don mears oil & gas industry consultant & api/tpcp

Understanding the Advantages and Limitations of a Comprehensive API-RP 578 Positive Material Identification (PMI) Program

•Downstream Refining Sector •Downstream Petro Chemical Sector

•Upstream Offshore & Transportation Sector

Don Mears Oil & Gas Industry Consultant &

API/TPCP Certified Training Provider

8/8/2013 API Beijing-Don Mears-ATC-9/13/213 1

Presenter – Don Mears

• President of Analytical Training Consultants (ATC)

• 30+ years of Oil & Gas industry experience

• Heavy involvement in API work groups

• Author of the API RP 578 PMI Certification Course

• Certified API Training Provider

• Oil & Gas Industry Consultant for Thermo Fisher Scientific

API/TPCP -0118


Presentation Outline

• Technologies XRF & OES for Refining Solutions • PMI Field Testing Methods (XRF) Old & New Technologies • New Construction – QA/MVP Programs Renewed & Required • Existing Piping Systems (Retroactive PMI ) Programs &

Applications • Control of Incoming Materials & Warehouse • Elements of Maintenance Systems for PMI • Recording & Reporting PMI Test Results • Why the USA Implemented OSHA NEP & API 578 PMI • Why the USA implemented OSHA CHEM/NEP & BSEE,

PHMSA/NTSB • Conclusion (Questions & Answers) 8/8/2013 API Beijing-Don Mears-ATC-9/13/213 3

Understanding the Advantages and Limitations of a Comprehensive API-RP 578

Positive Material Identification (PMI) Program

Downstream Refining Sector

Don Mears Oil & Gas Industry Consultant and



PMI Field Testing Methods ( XRF or OES ) Technologies: Two Primary Technologies for Portable Elemental

Analysis: • X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy (XRF)

– Technique of exciting and ejecting atoms’ inner shell electrons with x-ray radiation and analyzing the fluorescent x-rays emitted when the atoms return to a stable state. X-ray energies emitted correspond to the individual elements, while the intensity is a function of quantity

• Optical Emission Spectroscopy (OES)

– Technique of vaporizing sample surface and analyzing the emitted light spectra. The wavelength of the light corresponds to the elements present, while the intensity is a function of quantity of that element.


Kα x-ray

Lα x-ray

X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) – A Simple Overview

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

K L M-shells

1.25% Cr 0.5% Mo

……… 1. X-ray ejects K-shell electron

2. L-shell electron moves to replace ejected K-shell electron, M-shell electron replaces L-shell, etc…

3. Reduced energy state is given off as a “Kα”, “Lα”, etc. x-rays, the energies of which are read by the detector

4. The x-ray energies and fluxes are interpreted by the analyzer into the corresponding elements, concentrations, and resultant alloy grade

Alloy Grade P11


PMI Field Testing Methods: How OES Works

Excitation- Outer Shell

Emission-Radiated in form of Light!!


PMI Field Testing Methods ( XRF or OES ) Technologies:

Pros: Handheld X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy • Accurate • Portable

– the handheld XRF analyzer weighs approximately 1.3 kg (3 lbs.) and is transported in a belt holster at the user’s side

• Reduced sample preparation • Completely nondestructive • Simplicity

– XRF technology is much more user-friendly, allowing relatively unskilled operators to participate in the inspection process

Cons: • Can measure elements only down to Mg on the periodic table (cannot

measure carbon) • Stricter regulation and licensing requirements


PMI Field Testing Methods ( XRF or OES ) Technologies:

Pros: Transportable Optical Emission Spectroscopy • Accurate • Gives visible clue that material has been tested (burn mark) • Can measure more light elements than XRF (such as C) Cons: • Difficulty of transport

– OES instruments tend to be large and unwieldy, posing access problems in hard-to-reach locations

• Sample preparation – the OES testing requires careful preparation of the sample by grinding off the

oxide layer and eliminating any pitting or inclusions in the test area prior to analysis

• Damage to the sample – the OES test burns and vaporizes a small amount of the sample material,

resulting in a heat-affected zone that in some cases must be re-heat treated • User expertise

– OES instrumentation requires a high level of user sophistication to maintain calibration, recognize data anomalies, proper surface preparation, etc.


XRF Evolution in Performance • Since late 1960s, XRF has evolved through 7 generations; each generation has

added new measurement capabilities as indicated by the 3 groups below

– Smaller, faster, better performance, and easier to use

• Today, nearly all alloys can be tested with these powerful tools. This addresses PMI concerns in the upstream/downstream & transportation Sectors

Measured (1) element at a time to: >= 1.00% chemistry in >/= 1 to 2 minutes

Measured (16 to18 ) elements at a time to: >= 0.10% chemistry in </= 30 to 60 seconds

Measures (up to 30 ) elements at a time to: >/= 0.003% chemistry </= 3 to 12 seconds


New GOLDD Detector Technology • Geometrically Optimized

– Improved system geometry to reduce the path length from sample to detector

– Allows ~2X more x-rays to reach the detector with ½ the power

• Large-area Drift Detector – Light element detection in air (Mg, Al, Si, P, S) – Increased sensitivity for tramp and trace elements in

alloys – Doubling of the speed of alloy and metals testing – Enhanced performance for difficult (nearly twin) alloy

separations


How Filters in XRF Automatically Work the Element Range in the Periodic Table

“ Low Filter “engaged Automatically for : Ti ,V , Cr

“ Main Filter“ engaged Automatically for : All Elements

“ Light Filter “engaged Automatically for : S, P, Si, Al, Mg


Time 60s per filter w/out He AI-based Ti-based Fe-based Cu-based

Matrix Alloys Alloys Alloys Alloys Sb 20 35 50 70 Sn 15 30 50 70 Pd 15 20 40 55 Ru 15 15 20 20 Mo N/A 15 15 15 Nb N/A 15 15 15 Zr N/A 15 15 15 Bi 15 15 15 30 Pb 15 15 40 35 Se N/A 15 20 20 W 20 75 120 100 Zn 15 20 40 220 Cu 25 40 70 NA Ni 30 75 100 110 Co 30 70 500 110 Fe 50 175 N/A 175

Mn 70 160 160 175 Cr 50 160 35 65 V 20 550 25 40 Ti 20 N/A 30 30 S N/A* N/A N/A* 90 60* N/A NI'A* P N/A* N/A N/A* 110 65* 110 75* Si 400 320* 900 350* 350 175* 350 200'" AI N/A N/A* 4750 1300* 2200 650* 2500 625*

Mg 4000 1500" N/A N/A* N/A N/A* N/A N/A*

XL3t GOLDD + Limits of Detection in PPM (mg/Kg)


New Construction: PMI Cycle Overview – Renewed & Now Required Emphasis

Asset Recovery Asset Management

Residual elements found in carbon steel

(i.e., Cr, Cu, NI, Mo, V, Ti) MTRs normally do not test for

these elements and should not be in the carbon steel ! But they are there!!!


New Construction: Do Not Rely Solely on Supplier MTRs

• Experience has shown that you cannot rely on material test reports (MTRs) alone; there can be significant errors.

• One customer site survey revealed that as much as 40% of MTRs did not match actual chemistry. They also tend to lose the reports. They get separated from the existing material.

• API RP-578-(7.2)-States; “MTR’s Should NOT be considered a substitute for PMI testing”

“Trust but verify” – This is what PMI does !!!


Existing Piping Systems (Retroactive PMI ) Programs:

API RP 578

Material Verification Program for Existing Piping Systems • Responsibilities – The owner/user is responsible for determining if a retroactive material

verification program is appropriate for each existing piping system, for prioritizing the piping systems to receive retroactive PMI testing, and for determining the extent of PMI testing required.

• Prioritizing piping systems for retroactive PMI testing – If owner/user elects to prioritize piping systems for the material verification program or needs to determine whether PMI testing is needed at all, the owner/user should consider the following:

• Likelihood of a material mix-up during previous project and maintenance activities. • Consequences of a failure. Some factors to be considered include: flammability, fire

potential, toxicity, proximity to other equipment or community, temperature, pressure, mode of failure, and size of release.

• Reason for alloy specification (i.e., corrosion resistance or product purity). • Historical data relating to inadvertent material substitution. This may be related to

previous experience with material nonconformities in the process unit or within the operating plant.


Existing Piping Systems (Retroactive PMI) Programs : API RP 578

CIU Retroactive PMI

Valves, Pipes, Fittings, & Instruments

CCD Camera with Small Spot for Welds

High Temperature (450°F /232°C to 900°F/482°C)

PMI

Remote Access Retroactive PMI

Weld Dilution Retroactive PMI


Existing Piping Systems (Retroactive PMI) Programs

• Priority for API 578 2nd Edition: • Residual Elements in Carbon Steels in Hydrofluoric Acid Alkylation

Units – Note: Carbon steels in HF acid service have been reported to suffer increased corrosion rates based on the residual elements (RE) in steels.

• In general, it has been reported that steels with a high RE content are likely to suffer enhanced corrosion attack. Operators should review the potential impact of this in HF service.

• A guideline is that for base metal of C> 0.18% wt% and Cu + Ni + Cr, 0.15% wt % is optimum. These values are critical as the type and concentrations to be measured will directly affect the analytical methods operations need to adopt.

• API RP 571 – Pages 12,38


Existing Piping Systems (Retroactive PMI)

Programs Priority for API RP 578 2nd Edition – “High Temperature Sulfidic Corrosion – API RP

939-C” • Process units susceptible to sulfidation:

– Carbon steels with low silicon (0.10%) content can corrode at an accelerated rate

– Assets at risk from this type of degradation should apply PMI control to determine silicon levels. (Retroactive PMI is suggested and to follow API 578.)

– See API 571 and API RP 939-C – See Section 7.1.4 & 5

Low Si-33%, PMI-18%,Specification Break-17%


API RP-939-C shows Corrosion rate of Low Si in Carbon Steel


Measuring Low Si in the field has some Requirements

• Current Technologies both ( XRF/OES) have limits for the Process Temperature Range. • Proper Sample preparation is required. • Most material of concern for Sulfidation is Carbon Steel piping installed before 1985.

This material was usually double/tripled stamped ( A53/A106/API 5LB,& A285 Plates ) • Typically, fittings have higher Si content where piping straight runs have less Si. • Specification breaks are also a contributing factor ( 5Cr welded to 9Cr ) • Other Concerns for high temperature process ( 650 F and greater ) is using 5 Cr and 9Cr

with both low Cr & Si.


Sample Preparation for Low Si Measurement • Typical metal alloys used in the petrochemical industry will oxidize when exposed to

atmospheric conditions. This oxide coating can affect the accuracy of the reading when performing an XRF analysis and must be removed.

• Sample contamination can occur if you prepare with the wrong abrasive disc. It is recommended to use grinding discs made from zirconium aluminum oxide. Zirconium is a metal not commonly found in steel alloys, so trace amounts found on the surface will not negatively affect test results.

• As a recommended starting point, the following grit sizes are suggested: • Stainless Steel – 120 grit • Cr/Mo Steel – 80 grit • Carbon & Low Alloy Steel – 60 grit.

Rubber backing wheel Abrasive discs Handheld, right angle grinder


Control of Incoming Materials & Warehouse: API RP 578 • MVP should be associated with

receiving alloy materials • PMI testing may be performed

as part of the receiving function

• PMI could be performed at supplier’s location as a condition of release of shipment

• MVP should provide proper documentation & methods for indicating which materials have been tested and re-approved for use.

• MVP should be regarded as a quality assurance practice

PMI testing in the warehouse should not be regarded as alternative to field PMI testing


Elements of Maintenance Systems for PMI: API RP 578

• Temporary removal of spool pieces needs to be managed in such a way that material mix-ups cannot occur.

• Consideration shall be given to a firm control system • A verification prior to re-Installation to prevent mix-ups

occurring • Tagging spools as they are removed to ensure correct

replacement should be considered • PMI after the repair procedures to confirm proper alloys

were used • PMI may also include components used • Consulting with the inspector prior to commencement of

work can ensure good material control was enforced


http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/519460278/carbon_steel_pipe_elbow_6_inch.html

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/510834231/carbon_steel_pipe_elbow_6_inch.html

Elements of Maintenance Systems for PMI: API RP 578

Carbon steel elbow in a resid hydrotreater unit (RHU) heat exchanger outlet pipe (Elbow 1) ruptured after operating only 3 months in high-temperature hydrogen service. NO PMI performed and elbows removed without marking or tagging !


API 560-Refractory Anchors • Refractory metal is available in hex steel

grid, special grid and expanded metal. All material is available in stainless steel and grades T304, T316, T310, T330 as well as all of the standard grades. Other refractory insulation and refractory lining products include wire mesh, expanded metal mesh and hex steel grid.

• Refractory anchors and related

materials are used for anchoring and assembling refractory ceramic fibre linings or for reinforcing monolithic linings of castables, plastics or ramming mixes


API 560-Table 11 - Maximum temperatures for anchor tips

Anchor material Maximum anchor temperature

'C (OF)

Carbon steel 455 850

TP 304 stainless steel 760 1400





Alloy 601 (UNS N06601) 1093 2000

Ceramic studs and washers > 1093 > 2000

PMI Confirms the Correct Material is Installed for the Correct Temperature.


Refractory Fiber PMI Inspection Possibilities

• What are you doing currently to confirm the correct Refractory Material is being use?

• How do you confirm on “Turn-a-rounds” and Maintenance the correct Refractory Material is properly replace ?


• Material Certifications: (7.2) – Material Certifications, mill test reports, or Certificates of Compliance should not be considered a substitute for PMI testing, but may be an important part of an overall quality assurance program.

• Shop and Field PMI Test Documentation: (7.3) – Those individuals performing PMI testing should obtain and follow the PMI test procedure

approved by the owner/user. – This procedure should cover the techniques used , equipment calibration, the qualification

requirements of the PMI test personnel, the testing methodology, and documentations requirements.

– When documentation, such as drawings, is used in lieu of physical marking, the documentation should allow the owner/user to identify which components were tested.

• New and Existing Piping Systems Documentation: (7.4) – When PMI testing is conducted on new or existing piping systems, records of the results

should be kept as long as the piping system exists in its original location. – If a piping system or a portion of a piping system that has not received material verification is

relocated, the owner/user should consider the need for PMI testing prior to placing the relocated components into service.

Recording & Reporting PMI Test Results: API RP 578


Recording & Reporting PMI Test Results: API RP 578 Traceability to field components-(7.7)-the information listed in “PMI Test Records-(7.5)” should be reported in such a manner that they are traceable to the point of installation. The best way to tie the “Report Documentation” to the field P&ID or ISO drawings, is to mark the drawings (electronically or manually) and enter this (drawing number) in the XRF/OES analyzer. It is strongly suggested that you keep both paper and electronic files on this documentation.

Enter data into analyzer

PMI PMI

PMI PMI

PMI

PMI Interface with “Data Management Software” (i.e., PCMS, Ultra-Pipe, Meridian, Solid AIM & RBI software)


• Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Acts – Process Safety Management (PSM) 1910-119-Highly Hazardous Chemicals (HHC) 2/24/1992 – Refinery National Emphasis Program (NEP) CPL 03-00-004 6/7/2007 – Chemical National Emphasis Program (NEP) 09-06 (CPL 02) Notice – Pilot NEP 7/27/2009 – Chemical National Emphasis Program ( CHEMNEP) (CPL 03-00-014)-Nationwide 11/29/2011- (

Replaced Pilot NEP)

• American Petroleum Institute (API) – Standard-API 570 – Piping Inspection Code – Standard-API 510 – Pressure Vessel Inspection Code – Standard-API 653 – Storage Tank Inspection Code – Recommended Practice-API RP-578 – Material Verification Program-MVP/PMI – Recommended Practice-API 571 – HF Corrosion in CS Pipes ( REs, Cr, Cu, Ni ) – Recommended Practice-API 939-C – Guidelines for Avoiding Sulfidation

• Mechanical Integrity Needs in the Oil & Gas Industry – Understanding HOW, WHY, and APPLYING:

ATC – API 578 PMI Certification Training Course AIM – Asset Integrity Management MI – Mechanical Integrity Requires “Data Management” Software

Why OSHA Established the NEP Program in USA?


API 578 RP 578 PMI Certification Course “Guidelines & Application Procedures for Positive Material Identification (PMI)

with XRF & OES Technologies”

Analytical Training Consultants Don Mears, Author

API/TPCP -0118 8/8/2013 API Beijing-Don Mears-ATC-9/13/213 32

Why?: Corrosion Failures in Process Piping

• 41% of the largest losses in the hydrocarbon processing industry resulted from failures in piping systems.

• Corrosion is one of the leading causes of piping failures.

• OSHA’s National Emphasis Program (NEP) includes positive material identification (PMI) as a part of Mechanical Integrity (MI)

• “Recognized And Generally Accepted Good Engineering Practices” or “RAGAGEP”

– RAGAGEP example for PMI: • API RP 578, Material Verification Program for New and Existing Alloy Piping

Systems, Section 4.3

• CSB, Safety Bulletin – Positive Material Verification: Prevent Errors During Alloy Steel Systems Maintenance, BP Texas City, TX Refinery Fire

Second International Symposium on the Mechanical Integrity of Process Piping January 1996, Houston, TX, USA


“Recognized And Generally Accepted Good Engineering Practice” (RAGAGEP): API RP 578

Engineering, operation, or maintenance activities based on established codes, standards, published technical reports or recommended practices (RP) or a similar document. RAGAGEPs detail generally approved ways to perform specific engineering, inspection or mechanical integrity activities, such as fabricating a vessel, inspecting a storage tank, or servicing a relief valve (See CCPS [Ref. 33]).

Reasons Why RAGAGEP Is Required by OSHA


Hazards Identified: Total Violations Rise…Serious and Repeat Violations Increase

OSHA Violation Statistics FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 % Change 2003-2007

Total Violations 83,539 86,708 85,307 83,913 88,846 6.4%

Total Serious Violations 59,861 61,666 61,018 61,337 67,176 12.2% Total Willful Violations 404 462 747 479 415 2.7

Total Repeat Violations 2,147 2,360 2,350 2,551 2,714 26.4%

Total Other-than-Serious 20,552 21,705 20,819 19,246 18,331 -10.8%

BP Texas City, Texas: Fined $30.7 million for 439 willful violations on 10/30/09-Resolved 409 citations in July 2012 and paid $13 million by end of year !


Hazards Identified: Total Violations Increase – 2010

• The significant increase over previous fiscal years is partly attributed to the large number of willful violations that were issued to BP North America and BP Huskey in FY 2010

OSHA Violation Statistics FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 %Change

2006-2010

Total Violations 83,913 88,846 87,687 87,663 96,742 15.3%

Total Serious Violations 61,337 67,176 67,052 67,668 74,885 22.1%

Total Willful Violations 479 415 517 401 1,519 217.1%6

Total Repeat Violations 2,551 2,714 2,817 2,762 2,758 8.1%

Total Other-than-Serious 19,246 18.,331 17,131 16,615 17,244 -10.4%


Positive Material Identification (PMI)

• Does the employer ensure that replacement piping is suitable for its process application? – Yes, No, N/A

• If no, possible violations include: – The employer did not follow RAGAGEP when it failed to conduct

positive material identification (PMI) testing. – Example RAGAGEP for PMI:

• API RP 578, Material Verification Program for New and Existing Alloy Piping Systems, Section 4.3)

• CSB, Safety Bulletin – Positive Material Verification: Prevent Errors During Alloy Steel Systems Maintenance, BP Texas City, TX Refinery Fire

Inspection Scheduling by OSHA – All Refineries Section E-10


Refinery NEP Most Frequently Cited PSM Elements

Element Description % of Citations Cumulative %

j Mechanical Integrity 19.4% 19.4% d Process Safety Information 17.5% 36.9% f Operating Procedures 17.1% 53.9% e Process Hazard Analysis 17.0% 70.9% l Management of Change 8.2% 79.1%

m Incident Investigation 6.7% 85.8% O Compliance Audits 3.8% 89.6% H Contractors 2.8% 92.5% G Training 2.7% 95.2%

N Emergency Planning & Response 1.5% 96.7%

C Employee Participation 1.4% 98.1% I Pre-startup Review 1.1% 99.2% K Hot Work Permit 0.8% 100.0%




Downstream Petro Chemical Sector




Chemical Safety Board (CSB) Established in1990

• After the deadly 1989 explosion of Phillips Houston Chemical Complex that claimed the lives of 23 people in Pasadena, Congress setup a system designed to reduce the number of chemical accidents by forming the investigative board, known for short as CSB. Congress established the board to overhaul the Clean Air Act and to create an independent agency designed to keep tabs on the chemical and petroleum industry.

• According to the findings of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, since 1998 an average of five plant workers have been killed every month in the United States by explosions or leaks of chemicals that have become integral to modern industrial life.


http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/images/stories/large/2011/12/18/FEMA_PuertoRicoGas_Fire.jpg

Thermo Scientific Niton XRF Analyzers in Downstream Process-Petro Chemical Plants

• CSB Chairperson Rafael Moure-Eraso said, "We are seeing too many ammonia releases in

our daily incident reviews. Based on the CSB's monitoring of media reports there were four high consequence incidents involving the release of anhydrous ammonia which led to a total of six fatalities in 2009:

• May 14, 2009: American Cold Storage, Louisville, KY 2 fatalities • June 20, 2009: Mountaire Farms, Lumber Bridge, NC 1 fatality • July 15, 2009: Tanner Industries, Swansea, SC ? fatality • November 16, 2009: CF Industries, Rosemount, MN 2 fatalities

Therefore; OSHA Released :Chemical National Emphasis Program ( CHEMNEP) (CPL 03-00-014)-Nationwide 11/29/2011


OSHA-PSM Covered Chemical Facilities National Emphasis Program-CPL-03-00-014, 11/29/2011

• This instruction cancels-OSHA 10-05( CPL 02 ) Pilot Program of 7/27/2009 • It has 2 facility Categories: 1) Ammonia/Refrigeration, 2) All other Chemical Plants with

Highly Hazardous Chemical ( HHC)-CPL-02-02-045, PSM Guidelines and Enforcement Procedures. ( excludes: VPP and SHARP Facilities).

• Emphasis on “Process Safety Management” (PSM)- ” Implementation” Enforcement • Facility “Documentation” will be required by the inspection team of OSHA. • The inspection will contain the following :

• Initial Walk around-Looking for differences in PSM document and has discussion with operation • Inspection of Selected Units or Plants to observe operations, inspection, MI, construction ,

Contactors, etc. • Compliance Guidelines, review inspection History & Abatement for previous 6 years to see if hazard

still exist.

You Say you practice PSM… Show me you Do it!!!! Implementation


http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=petrochemical+plants&view=detail&id=862826C8F8C850FD9E06AFF743AFD438925C5E62&first=361&FORM=IDFRIR

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/TASNEE_001.jpg

OSHA’S Inspection Comes for a “Dynamic List” • This list-based evaluation is a gap analysis formatted in a series of questions that

have been developed to assess and verify the employer’s PSM compliance with specific issues such as design, fabrication, installation, start-up, operation, maintenance, change, controls (engineering and administrative), safe work practices, contractor safety, etc., at the facility by examining a Selected Unit.

• Abatement Requirements include the following: • Management system/program requirements – e.g., the employer must develop

mechanical integrity program procedures that include piping inspection procedures,1910.119(j)(2), and

• Specific employer action/task abatement requirements - e.g., the employer must inspect the piping, 1910.119(j)(4).(Inspections and tests shall be performed on process equipment.) and (Inspection and testing procedures shall follow recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices-”RAGAGEP”

• RAGAGP according to OSHA includes PMI inspection according to API578 Procedures


http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=petrochemical+industry&view=detail&id=07E5EB190AEA8E8EBA1C370C25766639F0CEB97B&first=0&qpvt=petrochemical+industry&FORM=IDFRIR

Chemical Plant NEP Citations by PSM Element

Element Description % of PSM

Citations Cumulative % j Mechanical Integrity 23.8% 23.8% d Process Safety Information 20.2% 44.0% e Process Hazard Analysis 19.0% 63.0% f Operating Procedures 13.9% 76.9% g Training 4.8% 81.7% h Contractors 3.8% 85.6% o Compliance Audits 3.4% 88.9% l Management of Change 3.1% 92.1% n Emergency Planning & Response 2.9% 95.0% m Incident Investigation 2.6% 97.6% i Pre-startup Review 1.4% 99.0% k Hot Work 1.0% 100.0%



Upstream Offshore & Transportation Sector




PMI Inspection Program for Deep Water Sub-Sea Equipment – Important Before Installation

• Confirm with PMI that your material is in specification before Fabrication. • Confirm all supply parts (valves, flanges, pipes, welds, etc.) are what is specified for

application.


Portable XRF Analyzers in Upstream Process – Hard Banding Applications

Re-applying hard band-test with XRF


Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

• BP/Transocean/Halliburton – Macando Well on 4/20/2010 • (11) Fatalities and Gulf Coast Pollution…Still ongoing court cases!


PHMSA Issued Advisory Bulletin 09-01 – May 21, 2009

• This bulletin advises pipeline operators of material problems – inconsistent chemical (PSL 2 specifications) and material properties (yield strengths & tensile strengths) – that

have been found in micro alloyed high-strength line pipe grades, generally grade X-70 and above.

• Some pipe material did not meet the requirements of the American Petroleum Institute, Specification for Line Pipe—5L, (API 5L), 43rd edition for the specified pipe grade even though the pipe supplier provided documentation that the pipe met these minimum standards. ( MTRs)

• It suggests that pipeline operators closely review manufacturing specifications for the production and rolling of steel plate. Trust by Verify with PMI


API 5L-Table 5 – Chemical Composition for PSL 2 Pipe with t ≥ 25,0 mm (0.984 in.)

Element – Table 5 Percentage Min or Max Table 5 Annex-N – adopted ISO 3183 – for Europe Addendum 3 effective date 1/1/2012

Copper (CU) = 0.50% Max No Change

Nickel (Ni) = 0.30% Max Ni = 1.00%

Chromium (Cr) = 0.30% Max Cr = 0.55%

Molybdenum (Mo) = 0.15% Max Mo = 0.80%

Sum (Nb + V) </= 0.06% Max No Change

Sum (Nb + V + Ti) </= 0.15% Max No Change

Boron (B) </= 0.001% Max B </= 0.004%

PMI/XRF analyzers can confirm these (except boron) min/max, specs


“Recognized And Generally Accepted Good Engineering Practice” (RAGAGEP): API RP 578

Engineering, operation, or maintenance activities based on established codes, standards, published technical reports, or recommended practices (RP) or a similar document. RAGAGEPs detail generally approved ways to perform specific engineering, inspection, or mechanical integrity activities, such as fabricating a vessel, inspecting a storage tank, or servicing a relief valve (See CCPS [Ref. 33]).

Reasons Why – RAGAGEP?


The Department of Labor of the United States of America (USDOL) and

The State of Administration of Work Safety of the People’s Republic of China (SAWS)

•Enforcement of laws and regulations on workplace safety and health; •Emergency response procedures generally applicable to workplace accidents and incidents;

•The role of private insurance programs in the promotion of workplace safety and health; •Public awareness raising of workplace safety and health laws and regulations;

•Effective collection and analysis of workplace safety and health data; and •Regulation and inspection relating to the production, handling and distribution of hazardous

chemicals. 8/8/2013 API Beijing-Don Mears-ATC-9/13/213 52

China •May 27, 2011 Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Labor of the United States of America and the State Administration of Work Safety of the People's Republic of China Regarding Cooperation on Work Safety and Health [PDF*]

https://www.osha.gov/international/index.html

https://www.osha.gov/international/docs/2011-MOU-with-SAWS.pdf

https://www.osha.gov/international/index.html

https://www.osha.gov/index.html

Questions & Answers?

Don Mears Analytical Training Consultants & Thermo Scientific Portable XRF Analyzers 1719 Burning Tree, kingwood, Texas ( USA) 77339 Web: www.ATC578.Com [email protected] or [email protected] Phone: +1 (281) 684-8881

API/TPCP -0118 Portable XRF Analyzers


http://www.atc578.com/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

don mears oil & gas industry consultant & api/tpcp

Documents