2010-08-24 Pipeline Integrity Management Guidleine

Ask the Network Page 1 of 1
Pipeline & Subsea Systems Integrity - Closed Discussion Item
Pipeline Integrity Management Guideline

Posted Tuesday, August 24, 2010 16:39 by Salama, Mamdouh M. View Attachment(s)
The purpose of this document is to provide a general guidance of the key elements that need to be considered during the
design and project execution phases as well as operation to ensure pipeline integrity. Effective integrity management
starts at the design stage and involves integration of decisions that include: pipeline sizing, materials selection and
procurement, piggability, corrosion control, design of pipeline and facilities, commissioning, inspection, monitoring,
maintenance and documentation.
http://sptupks.conocophillips.net/sites/pssi/Lists/Ask%20the%20Network/ViewInThread.a... 2/14/2012
UNCONTROLLED UNLESS VIEWED VIA THE CPMS SITE
Upstream Engineering Standards and

Practices
CPMS-PPL-EP-027
Pipeline Integrity Management

Design to Operations
Recommended Document Retention: ADM220 Administrative, Policy and Procedures; Policy, Directives and Procedures.
Rev.
Technical Authority Reviewed By Approved By Date Description
No.
1 M. M. Salama C. A. Rodriguez L. C. Krusen 17-Aug-10 Issued for Use
Pipeline Integrity Management Design to Operations
CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 2 of 21
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PURPOSE........................................................................................................................................ 3
2.0 SCOPE............................................................................................................................................. 3
3.0 DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................................. 3
4.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................. 5
5.0 FACTORS AFFECTING PIPELINE INTEGRITY............................................................................. 7
6.0 SUPPLEMENTS TO DESIGN CODE REQUIREMENTS................................................................ 7
6.1 Pipeline Size .......................................................................................................................... 9
6.2 Pipeline Design Life ............................................................................................................... 9
7.0 MATERIALS SELECTION ............................................................................................................. 10
8.0 CORROSION CONTROL .............................................................................................................. 11
8.1 Definition of Effective Corrosion Inhibitor ............................................................................ 12
8.2 Factors Impacting Inhibitor Qualification Tests ................................................................... 12
9.0 CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 12
10.0 PRE-COMMISSIONING................................................................................................................. 13
10.1 Cleaning / Gauge Pig / Sizing Plate .................................................................................... 13
10.2 Water Fill / Hydrotesting ...................................................................................................... 13
10.3 Hydrotesting Fluids .............................................................................................................. 14
10.4 De-Watering, Drying & Preservation ................................................................................... 15
10.5 Base Line Inspection ........................................................................................................... 15
11.0 EXTERNAL CORROSION ............................................................................................................. 16
12.0 PROTECTION AGAINST EXTERNAL IMPACT ............................................................................ 16
13.0 MAINTENANCE ............................................................................................................................. 17
13.1 Maintenance Pigging ........................................................................................................... 17
13.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................................ 17
13.3 Leak Detection..................................................................................................................... 18
13.4 In-Line Inspection (ILI)......................................................................................................... 19
14.0 MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE (MOC) ........................................................................................... 19
15.0 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................. 20
16.0 RESPONSE PLAN......................................................................................................................... 20
17.0 RECORDS AND DOCUMENTATION............................................................................................ 20
18.0 PIPELINE DECOMMISSIONING................................................................................................... 21
This document may not be used or reproduced without the permission of ConocoPhillips.
1.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of this document is to provide a general guidance of the key elements that need to
be considered during the design and project execution phases as well as operation to ensure
pipeline integrity. Effective integrity management starts at the design stage and involves
integration of decisions that include: pipeline sizing, materials selection and procurement,
piggability, corrosion control, design of pipeline and facilities, commissioning, inspection,
monitoring, maintenance and documentation.
2.0 SCOPE
This document identifies key parameters that need to be addressed to ensure satisfactory carbon
steel pipeline integrity. The focus of this document will be on integrity management associated
with degradation induced by internal fluids. Risks related to other damage mechanisms such as
external corrosion, geotechnical and mechanical hazards are briefly addressed.
The document presents recommendations associated with the following areas: Design, Materials
selection, Corrosion inhibitors, Construction, Pre-Commissioning, Maintenance, Damage
assessment, Documentation and Decommissioning. The document also includes a list of other
internal and industry guidelines that need to be considered in association with this document.
The focus of this document is on carbon steel pipelines. Corrosion resistant alloy pipes, clad
pipes and non-metallic pipes will be addressed in separate documents
3.0 DEFINITIONS
API Specifications American Petroleum Institute is the Organization responsible for the
establishment and certification of Industry Standards. API represents
over 400 Corporations.
ASME Piping Code The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Piping Code
sets forth the Engineering requirements deemed necessary for the safe
design and construction of pressure piping systems. ASME B31.8 code
covers the design, fabrication, installation, inspection and testing of
pipeline facilities used for the transportation of gas. ASME B31.4 piping
code is used for transportation of liquid hydrocarbons.
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) has the
predominate responsibility for developing and maintaining technical
standards in the USA.
“As Built” Drawings These drawings show the pertinent pipeline details (size, location,
depth, etc.) encountered during the installation and construction of the
pipeline. The project should not be considered complete until the “as
built” drawings are complete and filed with Project documentation.
Global Positioning System (GPS) data from beginning to end of pipeline
should also be recorded.
Cathodic Protection Cathodic Protection (CP) System is an impressed current system
System comprised of DC rectifiers and sacrificial anode beds used in
conjunction with external coatings to protect buried pipelines from
external corrosion.
Certificates of A document which the material manufacturer certifies that the material
Compliance represented has been produced and tested in accordance with the
requirements of the basic material specification shown on the
certificate. These Certificates should include Material Test Report
(MTR’s) documents which record the results of tests, examinations, and
treatments required by the Material Specification.
Contractor The Company selected to furnish equipment and materials to construct

and install the pipeline.
Defect Mechanisms There are several known and well understood defect mechanisms that
can adversely affect steel pipelines and should be addressed in their
design. These mechanisms attack the pipe metallurgy causing loss of
pipeline integrity. The most common of these mechanisms are external
and internal corrosion, erosion, air to soil interface corrosion, and dead-
leg corrosion. These mechanisms are discussed in more detail later in
this document.
Department of is the Federal Agency that has developed the minimum standards for
Transportation (DOT) pipelines transporting hazardous materials. Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) – PHMSA's mission is to
protect people and the environment from the risks inherent in
transportation of hazardous materials - by pipeline and other modes of
transportation.
Fusion Bonded an epoxy based powder coating that is widely used to protect steel pipe
Epoxy (FBE) used in pipeline construction, concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) and on a
wide variety of piping connections, valves etc. from corrosion.
Hydrates Under certain conditions (high pressure, low temperature, and free
water) hydrocarbon gas streams can from hydrates. The gas begins to
form solid crystals that can eventually freeze solid and plug the pipeline.
Maximum Allowable is the maximum calculated operating pressure based on total pipeline
Operating Pressure thickness less any corrosion allowance at the design temperature. This
(MAOP) is the maximum pressure the pipeline can be operated in accordance to
the provisions of the Design Code.
Maximum Operating is the expected maximum operating pressure from normal operating
Pressure (MOP) conditions.
NACE National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) is the
Organization that has developed the Industry Standards for Corrosion
Control.
Overpressure These systems incorporate various levels of protection such as process
Protection Systems controls, process shutdowns, and pressure relief devices (PRD) to
insure that the pipeline and related facilities are not operated above
their maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP).
Pigs and Pigging The term “Pig” is a pipeline term used to describe equipment, which can
Facilities be inserted into the pipeline and used to clean it of unwanted liquids
and solids that can drop out of the gas stream in normal pipeline
operations. There are many different types of pigs; some of the most
common are Poly, Scrapper, and Cupped pigs. “Pigging Facilities” are
the general terms given to the Launcher and Receiver Equipment used
to insert and catch the pigs at each end of the pipeline.
“Intelligent or Smart Smart pigs are sophisticated inspection tools that use NDE methods to
Pigs” measure wall thickness, take photographs of welds & pipe interior walls,
and assist in determining the condition and integrity of a pipeline. They
are inserted into the pipeline and collect data as the pig moves along
the section of pipeline to be inspected.
Pipeline Drip This is a vessel installed in a low spot on a very low pressure, “un-pig-
able” pipeline that collects liquids which are periodically removed by
vacuum trucks.
Pre-Startup Safety The PSSR must be completed before startup of the pipeline and is
Review (PSSR) intended to insure that the pipeline construction and installation is
complete and ready to be safely put into operation.
Regulated Pipelines Pipelines are regulated within each Business Unit and regulated to a
jurisdiction that is site specific to each location. For example; within the
US and Alaska, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),
(DOT) and state agencies are used for pipelines and in Canada, the
National Energy Board (NEB).
Rights of Way Before pipeline construction can begin, it is necessary to get permission
(ROW) (ROW) from private landowners, government agencies, etc. to construct
and install the pipeline across their property.
Scope of Work The Project scope outlines the basic information, codes, standards, and
(SOW) guidelines to be followed during the construction and installation of the
pipeline.
Technical Authority Technical Authority (TA) - a recognized subject-matter expert within
(TA) COPC who meets each of the following qualifications:
x Has experience in the discipline category, is currently active in the
discipline, and demonstrates a proficient or expert skill level.
x Demonstrates technical leadership or mentorship qualities to assist
peers
x Is recognized by the organization as a technical professional.
4.0 REFERENCES
Related COP References
CPMS-PPL-EP-001 Pipeline and Rigid Riser Design

CPMS-PPL-EP-002 Handling, Storage & Transportation of Line Pipe
CPMS-PPL-EP-003 Flanges, Fittings, Piping & Risers for Offshore Applications
CPMS-PPL-EP-004 Offshore Pipeline Hydrostatic Testing, Drying and Pre-Commissioning
CPMS-PPL-EP-005 Coating of Pipelines
CPMS-PPL-EP-007 Welding of Offshore Pipelines and Risers
CPMS-PPL-EP-008 Pipeline Route Survey
CPMS-PPL-EP-009 Offshore Pipeline and Rigid Riser Installation
CPMS-PPL-EP-010 Pipeline Field Joint Coatings
CPMS-MAT-EP-004 Sacrificial Aluminum Anode Fabrication
Recommended Practice for Asset and Operating Integrity Program, ConocoPhillips Upstream
Pipeline Corrosion and Inspection Management; PAT – Upstream Technology, Bartlesville
Facilities Integrity Network of Excellence External Corrosion Guidance Document
Corrosion Inhibitor guideline – Global Chemicals NoE
Global CHEMICAL QAQC Guideline – Global Chemicals NoE
Global Corrosion Monitoring Guideline – Global Chemicals NoE
Maintenance Pigging and Sampling Guideline – Global Chemicals NoE
Separation Guideline – Global Chemicals NoE
Selected External References
ASME B31.3 Process Piping

ASME B31.4 Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbon and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8 Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
API 5L Specification for Line Pipe
API 6H Specification for Pipeline Valves, End Closures, Connectors and Swivels
API RP 14E Recommended Practice for Design and Installation of Offshore Production
Platform Piping Systems
API Standard 1104 Welding Pipeline and Related Facilities
API RP 1110 Pressure Testing of Liquid Petroleum Pipelines”
API RP 1111 Design, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Offshore Hydrocarbon
Pipelines (Limit State Design)
API Standard 1163 In-line Inspection Systems Qualification Standard
API 1136 Computational Pipeline Monitoring for Liquid Pipelines
API 1149 Pipeline Variable Uncertainties and their Effect of Leak Delectability
API 1160 Managing System Integrity for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines
API 1130 Computational Pipeline Monitoring for Liquid Pipelines
DNV OS-F101 Submarine Pipeline Systems
DNV-RP-0501 Erosive Wear in Piping Systems (1996, Det Norske Veritas)
DNV-RP-F101 Corroded Pipelines
DNV RP F103 Cathodic Protection of Submarine Pipelines by Galvanic Anodes
DNV RP B401 Cathodic Protection Design
DOT/PHMSA Part 192 Gas Part 195 Liquids - Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration
ISO 13623 Pipeline Transportation Systems
ISO 12473 General Principles of Cathodic Protection in Seawater
NACE MR0175 / Materials for use in H2S-containing Environments in oil and gas production—
ISO 15156-1 Part 1: General principles for selection of cracking-resistant materials
NACE RP 0286 Electrical Isolation of Catholically Protected Pipelines
NACE SP0106-2006 Control of Internal Corrosion in Steel Pipelines and Piping Systems
CAN/CSA-Z662-03 Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems
Tulsa Reference
[3] Shirazi, S. A., McLaury, B. S., Shadley, J. R. and Rybicki, E. F. (1995), “Generalization of the API RP
14E Guidelines for Erosive Services”, J. Petroleum Technology, Vol. 47, No. 8, pp. 693-698, Society of
Petroleum Engineers (SPE).
5.0 FACTORS AFFECTING PIPELINE INTEGRITY

Degradation to pipeline integrity has great economic, safety and environmental impacts. In
addition, factors that compromise the integrity of a pipeline have negative impacts on the integrity
of the facilities that are located both upstream and downstream of the pipeline. Therefore, each
time a pipeline leak occurs, that results in an oil spill and/or major interruption to production, the
issue of pipeline integrity gets elevated on the radar screen of company executive management.
However, evaluation of these leaks leads to the conclusion that most of them, with the exception
of third party damage, are occurring in pipelines under one or a combination of the following four
conditions:
1. The pipeline is operating beyond its original design life.
2. The integrity of the pipeline was not sufficiently considered at the design stage and thus the
compatibility between the design of the facility and the pipeline’s operating conditions and
maintenance requirements (e.g. operational and inspection pigging) along its life were not
adequately addressed.
3. The pipeline is operating under conditions that are different from those used in their original
design and the operational groups do not have a rigorous management of change process.
4. The risk to pipeline was not properly quantified due to insufficient definition of the failure
probabilities of the different degradation modes and improper account of the political and
economic consequences of a failure.
Precautions
1. The issues that may have the greatest impact on pipeline integrity and must be considered at
the FEL 1 stage are the negative impact of the pipeline oversize, the use of non-standard
pipeline sizes and whether it is possible to control corrosion using chemical inhibition.
2. Because pipeline integrity requires synergy between the design, construction, commissioning
and operations, it is important that input from the Operations Excellence Group be integrated
in early design stages. The core team of the Pipeline Integrity NoE can serve as a resource
to review pipeline basis of design and provide operational input.
6.0 SUPPLEMENTS TO DESIGN CODE REQUIREMENTS
Pipelines are designed using industry accepted standards such as ASME B31.8, ASME B31.4,
CSA Z662, API 1111, DNV OS F101, API RP 1129, etc. In addition to the requirements of the
relevant code, the following seven issues must be carefully considered by the designer:
1. Pipelines are designed based on three approaches: stress based design, strain based design
and limit state design. Depending on the location of the pipeline, regulatory requirements are
different and thus must be understood. Once the design approach is selected, it must be
consistently applied throughout the planning and execution phases of the pipeline. It is
recommended that the selected pipeline design code be applied to include any associated
pig receiver and launcher systems.
2. If a stress based design approach is used and the applicable code establishes the allowable
stress based solely on yield strength, care must be taken if the selected steel has a yield to
ultimate strength ratio that is higher than 0.7, which is often the case for high strength steels.
The safety factor based on burst pressure limit state can be calculated as follows:
§ Pburst · § g ·§ 1·
SF ¨ ¸ 0.45 ¨ ¸ ¨¨1 ¸¸
¨ MOP ¸ ©F¹© q¹
© ¹
Where:
g is the ratio of actual yield strength to SMYS (it is in the order of 1.1)
F is the utilization factor, e.g. 0.8 or 0.72
q is the actual yield to ultimate strength ratio = Y/T
To ensure a minimum safety factor of 1.5 for the case when g of 1.1 and utilization factor of
0.8, the Y/T ratio should be less than 0.70. For higher Y/T values which is often the case of
steel grades higher than X70, considerations should be given to reducing the utilization factor
even lower than recommended by current codes of practice. (Equation was derived by
ConocoPhillips’ Mamdouh Salama, DNV, University of Tulsa).
3. The current practice is to specify fracture toughness using Charpy toughness values as
criteria for crack arrest. This approach is acceptable for conventional grade of steels up to
X 70. For higher grades of the steels, modified Charpy toughness values or other fracture
toughness parameters must be considered. In the absence of fracture assessment analysis
to establish the requirement fracture toughness, the following fracture toughness values shall
be specified: 1) a minimum CTOD value of 0.7 mm at the minimum operating temperature,
and 2) a Charpy value that ensures the upper shelf at 20oC below the minimum operating
temperature for steel thickness 1 inch. For steels thickness greater than 1 inch, the upper
shelf shall be guaranteed at 30oC below the minimum operating temperature.
4. For pipelines that are designed using the strain-based approach, the pipe specification must
specify a minimum value for uniform strain that is twice the strain demand on the pipe. In
addition, the strain capacity of the pipeline must take into consideration the defect size that
can be reliably detected. It is noted that for automated UT inspection, the minimum
detectable weld defect depth is 2.5 mm (0.098 in); thus a defect of 3 mm (0.118 in) by 40 mm
(1.575 in) is often used as basis for calculating the strain capacity of pipeline welds. While
the general practice is to focus on the axial strain capacity of the girth weld, the strain
capacity of the seam weld must also be considered. For pressurized pipe, as the axial strain
increases beyond the yield strain, the hoop strain will also increase to beyond yield and can
reach a level even higher than the axial strain.
5. For pipelines operating at high temperature, the effect of thermal expansion must be
adequately considered to ensure against buckling unless the pipeline design accounts for the
resulting high strains.
6. While most codes do not require corrosion allowance, the designer needs to consider
corrosion allowance for steel pipelines taking into account service life, corrosivity of fluids
throughout the life of the pipeline and potential reduction in pressure requirements as the field
depletes. However, unless a risk assessment is made to eliminate the need for any corrosion
allowance, a minimum internal corrosion allowance of 1.5 mm (0.059 in) should be used for
all carbon steel pipelines; typical corrosion allowance of 3 mm (0.188 in) is often considered
for corrosive service.
7. The pipeline designer must consider the requirement for cleaning and inspecting the pipeline
and its associated facilities on pigging facility in conjunction with the corrosion control
strategy. Pipeline facilities may include pig launchers and receivers, traps to collect debris,
storage, bends, risers, block valves, full port valves, etc.
6.1 Pipeline Size

It must be noted that pipeline performance regarding corrosion control is better when flow rates
are optimized; therefore, serious consideration should be given to minimizing the pipeline
diameter. While the minimum recommended flow velocity depends on the fluid properties, it is
recommended that the minimum flow velocity for gas pipe be 5 m/sec (16.4 ft/sec) and for liquid
pipelines be 2 m/sec (6.56 ft/sec) for liquid pipes to avoid settling of solids and to prevent the
formation of sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB) colonies.
On the high end, one needs to consider the effect of flow velocity on both erosion and corrosion.
The following recommendations need to be considered:
1. For solid-free, noncorrosive fluids, providing pressure drop is not a concern, the maximum
flow rate can be established using the following form of API RP 14E equation:
400
V=
Um
Where:
V is the maximum fluid velocity limit in ft/sec

Um is the gas-liquid mixture density at flowing pressure and temperature in lb/ft3.
2. For sand-free, corrosive fluids, chemical inhibitors exist that are effective at flow velocities
corresponding to C-factors higher than 300. However, it is very important that the
effectiveness of the inhibitor be evaluated in a flowloop at these high velocities. For multi-
phase pipelines, the effectiveness of the corrosion control program depends on the proper
transport of the inhibitors in the pipeline.
3. For sand-laden fluids, the maximum flow rate limit can be established using one of the
available erosion prediction models (Equation was derived by ConocoPhillips’ Salama, M. M.
[1998], “An Alternative to API 14 E Erosional Velocity Limits for Sand Laden Fluids”,
Transaction - Energy Resources Technology Journal, Vol. 122, No. 2, pp. 71-77 [2000]
ASME).
6.2 Pipeline Design Life
Pipelines as well as other facilities are designed to meet a specified life (e.g. 20 years) that is
derived prior to project execution based mainly on reservoir performance. Though not practical, a
truly optimized design of a pipeline should ensure that it will operate without any leak to the end
of design life but fail immediately after the design life. If the pipeline was able to operate safely
beyond its design life for long period, it would mean that the pipeline was over-designed and thus
unnecessary capital and operating costs were spent. However, if pipelines are expected to be
operating without a leak far beyond their design life, which is the often case, it is necessary that a
company philosophy regarding design life be established. There are three possible approaches
to setting this philosophy:
1. Set the design life of the pipeline based on a statistically derived life that is higher than the
economic field or facility design life. The pipeline design life may be selected to be a multiple
of the field life based on consideration of field size potential, expected technology advances,
projection of oil prices, replacement cost, environmental risk, etc. This approach is not
uncommon for production facilities. As an example, offshore structures, mooring lines and
risers are designed for a life that is 3 to 10 time the field life The factor of 10 is used for
critical, difficult to inspect and difficult to repair structural components.
2. Set the design and operating strategy such that the pipeline will be intact (i.e. no measurable
damage) at the end of its reservoir design life.
3. Set the design and operating strategy such that the pipeline can have certain specifiable
damage (i.e. X% maximum thickness loss) at the end of its reservoir design life.
Obviously these strategies will have different capital and operating cost implications and thus
need to be established in advance by the project team in consultation with operational staff and
taking into account the expected operating condition of the pipeline through its life. Unless the
project is using specific philosophy with respect to pipeline design life, it is recommend that the
pipeline design life be 4 times the life of the field if pitting is a potential corrosion mechanism and
2 times the field life is pitting is not a potential corrosion mechanism.
Since the main damage mechanism for pipeline is time-dependant degradation due to chemical
attack (corrosion), it must be recognized that it is difficult to regain control of the degradation
process after it starts. Although life extension techniques exist, the life after the pipeline starts to
corrode presents technical and economic challenges.
7.0 MATERIALS SELECTION
Prior to selecting the pipeline material, it is critical that a detailed description of all the fluids that
the pipeline will be handling through its design life are defined and their corrosivity and
degradation potential be established. Based on this information, it can be decided whether
corrosion is a potential risk. If corrosion is not designated as a risk, as the case for water free
systems, the material of choice will be carbon steel. If corrosion is designated to be a risk and it
is decided that it cannot be controlled by corrosion inhibitors, the material of choice will be a
compatible solid or clad corrosion resistant alloy. If corrosion inhibitors are considered as a
feasible solution for corrosion control, the material of choice will be carbon steel.
Since the most common material used for pipelines is API 5L grade carbon steel, this guideline
will focus on carbon steel pipelines operating under corrosive conditions. (The term “corrosion” is
used in its general sense to include uniform corrosion, pitting corrosion, stress corrosion cracking,
etc.)
In addition to invoking the API 5L –PSL2 requirements, the preparer of the purchase specification
of steel pipelines must consider the following nine requirements:
1. Steel mill qualification
2. Steel chemistry and mechanical properties
3. Weldability and prequalification requirements
4. Geometrical tolerances
5. Limits on both yield to ultimate strengths and their ratio
6. Fracture toughness criterion and requirements based on steel properties
7. Reliability of inspection including probability of detection and accuracy of sizing of defects
8. Internal and external surface conditions including preservation internal coating and external
corrosion control coating
9. Qualification and selection of corrosion control strategy (e.g. inhibitors, coatings, CP, etc.)
Notes:
1. While API -5L-PSL2 does not specify Charpy test for the seam weld, consideration should be
given to specifying the same requirement as for the girth weld for pipelines that will be
subjected to plastic bending strain.
2. While CPMS-PPL-EP-001 accepts the use of ERW pipes for sizes in the range of 4.5 to 24
inch, ERW pipes should be used with care and should not be purchased except from
prequalified mills.
3. Since it is difficult to reconsider the decision of using carbon steel after the project is
sanctioned, it is critical that corrosion inhibitor evaluation be done prior to project sanction to
ensure that an effective corrosion inhibitor is identified.
4. For high pressure gas pipelines subjected to high plastic strain, special considerations must
be given to mechanical properties such as the stress-strain curve shape, uniform strain limit,
maximum strength values and fracture toughness values.
8.0 CORROSION CONTROL
Corrosion control involves both internal corrosion control and external corrosion control. For
carbon steel pipes, internal corrosion control is achieved through the use of corrosion inhibitors
and serious consideration to flow conditions to avoid solid deposits and bacteria formations.
External corrosion control is achieved through the use of coatings and cathodic protection. In
case of insulated pipelines, corrosion under insulation needs to be carefully considered. The
Production Assurance Technology (PAT) group is available for consultation for ongoing.
operations and new project development.
Corrosion Inhibitors
The risk of corrosion damage to carbon steel pipelines handling corrosive fluids is mitigated by
the use of effective corrosion inhibitors that can reduce the corrosion rate to an acceptable level.
The selection of the chemical inhibition option will require incorporating injection and monitoring
points in the system as well as possible pigging facilities. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to
identify an effective corrosion inhibitor very early in the project before finalizing the materials
selection. If the corrosion inhibition option is postponed to after the project is commissioned, the
integrity of the system will quickly degrade.
While the common practice is to specify the corrosion allowance based on general corrosion,
pipelines often fail due to localized corrosion. Therefore, corrosion inhibitor testing must include
evaluation of both general and pitting corrosion.
Corrosion inhibitors are effective only when they reach the pipe surface and thus they are most
effective when applied to clean surface. Therefore, removing surface debris, and when
necessary de-scaling the pipeline surface by routine pigging or chemical treatment, is of utmost
important. It is also important to ensure that no oxygen ingress occurs in the pipeline, since
corrosion inhibitors are not effective against oxygen corrosion.
Even if the proper inhibitor is identified, its improper application can result in inadequate
distribution. Therefore, considerations should be given to the location of the inhibitor injection
point to ensure that the inhibitor is properly dispersed in the flow by the time it reaches the
pipeline.
Note:
For pipelines handling corrosive multiphase flow, special attention needs to be given to top-of-line
corrosion that may occur under certain flow conditions because the inhibited liquid does not
transfer to the top surface of the pipeline. While inhibitor companies market vapor-phase
inhibitors, the effectiveness of these inhibitors is questionable. A corrosion inhibitor solution to
this concern may involve batch treatment with inhibitors and pigging using special inhibitor
distribution jet pigs.
8.1 Definition of Effective Corrosion Inhibitor
There are differences of opinion regarding what constitutes an effective corrosion inhibitor. An
effective corrosion inhibitor is defined as one that will reduce the corrosion rate to a level not
higher than 4 mpy (0.004 inch/year; 0.1 mm/yr), independent of the un-inhibited corrosion rate.
Chemical suppliers tend to specify an effective corrosion inhibitor based on an inhibitor efficiency
factor, of 98%. This means that the inhibitor will be deemed effective if it results in a corrosion
rate of 2% of the un-inhibited corrosion. There could be a large difference between the two
criteria. As an example, if the un-inhibited corrosion rate is 1000 mpy, the recommended criterion
of this guideline selects an inhibitor that results in a corrosion rate that is < 4 mpy while the
chemical supplier may select an inhibitor that results in a corrosion rate that is < 20 mpy. It is
important that 4 mpy criterion be specified in the chemical supplier’s inhibitor purchase contract.
8.2 Factors Impacting Inhibitor Qualification Tests
The effectiveness of a corrosion inhibitor is established based on qualification tests; these tests
must consider the following parameters that have major impact on the effectiveness of the
inhibitors:
1. Fluid composition, both type and concentration (e.g. hydrocarbon, water chemistry, corrosive
species, bacteria, solids such as sand, scale and clay, and other chemicals such as
elemental sulfur, mercury, etc.)
2. Flow conditions (flow regime, P, T, flow rate)
3. Surface condition of the pipe (clean, scaled, corroded, solid deposits, etc.)
4. Material composition including weld metal
5. Operational/ Maintenance cleaning (pigging procedures)
While these parameters are considered during the initial selection of the corrosion inhibitor, any
changes in these parameters during operations makes the original selection of the corrosion
inhibitor invalid and a new qualification program needs to be initiated. The ability to identify
relevant changes in operation and manage the modification to the corrosion control program as a
result of such changes is the most critical factor in maintaining pipeline integrity. Therefore, an
on-going qualification program of corrosion inhibitors should be put in place.
9.0 CONSTRUCTION
There are several construction related parameters that impact the long term integrity of the
pipeline. These include:
1. Material composition and microstructure.
2. Weld metal composition and geometry (risk of crevices if root bead is not flush with the pipe
wall and risk of galvanic corrosion).
3. Internal cleanliness to remove mill scale and any construction debris. The use of internal
surface preservation coating is recommended because it greatly reduces the time required to
dry the pipeline after hydrotesting.
4. Type and quality of the external coating: Surface preparation is the most important factor
affecting the quality of the coating. The degradation of the coating system in service should
be considered in the design of the CP system.
5. Storage & Handling: Extra care should be taken on pipeline handling and storing from the
mills and coating yards to minimize mechanical damage that causes pipe rejections during
pipeline installation.
6. Inspection: This involves all manufacturing steps from steel heat treatment to field coating of
the field weld. Reliance on manufacturing inspection is never sufficient, independent
inspection should be instituted at all critical manufacturing steps. Also, geometric tolerances
should be checked during storage and handling during the construction phase to minimize
mechanical damage and ensure that out-of-tolerance pipes are not installed in the system.
7. Installation: Care should be taking during installation to ensure that the pipeline is not
subjected to damage or excessive installation strains. For offshore pipe lines, consideration
should be given to minimize free spans to avoid excessive fatigue damage during service and
to soil/rock weight above the pipeline in cases when there is a risk of upheaval buckling.
Note:
Care must be taken during construction to ensure that the inside of the pipelines are not
contaminated by corrosive fluids or solids.
10.0 PRE-COMMISSIONING
Pipe commissioning involves four operations:
1. Cleaning / Gauge Pig / Caliper Pigging
2. Water Fill / Hydrotesting
3. De-Watering, Drying & Preservation
4. Base Line Inspection
10.1 Cleaning / Gauge Pig / Sizing Plate
Assessment of whether there are any construction damage/dents is required through the use of
either a caliper pig or a gauge pig. The gauge pig can be used first to determine if a caliper run is
necessary. For a large diameter pipeline, it is recommended to caliper pig the line prior to
hydrotesting because dents may be reformed by the hydrotest lowering their subsequent
detection probability.
10.2 Water Fill / Hydrotesting
The most important factor that negatively impacts the integrity of the pipeline is the contamination
of the pipeline as a result of the poor quality of the water used in the test. If there is a potential for
microbial contaminates in the pipeline from construction practices, the line should be cleaned and
treated prior to filling it with water.
The following are key issues that need to be considered prior to starting the hydrotest of a
pipeline:
x The hydrotest fluids and any associated chemicals.
x Details of venting, pressurizing, depressurizing draining and drying arrangements.
x Specifications of hydrotest pressure, pumping rate, pressure hold duration (minimum 4 hrs),
acceptable pressure variability (generally 0 to 0.5 bar (7.25 psig)) during hold time,
acceptable air volume (generally < 0.2% of pipeline capacity at static head pressure), and
depressurization rate (generally < 1.5 bar/minute (21.7 psig/minute).
x Pressure and temperature monitoring locations and certified accuracy. The acceptable
accuracy is generally + 0.25 bar (3.6 psig) and + 0.5°C (0.9°F).
x Set pressure for the relief valve, generally 5% above the test pressure.
x Design calculations to account for pipeline profile, test and pumping heads, temperature
change-pressure relationship, and pressure-volume relationship.
x Disposal of the hydrotesting fluids.
x Documentation of pressure, volume and temperature data and water analysis (oxygen, pH,
suspended solids, bacteria level, chemical dose level) taken during the hydrotest. For
offshore pipelines, tide data may also be required.
x Duration of the preservation period when the treated hydrotest water will be left in the
pipeline.
Notes:
1. While hydrotesting is a requirement by almost all regulators, there are precedents for
requesting and being granted a waiver to eliminate the hydrotesting in cases where disposal
of water used in testing poses severe environmental concern such as in the arctic regions. If
the project plans to request a waiver, it is very important that serious considerations be made
to the quality control process and documentation of all the manufacturing and construction
steps of the pipeline.
2. Hydrotesting does not provide a full guarantee of pipeline integrity because in some cases
dent and hairline cracks can pass the hydrotest, but some of these pre-existing defects can
fail after the line is put in operation.
10.3 Hydrotesting Fluids
Serious considerations should be given to the quality of the water used in hydrotesting,
particularly its microbial contaminations (algae, bacteria, fungi, etc.). If non-potable waters are
used, it must be provided for testing at least 45 days in advance to determine the nature and
extent of infestation and develop a proper treatment plan. Note that some bacteria require 30
days of culture time to accurately determine their extent or influence.
All water introduced into a pipeline during and after the hydrotest should be deoxygenated, free
from all suspended solids that exceed 100 micros and treated with corrosion inhibitor, biocide and
oxygen scavenger. The maximum acceptable pitting corrosion rate of the water used should be
0.1 mm/year (3.9 mil/year).
For stainless steel pipes, chloride content of the water must not exceed 50 ppm and it is desirable
to keep it at or below 10 ppm to minimize the risk of pitting.
The chemicals injected with the water should be compatible with the water, each other, the
pipeline material, and toxicity regulatory requirements. Note that some oxygen scavengers and
biocides are not compatible and thus the right chemistries and procedures need to be chosen.
The chemicals should also be of proven effectiveness for a minimum of one year or longer
depending on the pipeline preservation period.
Consideration should be given to environmental issues associated with disposal of the
hydrotesting water due to their potential toxicity if discharged in the environment. Therefore,
water quality and disposal decisions must be coordinated with the environmental personal
assigned to the project.
Consideration should also be given to the risk of foam and emulsion in the process facility
operations if the water is discharged to the process stream.
10.4 De-Watering, Drying & Preservation

The presence of residual water in the pipeline after the hydrotesting can cause major problems to
the integrity of the pipeline as well as the quality of the product transported in the pipeline.
Therefore, specifications for proper drying and treatment of the pipeline after the hydrotesting
must be established early in the project planning phase.
Hydrotest water should be removed by de-watering pigs and any residual water should be
removed by standard displacement pig (with no bypass). Low sulfur diesel can be used to drive
the dewater pigs for product lines. There are various methods to dry gas lines, in all cases the
pigging needs to use a dry gas or air to run the pigs. Gas lines can be dried through the following
methods:
x Multiple low density foam pigs driven by low dew point water (-60°F water dew point air).
x Foam pigs followed by application of a vacuum where nitrogen is injected into the far end of
the line to sweep out the water that has flashed due to the vacuum.
x A methanol slug train driven by dry gas or air.
The dewatering is considered complete when the final swab pig run is cut open and found dry.
While crude pipelines are not impacted with the typical amount of residual hydro test water
remaining in the pipeline, consideration should be give to the risk of valve freeze-up and strainer
plugging for pipelines operating in low temperature. Note that pigging the pipeline with
compressed air that has dew point > -28.9oC (20oF) will not remove all the water in the line.
For gas pipelines, the pipeline should be blanked off and left full of dry gas (generally nitrogen) at
a pressure of 0.34 to 0.69 bar (5 to 10 psig).
Prior to the initial flow of a pipeline handling corrosive fluids it is recommended to treat the line
with a slug of inhibitors and when necessary biocide.
10.5 Base Line Inspection
For all pipelines that are designated as high risk (high probability of failure and high consequence
of failure), it is important that base line definition of the pipeline’s physical condition is established
for use as a reference for subsequent inspections. This may involve an in-line inspection using
an intelligent pig and caliper pig. This initial pig run would provide reference for future inspections
and will allow for locating and characterizing existing construction anomalies.
The base line Caliper and Intelligent pig run would also validate that the construction of the line
was in accordance with the company’s standards. Locating installation defects at that time would
allow the contractor to repair the line prior to demobilizing.
When using an intelligent pig, it is important to understand the uncertainties associated with some
in-line inspections such as Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) and carefully validate these
uncertainties against the physical record of the pipeline geometry and surface conditions that are
recorded during its construction. It is also important that the raw data of the inspection traces be
preserved. The reason is that inspection companies often change the sizing algorithm used to
translate the inspection traces into physical wall thicknesses and without the original traces one
cannot relate different inspections results. Where possible, it is advantageous to follow up the
worst pig calls with UT inspection to see how the pig data compares. If the variance is significant
and consistent, the ILI vendor can use the UT inspection data to adjust their applied saturation
curves, and re-evaluate the raw data.
If the decision is made not to run a smart pig, the pipeline should be equipped with flanges and
valves so that temporary pig traps can be installed in the future.
11.0 EXTERNAL CORROSION

The nature of external corrosion depends on the location of the pipeline, e.g. offshore (seabed or
buried), on-shore (buried or above ground and insulated). For external corrosion, the corrosion
mechanism is mainly due to oxygenated water.
While coating and cathodic protection (CP) are effective in protecting the pipeline against water
induced external corrosion, they are not effective against microbial induced corrosion (MIC).
Also, some soils have high resistivity which complicates the CP design and thus soil resistivity
must be considered in early phases.
Inspection for external corrosion involves monitoring of the cathodic protection and evaluation of
the level of degradation to the coating system. Inspection for corrosion under insulation (CUI) is
not a simple matter and the design of the jacket for the insulation system must be considered to
allow the removal of the insulation for inspection.
The report by the Facilities Integrity Network of Excellence on External Corrosion Guidance
Document offers good input to mitigating external corrosion.
Note:
While increasing the CP level may help to meet certain criteria to protect the pipe, it can create
many problems including the possibility of coating disbondment and coating deterioration.
Therefore, it is important for the selected coating to pass the specified cathodic disbondment
requirement. While disbonded Fusion Bonded Epoxy (FBE) coating does not shield CP, care
must be taken when selecting field applied (girth welds and rehabilitation) coatings to ensure that
when disbonded they do not shield CP. Acidic and near neutral pH environments that develop
under disbonded shielding pipeline coatings can lead to corrosion and possibly environmentally
assisted cracking.
12.0 PROTECTION AGAINST EXTERNAL IMPACT
Main categories of external impact that need to be considered include:
x Adjacent excavation activities (construction, agriculture, etc.)
x Fishing activities and anchors for offshore pipelines
x Dropped objects
x Vehicle collisions
x Environment conditions (temperature, wind induced vibrations)
x Ground stability (earthquake, landslip, scour)
x Fatigue
x Sabotage
Public awareness should be emphasized to ensure that the location of the pipeline is known to all
concerned to reduce the likelihood of inadvertent discovery of the pipeline through other activities.
Pipeline routes should be documented and these documents should be distributed as
appropriate. For onshore pipelines, the pipeline route should be physically marked. The tactics
by which each pipeline is protected against external impact should be clearly defined, taking
account of the means of mitigation described in the various regulations, codes and standards
referenced in this guideline. Considerations should be given the use of supplementary
mechanical protection systems such as concrete coatings and sand/padding/select backfill.
More specific measures include crash barriers in the vicinity of vehicle activity, culverts/casings
for road crossing, concrete slabs for vulnerable buried pipelines and rock dumping for offshore
pipelines.
Security issues are not addressed in this guideline and should be managed by the local Business
Unit instructions.
13.0 MAINTENANCE
A maintenance manual should be considered for each new pipeline or group of similar pipelines.
This manual should take into account the risk factors of the line and the local regulatory
requirements in addition to the guidelines provided in ASME B31.8 for gas pipelines and ASME
B31.4 for liquid pipelines. The maintenance manual should address issues such as maintenance
pigging, on-line monitoring, in-line inspection, management of change (MOC) procedures, etc.
13.1 Maintenance Pigging
Maintenance pigging is required for mitigating corrosion in pipelines that have a potential for
water and/or solids deposits. Factors that must be considered in maintenance pigging include the
type of pig to be used, the pigging interval, the number of pigs to be run each time, monitoring of
returns, disposal of returns, chemical treatment in association with pigging and pigging valves.
If there is a risk that the pipeline contains debris, a progressive pigging program is required to
avoid getting the pig stuck. A low density foam pig or dual diameter cup-cup pig, followed by pigs
with increasing density may be necessary. If a large quantity of debris is expected, the use of a
gel pig may be necessary.
For addition information refer to: “Maintenance Pigging and Sampling Guideline” by the Global
Chemical Network.
13.2 Monitoring
Serious considerations must be given to the monitoring and fluid sampling locations during the
design phase to allow for the proper recording of the fluids entering the pipeline, their rate and
composition. Monitoring should also include sampling the fluids exiting the pipeline to validate
the acceptable level of residual inhibitors. It is important that operational personal be engaged in
this process because it is their responsibility to maintain these systems and to check the data on
a frequent basis to ensure that they identify significant changes.
Since oxygen can aggravate the corrosion by other mechanisms and its corrosion will not be
prevented by corrosion inhibitors, it is of utmost importance that the fluid monitoring system be
able to detect any oxygen ingress. This is of particular importance for the pipelines that are
handling third party production. Coupon surface analysis is the most sensitive measure to detect
the presence of oxygen.
The philosophy regarding location of corrosion probes and retrievable spools, and frequency of
retrieving corrosion coupons must be established during the design stage to ensure the relevancy
of their results. Additional monitoring such as iron count, bacteria measurement, etc. must also
be considered.
The facility must be designed to include the proper instrumentation to monitor all chemicals. For
corrosion inhibitors, the following are the minimum monitoring requirements:
x Monitoring of both chemical injection rate and residual inhibitors at the outlet of the pipeline.
x The inhibitors must be comparatively analyzed at least once every year to ensure that their
compositions have not been altered by the suppliers.
Note:
Operations must set the proper control such that no changes are allowed before the re-
qualification of the chemical treatment program. An on-going qualification program and selection
of the most effective corrosion inhibitor should be implemented.
13.3 Leak Detection

The philosophy of leak detection must be established during the design stage of the pipeline and
it must be specified as part of the integrity management system. While installation of leak
detection systems is required for regulated pipelines, considerations should be given to using
them for unregulated pipelines when the risk of leak is considered high based on the company
risk matrix philosophy. The company critical pipeline registry defines critical pipelines as those
that have flow rates > 5,000 Bbls/day or > 30 MMSCFD. Both computational pipeline monitoring
(see API 1130) and sensor based monitoring should be considered.
For pipelines that are subjected to transient flow conditions, serious consideration must be given
to installing a leak detection system based on external sensors in addition to the computational
pipeline monitoring (CPM) system. There are many types of external sensors that are classified
as follows:
x Liquid sensing: cable, fiber optic or electrochemical detection
x Vapor sensing: vapor permeable tubes
x Temperature, Acoustic and Line movements: fiber optics
x Acoustic emission: Acoustic sensors
The selection of a leak detection system requires considerations of the following factors:
x Leak size (min. detectable leak size, % of throughput)
x Response time (time needed to detect a leak)
x Leak location estimation
x Release volume estimation
x Leak detection in shut-in pipeline segment
x Sensitivity to flow conditions (slack condition during transients)
x Rate of false alarms and misses
x Robustness
x Ability to handle complex configuration (multi-injection and delivery points)
x Availability (during transient conditions)
x Retrofit feasibility for system and methodology on existing pipeline
x Ease of testing (API 1130 specify 5 year test frequency)
x Cost (capital and operating)
x Ease of personnel training (complexity and need for human interface)
x Ease of maintenance (requirement and frequency)
Other type of surveillance systems that may also be considered in addition to sensors are:
x Remote surveillance using Infra Red (IR) camera
x Laser system for gas boom
x Synthetic aperture radar system
x Satellite
x Unmanned aerial system
Note:
It is very difficult to install and maintain a Leak Detection System (LDS) for pipeline systems that
have compressible fluids.
13.4 In-Line Inspection (ILI)
Frequency of intelligent pigging must be established prior to operating the pipeline taking into
account regulatory requirements, severity of the mitigated corrosion and financial impact of
pipeline shutdown. For pipelines that are accessible for NDT, the potential mode of failure should
be evaluated and if general corrosion is the predominate mode of failure then spot inspections in
accordance with API RP 1160 is one method to monitor the line between pig runs. However
many / most pipelines are not ideal candidates for API RP 1160.
ASME B31.8S is another recommended practice that can be applied to determine the
recommended frequency for performing assessment of pipelines. Many countries may have their
own integrity management requirements; however, PHMSA (Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration) has 3 different criteria’s depending on Gas, Liquids and Distribution
pipeline systems. It is important that considerations should be given to the probability of
detection, probability of false call and the sizing accuracy in the selection of the ILI tool and in
establishing the frequency of its use.
14.0 MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE (MOC)
The ability to manage changes in pipeline operations (fluid composition and flow patterns) is the
most critical factor in ensuring pipeline integrity. These changes must be monitored to assess
whether the currently used corrosion control strategy remains suitable or a new strategy needs to
be qualified and implemented.
The following are typical scenarios that can result in major damage to the pipeline because they
make the corrosion inhibition program ineffective:
1. As the field ages, water concentration and chemistry will change from those that may have
been used in the original inhibitor qualification.
2. As water break-through occurs, souring of the fluids may occur, consequently, changing the
fluid chemistry.
3. As water break-through occurs, solids may start being produced which will deposit in the
pipeline creating conditions that were not originally anticipated. This operational change may
require changes in the chemical treatment program as well as the maintenance pigging
frequency.
4. As well productivity decreases or as more wells are added, the flow rate and flow regime will
change from the original conditions.
5. The original pipeline integrity program could have relied on slugging conditions to protect the
top of the pipeline. As the field matures, operations may decide to add chemical such as
drag reducers to reduce slugging to increase production. This change in operations will
eliminate the top of the line corrosion protection and thus batch treatment may need to be
implemented.
6. The MOC procedure should also be followed when the chemical vendor makes any changes
to their products.
Note:
Management of change requires both monitoring and commitment to act upon the changes. Both
of these require increase in the maintenance resources (staffing and funds) which in most cases
occur during the time when the production is decreasing and the company is focusing on
reducing costs.
15.0 DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
When damage to a pipeline is observed or suspected, it is important to address two issues:
1. The cause of the damage and whether it is caused by a third party as a result of improper
integrity management.
2. Assessment of the damage on the pipeline integrity to establish whether the pipeline can
operate as is, operate at a reduced pressure, require repair or require replacement of the
damaged section. Obviously in case of a leak, the pipeline will be depressurized and repair
plans will be developed.
If the assessment suggests that the pipeline can operate in the damaged condition, the highest
priority should be given to establishing and implementing integrity management procedures to
mitigate the progress of damage. If the damage is attributed to internal corrosion, arresting the
damage may involve rigorous internal cleaning, batch treatment with corrosion inhibitor, batch
treatment with biocides; eliminate flow from certain wells, etc. If the damage involves pipeline
deformation due to span, temperature or any other phenomena, arresting or mitigating the
damage may require span supports, use of special clamps and/or rock dumping.
Following the mitigation, a plan should be established and implemented to regain control of the
pipeline integrity consistent with the original operating practices. These modifications may
involve changing the chemical treatment, increasing the maintenance pigging frequency,
eliminating sources of oxygen ingress, increasing on-line monitoring, etc.
16.0 RESPONSE PLAN
A response plan should be in place in case of failure, which describes the optimum manner to
respond to the failure in order to minimize its impact.
The plan should cover:
• Emergency response to mitigate the hazardous consequences of the leak
• Options for isolation, containment and repair of the leak
• Clean up strategy and logistics
• Minimization of business interruption
It should be recognized that some pipeline leaks may present a major commercial exposure. The
need to minimize business interruption, requires BU leadership, and should be planed
accordingly.
Business interruption minimization plans should include:
• Re-routing and alternative production options
• Temporary and permanent repair strategies
• Availability of repair resources and equipment
• Possible membership of “industry consortium”.
17.0 RECORDS AND DOCUMENTATION
The following documents and their updates must always be accessible:
x Materials (MTR - Material Test Reports), welding, construction, and testing specification
x Design Reports
x As-built records including deviations
x Inspection and monitoring records

x Maintenance Manual that includes MOC procedures
x Maintenance and repair records
x Modification records
x Records of fluid composition and flow conditions
x Qualification records of all injected chemicals
x Regulatory & HSE documentation
18.0 PIPELINE DECOMMISSIONING
When it is decided to retire an oil transporting pipeline, a decommissioning plan should be
established. This will generally involve flushing the pipeline with 2 to 3 pipeline volumes of water
and pigged with low density foam pigs until the oil in water (OIW) concentration is less than 30
ppm. The last pipeline volume pumped is treated with biocides before capping the pipeline ends.
The use of produced water or a seawater/produced water blend is not recommended because
they may contains water soluble organics and sulfates that would increase the risk of microbial
corrosion.
If pigging alone cannot clean the pipeline to the acceptable OIW, the use of a detergent with good
emulsifying properties and a good environmental profile such as Schmoo-be-gone
(aminoglycoside type).
Particular circumstances, depending on the legal agreement and/or regulatory jurisdiction may
require removal of the pipeline section.

2010-08-24 Pipeline Integrity Management Guidleine

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

2010-08-24 Pipeline Integrity Management Guidleine

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

2010-08-24 Pipeline Integrity Management Guidleine

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ask the Network Page 1 of 1

Pipeline & Subsea Systems Integrity - Closed Discussion Item

Pipeline Integrity Management Guideline

Upstream Engineering Standards and

Pipeline Integrity Management

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 2 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 3 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 4 of 21

Contractor The Company selected to furnish equipment and materials to construct

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 5 of 21

Related COP References

CPMS-PPL-EP-001 Pipeline and Rigid Riser Design

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 6 of 21

Selected External References

ASME B31.3 Process Piping

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 7 of 21

5.0 FACTORS AFFECTING PIPELINE INTEGRITY

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 8 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 9 of 21

6.1 Pipeline Size

V is the maximum fluid velocity limit in ft/sec

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 10 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 11 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 12 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 13 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 14 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 15 of 21

10.4 De-Watering, Drying & Preservation

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 16 of 21

11.0 EXTERNAL CORROSION

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 17 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 18 of 21

13.3 Leak Detection

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 19 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 20 of 21

CPMS-PPL-EP-027 Revision 1 Page 21 of 21

x Inspection and monitoring records

You might also like