ab-512c peim audit workbook (1)

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Workbook Title of 87

ABSA Audit Workbook: AB-512c

Workbook Revision: 3

Revision Date: 2013-02-01

Audit Checklist conforms to AB-512 Revision 2

Minimum System Requirements: Microsoft Excel 20031 GB Memory (More Recommended)With Excel 2003 Set Macro Security Level to Medium and Enable at StartupWith Excel 2007 Enable Macros in Macro Security

If Color Output is Desired Then Capability to Print to Color Printer, or to PDFFrom Excel and Then to Color Printer, is Necessary

Audit Workbook Version: 3.0

Please print this worksheet to obtain instructions on the use of the Audit workbook

This Microsoft Excel based Pressure Equipment Integrity Management (PEIM) System Audit Workbook is provided at no cost and without software support, by ABSA. The purpose of this Workbook is to facilitate internal auditing of PEIM Systems by examining the same questions/activities and providing the same measurement of compliance as is currently utilized during ABSA audits.

The Audit Workbook includes separate Worksheets for each PEIM element described in the AB-512 Pressure Equipment Integrity Management System Requirements document as well as for some additional certification scope areas (e.g., RBI, quality control procedures for pressure piping construction, pressure welder testing and relief valve servicing) at the end of the PEIM elements. Each Worksheet has a number of questions relating to the respective element or additional certification scope. In case worksheets need to be revised slightly for presentation, the worksheet password is "IMR", without the quotation marks.

The questions are answered by selecting a value in the corresponding cell in the Comply Level column. A description of the possible answers is included in the User Guide Worksheet (see Section 1).

When a question is answered using any value other than "yes", a prompt is generated for the auditor to write a comment in the cell immediately below the question cell. Once this is done, a value can be selected from the pick list for the Comply Level cell. The Workbook will assign a default score that the auditor may adjust for the question or activity unless the "see note" answer is selected, as described in Section 1 of the User Guide Worksheet. For a "see note" entry, which is normally associated with an corresponding finding or observation, the description or note regarding the finding/observation reference and the points assigned for the activity needs to be entered manually by the auditor; however, the worksheet macro will provide a default value at the scoring level of an observation.

When it is necessary to enter a comment or description for a finding or observation that is larger that the original size of the cell below the question the auditor should input the comment and when all of the entry is completed, as the Comply Level entry is selected (for any compliance level other than "yes") the comment row height will resize automatically (i.e., Excel AutoFit function) to contain the full comment text. Comment text entries larger than 255 character will cause difficulties for Excel. One solution for very large comment entries is to unprotect the worksheet and paste some of the comment text below the question text. The answer comment text may then be formatted as blue text. This formatting text color correction will also have to be made on the findings or observations worksheet, as applicable.

Pressure Equipment IntegrityManagement System

Audit Workbook






Audit Workbook

There are two cases where a Not Applicable "NA" entry is appropriate. In the first case where an entire element is NA (e.g., internal audit for an initial PEIMS implementation audit or when an element is not reviewed during a periodic audit), there should be no data entered in the worksheet for the NA element. If the element is not used (i.e., cell D5 is blank) then the result for the element will appear as NA in the summary chart, the printing macro will show the element as NA in the table of contents and the element will not be included in the printed report.

In the second case, only some questions are NA. For example, if the organization does not own/operate boilers or thermal liquid heaters the PER supervision requirements will not apply. In this case it is necessary to provide a brief description of why the question is NA in the comment/answer cell and then the NA response may be selected. If the same comment/answer applies to more than one question the comment can be copied and all of the destination cells may be selected by depressing the "CTRL" key while selecting all of the destination cells and then pasting the applicable comment in all of the cells, without having to type the entry into each cell. In addition, when NA has been selected as the applicable response at least once on a worksheet it is only necessary to enter N into the "Comply Level" cell and Excel will anticipate the NA entry. Entering the first letter of a "Comply Level" entry and the down arrow key repeatedly is a rapid way to make entries in the "Comply Level" column, after the first use of a response.

A summary of the results from the answers to questions for each element are provided in the Chart Worksheet immediately following the Worksheet for each element. The Compliance Level score and chart entry color is different for varying compliance scores, so PEIMS elements that require greater remedial or corrective action are evident, as described in the User Guide Worksheet (see Section 2). An overall Compliance Level measurement using the points assigned for each question or activity is compiled in the Summary Chart Worksheet.

After completing all audit element entries an Audit Report can be generated by clicking the "Clear Sheets" and then "Copy Findings" buttons on the Audit Observations Worksheet. When the Copy Findings button is pressed, relevant data is copied into the Audit Findings and Audit Observations Worksheets from each of the element Worksheets that have been used in the audit, when the compliance level for the respective question is anything other than "yes" or "na" or "see note". In addition, when the "Copy Findings" button is pressed the Table of Contents page numbers are populated depending on the elements that are utilized. If lengthy answers have changed the default pagination for an element the page breaks in the element and the Table of Contents entries will need to be corrected/adjusted by the user.

An Audit Report can be printed by clicking the Print Report button on the Audit Observations Worksheet. It should also be noted that the Table of Contents Page is populated with the page numbers based on a formula that assumes six Findings or Observations will fit on each page of the Findings and Observations Worksheets. If it is necessary to adjust the row heights for Findings or Observations so this is not the case then the Table of Contents page numbers will also have to be corrected/adjusted by the user. The print report function provides options regarding the print selection. Selecting "entire report" will result in a report of approximately 50 pages if audit data has been entered in all base PEIMS elements. After printing any of the reports or questions it is necessary to select the "Workbook Title" page in order to regain functionality within the workbook, otherwise Excel remains in the multiple worksheet selected state.






Audit Workbook

The buttons at the top of the Audit Observations Worksheet activate macros which clear and populate the Audit Findings and Audit Observations Worksheets as described above. After optionally saving the audit results file, an action button is also provided for clearing the entire Workbook in preparation for another audit; however, best practice is to use a new AB-512c Workbook for each audit so it should not be necessary to clear the Workbook. Clearing the Workbook removes all entries on all of the Worksheets excepting the Cover Page through Audit Details Worksheets. An action button is also provided to create a Follow-up Workbook, which is a separate Excel Workbook with just the Findings and Observations Worksheets, that can be provided to clients as an Excel Workbook they can use to track audit follow-up.

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Cover Page of 87

Pressure EquipmentIntegrity Management System Audit Report

For

Company Name

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Table of Contents of 87




Table of ContentsDescription of Contents Page NumberCover Page ……………………………………………………………………………………………….………………. 1Table of Contents ……………………………………………………….………………………………………………… 2Executive Summary ……………….……………………………………………………………………………………… 3Compliance Summary Chart ……….……………………………………………………………………………………. 4Audit Details ………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5Audit Findings ……………….………..………………………………………………………………………………….. 6Audit Observations …………..………..………………………………………………………………………………….. 7Pressure Equipment Integrity Management (PEIM) System Audit Protocol Explanations ………………………….8Element 1 Management Responsibility and Leadership Activities/Questions …………..……………………………NAElement 1 Compliance Chart ………….…………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 2 Quality System Documentation Activities/Questions ………….……………………………………………NAElement 2 Compliance Chart …………….………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 3 Competency and Training Activities/Questions ………….…………………………………………………NAElement 3 Compliance Chart ……….……………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 4 Design Control Activities/Questions …………….……………………………………………………………NAElement 4 Compliance Chart …………….………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 5 Purchasing and Material Control Activities/Questions ……….…………………………………………….NAElement 5 Compliance Chart …………….………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 6 Construction and Installation of Pressure Equipment Activities/Questions ……….…………………… NAElement 6 Compliance Chart ………….…………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 7 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices Activities/Questions ………..………………………… NAElement 7 Compliance Chart …………….………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 8 Operation of Pressure Equipment Activities/Questions ……….………………………………………… NAElement 8 Compliance Chart …………….………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 9 Management of Change Activities/Questions ……….………………………………………………………NAElement 9 Compliance Chart …………….………………………………………………………………………………. NAElement 10 Integrity Assessment Program Activities/Questions ………….………………………………………… NAElement 10 Compliance Chart ……………..……………………………………………………………………………..NAElement 11 Nondestructive Examinations and Testing Activities/Questions ……………..………………………… NAElement 11 Compliance Chart ……………..……………………………………………………………………………..NAElement 12 Repairs and Alterations to Pressure Equipment Activities/Questions ……….………………………….NAElement 12 Compliance Chart …………..………………………………………………………………………………..NAElement 13 Overpressure Protection and Protective Devices Activities/Questions ……………………..……….….NAElement 13 Compliance Chart ………..…………………………………………………………………………………..NAElement 14 Internal Audits Activities/Questions ………….…………………………………..…………………….…...NAElement 14 Compliance Chart ……………..……………………………………………………………………………..NAElement 15 Corrective and Preventative Actions Activities/Questions …………..…………………………………. NAElement 15 Compliance Chart ……………..……………………………………………………………………………..NAElement 16 Accidents and Incidents Activities/Questions ……………..………...………………………………….. NAElement 16 Compliance Chart …………………………………………..………………………………………………..NAAB-505 Risk Based Inspection Requirements …………….…………..………...…………………………………..… NAAB-505 Risk Based Inspection Compliance Chart ….………………..……………………………………………….. NAAB-518 Pressure Piping Construction …………………………………………………...…………………………..… NAAB-518 Pressure Piping Construction Compliance Chart …………………………………...……………………….. NABoiler External Piping Construction, B&PV Repair/Alteration and Fitting Construction ………………………….. NABoiler External Piping Construction, B&PV Repair/Alteration and Fitting Construction Compliance Chart .……. NAPerformance Qualification Testing of Welders Requirements …………………………………………………………NA

AUDIT REPORTPressure Equipment Integrity

Management System

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Table of Contents of 87

Performance Qualification Testing of Welders Compliance Chart .……………………………………………………NAAB-524 Pressure Relief Device Servicing Requirements ………………………………………………………… NAAB-524 Pressure Relief Device Servicing Requirements Audit Compliance Chart ……………………………. NA

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Executive Summary of 87




Executive Summary:


Management System

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Summary Chart of 87

Pressure Equipment Integrity Management System Audit - Compliance Summary

Element

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

1 Management Responsibility and Leadership 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA2 Quality System Documentation 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3 Competency and Training 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA4 Design Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA5 Purchasing and Material Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6 Construction and Installation of Pressure Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA8 Operation of Pressure Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA9 Management of Change 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

10 Integrity Assessment Program 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA11 Nondestructive Examinations and Testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA12 Repairs and Alterations to Pressure Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA13 Overpressure Protection and Protective Devices 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA14 Internal Audits 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA15 Corrective and Preventative Actions 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA16 Accidents and Incidents 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Pressure Equipment Integrity Management System Element

Nu

mb

er o

fA

ctiv

itie

sE

xam

ined

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

Ass

ign

ed

Sco

re

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Column I Column JElement Score Overall Audit Score

Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Audit Details of 87




Audit Details:

Company Name: Company Name

Location/Address: Company Address

Audit Dates:

Telephone: E-Mail:

Chief Inspector(s): In- house Contracted

Contract Inspection Company Name:

Type of Audit:

Reason for Audit:

Scope of Audit: All Elements of the Integrity Management Program were reviewed

Name and title of persons present at:



Audit team members:

Report prepared by: Date:

Management Representative(Name & Title):


Management System

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Audit Findings of 87




Audit Findings:

NO. DESCRIPTIONIMRELEMENT

ELEMENTREFERENCE

REFERENCECLAUSE(S)

FINDINGTYPE


Management System

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report Audit Observations of 87




Audit Observations:

NO. DESCRIPTIONIMRELEMENT

ELEMENTREFERENCE

REFERENCECLAUSE(S)

FINDINGTYPE


Management System

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report User Guide of 87

PEIM System Audit Protocol Explanations1 Point / Percentage Scoring

1a1b

1c

1d

1e

1f

2 Score Banding

2a

2b

2c

3 Audit Questions (Activities) Sheets

3a General activity criteria questions are laid out in reflection of the IMR Elements.

3b3c

3d3e

3f

3g

3h

4 Summary Chart and Charts of Compliance in Each Element

4a The Summary Chart is an overall view of results from all audit sheets and element compliance charts.

4b Number of activities is the number of questions or activities examined in the respective elements.

4c Element compliance charts present the level of compliance in each sub-category in each IMS element.

4d

Full compliance: Indicated by a yes response for the question/activity, which will equate to a 100% compliance result.Observations: If an observation (ob) is reported the default points assigned to the associated questions or activities will normally be approximately 60% of possible activity score.

Minor Finding: If a minor finding (mi) is reported the default points assigned to the associated questions or activities will normally be approximately 20-30% of the possible activity score.

Major Finding: If a major finding (ma) is reported there will be no points assigned to the associated questions or activities.

Not Applicable: Questions/activities that are deemed to be not applicable to the particular PEIM system implementation will receive a na response and the question/activity will not be considered in the scoring.

See Note: If questions or activities are associated with an observation or finding the see note reference will be used and the points assigned will be proportionate to the extent of compliance.

86 - 100% (Green) - Generally, Meets Expectations – requires continual improvements of the processes to progress towards an Error Free system and operating in a preventive/predictive work environment.

71 - 85% (Amber) - Opportunities and the Need for Improvement Exists - requires improvements and continuous efforts to improve the system with targets and actions in order to meet all expectations.

0 - 70% (Red) - Below Expectations - requires major improvements and continuous management attention to re-planning, along with strong targets and initiatives in order to meet expectations.

Comments regarding implementation evidence are necessary for observations and findings, this is pre-formatted in blue.

In the compliance level column, a result must be entered as a - yes, ob, mi or ma. Not applicable na could be used in situations where an audit element is outside the stated scope of the IMS; such as supervision requirements of the Power Engineers Regulation (PER) when there is no equipment that would require supervision in accordance with the PER. A "na" response will not tally in the score.

A yes, ob, mi, ma or na result has been conditionally formatted in the color illustrated.Yes (yes) - compliance evidence is present, with full compliance in all audit samples, and with evidence of preventive measures showing continual improvement as applicable.

Observations (ob) - evidence of compliance is present; however, increased discipline and commitment to fully comply at all times may be appropriate or some additional preventive measures would change this to a continual improvement process. Essentially in compliance but there is an "opportunity for improvement".

Minor Finding (mi) - some evidence of compliance may be evident and/or a process may be present, but regulatory requirements are not met. There is a requirement for the owner to initiate remedial or corrective action to comply with regulatory requirements and assure pressure equipment safety; however, no immediate safety hazard is evident. An analogy would be "safe but not compliant" (e.g., an isolation valve in the overpressure relief device path was found to be open but not locked or car-sealed in this state).

Major (ma) - would indicate no evidence of compliance, ignoring the requirements or a lack of commitment to comply with regulatory requirements. Requires strong management commitment along with an ABSA CAR and internal nonconformance to rectify. In most instances this will be circumstances considered as "operation with unacceptable risk" (e.g., an isolation valve in the overpressure relief device path was found to be in the closed position, a pressure relief device set above vessel MAWP, or pressure equipment that requires supervision in accordance with the PER was found to be inadequately supervised).

All Minor (mi) findings and Major (ma) findings should result in a formal internal non-conformance or CAR (per QMS requirement) to be issued for resolution and root cause identification, by the audited company.

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 1. Management of 87

Management Responsibility and Leadership

1.1 Management Commitment 0IMR Sect. 2.7 a. Is there evidence top management has established PEIM system policies and communicated them to all applicable employees? 10

IMR Sect. 2.6 b. Is there evidence top management has ensured the availability of adequate resources to implement the PEIM system? 15

IMR Sect. 2.6 c. Has top management established and approved a documented PEIM policy? 10

1.2 PEIM Objectives and Planning 0IMR Sect. 2.7 a. Does top management ensure that PEIM system objectives are established? 15

IMR Sect. 2.7 b. Are PEIM system objectives being met, or has appropriate action been taken? 15

IMR 2.7 c. Is there an appropriate planning process in place to assure effective development and maintenance of the PEIM system? 10

1.3 PEIM System Management Representative 0IMR 2.6 a. Has a Management Representative been appointed who has the defined authority and responsibility for PEIM system implementation? 5

1.4 Internal Communication 0

10

1.5 Management Review 0

20

b. Does the review include assessing opportunities for improvement and the need for changes to the PEIM system, including the IMS policies and quality objectives?15

c. Are records from management reviews maintained? 15

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

Ref. IMRSect. 2.7

a. Is there evidence management has communicated the PEIM policy, all established PEIM system objectives and the commitment to meet statutory and regulatory requirements related to pressure equipment integrity, and that these communications are understood by employees?

IMR Sect. 2.7Sect. 13 PESR

a. Is there evidence that top management has reviewed the PEIM system at appropriate intervals to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness (Management Review)?



D1

yes = Full Compliance ob = Observations mi = Minor Finding ma = Major Finding na = Not Applicable see note = Explanation in Text

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 1. Management of 87

Management Responsibility and LeadershipElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

1.6 Management Review Input and Output 0IMR Sect. 2.7 a. Is there evidence the input into management review includes reports of and analysis of IMS nonconformities? 4

IMR Sect. 2.7 b. Is there evidence the input into management review includes results of audits? 4

IMR Sect. 2.7 c. Is there evidence the input into management review includes states of preventive and corrective actions? 4

IMR Sect. 2.7 d. Is there evidence the input into management review includes follow-up actions from previous management reviews? 4

IMR Sect. 2.7 e. Is there evidence the input into management review includes planned changes that could affect the PEIM system? 4

IMR Sect. 2.7 f. Is there evidence the input into management review includes recommendations for improvement? 4

IMR Sect. 2.7

g. Is there documented evidence management review output includes decisions and actions related to improvement of the effectiveness of the PEIM system?6

Total Possible Score in Element 0

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 1. Chart of 87

Pressure Equipment Integrity Management System Audit - Element Compliance Summary

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

1.1 Management Commitment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA1.2 PEIM Objectives and Planning 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA1.3 PEIM System Management Representative 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA1.4 Internal Communication 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA1.5 Management Review 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA1.6 Management Review Input and Output 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 1

Management Responsibilityand Leadership

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Man

agem

ent C

omm

itmen

t

PEIM O

bject

ives

and

Plannin

g

PEIM S

yste

m M

anag

emen

t Rep

rese

ntat

ive

Inte

rnal

Comm

unica

tion

Man

agem

ent R

eview

Man

agem

ent R

eview

Inpu

t and

Out

put

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Column I Column JElement Component Score Overall Element Score

Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 2. Documentation of 87

Quality System Documentation

2.1 Written Description of the Quality Management System 0a. Does the written quality system include each of the specific requirements of the Integrity Management Requirements Document AB-512? 3

IMR Sect. 2.2 b. Does the written quality system accurately describe the scope of the quality management system, including details of and justification for exclusions? 2

IMR Sect. 2.7 c. Does the written quality system include documented procedures established for the quality management system, or references to them? 3

2.2 QMS Scope and Application [AB-512(a)] 0IMR Sect. 2.8

2

2.3 Control of Documents 0IMR Sect. 2.8 a. Does the company have a document control procedure (i.e., documented controls as per the IMR)? 2

IMR Sect. 2.8 b. Is there evidence of a master list or other equivalent control features/methods to enable control of documents required by the QMS and their revision? 2

IMR Sect. 2.82

IMR Sect. 2.82

IMR Sect. 2.8 e. Is there evidence that processes are implemented requiring that document changes and revision status is identified? 2

IMR Sect. 2.8 f. Is there evidence that processes are implemented to ensure that the relevant versions of applicable documents are available at points of use? 2

IMR Sect. 2.8 g. Is there evidence that processes are implemented requiring that documents are legible and readily identifiable? 2

IMR Sect. 2.8 h. Is there evidence that processes are implemented requiring that external documents are identified and their distribution controlled? 2

IMR Sect. 2.8 i. Is there evidence that processes are implemented requiring that obsolete documents are not used by mistake and to identify them if retained? 2

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual


a. Does the AB-512(a) form (and the equivalent chart included in the IMS Manual) accurately describe the scope and responsibilities of the current organization and the PEIM system?

c. Is there evidence that processes are implemented requiring that changes to documents shall be reviewed and approved by the same functions that performed the original review and approval?

d. Is there evidence that processes are implemented requiring that documents are reviewed, updated, and re-approved as applicable (this includes the requirement that the current IMS Manual be provided to and accepted by ABSA)?

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 2. Documentation of 87

Quality System DocumentationElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

2.4 Control of Records 0IMR Sect. 2.8

2

IMR Sect. 2.83

IMR Sect. 2.8 d. Based upon the audit samples were required PEIM system records legible, identifiable and retrievable? 2


a. Is there a documented procedure defining the controls needed for the identification, storage, protection, retrieval, retention time and disposition of PEIM system records?

b. Are records retained as specified by the PESR (e.g., AB-83, a suitable system for retaining Certificate of Inspection Permits), applicable industry standard or by company policy, whichever is longer (e.g., life cycle of the equipment)?

D1




Quality System Documentation

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

2.1 Written Description of the QMS 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA2.2 QMS Scope and Application [AB-512(a)] 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA2.3 Control of Documents 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA2.4 Control of Records 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 2

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Writ

ten

Descr

iption

of t

he Q

MS

QMS S

cope

and

App

licat

ion [A

B-512

(a)]

Contro

l of D

ocum

ents

Contro

l of R

ecor

ds0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 3. Competency of 87

Competency and Training

3.1 Training 0IMR Sect. 2.9

15

IMR Sect. 2.9 b. Are training programs or other training resources identified? 10

IMR Sect. 2.9 c. Is required technical and safety training identified and documented for personnel that are critical to IMS implementation? 10

IMR Sect. 2.9 d. Is there documented evidence that IMS awareness training has been provided, at appropriate intervals, to all staff involved in IMS activities? 15

IMR Sect. 2.910

20

3.2 Personnel Qualifications 0IMR Sect. 2.9 a. Are personnel performing design activities (i.e., pressure piping to B31 codes) qualified as required by the applicable construction code? 10

b. Are personnel that are certifying integrity assessments for pressure equipment qualified as required by IB02-002 and AB-506? 15

15

IMR Sect. 2.9 d. Are owner's Inspectors for piping construction qualified in accordance with the B31 construction code? 15

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

a. Have training requirements been identified for individual jobs/positions that are critical to PEIM system implementation (Inspectors, CI, Engineers, Purchasers, Receivers, Operations and Maintenance staff as applicable)?

e. Are there provisions for and evidence of continuous training with respect to changes to operating procedures, legislation, technology and best PEIMS practices to ensure the required level of competency is maintained?

IMR Sect. 2.9IMR Sect. 2.14

f. Does operator training include normal operations and safe operating limits, controlled start-up and shutdown, preparation for maintenance, reinstatement after maintenance and control of emergency situations?

IMR Sect. 2.9IB02-002

IMR Sect. 2.9PER

c. Has the company implemented procedures that ensure pressure equipment that requires supervision in accordance with the PER is supervised as required by the PER?

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 3. Competency of 87

Competency and TrainingElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.3 Competency Assessment and Certification 0IMR Sect. 2.9 a. Are there records of assessment, reassessment and certification of competence for personnel who assess the integrity of in-service equipment? 20

b. Are there records of assessment, reassessment and certification of competence for personnel who operate pressure equipment? 20

IMR Sect. 2.95

IMR Sect. 2.920


IMR Sect. 2.9PESR Sect. 37

c. If temporary operators (e.g., summer students, vacation relief staff) are operating pressure equipment are adequate provisions implemented for training, assessment, re-assessment and certification of competence?

d. Are there implemented procedures to ensure that any contract personnel who perform IMS tasks meet the required training and competence requirements (e.g., owner's Inspector)?

D1




Competency and Training

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

3.1 Training 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.2 Personnel Qualifications 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3 Competency Assessment & Certification 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 3

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Traini

ng

Perso

nnel

Qualifi

catio

ns

Compe

tenc

y Ass

essm

ent &

Cer

tifica

tion

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 4. Design of 87

Design Control

4.1 Design Scope 0IMR Sect. 2.10

a. Does the organization employ a Design Basis Memorandum (or equivalent design scope document) to identify design requirements to facilitate safe design?10

IMR Sect. 2.105

IMR Sect. 2.10

c. Are there provisions ensuring that the latest accepted code edition and addenda of the applicable construction codes are used for pressure equipment design?5

IMR Sect. 2.10 d. Is there an implemented management of change process in place for all design activities? 5

4.2 Design Preparation 0IMR Sect. 2.10

5

IMR Sect. 2.10 b. Is there evidence that all design documents, including any revisions, have the required approval and that the latest revisions are available and used? 5

5

IMR Sect. 2.10

d. Have safe operating limits been defined in the design and have appropriate procedures been implemented (e.g., HAZOP, PHA) to control operating hazards?5

IMR Sect. 2.105

f. Is there evidence in the audit sample of designs, that overpressure protection is designed in accordance with Section 38 of the PESR? 5

4.3 Design Completion 0IMR Sect. 2.10 a. Are the design specifications used by the organization maintained, and current revisions available to manufacturers and piping contractors? 5

IMR Sect. 2.10 b. Is there an implemented process to ensure that the latest revision of all applicable design documents are provided for use in construction? 5

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

b. Is there appropriate oversight provided by the owner to the preparation, verification and approval of design documents (e.g., specifications, PFDs, P&IDs, overpressure protection, etc.) from the DBM?

a. If the design preparation is subcontracted is there evidence that the contractor selection process has addressed PEIM related issues such as availability of the latest applicable Codes and Standards?


c. Is there evidence that pressure equipment design information is submitted to ABSA Design survey by the owner or their agent and that the design registration requirements of the PESR have been met?

e. Are there implemented processes to address closure welds in pressure piping systems (i.e., either a procedure accepted as part of the PEIM system as per AB-519 or are individual closure weld procedures submitted as part of pressure piping design submissions)?


D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 4. Design of 87

Design ControlElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

4.4 Project Execution 0IMR Sect. 2.10 a. Is there an implemented procedure to determine if pressure equipment manufacturers and piping contractors are qualified (as per the SCA) for their scope of work?

5

IMR Sect. 2.105

IMR Sect. 2.10 c. Is there evidence of a management of change process for design issues to be resolved during the project execution? 5

4.5 Project Completion 0IMR Sect. 2.10 a. Is there evidence of a commissioning checklist that includes confirmation that pressure piping installation is in accordance with the Safety Codes Act? 10

IMR Sect. 2.10

b. Are there procedures to ensure that the applicable design documents (e.g., P & IDs, process flow diagrams, shutdown key) reflect the as built condition?5

IMR Sect. 2.10 c. Prior to start-up of the pressure equipment is there evidence that a pre-start-up safety review (PSSR) is completed? 5

IMR Sect. 2.10 d. Is there evidence that safe operating limits have been verified as part of commissioning and applicable operator training has been completed? 10

4.6 Ongoing Design Related Processes 0IMR Sect. 2.10 a. Are there procedures to ensure that the applicable design documents (e.g., P & IDs, process flow diagrams, shutdown key) are maintained current? 10

IMR Sect. 2.10 b. Is there evidence that alteration procedures, fitness for purpose evaluations, leak containment designs etc. are submitted to ABSA Design Survey? 5


b. Is there an implemented procedure to provide the required oversight during project execution (e.g., an owner's Inspector for ASME B31 piping construction or a source inspector for pressure vessel construction)?

D1




Design Control

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

4.1 Design Scope 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA4.2 Design Preparation 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA4.3 Design Completion 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA4.4 Project Execution 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA4.5 Project Completion 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA4.6 Ongoing Design Related Processes 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 4

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Design

Sco

pe

Design

Pre

para

tion

Design

Com

pletio

n

Projec

t Exe

cutio

n

Projec

t Com

pletio

n

Ongoin

g Des

ign R

elate

d Pro

cess

es0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 5. Purchasing of 87

Purchasing and Material Control

5.1 Selection of Suppliers 0IMR Sect. 2.11 a. Is there a process defined and implemented for selecting suppliers based on their ability to meet the regulatory and owner's requirements? 2

IMR Sect. 2.11 b. Has a criteria for the selection, evaluation and re-evaluation of suppliers been established? 2

IMR Sect. 2.11 c. Is there evidence that records of evaluation results, and any changes to vendor approval arising from evaluations, are maintained? 2

IMR Sect. 2.11 d. Is a current approved vendors list available to all personnel involved in pressure equipment purchasing activities? 2

IMR Sect. 2.11 e. Is there evidence the approved vendors list is used by personnel purchasing materials and services that can impact upon pressure equipment integrity? 2

5.2 Purchasing (General) 0IMR Sect. 2.11 a. Does the purchasing information for products or services include the Quality System Certification requirements, when applicable? 2

IMR Sect. 2.11 b. Does the purchasing information for products or services identify the applicable issues of the Codes or Standards to which the product must comply? 2

IMR Sect. 2.112

IMR Sect. 2.112

5.3 Contracts 0IMR Sect. 2.11 a. Are written contracts maintained for services that can impact the effectiveness of the IMS (e.g., Inspection, Design, NDE)? 2

IMR Sect. 2.112

5.4 Material & Service Procurement at Field Site(s) 0IMR Sect. 2.11 a. Is an approved vendors list used for procurement of products and services at field sites? 2

IMR Sect. 2.11 b. Is there applicable information available to field staff who may purchase pressure equipment materials (e.g., line lists, piping/valve specifications, etc.)? 2

IMR Sect. 2.112

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

c. Does the purchasing information for pressure equipment materials or products include the material and product specifications and design registration requirements (e.g., pressure fitting procurement)?

d. Does the purchasing information for pressure equipment related services include the extent and type of service, regulatory requirements and any additional Owner's specified requirements (e.g., pressure relief valve servicing)?

b. Are written contracts maintained for all pressure equipment that is operated on behalf of other owners and do these contracts include responsibilities for operation, maintenance, servicing PRVs, inspection, repair, etc?

c. For pressure equipment materials purchased at field sites, does the purchasing information for products and services include the necessary information as described under heading 5.2 of this element?

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 5. Purchasing of 87

Purchasing and Material ControlElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

5.5 Control of Materials at Field Site(s) 0IMR Sect. 2.11 a. Is there evidence of implemented procedures to ensure received materials conform to the correct specifications and quantity? 2

IMR Sect. 2.11

b. Is there evidence that personnel who are responsible for receiving pressure equipment materials are aware of material requirements, including identification?2

IMR Sect. 2.11

c. Is there evidence of implemented procedures to ID materials with the correct specification etc., whenever material ID will not be maintained to point of use?2

IMR Sect. 2.11 d. Is there evidence of an implemented system for identifying and disposing of non-conforming items? 2

IMR Sect. 2.11 e. Is there evidence of an implemented system for ensuring that equipment or materials issued complies with the Code and design specifications? 2

IMR Sect. 2.112


f. Is there evidence that new material and used material storage is segregated such that used material would not be utilized in pressure equipment construction, or as replacement items?

D1




Purchasing and Material Control

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

5.1 Selection of Suppliers 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA5.2 Purchasing (General) 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA5.3 Contracts 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA5.4 Material & Service Procurement at Field Site(s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA5.5 Control of Materials at Field Site(s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 5

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Select

ion o

f Sup

plier

s

Purch

asing

(Gen

eral)

Contra

cts

Mat

erial

& S

ervic

e Pro

cure

men

t at F

ield

Site(s

)

Contro

l of M

ater

ials

at F

ield

Site(s

)0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 6. Construction of 87

6.1 General Requirements 0IMR Sect. 2.12 a. Is there evidence that the implemented IMS provided adequate coordination and control of pressure equipment manufacturing and installation activities? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12 b. Relative to pressure equipment construction, is there evidence that appropriate oversight was provided to contractor quality control systems? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12 c. Is there evidence that contract organizations have been verified to have the required capabilities and are approved vendors? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12 d. Is there evidence that suppliers have been provided with the current versions of required specifications and drawings? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12

e. Is there evidence that completed project documentation is reviewed and retained, and documentation required by the PESR is included & completed correctly?10

IMR Sect. 2.12

f. Has there been verification of design registration, as applicable, and that Completion of Construction Declaration (AB-81) forms are submitted for registered designs?5

6.2 Control of Shop Construction 0IMR Sect. 2.12 a. Is there evidence that the implemented IMS adequately determined the need and extent of any source (shop) inspection? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12 b. Is there evidence that, for shop constructed pressure piping, an owner's Inspector has been appointed? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12

c. For shop constructed pressure piping is there evidence that the owner's Inspector has certified the pressure piping Construction and Test Data Report (AB-83) form?5

6.3 Field Construction and Installation 0IMR Sect. 2.12 a. Is there evidence that, for field constructed pressure piping, a competent owner's Inspector has been appointed? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12 b. Is there an appropriate implemented procedure to ensure that constructed pressure equipment meets regulatory requirements prior to operation? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12 c. If closure welds were completed, were the requirements of AB-519 met? 5

IMR Sect. 2.12

d. For field constructed pressure piping is there evidence that the owner's Inspector has certified the pressure piping Construction and Test Data Report (AB-83) form?10

ElementReference

Construction and Installation of Pressure Equipment ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 6. Construction of 87

ElementReference

Construction and Installation of Pressure Equipment ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

6.4 ABSA Inspections 0IMR Sect. 2.12

5

6.5 Construction of Pressure Equipment by the Owner 0IMR Sect. 2.12

4

4

2


a. Is there evidence the IMS provided for ABSA notification when new boilers, thermal liquid heaters, or vessels manufactured outside Alberta required a Certificate of inspection Permit prior to operation?

a. Are written procedures that meet ABSA requirements implemented for new construction activities that are completed by the owner (e.g., mechanically assembled piping and tubing that is not exempt under Section 4 of the PESR)?


b. Has an audit of the applicable pressure equipment construction procedures been completed as part of the IMS certification audit (e.g., pressure piping construction procedures meet AB-518)?

IMR Sect. 2.12PWR

c. If the owner is constructing welded pressure equipment and has implemented a Welder testing program, has the Welder testing program been audited as part of the IMS certification audit?

D1




Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

6.1 General Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.2 Control of Shop Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.3 Field Construction & Installation 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.4 ABSA Inspections 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.5 Construction of Pressure Equipment by the Owner 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 6

Construction and Installation of Pressure Equipment

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Gener

al Req

uirem

ents

Contro

l of S

hop

Const

ruct

ion

Field

Const

ruct

ion &

Inst

allat

ion

ABSA Insp

ectio

ns

Const

ruct

ion o

f Pre

ssur

e Equ

ipmen

t by

the

Owner

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 7. M&TE of 87

Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices

7.1 General Requirements 0IMR Sect. 2.13 a. Does the company have a documented procedure for calibration of monitoring and measuring devices? 5

IMR Sect. 2.13

b. Are monitoring and measuring devices that are owned or rented for inspection to verify the condition of pressure equipment included in IMS calibration requirements?5

IMR Sect. 2.135

IMR Sect. 2.135

IMR Sect. 2.13 e. Is each item of monitoring and measuring equipment identified to enable calibration status to be determined? 2

IMR Sect. 2.13

f. Does the IMS include provisions to monitor the calibration status of contractor's monitoring and measuring equipment and is there evidence of such monitoring?3

7.2 Calibration of Equipment 0IMR Sect. 2.13 a. Is each item of monitoring and measuring equipment owned or rented by the company calibrated or verified at specified intervals or prior to use? 3

IMR Sect. 2.13 b. Is each item of monitoring and measuring equipment owned or rented by the company calibrated or verified against traceable measurement standards? 3

IMR Sect. 2.133

7.3 Validity of Verifications 0IMR Sect. 2.13

3

IMR Sect. 2.13

b. Are measures implemented to ensure that verifications accepted based upon monitoring and measuring equipment that is found to be out of calibration remain valid?3


ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

c. Are monitoring and measuring devices that are owned or rented by contractors for inspections to verify the condition of pressure equipment included in IMS calibration requirements (e.g., NDE equipment, test pressure gauges, mechanical measuring equipment and coating test equipment)?

d. Are monitoring and measuring devices that are owned or rented by the owner or contractors for servicing and calibrating critical process controls and shutdown devices included in IMS calibration requirements?

c. For monitoring and measuring equipment owned or rented by the company, are measurement standards traceable to national measurement standards or, where no such standards exist, is the basis used for calibration recorded?

a. For monitoring and measuring equipment owned or rented by the company, are measures implemented to control the issue of the equipment; to ensure it is suitable for intended use, calibration is current, and that it is examined after use for damage that could affect the accuracy of the equipment?

D1




Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

7.1 General Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.2 Calibration of Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.3 Validity of Verifications 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 7

Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Gener

al Req

uirem

ents

Calibr

ation

of E

quipm

ent

Validit

y of

Ver

ificat

ions

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 8. Operation of 87

Operation of Pressure Equipment

8.1 Safe Operating Limits 0IMR Sect. 2.14 a. Is there evidence of implemented processes for defining the safe operating limits of pressure equipment (e.g., PHA, HAZOP, LOPA), as applicable? 10

IMR Sect. 2.1410

IMR Sect. 2.1410

IMR Sect. 2.14 d. Is there a process to control changes to safe operating limits? 10

IMR Sect. 2.14 e. Is there evidence that the safe operating limits that have been established are consistent with the process requirements? 10

8.2 Critical Task and Operating Procedures 0IMR Sect. 2.14 a. Is there evidence that adequate procedures are available documenting critical tasks to be completed (e.g., filter changes, dealing with hydrates, etc.)? 15

IMR Sect. 2.1420

IMR Sect. 2.14 c. Is there evidence that operating controls ensure that equipment is operated in accordance with the instructions provided? 10

d. Is there evidence that operating procedures are periodically reviewed for suitability and adequacy? 10

8.3 Operating Records and Observations 0IMR Sect. 2.14 a. Are there applicable procedures implemented to record operating history for pressure equipment and ensure the design limitations are not exceeded? 10

IMR Sect. 2.1410

IMR Sect. 2.14 c. Are there implemented procedures to notify inspection and engineering personnel when pressure equipment is operated outside of design conditions? 10

IMR Sect. 2.1410

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

b. Are there implemented controls to ensure pressure equipment is operated within established safe operating limits; including administrative controls if/when shutdown devices are bypassed for any reason?

c. Is there evidence of a suitable method for recording and retaining information about safe operating limits and any changes to them (e.g., shutdown key with revision control)?

b. Is there evidence that suitable equipment specific instructions are available for safe operation of equipment (e.g., start-up, shutdown, emergencies, adequate overpressure protection of isolated equipment, etc.)?


b. Are there implemented procedures to communicate, to Inspection and other relevant personnel, the operator's observations that may impact upon pressure equipment integrity?

d. Are operating Log Books (or equivalent means of communication) maintained to convey important operating information between operators, for example when operating controls or safety systems are bypassed for maintenance?

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 8. Operation of 87

Operation of Pressure EquipmentElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

8.4 Power Engineers Regulation Requirements 0a. If audit sample facilities include Boilers or Thermal Liquid Heating Systems; is supervision provided in accordance with the PER? 10

b. If operating plants include Boilers or Thermal Liquid Heating Systems; are the Chief Power Engineer's responsibilities and role in the IMS documented? 10

10

8.5 General Plant Operations 0PESR Sect. 35 a. Is there evidence that operators are aware of the requirements to report accidents and unsafe conditions to ABSA? 5

PESR Sect. 37 b. Is there evidence of periodic function testing of critical shutdown devices (e.g., ESDs)? 10

IMR Sect. 2.14

c. Are operators aware of procedures for temporary and permanent physical and operational changes to pressure equipment, procedures and the organization?5

PESR Sect. 37 d. Are pressure hoses that are employed appropriate for the service conditions and examined/tested regularly? 5

IMR Sect. 2.14 e. Is there evidence of appropriate procedures/permits to control hazardous work, such as Hot Work, Entry into Confined Spaces, LOTO, etc? 10

IMR Sect. 2.14 f. Is there evidence of periodic safety meetings that include the opportunity to discuss and resolve issues related to pressure equipment safety? 5

8.6 Optional Second Facility Review of General Plant Operations 0PESR Sect. 35 a. Is there evidence that operators are aware of the requirements to report accidents and unsafe conditions to ABSA? 5

PESR Sect. 37 b. Is there evidence of periodic function testing of critical shutdown devices (e.g., ESDs)? 10

IMR Sect. 2.14

c. Are operators aware of procedures for temporary and permanent physical and operational changes to pressure equipment, procedures and the organization?5

PESR Sect. 37 d. Are pressure hoses that are employed appropriate for the service conditions and examined/tested regularly? 5

IMR Sect. 2.14 e. Is there evidence of appropriate procedures/permits to control hazardous work, such as Hot Work, Entry into Confined Spaces, LOTO, etc? 10

IMR Sect. 2.14 f. Is there evidence of periodic safety meetings that include the opportunity to discuss and resolve issues related to pressure equipment safety? 5


PER Sect. 2-4PER

IMR Sect. 2.14PER

IMR Sect. 2.14PER

c. If operating plants include Boilers or Thermal Liquid Heating Systems; is there evidence that the plant Log Books meet PER requirements (e.g., if electronic does the log book meet IB08-003)?

D1




Operation of Pressure Equipment

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

8.1 Safe Operating Limits 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA8.2 Critical Task and Operating Procedures 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA8.3 Operating Records and Observations 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA8.4 Power Engineers Regulation Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA8.5 General Plant Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA8.6 Optional Second Facility General Plant Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 8

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Safe

Opera

ting

Limits

Critica

l Tas

k an

d Ope

ratin

g Pro

cedu

res

Opera

ting

Recor

ds a

nd O

bser

vatio

ns

Power

Eng

ineer

s Reg

ulatio

n Req

uirem

ents

Gener

al Plan

t Ope

ratio

ns

Option

al Sec

ond

Facilit

y Gen

eral

Plant O

pera

tions

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 9. MOC of 87

Management of Change

9.1 Management of Change Process Requirements 0IMR Sect. 2.15 a. Is there a documented procedure to address Management of Change (MOC) as required by AB-512? 5

IMR Sect. 2.15 b. Does the MOC procedure identify what kind of activities are subject to MOC and what are considered replacement in kind? 5

IMR Sect. 2.15 c. Does the Management of Change procedure identify temporary as well as permanent changes and include end date management? 5

IMR Sect. 2.15 d. Does the Management of Change procedure indicate that technical information required to support the reason for the change is to be provided? 5

IMR Sect. 2.15 e. Does the Management of Change procedure include provisions for determining the impact the change may have on health and safety? 5

IMR Sect. 2.15 f. Does the Management of Change procedure include provisions to ensure that the MOC procedure has been correctly applied? 5

IMR Sect. 2.15 g. Does the Management of Change procedure include provisions to ensure that the required authorization from all relevant disciplines has been obtained? 5

IMR Sect. 2.15

h. Does the MOC procedure include training for operating and other personnel, whose job tasks will be affected by the change, prior to implementing the change?5

IMR Sect. 2.15

i. Does the MOC procedure provide for updating of process safety information, and drawings, when the MOC results in a change to the described processes?5

9.2 Management of Change Implementation 0IMR Sect. 2.15 a. Is there evidence that a method of tracking, the status of MOCs that have been initiated, has been implemented? 10

IMR Sect. 2.15 b. Based upon audit samples any observed changes to facilities were made following the Management of Change process? 20

IMR Sect. 2.15 c. If any pressure equipment alterations were completed since the last certification audit was there a commensurate MOC utilized? 10

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 9. MOC of 87

Management of ChangeElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

9.3 Management of Change Examples 0IMR Sect. 2.15 a. If any Management of Change examples identified temporary changes was the end date effectively managed? 10

IMR Sect. 2.15

b. Based on Management of Change examples reviewed, was there evidence that MOCs were tracked to completion and is there a status report available?10

IMR Sect. 2.15 c. Did the examples of Management of Change include the technical information to support the reason for the change? 10

IMR Sect. 2.15 d. Did the examples of Management of Change include determination of the impact the change would have on health and safety? 10

IMR Sect. 2.15 e. Based on the Management of Change examples reviewed, has the MOC procedure been correctly applied? 10

IMR Sect. 2.15 f. Based on the Management of Change examples reviewed, was the required authorization from all relevant disciplines obtained? 10

IMR Sect. 2.15 g. Based on MOC examples reviewed, was there training provided for personnel, whose job tasks will be affected, prior to implementing the change? 10

IMR Sect. 2.15

h. Based on MOC examples reviewed, was there evidence that process safety information, operating procedures and drawings, were updated as applicable?10


D1




Management of Change

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

9.1 MOC Process Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA9.2 Management of Change Implementation 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA9.3 Management of Change Examples 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 9

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

MOC P

roce

ss R

equir

emen

ts

Man

agem

ent o

f Cha

nge

Imple

men

tatio

n

Man

agem

ent o

f Cha

nge

Exam

ples

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 10. Inspection of 87

Integrity Assessment Program

10.1 Assigning Resources 0IMR Sect. 2.16 a. Has a competent person (Chief Inspector, however named) been appointed to be responsible for the integrity assessment program? 5

IMR Sect. 2.16 b. Is there evidence that a competent person has assumed responsibility for the program in the absence of the appointed individual? 5

IMR Sect. 2.16 c. Is there evidence of supervision of inspection personnel, by competent individuals? 5

10.2 Work Planning for Inspection & Servicing 0IMR Sect. 2.16

10

IMR Sect. 2.16 b. Is there evidence that integrity assessment activities include all of the owners pressure equipment, not just items that are on registration? 10

IMR Sect. 2.16 c. Is there evidence that the planned integrity assessment activities are appropriate to the safety and fitness for purpose of the equipment? 5

IMR Sect. 2.16 d. Does the integrity assessment work plan include the necessary isolations, preparation and cleaning of items designated for inspection? 5

IMR Sect. 2.165

IMR Sect. 2.16 f. Is there evidence that the work planning has been communicated and agreed upon by those concerned with facilitating the work? 5

10.3 Pressure Equipment Assets and Records 0

a. Is there evidence that an accurate inventory of all pressure equipment has been established, maintained and reconciled against ABSA records, as applicable?10

8

c. If the owner has sold or otherwise disposed of pressure equipment did they provide the pressure equipment records to the new owner? 5

7

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

a. Is there evidence that a suitable planning process has been implemented to ensure that integrity assessment activities are scheduled in accordance with the requirements established in AB-506?

e. Is there evidence that the integrity assessment work planning process included operated pressure equipment that may be owned by others and rental equipment unless integrity assessment was otherwise provided for by contractual agreements?



b. Is there evidence that equipment records have been maintained that include design and manufacturing information, maintenance, inspection, servicing, tests, repairs and alterations of each item of pressure equipment or system (ref. PESR Sect. 41 and PESR Interpretation)?



d. Is there evidence that the owner has notified ABSA in writing when a boiler, pressure vessel, fired heater pressure coil or thermal liquid heating system has been bought, sold, relocated, otherwise disposed of or has been removed from service as required by the Act?

D1



Integrity Assessment ProgramElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

10.4 Hazard Assessment 0IMR Sect. 2.16 a. Is there evidence that the owner has established processes for identifying and controlling hazards at their facilities? 7

IMR Sect. 2.167

IMR Sect. 2.16

c. Is there evidence of appropriate hazard assessments at facilities that will be operated on behalf of other owners and when existing facilities are acquired?6

10.5 Inspection Procedures 0IMR Sect. 2.16 a. Is there evidence the owner has developed and maintained appropriate inspection procedures in accordance with AB-506? 10

IMR Sect. 2.16 b. Is there evidence that inspection procedures are available, and used by personnel performing the applicable inspections? 10

10.6 Inspection and Test Plans and Strategies 0IMR Sect. 2.16

15

IMR Sect. 2.16 b. Are there inspection and test plans and strategies for all boilers, pressure vessels, fired heaters, thermal liquid heating systems and pressure piping? 15

10.7 Installation Inspection Prior to Service 0a. Is there evidence that an inspection of each item of pressure equipment is completed after installation and prior to the item being placed into service? 10

8

7

b. Is there evidence that the hazard assessment at each facility included visual assessment to identify mechanical integrity threats, the fluid service and other information needed to prepare appropriate inspection plans for the pressure equipment?

a. Is there evidence that equipment specific inspection and test plans and strategies have been established for pressure equipment, and approved by competent personnel?



b. Is there evidence that all ABSA inspections for issuance of Certificate of Inspection Permits required by the PESR have been completed prior to the item being placed into service?


c. As part of the installation inspections, is there evidence that inspection and overpressure relief device servicing interval requirements have been assigned by competent personnel (e.g., ISI) and inspection intervals have been reported to ABSA within 12 months of the installation inspection?

D1



Integrity Assessment ProgramElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

10.8 Periodic Integrity Assessment 0a. Based upon audit samples is there evidence that external assessments are completed in accordance with AB-506? 5

b. Audit samples indicate that corrosion surveys and other condition monitoring activities needed to assure continued safe operation are completed? 5

c. Based upon audit samples is there evidence that thorough (i.e., external and internal or equivalent) assessments are completed in accordance with AB-506?15

d. Is there evidence that appropriate inspection intervals have been assigned in accordance with AB-506, or AB-505 if applicable? 10

e. Is there evidence that inspections of pressure piping systems have been assigned and completed in accordance with AB-506? 5

f. Is there evidence of preparation and maintenance of detailed inspection reports for each pressure equipment item, as per the integrity assessment work plans?5

g. Is there evidence that the inspection reports have been certified by an Alberta In-Service Certified Inspector? 5

h. Is there evidence of the submission of inspection status summary reports (i.e., ESRs), authenticated by the Chief Inspector, in accordance with AB-506?5

i. Has the IMS deferral process been implemented for all pressure equipment that will not be inspected by the inspection due date, in accordance with AB-506?5

5

10.9 Close-Out of Inspection Findings 0IMR Sect. 2.16 a. Is there evidence of implementation of a process to identify inspection findings and other integrity assessment findings that require follow-up? 5

IMR Sect. 2.16 b. Is there evidence that the inspection and integrity assessment follow-up items have been tracked and acted upon to achieve closure? 10











IMR Sect. 2.16 j. If the scope of the IMS includes implementation of risk based inspection (RBI) intervals in excess of the time based intervals specified by AB-506; has an audit of the applicable procedures been completed as part of the IMS certification audit?

D1




Integrity Assessment Program

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

10.1 Assigning Resources 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA10.2 Work Planning for Inspection & Servicing 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA10.3 Pressure Equipment Assets & Records 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA10.4 Hazard Assessment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA10.5 Inspection Procedures 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA10.6 Inspection & Test Plans and Stategies 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA10.7 Initial Inspection Prior to Service 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA10.8 Periodic Integrity Assessment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA10.9 Close Out of Inspection Findings 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 10

Nu

mb

er o

fA

ctiv

itie

sE

xam

ined

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

Ass

ign

ed

Sco

re

Assign

ing R

esou

rces

Wor

k Plan

ning

for I

nspe

ction

& S

ervic

ing

Press

ure

Equipm

ent A

sset

s & R

ecor

ds

Hazar

d Ass

essm

ent

Insp

ectio

n Pro

cedu

res

Insp

ectio

n & T

est P

lans

and

State

gies

Initia

l Ins

pect

ion P

rior t

o Ser

vice

Period

ic In

tegr

ity A

sses

smen

t

Close

Out o

f Ins

pect

ion F

inding

s0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 11. NDE of 87

Nondestructive Examinations and Testing

11.1 General Requirements 0IMR Sect. 2.17 a. Relative to nondestructive examinations is there evidence that written instructions are provided to contractors? 4

IMR Sect. 2.174

11.2 Procedure and Personnel Qualifications 0IMR Sect. 2.17 a. Is there evidence that written procedures are developed, and followed, for NDE and other special processes? 4

IMR Sect. 2.17 b. Where special NDE procedures are required is there evidence that the procedures were qualified/validated prior to their use? 4

IMR Sect. 2.17 c. Is there evidence that NDE personnel qualification and certification requirements were verified? 4

11.3 NDE Plans and Results 0IMR Sect. 2.17 a. Is there evidence that corrosion monitoring plans are developed and approved by competent personnel? 5

IMR Sect. 2.17 b. Is there evidence that corrosion monitoring results are reviewed by competent persons, to flag any findings that may indicate potential problems? 5

IMR Sect. 2.17 c. Is there evidence that timely follow-up action was taken with respect to any identified problems areas from corrosion monitoring? 5

IMR Sect. 2.173

IMR Sect. 2.17 e. Is there evidence that the results of corrosion monitoring were approved by competent personnel and the results maintained on file? 2


ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

b. Is there evidence that effective oversight is provided to ensure that NDE contract activities are coordinated with the written instructions provided and the integrity assessment requirements?

d. Is there evidence that, as applicable, inspection plans and intervals were adjusted accordingly on the basis of corrosion monitoring, and approved by competent personnel?

D1




Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

11.1 General Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA11.2 Procedures and Personnel Qualifications 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA11.3 NDE Plans and Results 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 11

Nondestructive Examinations and Testing

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Gener

al Req

uirem

ents

Proce

dure

s an

d Per

sonn

el Qua

lifica

tions

NDE Plan

s an

d Res

ults

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 12. Repairs of 87

Repairs and Alterations to Pressure Equipment

12.1 General Requirements 0a. Is there evidence that repair/alteration contractors had a valid AQP Certificate of Authorization Permit and capabilities for the scope of work? 8

IMR Sect. 2.18 b. Is there evidence that there was appropriate coordination of contract and in-house work pertaining to the repair or alteration of pressure equipment? 5

IMR Sect. 2.18

c. Is there evidence that the repair/alteration organization was provided with all technical specifications and quality standards needed to develop the work procedure?5

IMR Sect. 2.18 d. Is there evidence that repair/alteration procedures covered all required technical and quality standards for the service the item was to be placed in? 5

IMR Sect. 2.18

e. Is there evidence that competent inspection and other resources were deployed to ensure repair/alteration work was done safely, in accordance with the SCA?8

IMR Sect. 2.18

f. Is there evidence that documentation of repairs/alterations, including any design changes, procedures, reports and quality system records are retained on file?7

IMR Sect. 2.18

g. Is there evidence that equipment inspection plans for repaired/altered items are re-assessed and inspection requirements and intervals are revised as required?7

IMR Sect. 2.185

12.2 Requirements for Boilers, Pressure Vessels, Thermal Liquid Heating Systems & BEP 0IMR Sect. 2.18 a. Is there evidence that repair/alteration procedures received approval prior to commencement from competent personnel on behalf of the company? 8

b. Is there evidence that ABSA was notified prior to commencement of all repairs and alterations as required by AB-513? 7

IMR Sect. 2.185

IMR Sect. 2.185

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual


h. Is there evidence of implemented controls to ensure that any hot taps and temporary enclosures installed to maintain integrity and prevent leakage meet regulatory requirements?


c. Is there evidence that the ABSA SCO accepted the procedure for all repairs and alterations outside of the Owner-Certified Repair scope and that proposed alterations were accepted by ABSA Design Survey, as required?

d. Is there evidence that repairs and alterations were inspected and certified by an ABSA SCO or a competent person who holds the appropriate Alberta In-Service Inspector Certificate as per the requirements of AB-513?

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 12. Repairs of 87

Repairs and Alterations to Pressure EquipmentElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

IMR Sect. 2.185

IMR Sect. 2.185

12.3 Owner Certified Repairs 0IMR Sect. 2.18

7

IMR Sect. 2.187

IMR Sect. 2.186

12.4 Pressure Piping Repairs and Alterations 0a. Is there evidence that pressure piping repair/alteration inspections, as required by the applicable ASME B31 piping code, have been completed? 7

8

8

4

12.5 Repair or Alteration of Pressure Equipment by the Owner 0IMR Sect. 2.18

4

IMR Sect. 2.184


e. Is there evidence that a copy of the Alberta Repair and Alteration Report (AB-40 or AB-83 for BEP) form is retained on file and the original has been provided to ABSA?

f. For pressure piping repairs or alterations that require inspection and certification by ABSA (e.g., BEP) is there evidence that an ABSA SCO has inspected the repair/alteration and certified the pressure piping Construction and Test Data Report (AB-83) form?

a. Is there evidence available that indicates all of the repairs that have been inspected and certified by the Owner were within the limits defined in the ABSA accepted IMS scope of Owner-Certified repairs or authorized by an ABSA SCO as permitted by AB-513?

b. Is there evidence that appropriate inspections were made for Owner-Certified repairs to verify the repairs were completed to the applicable standards (e.g., using UG-90 as a guide for the required inspections)?

c. Has the owner, or the owner's designated inspection company, demonstrated the appropriate repair inspection competence for Owner-Certified repairs as required by AB-513 and followed the repair process described in the accepted QMS?



b. If individual pressure fittings are replaced (e.g., threaded elbow, threaded valve, etc.) on B31.3 pressure piping systems as part of maintenance activities, does the PEIM system include a procedure that addresses design, material control, installation and testing of the resulting piping system?


c. Is there evidence that a piping Construction and Test Data Report (AB-83 form, or equivalent), certified by the owner's Inspector, is completed as required by the PESR?

IMR Sect. 2.18PESR Sect. 22PESR Sect. 32

d. Is there evidence of design registration for alterations/additions to piping systems (>500 liters aggregate volume) and that Completion of Construction (AB-81) forms are submitted to ABSA as per regulatory requirements, or that the alterations were accepted as otherwise provided for in AB-513?

a. Are written quality control procedures that meet ABSA requirements implemented for repair or alteration activities that are completed by the owner (e.g., pressure vessel repairs or mechanically assembled piping and tubing that is not exempt under Section 4 of the PESR)?

b. If repair or alteration activities are part of the IMS scope, has an audit of the applicable quality control procedures been completed as part of the IMS certification audit?

D1




Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

12.1 General Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA12.2 Boilers, Pressure Vessels, TLHS & BEP 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA12.3 Owner Certified Repairs 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA12.4 Pressure Piping Repairs and Alterations 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA12.5 Repair/Alteration of Pressure Equipment by the Owner 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 12

Repairs and Alterations to Pressure Equipment

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Gener

al Req

uirem

ents

Boiler

s, P

ress

ure

Vesse

ls, T

LHS &

BEP

Owner C

ertif

ied R

epair

s

Press

ure

Piping

Rep

airs

and

Altera

tions

Repair

/Alte

ratio

n of

Pre

ssur

e Equ

ipmen

t by

the

Owner

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 13. PRDs of 87

Overpressure Protection and Protective Devices

13.1 General Requirements and Records 0IMR Sect. 2.19 a. Is there evidence that there is a complete inventory of overpressure relief devices is maintained? 15

IMR Sect. 2.19 b. Is there evidence that the applicable design specifications for all overpressure relief devices are maintained? 10

10

d. Is there evidence that all pressure equipment, as applicable, is protected from overpressure to prevent operation outside the equipment design? 15

e. When overpressure relief capacity is prescribed by codes/standards, is there evidence that adequate capacity is provided (e.g., boilers, LPG storage bullets, etc.)?10

15

g. Is there evidence that the owner is maintaining appropriate records of the servicing and replacement of overpressure relief devices? 15

h. Is there evidence the pressure equipment overpressure relief systems have been verified as adequate when pressure plant changes have been made? 10

13.2 Removal and Replacement of Relief Devices 0

a. Is there evidence that appropriate controls are implemented to ensure pressure relief devices are protected from damage during removal and replacement?15

b. Is there evidence that controls are implemented to ensure pressure relief devices are returned to the correct locations after servicing? 15

c. If pressure relief devices in the serviced condition are kept in storage, is there evidence of the implementation of procedures for controlled storage? 10

d. Is there evidence that overpressure relief valve seals are maintained in place after servicing and during the time the valve remains in operation? 15

10

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual


c. Is there evidence that overpressure relief devices meet design specifications, ASME requirements & are the correct device for the service (e.g., liquid, gas, steam, S, UV, UD, etc.)?




f. If pressure equipment is protected from overpressure by system design, is there evidence that the design has been accepted, and the overpressure protection by system design is controlled in accordance with the accepted design?








e. If rupture discs have been accepted as primary overpressure protection devices is there evidence that procedures address specifications of discs and holders, storage, handling and installation procedure training which includes proper torqueing (including calibration of torque wrenches)?

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 13. PRDs of 87

Overpressure Protection and Protective DevicesElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

13.3 Inspection and Servicing 0

a. Is there evidence that installation inspection and online visual examination of the overpressure relief devices has been completed in accordance with AB-506?20

b. Is there evidence that pressure relief valve servicing is done by a company that has a valid Certificate of Authorization, applicable scope, and is an approved vendor?15

15

d. Is there evidence that pressure relief valves have been pre-popped prior to servicing in order to facilitate establishing the optimum safe servicing interval?15

e. If relief valve servicing activities are part of the IMS scope, has an audit of the applicable procedures been completed as part of the IMS certification audit?15

13.4 Isolating Valves in the Relief Path 0a. If the owner has installed isolating valves in the overpressure relief device path, is there evidence of applicable procedures accepted by an ABSA SCO?

15

b. If the owner requires the option of isolating pressure relief devices while equipment is in operation, is the evidence of acceptable management controls?15

15

13.5 Protective Devices 0

15

b. Is there evidence that testing records for protective devices are maintained and that servicing and testing is scheduled appropriately? 15





c. Is there evidence appropriate servicing intervals have been assigned for overpressure relief devices, based upon testing, servicing reports and operating information as required by AB-506?

IMR Sect. 2.19

IMR Sect. 2.19




c. Is there evidence of a documented audit of the status of all pressure relief device isolating valves, and the locks or seals that maintain valve state, on at least an annual basis and prior to returning the plant to operation after shutdowns where relief devices have been isolated?


a. Is there evidence of controls to maintain the status/operability of protective devices to prevent pressure equipment operation outside of safe operating limits (e.g., procedures controlling the by-passing or isolating of protective devices)?


D1




Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

13.1 General Req. and Records 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA13.2 Removal and Replacement of Relief Devices 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA13.3 Servicing and Intervals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA13.4 Isolating Valves in the Relief Path 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA13.5 Protective Devices 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 13

Overpressure Protection and Protective Devices

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Gener

al Req

. and

Rec

ords

Remov

al an

d Rep

lacem

ent o

f Reli

ef D

evice

s

Servic

ing a

nd In

terv

als

Isola

ting

Valves

in th

e Reli

ef P

ath

Prote

ctive

Dev

ices

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 14. Internal Audit of 87

Internal Audits

14.1 Internal Audit Planning 0IMR Sect. 2.20 a. Is there evidence that internal audits of PEIM system implementation have been scheduled at the frequency specified in the internal audit procedure? 5

IMR Sect. 2.20 b. Is there evidence that the internal audit appropriately addressed the PEIM system scope? 5

IMR Sect. 2.20 c. Is there evidence that the internal audit appropriately addressed the locations where the PEIM system is implemented? 5

IMR Sect. 2.20 d. Is there evidence that a suitable audit plan was used to complete the internal audit, and to document each of the activities and examples reviewed? 5

14.2 Conducting Internal Audits 0IMR Sect. 2.20 a. Is there evidence that the internal audits were documented as required by the internal audit procedure? 5

IMR Sect. 2.20 b. Is there evidence that audit findings are suitably documented and reported in accordance with the internal audit procedure? 5

IMR Sect. 2.20

c. Is there evidence that all of the scheduled audits (i.e., compliance with the internal audit procedure) were completed and that the audit reports are on file?5

14.3 Internal Audit Follow-up 0IMR Sect. 2.20 a. Is there evidence that timely remedial and/or corrective/preventative action was taken with respect to internal audit findings? 5

IMR Sect. 2.205


ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

b. Is there evidence that any non-conformances and corrective/preventative actions resulting from internal audits are documented per the accepted internal audit procedure?

D1




Internal Audits

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

14.1 Internal Audit Planning 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA14.2 Conducting Internal Audits 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA14.3 Internal Audit Follow-up 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 14

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Inte

rnal

Audit

Plannin

g

Condu

cting

Inte

rnal

Audits

Inte

rnal

Audit

Follow

-up

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 15. Corrective Actions of 87

Corrective and Preventative Actions

15.1 General Requirements 0IMR Sect. 2.21

5

IMR Sect. 2.21 b. Is there evidence that the identified issues are investigated and that suitable action is taken to prevent their recurrence, as required by the IMS? 5

IMR Sect. 2.21

c. Is there evidence that the method of documentation used to record issues and the actions taken along with the required approvals is as per IMS requirements?5

IMR Sect. 2.21

d. Is there evidence that processes are implemented to control and track remedial, corrective and preventative actions and address any items that remain open?5

IMR Sect. 2.21 e. Is there evidence that corrective and preventative actions have been reviewed, as necessary, to determine they have been effective? 5

15.2 Remedial, Corrective & Preventative Action 0IMR Sect. 2.21

10

IMR Sect. 2.21 b. Have the identified corrective and preventative action items been closed in a timely manner? 10

15.3 Safety Codes Act Non-Compliance 0IMR Sect. 2.21 a. Is there evidence that Safety Codes Act Non-Compliance is identified and documented in accordance with the accepted IMS Manual? 10

IMR Sect. 2.21 b. Is there evidence that items identified as Safety Codes Act non-compliance are resolved in accordance with the IMS? 10


ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

a. Is there evidence that issues that may negatively impact upon pressure equipment safety or IMS requirements are identified, documented and reported appropriately within the organization?

a. Is there evidence that documentation of remedial, corrective and preventative action is used whenever non-compliance is encountered, as described in the accepted IMS Manual?

D1




Corrective and Preventitive Actions

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

15.1 General Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA15.2 Remedial, Corrective & Preventative Action 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA15.3 Safety Codes Act Non-Compliance 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 15

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Gener

al Req

uirem

ents

Remed

ial, C

orre

ctive

& P

reve

ntat

ive A

ction

Safet

y Cod

es A

ct N

on-C

ompli

ance

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 16. Accidents of 87

Accidents and Incidents

16.1 General Requirements 0IMR Sect. 2.21

4

5

5

IMR Sect. 2.214

IMR Sect. 2.21 e. Is there evidence that the reported incidents, accidents and near-misses are investigated and that suitable action is taken to prevent their recurrence? 4

IMR Sect. 2.21 f. Is there evidence that processes are implemented to control and track the corrective/preventative actions identified and verify their effectiveness? 4

IMR Sect. 2.21 g. Is there evidence that incidents, accidents and near-misses are reviewed to determine & implement action to prevent recurrence? 4

16.2 Reporting Accidents to ABSA 0

5

b. Is there evidence that all accidents not caused by pressure equipment but having some impact upon pressure equipment (e.g., fire) have been reported to ABSA?5

c. Is there evidence that, with respect to accident reporting, a full report in writing was submitted to the Administrator as soon as possible after the accident?5

16.3 Reporting Unsafe Conditions to ABSA 0

5


ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

a. Does the company have documented procedures for reporting, investigating and implementing corrective or preventative action with respect to accidents and unsafe conditions?


b. Does the company's documented procedure for reporting accidents and unsafe conditions relative to pressure equipment address the reporting requirements of the PESR?


c. Does the company's documented procedure for pressure equipment accident investigations include provisions to preserve the accident scene as required by Section 35(3) of the PESR?

d. Is there evidence that incidents, accidents and near-misses that affect pressure equipment safety are identified, documented and reported within the organization as required by the IMS?


a. Is there evidence that all accidents involving pressure equipment that resulted in damage to property or injury to, or death of, a person were reported to the Administrator in accordance with regulatory requirements?



IMR Sect. 2.21PESR Sect. 35SCA Sect. 59

a. Is there evidence that any unsafe condition with respect to pressure equipment or a process or activity to which the Safety Codes Act applies has been reported forthwith, to the Administrator, in accordance with the regulatory requirements?

D1




Accidents and Incidents

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

16.1 General Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA16.2 Reporting Accidents to ABSA 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA16.3 Reporting Unsafe Conditions to ABSA 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementNo. 16

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Gener

al Req

uirem

ents

Repor

ting

Accide

nts

to A

BSA

Repor

ting

Unsaf

e Con

dition

s to

ABSA

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 17. RBI of 87

AB-505 Risk Based Inspection Requirements

4.0 Application and Limitations 0AB-505 4.0 a. Has the company met the AB-505 specified RBI program pre-requisites? 5

AB-505 4.05

AB-505 4.05

6.1 Logical and Fully Documented Process 0AB-505 6.1

a. Is the RBI process clearly documented in a written procedure, which is a referenced and controlled document within the company's PEIM Quality Manual?6

AB-505 6.1 b. Does the RBI procedure define, in detail, each step to be taken during the risk assessment process? 6

AB-505 6.1 c. Does the RBI procedure detail how hazards are defined for each item of pressure equipment? 6

AB-505 6.1 d. Does the RBI procedure detail how the likelihood and consequences of failure are established? 6

AB-505 6.1 e. Does the RBI procedure detail how the likelihood and consequences of failure are used to determine risk level and inspection intervals? 6

6.2 Personnel 0AB-505 6.2

9

AB-505 6.2 b. Is the role of the company chief inspector in the RBI process clearly defined? 9

AB-505 6.210

AB-505 6.210

AB-505 6.29

AB-505 6.210

AB-505 6.2 g. Is the RBI training documented for all personnel participating in the RBI program? 9

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

b. If the company proposes to contract RBI program work; has the process for controlling outside consultants been defined and has the company assured, through a documented assessment process, that the consultant is capable of providing integrated services and assist in the RBI program development?

c. If a consultant is used; does senior management have documented and approved policies and procedures governing RBI along with a defined acceptable risk tolerance?

a. Does the RBI procedure define the personnel who will participate during each stage of the risk assessment, including their required qualifications, training, plant specific knowledge and experience?

c. Does the RBI procedure include a documented process for assessing the competency level of the personnel involved in the risk assessment to ensure that the team has the required knowledge and experience to make sound judgments?

d. Does the company's RBI procedure ensure that RBI team members have appropriate knowledge of the company's RBI and pressure equipment integrity management program, and of risk analysis?

e. Does the company's RBI procedure ensure that the RBI team leader has sufficient all-round technical knowledge and experience of the plant to know what information is required and where to find it?

f. Does the company's RBI procedure ensure that all personnel participating in the RBI program are fully trained in the program and understand the implications of the decisions made?

D1



AB-505 Risk Based Inspection RequirementsElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

AB-505 6.29

6.3 Required RBI Documentation 0AB-505 6.3 a. Does the company's RBI documentation include; team members performing the assessment and their qualifications? 4

AB-505 6.3 b. Does the company's RBI documentation include; the reassessment interval (may not be the same as the inspection interval)? 4

AB-505 6.3 c. Does the company's RBI documentation include; the factors used to determine risk? 4

AB-505 6.3 d. Does the company's RBI documentation include; the assumptions made during the assessment? 4

AB-505 6.3 e. Does the company's RBI documentation include; the risk assessment results (unmitigated risk levels)? 5

AB-505 6.3 f. Does the company's RBI documentation include; the actions required to move to new mitigation risk levels? 5

AB-505 6.3 g. Does the company's RBI documentation include; the mitigated risk levels? 4

6.4 Pre-Commissioning Inspections 0AB-505 6.4 a. Has a pre-commissioning inspection been completed on each pressure equipment item? 7

AB-505 6.46

AB-505 6.4 c. If equipment has been relocated or if the service or ownership changes, has the RBI analysis been revalidated? 7

6.5 Management of Change 0AB-505 6.4 a. Is management of change controlled by a written procedure that is referenced within the company's PEIM system Quality Manual? 15

AB-505 6.430

6.6 Computer Models 0AB-505 6.4 a. Has the company implemented measures to ensure the integrity of RBI computer records? 3

AB-505 6.43

AB-505 6.4 c. Have all persons using the computer model received adequate training on its use? 4

h. Is there evidence that the impact of personnel changes on the RBI program have been managed and controlled to ensure the continued competency of persons involved in the RBI process?

b. Have pre-commissioning inspections included verification that the equipment and its installation complies with the Safety Codes Act and Regulations and any specific owners design requirements prior to being placed in operation?

b. Is the process for evaluating the impact of changes addressed in the RBI procedure and implemented with sufficiently detailed documentation to enable the impact of a change to be fully understood?

b. Have all computer generated risk levels been reviewed and verified by the owner, and confirmed to be consistent with the principles used to develop the RBI program?

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

7.1 System Definition 0AB-505 7.1 a. Does the RBI procedure define the required information to be collected? 5

AB-505 7.15

AB-505 7.15

7.2 Hazard Identification 0AB-505 7.2 a. Within the RBI process have hazards been identified? 10

AB-505 7.220

AB-505 7.2 c. Have all applicable failure scenarios been identified/considered (e.g., pit to leak to ignition)? 15

7.3 Consequence Assessment 0AB-505 7.3 a. Although other consequences are certainly important, it is confirmed that other consequences have not been given higher importance than safety? 7

AB-505 7.3 b. It is also confirmed that the importance of safety has not be diluted due to inclusion of other consequence in the RBI program? 8

AB-505 7.310

AB-505 7.310

AB-505 7.3 e. Has the outcome of the above described consequence assessment been utilized when determining risk? 10

7.4 Likelihood Assessment 0AB-505 7.4

6

AB-505 7.46

AB-505 7.46

b. Has minimum applicable process data been considered and collected (i.e., operating pressure and temperature including transient and upset conditions, process fluid description including flammability, toxicity and reactivity)?

c. Has minimum applicable process data been considered and collected (i.e., process stability, process impurities, equipment design data, inspection/repair history, operating history, current mitigation strategy, personnel exposure, proximity to the public, environmental consequences and integrity windows)?

b. Have all basic modes of degradation been considered when identifying damage mechanisms for equipment (modes of degradation include: thinning due to corrosion or erosion, cracking, metallurgical changes, mechanical forces, etc.)?

c. Have appropriate factors been considered for each failure scenario (i.e., proximity to residential areas, highways and other industries, frequency and density of employee population, process fluid properties with respect to flammability, toxicity, exposure limits and reactivity)?

d. Have appropriate factors been considered for each failure scenario (i.e., potential for fatality or knockdown, potential for explosion, BLEVE or vapour cloud, contained energy and environmental impact)?

a. Has the company demonstrated a valid likelihood assessment process based on historical data, an understanding of failure mechanisms, current operation, and recognition of possible future changes to compile all available data into a single value or category?

b. Does the likelihood assessment incorporate a design factor, which considers design parameters versus operating parameters, design complexity, adequacy of design given current knowledge?

c. Does the likelihood assessment incorporate a process factor, which considers potential for upset and transient conditions, process stability, system cleanliness, operating history, operating procedures, operator skill and potential for failure of protective devices.?

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

AB-505 7.46

AB-505 7.46

AB-505 7.45

AB-505 7.4 g. Has each failure scenario been assessed to determine the likelihood of it occurring? 5

AB-505 7.4 h. Has the outcome of the above described likelihood assessment been utilized when determining risk? 5

7.5 Risk Determination 0AB-505 7.5 a. Does the RBI procedure define how risk level is derived (e.g., matrix or other method)? 10

AB-505 7.5 b. Is the same risk determination matrix (or other method) used consistently for all risk assessments? 10

AB-505 7.5 c. Has the highest resulting risk for each item, based on the analyses, been used to determine the inspection and mitigation strategy? 10

AB-505 7.515

7.6 Mitigation/Inspection Plan 0AB-505 7.6 a. Does the RBI procedure have a mechanism for establishing a mitigation/inspection plan (including intervals) based on the risk level determined? 10

AB-505 7.610

AB-505 7.6 c. Do the inspection plans define inspection techniques to be used, specific regions to be examined and the nature of damage to be expected? 10

AB-505 7.6

10

d. Does the likelihood assessment incorporate an inspection factor, which considers the effectiveness of previous inspections based on the damage expected, inspection techniques utilized and accessibility?

e. Does the likelihood assessment incorporate a damage factor, which considers results of previous inspections (direct and equivalent), known or expected damage mechanisms, rate of deterioration, and the date of the last inspection?

f. Does the likelihood assessment incorporate an equipment factor and a condition factor, which considers the complexity of the equipment and the physical condition of the equipment respectively?

d. Does the RBI procedure define how each risk will be addressed in terms of inspection frequency, scope and other mitigation techniques (management policy, typically achieved by segregating blocks in the matrix as having acceptable/unacceptable risk, and assigning required actions for each risk level)?

b. Based on the audit sample are the mitigation/inspection plans appropriate to the level of risk and have considered the expected failure modes and the key factors affecting risk?

d. Are mitigation activities, as appropriate, documented and validated as part of the mitigation/inspection plan (e.g., modify process/operating procedures, enhanced on-stream monitoring/inspection, upgraded alarm/detection systems, enhanced pm, instrument redundancy, replace/repair equipment, secondary containment/restraints or control of ignition sources)?

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

7.7 Re-Assessment 0AB-505 7.7

7

AB-505 7.78

AB-505 7.78

AB-505 7.7

d. Has a specified maximum time period before re-assessment been established, documented and implemented; to ensure that risk assessments remain current?7

7.8 Required Documents 0AB-505 7.8 a. The company has a copy of the required standards; PCC-3, API 510, API 570, API 572, (API 579) API 580 (API-581)? 10


a. Does the implemented RBI procedure incorporate provisions for updating the risk assessments to ensure that the results are current with the most recent inspection, process, and maintenance information?

b. Has the effectiveness of mitigation techniques been re-assessed after changes to the process, design, personnel, or other critical factors, or when new information becomes available that could impact the previous assessment?

c. Has the effectiveness of mitigation techniques been re-assessed after new inspection data is obtained (e.g., after turnarounds) or after a predetermined maximum time period has elapsed?

D1



AB-505 Risk Based Inspection Requirements - Element Compliance Summary

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

4.0 Application & Limitations 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.1 Logical and Fully Doc. Process 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.2 Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.3 Required RBI Documentation 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.4 Pre-Commissioning Inspections 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.5 Management of Change 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6.6 Computer Models 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.1 System Definition 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.2 Hazard Identification 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.3 Consequence Assessment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.4 Likelihood Assessment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.5 Risk determination 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.6 Mitigation/Inspection Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.7 Re-Assessment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7.8 Required Documents 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

AB-505Element

Ref.

AB-505 Risk Based InspectionRequirements

Nu

mb

er o

fA

ctiv

itie

sE

xam

ined

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

Ass

ign

ed

Sco

re

Applic

ation

& L

imita

tions

Logic

al an

d Full

y Doc

. Pro

cess

Perso

nnel

Requir

ed R

BI Doc

umen

tatio

n

Pre-C

omm

ission

ing In

spec

tions

Man

agem

ent o

f Cha

nge

Compu

ter M

odels

Syste

m D

efini

tion

Hazar

d Id

entif

icatio

n

Conse

quen

ce A

sses

smen

t

Likeli

hood

Ass

essm

ent

Risk d

eter

mina

tion

Mitig

ation

/Insp

ectio

n Plan

Re-Ass

essm

ent

Requir

ed D

ocum

ents

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 18. Piping of 87

AB-518 Pressure Piping Construction

3.3.3 Scope 0a. Is the scope of work undertaken within the scope of work applied for? 6

3.3.5 Organization

a. Are the responsibilities and authorities associated with the pressure piping construction quality procedure communicated to employees? 7

3.3.6 Responsibility

a. Is there evidence that management has provided adequate and competent resources for the construction activities? 7

3.3.8 Contract Review 0a. Are the pressure piping construction requirements defined? 5

b. Is the scope of work defined? 5

5

3.3.9 Document and Data Control 0a. Is a current version of the quality manual/procedure provided, and has this manual/procedure been accepted by ABSA? 10

b. Are the current issues of the appropriate documentation available at all relevant locations and to all relevant persons? 10

c. Are superseded documents removed from use throughout the organization or are such documents appropriately identified as superseded documents? 10

d. Is the current revision status of documents identified? 5

e. Are the documents legible, readily identifiable and retrievable? 10

3.3.10 Piping Design 0

7

6

c. Are the design documents stamped by a P. Eng. When a pressure piping system design is required to be registered with ABSA? 6

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.3

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.5

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.6

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.8

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.8

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.8

c. Are responsibilities for certifying construction (i.e., AB-83 or equivalent) and certifying the installation and readiness for operation (using an AB-81 form when applicable and submitting the completed form to ABSA) defined?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.9

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.9

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.9

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.9

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.9

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.10

a. Are design requirements such as the operating conditions, service requirements and other information needed to facilitate the safe design, construction, and inspection of the pressure piping system identified and documented?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.10

b. Are the personnel assigned to design the piping systems competent, and for new piping designs do they meet the qualification requirements of the company and of the applicable ASME B31 Code(s)?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.10

D1



AB-518 Pressure Piping ConstructionElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

7

6

f. Do all design documents, including any revisions, have the required approval and are the applicable revision of documents made available at the point of use?6

g. Is an appropriate management of change process utilized to manage changes to the design? 6

h. If the piping system's internal volume exceeds 500 liters, are the design registration requirements with ABSA specified? 6

3.3.11 Purchasing and Material Control 0a. Are the materials properly specified in the Purchase Order to meet the requirements of the engineering design and other owner's requirements? 8

7

8

d. Has a process been implemented to ensure that received materials conform to the correct specifications and quantity, and are not damaged? 7

e. Has a process been implemented for identifying and disposing of non-conforming items? 7

8

3.3.12 Construction of Pressure Piping 0

15

15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.10 d. Do the design documents provide information about the code of construction including edition, proper material specifications, design pressure, maximum and

minimum design temperatures, ASME B31.3 fluid category for process piping, type and extent of NDE required, hydro test pressure and medium, Pre-Heat and PWHT requirements, joint design details, WPS and dimensions?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.10

e. Are the design code edition and addenda of the applicable ASME construction codes, standards and other related documents available to design personnel and applied for pressure piping design?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.10

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.10

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.10

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.11

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.11

b. For CSA B51 Category A, B and C pressure fittings; has the manufacturer implemented a system to communicate pressure fitting design registration requirements to suppliers along with the provision that evidence of design registration would need to be available upon request.

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.11

c. For pressure fittings not described by CSA B51 Category A, B and C; is there documentation confirming the design registration of the pressure fittings allowing their use in Alberta?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.11

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.11

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.11

f. Has a process been implemented for identification of pipes, fittings, bolting, welding consumables and other materials used for piping fabrication while in storage and during construction activities?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12 a. Has an ITP (and/or Construction Travel Sheet) and a project file been initiated prior to the start of the project and have these documents been maintained? (For

projects with multiple spools that are documented on individual isometric drawings the documentation of examination and inspection may be more appropriately included on each isometric drawing)

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

b. As applicable, has the owner’s Inspector assigned to the job been informed prior to the start of the project for the purpose of reviewing the ITP (and/or a Construction Travel Sheet), and construction documents and for assignment of inspection hold points?

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

10

d. Has the implemented construction process ensured that welding and other fabrication activities are monitored and documented during production? 15

e. Have the WPSs specified in the engineering design been verified as suitable for the job? 10

f. When no WPSs are specified by the designer, is the process for assigning the WPS in coordination with the designer defined/implemented? 10

g. Is there an implemented process to ensure that copies of the registered WPS are available to the welders, and are understood and implemented effectively?10

h. Is there an implemented process to ensure that the welders are qualified for the job and are records of the welders qualifications maintained? 10

15

10

k. Is there an implemented process to ensure that for ASME B31.1 Boiler External piping, ABSA inspection and certification is achieved? 10

l. Is there an implemented process to ensure that PWHT is completed in accordance with the requirements of the engineering design, verified and documented?10

10

n. Is there an implemented process to ensure that the completed job is certified using an AB-83 form or equivalent and that the records are maintained? 15

10

10

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

c. Has the implemented construction process ensured that the materials are available, issued for construction and checked for conformance with the engineering design prior to start of fabrication?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

i. Is there an implemented process ensuring that the inspection and examination stages are identified, carried out in accordance with the acceptance standards, documented, verified and records maintained?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

j. Is there an implemented process for defining the extent of NDE, identification of spools, supply of NDE instructions to the NDE company, review of radiographs and reports and acceptance is defined and documentation maintained?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

m. Is there an implemented process to ensure that pressure testing is accomplished in accordance with requirements of the engineering design and codes, and documented?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

o. If applicable, when a job does not meet all of the requirements of the SCA, Regulations and applicable ASME B31 code(s) prior to release, has a partial AB-83 form been completed and provided to the primary contractor?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.12

p. When the piping system being constructed has required design registration by ABSA as a new design or an alteration to the existing registered design, has an AB-81 form been completed upon installation and prior to operation and submitted to ABSA?

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.3.13 Post Weld Heat Treatment 0a. Within the quality system have responsibilities for the implementation and maintenance of the PWHT procedures been assigned? 2

b. Have the PWHT requirements been defined in the engineering design/drawings or otherwise made available to construction personnel? 2

c. Have the PWHT activities been executed in accordance with the requirements of the engineering design? 2

d. Is there an implemented process to ensure that the piping spools designated for PWHT are identified? 2

e. Have the correct PWHT instructions for the piping been prepared and supplied to the heat treatment contractor? 3

f. Is there an implemented process to ensure that upon completion of the PWHT of the piping, it is inspected and the PWHT documentation verified? 2

g. Has the PWHT documentation been maintained as described within the written quality system? 2

3.3.14 Nondestructive Examinations and Testing 0a. Has the NDE required for the pressure piping fabrication been specified correctly, based upon the piping design documents issued for construction? 5

b. If applicable, has a lot size been designated appropriately? 5

4

4

e. Have written instructions for performing NDE been provided to the technicians performing NDE? 4

f. Is there an implemented process for identifying the welding joints requiring NDE and is the process implemented? 4

g. If applicable, has the correct NDE been performed to meet the specified NDE for each lot? 5

h. Has radiographic film and reports been reviewed and accepted by the applicable QC personnel? 5

i. Based upon a review of past job files have the NDE documents been maintained on file for the period of time specified in the QMS? 4

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.13

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.13

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.13

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.13

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.13

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.13

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.13

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

c. Are there implemented processes to ensure procedures used for performing NDE are documented and meet requirements of the current Regulations, ASME Section V and the applicable ASME B31 Code of construction; and that this has been verified as described within the QMS?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

d. Are there implemented processed to ensure that NDE interpretations are performed by CGSB/SNT-TC-IA Level II or III technicians and is this corroborated by a review of selected radiographic examination reports?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.14

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.3.15 Examination 0a. Are the responsibilities for the examination activities and qualifications of an examiner defined? 9

b. Are the examinations specified for various stages of construction conducted? 10

9

d. Are the materials received from the owner(s) and supplier(s) examined to assure conformance with the requirements of the engineering design? 9

e. Are the ‘partial’ piping systems and documents received from the subcontractors examined prior to release for further processing? 9

f. Are the partial piping turnover packages received from manufacturers within Alberta accompanied by ‘Partial AB-83’ forms? 9

g. Are the piping systems and documentation received from manufacturers outside of Alberta accompanied by ‘AB-83F’ forms and examined prior to release?9

h. Are completed piping systems and documents received from manufacturers from within Alberta accompanied by ‘AB-83’ forms and are examined prior to release?9

9

j. Are the examination records maintained as specified? 9

k. For ASME B31.1 Boiler External Piping, is ABSA’s inspection requirement addressed and is ABSA’s inspection enabled when required? 9

3.3.16 Pressure Testing 0

a. Is a documented procedure in place and understood by the personnel responsible for conducting the pressure tests; as confirmed through personnel interviews?6

b. Is over pressure prevented during the pressure test? 6

c. Are the pressure test areas secure and safe for all personnel? 6

d. Is the procedure effective, does it meet the requirements of the engineering design and the code of construction and is it being complied with? 7

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

c. Are QMS examination requirements and associated procedures available and understood by the personnel responsible for the examination activities as confirmed through verification of availability of documents at the point of use and verification of understanding through personnel interviews?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

i. Is the final examination carried out in accordance with the documented procedures, to complete the evidence of conformance of the finished product to the specified requirements?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.15

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.16

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.16

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.16

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.16

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

e. Are the pressure gauges calibrated and of proper range? 6

f. Are the required examinations carried out by qualified personnel? 6

g. Are the pressure test records maintained? 6

h. For ASME B31.1 Boiler External Piping, are prior arrangements made with ABSA to enable a SCO to inspect and witness the pressure test? 6

PESR Sect. 306

3.3.17 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices 0

3

4

c. Has the monitoring and measuring equipment been calibrated against internationally or nationally recognized standards, as required? 3

3

e. Based upon a sample of records, have the applicable calibration records of monitoring and measuring equipment been maintained? 3

2

g. Have method(s) for safeguarding the equipment from unauthorized adjustments been defined and implemented? 2

3.3.18 Competency and Training 0

20

b. Does the training plan include a requirement for identifying training needs, providing training, making assessment to assure competency and maintenance of records?20

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.16

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.16

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.16

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.16

i. Is there an understanding of the pressure test requirements contained in Section 30 of the PESR; specifically that if a pneumatic leak test is necessary this leak testing must be completed in accordance with an ABSA accepted pneumatic test procedure?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.17

a. Has a process been developed and implemented for determining which measurements are required to be taken during the construction, examination and testing of pressure piping and for selecting the appropriate equipment capable of providing the necessary accuracy and precision?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.17

b. Based on a sample of equipment, has a process been implemented to ensure that inspection, measuring and test equipment is identified, calibrated and adjusted at prescribed intervals, and that the equipment is verified to be in good condition prior to use?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.17

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.17

d. Has a process been defined and implemented to ensure the calibration, and for keeping details of equipment, unique identification, location, frequency of calibrations and checks, calibration method, acceptance criteria and action to be taken when the results are unsatisfactory?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.17

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.17

f. Has a process been implemented to ensure that the handling, preservation and storage of the equipment is such that the accuracy and fitness for purpose could be assured?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.17

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.18

a. Is there evidence that processes have been established and are continuing to maintain a documented plan for the training of personnel responsible for the construction of pressure piping?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.18

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

c. Are the records of training that are available for review consistent with the established requirements? 20

25

3.3.19 Corrective and Preventative Action 0a. Is there evidence of implementation of a documented procedure for Corrective and Preventive Action? 5

4

c. Has applicable training been provided for the implementation of the Corrective and Preventive Action program? 4

4

e. Have the Corrective and Preventive Action documents been controlled and maintained as described in the QMS? 4

f. Have the records been available for internal audit and to management for review? 4

3.3.20 Internal Audits 0

5

5

c. Has timely action been initiated with respect to the internal audit findings? 5

d. Has a process been implemented to verify the success of any corrective action that may have been taken as a result of internal audit findings? 5


AB-518 Sect. 3.3.18

AB-518 Sect. 3.4

d. Are QC personnel knowledgeable, meet the requirements of section 3.4 of AB-518 document and are providing competent quality control services at the construction site?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.19

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.19

b. Does the implemented procedure describe, the forms and include steps to identify the non-conformity, immediate action to dispose of the non-conformity, root cause analysis to determine the action in order to prevent it from happening again, and, to verify the effectiveness of the corrective action taken?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.19

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.19

d. Has a process been implemented for the review and evaluation of Corrective Action and Preventive Action Reports/Forms and logs on a periodic basis to establish if there are trends and to initiate improvement measures?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.19

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.19

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.20

a. Is there evidence that the pressure piping construction and repair and alteration of boilers and pressure vessels procedures have been subject to the Internal Audit process and/or procedures?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.20

b. Have the internal audit results pertaining to piping construction and boiler and pressure vessel repair and alteration been communicated to the appropriate personnel and management?

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.20

AB-518 Sect. 3.3.20

D1



AB-518 Pressure Piping Construction Audit - Compliance Summary

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

3.3.3-6 Scope, Org. and Resp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.8 Contract Review 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.9 Document and Data Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

3.3.10 Piping Design 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.11 Purchasing and Material Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.12 Construction of Pressure Piping 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.13 Post Weld Heat Treatment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.14 Nondestructive Examinations and Testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.15 Examination 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.16 Pressure Testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.17 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.18 Competency and Training 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.19 Corrective and Preventative Action 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.3.20 Internal Audits 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

AB-518Element

Ref.

AB-518 Piping Construction Requirements

Nu

mb

er o

fA

ctiv

itie

sE

xam

ined

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

Ass

ign

ed

Sco

re

Scope

, Org

. and

Res

p.

Contra

ct R

eview

Docum

ent a

nd D

ata

Contro

l

Piping

Des

ign

Purch

asing

and

Mat

erial

Con

trol

Const

ruct

ion o

f Pre

ssur

e Pipi

ng

Post W

eld H

eat T

reat

men

t

Nonde

stru

ctive

Exa

mina

tions

and

Tes

ting

Exam

inatio

n

Press

ure

Testin

g

Contro

l of M

onito

ring

and

Mea

surin

g Dev

ices

Compe

tenc

y an

d Tra

ining

Corre

ctive

and

Pre

vent

ative

Act

ion

Inte

rnal

Audits

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 18a. BEP-R&A-Fittings of 87

BEP, Repairs & Alterations and Pressure Fittings

BEP Boiler External Piping Construction 0Design Control a. Has the boiler external piping design been registered with ABSA, if the piping has not been registered as part of the boiler proper design? 6

b. Has all BEP material been ordered to SA/SB material specifications? 6

c. Is there provision for mandatory inspection by an Authorized Inspector and/or has inspection been completed by the Authorized Inspector? 7

d. Were hold points and inspection points established by the AI and were the inspection and hold points signed-off as required? 6

6

f. Has a hydrostatic pressure test been conducted in accordance with ASME Section I? 6

6

h. Has the boiler external piping been marked in accordance with ASME Section I, PG-109 (with the exception of the ASME Code symbol marking)? 7

R/A Repair and Alteration of Boilers and Pressure Vessels 0R/A Procedure

7

R/A Procedure b. For alterations; has the alteration procedure along with supporting calculations as applicable been submitted to and accepted by ABSA Design Survey? 7

R/A Procedure

7

R/A Inspection6

5

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

Material Control

Examination & Inspection



e. Does the manufacturer have a visual inspection procedure that meets code requirements and are personnel appropriately trained to perform visual inspection following the procedure?

Pressure Testing

Certification & Marking

g. Has the construction data report (AB-83) been certified by the manufacturer and the AI and has the manufacturer completed, certified and submitted the AB-81 form to ABSA, as applicable?

Certification & Marking

a. Has an appropriately detailed written repair/alteration procedure been prepared and maintained on file (Note: An AB-40 form could be used to document relatively straightforward repairs/alterations)?

c. For any alterations and when repair scope is outside of that authorized as owner-certified repairs; has the repair/alteration procedure been submitted to the ABSA SCO prior to the commencement of the work so that the necessary hold and inspection points may be assigned or, if repair(s) were within the scope of owner-certified repairs is there evidence that ABSA was notified?

d. Based on an audit sample of completed repairs/alterations has ABSA completed inspection and certification of alterations and repairs that were outside the scope of owner-certified repairs?

R/A Material Control

e. Based upon the audit sample of material procurement records for B& PV R/A activities; has the necessary additional purchase order information been provided, as applicable (e.g., request for MTRs, request for Partial Data Reports, request for UCS/UHT 79 certification on formed heads)?

D1



BEP, Repairs & Alterations and Pressure FittingsElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

f. Partial Data Reports received for replacement components fabricated by others? 5

7

5

i. Are material test reports verified against ASME Section II requirements and is acceptance indicated as described within the QMS procedure? 7

7

7

7

7

R/A Marking6

Fittings Pressure Fitting Construction 0Design Control

7

Design Control

b. Is the Statutory Declaration Form (AB-41) on file and is the design registered (CRN number) for use in Alberta and current (i.e., CRN not older than 10 years)?6

6



g. Material traceability information maintained as described in QMS procedure (e.g., a material tabulation is maintained in case material identification is not visible on the completed repair/alteration)?


h. For formed items (e.g., heads, conical sections, shells, etc.) the formed shape and tolerance (e.g., dish and knuckle radii of heads, particularly F&D heads) is verified and documented prior to fabrication?


R/A Welding Control

j. Have WPSs been verified as appropriate for the repair/alteration parameters (e.g., "P" number(s), base metal and deposited weld metal thicknesses, PWHT or controlled deposition, MDMT/impact testing, etc.) and has this been documented as required by the QMS procedure?

R/A Welding Control

k. Have welders qualifications been verified for the repair/alteration WPS performance variables (e.g., "F" number(s) deposited weld metal thicknesses, position, progression, etc.) and has this been documented as required by the QMS procedure?

R/A Examination

and Certification

l. Have appropriate hold and inspection points been designated (e.g., using UG-90 for guidance) and has examination and inspection activity completion been documented as required by the QMS procedure?

R/A Examination

and Certification

m. Has the AB-40/AB-83 form been signed to indicate conformance with repair requirements and certified by a competent inspector (i.e., owner's inspector if within the scope of owner-certified repairs or an ABSA SCO for all other repairs and any alterations to boilers, pressure vessels, BEP and TLH systems)?

n. For any B&PV alterations, and repairs when required by the owner or ABSA; has the required marking (i.e., nameplate with marking required by CSA B51) been attached to the repaired/altered pressure equipment in an acceptable manner?

a. Design calculations, specifications and drawings on file contain the applicable information for fitting construction (e.g., code of construction - edition/addenda, MAWP/MDMT, CA, NDE requirements, WPS number and joint types - weld details, test pressure and impact test req./exemptions)?

Material Control c. Are purchase documents generated from Bills of Materials and do they contain the applicable additional information (e.g., ASME specification number, grade,

schedule or thickness, dimensions, request for partial data reports if applicable, UCS-79 certification if applicable, tack welding instructions, NDE & Heat Treatment, request for MTRs as applicable and fitting registration requirements if applicable)?

D1



BEP, Repairs & Alterations and Pressure FittingsElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

d. Is there evidence that material receiving, examination and material substitutions are completed/controlled as described in the QMS? 6

7

7

7

h. Is material in stock (including welding consumables) identified and controlled as described in the QMS? 6

6

6

6

7

m. Has the pressure fitting been marked as described by the approved drawing and the QMS procedure? 7

6


Material Control

Material Control

e. For pressure fittings constructed to ASME Section VIII requirements are MTR chemical and physical test results verified to Section II requirements (construction drawing edition/addenda) and is MTR approval designated as per the QMS.?

Material Control

f. Is material identification maintained during construction as described in the QMS [e.g., accurate transfer of all markings per UG-77(c) or accurate transfer of coded marking] and are material markings recorded and transcribed as described in the QMS?

Material Control

g. Is material identification traceability maintained for all applicable pressure fitting materials (e.g., plate or pipe shells, nozzles, flanges, couplings or TOLs and attachments)?

Material Control

Welding Control

i. If pressure fittings are constructed to Section VIII requirements are Welder Performance Qualification tests witnessed and certified by the Manufacturer and is a Welder Continuity Log maintained?

Welding Control

j. Are the welding procedure specifications indicated on the approved drawing utilized for applicable welded joints and are welder qualifications verified for WPS performance variables (e.g., "F" number(s) deposited weld metal thicknesses, position, progression, etc.) and documented as required?


k. For category H fittings in lethal service has inspection been completed by the A.I. and/or has the examination and inspection activity completion been documented as required by the QMS procedure?


l. Has all NDE, heat treatment and pressure testing been completed and documented as required by the approved drawing and the QMS (e.g., are calibrated gauges used for pressure testing as indicated in the QMS procedure)?

Marking & Certification

Marking & Certification

n. For Category H fittings has the documentation specified by the QMS procedure been completed and certified by the manufacturer and by the A.I. (if applicable for lethal service fittings)?

D1


ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 18a. Chart of 87


Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

BEP Boiler External Piping Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 NAR&A Repair and Alteration of Boilers and Pressure Vessels 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Fittings Pressure Fitting Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 NATotals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

ElementReference

BEP, Repairs & Alterations and Fitting Construction

Nu

mb

er o

fA

cti

viti

es

Exa

min

ed

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

As

sig

ne

d

Sco

re

Boiler

Ext

erna

l Pipi

ng C

onst

ruct

ion

Repair

and

Alte

ratio

n of

Boil

ers

and

Press

ure

Vesse

ls

Press

ure

Fitting

Con

stru

ction

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 19. Welder Testing of 87

Performance Qualification Testing of Welders

1 General Requirements and Written QMS 0a. Are the required Codes available (i.e., Section II A, B and C, Section V, Section IX and the Safety Codes Act and Regulations)? 8

b. Has a competent person (QCM, however named) been appointed to be responsible for the welder testing quality system? 7

c. Is the Quality System Manual up-to-date and does the Manual reflect actual practices and requirements? 12

d. Have revisions to the Quality system manual been accepted by ABSA prior to issue and implementation? 8

e. Are copies of the Quality system manual available to key personnel? 9

f. Does the organization chart in the Quality System Manual reflect the present organization? 7

g. Are non-conformances processed in accordance with the Quality Management System? 7

h. If there are audit samples of "Special Tests" is there evidence that the procedure has been accepted as described in the QMS? 7

2 Material Control 0a. Is material ordered to ASME specifications and are procurement documents processed as described in the QMS Manual? 4

b. If material is supplied by the candidate or his employer, is control and verification of material adequate? 3

c. Is material examined for damage, quantity and are the required identification markings verified at time of material receipt? 3

d. Is material accepted based upon all of the required markings of the material specification and/or traceability to material test reports? 4

e. Is material (base material and welding consumables) in storage properly identified and segregated? 4

f. Is the storage and retrieval of welding consumables in accordance with the QMS and the manufacturer's recommendations? 4

g. Is material issued as described in the QMS? 3

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

AOQP TestRequirements















D1



Performance Qualification Testing of WeldersElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3 Personnel Training and Competency 0a. Has a training and upgrading program been established as described in the QMS? 25

b. Are personnel training and competency records established and maintained as described in the QMS? 25

c. Are personnel assigned performance qualification duties trained and qualified (verified as competent) as described in the QMS? 25

d. Do testing personnel have full support of management and fully understand the QMS? 25

4 Performance Qualification Cards 0a. Are performance qualification cards acceptable and as illustrated in the QMS Manual? 15

b. Is the system for issuing duplicate PQ cards adequate? 15

c. Is the security system for safe-keeping PQ cards adequate? 15

5 Performance Qualification Test Standards 0a. Are the Certificates of Competency of candidates verified prior to undertaking a PQ test? 15

b. Are performance qualification tests conducted by qualified personnel? 15

c. Are registered welding procedures available to candidates? 15

d. Are shop rules available and made known to candidates? 15

e. Is the PQ test evaluation and acceptance criteria established and communicated to candidates? 15

f. Is performance qualification testing completed in accordance with ASME Section IX? 25

25

h. Is the system of identification and retention of test coupons adequate and as described in the QMS? 15

i. Is the performance qualification card completed accurately (i.e., accurate performance variables), signed and issued by the person responsible for the PQ test?20

j. Is the document retention system for performance qualification test records acceptable and as described in the QMS? 15















g. Is the performance qualification test record form completed accurately (i.e., in accordance with code requirements) and signed by the person responsible for the PQ test?




D1



Performance Qualification Testing of WeldersElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

6 Non-Destructive Examination 0a. Are NDE personnel who have interpreted test results qualified and certified as Level II or III examiners in accordance with CGSB or SNT-TC-1A? 2

b. Are NDE procedures and personnel qualifications and certifications available and have they been reviewed and approved as described in the QMS? 2

c. Is the NDE interpretation report properly completed, traceable to the test weld and acceptably archived as per the QMS? 2

d. Is radiographic film traceable to the PQ test weld(s)? 2

e. Is storage of radiographic film and NDE reports acceptable? 2

f. Does radiographic film quality and density comply with Code requirements and is this verified as described in the QMS? 3

g. Is radiographic film viewing equipment adequate? 2

7 Heat Treatment 0a. Are the heat treatment contractor's written procedures available and have they been reviewed and approved as described in the QMS? 2

b. Do the sample heat treatment instructions comply with Code requirements for the applicable heat treatment? 3

c. Are heat treatment record charts legible and have they been verified against instructions as described in the QMS, and approved? 3

d. Are heat treatment records retained as described in the QMS? 2

8 Calibration of Measuring and Test Equipment 0a. Is measuring and test equipment identified and labeled as described in the QMS? 5

b. Are records of calibration maintained as described in the QMS? 5

c. Is the storage of calibrated equipment and it's examination prior to use as described in the QMS? 5

9 Document and Record Retention 0a. Are performance qualification test records, and associated documents, traceable to the individual test and retrievable as described in the QMS? 25

b. Are all of the non-PQ-test documents and records retained as described in the QMS? 25


















D1



Performance Qualification Testing of Welders - Element Compliance Summary

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

1 General Requirements and Written QMS 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA2 Material Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3 Personnel Training and Competency 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA4 Performance Qualification Cards 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA5 Performance Qualification Test Standards 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA6 Non-Destructive Examination 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA7 Heat Treatment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA8 Calibration of Measuring & Test Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA9 Document and Record Retention 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

WelderTestingElement

Performance Qualification Testing of Welders

Nu

mb

er o

fA

ctiv

itie

sE

xam

ined

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

Ass

ign

ed

Sco

re

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%

ABSA PEIM System Audit Report 20. PRD of 87

AB-524 Pressure Relief Device Servicing Requirements

3.6.1 Scope of Work 0a. Is the organization working within the scope of work defined in the Certificate of Authorization Permit (CAP) at the audit location or the mobile unit being audited? 10

b. Is there any evidence of additional shops and/or mobile units being in operation but not authorized? 10

3.6.3 Quality Management System/Doc. Control 0a. Has the organization implemented a documented QMS? 4

b. Are the referenced procedures available to the users? 4

c. Has the organization implemented an adequate number of documented procedures to ensure effective overall implementation of the QMS? 5

d. Are required copies or internet access to SCA, Regulations and Codes per the requirements of 3.2 of AB-524, available? 4

e. Has the organization identified records that should be maintained? 4

4

g. Has the organization documented the Document Control procedure? 4

h. Are the procedures approved by the department manager or his/her designate? 4

i. Has the organization managed (i.e., authorized) changes to documents as described in the QMS? 4

j. Are the documents controlled as described in the Document Control procedure? 4

k. Are relevant documents available at the point of use? 5

ElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.1

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.1

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

f. Were there any complaints received from the clients in regards to service reports not including adequate information, incomplete, not sent at all, sent late, not legible, etc?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

D1



AB-524 Pressure Relief Device Servicing RequirementsElementReference

ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

l. Does the organization prevent the use of obsolete documents as described in the QMS? 4

m. Are documents of external origin controlled? 4

n. Is there a master list or an equivalent system that identifies the documents that should be controlled? 4

o. Has the organization identified the records that should be controlled to prove conformity to the requirements, and are those records controlled? 4

p. Is the identification, storage, protection, retrieval and disposition of records managed in accordance with the requirements of the QMS? 5

q. Are records controlled for at least 5 years? 4

r. Is the records keeper (i.e., person controlling records and record retention) as designated in the QMS? 4

3.6.4 Management Responsibilities 0a. Has management reviewed the organization’s PRVs Servicing Program at least yearly to ensure continued suitability and effectiveness? 7

8

7

7

7

f. At the conclusion of the audit, did you develop the feeling that the management is committed to the successful implementation of the PRVs servicing program? 9

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.3

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.4

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.4

b. Based upon audit samples, was it evident during the course of the audit that the management provided adequate and competent resources to implement the PRVs servicing program effectively?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.4

c. Did the organization's management appoint one of its senior managers to assume responsibilities for ensuring that the QMS processes are established, implemented and maintained?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.4

d. Did the organization's management define the responsibilities and authorities of the personnel and was it evident during the course of the audit that the management communicated those responsibilities and authorities to the personnel effectively?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.4

e. Was it evident during the course of the audit that the management ensured that no changes to the management system are done that would render the system in non-compliance with the AB-524 document, SCA, regulations, codes and standards?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.4

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.6.5 Resource Management 0

15

15

15

d. Does the technician training program meet the requirements of Appendix ‘C’ of the AB-524 document? 15

3.6.6 Purchasing and Material Control 0a. Has the organization documented the methods for purchasing PRVs and parts thereof? 5

6

c. Does the organization verify the purchased product to ensure that the product meets the requirements of the P.O. and the quality requirements of the organization? 6

d. Has the organization established processes for the identification, traceability and preservation of the PRVs and parts thereof? 7

e. Have effective controls been implemented to prevent the use of non OEM parts in PSV servicing activities? 6

5

g. For any complaints received in regards to mishandling of the PRVs during transportation and at the shop, was effective corrective action taken? 5

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.5

a. Was it evident during the course of the audit that the organization's management provided adequate human resources to implement and maintain the QMS, and, continually improve it’s effectiveness?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.5

b. Was it evident during the course of the audit that the organization's management provided adequate PRVs performance testing equipment in accordance with the requirements of Sections 3.3 and 3.8 of AB-524?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.5

c. Did the organization determine the competence of the personnel performing work affecting conformity (i.e., has the organization provided training, evaluated the effectiveness of the training and maintained the necessary records to prove conformity)?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.5

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.6

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.6

b. Do the purchasing methods include specific information such as part and/or model number, type, class, grade or other precise information necessary to ensure conformity to the specified requirements?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.6

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.6

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.6

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.6

f. Has the organization implemented safe handling procedures to ensure that PRVs are transported to and from owner’s premises and handled at the shop in a manner that preserves the integrity of the PRVs and parts thereof?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.6

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.6.8 Servicing and Testing of PRVs 0

14

14

14

d. Did the organization accomplish servicing of the audit sample PRVs satisfactorily, in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.3 of the AB-524 document? 10

e. Does the organization install a PSV service tag in accordance with the requirements of the AB-524 document? 10

f. If the organization is testing steam PRVs with air, are the Red Tags being installed in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.3 of the AB-524 document? 10

9

h. If applicable; has the organization also field tested the red tagged steam PRVs on the owner’s boiler and documented this process acceptably? 10

10

9

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

a. As applicable to the fluid service testing scope applied for; witness the set pressure and leak testing of at least 1 PRV for the air/gas fluid service, record nameplate data in audit details and interview the technician as the testing process is demonstrated. Was testing acceptable?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

b. As applicable to the fluid service testing scope applied for; witness the set pressure and leak testing of at least 1 PRV for the liquid fluid service, record nameplate data in audit details and interview the technician as the testing process is demonstrated. Was testing acceptable?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

c. As applicable to the fluid service testing scope applied for; witness the set pressure and leak testing of at least 1 PRV for the steam fluid service, record nameplate data in audit details and interview the technician as the testing process is demonstrated. Was testing acceptable?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

g. If applicable; do the Red Tags includes the required information substantially as shown in the AB-524 document, and do the Red Tags meet the requirements in all respects?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

i. If applicable; are the technicians employed by the organization authorized to test steam PRVs on the owner’s boiler, trained to ensure safe and accurate testing of the PRVs, and certified competent by their employer?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.8

j. For any complaints received with respect to PRV operation, or PRVs returned by an owner because they did not operate within the set pressure tolerance limits of the applicable ASME Code, was effective corrective action taken by the organization?

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.6.9 Conversions and Changes 0a. Are the conversions and changes being done in accordance with the procedures of the manufacturer? 13

b. Does the organization document conversion or change requests from the owner in accordance with the QMS and AB-524? 15

13

d. When a "Repair Name Plate" is required; has the information that was changed on the original name plate been properly lined-out? 9

e. Does the organization record the conversions or changes in a service report? 10

3.6.10 Name Plates 0a. Are the Name Plates and/or Tags marked in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.6.10 of AB-524? 13

b. Are the name plates and/or tags made of durable materials in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.6.10 of AB-524 document? 10

7

3.6.11 Assist Lift Testing 0

8

b. Is the Assist Lift Device (ALD) calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer’s requirements/procedures? 9

c. Are the personnel designated for the use of the Assist Lift Device trained and assessed to be competent by the service shop manager? 9

9

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.9

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.9

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.9

c. Is there an evidence that a "Repair Name Plate" has been attached, securely and adjacent to the original Name Plate, whenever a conversion or change that affects the PRV model number is completed by the organization?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.9

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.9

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.10

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.10

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.10

c. For any complaints received with respect to; Name Plates/Tags becoming detached due to non-secure attachment, or becoming illegible in a short period of time while being in service, or not stamped/printed in accordance with AB-524 requirements, or a wrong/incorrectly completed Name Plate was installed, or any other deficiency reported in connection with Name Plates/Tags, was effective corrective action taken by the organization?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.11

a. Has the organization implemented a documented procedure(s) for assist lift testing, that meet the requirements of the manufacturer of the assist lift device and that have proven to produce accurate results in the past?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.11

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.11

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.11

d. Based upon witnessing of a field test with an ALD; was the field testing of a PRV with an ALD completed in accordance with all the requirements of the ALD manufacturer?

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.6.12 Measuring Devices 0

6

8

c. Are the measuring devices identified, protected from damage during handling and storage, and safeguarded from unauthorized adjustments? 6

d. Is the measurement acceptance criteria established and followed? 6

e. Are calibration records available? 6

f. Is the calibration done at an environmentally clean place in the shop? 6

7

3.6.13 Control of Nonconforming Product 0

6

b. Are records maintained per the requirements of the control of nonconforming product procedure? 7

c. Based upon the audit samples have nonconforming products been handled in accordance with the requirements of the procedure? 7

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.12

a. Has the organization identified the measurements that are required to be taken during the course of servicing, setting and testing the PRVs and determined measuring devices are required?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.12

b. Are the measuring devices calibrated and verified at specified intervals (i.e., as per AB-524), against certified equipment having a known and valid relationship to nationally recognized standards, prior to use or whenever error is suspected?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.12

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.12

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.12

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.12

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.12

g. Were any test pressure gages or other measuring equipment found to be out of calibration when in use (e.g., on the test bench) and if so, was corrective action taken and those owners whose PRVs may have been affected informed?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.13

a. Has the organization developed a procedure to describe the control of nonconforming product and addressed all of the requirements of Section 3.6.13 of the AB-524 document?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.13

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.13

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.6.14 Internal Audits 0a. Has the organization developed a procedure to describe the Internal Audit process and addressed all of the requirements of Section 3.6.14 of the AB-524 document?

6

b. Has the organization prepared a schedule for conducting the Internal Audits? 6

c. Has the organization carried out and documented the Internal Audits in accordance with the Internal Audit procedure? 7

6

3.6.15&16 Corrective and Preventive Action 0

6

7

7

6

7

7

AB-518 Sect. 3.6.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.6.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.6.14

AB-518 Sect. 3.6.14

d. Has the organization communicated the audit results to the appropriate personnel and management and are the records of Internal Audits maintained in accordance with QMS requirements?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.15

a. Has the organization developed a procedure to describe the Corrective Action process and addressed all of the requirements of Section 3.6.15 of the AB-524 document?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.15

b. Based upon audit samples, is it evident that the organization has correctly completed root cause analysis of reported problems so as to correctly identify the root cause of the problem rather than addressing symptoms of the root cause?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.15

c. Based upon audit samples, is it evident that the implemented corrective action procedure is adequate and that the procedure has helped the organization improve its quality management system?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.16

a. Has the organization developed a procedure to describe the Preventive Action process and addressed all of the requirements of Section 3.6.16 of the AB-524 document?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.16

b. Based upon audit samples, is it evident that the organization has implemented a proactive program to discover errors in the organizations processes or conditions and removing them before they could cause defects?

AB-524 Sect. 3.6.16

c. Based upon audit samples, is it evident that the implemented preventive action procedure is adequate and that the procedure has helped the organization improve its quality management system?

D1




ComplyLevel

ActivityScore

Possible/Actual

3.8 Press. Eq. Req. for a PRV Servicing Shop 0

7

b. Are the Certificate of Inspection Permits valid (if the equipment falls under the regulations and requires a Certificate of Inspection Permit)? 6

8

7

e. Has the organization qualified the test equipment in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.8 of the AB-524 document and is the qualification acceptable? 15

7

10


AB-524 Sect. 3.8

a. For new equipment installation or a new shop; if the new equipment is not exempt from the SCA and Regulations, was it inspected, protection against overpressure verified and the equipment certified by an ABSA SCO prior to use?

AB-524 Sect. 3.8

AB-524 Sect. 3.8

c. Has the owner established an integrity management program for the pressure equipment (boilers, pressure vessels and pressure piping systems) to assure that the equipment is inspected at specified intervals, maintained and is confirmed safe for continued operation?

AB-524 Sect. 3.8

d. If the service shop has installed a boiler, are the technicians designated to test the PRVs on the boiler certified per the requirements of the Power Engineers Regulation?

AB-524 Sect. 3.8

AB-524 Sect. 3.8

f. If any modifications to the testing system affecting the pressure, capacity and performance of the test equipment have been made has the organization re-qualified the testing system in accordance with the requirements of Section 3.8 of the AB-524 document?

AB-524 Sect. 3.8

g. Has the organization maintained the records required by Section 3.8 of the AB-524 document (i.e., test equipment qualification records, MDRs for pressure vessels and AB-83 forms for pressure piping, valid Certificate of Inspection Permits for boilers and pressure vessels, specifications of the test vessels unless included in the MDRs and a schematic of the testing system)?

D1



AB-524 Pressure Relief Device Servicing Requirements Audit - Compliance Summary

Obs

erva

tions

% Compliant

Audit Score

3.6.1 Scope of Work 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.3 Quality Management System/Doc. Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.4 Management Responsibilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.5 Resource Management 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.6 Purchasing and Material Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.8 Servicing and Testing of PRVs 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.9 Conversions and Changes 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

3.6.10 Name Plates 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.11 Assist Lift Testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.12 Measuring Devices 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.13 Control of Nonconforming Product 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.6.14 Internal Audits 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

3.6.15/16 Corrective and Preventive Action 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA3.8 Press. Eq. Req. for a PRV Servicing Shop 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

Totals 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA

AB-524Element

Ref.

AB-518 Piping Construction Requirements

Nu

mb

er o

fA

ctiv

itie

sE

xam

ined

Min

or

Fin

din

gs

Maj

or

Fin

din

gs

Po

ssib

le

Sco

re

Ass

ign

ed

Sco

re

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Scoring

86-100%

71-85%

0-70%