Inspection Company AIM was commissioned by Client Company to perform an Asset Performance Management Assessment (APMA) for the Utility Units at the Plant that processes oil and gas for Aramco reserves located in the Arabian Gulf.
Asset Performance Management Assessment Plant Report
Client Company commissioned the review to address systemic causes surrounding various unit performance issues that have affected these units. The purpose of the assessment was to provide a general / high level review of the unit assets and the management systems addressing those assets, with the goal of assisting the unit in the optimization of their asset integrity program. They covered multiple technical disciplines using a multidisciplinary team to review the work processes (systems and procedures) and the current health of selected static, rotating, electrical, instrumentation, and process control equipment/assets to validate findings.
To perform the requested APMA, a team of experienced rotating equipment, fixed equipment, process, electrical, and controls specialists with extensive experience in integrity and maintenance management, performed site walkdowns, reviewed available documentation, and conducted in-depth interviews with management, engineering, operations, maintenance, inspection, reliability, and controls personnel at all levels of the Plant organization.
Inspection Company requested the documents outlined in Appendix A be provided prior to the onsite visit to allow the Inspection Company team to be informed of potential problem areas. The objective of the pre-review was to allow Inspection Company to focus its efforts on key problem areas. As indicated in Appendix B, a significant amount of design information was supplied to the team prior to the site visit as was other information such as the Combined Trip Report.
Given the documented information provided and based on the results of staff interviews, the Inspection Company team was able to determine the degree to which the Plant Utility units conform to Client Company and industry “best practices”, to review problem areas that have been of particular concern to Plant staff, and to make recommendations that could optimize their asset integrity program.
During the review, the team identified the following positive indicators within the Plant Units’ Maintenance, Operations, Engineering, and Technical Supports areas that will support the implementation of a proactive Asset Management Program including:
• Interviews with senior and middle mangers as well as with engineering personnel, unit supervisors, and support activities indicated there is a generally good appreciation of Client Company’s Maintenance Policy and Guidelines; there was no evidence of a documented Asset Management Policy in place at Plant. It is our understanding that no documented Asset Management Policy has been implemented at any Client Company facility.
• Equipment problems within the Utility Unit have been identified, are well understood, and remedial actions proposed appear to be practical for the given conditions and resource restrictions.
• The acquisition and implementation of a late generation version of the SAP-PM Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) to support proactive tracking, assessment, and documentation of maintenance activities. Such a system is the foundation for tracking, assessing, and documenting issues affecting equipment and system performance.
• Client Company has an excellent set of recommended “best practices”.
• While no formal processes for addressing risk assessment have been employed for the Utility Units, it was the impression of the assessment team that maintenance, operations, and engineering staff are aware of the relative importance and impact that the
equipment and systems in the Utility Units have on Health, Safety, and the Environment and production.
• The Plant GOSP Utility Units’ work planning and execution is managed and executed with professionalism, a good understanding of the process, and in accordance with established procedure.
• The many corrosion issues and challenges within the Utility Units are well known.
Notwithstanding those issues and challenges, the Inspection and Testing Department in conjunction with the Lead Engineer, NA Corrosion & Inspection are performing inspections and corrosion reviews that conform to “best practices”. The critical inspection programs used by Plant are based on the corresponding Client Company Standards and Guidelines (e.g., SABP-A-036, SAES-L-133, SAEP-1135, etc). These standards and guidelines are based on American Petroleum Institute, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, and National Association of Corrosion Engineers standards and best practices and meet their intended objectives. The Inspection Department follows the guidelines in these programs and appears to be in full compliance with the requirements specified.
• The operations issues within Well Formation Water Injection, Washwater Unit, MED Unit, and Sea Water Supply and Brine Water Pump-out Lines are understood in detail by the Utility Units’ staff and the solutions proposed to deal with issues are appropriate.
• The Management of Change (MOC) process to require the updating of appropriate documents and forms has been developed to ensure that appropriate documents and procedures are updated.
• The Plant GOSP approach to addressing anomalies and repairs and performing failure analyses is in line with industry best practices.
While observing that these initiatives and management practices are positive steps and essential to the implementation of a good Asset Management Program, it was observed that a number of actions need to be undertaken to ensure a world class, proactive Asset Management Program is fully implemented at Plant. These actions are:
• Plant has no formal Reliability policy.
• Corrosion is the main maintenance problem facing the Utility Unit complex primarily due to high oxygen and low pH content in Reverse Osmosis (RO) water coming from offsite and lack of corrosion inhibitor/oxygen scavenger in high salt disposal water injection system.
• There are insufficient resources available to support all aspects of the Plant Utility Units’ Asset Management strategy.
• Equipment criticality is currently based on consensus and interaction among the different organizations.
• No risk management (e.g., Risk Based Inspection, Reliability, Availability, and
Maintainability, etc.) approaches have been formally adopted for the Plant GOSP.
• While maintenance plans are provided in SAP-PM, there was no information available as to the organization that developed the plans, the process used for their development, or the criteria used in their development.
• There was no evidence that a program was in place to define the maintenance and inspection Preventive Maintenance (PM) types and frequencies in SAP-PM.
• Trending of vibration monitoring results and inspection readings is performed regularly by the reliability group. The team was informed that it was the responsibility of the reliability group to trend plant component health to determine if components were affecting plant performance and adjust maintenance frequencies as needed. However, because only three of ten authorized positions in the organization were staffed, they are not able to do so. There was no information available that indicated that this group or any other organization was trending the information.
• There is a significant amount of data available from SAP-PM maintenance histories and inspection results to identify areas of improvement. There was no information available that this is being accomplished; improvement opportunities are determined by system inadequacies (e.g., frequent failure of the new seal flush pumps, G26-G-255C/D, for the new formation water injection and booster pumps; internal corrosion in formation water line, etc). The review and assessment of such data is typically the responsibility of a reliability engineer with sufficient training, time, and resources to review, trend, and potentially forecast potential failures. The reliability organization currently has three individuals out of a total of ten authorized to perform the functions of that group.
• A grounding resistance measuring instrument is not available with Plant Electrical
and Instrument (E&I) operations and maintenance department. E&I operations observes and resolves grounding fault issues based on experience.
• Test equipment is not calibrated by third-party agencies.
• While records for troubles/failures could be entered into SAP-PM, these records do not appear to be available to the technicians to support their maintenance activities. The availability of the technicians to review maintenance and failure records would enhance their ability to troubleshoot failures in the future and improve productivity.
• A number of rotating equipment, static equipment and piping, instrumentation, and electrical problems exist, including:
• The current major machinery issue in Utility Plant G 26 is frequent failure of the new seal flush pumps, G26-G-255C/D, for the new formation water injection and booster pumps. They are failing due to corrosion from the RO water from the Tanajib Plant which has high oxygen content and inadequate metallurgy.
• There is a formation water line corrosion issue caused by welding in new spool pieces which results in damaged Fusion Bonded Epoxy (FBE) lining.
• There is internal corrosion in the washwater lines caused by dissolved oxygen.
• A washwater line flange connection underwent crimping damage due to improper bolting torque.
• Operation of PCV-2066B/2067B and PCV-2068B, and the ratio control valve for
E-310A/B/C is accomplished manually.
• Signs of oil leakage were observed at the 230/13.8kV Power Transformer G26-P-101T 60/80MVA may indicate onset of potential failure or impact the effectiveness of transformers.
• Safe operating parameters and limits have been defined per the unit Operations
Instruction Manuals (OIM) instrumentation set points.
• The acceptance and implementation of the newly installed the Plant Water System upgrade (BI-169) does not allow for maximum through-put for oil separation because of inadequacies in its design. The sign-off of the installation on behalf of Client Company of construction and commissioning by the Engineering, Construction, and Procurement contractor of the inappropriate design has resulted in a requirement that requires additional investment over and above that originally anticipated to insure that the system can function as intended.
• There was no evidence that unit/sight level personnel have input into upgrade projects especially in the area of vendor selection and reliability and maintainability issues.
• A random review of MOCs open during 2012 indicated that two Work Orders (WO) had been closed out without the checklist completed and signed off. Discussions with maintenance and engineering personnel indicated that not all drawings affected by a MOC had been updated to “as built” status.
• A MOC Register exists. However, there was no evidence of tracking of MOC status.
• Retention of maintenance and engineering personnel is an issue and causing problems.
Many senior personnel with years of practical plant experience are leaving. While Client Company is able to hire more junior personnel, hiring experienced personnel to replace experienced personnel that are retiring is an issue at Plant. Based on discussions with Client Company corporate personnel, it appears that this is an issue that affects Client Company at many of its facilities. Obtaining sufficiently trained staff to replace retiring personnel could impact future performance, especially in light of increased production requirements over the next 5 to 6 years.
To address the current gaps in the Plant Utility Units’ Asset Management Program, the following actions are recommended:
• Adopt and implement the Total Plant Reliability Manual for the Utility Unit’s as well as for the remaining units of the Plant GOSP.
• Perform internal or external audits on a regular basis to ensure ongoing attention to program shortfalls.
• The Plant GOSP should adopt Guide Number 02-001-2009, Risk Assessment and Management, A Guide for Managers; implementation of the guideline should be accomplished with the assistance of a third party to ensure consistency and objectivity.
• SABP-G-017 10 Equipment Criticality Assessment which provides a procedure for developing equipment criticality should be adopted and implemented.
• The adoption and implementation of a formal risk assessment approach will allow for alignment of maintenance and inspection resources with the risk that each item of equipment poses resulting in a more efficient use of resources and potentially reducing overall costs.
• A SABP-G-012, A User Guide to Root Cause Analysis Guidelines and Procedures should be adopted and implemented at the Plant GOSP.
• As indicated in the assessment findings, there was no process currently in place to review and trend maintenance results. A process should be developed to review maintenance results and identify trends which may indicate the need for more frequent maintenance activity or, conversely, investigate the risk of accomplishing maintenance tasks less frequently if warranted.
• Test equipment to measure the ground resistance with valid calibration certificate should be provided to the operations and maintenance departments. It is also recommended that the ground resistance be checked periodically.
• As a “best practice”, a program for independent calibration of test equipment should be developed and implemented.
• Maintenance records for failures and anomalies are recorded to provide a history of failures/troubles from which assessments can be accomplished. However, there was no evidence that this was being accomplished either by the reliability group or another organization. The reliability group should be staffed to full complement to accomplish this ongoing process in a timely fashion.
• Equipment Recommendations:
• Rotating — To address the seal problem, replacement of the present mechanical seals with double seals with a recirculating flush of potable water has been proposed. The optimum solution to this problem would be to decrease the oxygen content in the RO water currently obtained from Tanajib which is the root cause of the corrosion problem with the seals. However, the time and resources required to implement this solution preclude its implementation in the short term. Given that, the solution proposed by plant staff is a viable solution.
• Static Equipment/Piping — Damaged formation water FBE lined piping should be replaced with new spools using flanged connections; develop and apply bolting procedures, train personnel in their proper application, and insure proper quality control of bolting maintenance tasks.
• Instruments —The root cause of the loss of automatic control of PCV-2066B/2067B and PCV-2068B should be determined and the problem corrected.
• Insure that checking for transformer oil leaks is included as part of the equipment PM regime.
• Insulated grounding cables should be used to protect the cable conductors from the corrosive conditions of the unit.
• The solutions to Utility Unit equipment and operating problems have been identified; they need to be implemented. Based on the experience of the team, the solutions proposed by unit staff are appropriate given the age of the unit and the personnel and financial resources available. The team could not offer an opinion as to their cost-effectiveness without a life cycle cost analysis of various, viable alternatives which was beyond the scope of the assessment.
• The efforts to decrease the RO water content by placing the delivery pipeline output from Tanajib downstream of the installed deaerator should be implemented.
• Improve the process and oversight of design/construction/commissioning activities carried out by contractors. This should include selection and training of Client Company personnel to ensure those with sign-off authority have sufficient knowledge and understanding to ensure contractors meet all specified requirements.
• Develop a process that allows for input of site field experience into upgrade design review process.
• Undertake an audit to ensure that drawings, documents, etc. affected by a MOC have been updated. Additionally, provide a means for completing and signing off the close out checkout sheet in SON-040 -330.
• Develop a means for tracking the status of each MOC as the actions required by
SON-040 -330 are competed.
• While the assessment team is cognizant of the barriers to identifying, hiring, and retaining qualified, experienced personnel, efforts to obtain such personnel, especially for key equipment experts, should be re-emphasized as a top priority.