Corrosion

Management
Assurance
System 1999
R C Woollam and D Paisley
Verison 2 dated October 1999

Main CD
Contents
 Corrosion
Management
Assurance
System
1999
Corrosion Management
Assurance System
1999
 Preface

A successful Corrosion Management Program is an important component

of the management of most Business Units, whether at the development and
early production phases where capital and operating expenses are traded, or
in mid to late life where costs are highly constrained and corrosion risks are
generally increased. As a consequence, it is important to the whole life suc-
cess of projects that assets have in place programs to actively manage corro-
sion from the earliest stages through to end of field life.

The Corrosion Management Assurance System (CMAS) should be used by

each BU to assure and assess progress and performance in developing and
implementing a successful Corrosion Management Program. In addition,
CMAS provides a common basis for discussion on the appropriate Corro-
sion Management Strategy within an asset and for discussion between as-
sets, facilitating the transfer of knowledge and best practice, and hard earned
experience.

By following the processes and structures outlined in this booklet BUs should
gain confidence that the levels of corrosion control and management are
appropriate for the delivery of long and short term business performance.
With a developing understanding of the corrosion issues being faced, we can
move forward with greater certainty and assurance that the unforeseen risks
of corrosion are reduced.

This system has been developed by the most experienced individuals in cor-
rosion and widely networked prior to issue.

Feedback is welcomed and encouraged, see 7 Feedback, as it is only

through the further use and refinement that the true value to the businesses
can be realized.

John Mogford
December 1998

October 1999 i
 Corrosion Management Assurance System

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 1
2 Overview 2
3 Corrosion Management Process 4
4 Corrosion Management Infrastructure 6
5 Assurance Scheme 8
6 Element Description
6.1 Corrosion Management Strategy 10
6.2 Program Implementation 11
6.3 Life/Risk Analysis 12
6.4 Mitigation Action 13
6.5 Program Review 14
6.6 Strategy Review 15
6.7 Asset/Group Business Context 16
6.8 Knowledge and Learning 17
6.9 Ownership and Leadership 18
6.10 Discipline Integration 19
6.11 Risk/Reliability Criteria 20
6.12 Performance 21
7 Feedback 22

October 1999 iii

 1. Introduction

The Corrosion Management Assurance System (CMAS) provides a frame-

work to aid in the development and continuous improvement of a Corrosion
Management Program.

CMAS is not intended to provide a ‘cookbook’ approach to corrosion man-

agement, but, is intended, through the assurance scheme, to stimulate and
prompt the identification of gaps in existing programs and those under de-
velopment, and provide a mechanism to continuously improve and evolve.

While not a ‘cookbook’ it would be expected that a well developed and

mature corrosion management program would express ALL of the main
elements described in CMAS.

CMAS links to the elements of OIAS within the context of corrosion

management.

October 1999 Page 1

 2. Overview

The Corrosion Management Assurance System is divided into two major

components inside an assurance scheme.

The first component is a Corrosion Management Process which

describes the steps required to manage corrosion in the short term in re- Corrosion Management Process
sponse to operational changes and also over the longer term as the corro- Corrosion Management Strategy
sion control requirements change through the life of the Business Unit (BU). Program Implementation
Life/Risk Analysis
The second component is the Corrosion Management Infrastruc- Mitigation Action
ture which describes the elements of organization and business context Program Review
required in order to support a fully functioning Corrosion Management Strategy Review
Process.

The Assurance Scheme, with an audit and gap management pro-

cess is designed to provide the feedback necessary for continuous improve-
ment.

Each of the sections of CMAS has in turn a number of elements, this hier-
Infrastructure
archical structure allows access to CMAS at a number of different levels
BU/Group Business Context
and the hierarchy is retained in the structure and layout of this
Risk/Reliability Criteria
booklet.
Ownership/Leadership
Discipline Integration
Knowledge and Learning
Performance

Corrosion Management Process

and Infrastructure Elements

Page 2 Corrosion Management Assurance System October 1999 Page 3

 3. Corrosion Management Process Corrosion
Management
The elements of the Corrosion Management Process, Strategy
3.1 Corrosion Management Strategy
Defines the long term strategic objectives of the corrosion management pro-
gram which complement and are compatible with the BU strategic business
plan. The strategy assesses the risks due to corrosion and then determines
and sets goals/targets for the mitigation, monitoring and inspection options
necessary for long term plant integrity.
3.2 Program Implementation Implementation

Tactical/Short Term Feedback

The short term/tactical implementation of the corrosion management strat-

Strategic/Long Term Feedback

egy is an integrated activity combining the monitoring, mitigation, inspec-
tion programs and data analysis with the repair and maintenance of the
plant.
3.3 Life/Risk Analysis
Life and risk analyses are the core of the corrosion management process, Life/Risk Analysis
providing through the analysis of the data generated in 3.2 the immediate
driving force for repair, maintenance and inspection programs as well as the
feedback for the mitigation and prevention programs.
3.4 Mitigation Actionction
The action steps taken in response to the short term/tactical analysis, 3.2 Mitigation Action
and 3.3, of the corrosion management process. The mitigation action is di-
rected toward achieving the goals/targets set for the corrosion management
program in the strategy and ensuring continued plant fitness for service.
3.5 Program Review
Review of the corrosion management program, as defined in the corrosion Program Review
management strategy, ensures implementation of the strategy and verifies
performance against short term targets and objectives.
3.6 Strategy Review
Review of the corrosion management strategy ensures consistency and con-
tinued applicability with changing business plan requirements and the chang-
ing production and corrosion environment. Strategy Review

Corrosion Management Process

Page 4 Corrosion Management Assurance System October 1999 Page 5

 4. Corrosion Management Infrastructure

The elements of the Corrosion Management Infrastructure

are,
4.1 BU/Group Business Context
The BU long term business and reservoir development plan and corporate BU/Group Knowledge
goals and objectives which define the environment within which the corro- Business and Learning
sion management strategy must be compatible and consistent. Context
4.2 Knowledge and Learning
The accumulation and use of knowledge through internal learning as well as Context and Direction
the use of knowledge and experience gained elsewhere produces a compe-
tent program team capable of delivering distinctive performance.
4.3 Organizational Ownership and Leadership Ownership Discipline
The clear definition and communication from the BU Leader of the line of and Integration
accountability for, and reporting of, operational plant integrity and the line Leadership
of accountability for, and reporting of, technical integrity of the operation.
4.4 Discipline Integration
The integration of a number of different discipline areas, typically, corro-
Organization and Structure
sion engineering, inspection, production chemistry and chemical supply (in-
ternal and/or external). These disciplines each contribute to the overall pro- Risk and
cess of managing the life/risk of the plant operation. Reliability Performance
4.5 Risk/Reliability Criteria Criteria
The common basis of analysis, typically monetary, and methodology for the
assessment of risk, likelihood and consequence (HSE, production efficiency,
equipment and O&M costs), required for clear probabilistic decision mak- Control and Effectiveness
ing.
4.6 Performance
The corrosion management program is conducted within a framework of
performance measures, targets and tracking to demonstrate efficiency and
delivery of cost effective and technically effective corrosion control.

Corrosion Management Infrastructure

Page 6 Corrosion Management Assurance System October 1999 Page 7

 5. Assurance Scheme

The elements of the Assurance Scheme,

BU
5.1 Audit
Plan
As part of the initial project development program or as part of the continu-
ous improvement process, the BU Corrosion Management Strategy and
CMAS
Programs are compared with Corrosion Management Assurance
System. Audit
Compare against CMAS
5.2 Gap and Opportunity Identification Gap analysis
Program gaps are identified and opportunities for improvement developed Opportunity development

Continuous Improvement Feedback

and then used as a basis for continuous improvement of quality and perfor-
mance.

5.3 Prioritization
Each gap or opportunity is prioritized according to an assessment of impact
and manageability.
H H
5.4 Assurance Plan Tracking M M
A simple project management mechanism for the planning, tracking, bud- L L
geting and resourcing to manage opportunity implementation. L M H L M H
Impact Manageability
5.5 Continuous Improvement Feedback Freq vs Impact Impact vs Manage

A structured process to drive the timing and auditing of the Corrosion Man- Prioritization
agement program in order to continuously improve performance. Impact assessment
Manageability assessment
Action prioritization

Assurance Plan Tracking

Prioritized action plan
Resourcing and budgeting
Measurement and tracking

CMAS Assurance Scheme

OIAS Element: 11
Page 8 Corrosion Management Assurance System October 1999 Page 9
 6. Element Description 6.1 6. Element Description 6.2

6.1 Corrosion Management Strategy 6.2 Program Implementation

Defines the long term strategic objectives of the corrosion management pro-
gram which complement and are compatible with the BU strategic business
plan. The strategy assesses the risks due to corrosion and then determines
and sets goals/targets for the mitigation, monitoring and inspection options
necessary for long term plant integrity.
Aspiration
There should be a structured strategy in place for managing the corrosion
related operational risks over the predicted life of the BU which fits with the
BU long term business plan. The program should be based on the best avail-
able practice and account for the changing production fluids as the BU ages
as well as the original plant design intent and deviations from this intent.
Success Factors
1 Early materials/corrosion input into conceptual design
embedded into operational philosophy
2 System by system corrosion risk assessment
3 Full BU life ‘corrosivity’ profile analysis
4 Combined mitigation, monitoring and inspection strategy to
address risks identified
5 CAPEX vs OPEX costs implications to the BU
6 Cascaded from and linked to the components of the BU
business plan - HSE, production and costs of material
equipment and operation
7 Integration of corrosion management strategy as part of
the overall BU integrity plan
8 Program to provide plant life management
9 Clear statement of goals and objectives
10 Review, concurrence and support from BU
Management Team
11 Integration of corrosion management strategy with
procurement strategy
The short term/tactical implementation of the corrosion management strat-
egy is an integrated activity combining the monitoring, mitigation, inspec-
tion programs and data analysis with the repair and maintenance of the
plant.
Aspiration
There should be in place an integrated program to implement the corrosion
management strategy in the short term. The program should integrate the
operational and technical disciplines which when combined enable the life
of the BU to be efficiently managed.
The program should be tactical in nature, daily to quarterly, and address the
management of the immediate operational risks by driving changes in the
mitigation levels and control.
Success Factors
1 Common database and data transfer format
2 Clear and simple access to data
3 Integrated methodology for data interpretation, analysis and recording
4 Performance measurement, tracking and targets linked to
the BU business plan
5 Milestones and dates for achieving the goals and objectives
set out in the strategy
6 Strong link to operational organization
7 Strong link to chemical deployment
8 Focus on managing plant and equipment life
9 Detail focus - specific pieces of equipment and specific
control action adjustments

OIAS Element: 1 3 5 6 9 OIAS Element: 4 6

Page 10 Corrosion Management Assurance System October 1999 Page 11
 6. Element Description 6.3 6. Element Description 6.4

6.3 Life/Risk Analysis 6.4 Mitigation Action

Life and risk analysis are the core of the corrosion management process,
providing through the analysis of the data generated in Program Imple-
mentation the immediate driving force for repair, maintenance and in-
spection programs as well as the feedback for the mitigation and prevention
programs.
The action steps taken in response to the short term/tactical analysis, Pro-
gram Implementation and Life/Risk Analysis, of the corro-
sion management process. The mitigation action is directed toward achiev-
ing the goals/targets set for the corrosion management program in the strat-
egy and ensuring continued plant fitness for service.

Aspiration
The data generated as part of the integrated corrosion management program
should be analyzed in terms of the remaining life of the plant and hence in
terms of the operational risk, likelihood and consequence of
failure.
Success Factors
1 Common means, typically monetary, of comparing and
reviewing results and decisions
2 Analysis of risk, reliability and mean time to failure (MTTF)
in a single linked operation
3 Highlights the important parameters which contribute most
significantly to operational risk
4 Highlights the equipment which contributes most
significantly to operational risk
5 Enables control of the parameters which most significantly
contribute to plant operation risk
6 Parameter identification enables depth of analysis to be
structured to be fit-for-purpose
7 Enables activities to be prioritized to minimize operational
risk
Aspiration
The short term, tactical - typically less than 12 months, actions which are
taken in direct response to the output from the corrosion management pro-
gram and the life/risk analysis. This activity ensures the continued plant
fitness for service provides the feedback control designed into the corrosion
management strategy.
Success Factors
1 Focus on ‘Fitness For Service’ ensuring continued safety
to operate
2 Focus on mitigation level and operational changes to address
immediate needs
3 Clear guidelines and practices for defining and ensuring
fitness for service
4 Clear control/set points which have a programmed response
if out of target range
5 Clearly defined changes in response to defined outputs from
the monitoring and inspection programs
6 Tactical, short term, less than 12 months, in nature

OIAS Element: 2 4 6 OIAS Element: 4 5

Page 12 Corrosion Management Assurance System October 1999 Page 13
 6. Element Description 6.5
6.5 Program Review
Review of the corrosion management program, as defined in the corrosion
management strategy, ensures implementation of the strategy and verifies
performance against short term targets and objectives.
Aspiration
The corrosion management program should be reviewed and audited on a
regular basis in order to determine conformance to the objectives set out in
the corrosion management strategy.
Success Factors
1 Regular (annual maximum) and structured review of
performance against targets
2 Implementation of changes in the corrosion management
strategy
3 Clearly defined changes in response to defined outputs from
the monitoring and inspection programs
4 Tactical, short term, less than 12 months
5 Part of assurance of appropriate self-regulation
6 Lack of effective corrosion control at the program level
highlights need for strategic change
7 Reviews the level of mitigation rather than the type of
mitigation
8 Sets specific short term targets on relevant performance
indicators
9 Strong linkage to performance management process within
the BU
10 High level of visibility of the output from the program
review/performance management throughout the BU
OIAS Element: 3 5 9 11
Page 14 Corrosion Management Assurance System
6. Element Description 6.6
6.6 Strategy Review
Review of the corrosion management strategy ensures consistency and con-
tinued applicability with changing business plan requirements and the chang-
ing production and corrosion environment.
Aspiration
Through the life of the BU changing operational, environmental and/or busi-
ness conditions will typically dictate a change in the corrosion management
strategy being employed. The structured review process drives this reassess-
ment of requirements.
Success Factors
1 Regular (annual) and structured review
2 Operational, business and technical group input
3 Review with respect to the original design intent and
operational limits
4 Use of internal/external reviews/audits
5 Extremes of mitigation or lack of corrosion control, at the
program level highlight need for strategic change
6 Review cost effectiveness of current program
7 Strategic review should consider all the options, from
materials, to chemical, to replacement
8 Reviews the type of mitigation rather than the absolute level
of mitigation
9 Part of assurance of appropriate self-regulation
10 Sets long term targets with short term ‘check-in’ dates
OIAS Element: 3 5 9 11
October 1999 Page 15
 6. Element Description 6.7
6.7 BU/Group Business Context
The BU long term business and reservoir development plan and corporate
goals and objectives which define the environment which the corrosion man-
agement plan must be compatible and consistent with.
Aspiration
The Corrosion Management Strategy is the link between the BU business
plan and the routine corrosion control program, therefore, the business con-
text is a vital input into the strategy development.
Success Factors
1 Context and background derived from Group policies and
expectations
2 Field development plan and future infrastructure requirements
3 BU business and cost base requirements
4 Production and reservoir profiles for ALL fluids
5 Facilities and satellite development requirements
6 Involvement of business/commercial and reservoir team
members
OIAS Element: 1
Page 16 Corrosion Management Assurance System
6. Element Description 6.8
6.8 Knowledge and Learning
The accumulation and use of knowledge through internal learning as well as
the use of knowledge and experience gained elsewhere produces a compe-
tent program team capable of delivering distinctive performance.
Aspiration
To develop and promote a fully competent corrosion management program
team capable of managing the corrosion related operational risks of an BU
using experience gained internally, but, also cognizant of experience and
best practice gained outside the immediate organization. An organization
prepared to learn from the mistakes and successes of others as well as share
their own successes and mistakes.
Success Factors
1 Involvement in the greater BPX corrosion network
2 Learn from and contribute to the corporate knowledge
3 Learn from what happened elsewhere spread what has been
learned
4 Promotion of, and participation in, corrosion awareness
throughout the organization
5 Contribute to and utilize peer reviews and networks
6 Assessment of competency/experience and training of
strategy/program implementation team
7 Succession planning and personnel skills mix considered
8 Contribute to and participate in the Technology Program
OIAS Element: 6 7 8 9
October 1999 Page 17
 6. Element Description 6.9 6. Element Description 6.10

6.9 Organizational Ownership and Leadership 6.10 Discipline Integration

The clear definition and communication from the BU Leader of the line of
accountability for, and reporting of, operational plant integrity and the line
of accountability for, and reporting of, technical integrity of the operation.
Aspiration
The operations and operational support sections of the organization clearly
understand their separate accountabilities for plant integrity and technical
integrity of the BU operations as well as the ownership and responsibilities
that contribute to overall BU integrity.
Success Factors
1 Line of accountability for operational plant integrity
2 Line of accountability for technical integrity
3 Role of technical integrity in providing BU assurance of
operational plant integrity
4 Point of resolution of assurance issues
5 Responsibility for providing technical integrity input to
operations
The integration of a number of different discipline areas, typically, corro-
sion engineering, inspection, production chemistry and chemical supply (in-
ternal and/or external). These disciplines each contribute to the overall pro-
cess of managing the life/risk of the plant operation.
Aspiration
That the various disciplines involved in corrosion management work in a
integrated fashion to provide plant life management. Plant life management
requires that many skills and disciplines from operations and operations
support be combined and coordinated.
Success Factors
1 Clear goal of BU life/risk management
2 Alignment of individual groups goals and targets to the BU
objectives
3 Organization achieves objectives
4 Operational support organization aligned to the operations
organization
5 Support organization multi-disciplined
6 Involvement of Group and contract personnel in the
corrosion management process

OIAS Element: 1 OIAS Element: 7 8

Page 18 Corrosion Management Assurance System October 1999 Page 19
 6. Element Description 6.11 6. Element Description 6.12

6.11 Risk/Reliability Criteria Performance and Audit

The common basis of analysis, typically monetary, and methodology for
the assessment of risk, likelihood and consequence (HSE, production effi-
ciency, equipment and O&M costs), required for clear probabilistic deci-
sion making.
Aspiration
The corrosion management of a BU involves the estimation of life of a
piece of equipment as a mean time to failure, this is related to the probabil-
ity (or likelihood or reliability) of failure and the consequences of that fail-
ure. Determining the likelihood and consequence (risk) allows the relative
value of changing these risks to be assessed on a common and consistent
basis.
Success Factors
1 Consistent basis for probabilistic decision making
2 Acceptance of the non-deterministic nature, and therefore
uncertainty in managing corrosion
3 Consistent and simple methodology
4 Common basis for assessing business impacts due to HSE,
production and costs
5 Prioritization of actions based on risked criteria
6 Acceptance of a risk based approach to cost/exposure
management
The corrosion management program is conducted within a framework of
performance measures, targets and tracking to demonstrate efficiency in
delivery of cost effective and technically effective corrosion control.
Aspiration
Through the life of the program demonstrate the value of good corrosion
management programs through a process of performance measurement and
tracking. The performance measures relating the BU corrosion control per-
formance to the expectations in the BU business plan and corrosion man-
agement strategy.
Success Factors
1 Setting meaningful, unambiguous and simple performance
targets, tracking progress toward targets and taking
appropriate corrective action
2 Corrosion management performance is both technical and
commercial activity, both types of targets should exist
3 A natural tension between technical and commercial
performance measures drives continuous improvement
4 Conversion of corrosion data into corrosion information that
can be used to make rational decisions
5 Reporting inside the corrosion management community and
outside to BU management and partners
6 Relating corrosion control to BU performance (good and
bad)
7 Dynamic performance measures which adapt and change
with corrosion management strategy and BU requirements
8 Visibility and availability across the BU

OIAS Element: 2 OIAS Element: 4 11

Page 20 Corrosion Management Assurance System October 1999 Page 21
 Feedback

The full potential value from a Corrosion Management

Assurance System (CMAS) will only be realized through use
and improvement with use; the development to date has followed this
process.

If you have any comments, questions or suggestions based on experi-

ence with this version of CMAS please contact:

Richard C. Woollam
Phone: +1 (907) 564-4437
FAX: +1 (907) 564-4450
E-mail: Woollam, Richard C
Internet: woollarc@bp.com
Mail: BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc.
PO Box 196612
900 E Benson Blvd
Anchorage
AK 99519-6612
USA

Dominic Paisley
Phone: +1 (907) 564-4466
FAX: +1 (907) 564-4450
E-mail: Paisley, Dominic M
Internet: paisledm@bp.com
Mail: BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc.
PO Box 196612
900 E Benson Blvd
Anchorage
AK 99519-6612
USA

Richard Woollam
Issued: December, 1998
Revised: October, 1999
Page 22 Corrosion Management Assurance System