SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION

(Jan, 2000)

1.1 Introduction

The ASME and API design codes and standards for pressurized equipment provide rules for the
design, fabrication, inspection and testing of new pressure vessels, piping systems, and storage
tanks. These codes do not address the fact that equipment degrades while in-service and that
deficiencies due to degradation or from original fabrication may be found during subsequent
inspections. Fitness-For-Service (FFS) assessments are quantitative engineering evaluations which
are performed to demonstrate the structural integrity of an in-service component containing a flaw or
damage. This Recommended Practice provides guidance for conducting FFS assessments using
methodologies specifically prepared for equipment in the refining and petrochemical industry. The
guidelines provided in this recommended practice can be used to make run-repair-replace decisions
to help ensure that pressurized equipment containing flaws which have been identified by inspection
can continue to operate safely.

1.2 Scope

1.2.1 The methods and procedures in this recommended practice are intended to supplement and
augment the requirements in API 510, API 570 and API 653.

1.2.2 The assessment procedures in this recommended practice can be used for fitness-for-service
assessments and/or rerating of components designed and constructed to the following codes:
· ASME B&PV Code, Section VIII, Division 1
· ASME B&PV Code, Section VIII, Division 2
· ASME B&PV Code, Section 1
· ASME B31.3 Piping Code
· ASME B31.1 Piping Code
· API 650
· API 620

1.2.3 The assessment procedures in this recommended practice may also be applied to pressure
containing equipment constructed to other recognized codes and standards, including international
and internal corporate standards. This recommended practice has broad application since the
assessment procedures are based on allowable stress methods and plastic collapse loads for non-
crack-like flaws, and FAD-based strategies for crack-like flaws (see Section 2, paragraph 2.4.2).

1.2.3.1 The user is advised to first review the validation discussion of Appendix H when the procedures of
this recommended practice are applied to pressure containing equipment not constructed to the
codes listed in paragraph 1.2.2. The information in Appendix H, along with a knowledge of the of
differences in design codes, should enable the user to factor, scale, or adjust the acceptance limits of
this recommended practice such that equivalent FFS in-service margins can be attained for
equipment not constructed to these codes. When evaluating other codes and standards the following
attributes of the ASME and API design codes should be considered:
· Material specifications
· Upper and/or lower temperature limits for specific materials
· Material strength properties and the design allowable stress basis
· Material fracture toughness requirements
· Design rules for shell sections

1-1
 1-2 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

· Design rules for shell discontinuities such as nozzles and conical transitions
· Design requirements for cyclic loads
· Design requirements for operation in the creep range
· Weld joint efficiency or quality factors
· Fabrication details and quality of workmanship
· Inspection requirements, particularly for welded joints
1.2.3.2 As an alternative, users may elect to correlate the pressure-containing component’s material
specification to an equivalent ASME or API listed material specification to determine an associated
allowable stress. This approach provides an entry point into the ASME or API codes (refer also to
Appendix A) wherein the pressure-containing component is reconciled or generally made equivalent
to the design bases assumed for this recommended practice. Hence general equivalence is
established and the user may then apply the acceptance limits of these fitness for service procedures
unaltered. Equivalent ASME and ASTM material specifications provide a satisfactory means for
initiating a reconciliation between the ASME and API design codes and other codes and standards.
However, the user is cautioned to also consider the effects of fabrication and inspection requirements
on the design basis (e.g., joint efficiency with respect to minimum thickness sizing).

1.2.4 The Fitness-For-Service assessment procedures in this recommended practice cover both the
present integrity of the component given a current state of damage and the projected remaining life.
Assessment techniques are included to evaluate flaws including: general and localized corrosion,
widespread and localized pitting, blisters and laminations, weld misalignment and shell distortions,
and crack-like flaws including environmental cracking. In addition, evaluation techniques are
provided for condition assessment of equipment including resistance to brittle fracture, long-term
creep damage, and fire damage.

1.2.5 Analytical procedures, material properties including environmental effects, NDE guidelines and
documentation requirements are included in the fitness-for-service assessment procedures in this
document. In addition, both qualitative and quantitative guidance for establishing remaining life and
in-service margins for continued operation of equipment are provided in regards to future operating
conditions and environmental compatibility.

1.2.6 The Fitness-For-Service assessment procedures in this recommended practice cover situations
involving flaws commonly encountered in the refining and petrochemical industry in pressure vessels,
piping and tankage. The procedures are not intended to provide a definitive guideline for every
possible situation that may be encountered. However, flexibility is provided to the user in the form of
an advanced assessment level to handle uncommon situations that may require a more detailed
analysis.

1.2.7 The methods and procedures in this recommended practice can also be used in conjunction with the
National Board Inspection Code (NBIC) to the extent currently permitted by that document and local
regulations.

1.3 Organization And Use

The organization, applicability and limitations, required information, analysis techniques and
documentation requirements are described in Section 2.0 of this document. In addition, an overview
of the acceptance criteria utilized throughout the document to qualify a component with a flaw is
provided. First time users of the Fitness-For-Service assessment technology in this document are
urged to carefully review Section 2.0 prior to starting an analysis.
 Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE 1-3
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

1.4 Responsibilities

1.4.1 Owner-User

The owner-user of pressurized equipment shall have overall responsibility for fitness-for-service
assessments completed using the procedures in this recommended practice.

1.4.2 Inspector

1.4.2.1 The Inspector shall be responsible to the owner-user for determining that the requirements of
API 510, API 570 and API 653 for inspection and testing are met. In addition, the Inspector shall
provide all necessary inspection data required for a fitness-for-service assessment in accordance
with the appropriate section of this document.

1.4.2.2 The Inspector shall ensure that the results of the assessment are documented and filed with the
appropriate permanent equipment records.

1.4.2.3 In some instances, the Inspector may also be responsible for the fitness-for-service assessment if a
screening (Level 1, see Section 2, paragraph 2.4 for definition) type of analysis is performed.

1.4.3 Engineer

1.4.3.1 The Engineer is responsible to the owner-user for most types of fitness-for-service assessments,
documentation, and resulting recommendations. The exception is that screening analyses (Level 1
analyses, see Section 2, paragraph 2.4 for definition) may be performed by an Inspector; however,
even in this case the Engineer should review the analysis.

1.4.3.2 In the context of this document, the term Engineer applies to the combination of the following
disciplines unless a specific discipline is cited directly. In many cases, a fitness-for-service
assessment will require several engineering disciplines and some will require input from all of those
described below.

a. Materials or Metallurgical Engineer – Responsibilities include identification of the material

damage mechanisms, establishment of corrosion/erosion rates, determination of material
properties including strength parameters and crack-like flaw growth parameters, development
of suitable remediation methods and monitoring programs, and documentation.

b. Mechanical or Structural Engineer – Responsibilities include computations of the minimum

required thickness and/or MAWP (MFH) for a component, and any required thermal and
stress analysis. The mechanical engineer should be knowledgeable in the design of pressure
containing equipment including pressure vessels, piping, and tankage.

c. Inspection Engineer – Responsibilities include those stated for either the mechanical or
materials engineer as well as those stated for the Inspector.

d. Fracture Mechanics Engineer – Responsibilities include assessment of crack-like flaws using

the principles of fracture mechanics. The Materials or Mechanical Engineer may also perform
this function.

e. Non-Destructive Examination (NDE) Engineer – Responsibilities include development of

methods to detect, characterize, and size or quantify the amount of damage. In addition, the
NDE Engineer shall recommend and ensure the accuracy of the NDE technique used for flaw
sizing. The Inspection, Materials or Mechanical Engineer may also perform this function.

f. Process Engineer – Responsibilities include documentation of past and future operating

conditions, including normal and upset conditions, and identification of the contained fluid and
 1-4 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

its contaminant levels. The process engineer should have a chemical engineering
background.

1.5 Qualifications

1.5.1 Qualifications for the Inspector (see paragraph 1.4.2) shall be per API 510, API 570, and API 653, as
applicable.

1.5.2 Engineers (see paragraph 1.4.3) involved in Fitness-For-Service assessments shall have a degree in
engineering and a minimum of two years experience in the inspection and failure analysis, or the
design, construction, repair, and operation of pressure vessels, piping and tankage in the refining
and/or petrochemical industry.

1.5.3 Qualifications for the Inspector (see paragraph 1.4.2) and the Engineer (see paragraph 1.4.3) shall
also meet any special owner/user qualifications and local jurisdictional requirements.

1.6 Definition Of Terms

Definitions of common technical terms used throughout this document may be found in Appendix I.

1.7 References

1.7.1 Throughout this document, references are made to various international codes, standards,
recommended practices, and technical reports which cover:
· Design, fabrication, inspection and testing of pressure vessels, piping, and tankage
· In-service inspection of pressure vessels, piping, and tankage
· Fitness-for-service standards applicable to welded components
· Materials selection and behavior in refining and chemical plant processing environments

Rules for the use of these codes, standards, recommended practices and technical reports are stated
in the each section and appendix of this document. The referenced codes, standards, and
recommended practices in this recommended practice, with the year of the acceptable edition, are
listed in Table 1.1.

1.7.2 References to other publications which provide background and other pertinent information to the
assessment procedures used in this recommended practice are included in each section and
appendix, as applicable.

1.8 Tables
 Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE 1-5
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 1.1
Codes, Standards, And Recommended Practices

Title Identification Year (1)

Calculation of Heater-Tube Thickness in Petroleum ANSI/API RP 530 Fourth Edition,1996

Refineries

Recognition of Conditions Causing Deterioration or Failure ANSI/API RP 571 In Progress

Inspection of Piping, Tubing, Valves, and Fittings ANSI/API RP 574 (See Note 2)

Recommended Practice for Inspection of Atmospheric and ANSI/API RP 575 (See Note 2)
Low Pressure Storage Tanks

Inspection of Pressure Relieving Devices ANSI/API RP 576 (See Note 2)

Recommended Practice for Inspection of Welding ANSI/API RP 577 In Progress

Recommended Practice for Positive Materials Identification ANSI/API RP 578 In Progress

Recommended Practice for Risk-Based Inspection ANSI/API RP 580 In Progress

Inspection of Pressure Vessels ANSI/API RP 572 (See Note 2)

Inspection of Fired Boilers and Fired Heaters ANSI/API RP 573 (See Note 2)

Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: Maintenance Inspection, ANSI/API 510 Eight Edition, June,
Rerating, Repair and Alteration 1997

Design and Construction of Large, Welded, Low-Pressure ANSI/API Std 620 Ninth Edition, 1996
Storage Tanks

Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage ANSI/API Std 650 Ninth Edition, 1993
(Including Addenda
1, 2 & 3)

Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction ANSI/API Std 653 Second Edition,
1995

Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of ANSI/ASME B31G 1991

Corroded Pipelines

National Board Inspection Code ANSI/NB-23 1995

Piping Inspection Code: Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and API 570 First Edition, June
Rerating of In-Service Piping Systems 1993

Base Resource Document – Risk Based Inspection API Publ 581 (See Note 2)

Steels for Hydrogen Service at Elevated Temperatures and API RP 941 Fifth Edition,
Pressures in Petroleum Refineries and Petrochemical January, 1997
Plants

Avoiding Environmental Cracking in Amine Units API RP 945 (See Note 2)

 1-6 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 1.1
Codes, Standards, And Recommended Practices

Title Identification Year (1)

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures ASCE 7 (See Note 2)

Alternative Method to Area Replacement Rules for ASME B&PV Code 1995
Openings Under Internal Pressure, Section VIII, Division 1 Case 2168

Alternative Method of Calculating Maximum Allowable ASME B&PV Code 1998

Stresses Based on a Factor of 3.5 on Tensile Strength, Case 2278
Section II and Section VIII, Division 1

Alternative Rules for Determining Allowable Compressive ASME B&PV Code 1998
Stresses For Cylinders, Cones, Spheres and Formed Case 2286
Heads Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2

Alternative Maximum Allowable Stresses Based on a Factor ASME B&PV Code 1998
of 3.5 on Tensile Strength, Section II and Section VIII, Case 2290
Division 1

Rules For Construction of Power Boilers ASME B&PV Code 1999

Section I

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section II, Part D – ASME B&PV Code 1999
Properties Section II, Part D

Subsection NH – Class 1 Components in Elevated ASME B&PV Code 1997

Temperature Service Section III, Division 1

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Pressure ASME B&PV Code 1999
Vessels Division 1 Section VIII, Division 1

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Pressure ASME B&PV Code 1999
Vessels Division 2, Alternative Rules Section VIII, Division 2

Rules For Inservice Inspection Of Nuclear Power Plant ASME B&PV Code 1999
Components Section XI

Factory-Made Wrought Steel Buttwelding Fittings ASME B16.5 1995

Process Piping ASME B31.3 1996

Specification for General Requirements for Steel Plates for ASTM A20 (See Note 2)
Pressure Vessels.

Electric-Fusion-Welded Austenitic Chromium-Nickel Alloy ASTM A358 (See Note 2)

Steel Pipe for High Temperature Service

Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical ASTM A370 1990
Testing of Steel Products

General Requirements for Specialized Carbon and Alloy ASTM A530 (See Note 2)
Steel Pipe
 Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE 1-7
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 1.1
Codes, Standards, And Recommended Practices

Title Identification Year (1)

Electric-Fusion Welded Steel Pipe for Atmospheric and ASTM A671 (See Note 2)
Lower Temperatures

Electric-Fusion Welded Steel Pipe for High-Pressure ASTM A672 (See Note 2)
Service at Moderate Temperatures

Carbon and Alloy Steel Pipe, Electric-Fusion Welded for ASTM A691 (See Note 2)
High-Pressure Service at High Temperatures

Standard Practices for Cycle Counting in Fatigue Analysis ASTM E1049 1990

Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture ASTM E1820 1996

Toughness

Test Method For The Determination of Reference ASTM E1921 1998

Temperature, T0, For Ferritic Steels In The Transition
Range

Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fatigue Crack ASTM E647 1988
Growth Rates

Test Methods of Tension Testing of Metallic Materials ASTM E8 (See Note 2)

Standard Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting ASTM G46 (See Note 2)
Corrosion

Specification for Unfired Fusion Welded Pressure Vessels BS 5500 (See Note 2)

Method for Determination of KIC, Critical CTOD and Critical BS 7448: Part 2 1997
J Values of Welds in Metallic Materials

Code of Practice for Fatigue Design and Assessment of BS 7608 (See Note 2)
Steel Structures

Guide on Methods For Assessing the Acceptability of Flaws BS 7910 1999

in Structures

Guidance on Methods for Assessing the Acceptability of BS PD 6493 1991

Flaws in Fusion Welded Structures

Methods for the Assessment of the Influence of Crack BS PD 6539 1994

Growth on the Significance of Defects in Components
Operating at High Temperatures

Design of Steel Pressure Pipes DIN 2413 Part 1 (See Note 2)

Design of Steel Bends Used in Pressure Pipelines DIN 2413 Part 2 (See Note 2)

Summary of the Average Stress Rupture Properties of ISO/TR 7468-1981(E) (See Note 2)
Wrought Steels for Boilers and Pressure Vessels
 1-8 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 1.1
Codes, Standards, And Recommended Practices

Title Identification Year (1)

Guidance On Assessment of the Fitness For Purpose of IIW/IIS – SST 1157 1990
Welded Structures, Draft For Development

Guidelines for Detection, Repair, and Mitigation of Cracking NACE Std RP0296 1996
of Existing Petroleum Refinery Pressure Vessels in Wet
H2S Environments

Assessment Procedure For High Temperature Response Nuclear Electric R-5 1998
Of Structures

Assessment Of The Integrity of Structures Containing Nuclear Electric R-6 1998

Defects

Evaluation Of Design Margins For ASME Code Section VIII PVRC March, 1996

Evaluation Of Design Margins For ASME Code Section VIII, PVRC June, 1997
Division 1 And 2 – Phase 2 Studies

A Procedure for Safety Assessment of Components with SAQ/FoU-Report 96/08 1997

Cracks – Handbook

Method of Assessment for Flaws in Fusion Welded Joints WES 2805 1997
with Respect to Brittle Fracture and Fatigue Crack Growth

Notes:
1. The specific editions of the standards where a date is provided contain provisions relevant to this edition
of API 579.
2. Updates to API 579 will not consider changes in this document. Generally, the latest edition of this
document may be used in performing an assessment, as long as the equipment component being
assessed meets any stipulated limitations therein. However, in some assessments the edition of the
document in force at the time of the equipment's construction should be used if dictated by either
jurisdictional requirements or the judgment of the Engineer (see paragraph 1.4.3) performing the
assessment.