Corrosion Management – Summary of Main Activities 14
3 Pressure Systems Corrosion Management: Integration of
Activities 16
November 2007 Issue 1 i

NSSPU-GP-06-10-01 Corrosion Management
Contents (cont’d)
Addendum 1 Process System Corrosion Management Strategy

Overview – Typical
Addendum 2 Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)
Addendum 3 Outline of Process for Preparation of Corrosion Awareness
Material
Addendum 4 Roles and Responsibilities
Addendum 5 Material Degradation Reporting
Addendum 6 Annual Corrosion Management Report (Typical Example)
Addendum 7 Typical Examples of Tactical Review Summaries
Addendum 8 Strategic Review Output
Addendum 9 Corrosion Management Strategy Example
Addendum 10 Corrosion Management Audit (Health Check)
Addendum 11 Terms of Reference and Assurance Protocol
ii August 2009 Issue 1/AM01

1 Introduction
One of the requirements of the Integrity Management (IM) Standard is that a corrosion
management strategy shall be in place for each Performance Unit (PU). In support of
this requirement, the Engineering Technical Practices (ETP) ‘Guidance on Practice for
Corrosion Management’ (GP 06-10) provides high level guidance regarding the
essential elements of corrosion management.
The purpose of this document is to provide more detailed instructions regarding the
minimum requirements for an effective Corrosion Management System (CMS) to be in
place within each PU in the North Sea Strategic Performance Unit (SPU). All PUs in the
North Sea shall comply with the requirements of this document.
Since corrosion management has been in place for many years in the North Sea, lessons
have been learned and these best practices, mainly in the form of Addendums, have
been incorporated into this document so that they are available for all PUs as a means
of sharing and as continuous improvement.
Each PU shall have suitable documentation in place to manage corrosion on topsides
facilities, structures and pipelines. The PU strategy shall include:
 An outline of the process for managing corrosion within the PU, including roles and
responsibilities
 A summary of the corrosion threats, mitigation measures, online monitoring and
inspection plans – for each topsides system, each pipeline and each structure (this is
the output from the Risk-based Inspection (RBI) process)
 A scheme which outlines the strategy for managing each material degradation
(ie corrosion) threat (eg the Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI) threat is managed by
adhering to the Practical Application of Risk-based Inspection (NSSPU-GP-06-10-2),
Addendum 4
The term ‘corrosion’ is used throughout this document. This term is used for ease, in
lieu of the terms material degradation or material deterioration. Corrosion, material
deterioration and material degradation are all terms that have the same meaning.
They cover the following: pitting corrosion, general corrosion, erosion, crevice
corrosion, fatigue cracking and stress corrosion cracking, stress corrosion cracking
and CUI.
Addendum 9 provides a typical example of what should be included in a corrosion
management strategy for each PU/installation.
November 2007 Issue 1 1

2 Use of Language
Table 1 details the intended application of conformance words, and the level of approval
required (depending on risk exposure) to deviate. Each PU is required to maintain a
register of deviation from the standard.
Term STP Definition Approval for Deviation

Must Implies a REQUIREMENT. Group Risk – Group
Engineering Director
Used sparingly and only if a provision
reflects a GROUP STANDARD/ Segment Risk – E&P Head of
POLICY or is a STATUTORY Engineering
REQUIREMENT AND relates to
Safety Critical items or issues.
Shall Implies a REQUIREMENT. SPU Engineering Authority
Used if a provision is MANDATORY.
Should Implies a PREFERENCE. PU EA or Project EA
Used if a provision is PREFERRED
or BEST PRACTICE.
May Used where alternatives are equally No deviation approval required
acceptable.
Table 1 STP Conformance Terminology and Approval Levels for Deviation
All text displayed as italic and coloured blue is termed commentary text and is
supplementary guidance to the requirements of the standard.
3 Scope
This standard shall be applicable to all equipment that is subject to corrosion as a result
of exposure to process or natural environments in the North Sea and associated onshore
plants. Typical equipment is identified within ETP G6-10 and includes:
 All topsides facilities, in particular vessels, pipework, tanks and exchangers
(downstream of xmas tree)
 Onshore pipework, vessels and tanks
 Pipelines and subsea facilities (downstream of xmas tree)
 Structures
This standard provides an outline of what is required to be in place in order to manage
corrosion in these areas.
2 November 2007 Issue 1

3.1 Topsides Facilities, Onshore Plant and Onshore and

Offshore Pipelines
Minimum Requirements
In order to effectively manage corrosion the corrosion threats for each pipework
system, vessel, tank, pipeline and structure shall be identified and qualified.
When the threats have been identified, mitigation measures shall be determined and
implemented along with the most appropriate inspection plan or Written Scheme of
Examination (WSE) for the identified threats.
For topsides pipework and equipment, inspection plans associated with corrosion
management shall be in place to monitor deterioration rates and measure the
effectiveness of corrosion mitigation measures. Mitigation measures include materials
selection, process control, corrosion inhibitor in topsides facilities, regular pipeline
pigging, corrosion inhibition of subsea pipelines and cathodic protection systems on
subsea structures.
Regular performance assessments shall be undertaken to re-evaluate threats, revise
specific mitigation and inspection activities and review overall corrosion management
strategies.
An effective CMS shall, as a minimum, have the following in place:
 Definition of the Plant or PU scope covered by the CMS
 BP ownership of the Corrosion Management Process and Strategy
 A competent team in place involving corrosion and inspection engineers
 Roles and responsibilities that are understood
 Corrosion Risk Assessments for all process systems, pipelines and structures updated
on a regular basis, so that:
 All corrosion threats are identified
 Mitigation methods are identified and implemented
 Inspection and online monitoring activities are in place in order to measure the
effectiveness of any mitigation and to determine the level of deterioration
caused by each threat
 Management schemes outlining how each corrosion threat is to be managed
 Performance assessments (reporting and tactical reviews) carried out regularly within
the asset team (4 to 8 week frequency)
 Annual Corrosion Management Review overviewing asset condition and forward plan
of recommendations
 Strategic reviews carried out on an annual basis – utilising the findings of the Annual
Corrosion Management Review
 Corrosion management health checks/external peer reviews carried out at
3-year intervals

4 Corrosion Management System

4.1 Flow Scheme Overview
An overview of the generic flow scheme to manage corrosion is provided in Figure 1.
The typical activities and decisions essential to the overall process are summarised in
Figure 2.
A more detailed example of how the main pressure systems CMS activities may
integrate with each other is provided in Figure 3.
The main activities of the CMS are described in detail in the following paragraphs.
Where appropriate, examples of what is considered to be typical good practice examples
are included as additional guidance.
4.2 Risk Assessment

The key activity of the corrosion management process is the Corrosion Risk Assessment
for each process system – pipework and vessels.
This is a live activity and shall be central to the development of an effective CMS for
pipework systems and items of equipment. Corrosion threats shall be identified and
assessed, along with the associated consequences. The resulting risk (defined as the
product of probability and consequence) shall become the basis for the development and
update of mitigation measures, online monitoring schemes and inspection plans.
NSSPU-GP-06-10-2 describes the Risk Assessment process in detail and shall be
used for carrying out Risk Assessments associated with the development of
documentation for managing corrosion on topsides facilities and onshore plant.
Management schemes outlining how each corrosion threat is to be managed shall be
developed. Key guidance on management of external corrosion threats is provided within:
 Management of Corrosion Under Insulation (NSSPU-GP-06-10-2, Addendum 4)
 Fabric Maintenance Standard and Guidance (UKCS-TI-027)
Where support is required in the development of management schemes for specific
corrosion threats, the SPU Corrosion and Materials Technical Authority (TA) should be
consulted.
For pipelines, external corrosion threats will be influenced by the condition of protective
coatings and cathodic protection. Internal corrosion threats will be directly related to the
process streams contained within the pipelines and the guidance contained within
NSSPU-GP-06-10-2 document will therefore be relevant for assessing the internal
corrosion threats for pipelines.
All pipeline corrosion risks should be discussed and agreed between the Pipelines TA,
SPU Corrosion and Materials TA, corrosion, inspection, process and operational
specialists.

The Pipeline Integrity Management Systems (NSSPU-GP-43-49) shall be consulted.

For structures, if required, Corrosion Risk Assessments should be carried out in
conjunction with the asset structural focal points. Corrosion threats on structures
are directly related to the condition and the effectiveness of the Cathodic Protection
System. The In-service Inspection and Testing of Onshore Civil and Structural
(NSSPU-GP-32-46) shall be consulted.
The following ETPs address cathodic protection of structures and will provide guidance:
 Guidance on Practice for Cathodic Protection (GP 06-31)
 Guidance on the Practice for Cathodic Protection of Onshore Structures (GP 06-33)
 Guidance on the Practice for Cathodic Protection of Offshore Structures (GP 06-35)
 Guidance on Practice for Cathodic Protection System maintenance and Monitoring
(GP 06-36)
Corrosion Risk Assessments should be updated regularly when new inspection or
monitoring data is made available and/or if process or operational data changes occur or
when material changes are made. The frequency at which the Risk Assessment review
for a system should take place will be based on the system consequence, current
system condition and predicted deterioration.
The deliverable from the Risk Assessment shall be the new or revised:
 Inspection plans
 Mitigation measures
 Monitoring requirements
 Process System Corrosion Management Overview Statement. These overviews
should contain the corrosion threats for each process system along with a summary
of the required mitigation, monitoring and inspection activities for each system
or component reviewed
– The overview statement should also summarise the current condition of each
process system, along with current concerns. This statement should take the form of
a high level process system corrosion management overview and may be utilised to
demonstrate current condition to management. The statement should be utilised to
assist in the production of the annual corrosion management summary (refer to
Paragraph 4.5.1)
An example of a typical process system corrosion management overview document is
provided in Addendum 1.

4.3 Corrosion Control Programme

The mitigation measures, monitoring requirements and inspection plans which have been
identified by the Risk Assessment shall developed into an integrated programme.
The programme shall integrate the operational and technical disciplines so that the
asset life can be effectively managed. Roles and responsibilities shall be defined and
understood by all.
The programme should be tactical in nature and address the management of immediate
operational risks by driving changes in the mitigation levels and control.
4.4 Implementation of the Corrosion Control Programme

The short-term tactical implementation of the CMS is contained within the integrated
corrosion control programme which consists of mitigation, monitoring, inspection
programmes, corrosion awareness, data analysis and repairs.
4.4.1 Mitigation
Corrosion mitigation is fundamental to an integrated corrosion control programme.
The objective of the corrosion mitigation is to reduce the impact of the identified corrosion
threat to enable life of the asset to be effectively managed.
Mitigation of corrosion shall be achieved by a number of factors which include the
following:
 Removal of a corrosive agent (such as removal of oxygen from the Water Injection
System)
 Addition of corrosion inhibitor to produced fluids to prevent pipe wall corrosion
 Addition of biocide to mitigate microbiological corrosion
 Control of pH in closed loop cooling water systems
 Material selection or material change
 Modification of the process or operating parameters
Corrosion control matrices shall be developed and shall record the following for each
corrosion threat within a process system:
 All possible control options
 Target control levels
 Actions to be taken when there are excursions outwith allowable targets
 Clear roles and responsibilities identified to act on excursions
An example of a typical set of corrosion control matrices is provided in Addendum 2.
When starting to look at process system corrosion controls, good practice advice is to
concentrate on getting the most important controls (ie the top five) working efficiently
first rather than trying to look at all corrosion controls at the same time and getting none
of them to work effectively.

The above mitigation measures relate to internal corrosion control. External corrosion
mitigation of topsides pipework is usually by coatings but sometimes also by materials
selection.
External corrosion, either on insulated or uninsulated pipework and vessels, is one of the
most difficult threats to manage in the North Sea SPU. The documents that have been
developed to help manage this threat are:
 Design and Prevention of CUI (ETP GP06-25) (which covers mainly the design
aspects for coatings and insulation)
 Management of Corrosion Under Insulation (NSSPU-GP-06-10-2, Addendum 4)
(which relates to strategic guidance for inspection for the CUI threat in operation)
 Fabric Maintenance Standard and Guidance (UKCS-TI-029)
4.4.2 Monitoring
Corrosion monitoring is fundamental to an integrated corrosion control programme.
The objectives of the corrosion monitoring programme can be summarised in the
following statements:
 Corrosion monitoring activities should provide essential information on plant
condition, to enable the plant to be run in a safe and efficient manner
 Corrosion monitoring data should be continuously evaluated and reviewed to
ensure the integrity of plant and equipment; thereby helping to avoid unplanned
shutdowns as a result of corrosion
 Corrosion monitoring data should be used to progress the inter-relationship between
corrosion parameters and operating variables as they change with time in order to
improve the effectiveness of the corrosion control strategy
There is no single monitoring method to cover all of the above objectives; several
methods are used. Typically, the most common methods used in the North Sea SPU are
weight loss coupons, corrosion probes, visual inspection and non-intrusive instrumented
inspection such as ultrasonic wall thickness determination and radiography.
The analysis and interpretation of the monitoring data collected from on line monitoring,
inspection and process monitoring (as identified in the corrosion control matrices) allows
short and long-term corrosion trends to be established.
The ETP ‘Guidance on Practice for Corrosion Monitoring’ (GP 06-70) provides
guidance for the selection, installation and use of technologies for the monitoring of
internal corrosion within in-service piping and equipment.

4.4.3 Inspection
Inspection is fundamental to an integrated corrosion control programme and is a major
contributor to achieving the objectives as highlighted in Paragraph 4.4.2.
Inspection plans shall be derived as an output from the Process System Risk
Assessment which is covered in the document Practical Application of Risk-based
Inspection (NSSPU-GP-06-10-2).
Inspection scopes and inspection frequencies are dependent on a knowledge of the
corrosion rate and type of corrosion predicted. For example, more coverage may be
required for pipework which has a pitting corrosion threat compared with a pipework
system which has a general corrosion threat.
In addition to the guidance provided for the development and implementation of
inspection plans that are provided in NSSPU-GP-06-10-2, the following ETPs shall also
be consulted with respect to inspection of pipework and equipment:
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing – Common Requirements
(NSSPU-GP-32-40)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Vessels, Tanks and
Exchangers (NSSPU-GP-32-41)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Piping Systems
(NSSPU-GP-32-42)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Pressure Containing
Envelope of Rotating Equipment (NSSPU-GP-32-43)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Above Ground
Atmospheric and Low Pressure Storage Tanks (NSSPU-GP-32-44)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Fired Boilers and
Heaters (NSSPU-GP-32-45)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Onshore Civil/Structural
Facilities (NSSPU-GP-32-46)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Mechanical Protective
Devices (NSSPU-GP-32-47)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Heat Exchangers
(NSSPU-GP-32-48)
 Guidance on Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Special and Other
Equipment (NSSPU-GP-32-49)

4.4.4 Corrosion Awareness

The corrosion awareness programme is fundamental to an integrated corrosion control
programme. This programme enables communication of the key corrosion related
issues to be made to all relevant parties (in particular offshore personnel) in order to
allow everyone to understand why certain activities are being undertaken and to
encourage others to assist in the management of corrosion. Corrosion awareness
material can be accessed through the Integrity Management website. Material is now
available to cover all aspects of corrosion management and can be updated for a
particular PU requirement with minimum effort.
All updates to existing corrosion awareness material or the preparation of new material
should preferably be carried out by the PU (by the PU Corrosion Engineer who will
normally reside within the inspection and corrosion management service provider) in
conjunction with the BP Graphic Communications Department who hold all master copies
of the corrosion awareness material. The SPU Corrosion and Materials TA shall be
provided with copies of new material so that this can be made available for sharing
with other PUs.
The process for preparation of corrosion awareness material is provided in Addendum 3.
4.4.5 Repairs
All corrosion damage should initially be properly assessed by competent personnel
within the inspection and corrosion service provider, in conjunction with the PU Integrity
Engineer. Any repairs and/or replacements should be carried out within the timeframe
specified by the competent personnel. In order to avoid any overdue repair orders on
critical pipework and equipment, all repair orders should be properly risk ranked
(ie consideration of both probability and consequence of failure).
Weldless Repairs to Piping (UKCS-TI-026) outlines the process for carrying out
temporary repairs to pipework.
4.4.6 Roles and Responsibilities

It is imperative that all personnel involved in the management of corrosion understand
their roles and key responsibilities. All PUs should produce Responsible/Accountable/
Consulted/Informed (RACI) charts in order to understand the inter-relationships.
Addendum 4 provides an example of the typical roles and responsibilities that should
exist for management of corrosion within a North Sea PU.
4.4.7 Data Management

Each PU shall have a database to hold all the design and operational data that
should be utilised in the Risk Assessments of vessels and/or pipework systems. The
database should allow trending of features in order to enhance the pipework inspection
plans.
The database should ideally be able to manage data derived from all types of
inspections, including inspections to determine internal and external condition (including
CUI) of pipework and vessels.

Guidance is provided in Figure 3 regarding the persons responsible for data flow for the
main activities within the corrosion management process.
4.4.8 Material Degradation Reporting (Corrosion Damage Reports)

A process has been developed so that material degradation reporting can be recorded
via a dedicated SharePoint site. The procedure for this activity is located within the the
SharePoint site (refer to Addendum 5). This site should be used for recording.
The objectives of the material degradation reporting are:
 To enable consistent recording across the assets of the key details associated with
the following:
 Failures or unplanned changeouts (below retirement thickness) due to material
degradation (eg corrosion, erosion or fatigue)
 Planned repair or changeout of item (ie item is below retiral and has been
identified by routine inspection)
 To facilitate sharing between the assets of key information associated with material
degradation failures, repairs and replacements
 To facilitate the transfer of knowledge across the assets regarding repeat failures,
technical root causes of failures and system causes of failures
4.5 Performance Assessment

The corrosion management programme is conducted within a framework of
performance measures, targets and tracking to demonstrate effective implementation
and successful mitigation using technically and cost efficient processes.
The visibility of performance measures within the Asset is key to their success.
The following are considered to be Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for corrosion
management:
 Corrosion control compliance (KPI – select key parameters for monthly discussion)
 Planned inspections (comparison of inspections carried out versus plan for monthly
discussion)
 Repair orders – completion on time (for monthly discussion)
 Review or material degradation rates (erosion or corrosion) in key systems
(versus targets)
 No hydrocarbon leaks
4.5.1 Assessments
Recording and communicating findings from corrosion monitoring programmes is
essential in order to establish effectiveness of the programmes.
As well as routine daily communications, more formal regular updates of findings
and trends should be produced for discussion at the tactical review meetings (refer to
Paragraph 4.5.2).

In addition, on an annual basis, a report which summaries the condition of each process
system shall also be produced and shall be the basis for the strategic review (refer to
Paragraph 4.5.3). Addendum 6 provides an example of what should typically be included
in the Annual Corrosion Management Report.
4.5.2 Tactical Reviews

Tactical reviews of the corrosion management programme shall be carried out on
a 4 to 6 week frequency to ensure compliance with the strategy and to monitor
performance against short-term targets and objectives of the programme.
The following should be included in discussion at these meetings:
 Corrosion control compliance
 Inspection and corrosion monitoring findings
 Anomalies identified/corrosion trends
 Corrosion related leaks
 Repair order status
 Risk Assessment programme progress and forward plan
 Material changes
 Operational changes and upset conditions
 Matrix or list identifying top threats, along with a status update on how they are being
managed and challenges associated with their management
Attendees at this meeting should include, as a minimum, the BP Integrity Engineer, the
inspection and corrosion service provider Corrosion Engineer, Delivery Team Leader and
inspection personnel, BP process and offshore operational personnel.
Meetings shall be minuted and actions resulting from the meeting shall be logged and
tracked.
Typical examples of the meeting summary are provided in Addendum 7.
4.5.3 Strategic Reviews

Strategic reviews of the corrosion management strategy should be carried out on
an annual basis to ensure consistency and applicability with changing business plan
requirements and changing production and corrosion management environment.
The annual corrosion management report should form the basis of this review.
This annual report can effectively be a summary of the tactical review findings that have
been gathered over the year. Regular reporting for tactical reviews may therefore make
this activity easier.
Attendees should include the BP PU Integrity Engineer, Process and Operational
Engineers, the SPU Corrosion and Materials TA, and the Inspection and Corrosion
Engineers from the service provider, including offshore-based Inspection Engineers.

Meetings shall be minuted and actions resulting from the meeting shall be logged
and tracked.
A typical example of the Annual Corrosion Management Report is included in
Addendum 6. A example of a typical output from the strategic review is included in
Addendum 8.
4.5.4 Peer Reviews

A more formal peer review of the CMS should be conducted every 3 years as part of the
continuous improvement cycle.
The protocol for this review – alternately known as Corrosion Management Health
Checks – is provided in Addendum 10.
These reviews should usually be led by the SPU Corrosion and Materials TA in
conjunction with other Asset members, and/or external consultants.
4.6 Design/New Projects/Equipment Changes

For all new items of equipment and new project design, there should be
materials and corrosion input early in conceptual design taking into account the full
Asset life ‘corrosivity’ profile and the CAPEX and OPEX implications to the Asset.
The project delivery to the Asset shall include a full Risk Assessment which complies
with NSSPU-GP-06-10-2 for incorporation into the asset corrosion management strategy.
4.6.1 Management of Change

Modifications to existing facilities should be reviewed so that the Risk Assessments
can be modified. Changes in operating conditions should require a reassessment of the
corrosion threats with possible revision of mitigation and monitoring requirements.
4.7 Experience and Lessons Learned

Learning from own experience will take part within each Asset through the tactical and
strategic review process.
The following good practices should be in place to facilitate shared learning:
 Shared learning days/specialist discipline review meetings. The Regional Materials
and Corrosion Consultant should facilitate this activity. This will allow Assets to:
 Share experiences
 Share good practices
 Corrosion alerts
 Corrosion awareness material
 Peer review process
 Common material degradation reporting system

Figure 1 BP Corrosion Control System

Figure 2 Corrosion Management – Summary of Main Activities

Figure 2 Corrosion Management – Summary of Main Activities (cont’d)

Figure 3 Pressure Systems Corrosion Management: Integration of Activities

Addendum 1
Process System Corrosion Management Strategy
Overview – Typical
Process System Corrosion Management Overview – Typical

November 2007 Issue 1 Add 1-1/2
Addendum 2
Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)
1 Process Systems 1
2 Utility Systems 3
3 Water Injection System 4
4 Wash Water System 5
5 Subsea Fields 6
6 Structures (External) 7
7 Diesel 8

November 2007 Issue 1 Add 2-i/ii
1 Process Systems

November 2007 Issue 1 Add 2-1

Add 2-2 November 2007 Issue 1
2 Utility Systems

3 Water Injection System

4 Wash Water System

5 Subsea Fields

6 Structures (External)

7 Diesel

Addendum 3
Outline of Process for Preparation of
Corrosion Awareness Material
Outline of Process for Preparation of

November 2007 Issue 1 Corrosion Awareness Material Add 3-1/2
Addendum 4
Roles and Responsibilities
1 Scope 1
2 Responsibilities 1
2.1 BP 1
2.2 Inspection and Corrosion Management Service Provider 2
2.3 Asset Production Chemist, Onshore 5

1 Scope
Typical roles and responsibilities for corrosion management in a North Sea PU are
identified below.
2 Responsibilities
2.1 BP
BP is responsible for the effective management of inspection and corrosion on their
offshore and onshore facilities in order to minimise the potential for hydrocarbon leaks
and to ensure production can be maintained safely.
2.1.1 Field Operations Manager

The Field Operations Manager (FOM) has overall responsibility for the integrity of the
offshore Installation, and as such, ensures that suitable effective arrangements are put
in place to manage inspection and corrosion in order to minimise the potential
for leaks from pressurised systems and structural damage due to degradation of
the material.
2.1.2 Engineering and Maintenance Team Leader

The Engineering and Maintenance Team Leader is responsible for:
 Ensuring that the necessary support is available, onshore and offshore, to ensure
that corrosion monitoring/inspection activities can be carried out in accordance with
the plan
 Ensuring that the necessary remedial work is carried out
 Ensuring sufficient budget is available to meet the requirements of this document and
associated corrosion/inspection management strategies
2.1.3 Integrity Engineer

The Integrity Engineer is responsible for:
 The management of the Inspection and Corrosion Management (ICM) contract,
providing direction where required
 Day-to-day administration support to corrosion/inspection management activities
 Review of reports and dissemination of information to the onshore/offshore
Engineering Team, as necessary
 Reviewing corrosion and inspection reports produced by the Inspection and Corrosion
Management (ICM) service provider and be aware of the implications and impact of
the corrosion and inspection trends on the facilities
 Support and challenge for/to the inspection and corrosion management service
provider regarding the recommendations made
 Budget management

 The approval and ownership of Risk-based Inspection (RBI) assessments including

changes and associated inspection intervals
 The approval of workpacks and inspection recommendations
 The Management of Repair Orders (ROs)
 Interfacing with support services required to implement inspection
 Integrity documentation
 Complying with BP regional STP Safety Management System (SMS) documents
 Representing the Asset within the maintenance and integrity network and utilising
shared learning to yield opportunities for improvement
 Auditing and reviewing of inspection management contract
2.1.4 Materials and Corrosion Consultant (Technical Authority)

The BP regional Technical Authority (TA) for materials and corrosion:
 Evaluate the effectiveness of the strategy primarily in terms of corrosive prevention
and safety issues but also including cost and field life implications
 This is carried out by ad hoc attendance at tactical review meetings, by attendance at
strategic review meetings and by peer review corrosion management health checks
 Act as a key source of technical advice on corrosion issues to the Asset Management
on the material degradation aspects of plant, processes, structures and pipelines
 Promote a consistent approach to management of corrosion across all North
Sea Assets
 Facilitate shared learning sessions
 Be technical custodian of the relevant Safety Management System (SMS) documents
 Facilitate the key requirements of the engineering technical practices to ensure
compliance
 Network with peers within BP and externally to ensure best practices are transferred
into the North Sea Assets
2.2 Inspection and Corrosion Management Service Provider

The ICM service provider is also BP’s Independent Inspection Authority (IIA) and is
responsible for:
 The day-to-day management of corrosion and inspection activities and for the
management of all data gathered from offshore surveys using a database
 Planning of all corrosion and inspection activities and identifying when support
services are required
 Preparing and maintaining the RBI assessments and associated written inspection
instructions

 Providing the services of a Competent Person to make recommendations as to the

suitability of pipework, vessels or structures for continuing service
 The provision of technical support to BP as necessary to deliver corrosion and
inspection management services
2.2.1 Delivery Team Leader

The Delivery Team Leader is responsible for:
 Assisting with budget preparation, reforecasting and cost management
 Resources and management structure within the ICM service provider to deliver
inspection and corrosion management services
 The ICM service provider performance
 Issuing monthly status reports for onshore and offshore activities, including progress
against planned activities
 Management of the action log
2.2.2 Corrosion Engineer

The Corrosion Engineer is responsible for:
 Corrosion data management and associated database
 Reviewing corrosion related monitoring/inspection findings
 Carrying out investigations and preparing reports as required
 Generating annual corrosion coupon retrieval programmes (if/when required)
 Reviewing and updating pipework RBI as necessary. Populating requirements from
RBI into the inspection database to allow workpack preparation
 Reviewing changes in the operating conditions and proposed plant modifications and
assessing their impact upon fluid corrosivity
 Recommending and managing specialist services as necessary, for example
microbiological surveys, failure investigations etc
 Annual and quarterly integrity reviews. Annual reports to include a summary sheet for
each system
 Performance monitoring of corrosion rates, inhibitor deployment and status of probes
and coupons. Liaising with the chemical treatment contractor as necessary to obtain
this information
 Compiling inspection workpacks and estimating inspection resources required
 Assisting the Integrity Engineer by driving innovation in corrosion control and
management improvements

2.2.3 Senior Inspection Engineer

The Senior Inspection Engineer (SIE) is responsible for:
 Reviewing and approving engineering and technical activities with guidance as
necessary from the ICM service provider technical specialists
 The analysis of anomalies and recommendations with regard suitability for continued
service
 Ensuring the 5-year plan is implemented and completed in an optimum manner.
Formal report to be issued to Asset when overdue and/or resource limitations are
expected
 Maintaining a live annual plan of inspection activities, updating at appropriate
intervals, with workpacks and ROs referenced on the schedule
 Liaising with onshore and offshore team to facilitate the planning of inspection
 Planning and scope of inspection during scheduled turnarounds
 Ensuring all inspections include appropriate written instruction
 Managing the Maximo inspection Work Orders (WOs) to minimise the occurrence of
overdue inspections. All Safety Critical (SC) inspections that have or may become
overdue are notified to the Asset
 The management of vessel inspections ensuring optimum usage of non-intrusive
technology
 Ensuring a workpack, or other appropriate written instruction, is available for each
Maximo activity at least 6 weeks before the schedule date
2.2.4 Offshore Inspection Engineer

The Offshore Inspection Engineer (OIE) is responsible for:
 Managing, accepting and implementing the requirements of inspection workpacks
 Obtaining scaffold and insulator support requirements for each workpack from the
Deck Foreman or insulator (if on Installation). Populating Maximo with total man-hour
estimates for each workpack
 Raising an Inspection Query (IQ) where inspection reports an anomaly, raising WO in
Maximo as required. Raise Material Degradation Reports (MDRs) in Maximo
 Reviewing workflow in Maximo to ensure offshore work plan is optimising WO close
out. Consulting live inspection plan generated by SIE
 Generating thorough pipework reports on a system basis once inspections for a given
system are completed
 Investigating and monitoring of anomalies (including those reported by support
inspection activities), reporting conclusions to the SIE
 Monitoring RO close out status and providing updated RO register prior to each
scheduled RO review meeting to the Senior Inspection and Integrity Engineer
 Scheduling opportunist inspection during unplanned shutdowns/events

 Providing an end of trip report after each trip summarising work completed, anomalies
reported and reports issued. Also to include a summary of all overdue inspections and
those due within the next 90 days (Maximo workflow) with details of plans to closeout.
Refer to Addendum 1 for report template
 Ensuring Maximo is updated with a summary of all inspection activities as work is
completed
 Maintaining and filing offshore reports and supporting documentation to allow easy
future access
 Providing general inspection support to Installation personnel as required
 Liaising with offshore planners as required supporting project delivery
2.2.5 Ultrasonic Thickness Technician

The Ultrasonic Thickness (UT) Technician is responsible for:
 Implementing UT requirements of workpacks not access restricted
 Implementing UT erosion monitoring of flowlines
 Providing general inspection support to Installation personnel as required
 Providing end of trip report
2.2.6 Technical Assistant

The Technical Assistant is responsible for:
 Assisting the preparation of inspection workpacks
 Entering inspection and corrosion monitoring data into the inspection database
 Assisting with general maintenance of the inspection database
 Providing general support to the Corrosion Engineer and SIE
2.3 Asset Production Chemist, Onshore

The BP Asset Production Chemist (APC) is responsible for selection and dosage rates of
chemicals used to treat the production systems offshore. The APC monitors chemical
usage via reports from the offshore production staff and establishes their effectiveness
from production report data.
He/she liaises regularly with the Offshore Operations Engineer (OOE)/Operations Team
Leader (OTL) to ensure that the chemical dosing programme is being maintained.
He/she liaises with well operations regarding chemicals to be injected downhole and
so has an overall picture of chemical flows through the production systems. He/she
will make recommendations, jointly with the Integrity Engineer, to the OOE/OTL and Well
Service Supervisor (WSS) on essential corrosion control actions for downhole chemical
treatments.

He/she is responsible for informing the ACE of any changes in production chemistry and
consequent changes in the types and quantities of chemicals injected both downhole and
topsides. The ACE consults with the BP Corrosion Consultant (BPCC) on changes in
corrosion inhibitor deployment prior to implementation.
The ACE participates in the regular review and revision of the corrosion control
matrices.
The ACE provides a monthly and annual review and analysis of changes in production
well operations and chemical usage data for summarised inclusion in the monthly and
annual corrosion reports

Addendum 5
Material Degradation Reporting
To allow for a central database of material degradation issues to be created which can be easily
tracked and shared to create a cross Strategic Performance Unit (SPU) understanding, the
Material Degradation Report (MDR) system has been created.
A MDR should be raised under the following conditions:
 Failures or unplanned changeouts (below retirement thickness) due to material degradation
(eg corrosion, erosion, fatigue)
 Planned repair or changeout of item (ie item is below retiral and has been identified by
routine inspection)
The intention is for the MDRs to focus on integrity problems, normally those within the
workscope of the inspection corrosion management contractor ie issues with electrical
equipment or similar would not be routinely included.
There can be some discretion as to what else can be included in a MDR. It is not the intention
that all fabric maintenance repairs are included in a MDR. However, if the inspection/corrosion
personnel become aware of an issue that they think needs to be shared, this should be
included.
The material degradation record should be entered into the spreadsheet by the responsible
asset nominated inspection or corrosion personnel. The asset nominated engineer will be held
accountable for the entrance of these into the system by the Asset BP Integrity Engineer.
Only inspection and corrosion specialist personnel should be involved in raising, updating and
completing a MDR. The corrosion engineer shall have final endorsement of the failure
mechanism.
Each asset spreadsheet will be collated typically every six months (at the end of the month)
by the BP North Sea Corrosion Consultant who will arrange for a central spreadsheet to
be compiled from all asset data and the information made available online for cross asset
awareness and understanding.
An example of part of the MDR spreadsheet contained within Sharepoint is given here.


Addendum 6
Annual Corrosion Management Report
(Typical Example)
1 Scope 1
2 Executive Summary 1
3 Safety 1
4 General – Key Issues 1
5 Monitoring and Inspection Summary 2

5.1 Inspection Programme 2
5.2 Monitoring 2
6 Modifications 3
7 Process System Reviews 3
8 Documentation 3

November 2007 Issue 1 (Typical Example) Add 6-i/ii
Note: This is a typical example to cover topsides mechanical integrity statement as influenced
by corrosion management.
1 Scope
This topside annual corrosion management statement is designed to primarily cover the
mechanical integrity of topsides facilities. This statement will provide a summary of the
main activities that have taken place to manage corrosion, along with a summary of the
assessed condition for each process system. There are associated Annual Integrity
Statements designed to cover structural and pipeline systems produced by the
designated disciplined engineers.
2 Executive Summary
This is a summary of main issues identified during the year.
3 Safety
Incidents: – Summary of incidents related to corrosion. Include number of Lost Time
Incidents (LTIs) and High Potentials (HIPOs) as a result of inspection activities.
Failures: – Summary of failures as a result of corrosion with subsequent actions and
current status.
Temporary Repairs: – Provide status of temporary repairs with emphasis on new ones
added during the year.
Anomaly Tracker: – Summary of anomalies identified in the year, along with status and
follow up activities.
Repair Orders: – Provide summary of overdue repair orders, with status and reasons.
4 General – Key Issues

Scope: – This paragraph can be dedicated to provision of status of key issues identified
in the year or which are highlighted as the top ten issues for the Asset (usually
presented in a matrix – refer to example of the following key issues and also example
of Risk Matrix in Paragraph 8).
Key Issue 1 (eg Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI)): – Provide status on management of
this issue.
Key Issue 2 (eg drains): – Provide status on management of this issue.

November 2007 Issue 1 (Typical Example) Add 6-1
Key Issue 3 – (eg integrity reviews): Provide status on this activity (note the Integrity
Reviews are sometimes called the Plant integrity review or the Risk-based Assessment
(RBI) review). Main output criteria for the system integrity reviews are: full review of
system current condition identifying areas of concern (where applicable), fitness for
service statement, forward inspection plan, action list and next scheduled review date.
Key Issue 4 (eg microbial corrosion): – Provide status on management of this issue.
Database: – Identify any issues and/or improvements with database trending of data.
Planning: – Identify any issues and/or improvements.
X-BU Issues: – Provide details of relevant issues.
5 Monitoring and Inspection Summary

5.1 Inspection Programme
Identify status (ie performance) of inspection activities that were planned for the year.
This covers:
 Completion of planned Non-destructive Testing (NDT)
 CUI programme annual plan (9% completion)
 Overdue inspection activities – summary on a monthly and yearly basis
 Issue of workpacks 3Q in advance – status for year
 Review of workpacks within 1 month of completion – status for year
 Timely issue of any monthly corrosion status reports – provide status
5.2 Monitoring
Corrosion monitoring: probes and coupons, Field Signature Method (FSM) spools:
 Retrievals – provide summary
 Results – provide summary
 Issues – provide summary
Monitoring:
 Erosion: sand probes – provide summary
 Vibration: provide summary

Add 6-2 (Typical Example) November 2007 Issue 1
6 Modifications
 Provide key modifications to the topsides facilities/systems
 Include major changes to process conditions
7 Process System Reviews

There is preferably an update on the condition of each process system, based on
inspection and monitoring data collected during the year. If there are no recognised
issues identified for a system, this will be highlighted here, along with the issues that
have been highlighted for a system, along with follow up activities.
A thorough review of a system takes time and is carried out as part of the integrity
reviews (or Plant integrity review, or RBI assessments). Not all systems will have had a
system integrity review during the year. This paragraph highlights what systems have
had a full integrity review during the year.
Main output criteria for the process system integrity reviews are:
 Full review of system current condition identifying areas of concern (where applicable)
 Fitness for service statement
 Forward inspection plan
 Action list and next scheduled review date
Summaries of these reviews are sent offshore and the full system integrity reviews filed
in a system such as Documentum.
8 Documentation
Strategies: provide summary on documentation updates in the year – examples given
below:
 Facilities Integrity Management Scheme (FIMS), rev X issued
 CUI general: continue with BP strategy Management of Corrosion Under Insulation
implementation
 Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (CISCC) risk lines: Summary: strategy developed
for higher risk areas

November 2007 Issue 1 (Typical Example) Add 6-3
KPIs: corrosion control matrices provide summary of corrosion control matrices for the
year, refer to diagram below. This can include corrosion mitigation and operational
controls as well as inspection activities.
Risk matrix: an integrity risk matrix is required to highlight the main threats to plant
integrity, their risk, manageability and the progress of remedial actions to mitigate them. It
is reviewed at the Integrity Team tactical meeting that occurs every 4 to 6 weeks. Once a
risk has been successfully managed and is no longer deemed to be an integrity threat it
is removed from the listing.

Add 6-4 (Typical Example) November 2007 Issue 1
Addendum 7
Typical Examples of Tactical Review Summaries
1 Example 1: Monthly Review 2
2 Key Performance Indicator Definitions 4
3 Example 2: Monthly Tactical Review Meeting 5

3.1 Monthly Report Typical Headings 6
3.2 Pipelines 8
3.3 Corrosion/Chemicals 8
3.4 Pressure Systems 9
4 Corrosion Key Performance Indicators Rolling Comparison

Percent of Compliance 10
5 Example of Risk Matrix for Discussion at Tactical Review Meeting 11

As a minimum, the tactical review meetings should cover the following topics:
 Mitigation/monitoring/inspection and system condition status as known
 Near misses/Serious Occurrence Reports (SORs)/Alerts/Health, Safety and
Environment (HSE) notices
 Temporary repairs
 Leaks/failure investigations/issues arising in the month
 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
 Risk matrix
 Action tracker review
 Piping integrity review status – this is sometimes referred to as the Risk-based
Inspection (RBI) assessment or the plant integrity review
 Any Other Business (AOB)
Two examples of the way in which the tactical review meeting output is recorded is
provided on the following pages.

1 Example 1: Monthly Review

(Refer to Paragraph 2 for KPI definitions.)


2 Key Performance Indicator Definitions

(Used in Example 1 Monthly Review.)

3 Example 2: Monthly Tactical Review Meeting

3.1 Monthly Report Typical Headings
Due Onshore/
Item Subject/Actions Actionee
Date Offshore
1.1 Corrosion KPIs: Monthly Onshore/
Meeting Offshore
Review % compliance over a
number of months.
1.2 Review Leaks: Monthly Onshore/
Meeting Offshore
Review number of hydrocarbon
leaks over a number of months.
1.3 Inspection KPIs: Monthly Onshore/
Meeting Offshore
For example, the following could
be recorded for current and
previous 2 months.
Overall 86% with respect to plan,
2 red – Repair order (RO) progress
and Workbook issue, 1 amber –
Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI)
progress.
1.4 Progress on monitoring a key Ongoing Onshore/
threat such as CUI (but could be Offshore
any issue or area of concern) CUI
Survey Progress:
05/08/05 – Register now complete
05/08/05 – Initial line walk complete
14/07/05 – Line walk in progress to
verify which lines are insulated
(check against P&IDs) and check
current condition to permit
re-assessment of existing plan.
09/06/05 – Generate a register for
insulated lines. Plan 2 trips for
walking the lines to clarify what
lines are still insulated and what
are the problem areas.
1.5 Progress on monitoring key threat Onshore
– eg dead leg corrosion.
Provide status of what has
happened in current month.

Due Onshore/
Date Offshore
1.6 Corrosion Probes and Coupons: Monthly Onshore/
Meeting Offshore
Provide status of coupons/probes
removed during month (with
findings).
1.7 Summary of Sand Data: Monthly Onshore/
Meeting Offshore
Report on sand production and any
influence it may have on metal loss
topsides, influence on the sand
management strategy.
1.8 Summary of Process Changes: For info Onshore
Review process and operational Monthly
changes during month and possible Meeting
impact on material degradation.
1.9 Corrosion Related Modifications: Monthly Onshore
Meeting
Review any modifications that are
taking place and impact on material Ongoing
degradation.
1.10 Offshore ‘Corrosion Champion’ Monthly Offshore
Update: Meeting
Update team on corrosion
communications and review and
significant issues from platform
leak surveillance and walkabouts.
1.11 Verification Issues: As Onshore
required
Discuss any verification issues.
1.12 Corrosion Risk Matrix: Monthly Onshore/
Meeting Offshore
Discuss and update the corrosion
risk matrix – reference example
given at end of addendum.
1.13 Monthly Report/Repair Orders: Monthly Onshore
Discuss overdue RO data/status. Meeting
1.14 Meetings: As Onshore
required
Identify any additional key
meetings that are required.

3.2 Pipelines
Due Onshore/
Date Offshore
2.1 Review corrosion monitoring data Monthly Onshore/
collected during the month. Meeting Offshore
Onshore/
Onshore
3.3 Corrosion/Chemicals
Due Onshore/
Date Offshore
3.1 Any New Trials for the Ongoing Onshore
Scale/Corrosion Inhibitors:
Discuss status of any chemical
trials.
3.2 Chlorinator (or other key chemical Ongoing Offshore
delivery equipment):
Discuss status of any key
equipment that delivers a key
corrosion mitigation chemical such
as a chlorinator.
3.3 Corrosion Awareness: Toolbox Provide Offshore
talks: Timing
Discuss what awareness material
has been delivered during the
month and what will be delivered in
next month/quarter.
3.7 Include any details on further Ongoing Onshore/
additional sampling that has taken Offshore
place during the month or is due to
take place.

3.4 Pressure Systems
Due Onshore/
Date Offshore
4.1 Oil Export System: Provide Onshore
Date
Summarise any key activities that
have taken place in the month or
are due to take place in following
months.
4.2 Fatigue: Monthly Onshore
Meeting
Identify any issues.
4.3 Flowlines: Provide Onshore
Date
months.
4.4 Flowlines/Chokes: Provide Onshore/
Date Offshore
months.
4.5 Deadlegs: Provide Onshore
Date
Review of the pipework deadlegs
(currently in progress).
General status and actions for other systems:

 Diesel System
 Water Injection System
 Recovered Oil System
 Cooling Medium Systems

4 Corrosion Key Performance Indicators Rolling Comparison

Percent of Compliance

5 Example of Risk Matrix for Discussion at Tactical Review

Meeting

Addendum 8
Strategic Review Output
The purpose of the strategic review is to discuss the strategy that is presently in place to
manage corrosion in the Asset ie:
 The process, including roles and responsibilities
 The RBI outputs – monitoring, inspection and mitigation measures that have been in place
over the previous year
 Management schemes that are in place for each corrosion threat
 To establish whether changes or additions to the corrosion management strategy are
required
An outline of what may be covered during a strategic review is provided below, along with some
key questions to consider. The outcome from these discussions should be minuted and tracked:
 Presentation of the annual report and corrosion management strategy
 Review the threats in each system, is the monitoring, inspection and mitigation measure
still appropriate? Are there any corrosion mechanisms that are not being managed in a
particular process system?
 Are there any challenges or changes that need to be made in the present documentation
for managing corrosion, such as any revisions or developments required to the
management schemes for specific corrosion threats, any revision of roles and
responsibilities?
 Review of the minutes/actions from the previous strategic meeting
 What differences have these actions made?
 Have the actions been implemented?
 Vessels and pipework Risk-based Inspection (RBI) (integrity review) status
 What are the issues with this activity?
 Brainstorming session
Strategic Review Output

Addendum 9
Corrosion Management Strategy Example
Material Degradation Management System
Lower Level Material Degradation Management Strategy
Pipeline Corrosion Management Examples

Addendum 10
Corrosion Management Audit (Health Check)
1 Corrosion Management Health Check 1

1.1 Corrosion Management Process 1
1.2 Corrosion Threats Being Managed in Each System 2
2 Corrosion Management Health Check Questionnaire 2

2.1 Corrosion Management Strategies 2
2.2 Risk Assessment 3
2.3 Corrosion Control Plan and Implementation 3
2.4 Specific Corrosion Control Option: Corrosion Inhibition 4
2.5 Specific Corrosion Control Option: External Protection
of Buried Pipework – Cathodic Protection 5
2.6 Monitoring and Inspection Equipment and Techniques
(including Repairs) 5
2.7 Corrosion Awareness 6
2.8 Responsibilities 6
2.9 Reporting and Communication 6
2.10 Data Management 7
2.11 Management of Corrosion (Material Degradation)
in each System 7
2.12 Documentation Required (for Pre-reading Preferably) –
or Made Available During the Review 8
2.13 Personnel Required to Take Part in the Health Check 8

1 Corrosion Management Health Check

The aim of the ‘Health Check’ should be to work with the Assets to:
 Reduce Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) impact
 Identify any gaps/opportunities in the corrosion management processes
 Identify any gaps/opportunities in the management of corrosion threats
 Ensure best practice and lessons learned are captured and transferred federally
 Identify opportunities for new technology deployment
 Develop risk/opportunity matrix(ces)
All gaps/opportunities should be prioritised and a detailed action plan developed.
Where possible, most of the reporting should be via PowerPoint presentation but this
may not always be possible.
The main activities carried out as part of this ‘Health Check’ should be in relation to
the following (it is considered good practice to include an offshore/site visit as part of
the audit):
1.1 Corrosion Management Process

Are the basic processes in place? For example, the following will be investigated:
 Asset corrosion management strategy – does it exist, what does it contain?
Any gaps?
 Corrosion threat assessment ie the Risk Assessment
 How is this carried out – refer to Practical Application of Risk-based Inspection
process (UKCS-TI-018) and other Safety Management System (SMS) documents –
what are gaps?
 Investigate outputs from the Risk Assessment activity
 For example, how are the following implemented, by whom, how reported, what is
done with results?
 Corrosion mitigation plans and implementation
 Corrosion monitoring plans and implementation
 Inspection plans and implementation
 Update of strategy for managing corrosion in each system
 Roles and responsibilities – does everyone know what they are supposed to do?
 Team make up – are the right people involved in managing corrosion in service
provider/Asset
 Interfaces – how are they managed?

 Communication meetings and reporting in place

 Regular 4 to 6 weekly corrosion meeting to discuss short-term mitigation (corrosion
control matrices) and monitoring/inspection activities, changes in process
conditions, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
 Follow up of identified actions from meetings
 Regular reporting of status of activities and findings
 Annual overview status of condition of facilities
 Follow up of anomalies and other recommendations (including actions from monthly
meetings and annual overview reports)
 Repairs to Safety Critical (SC) systems – how are they implemented
1.2 Corrosion Threats Being Managed in Each System
Review of Previous Last Two Annual Corrosion Management Reports

Some of this will also fall out of Paragraph 2.1.
Review each process system, gaining an overview of what the threats are and how
they are being mitigated, monitored and inspected.
For this exercise, the corrosion, inspection, process and operational people
should be present in the room to get as much input, sharing of information and
awareness
as possible.
Identify gaps/learnings/follow up opportunities.
2 Corrosion Management Health Check Questionnaire

Develop questions in following categories.
2.1 Corrosion Management Strategies

Establishes what exists with respect to high-level and process system strategies.
Do people know about them?
What procedures are in place to implement all the corrosion management activities,
identifying roles and responsibilities? Do they take account of changing operating and
process conditions?
 Does a high-level corrosion management strategy exist?
 What systems are covered in the management of corrosion?
 Does a document exist which identifies the corrosion management strategy within
each system?
 Are there copies of the above documents available?

 Are the documents available to the Offshore/Onshore Team?

 Does the high-level strategy define roles and responsibilities?
 Are all defined role holders aware of their responsibilities?
 Are there procedures available for the various activities required for implementation of
the corrosion management strategies? (If so, can they be seen?)
 How are changing operational and process data (and modifications) utilised in the
revision and update of the corrosion management strategies (ie incorporation into
corrosion control systems/mitigation/monitoring/ inspection)?
 In development of the corrosion management/inspection strategies, what cognisance
has been taken of UK regulations (eg Design and Construction Regulations (DCR))?
 Does regular review/update of the strategies take place?
 Does review of strategies take account of experiences of corrosion management on
other Installations (ie lessons learned)?
 Compliance with main body of document?
2.2 Risk Assessment

Explores how this has been carried out to ensure that the deterioration threats have been
identified for each system:
 What systems have had a Risk Assessment carried out?
 Are any Risk Assessments available for review – sample a couple of systems?
 Have deterioration mechanisms been identified for each system?
 Has the likelihood/rate of deterioration been assessed?
 Has the consequence been evaluated (safety/environment/business)?
 Has historical monitoring and inspection data been input into revisions of Risk
Assessment?
 Who has been involved in the Risk Assessments?
 What happens with the output from the Risk Assessment, ie inspection plans,
corrosion mitigation?
 Compliance with NSSPU-GP-06-10-2?
2.3 Corrosion Control Plan and Implementation

Explores how corrosion control plans have been developed to control the threats/risks.
The implementation of the corrosion control plan is also explored.
 How has the corrosion control programme been developed?
 Does a corrosion control plan exist for each system?
 Are mitigation (control) plans in place for all threats?
 Does the plan identify the most appropriate control options based on the risk analysis?

 Are the targets for corrosion control identified for each option (ie performance
indicators)?
 Who is involved in setting the control measures?
 Have the key players been identified?
 Are the roles and responsibilities identified?
 Are the roles and responsibilities reviewed regularly?
 Does everyone understand their role (eg what to do in an upset condition)?
 Is the corrosion control plan visible to onshore/offshore?
 Can changes in operational practices be accommodated within the corrosion control
plan (ie is it reviewed regularly)?
 Does the corrosion control plan take into account the system desired life?
 How is the effectiveness of the corrosion control plan measured?
 Is there a plan for managing Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI)?
 Does it comply with Management of Corrosion Under Insulation (NSSPU-GP-06-10-2,
Addendum 6)?
 How is fabric maintenance managed? Does it comply with Fabric Maintenance
Standard and guidance (UKCS-TI-029)?
2.4 Specific Corrosion Control Option: Corrosion Inhibition

Explore how inhibition is carried out and how effectiveness measured, roles and
responsibilities etc. What happens if things go wrong with the inhibition etc?
 What systems get corrosion inhibition?
 Where is the corrosion inhibitor injected?
 How is the corrosion inhibitor injected?
 How is the corrosion inhibitor distributed to the systems that require protection?
 How does the platform know how much has been injected?
 What is the process for injecting corrosion inhibitor, measuring its effectiveness,
rectifying faults, responding to upset conditions etc?
 What are the roles and responsibilities within this process?
 Does everyone understand their roles and responsibilities?
 What are the perceived problems associated with the Corrosion Inhibition System?

2.5 Specific Corrosion Control Option: External Protection of Buried Pipework

– Cathodic Protection
Explore how external protection of buried pipework is managed, roles and
responsibilities. What happens if issues arise with over or underprotection?
 What buried pipework systems receive cathodic protection?
 Are there any buried pipework systems that do not receive cathodic protection?
 Describe the Cathodic Protection System that is in place to provide protection
 Who manages the cathodic protection of the buried pipework?
 What are the roles and responsibilities for this activity?
 Does everyone understand their responsibility?
 Describe the process for monitoring the cathodic protection, measuring its effectiveness
and rectifying faults (eg non-functioning items, underprotection/ overprotection)
 What are perceived problems associated with the cathodic protection of buried
pipework?
2.6 Monitoring and Inspection Equipment and Techniques (including Repairs)

Explores the types of inspection and monitoring techniques employed, evaluation of data,
and reporting of anomalies etc, including the repair order process.
 What online monitoring exists on pipework (eg probes and coupons)?
 What online monitors exist (eg oxygen, flow rates, inhibitor rates)?
 Is there a plan for probe, coupon and ultrasonic data collection?
 How is the pipework (eg Ultrasonics – Ultrasonic Testing (UT)) programme developed
and updated?
 Have any baseline surveys been carried out?
 How are inspection intervals set – refer to Risk-based Inspection (RBI)?
 Who carries out the inspections/online monitoring?
 How is the UT data stored and analysed – short/long-term?
 Is the data trended?
 How are anomalies identified, reported and followed up?
 How are repairs followed up? Review raised order process
 Are there any overdue repair orders in SC equipment and pipework? Review these if
they exist
 What inspection and monitoring techniques are utilised on vessels?
 How are changes in operational and process conditions, along with historical
inspection details, accounted for in the pipework and vessel surveys (ie how are the
programmes updated)?

 Who are the key players involved in the development of monitoring and inspection
programmes?
 Are roles and responsibilities clearly understood?
 Do the key players have access to other networks/corrosion bulletins?
 How are results of the monitoring and inspection fed back into the corrosion control
plan and the strategies (short/long-term)?
2.7 Corrosion Awareness

Explores whether personnel are aware of why things are being done and the
consequences of not doing things.
 Does a corrosion awareness programme exist (or is in the plan)?
 Are offshore (or onshore plant) personnel aware of the corrosion control plan and why
things are being done?
 Do the key players onshore understand the corrosion control plan?
2.8 Responsibilities
Explores roles and responsibilities between all key personnel involved in various
activities. Is everyone aware of their roles and responsibilities (offshore personnel and
BP onshore involvement/ownership)?
 Who are the key players involved in corrosion management?
 Are all key players aware of their roles and responsibilities?
 Who is the offshore focal point for corrosion and inspection management in BP and in
the service provider? Who provides support and challenge on key issues?
 Do any examples of roles and responsibility matrices exist? Review a sample
 How do key players offshore relate to the key players onshore and vice versa?
 Do offshore key players get involved in the Risk Assessments?
2.9 Reporting and Communication

Explore regular reporting and communication via meetings with Corrosion and Inspection
Team, BP, production chemistry and onshore/offshore.
 Do regular 4 to 6 weekly team meetings occur, ie tactical review meetings?
 How frequently do these meetings occur?
 Who attends these meetings?
 Does an example of the minutes of these meetings exist? Review this
 Does a matrix of key threats exists for discussion at the meeting?
 How do actions get followed up and who tracks them?

 What reports exist which summarise activities and findings, eg does a monthly status
report exist? Review this
 Does an annual corrosion management (material degradation) report exist to facilities
and for pipelines? Look at current and previous year report
 Does a strategic annual review based on the annual corrosion report report take
place? Review the summary of the strategic review
 What other ad hoc meetings exist?
2.10 Data Management

Explores how data is managed within the Asset, from recording and reviewing inspection
data, along with recording inspection plans in the maintenance management system (eg
Maximo) – some overlap with other sections.
 How is inspection data collected, stored and analysed?
 How are anomalies followed up?
 Where is data collected on external inspections (eg via CUI surveys and fabric
maintenance surveys) stored and analysed?
 Who analyses probe and coupon data and where is this stored?
 Who analyses the corrosion control data and where is this stored?
 What is the process for ensuring that the inspection plans are entered into the
Maintenance Management System?
2.11 Management of Corrosion (Material Degradation)

in each System
Explores each process system to understand what the threats are and how each threat is
managed. Investigates what obstacles and problems have been in the way of
management of threats. A team review consisting of corrosion, inspection, production
chemistry, process and operational expertise is required for this review.
 For each system, what are the main material degradation threats?
 How is each threat managed?
 What have been the problems (obstacles) in the way of management of these threats?
 Does an overall risk matrix exist which summarises the main threats?

2.12 Documentation Required (for Pre-reading Preferably) – or Made Available

During the Review
The following is a list of some of the key documents for review:
 Asset Corrosion Management Strategy
 Corrosion management strategy for each system
 Organisation chart
 Roles and responsibilities document
 Corrosion control matrices
 Examples of the KPIs used on a regular basis to measure progress/effectiveness/
increase awareness of issues
 Copies of a couple of Risk Assessments
 Monthly corrosion/inspection report – 2 off
 Minutes of meeting for monthly corrosion/inspection meeting
 Annual corrosion management report – current year and previous year
 Matrix of key corrosion threats
 List of overdue repair orders for SC inspections
 Overview document demonstrating the cathodic protection of buried pipework
 Procedures for managing corrosion and inspection, including Risk Assessment, repair
order process, anomaly tracking, inspection planning
 Examples of inspection reports
 Workpacks
 Inspection findings: Internal inspections External inspections
 Anomaly tracking
2.13 Personnel Required to Take Part in the Health Check

The following personnel should take part in the health check:
 Corrosion and inspection personnel
 Process engineering
 Operations
 Maintenance
 Fabric maintenance contractor
 Integrity Team leader
 Integrity Engineer
 Production Chemist

Addendum 11
Terms of Reference and Assurance Protocol
Paragraph Page
1 Terms of Reference 1
1.1 Scope 1
1.2 Objectives 1
2 Assurance Protocol 2

August 2009 Issue 1/AM01 Add 11-i/ii
1 Terms of Reference
This assurance protocol shall be used to check for compliance with the requirements
specified in the Procedure for Audit and Monitoring (UKCS-AL-001).
1.1 Scope
The assurance protocol is intended to serve two purposes. These are to provide:
 An audit question set based upon all requirements for auditors to evaluate compliance
of the entire procedure at an Asset
 A monitoring question set based upon relevant requirements to be used by Asset or
function personnel to evaluate compliance with parts of the procedure
1.2 Objectives
The assurance protocol shall:
 Ensure that the requirements detailed in this document are being systematically
checked at an Asset or function
 Provide a common approach to testing compliance across all Assets where this
procedure is applicable
 Allow those involved in audit or monitoring activities to document findings and
recommendations in advance of report approval in Tr@ction

August 2009 Issue 1/AM01 Add 11-1
2 Assurance Protocol
For a usable version on the Assurance Protocol, please click here.

Add 11-2 August 2009 Issue 1/AM01





















August 2009 Issue 1/AM01 Add 11-23/24

Nsspu-Gp 06-10-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nsspu-Gp 06-10-1

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

Nsspu-Gp 06-10-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

North Sea SPU (UK)

Site Technical Practice

Issuing Keith Floyd Document Catriona Smith

4 Corrosion Management System 4

November 2007 Issue 1 i

Addendum 1 Process System Corrosion Management Strategy

ii August 2009 Issue 1/AM01

November 2007 Issue 1 1

Term STP Definition Approval for Deviation

Table 1 STP Conformance Terminology and Approval Levels for Deviation

2 November 2007 Issue 1

3.1 Topsides Facilities, Onshore Plant and Onshore and

November 2007 Issue 1 3

4 Corrosion Management System

4.2 Risk Assessment

4 November 2007 Issue 1

The Pipeline Integrity Management Systems (NSSPU-GP-43-49) shall be consulted.

November 2007 Issue 1 5

4.3 Corrosion Control Programme

4.4 Implementation of the Corrosion Control Programme

6 November 2007 Issue 1

November 2007 Issue 1 7

8 November 2007 Issue 1

4.4.4 Corrosion Awareness

4.4.6 Roles and Responsibilities

4.4.7 Data Management

November 2007 Issue 1 9

4.4.8 Material Degradation Reporting (Corrosion Damage Reports)

4.5 Performance Assessment

10 November 2007 Issue 1

4.5.2 Tactical Reviews

4.5.3 Strategic Reviews

November 2007 Issue 1 11

4.5.4 Peer Reviews

4.6 Design/New Projects/Equipment Changes

4.6.1 Management of Change

4.7 Experience and Lessons Learned

12 November 2007 Issue 1

Figure 1 BP Corrosion Control System

November 2007 Issue 1 13

Figure 2 Corrosion Management – Summary of Main Activities

14 November 2007 Issue 1

Figure 2 Corrosion Management – Summary of Main Activities (cont’d)

November 2007 Issue 1 15

Figure 3 Pressure Systems Corrosion Management: Integration of Activities

16 November 2007 Issue 1

Process System Corrosion Management Overview – Typical

3 Water Injection System 4

4 Wash Water System 5

Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)

Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)

Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)

Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)

3 Water Injection System

Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)

4 Wash Water System

Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)

Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)

Corrosion Control Matrices (Typical Example)