B - Balloted/A- Approved R - Refer to RP D- Redundant Item -Deleted B -Balloted

API INSPECTION CODES TASK GROUP SCORECARD

Nov 12, 2011

B - Balloted/A- Approved R - Refer to RP D- Redundant item –deleted B -Balloted – resolve/re-ballot P - Currently assigned or pending assignment /
API 510 – PRESSURE VESSEL INSPECTION CODE /
Item No. / Status / Section / Subject / Originator / Assigned / Notes /
510-133 / R / 5.7 / Procedural requirements for UT thickness measurements.
Note: Task Group concurred that this information should reside in RP 572 rewrite task group. / TI 510-I-02/03 / G. Heath / G. Heath presented a proposed wording to be added API 510 Paragraph 5.7 to address temperature limitations for ultrasonic testing. The wording is acceptable for Bullet #4 in 570, 510 and 653 but the rest of the proposal should be included in 574.
Roland should communicate the wording of bullet point 4 to Carl and the 653 committee.
510-134 / R / Include wording to address the issues of doubling UT thickness readings. / D. Martinez / K. Smith / Completed. This scorecard item is included with item 133 above it.
510-135 / P / 1.1.1
3.23 / Define what it means for a pressure vessel to be "placed in service". / Shell ballot / J. Reynolds / Prepare draft change for review at Spring 2006 meeting.
510-136 / B / 1.2.2b / Flag Item Vessels with a design pressure less than +/- 15 psi are exempted from code. Believe large equipment in this pressure range should still be inspected per API 510, e.g vacuum columns, CCU regenerator, etc. At least the external inspection requirements should be applicable / J Riley
D. Layman / Reviewed at Spring 2006, Fall 2006, and Spring 2007. D. Layman wrote simplified version to be balloted and reviewed in Fall 2007 meeting (510-25-07).
Include inquiry from Bill Neill about concern that all vessels, regardless of exemption should have an initial inspection.
510-139 / R / 5.5 / Introduce and rename inspections as being "intrusive and non-intrusive". Reflects comments related to changing "on-stream" inspection to non-intrusive inspection throughout the document / D Wang
R. Sitton / J. Riley / Ryan Sitton prepared draft for review in Spring 2006 meeting. Review definitions section for On-stream. Include wording cautioning that an external may not present the same opportunity for localized corrosion and internals damage. (See IP 12 wording) May need to include additional NDE coverage, advanced techniques; need to consider areas that may not be accesses (such as under saddle supports). – Resolultion was to consider this as part of RP 572 text and explanations and leave API 510 with “on-stream” as it is already.
510-143 / P / 3.36
3.41 / Need to add comments and direction for pressure boundary versus non-pressure boundary / Shell ballot / J. Reynolds / No action yet.
510-144 / P / 5.8.7 / Create definition for "Major repair" and consider its implications for pressure testing. / Shell ballot / J. Reynolds / Proposed: Any work not considered an alteration that removes and replaces part of the pressure boundary, e.g. replacing part of the shell or replacing a head. Term added to pressure test. This should be part of the review for scorecard item 510-146
510-146 / P / 3 / Create a definition for pressure testing and leak testing versus testing. Clarify these concepts. ASME PCC-2 uses term “tightness testing”. Review use of terms hydrostatic, pneumatic, and other wording associated with testing. / Shell ballot / J. Riley,
R. Konet; Bill Bagnato from NBIC / Review changes made in API 510 rewrite. See if further changes are necessary around wording that includes the term “testing”. Compare with new ASME PCC-2 Part 5: Article 5.1 – Pressure and Tightness Testing of Piping and Equipment. Note: NBIC Part 1 and Part 2 subgroups doing the same thing for NBIC. Also, include these in RP 572 rewrite.
510-157 / P / 5.5.5 / Remove insulation for susceptible areas for CUI / P. Hunt / P. Hunt / No action yet.
510-161 / P / 8.1.5.4 / Need for an engineer or inspector to approve routine repairs / B. Smallwood / B. Smallwood / No action yet.
510-166 / P / 5.11.4 / Mis-marked materials verification / G. Heath / G. Heath, P. Hunt / Not sure of issue or status.
510-167 / B / 8.1.5.1.1 / Item e: Date for temporary repairs / Unknown / J. Riley / Was API rewrite item 41. Current ballot to change word temporary to interim and include documentation of technical considerations for interim period before more permanent repair is done.
Balloted Fall 2007 (510-26-07).
510-168 / P / 8.1.6.4.2 / Authorized inspector responsible when PWHT welding alternatives are used in lieu of PWHT / J. Reynolds / J. Reynolds / Not sure of status.
510-169 / B / New item / Requirements for vessels in cyclic service / J. Reynolds / J. Riley, Robert Sims / Review roundtable information on cyclic service vessels. Make recommendation on addition wording for inspection requirements. Ballot 510-23-06 pending resolution.
Proposal was revised and approved for reballot in Fall 07 (510-27-07).
510-171 / P / New item / Revise references to API 579 standard when published / J. Riley / J. Riley / Waiting publication of API 579-1 /ASME 579-1 2007 (API 579 Second Edition). Then correct all references in API 510 and API 570.
510-172 / B / 5.8.1
8.1.5 / ASME PCC-2 References / J. Riley / J. Riley / Draft ballot reviewed Spring 2007. Current ballot prepared for review in Fall 2007 (510-28-07).
510-173 / B / 7.4.2 / Corrosion Averaging in Reinforced Areas. / J. Riley / J. Riley / Ballot prepared for review in Fall 2007 (510-29-07). Refer to inquiry 510-I-04-07.
510-174 / P / 3 / In the definition of same service, quantify a “period of years” that describes the length of time the vessel’s operating conditions have been consistent. / P. Hunt
Bal. 510-15-06
510-175 / P / 5.5.3.2 / Add text that mentions the purpose of performing the inspection. / G. Alvarado
Bal. 510-16-06
510-176 / P / 7.1.1.2 / When evaluating a corrosion rate, add a first step to assure that the NDE readings used to determine wall thickness are of sufficient accuracy and precision to calculate a valid corrosion rate of suitable precision. / G. Alvarado
Bal. 510-17-06
510-177 / P / 5.5.1 / We must consider that certain process parameters will change that are intrinsic to the process and cannot be lowered. This does not necessarily mean the unit needs to be shutdown or equipment replaced. It does mean that if there is potential consequence to reliability or safety that qualified people determine the appropriate course of action, if any is needed. See added wording to first sentence below. / G. Alvarado
Bal. 510-20-06
510-178 / P / 5.7.2.4c,d
5.11.2 / The word "excessive" is used in several places in the document. I would suggest we consider a more definitive descriptor if possible (maybe a range) since this a relative term and may cause the reader to make an incorrect judgment. / R. Goodman
JISI Ballot 1
510-179 / P / 3 / Add definition for “corrosion allowance”. / R. Duvic
JISI Ballot 1
510-180 / P / 3 / Add definition for “damage mechanism / R. Riley
JISI Ballot 1
510-181 / P / 3.2 / Add a definition for "data report". This is a somewhat generic term / D. Layman
JISI Ballot 1
510-182 / P / 3.21 / Delete the word “visual” in the definition of external inspection. The document addresses other types of inspection for external inspection. / N. Faransso
JISI Ballot 1
510-183 / P / 3.22 / In the definition of FFS, delete the word “conditions” and change “integrity” to “structural integrity”. / G. Buchheim
JISI Ballot 1
510-184 / P / 3.41 / Change the definition of “non-pressure boundary” to read: “Components of, or the portion of . . .” / G. Buchheim
JISI Ballot 1
510-185 / P / 5 / Add a section covering inspection of pressure gages. / C. Harley
JISI Ballot 1
510-186 / P / 5 / Add new section covering inspection audits. / D. Layman
JISI Ballot 1
510-187 / P / 5.1.1.3 / Add requirement to periodically review the inspection plans. / R. Riley
JISI Ballot 1
510-188 / P / 5.1.2 / In the minimum contents of an inspection plan, add “CMLs” to item (d) and add a new item (h): “acceptance/rejection criteria”. / C. Harley
JISI Ballot 1
510-189 / P / 5.6.3 / Add a list of characteristics that could lead to the need for the selection of more CMLs (see JISI draft). / O. Konski
JISI Ballot 1
510-190 / P / 5.7.1 / Show list of examination techniques in a table with columns of: Damage Type, Flaw Type, Inspection Technique, ASME Section V Article. / G. Buchheim
JISI Ballot 1
510-191 / P / 5.7.2 / Since corrosion loss can take three forms, uniform, local, and pitting, suggest changing the first sentence to “Corrosion may cause a uniform loss, a localized loss, or may cause a pitted appearance.”. Suggest ending the second sentence after the word “visually”. Suggest adding a sentence, “For all three forms of metal loss, measurements are necessary to determine the extent and magnitude of the loss.”, after the first sentence. / G. Buchheim
JISI Ballot 1
510-192 / P / 5.7.2.4 / Modify the factors that can reduce the accuracy of UT measurements (see JISI ballot comments). / G. Heath
JISI Ballot 1
510-193 / P / 5.8.2.1 / Add an equation of the hydrostatic test pressure for vessels designed to ASME B&PV Code Section VIII, Division 2. / G. Buchheim
JISI Ballot 1
510-194 / P / 5.8.2.2 / Identify a more appropriate term for “non-code related pressure test”. / G. Rodery
JISI Ballot 1
510-195 / P / 5.8.4.2 / Add guidance on actions to take after a pressure test and what to do if potable water is not available, including establishing a minimum chloride level (see JISI ballot comments).
Make the inspector’s verification of the water quality mandatory (change should to shall). / R. Goodman
G. Buchheim
JISI Ballot 1
510-196 / P / 5.8.5 / Require an engineer to review the potential personnel and property risks when substituting a pneumatic test for a hydrostatic test. / G. Buchheim
JISI Ballot 1
510-197 / P / 5.9.1 / Reword to include the use of component markings and/or a simple magnet to check carbon steel materials. The use of an alloy analyzer can be used at the discretion of the inspector. / E. Ellis
JISI Ballot 1
510-198 / P / 6.3.1 / Clean up this section by revising with better code-like language and create a table with recommended maximum intervals similar to Table 6-1 in API 570. / C. Rodery
JISI Ballot 1
510-199 / P / 7.4 / Remove FFS assessment from 510. This can be done only after Level 1 in 579 is made uniform in its complexity and able to be applied by an inspector and referenced in the inspection codes. / G. Buchheim
JISI Ballot 1
510-200 / P / 7.4.4 / Look at incorporating the new information in ASME Section VIII Div 2 to the alternative evaluation methods for thinning. / C. Rodery
JISI Ballot 1
510-201 / P / 8.1.5.1.2.3 / Clarify appropriateness of piggybacking reinforcement pads (ASME Code does not prohibit and a sketch also appears in Bednar’s Pressure Vessel Design Handbook) / C. Rodery
JISI Ballot 1
510-202 / P / Verify wording and use of TML’s versus CML’s in latest edition of API 510. / ConocoPhillips Email March 2008.
510-203 / P / 5.4.4 Vessels in cyclic service (cycles of pressure, temperature, or combinations of both pressure and temperature) should be evaluated for potential failures. The following considerations should be evaluated where applicable for vessels in cyclic service:
a. originally designed and fabrication based on an applicable construction code with additional consideration of cyclic service operation;
b. potential for internal or external corrosion (e.g. corrosion under insulation), cracking, or other types of damage during cycling and at steady state;
c. potential for fatigue cracking of the vessel and contributing fatigue propagation from internal or external vessel attachments, repairs, modifications, corrosion, damage (e.g. gouges);
d. engineering analysis to determine maximum tolerable flaw sizes and critical locations to assist in selection of NDE of suitable sensitivity and areas for inspection;
e. the need for appropriate NDE to detect fatigue failure or distortion [such as external ultrasonic shearwave flaw detection, external and/or internal wet fluorescent magnetic particle testing time-of-flight diffraction ultrasonics (TOFD), out-of-roundness measurement, and measurements of weld seams for peaking or flattening]. / G Alverado Ballot 510-27-07
510-204 / P / 5.4.4 / Also revise the list of considerations into questions for consideration, as shown below, and make these fatigue "considerations" a requirement, not a suggestion. Also revise the lead-in sentence to draw attention to the fact that these considerations are for their impact on inspection plans, which is sort-of assumed but not implicitly stated. / J Reynolds Ballot 510-27-07
510-205 / P / 8.1.5.1 / 8.1.5.1.5, but refer to the PCC-2 mechanical clamps article. / J Reynolds Ballot 510-28-07
510-206 / P / 7.4.2.4 / Simply stated, all FFS rules should be removed from API 510 and API 570 and replaced with a direct reference to API 579-1/ASME FFS-1. The thickness averaging rules in API 510 and API 570 are not correct and may result in unconservative assessments. In addition, what is in these documents is confusing and of limited.
We are now on the second edition of API 579, the expertise for FFS assessments reside in the API/ASME FFSJC, its time to remove all FFS rules from API 510 and API 570. This is duplication of material, duplication of effort, and likely a waste of committee members time.
In addition, we just published the joint API/ASME document to enhance acceptance by jurisdictions. Duplication of rules in API 510 and API 570 only confuse the issue. In fact, a jurisdiction may decide to limit FFS evaluations based on the old FFS rules in API 510 and API 570, not a good situation.
We should be pointing users of 510. 570 and 653 inspection documents to the API/ASME joint standard for the reasons stated above.