Jim McVay,

{ Sr Manager, Metallurgy and Inspection

Andeavor

A Work Process for Petroleum Refining Piping

CML Placement and Testing Determinations

10.17.2017
{ About Us
Andeavor is a premier
{ Some Numbers
 Number of Refineries: 10
refining, marketing and  Refining Capacity:
logistics company with Approximately 1.2 million bpd
operations primarily located  Employee Count: More than
13,000
in the western and mid-  Retail Sites: Approximately
continent United States. We 3,000
operate with the highest  Barrels of Storage Capacity:
levels of integrity and More than 46 million
respect and with a steadfast  Miles of Pipelines: More than
dedication to safety and the 4,800
environment.  Marine, Rail and Storage
Terminals: 39
 Natural Gas Processing
Complexes: 6
 States Where We Operate: 18

Andeavor
 Current Issues with Piping CMLs
 The Piping CML Review Process

 Output
 Emerging Piping CML Inspection Guidelines
 Low Corroding or Non-corrosion Systems

 Certain General Corrosive Services

 Certain Specific Potentially Problematic Services (in the unit of

interest)
 CML Examination Point Selection Guidelines
 Piping CML Inspection Programming

Topics
 Many refinery sites with different heritage practices. The result is:
 Broad range of CML placement and density practices

 Broad range of examination point location placement practices within

each CML
 Scant application specific guidance with any site (or heritage practice).
 Current RBI programming calling for % testing based on risk. Which ones
do you look at this time?
 A very small amount (about 4% on average) of current Piping CMLs
enterprise-wide have ever shown corrosion activity.
 Far too much data in existing thickness measurement databases telling the
inspector very little and generating distracting and unproductive testing
work and analyses.

Current Issues
 Some Terminology
 Condition Monitoring Location (CML): Designated areas on equipment or
piping systems where periodic examinations are conducted. CMLs may
contain one or more examination points and utilize multiple NDE
techniques to make wall thickness determinations based on predicted
damage mechanisms.

 Examination Point: A unique isolated location on equipment or a piping

system where thickness measurement tests are taken. CML’s may contain
one or more examination points.

Examination Points

One CML with Multiple Examination Points

The Piping CML Review
Process
• Facilitators: : (1) Assemble and review current Corrosion Review Documents, (2)
Review related Company and Industry incidents (3) Assemble and scrutinize existing
NDE data, and (4) Assemble Network Meeting Presentation Material
Pre-work • Inspectors and Corrosion Engineers: Review Inspection records to come armed with
knowledge on where corrosion has occurred and what it looked like.

• Bring all responsible unit inspectors and corrosion engineers together to a face to face meeting.
• Discuss the following: Typical Operating processes and practices for units under review, typical
degradation mechanisms, where corrosion has actually been observed in operating units, where
Network corrosion has not been observed, related incidents, current CML and testing point placement practices.
• Come to consensus on: Appropriate CML and examination point placement practices, appropriate
Meeting
testing methodologies, appropriate inspection programming to monitor selected CMLs.

• Prepare Detailed Meeting Minutes

• Review decisions collectively by telecom and come to a consensus
Follow-up • Incorporate into an enterprise Piping CML Guidance Document
 1. Process Review
8. Presentation By Outside
2. Damage Mechanism NDE Expert Consultant
Review focused on the challenges
3. IDMS Database Review of the 6 list.
4. Inspector/Engineer 9. Discuss current and
Survey of Problem areas optimized Inspection
Strategies for the 6 list and
5. Company and AFPM other services.
Incident Database 10. Discuss Examination Point
Review placement requirements
6. Compile Lists of 4 and 5 within each CML type.
7. A nice dinner 11. Discuss Implementation
challenges and needs.

Piping CML Meeting Agenda

Key resources for the facilitator are:

 API 571: For use in discussing application degradation mechanisms

 Existing corrosion study documents identifying applicable degradation mechanisms and
expert determined expected corrosions rates
 IDMS database: Used to identify all CMLs where corrosion has and has not been observed by
piping circuit and location and methods used historically to monitor.
 AFPM Incident and Company Incident database systems: Can provide helpful information
on significant loss of containment events involving piping in units of interest.

Key resources for the Inspectors and corrosion engineers are:

 IDMS database
 Detailed NDE reports
 Repair and replacement histories
 Failure analyses
 Historical temporary repair lists

Notes on Pre-work
Participation:

 Typically involves facilitators (corporate SMEs or equal) and all

responsible unit inspectors and corrosion engineers. Helpful to
get Process SME involvement too.
 Most helpful to have all together for a face-to-face meeting but
participation can be accommodated otherwise.
 Often we bring in an outside NDE expert to discuss typically
utilized latest NDE technologies.

Notes on Network Meeting

Expectations:

 Lists are compiled by system/piping circuit of where corrosion has been

observed
 Appropriate CML placements within piping circuits of concern are
discussed.
 Appropriate placement of examination points within CMLs are discussed.
 Appropriate testing methods of examination points within CMLs are
discussed.
 What to do with the rest (the low and no corroding systems) is discussed.
 Appropriate inspection planning for piping CML monitoring is discussed.

Notes on Network Meeting

 Detailed meeting minutes are produced and
reviewed line-by-line with participants.
 Process SME input is solicited as well.

 All input at this stage is encouraged. We don’t want

to miss anything.

Notes on Follow-up
It all ends up here…
Industry Follow-up

 Andeavor, Phillips, Valero  The first meeting is October

26/27 in Los Angeles at the
and Holly Frontier are Andeavor LA Refinery
planning to have regular Campus Bldg (223rd St,
meetings to share best Carson CA) where piping in
practices and work Crude and Vacuum Units will
towards creating an be discussed.
Industry standard for  Contact Jim McVay at
James.W.Mcvay@andeavor.
Refinery Piping CML com if interested in
selection and testing. attending.
 Example Output from Industry Meeting
Corrosion Loop Tower Overhead System (Crude Tower)
HCl Corrosion
• Aqueous corrosion occurring in environments where HCl is present. Typically associated with
dewpoint corrosion, where condensing HCl vapors result in highly acidic HCl droplets that can cause
aggressive corrosion.
• HCl Corrosion damage in refineries most often associated with highly localized damage
Salt Deposition
• Localized corrosion (typically pitting) occurring under salt deposits that can form in the process stream
Anticipated Mechanisms
CO2 Corrosion
• Carbon dioxide (CO2) corrosion results when CO2 dissolves in water to form carbonic acid. The acid
may lower the pH and may promote pitting or general corrosion of carbon steel.
Organic Acid Corrosion
• Organic compounds present in some crude oils decompose in the crude furnace to form organic acids.
Organic acids condense in crude tower overhead systems and may cause localized corrosion.

• Corrosion found in piping from crude tower to condensers (near chemical/water injection points)
Observed Damage • Damage found in condenser outlet piping upstream of overhead accumulator
1. First two elbows and connecting pipe off the top of the tower. Perform UT inspection with a UT
circumferential band scrub at 3" intervals along pipe.
2. Injection point inspection at water and amine/ammonia injection points. Follow injection point
strategies on other slide in this presentation.
Best Practice CML and Examination 3. Perform 3" grid inspection on elbows on and at the bottom of the vertical run down the tower.
Point Guidance 4. 100% of other accessible elbows and components upstream of the condensers.
5. Inspect 100% of deadlegs, including injection nozzles and instrumentation fittings.
6. Install real-time corrosion monitoring, such as "Permasense", as directed by a corrosion/materials
engineer.

Boundaries for Application • This guidance is not applicable to two-drum overhead systems. Consult metallurgist for CML
(Process & Materials) placement.
Example Output from Industry Meeting

For each Corrosion Loop where active corrosion is expected pictures of

expected degradation would be collected and presented for reference.
We would also assemble detailed guidance for examination point
selection within each CML most appropriate for the Corrosion Loop in
question.
Output
Emerging Piping Inspection Strategies
Three types of piping CML placement and inspection
programming strategies typically emerge:

 Specific strategies for problematic areas often unique to a

process (Crude unit overhead systems, debutanizer systems
in CR units, Reactor effluent piping, etc.)
 More general strategies for common corrosive
systems/services throughout a refinery such as sour water,
blowdown systems, injection points, etc..
 General strategies for how to handle systems/services
where corrosion as not been observed and corrosion
experts predict low or no corrosion activity.
Draft Inspection Strategies for Low
Corroding or Non-corroding Services
Definitions: Non Corrosion Systems: ≤ 1 MPY expected and/or observed. May include services on other lists
in this presentation (list for Certain General Services and Certain Specific Potentially Problematic
Services) if the alloys used for those services are that the expected corrosion rates are < 1mpy.
Low Corrosion Systems: ≤ 3 MPY expected and/or observed and not services on other lists in
this presentation (list for Certain General Services and Certain Specific Potentially
Problematic Services)

Number of Complete inspection on 6 - 10 CMLs per circuit (typical)

CMLs

Locations 1. Elbows (2 Qt – see note)

2. Other Fittings (Reducers, Tees, Orifice Flanges) (1-2 Qt – see note)
3. Deadleg High Point (1 Qt)
4. Deadleg Low Point (1 Qt)
5. Piping (2 Qt – see note) (one horizontal and one vertical or one low horizontal and one high
horizontal (if a vapor space may develop at the high point)
6. Material Spec breaks if present – 1 at each location on lower alloy side. Consider all branch
connections.
Note: 1 Qt if circuit has 2 or less elbows, fittings or pipe sections as applicable.

Strategy Inspect 6-8 CMLs until wall 25% wall loss from baseline thickness (75% wall remaining) or 50%
of corrosion allowance for high pressure systems. Beyond this point, CMLs should be reevaluated
for to determine appropriate surveillance.
Draft Inspection Strategies for Certain General
Corrosive Services
System Inspection Strategy
Deadlegs RT 100% of deadlegs where accelerated corrosion is possible as identified in most current corrosion
studies and a percentage per standard practices for others.
1. Inspect per API 570 - UT Scrub circumferential bands areas every 3 inches along the length of the
vulnerable pipe as identified by API-570.
Injection Points 2. Piping that is < 8 inches may be alternately RT'd along the length of the vulnerable pipe as identified by
API-570.
3. RT Injection quill. Verify integrity and orientation.
1. Complete visual inspection of the piping to identify potential "Low Points" and place two CMLs at
each low point location.
2. Complete visual inspection of the piping to identify flare header tie-in points and place two CMLs at
Flare Piping
each tie in location, one at the tie in point another about 2 feet down stream.
3. Beyond that, assign one CML location for every 100 feet of piping.
4. Every CML location should be UT scrubbed (UT scan a 360 degree band around the piping).
1. Complete visual inspection of the piping to identify potential "Low Points". Assign two CML locations
to each low-point.
2. Complete visual inspection of the piping to identify flare header tie-in points and place two CMLs at
Vapor Recovery
each tie in location, one at the tie in point another about 2 feet down stream.
3. Beyond that, assign one CML location for every 100 feet of piping.
4. Every CML location should be UT scrubbed (UT scan a 360 degree band around the piping).
Double the CML locations of that required for low corroding and non-corroding piping. CML counts
Sour Water
applied to the entire sour water piping system, rather than a single circuit.
Double the CML locations of that required for non-corroding piping. CML counts applied to the entire
Process Water
process water piping system, rather than a single circuit.
Strategy Inspect CMLs at locations as described in this table until 25% wall loss from baseline thickness is experienced (75%
wall remaining) or 50% of corrosion allowance for high pressure systems. Beyond this point, CML testing should be
reevaluated for to determine appropriate surveillance.
 Draft Inspection Strategies for Certain Specific Potentially
Problematic Services in NHT Units (An example)
Piping System CML Strategy
General Sulfidation or High Temp 1. inspect of 50% of the thinnest components in the system.
H2/H2S corrosion (>475 F) in Rx feed 2. Inspect 50% of high point deadlegs. Focus on most corroded. One minimum.
or effluent piping 3. Inspect 25% of low point deadlegs. Focus on most corroded. One minimum.
4. Inspect 100% of orifice flange locations.
4. Inspection 100% of material spec breaks (lower alloy side). Consider all branch connections.
Note: For all alloys, except austenitic stainless steels which would typically render the piping systems as non-corrosive. Application of
these rules for assumes that low Si carbon steel and retro-PMI survey, as applicable, have been completed.
“Boil off point” on reactor feed side at 1. RT 100% (or UT scrub) all nozzles and elbows on the piping just off the HX for a distance of 10 feet.
immediate outlet of HXs 2. RT 100% of deadlegs between the tower and the first 10 feet of pipe down stream.
Rx Effluent Piping – Downstream of 1. inspect of 50% of the thinnest pipe sections in the system.
water inj point or last condenser to the 2. Inspect 100% of change of directions (elbows/tees). UT inspection with a UT circumferential band scrub at 3" intervals.
product separator 3. Inspect 100% of low point deadlegs. Focus on most corroded. One minimum.
4. Inspect 100% of high point deadlegs. Focus on most corroded. One minimum.
4. Inspect 100% of orifice flange or other pressure letdown locations per inspection strategies on another slide in this presentation..
Stripper Tower OVHD System (where 1. First two elbows and connecting pipe off the top of the tower. Perform UT inspection with a UT circumferential band scrub at 3"
wet/possibly wet) intervals along pipe.
2. Injection point inspection at injection points if present. Follow injection point strategies on other slide in this presentation.
3. Perform 3" grid inspection on elbows on and at the bottom of the vertical run down the tower.
4. 100% of other accessible elbows and components upstream of the condensers.
5. inspect of 50% of the thinnest components in the system in HC service downstream of the condensers and through the overhead
accumulator.
6. Inspect 100% of deadlegs, including injection nozzles, instrumentation fittings and level bridles throughout.
7. Inspect sour water piping off Ovh Accum iaw general sour water inj strategies with special focus at the pressure letdown location
(follow general strategies for pressure letdown locations as well).
Rich/Lean Amine Piping 1. inspect of 50% of the thinnest components in the system.
2. Inspect 50% of high point deadlegs. Focus on most corroded. One minimum.
3. Inspect 50% of low point deadlegs. Focus on most corroded. One minimum.
4. Inspect 100% of orifice flange and other pressure letdown locations.
Recycle H2 downstream of 1. inspect of 25% of the thinnest pipe sections in the system.
compressure 2. Inspect 100% of low point deadlegs.
3. Inspect 100% of high point deadlegs.
REAC Water Injection and Hot Monitor per the injection point strategies on another slide in this presentation. In addition ensure testing of 4 CMLs minimum on each
Hydrogen (>475F) Injection Points horizontal straight section from the injection point to the separator for intermittent water injection points and water injection points
without appropriately designed quills.
Strategy Inspect CMLs at locations as described in this table until 25% wall loss from baseline thickness is experienced (75% wall remaining) or
50% of corrosion allowance for high pressure systems. Beyond this point, CML testing should be reevaluated for to determine
appropriate surveillance.
  RT all dead legs and injections points (up to 25 ft downstream) for thickness
when testing is required and where practical.
 When doing RT testing for wall thickness best practice is to also get a UT
measurement at a representative and field marked location in the view of the RT
on the pipe for purposes of tracking corrosion rates in the IDMS system. If the
location is not corroding this practice is not typically necessary or required but
in those cases IDMS reading entry repeatability must be addressed by other
effective means.
 RT testing for thickness is preferred on 8 inch and smaller diameter pipe where
localized corrosion is possible. Not generally necessary for non-corroding and
low corroding piping as defined in this presentation, at least during initial
testing before pipe has lost 25% of original wall.
 For internally clad/overlaid piping which is typically very resistant to corrosion,
consider conducting regular internal lining inspections per RBI inspection
strategies in lieu of all but the most minimal external UT surveillance. We are
looking for that “needle in a haystack”. Consider borescope inspections for this
purpose.
 UT scrubs (100% coverage) for overlaid piping components highly corrosive
services (in REAC systems for instance).
 Special testing for material spec break locations in piping.
 Perform thermography to detect localized salt and deposit formations where
localized corrosion may develop.

Some Emerging General Piping

Methodologies Considerations
Draft CML Examination Point Selection Guidelines
Draft CML Examination Point Selection Guidelines
Draft CML Examination Point Selection Guidelines
Draft CML Examination Point Selection Guidelines
Draft CML Examination Point Selection Guidelines
Draft CML Examination Point Selection Guidelines
Draft CML Examination Point Selection Guidelines
Draft Piping CML Inspection Programming
Any Questions?