Paper No.

3723

Pipeline Corrosion Management; A Compendium

Bijan Kermani Thierry Chevrot

KeyTech TOTAL E&P
PO Box 275, Camberley Tour Coupole 22D60
Surrey GU15 2FH, UK 92078 Paris-La Défense Cedex, France

ABSTRACT
Pipeline integrity is key to maintaining operational success, safety and security and minimizing harm to the
environment. Corrosion is a dominant contributory factor to failures, leaks and integrity threats in pipelines.
Therefore, its optimum control within an integrity management framework is paramount for the cost effective
design of facilities and ensuring continued, uninterrupted and safe operations within the expected design life.
This paper summarizes major elements of a recent recommended practice (RP) on Pipeline Corrosion
Management (PCM) published by the European Federation of Corrosion (EFC). The RP goes into details on a
methodical approach to carrying out PCM. It is a step change in the approach, methodology and necessary
elements in ensuring integrity of pipelines in the oil and gas industry enabling improved safety, security and
minimizing the impact on the environment.
Key words: Corrosion, feedback, inspection, injection, pipeline, production, management, monitoring, off-
shore, on-shore, review.

PREFACE
Development, implementation and continual updating of a successful corrosion management framework are key
components of operating a pipeline throughout its production life, whatever the operating conditions. As a
consequence, it is important that a tailor-made corrosion management program is put in place to actively
manage corrosion from the earliest stages through to the end of pipeline life to ensure trouble free operations.
Such an approach needs to be taken on board and be implemented in the technical/commercial assessment of
new field developments, in prospect evaluations, and for operating existing pipeline systems.
Several industry surveys1,2 have shown that corrosion is a dominant contributory factor to failures, leaks and
integrity threat in pipelines. Therefore, its optimum control within an integrity management framework is
paramount for the cost effective design of facilities and ensuring continued, uninterrupted and safe operations
within the expected design life.
As part of a join industry project (JIP), a recommended practice (RP) was compiled to improve and manage
corrosion in upstream pipeline systems. The focus of the RP was placed on corrosion exclusively; both internal
and external. However, other integrity threats should be considered and addressed within an appropriate Asset
Integrity Management (AIM) program to enable integrity and reliability assurance.

©2014 by NACE International.

Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
Page 1
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
1
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 The RP has been published by EFC3. It is a compendium of current best practices and state of the art
knowledge by major operators, engineering contractors and service companies involved in hydrocarbon
production and transportation. It is intended to contribute to continued and trouble free operation of
pipelines. This paper captures, summarizes and includes major sections of the publication.

Background
The RP provides overview of elements, steps and measures necessary to manage corrosion of pipelines in oil
and gas production and transportation. It has been developed from feedback of operating experience,
research outcomes and operating companies’ in-house studies and practices. It has captured extensive
inputs from operating companies, manufacturers, engineering contractors and service providers.
The RP is not intended to provide a prescriptive framework for PCM, but only to outline, without going into
details, techniques, steps or measures which have been demonstrated as successful in the identification and
management of the corrosion threats to oilfield pipelines facilities. It also makes reference to existing and
recognized international standards whenever possible, without further details of their contents.
By following the procedures outlined in the RP, confidence can be gained that the levels of corrosion control
and management are appropriate for safe and trouble free operations.
The RP incorporates some minimum operational requirements and practices to ensure that when managing
corrosion in pipelines, fundamental principles are followed. It covers management of corrosion for pipelines
carrying hydrocarbons, injection water and/or produced water from design to decommissioning. It is
structured to follow the logical steps of a basic corrosion management process and makes references to
relevant and available International standards and/or recommended practices.
The recommendations set out in the RP are meant to provide flexibility and must be used in conjunction with
competent technical judgments. Nevertheless, it remains the responsibility of the user of the RP to judge its
suitability for a particular application or context.

Definitions
In the context of this paper as reflected in the RP, pipeline is defined as a line which carries fluids in
upstream hydrocarbon production operations from wellheads or production sites to process sites (including
platforms, reception plants, and downstream facilities) and vice versa. It excludes wells, vessels, rotating
equipment and process pipeworks.
Similarly, PCM is defined as that part of the overall pipeline management system (PMS) and operating
practices which is concerned with the development, implementation, review and change of the corrosion
policy. In the RP, PCM covers the management of corrosion from design to decommissioning, for upstream
pipeline systems carrying hydrocarbons, injection water and/or produced water. While numerous instances
of pipeline leak and failure are reported annually, the challenge to managing their occurrences has not been
reflected in the production of many international standards.

CONTENTS
The approach adopted in the RP follows the systematic steps taken by most operating companies in the
implementation of PCM. It follows the logical steps of a basic corrosion management process and is
structured accordingly. This includes assessment, mitigating measures, design and implementation,
monitoring and inspection, review and change of duty.
The structure of the document is captured in Figure 1 with a brief description of each Chapter summarized in
Table 1 further details of which are given in later sections of this paper.
Additional specific references to items or equipment are covered within respective annexes as outlined in
Table 1 and Figure 1.

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
This Chapter focuses on introducing the subject, outlines the objectives encompassing the scope of the RP,
purpose and benefits from the implementation of PCM program. The Chapter underlines necessary
management commitments and competency requirements.
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 2
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
2
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 Objectives of the RP
The RP aimed to produce a reference document to achieve the following objectives:
 To capture and compile into a comprehensive document industry-wide information in relation to PCM
 To define and outline common practices in PCM available amongst oil and gas operating companies
and engineering design houses to:
 Ease discussions with projects’ partners worldwide
 Deal with third parties tie-ins
 To agree with engineering design houses on processes and approaches necessary to define and
characterize corrosion management requirements at the design stage
The RP should be treated as an integral part of a pipeline management system (PMS).

Figure 1. Structure of the document.

Scope
Table2 and Figure 2 summarize the scope of the RP, and present a list of excluded items/equipment where
applicable. It should be noted that items within the RP include pig launchers and receivers.

Benefits of PCM Program

This section reinforces the fact that development and implementation of a structured corrosion
management program will ensure continued and safe operations of pipelines. In addition, key benefits
arising from the development and implementation of PCM program include:
 Balancing CAPEX and OPEX.
 Optimizing materials selection and corrosion control measures.
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 3
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
3
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
  Minimizing any adverse effect on the environment.
 Providing safety and security.
 Understanding of corrosion activities in pipeline systems by:
 Providing an early warning of active corrosion which enables cost-effective and early intervention
 Directing towards mitigation and monitoring measures
 Confirming effectiveness of remedial measures
 Enabling better-informed integrity, maintenance and repair planning decisions
 Providing feedback on operational conditions leading to corrosion and tailoring corrosion modeling
activities.
Overall, PCM together with risk based assessment (RBA) methodologies within the context of AIM will lead
to minimizing loss of containment, as well as optimizing future repairs and inspection needs. This can result
in potential cost savings.
Table 1
Contents of the RP
Chapter/Section Description
Chapter 1 Introduction outlining the scope, purpose of PCM, objectives, benefits and applicability of the RP
Pipeline description and register covering basic design data required for assessing and managing corrosion in
Chapter 2
pipeline systems
A description of information required to assess corrosion, competency level required to carry out such
Chapter 3
assessments, types of threats and overview of corrosion assessment methodologies
Chapter 4 Key elements of mitigation actions for internal and external corrosion control
Chapter 5 Necessity and means for corrosion monitoring and data gathering
Chapter 6 Necessity for inspection and its contribution to PCM
Chapter 7 Highlighting steps, measures and manners to review and provide feedback
Chapter 8 Change of duty and implementation of change
Annex A Covering specific reference to corrosion management of flexible pipelines
Covering specific reference to corrosion management of clad pipes, liners and corrosion resistant alloy (CRA)
Annex B
lines
Annex C Covering specific guidance on pig trap inspection and maintenance
Annex D Covering specific reference to corrosion management of manifolds
Annex E Covering specific reference to corrosion management of catenary risers
Annex F Covering specific reference to corrosion management of CO2 injection lines
Annex G Covering specific reference to corrosion management of steam injection lines
Annex H Covering specific reference to corrosion management of injection lines
Annex I Abbreviations and definitions

Management Commitment
The implementation, use, and maintenance of a suitable PCM program require adequate resources and
therefore, management commitment.
Typical ways of demonstrating management commitment may include:
 The preparation of multi-annual budgets dedicated to the PCM in order to enable middle/long term
planning.
 Regular (annual) management reviews of the effectiveness of the PCM as part of the overall AIM
program.
 The formal approval of a corrosion management policy.
 The maintenance of competencies and skill levels in the team responsible for PCM, which can be
encouraged by:
 Rewarding career path
 Establishing adequate continuity through succession plans
 Recognizing expertise of key personnel
 Ensuring the implementation of specific competency development programs.
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 4
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
4
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 Table 2
Scope of the RPa
b
Items Covered by The RP Excluded Items

 Lines handling gas prepared for domestic use (gas distribution systems)
 Lines handling processed products
 Valves and rotating equipment
 Subsea templates
 Pressure vessels
Risers, transportation pipelines and trunklines for
 Topside/surface facilities
liquids, gases and multiphase fluids
 Compression stations
 Utility lines/umbilicals/chemical injection lines
 Drain lines
 Non metallic materials
c
 Slug catchers
Crude oil storage, handling facilities, vessels and rotating equipment, heat
Flowlines and gathering lines
exchangers, field facilities and processing plants
Manifolds and PLEMS Wellhead template
Catenary/dynamic risers J tube, Caissons
Pig launchers and receivers Valves
Flexible pipelines
CRA and CRA clad/lined and non metallic lined
pipelines
Injection lines (CO2 injection, steam lines) Pumps, chemical injection lines, steam generation, CO2 removal plant
Notes:
a: In the context of the RP, flowlines, gathering lines and trunklines are considered as pipelines
b: Items within the RP include pig launchers and receivers
c: While slug catchers are designed within the pipeline codes, they are project specific and not included in the RP.

Responsibilities/Accountabilities:
Corrosion management in general is an activity requiring the involvement of several disciplines. In the case
of PCM, it is necessary that responsibilities and accountabilities of the different entities and personnel
involved are clearly defined and documented to ensure that:
 All activities required by the PCM are adequately addressed and carried out.
 The interfaces between the different entities are clear.
 The PCM program is followed rigorously and efficiently, thereby avoiding duplicated tasks.
 Each task related to the PCM program is carried out by personnel with adequate qualification and
experience.
The easiest and most reliable way of documenting responsibilities and accountabilities is to produce an
interface matrix as typically represented in a “Responsible Accountable Consulted Informed” (RACI) format.
This RACI describes the participation of various personnel in completing tasks or deliverables for a particular
pipeline system. This is particularly useful in clarifying roles and responsibilities in cross-
functional/departmental projects as well as processes involved in PCM.

Corrosion Management Policy:

A corrosion management policy is essential to clearly document:
 Management and personnel commitment towards the PCM
 High level objectives of the PCM
 Performance targets
 Means and resources to achieve these objectives.
The corrosion management policy can be complemented by other documents giving more detailed
information and directives about the various tasks to be achieved and procedures to be followed. These may
be related to a variety of topics which may for example include: corrosion assessments, corrosion
monitoring, chemical treatment, maintenance of protective coatings, etc.
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 5
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
5
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 Legends
A Individual producing well J Compressor station
B Subsea manifold K Export terminal
C Pipeline End Manifold (PLEM) L Import terminal
D Subsea template M In-field flowlines
E Offshore producing/ processing facilities N In-field manifolds
F WI/WAG wells P Let-down station
G Landfall Q Gas storage field
H Onshore processing facilities R Gas distribution network
Notes: Solid lines: Items included within the scope of the RP
Dashed lines: Items excluded from the scope of the RP
Items within the scope of the RP include pig launcher and receiver

Figure 2. A schematic of typical pipeline systems with coverage and exclusions within the RP.

Optimization and Use of Corrosion Modeling

The philosophy behind the RP is to reinforce the importance of methodologies, corrosion mitigation actions,
acquiring feedback and using operating company’s experience to achieve effective PCM. It is therefore,
recognized that while useful for corrosion assessment, corrosion models in isolation cannot be relied upon
solely to implement a satisfactory PCM program. In this context, corrosion models should be used bearing in
mind corrosion monitoring/inspection data, historical events, operational trends, past experience and field
data.
Furthermore, corrosion models should be used by personnel having an overall understanding of corrosion
management, in order to take into account their limits and their relevance with regards to field conditions
and experience.

Competency of Personnel
The competency of personnel involved in corrosion management activities is of paramount importance to
the success of PCM. While this will normally be handled through the corporate policy of the operating
company, the following aspects should be underlined:
 Key positions are identified in the PCM program in order to ensure that they are staffed on a
permanent basis, and that a multi-annual recruitment and training plan is made available.

©2014 by NACE International.

Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 6
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
6
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
  Personnel should have received adequate training to undertake the tasks they will be assigned to in
the PCM program. Training should be adapted to these tasks and should involve courses and / or on
the job training,
 It is of importance that all personnel involved in PCM, in whatever capacity, spend sufficient time in
the field to become familiar with operational practices. It is reinforced that PCM should not solely be
a “paper exercise”, as many deficiencies can only be identified on site through operational
involvement
 It is also important that personnel involved in PCM are suitably motivated.

CHAPTER 2: PIPELINE REGISTER AND DESCRIPTION

An overriding parameter in PCM is full knowledge of pipelines for which an operating company is
responsible. This knowledge is gained through development and updating of a full pipeline register
containing all related physical, logistical and operational parameters and information. Such information will
also contain the basic data necessary to implement respective corrosion management program.
Such a register characterizes the pipeline and should include:
i. All details related to the pipeline location, field and history.
ii. Design details including pipe configuration, materials data.
iii. Operating parameters covering types of fluid and environment (burial, atmospheric, marine, immersed,
soil if known, etc), operating conditions, acid gas contents and water chemistry.
iv. Internal and external corrosion mitigating measures covering operational pigging, chemical treatment,
type of cathodic protection (CP) system, coatings.
v. Inspection strategy including pigging capacity and related information.
This Chapter outlines necessary information required to capture full inventory of pipeline systems, their
compilation into the pipeline register and provides a snapshot of steps and elements in this process.

Operating Conditions
The pipeline register should document the basic operating conditions of each pipeline to provide a sound
basis for performing corrosion assessments. Operational conditions will also enable corrosion engineers to
identify potential corrosion threats, their significance, and their implications in terms of mitigation actions
and monitoring. The operating conditions can be divided into two parts as follows:

i. Physical Operating Conditions

As most corrosion mechanisms are affected by or sensitive to the operating pressures and temperatures
(both internal and environmental), these parameters need to be documented in the pipeline register.
Furthermore, the type of external environment (burial, atmospheric, marine, immersed, etc.) needs to be
documented to ensure that a complete external corrosion assessment can be performed.

ii. Fluid Characteristics

Fluid characteristics are of paramount importance for carrying out corrosion assessments, defining
mitigation actions and monitoring of corrosion. These should be captured and incorporated into the pipeline
register.
Organic acids are important both in terms of system corrosivity and especially for determining the risk of top
of line corrosion (TOLC). The presence of solids (as sand, mineral scales, etc) also needs registering.

CHAPTER 3: CORROSION ASSESSMENT

Pipelines experience many types of corrosion damage, internally and externally including general and
localized corrosion. These damage mechanisms are influenced and governed by physical, chemical and
hydrodynamic aspects of the pipeline system. Identification of key corrosion threats is a fundamental step in
PCM and is an iterative process throughout the design, operation and service life of pipelines. This Chapter
covers types of corrosion threat, information required to carry out corrosivity assessments, hotspot
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 7
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
7
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 identification and system corrosivity evaluation for both routine and non-routine operations. In addition, it
includes considerations on competency levels required for carrying out corrosivity assessments.

Relevant Corrosion Threats

The main corrosion threats in pipeline systems are outlined in Tables 3 and 4 with relevance to service and
primary influencing parameters, for internal and external corrosion, respectively. The internal corrosion
threats covered within the RP are schematically shown in Figure 3. The threats listed in Tables 3 and 4 are
broadly in line with time dependence threat categorization described in ASME B31.8S.
Table 3
Internal Corrosion Threats
Type of Threat Relevance to Service Primary Influencing parameters
Microbiologically influenced corrosion Oil and produced/injection Sulphate, nutrients, bacteria type, pH, flow rate,
(MIC) water salinity, temperature
CO2 corrosion Oil, gas and PW/PG injection P&T, acid gas contents, in-situ pH, flow regime, water
cut
H2S corrosion Oil, gas and PW/PG injection P&T, acid gas contents, in-situ pH, flow regime, water
cut, acid gas ratio, microbial activities
Top-of-line corrosion (TOLC) Stratified Wet Gas T, organic acid content, water condensation rate
Oxygen corrosion Water injection O2 content, T and flow rate, residual chlorine
Under-deposit corrosion Oil and produced/injection Solids, scales, flow rate
water
Preferential weld corrosion Oil, gas and PW/PG injection Weld metallurgy, flow regime, type inhibitor, water
salinity
Crevice corrosion Oil, gas and PW/PG injection Joint deign and configurations, oxygen content
Galvanic corrosion Water injection Dissimilar joints, oxygen contents
Erosion and corrosion-erosion Oil, gas and PW/PG injection Solids, flow regime
Corrosion and cracking from injected At chemical injection point Design of injection point, chemical dose rate, acid
chemicals type, oxygen concentration
Sulphide stress cracking (SSC) Oil, gas and PW/PG injection pH, H2S, T, steel metallurgy
Hydrogen induced cracking (HIC) Oil, gas and PW/PG injection pH, H2S, T, steel cleanliness and metallurgy
Corrosion-fatigue Dynamic risers Cyclic stress, system corrosivity

Table 4
External Corrosion Threats
Type of Threat Relevance to Service Primary Influencing parameters
Microbiologically influenced corrosion Buried pipelines Soil type, coating, CP inefficiency, anaerobic
(MIC) conditions
Crevice corrosion Above ground pipe support, Joint and support design
flanges
Galvanic corrosion Flanges, couplings, fittings, Dissimilar joints, water wetting
insulating joints
Soil corrosion Land lines Soil type, coating, CP inefficiency
Atmospheric corrosion Above ground lines Coating, environment
AC-induced corrosion Buried land lines Third party infrastructures, telluric activities
Corrosion under insulation (CUI) Above ground insulated lines Type of insulation, the environment
Stray current corrosion Buried land lines Third party infrastructures
Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) -high Buried land lines Soil conditions, T, coating degradation, CP. pH, cyclic
pH stress
Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) - Buried land lines Coating degradation, CP, pH and cyclic stress
neutral pH
Corrosion-fatigue Submarine lines Cyclic stress
Hydrogen embrittlement Submarine lines CP overprotection, coating, steel/weldment hardness

Gathering Data Input

Prior to undertaking the corrosion assessment, a list of key data should be gathered. It is important to
recognize that any sample is only representative of the process stream at the point where it has been taken.

©2014 by NACE International.

Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 8
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
8
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 Changes in the fluid chemistry between the inlet and sampling point, or during the time between sampling
and analysis should be understood and accounted for in interpreting the results.
During the operating life of a pipeline, the fluid chemistry and gas contents may vary with process upsets
and/or operational requirements. Therefore, frequency of water and gas sampling programs need to be
adequate and representative and their trends with time recognized.
Data relating to external condition tend to be collected less frequently, but are no less important and should
still be subject to regular update and analysis. These may include the soil and ground water conditions,
environmental conditions, and location (risers, landfalls, etc).

Figure 3. A summary of internal corrosion threats included in the RP (courtesy of reference 4).

System Corrosivity
System corrosivity is governed by many parameters and also the nature of pipeline use, which generally falls
into two broad categories of production or injection. For production, system corrosivity is associated with
acid gases (CO2 and H2S) which are invariably produced with the hydrocarbon phase. In contrast, for
injection, system corrosivity is governed by the nature of fluid being transported and primarily by dissolved
oxygen content but also CO2 and H2S if produced water is re-injected – specific case of PCM for injection lines
is covered in Annex H.
This Section describes methods and procedures used in evaluating fluid corrosivity in pipeline systems key
elements of which are outlined in Table 5.
Many predictive models or criteria have been developed which attempt to correlate corrosion rate with
service conditions. However, with the use of these predictive models in isolation, there is a danger of
working with a too simplistic or clear-cut picture of the situation. Experience is also required in the
interpretation and implementation of the outcome.

CHAPTER 4: CORROSION MITIGATION

Corrosion mitigation aims at controlling the rate and/or distribution of corrosion to a level that is
economically justifiable in the context of pipeline planned life, whilst minimizing human and environmental
risks.
Corrosion mitigation in pipelines falls broadly into four themes:
 Change of materials of construction through selection of appropriate materials
 Change/modify operational parameters such as flow, temperature, remove water
 Change/modify fluid chemistry through removal/reduction of corrosive gasses (O2, CO2 and H2S),
addition of corrosion inhibitor or neutralizing the pH
 Change/modify interfacial condition of metal through surface modification (coatings) and CP.

©2014 by NACE International.

Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 9
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
9
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 Pipeline corrosion mitigation is achieved through one or a combination of these methods. The relative merits
of each approach must be viewed in the context of the application, the required service life, the severity of
the conditions and economy. No hard and fast rules exist in a general sense, and many decisions are made
based on past experience and individual preference. Finally the value and importance of corrosion
monitoring and inspection should not be forgotten and goes hand-in-hand with the above for the most part
and certainly where carbon and low alloy steels are used.
This Chapter deals with methods, approaches and procedures in mitigating both internal and external
corrosion in pipelines. It describes implementation methods and goes on to outline merits of each technique
and their specific requirements. Finally a section is assigned to outlining PCM targets as an integrated part of
the overall PCM program.
The mitigation methods and associated monitoring and inspection methods are outlined in Table 6.
Table 5
Summary of Corrosion Evaluation Methods
Corrosion Model and
Media Manifestation Principal Parameters
Threat Standard
Hydrocarbon and CO2 Metal Loss  CO2 Many models,
Water Corrosion (general and /or  Organic acids Operating
localized corrosion)  Operating conditions company
 Water chemistry Preference
Production

Hydrocarbon and H2S Metal Loss  CO2/H2S ratio Subjective – no

Water Corrosion (general and /or  Operating conditions proven model
localized corrosion)  Water chemistry
Hydrocarbon and SSC/HIC Different type of  H2S NACE MR0175/ISO
6
Water cracking  In-situ pH 15156
 Operating conditions
 Water chemistry
Produced water, H2S/CO2/O2 Metal Loss  CO2 No proven model
commingled water, corrosion (general and /or  H2S
produced gas, WAG localized corrosion)  O2
Injection

etc  Operating conditions

 Water chemistry
Sea, brackish, aquifer O2 Corrosion Metal Loss  O2 Many models,
or river waters, WAG, (general and /or  Operating conditions Operating
commingled water localized corrosion)  Water chemistry company
Preference

Setting PCM Targets

To ensure intended mitigation actions are realized in service, appropriate targets should be assigned and
reviewed frequently. Depending upon the pipeline system, the targets may differ. However, these will be
linked not only to the mitigation methods described in the present Chapter, but also to the monitoring and
surveillance/inspection activities. Common key targets should address the following typical considerations:
 Is the corrosion rate, including localized damage rate, within the acceptable range set for the pipeline?
 Is the efficiency of mitigation systems being met?
 Are corrosion monitoring systems functioning as intended (including frequency of sampling and
analysis) and respective data within the acceptable limits?
 Is the pipeline subject to In-line Inspection (ILI) per the PCM program and respective data within the
acceptable range set for the pipeline?
 Are data arising from any other pipeline inspection activities or operational pigging in line with
pipeline PCM targets?
 Are the nature and composition of the transported fluids in line with the intended design?
 Is the quality of injected fluids with the expected range, i.e. Dissolved O2, CO2 and H2S, organic acid
content etc.?
As part of the review and feedback process, where service changes occur or in response to
monitoring/inspection data, PCM targets may require adjustments during the life of the pipeline. Failure to
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 10
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
10
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 meet the PCM targets would require full fitness for service assessment to determine the consequence of
deviation on pipeline status.
Table 6
Examples of mitigation action grouped together under various areas and showing associated monitoring
and inspection activities
Compliance Application
Mitigation Verification
Group Checks (product line or Examples of Typical PCM Targets
Method (Inspection)
(Monitoring) injection line)
No verification under
normal
Materials
Selection

Corrosion
Operating circumstances, other Water and gas analysis and compliance
resistant Both
envelope than assuring with design basis
materials
operating limits is
adhered to.
Process o
Process Control

Dehydration Dew Point / BS&W Product 10 C above dewpoint

control
Operational Pigging Compliance with operational pigging
Pigging records Both
Pigging frequency frequency and pig type
O2, CO2 and
Mechanical O2, CO2and H2S Both as Daily gas analysis reports showing
H2S
gas stripping concentrations applicable compliance with design
monitoring
Injection
Injection rate measurements according
Corrosion rates/ residual Wall thickness
Both to specification, CI residual in water
Inhibition inhibitor measurements
above the specified threshold value
level/
Oxygen Oxygen concentration Injection rate measurements according
Chemical Treatments

Scavenger (Ox Injection rates / wall thickness Injection to specification, Ox Sca measured
Sca) measurements residuals below specified critical value
Injection rate measurements according
H2S Scavenger Injection rates H2S concentration Both to specification, H2S content below
specified critical value
Frequency of biocide treatment
according to specification; sampling
Biocide Injection rates Biological activity Both
frequency and measured bacterial
activities with the specified limits

Injection rate and in-situ pH above the

pH Control Injection rates pH Both
specified threshold values,
Coatings
Organic

Periodic assessment of coating

Coating and Coating
Coating Survey Both conditions by visual comparison
painting degradation
methods using applicable standards

Frequency according to design basis

Impressed Pipeline Potential
Protection

Both and potential value in compliance with

Cathodic

current potential measurements

criteria from applicable standards
Frequency according to design basis
Sacrificial Pipeline Potential
Both and potential value in compliance with
Anodes potential measurements
criteria from applicable standards

CHAPTER 5: CORROSION MONITORING AND DATA MANAGEMENT

Corrosion monitoring is defined as the systematic and continual direct or indirect measurement of system
corrosivity. Its objective is to assist in the understanding of the corrosion process and/or to obtain
information for use in controlling corrosion and reviewing mitigation actions. This Chapter outlines
requirements, methods and information required to carry out internal as well as external corrosion
monitoring of pipelines. It includes a section on data management as successful PCM is entirely dependent
on the quality of information gathered and its respective analysis and interpretation.
It is of paramount importance to monitor corrosion before and after any change in service conditions and/or
mitigation measures. The knowledge gained from an effective monitoring system allows the
characterization of fluid corrosivity and the performance of the mitigation actions. The information gained
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 11
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
11
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 may also assist in the optimization of similar systems for future projects. Direct or indirect corrosion
monitoring can be challenging and reliance should not be placed on a single method or data from a single
location whenever operationally possible.
Table 7
A general guide on the application of corrosion monitoring techniques
Direct Methods Indirect Methods

Electrical Resistance

Electrical Continuity

Corrosion Product
Dissolved Gasses

Hydrogen Probe
Galvanic Probes
Electrochemical
Coupons/Spool

Techniques 6
Weight Loss

Monitoring

Flexible UT
Bacterial

Mapping

Analysis
Probes
Type of Service

Probe

Solids
Piece

pH
Water Injection √ √5 √4 √ √ √ O2, Cl2 √ √ √ √

Crude Oil,
CO2,
Water, Gas √ √ √3 Χ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
H2S
Service
CO2,
Aquifer Water √ √ 1 √ √ √ √ √ √
H2S
Unstablized CO2,
√ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Crude Oil H2S
Gas and
√ √ Χ Χ Χ √ 7 √ √ √ √
Condensate
CO,
Produced Water √ √ Χ 2 √ √ O2, √ √ √ √
H2S
1. Depends on water quality. LPR unsuitable where there is a low ion content or a strong tendency (or other form of electrode
contamination) is possible
2. May be used where oxygen content is high
3. Only in water cuts above ca. 10-20%
4. Depends on water quality. LPR unsuitable where biofilming tendency
5. Intrusive probes preferred. Flush mounted unsuitable where biofilming tendency.
o
6. Maximum temperature 120 C
7. May be useful for condensed water in sweet gas export lines.

Table 8
Typical Elements of External Corrosion Monitoring
System and Intent Parameters, Methods and Criteria
Verification of rectifiers  Output potential and current anode resistant
Efficiency of Cathodic protection, onshore  Potential Surveys (ON/OFF)
External CP pipelines (protected by impressed current)  Closed Interval Survey (CIS)
Efficiency of Cathodic protection, offshore  Potential surveys
pipelines (protected by sacrificial anodes)  Anode consumption
External Coating  Excavation (direct Assessment
Coating monitoring
Systems  CIS, Direct current voltage gradient (DCVG)

Internal Corrosion Monitoring

Continuous or periodic pipeline monitoring activities may be divided into several categories, including
 Fluids and process monitoring
 Corrosion monitoring (e.g. local corrosion measurements)
Results from monitoring are important inputs to the PCM program and can be used to define the need for
inspection. The extent of monitoring should be defined in the overall PCM program and will be a function of
pipeline criticality, pipeline material and corrosivity of transported fluids.
Key elements of internal monitoring are included in Table 7.

©2014 by NACE International.

Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 12
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
12
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 External Corrosion Monitoring
CP potential surveys are the most common methods used in the industry to monitor external corrosion of
pipelines. The pipeline industry has developed many criteria to assess CP effectiveness. These criteria may
require the measurement of On or Off potentials. Therefore, the monitoring technique may be chosen
depending on the selected CP criteria. Permanently installed monitoring devices for cathodically protected
pipelines should be considered especially when the line is not accessible for frequent potential
measurements. Such monitoring may include stab plates (offshore), reference electrode(s) for potential
measurement, monitored anodes for current determination and/or coupons and probes.
When the potential survey indicates that the pipeline is under protected, more complex actions such as the
use of fault location methods and/or excavation should be carried out to assess potential coating defects.
Key elements of external monitoring are included in Table 8.

CHAPTER 6: INSPECTION
Corrosion inspection is a key activity in ensuring pipeline integrity. Inspection normally refers to the
evaluation of the condition of a pipeline in relation to a standard or a specification. As product types and
their associated requirements have become increasingly complex, inspection has also evolved necessitating
involvement of different skills and state of the art technologies.
Within the context of PCM, inspection consists of a series of steps and actions including data gathering,
analysis and management outlined in this Chapter. These are fed into corrosion assessments and reviews.
Detail of individual inspection techniques is excluded from this Chapter as these are documented widely in
the published literature. However, the Chapter provides guidance on the objectives of inspection, the use of
risk based inspection (RBI) and some of the key issues to be aware of in using inspection within PCM.
The overall process of inspection for pipelines in service is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Typical inspection tasks with integrity management of pipelines.

CHAPTER 7: REVIEW AND FEEDBACK

Review and feedback is the cornerstone of an effective and successful PCM program. The purpose of such
review is to evaluate PCM results against the defined PCM targets set out within the PCM program. It should
be emphasized that this process requires management commitment and understanding of the
implementation of the PCM program. Fully realized, review and feedback is a holistic process, bringing
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 13
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
13
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 together many of the elements which make up the successful practice of PCM program covered in the RP.
For this very reason, it is a complex process. This Chapter outlines necessary steps in the review and
feedback process. A typical process for the review of PCM and inspection data is shown in the Figure 5.
The Chapter does not go into all the details, but it gives an overview to allow better understanding of the
fundamental steps in managing pipelines systems.
The main objective of review is to provide productive feedback on each element of the PCM program so that
necessary improvements can be made to enhance pipeline operation. To be effective, review and feedback
need to be carried out regularly.

Figure 5. Review and assessment of PCM.

Change of Duty and Implementation of Change

The function of a pipeline may change at any time throughout its lifetime to allow transportation of
alternative fluids. Any change to the fluid conveyed will need a reassessment of the pipeline design to
ensure that the pipeline is capable of conveying the fluid safely.
This Chapter outlines necessary steps and information required to implement change of duty in a pipeline
system.
Change of inventory and/or operating conditions may occur for the pipeline systems over their design
lifetimes. These changes typically arise from5:
 Major modifications/remedial work to the pipeline
 Changes in fluid composition or type: pipelines may be designed to operate with dry gas but changes
to the status of offshore installations may only be achieved if the gas can be transported in a wet state
- this may have a significant effect on the integrity of those pipelines and downstream facilities
 Entry of new product into an existing pipeline system
 Changes in production rates
 Changes in safe operating limits e.g. when changing the operating pressure
©2014 by NACE International.
Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 14
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
14
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
  End of use of a pipeline: this notification should set out the steps to be taken to decommission,
dismantle or "abandon" a pipeline. It is envisaged that a notification will comprise a timetable
indicating when the pipeline is to be taken out of service, how long the line was to remain
decommissioned and a description of how the line is to be made permanently safe.
 Changes in pipeline materials and equipment: this may comprise no more than a map or chart
showing where the changes are to take place and a brief description of the material and/or
dimensional changes.
 Re-routing of pipelines: eg. in close proximity to offshore installations which could have an effect on
the safety of the installation
 Re-routing of pipeline risers on offshore installation which may then pass closer to living quarters or
other vulnerable areas.
 The repositioning of Emergency Shut Down Valves (ESDVs) on pipeline risers
 Change of application (eg. from injector to producer etc).
The above is defined as “Change of Duty”.

CHAPTER 8: MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE

A review should to be made to determine how the Change of Duty will affect the originally established
corrosion management program. This will normally follow in-house management of change procedures.
However, in the absence of an in-house procedure aspects that should be taken into consideration in this
review can include
 Exiting pipeline conditions
 Review of feedback report
 New operating/duty conditions
This review should examine all relevant aspects of corrosion management which may include:
 corrosion modeling of the new duty conditions
 compatibility of existing pipeline chemicals with any new chemical used in the original system
 adequacy of existing corrosion mitigating systems
 adequacy of existing pipeline corrosion monitoring facilities for the new operating conditions
 adequacy of existing pipeline inspection plan
 adequacy of any existing pipeline management schemes.
The results of the Change of Duty review should be formally reported.
The conclusions and recommendations arising from the Change of Duty review should be used to update and
revise the PCM program and targets.

ANNEXES
A number of annexes are included in the RP as outlined in Figure 1 and Table 1, There are in relation to
specific items or equipment and their respective necessary corrosion management measures. The annexes
include measures for flexible lines or injection lines outlining specific requirements.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The RP on PCM was compiled to improve and manage corrosion in upstream pipeline systems. This is a
unique document and focuses on corrosion exclusively; both internal and external. The RP is published by
EFC and is a compendium of current best practices and state of the art knowledge by major operators,
engineering contractors and service companies involved in hydrocarbon production and transportation. It is
intended to contribute to continued and trouble free operation of pipelines.
The RP incorporates some minimum operational requirements and practices to ensure that when managing
corrosion in pipelines, fundamental principles are followed. It covers management of corrosion for pipelines
carrying hydrocarbons, injection water and/or produced water from design to decommissioning. It is
structured to follow the logical steps of a basic corrosion management process and makes references to

©2014 by NACE International.

Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 15
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
15
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited
 relevant and available International standards and/or recommended practices. It is intended for use by
personnel from the petroleum industry having knowledge of corrosion and materials.
Overall, PCM together with risk based assessment (RBA) methodologies within the context of AIM will lead
to minimizing loss of containment, as well as optimizing future repairs and inspection needs. This can result
in potential cost savings.
It is hoped that the RP will prove to be a key reference document for engineers, suppliers and contractors
working in the oil and gas industry, paving the way for corrosion free operation of pipelines with the ultimate
goal of improving safety, security and minimizing the impact on the environment.

ABBREVIATIONS
AIM: Asset Integrity Management BS&W: Basic Sediment and Water CP: Cathodic Protection
HIC: Hydrogen Induced Cracking ILI: In-line Inspection RP: Recommended Practice
PCM: Pipeline Corrosion Management PLEM: Pipeline End Manifold PMS: Pipeline Management System
RBA: Risk based assessment RBI: Risk based inspection SCC: Stress Corrosion Cracking
SSC: Sulphide Stress Cracking WAG: Water Alternating Gas WI: Water Injection

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The RP was developed by the Pipeline Corrosion Management Working Group (WG) of the EFC Working Party (WP) 13
on Corrosion in Oil and Gas Production represented by worldwide operators, engineering contractors and service
companies. The RP was the outcome of a JIP sponsored by BG Group, BP, ConocoPhillips, Shell, Statoil, Technip, Total,
Wellstream and Wood Group Integrity Management (WGIM).
The authors would like to express their appreciation to all who have contributed their time and effort to ensure the
successful completion of the RP. In particular we wish to acknowledge significant input from these individuals and their
respective companies: Richard Carroll (BG), Alan Crossland, Ammer Jadoon and Lee Smith (BP), Mike Swidzinski
(ConocoPhillips), Sergio Kapusta (Shell), Trygve Ringstad, Helen Sirnes and Bernt Slogvik (Statoil), Carol Taravel Condat
and Elias Remita (Technip), Richard Clements (Wellstream) and George Winning and Chris White (WGIM).
Finally, kind permission from Total to publish this paper is highly appreciated.

REFERENCES
1. “Analysis of DOT Reportable Incidents for Gas Transmission and Gathering System Pipelines, 1985 through 2000”,
Kiefner and Associates Inc. for the Pipeline Research Council International (PRCI).
2. http://events.nace.org/library/corrosion/pipeline/pipeline-failures
3. “Recommended practice for corrosion management of pipelines in oil and gas production and transportation”, eds
B Kermani and T Chevrot, The Institute of Materials, European Federation of Corrosion, Publication No 64, February
2012,
4. “Guidelines for use of statistics for analysis of sample inspection of corrosion”, prepared by TWI Limited for Health
and Safety Executive, Research Report 16, 2002.
5. A guide to the Pipelines Safety Regulations, Guidance on Regulations, Health and Safety Executive, 1996
6. Petroleum and natural gas industries – Materials for use in H2S containing environments in oil and gas production
NACE MR0175/ISO 15156, Parts 1-3, 2009.

©2014 by NACE International.

Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole, must be in writing to
NACE International, Publications Division, 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.
Page 16
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
16
olga perales - Invoice INV-1094566-L7W0W6, downloaded on 9/26/2016 6:45PM - Single-user license only, copying/networking prohibited