Scribd Logo
Carica

Benvenuto in Scribd!

  • In Line Inspection On Shore Gas

    Caricato da

    Pasquale Cutri
    36 visualizzazioni63 pagine
    in line inspection for on shore gas

    Titolo originale

    In Line Inspection on Shore Gas

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formati disponibili

    PDF o leggi online da Scribd

    Hai trovato utile questo documento?

    Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

    Segnala questo documento
    in line inspection for on shore gas

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Scarica in formato PDF o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    36 visualizzazioni63 pagine

    In Line Inspection On Shore Gas

    Caricato da

    Pasquale Cutri
    in line inspection for on shore gas

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Scarica in formato PDF o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    di 63
    PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Inspections re No. RMP-11 Rev. 2, June 10, 2008 RMP-11 Prepared By: Reviewed By: Reviewed By: Approved By: PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY CALIFORNIA GAS TRANSMISSION GAS SYSTEM MAINTENANCE & TECHNICAL SUPPORT SYSTEM INTEGRITY SECTION Risk Management Procedure for In-Line Inspections Procedure No. RMP-11 Integrity Management Program ‘Sr. Gas Consultart Engineer Date: 6-17-04, Dato: 6-17-04, Integrity Management Program Manager Date: 6-18-04, “TrrLine Inspection Program Manager “Manager, System Integrity Deserption Date: 7-1-04, Reviewed sy | _ manager, stem integrity Ho. 0 | 701-04 Trial tosu 1 [10-13-05 Rovision 1 2 1é7o-08| Revision 2 Prepared By RMP-11 Table of Contents 40 PURPOSE. 1" 20 TUMETHODOLOGY 2.2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES cere nenennnnnn 23 QUALIFICATION AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS. RECORD RETENTION: a7 3.8 FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS.. 3.9. ILIPRE-ASSESSMENT REVIEW MEETING(S) un. 3.40 PRE-ASSESSMENT REPORT. 311 PIPELINE RETROFIT. 40 INLINE INSPECTION. 44 OBJECTIVES... 4.2 SELECTION AND MARKING OF ABOVE-GROUND MARKERS (AGM). 4.3 PREPARATION FOR IN-LINE INSPECTIONS. 53 PRESSURE REDUCTION REVIEW PROCESS.. 5.4 IMMEDIATE ANOMALY INSPECTIONREPAIR PLAN. 5.5 _INSPECTIONIREPAIR PLAN... dL 57 _MAOP RESTORATION REVIEWICONCURRENCE. 58 ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS. 89 _RMP-11 FINAL REPORT... 5.40 GIS ANOMALY DOCUMENTATION... 6.411 DISTRIBUTION 80. POST ASSESSMENT.. 61 REJNSPECTION INTERVALS. 62 _DATAINTEGRATION...... 119. EXCEPTION PROCESS.. 7A EXCEPTION REQUIREMENTS:.. {80 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORD KEEPING. ATTACHMENT A: DIRECT EXAMINATION PROCESS FLOW CHART. List of Tables 2 DIRECT EXAMINATION DATA COLLECTION RECUREMENTS. [MINIMUM PF TO JUSTIFY MAXIMUM REANSPECTION INTERVAL... TTWINO SCHEDULE RESPONSES ~ TIME DEPENDENT THREAT. DOCUMENTATION AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS TABLE BO: List of Figures FIGURE®S.2: TIMING FOR SCHEDULED RESPONSES. FORM D: ABOVE GROUND MARKER LOCATIONS FORM E: ILI VENDOR QUALIFICATION FORM. FORM F: IMMEDIATE ANOMALIES ANALYSIS . FORM G: ANOMALY PRIORITIZATION AND DIREGT EXAMINATION FORM (WSPECTIONINEPAIR PLAN) FORM Ht DIRECT EXAMINATION DATA SHEET : FORM Mt: EXCEPTION REPORT .. References ANST NO, ILPQ.2003 “IN-LINE INSPECTION PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS & CERTIFICATION" ‘AP11163 1ST EDITION “IN-LINE INSPECTION SYSTEMS QUALIFICATION STANDARD” [NACE RP 0102-2002 "STANDARD RECOMMENDED PRAGTICE, IN-LINE INSPECTION OF PIPELINES" [ASME B:31,88-2004 “MANAGING SYSTEM INTEGRITY OF GAS PIPELINES” 449 CFR PART 102, SUBPART O “PIPELINE INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT” (CGT CLEARANCE PROCEDURE 54420, 'RMP-06 “INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE” UTILITY WORK PROCEDURE WP4100-06 “SELECTION OF GAS PIPELINE REPAIR METHODS” DGSIGTS STANDARD 84413 "CPUC AND DOT REPORTABLE INCIDENTS, CURTAILMENTS AND CONDITIONS AND LOW PRESSURE SYSTEM PROBLEM REPORTING” 3. UTILITY WORK PROCEDURE WP4430.07 “ESTABLISHING SET POINTS ON OVERPRESSURE PROTECTION DEVICES" |. UO GUIDELINE G144t3 "PROCEDURE FOR EXCAVATING PIPELINES AND SERVICES" epxesaene RMP-11 4.0 PuRpose ‘The purpose of this procedure is to describe the process of performing an In Line Inspection (IL) on specified buried gas transmission pipeline segments. This procadure is in accordance with 49CFR Part 182, Subpart 0 — Pipeline Integrity Plan and ASME B31.8S-2001, Supplement to 831.8 on Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipolines. It provides instructions, guidance, and requirements to ensure consistent inspections, responses to ‘anomalies and documentation ofthe ILI results 44 2.0 INTRODUCTION Revision: All changes in the Procedure shall follow RMP-08 Section 12 and be reviewed with all Involved personnel whenever a revision is published. Incase of conflict between RMP-06 and RMP-11, RMP-08 governs. In-Line Inspection requires a structured process that is intended to improve safety by assessing and mitigating the pipeline integrity threats, such as, corrosion, mechanical damage, S.C.C, etc. By identifying and sizing anomalies inthe pipeline, the ILI process seeks to proactively prevent anomalies from growing to sizes that are large enough to affect the structural integrity ofthe pipeline segments inspected. 24 22 ILI Methodology ‘The ILI methodology isa four-step process that requires the integration of data from the In-Line Inspection, direct pipe surface examinations, and the pipe's physical characteristics. The four steps ofthe process. Pre-Assessment: The Pre-Assessment step collects historic and current data to determine whether the IL! is feasible and what tool is appropriate and to assist inthe interpretation and analysis ofthe inspection results. The types of data to be collected are typically available in GIS, transmission and distribution plat sheets, as-built job files, district and division records. This step also defines the work necessary to verily the pipeline segments are “piggable” or to make the segment “piggable.” In-Line Inspection: The In-Line Inspection step covers the route preparation and pipeline cleaning. This step also inoludes performing In-Line Inspection runs and the data analysis by the vendor to identify and quantify the pipe wall anomalies. Direct Examination: The Direct Examination step includes reviewing of In-Line Inspection data to prioritize the anomalies for excavations and evaluations. Data from the direct examinations are utilized to verify the accuracy of the ILI results and evaluate the idenifed anomalies in regards to pipeline integrity. It also includes requirements of repairs, performing the root cause analysis, and the requirements of the RMP-11 Final Report. Post-Assessment: The Post-Assessment step covers analyses of data collected from the previous three ‘steps and the development of a Post Assessment Plan to mitigate any significant deficiencies identified by the Root Cause Analysis and the ILI final report. The plan includes assigning re-inspection intervals and assessing/monitoring the overall effectiveness of the ILI process. Roles and Responsibiltios Manager of Technical Services: The Manager of Technical Services has the overallresponsibiily to ensure that this procedure is implemented effectively. ‘This procedure is used to assign approval of documents, plans and exceptions to this procedure. The Manager of Technical Services may delegate ‘some or all of these approving responsibilities. LI Program Mar ‘The ILI Program Manager is responsible for ensuring that all aspects ofthe ILI program are conducted in full compliance with this procedure. The Program Manager is responsible for ‘overall compliance, budgeting, and resource plaining necessary to implement the ILI program. ILI Engineer (ILE): The IL! Engineer fs responsible forthe implementation ofall engineering aspects ofthis procedure included in the pre-assessment,inJine inspection, direct examination and post assessment Phases. ‘Senior Risk Management Engineer (SRME): The Senior Risk Management Engineer is responsible for the quality control of the ILI projects. This person wil be the consuitant to the ILI Team and Integrity ‘Management Team for all LI projecis. This person is responsible for reviewing the criical interim phases and the RMP-11 Final Report for the compliance of this procedure and leads the team creating the Long Term Integrity Management Pian (LTIMP). RMP-11 23 24 25 ILI Project Manager (PM): A Project Manager will be assigned to manage each ILI project. This person is responsible for ensuring that all aspects of the assigned IL! projact are performed in full compliance with this procedure. In addition, the Project Managsr is responsible for effectively planning, documenting and ‘communicating the various aspects and stages ofthe assigned IL! project. The project Is the responsiblity of the Project Manager until the final report is completed and formally transmitted to the Integrity Management Program Manager. Integrity Management Program Manager (INPM): This person is responsible for ensuring the post , ‘assessment is completed for each ILI and the pipeline re-assessment interval is documented and ‘scheduled. This person is also a resource to the ILI Program Manager for risk assessments Corrosion Engineer (CE): The Corrosion Engineer is responsible forthe technical evaluation of direct ‘examinations and preparing root cause analysis in accordance with this procedure, Direct Examination Personnel: The In-Line inspection Personnel are responsible for performing direct ‘examinations in aocordance with this procedure and other testing procedures that have been referenced in the assessment process. Qualification and Training Requirements ‘The provisions ofthis procedure shall be applied under the direction of competent persons who, by reason of knowledge of the physical sclences and the principles of engineering and mathematics, acquired by ‘education and related practical experience, are qualified to engage in the practice of pipeline engineering fon transmission piping systems. The specific qualifications are described below. ‘Manager of Technical Services: Qualifications and Training requirements covered in RMP-O6 ILI Program Manager: The Program Manager shall be a degreed engineer with a minimum of 5 years of ‘experience (or equivalent) performing In-Line Inspections in the pipeline industry. Additionally the ILI Program Manager shall have a minimum of § years experience in either Pipeline Design, Operations or Integrity Management with a strong working knowledge of CFR 49 Part 192. ‘Training: 1, Review of RMP-11 annually, 2. RSTRENG Training Course, 3. GT&D Corrosion Control ‘Training Course, 4. Defect Assessment Course and 6. Industry Pigging Course ILI Engineer (ILE): The ILE shall be a degreed engineer and have a minimum of 1 year experience in Gas Distribution or Gas Transmission Engineering, Planning or Operations. The IL! Engineer shall work under the guidance and supervision of the IL! Program Manager. Training: 1, Review of RMP-11 annually, 2. RSTRENG Training Course, 3. GT&D Corrosion Control ‘Training Course, 4. Defect Assessment Coursa and 6. Industry Pigging Course Sr. Risk Management Engineer (SRME): Qualifications and Training requirements covered in RMP- 08 ILI Project Manager (PM): The PM shall have project management experience within the gas industry. ‘Training: 1. Review of RMP-11 annually, 2. Project Manager Training per PG&E Project Manager Guidelines. Integrity Management Program Manager (IMPM): Qualifications and Training requirements covered In RMP-06 Corrosion Engineer (CE): Qualifications ard Training requirements covered in RMP-06 Direct Examination Personnel: The personnel performing the direct examinations shail meet theit employer's Operator Qualification requirements as well as being certified with supporting training documentation for the specific inspections they are conducting. Record Retention: All forms and reports created for the ILI run shall be on file forthe life of the facility. Definitions: The following are definitions of some key terms used in this procedure Shall: Is a requirement that must be compliec with or its exception approved and documented in accordance with Section 7.0 of this procedure. 5 RMP-11 ‘Should: Is a recommendation that is desirable to follow if possible. Not following the recommendation, does not have to be documented or approved. Required: “Required data listed in Table 3.3.1 must be obtained for an effective IL! projector ts omission 'be approved and documented in accordance with Section 3.7 of this procedure. Desired: “Desired” data listed in Table 3.3.1 sould be obtained if itis documented or easily measured. Its ‘omission is not required to be approved or documented, Considered: “Considered” is a recommendation that a data element is taken into account for the selection of In-Line Inspection tools, interpretation, or analysis of test results. Fallure Pressure (Pf): Calculated burst pressure from of an IL! anomaly using RSTRENG or equivalent method, Failure Pressure* (Pf): Calculated burst pressure of an ILI anomaly including tool tolerances, Discovery Pressure (Pals): Pals is defined as the pipeline pressure atthe time the condition was [ww] ia josKeue asnes yoo yn dau AEM enemas tae i led|core |e edd oatsbune20 | ov Fae x x o uN a domonm so, | oF TERT a on “sploosy x ° nN a ‘souRus w a ure 39 Wipes io o fu] o yoyo wosene ao | 2 va coo = and same sod van | X |X X] 2 | BN] S| rrsoyeouasajas ondestos6 apinaia fen ‘suogenolywodiee, | °F ene end svonooiear 18 352C ins ve sysjeur asne ing =~] “nae, | x | x 2 [um | a] Aanns gio pur ssh eo: poddns, Twaung keag | 8? ve REG ‘spicoey _Aanins $id pur sisAjeve esnes yoo woddng 3 337 ie Ld | ge) Lares # “E85 “epajep ainpeynuew Bupenoe en x ° wn | a ued 6p 6u1B6rd yod eousnyu Pe8tid, Aenowmnaid | 99 ee x [x x[ ¢ [alo ‘dip Guid od eouerg vopetnewaw | #8 x [x x[o [ale ‘dip Budo over wskew prvdoa | 79 BS eal sews ond Bp pod ever 5 ‘Tx [ [x [2 [2 | 2 | cnona:onmnmos ions seater ol n Ey x] x x{o [ola dip But od eoveng v9 yevos 2 | EN | 9] specuongtt 2080; svonmoe erred os x [x o fu| a oSeuep Aid weed os x|x] > [uv] o ever ibang ainpayueu SY 3s ART emenscen | ohoS xf oe fan] ow yep wowosoese od rysen a vesou0e Sats Toe “soyeuove xn Sune poseasut end ee x] e |um | 8] ony seuiseoe ° era vsn nf Soa beep hued PN ouipues we, ‘sate ieee X] 2 [YN | 8] ounsosse od or mer ruses erie ss oneajion ep 2 aneve ee x | 9 | wm] 6) raussosse odo) ee Hee opr rs a se le @ E g Tye £ 3 ssynsou uopoedsu 10 3 g |gele|= £| 3 sjsfieuy pue uoneiasdiowy 3 g |eelels Sk ipes) & LOG Ba el Ba = Along g eanog neg ‘quewosnboy a ara x x] 0 | > | o | , prenmesamnsape trae aaa |e: ee ee ad runout le = rene x] 0 | > | a | , peupmmcamnsepie tat’s | vampemararen cone uch eae re seep et ‘Weld voREE A FE voES soar x[x| > | | o | ,ppspamcaunesietnas| wemeramamn| “SERRE | vz ythid sod ‘sefteue asteo looy eovenyLy ue vopeBus spuooee x o juw|a ue vonuanard int. un BLE "ues IP roy ee ‘uid sod ‘seve estieg Jory 2ovanyLy sunso uopsedsul Jo # a3 a ‘squainwiog ‘easnos eed Tawa RMP-11 34 3.8 3.6 a7 Data Analysis (Pre-fleld visit) 3.44 Identification of Missing Data: Once the Pre-feld Visit data is collected the ILI Engineer should analyze the data to identify missing elements, and develop a list of data that will need to be obtained th the field. Form A - DATA ELEMENT CHECK SHEET in APPENDIX A can be used for this purpose. Flold Visit 3.5.1 General Description: Examining the physical locations. where the ILL is to be conducted Is a key actuity in the gathering of data. Its important to collect as much data as possible to achiove the objectives of the Pre- assessment and effective plan for the In-Line Inspection step of the ILI process. Hence, preparation is key to conducting an effective field visit. ‘Some of the data elements from Table 3.3.1 that may require field collection or verification in the field are: ‘Tamue 3.5.1: TWPIcAL Fist COLLECTED DATA pam: ectiption e Focent ota 22 | Changosmoutemonsthatmay | 2.2 | Atsausmon' of ontonmenta _not be In GIS_ iene Presanca of ma) Be ames 2a | sppunonences sun as vanes | At stem ype (anodes, puter ‘ears, od sats) 28 | Prosnco cashes 42 | Suey Curent soucetocatone Pray oir spain ap | sete, HV ote daa. | Testpontocatons pe ‘taupe tows a ra M3 | Secoss pon) esses “Type and frequency of third 21 | sotchaactettes 8 pes wo | party damage Review sora personel 3.5.2 Documentation: All data collected in the field that will be used in the ILI Data Filing: Data collected during pre-assessment phase shall be stored in the final report per Section 6.9. Data Analysis Once the Field Visit data is collected the IL! Engineer shall analyze the data to identify missing REQURED data elements, and conduct a SUFFICIENT DATA ANALYSIS ~ FORM B. 3.74 Sufficient Data Analysis: The data shall be analyzed to determine if there is sufficient data to conduct an ILI. The analysis should include the following: ‘+ Missing Required Data: if there is missing required data and itis felt that this data is not essential to the ILI then the reason its not necessary shall be explained in Form B - SUFFICIENT DATA ANALYSIS: Fora + Missing Desired Data: ‘The IL! Engineer should review the missing desired data to identi if any of those data elements are essential to 1B RMP-11 3.8 39 3.10 conduct the ILI. If some of the missing desired data is essential It should be identified in the analysis and document on Form B. 3.7.2 Documentation: The IL! Engineer shall document if there is sufficient data to conduct an IL. Form B - SUFFICIENT DATA ANALYSIS FORM can be used for this purpose. Feasibility Analysis 3.84 Analysis: The IL! Team shall integrate and analyze the data collected on the pipeline segments and determine whether the use of/L! is appropriate. The framework for this analysis is that the Program Manager shall ‘examine the existing data in each of the five categories in Table 3.3.1 (Form A) and assess the folowing: ‘+ In-Line inspection: In-Line Inspection should address physical, ‘operational and economic considerations. ‘+ Direct Examination: Cirect Examination should address physical, ‘operational and eoonorric considerations. 3.8.2 Documentation: The IL! Engineer shall propare Form C - FEASIBILITY ‘ANALYSIS FORM and have it approved by the ILI Program Manager. ILI Pre-Assessment Review Meeting(s) 3.9.1 Purpose: The ILI Project Manager shall conduct a meeting(s) to review the pre-assessment results, communicate the plan of how the ILI will be ‘conducted, and build consensus for the plan. 3.9.2 Agenda: The meeting(s) should have the following in its agenda: ‘+ Review the ILI Request in’ormation, DATA ELEMENT CHECK SHEET (Form. ‘A), SUFFICIENT DATA ANALYSIS FORM (Form B), and FEASIBILITY ‘ANatysis FoRM (Form C) GIS Maps 5 + Discussion of required pipsline modifications 3.9.3 Attendees: The meeting(s) may have the following attendees: Project Manager ILI Program Manager Manager of Technical Services or Pipeline Engineering ILI Technical Consultant Senior Corrosion Engineer Pipeline Engineer of the area Crew member familiar with the pipetine ILI Engineer Estimator 9.4 Changes: Changes agreed upon in the meeting(s) should be documented on the Pre-assessments forms, Pro-assessment Report ° 3.40.4 Report: The report shall heve the following data and have been incorporated with the changes from the Pre-assessment meeting described in paragraph 3.9. All required forms shall be signed and dated by the IL! Program Manager. + ILI Request information + GIS Maps 14 RMP-11 ant «+ DATA ELEMENT ClECK SHEET (Form A) «SUFFICIENT DATA ANALYSIS FoRM (Form B) «+ FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS FoRM (Form C) ‘+ Scope of work to modi pipeline, i applicable «The proposed inspection tool requirements 3.40.2 Review, Approval and Filing: The report shall be reviewed and ‘approved by the ILI Program Manager. A copy shall then be kept in the project fe. Pipeline Retrofit 3.11.1 Purpose: The step is o do necessary physical modification to make the pipeline piggable and instal launcher and receiver. 341.2. Retrofit Plan: The IL! Program Manager shall prepare a plan including funding, resource, engineering design and construction for the retrofit. ‘The retrofit phase of a pipeline to be plgged for the first time may take more than a year to complete. 4.0 IN-LINE INSPECTION 44 Objectives: The objectives of the In-Line Inspection process are to: Clean the pipeline adequately for inspection ‘Geometrically inspect the pipeline for dents or other geometric anomalies Inspect the pipeline for corrosion or other metal loss anomalies Map the pipeline to assure correct alignment and abilly to locate anomalies Obtain ILI vendor report that will ocate and quantify the severity of damage to the pipe wall and identify other anomalies Selection and Marking of Above-Ground Markers (AGI) 42.4 Objective: Prior to concucting an In-Line Inspection, the location of above ‘ground markers shall be identified in the field and centimeter accuracy GPS coordinates obtained for these locations along with the depth of cover. A minimum of ona AGM should be established approximately every mile. Markers shall be established in the field to identify the physical location of the AGMs. GIS themes shall be created for all AGMs and stored in GIS. 42.2 Type of AGMs: AGMs can be established every mile by utilizing one of the following: 4.2.2.4 Significant bends, taps, valves, above ground crossings, wall thickness changes or the start of casings that can be accurately located in the field 4.2.2.2 Pre-selected GPS locations for “pig trackers" 4.23 Documontaton: The location and method of marking shall be Indicated (on the IN-LINE INSPECTION ABOVE GROUND MARKER LOCATIONS form (Form 9) Proparation for In-Line Inspections 43.1 Specification: 4.3.1.4 Each ILI Projectshall have a written specification prepared for cleaning. These specifications shall provide adequate information 1s RMP-11 433 to ensure the pipeline is cleaned to meet the ILIT inspection requirements. 4.34.2 Each ILI Project shall have a written specification prepared for ILI ‘This specification shall provide adequate information to ensure the ‘vendor's inspection results meet the integrity assessment Tequirements. As a minimum the specification shal include the following: * Safety: The vendor shall meet PGBE's specified minimum ‘requirements. «Sizing Accuracy: The required anomaly sizing shall be ‘specified to delermine an acceptable inspection. Allowable ‘exceptions to the accuracy may be specified to account for, short distances of speed excursions, etc. + Caliper Accuracy: The required anomaly sizing shall be specified to determine ah acceptable inspection. Inspection shall be perforned to collect data on dents, ovalites, or other ‘geometric features that impact the integrity of the pipeline. ‘+ Geospatial Accuracy: Where practical, in addition to collecting the data about the condition of the pipe wal, all In- Line Inspections wil also collect geospatial information throughout the survey. The geospatial information should tenable the coordinate location of all anomalies, pipe joints, the location of all pipeline appurtenances, and the acourate development ofthe pipeline profile. The aboveground ‘markers will be used to georeference the data to a horizontal accuracy of +/-3. ‘+ Operator Qualifications: Documentation needed to verify the ‘competency ofthe vendor personnel who calibrate and operate the ILIT and analyze the data, including required training and testing. (ASNT No. ILI-PQ-2003) + Schedule: Required Immediate repair anomaly report as they ‘are identiied and 80-day response time for final report. ‘* Report Format: Data required in Immediate repair anomaly report, final report, and the data format, Contract: ‘+ PG8E shall follow existing corporate contracting guidelines, including sending out a request for proposal to qualified cleaning and inspection vendors, evaluating bids and contracting for cleaning, Inspection and mapping of the pipeline. ‘ Vendor Qualification: A PG&E ILI Team shall review and approve the vendor's quaification noting any exceptions to the minimum requirements (Form E) In-Line Inspection Plan Review: The Project Manager shall assemble ‘and submit an In-Line Inspection Plan to the IL! Program Manager for review. 4.3.34 Plan contents: The plan shall have the following documents: * In-Line Inspection Above Ground Marker Location Form (Form. 0) 16 RMP-11 ‘+ IL Vendor Qualification Form (Form &) ‘+ [Lt Specifications) © Contract, ‘+ Schedule 4.4 In-Line Inspection Field Operations: 4A 42 4h3 448 445 In-Line Inspection Field Meeting: The Project Manager shall conduct a field meeting with the ILI vendor and the personnel supporting the inspection, At this meeting they should cover the following while referring to the ILI Contract, GIS Maps as well as other documents prior to the inspection run: «ILI Access: View the leunch and receipt points for the ILI. ‘ILI Procedure: Review contractor's process and clarify the support PG8E will provide during the run. ‘« Access to Above Ground Markers (AGM): Ensure the contractor is familar with accessing each (AGM) and has the maps necessary to return to those locations. «= Tracking: Review which party s responsible for pig racking. + Schedule: What exact dates and times the vendor wil conduct the Inspection, + Landowner Contact: Provide Landowner notification information that will be sent fo propertes that will be accessed by PG&E or Contractor personnel, Also discuss protocol if landowners question field personnel, « Safety and Environmental Hazards: Discuss safety hazards, such as \raffic, overhead lines. rectifier potentials, flora and fauna and other ‘environmental concems. + Notification Procedure: The vendor shall noffy the Project Manager ‘when abnormal conditions or situations develop. Operation Safety: PG&E shall follow all existing CGT Clearance Procedure $4420 requirements in launching, running and receiving pigs. These procedures detail clearance points, use man-on-line tags, etc. Contamination Prevention: PG&E shall develop and implement a plan to collect and remove debris generated from cleaning and inspection ‘operations and to minimize debris spreading to offine taps and downstream customers on the pipeline. This plan may require the installation of fters andio separators at receiver location or at major off- line taps... It may also require that taps be closed forthe duration of the pigging project or pig run or temporarily closed during pig passage. ‘Customer Service: PG8E shall develop and implement a plan to ‘accommodate customers belng fed from pipeline to the extent reasonable and practical. These options may include temporary shutdown, back feed, ceross-te or alternative gas supply via CNG or LNG. Pig Tracking: PG&E shall track all pigs which are run in the pipeline at spacing intervais adequate to ensure that pigs are operating within velocity parameters of cleaning or Inspection requirements and to maintain the 17 RMP-11 ability to locate the pig within the pipeline should it become lodged or damaged. 448 Vendor Performance: The In-Line Inspections shall be performed strictly in accordance with the approved specification. Any significant deviation from the specification shall be approved and documented in the EXCEPTION PROCESS (Form M) of this procedure described in Section 7. 44.7 Verification of IL! Quality: Prior to leaving the site, the ILI contractor shall verity that the run was of sufficient quality to ensure meaningful data about the anomalies and to meet the sizing accuracy and the geospatial requirements. The Project Manager should document variances and PG8E's acceptance of these variances, 44,8 Liquid Collection: Collect quid sample at the pig recelver per GS8S O- 16 Attachment 2 for each pigging project. The liquid sample is needed for testing IC. 6.0. DIRECT EXAMINATION Fora typical Diract Examination Process see the flow chart shown in Attachment A. 5.4 Objective: The objective of the Dect Examination phase is to: + Gather data to validate the ILI Vendor's Report ‘+ Verify the pipetine's integrity + Perform necessary repairs «Restore the pipeline's MAOP, ifrequired + Determine the root cause of corrosion or damage ‘+ Complete an IL! Project Report 6.2 Immediate Anomaly Discovery and Final ILI Vendor Report: The contractor shall notify PGRE immediately when anomalies that are described by CFR 49, Part 192, Section O, as “immediate repair conditions” are identified (Table 5.5.1). The date of discovery of an "immediate" anomaly shall be considered either the notification date of “Immediate” anomalies or the receipt of the Final IL! Vendor Report. No later than 180 days after the date of the successful final ILI run, the ILI contractor shall submit a final report. The final report shall integrate the geometry, ‘metal loss, and any other ILI tools used, addressing internal corrosion, external corrosion and mechanical damage per the IL! specification. 5.3 Pressure Reduction Review Process: As soon as possible but not exceeding 5 calendar days of receipt of the immediate anomalies report, the ILI engineer shall review the anomalies and take proper action to ensure pipeline safety according to the following steps: 5.3.1 Create a list of “Immodiato” anomalies: The ILI engineer shall reviow the immediate anomalies reported by the ILI contractor and document them on Form F. This Form shall be completed even though there are no Immediate anomalies. 5.3.2 Verify pipe specifications and ro-assess each anomaly on Form F: ‘The ILI engineer shall detemmine the approximate location of each “immediate” anomaly and shall determine the HCAs and identify the relative consequences (class location, structures, etc.) inthe vicinity of the ‘anomaly, determine the actual pipe specifications and use RSTRENG or ‘equlvalent effective area method to assess the IL! tool Pf, Record the highest Pf value from RSTRENG or equivalent effective area method 18 RMP-11 6.3.3 5.3.4 5.3.8 5.3.6 53.7 calculation of each anomaly and prioritize the anomalies on Form F. If there are no "Immediate" anomalies remaining on the list. Proceed to Section 6.6. Pressure Reduction: Ifthere are any “immediate” anomalies eft on Form F after assessment of Pf, Immediately reduce the operating pressure according to the following steps: 5.33.1 Determine Palscovory (Pdi): Pais is defined as the pipeline pressure at the tine the condition was discovered and for the purpose of this procedure the highest pipeline operating pressure ‘Secuodn, fds mua be dona Be sll pele bedded Ih Helps determine te Meaaure'be bare spa auracalamperatirs, This acre the lndency reo to ‘Setond ms SEC suscep. Measure ceuiarnce otha pipe vga tape or ‘ther sable devs ond computa tho scual xa dametr cs ie. 22 Wild Seam denticaton “he ype of et ear ha bo Keren recorded. Rb ued to areas wth [GEAVE and ha presen of bre sam wel cou alg bo cloning. he sean ‘dpe catot be dtemined, cect abo Ta sme case vl bo nesta to prom ‘imac ee oat and charecinza ho weld po andcanalon. The mao wi ony ‘bode wen opecsealy cad for yt FES or sige Recoatng Ow pp and ‘eckting of bt ol wl alt bo afowoduresa lon sewn fan been dando Mares exter conan. 23 ‘aks Wet Coornatos Rrra “Til roped fr Lt nspctons Kye ont neareat gh weld to eterno te Iecaon ina bel ole and to compar oI grt weld dla 24 ‘er Damage ‘ther danage ote pe euoco ta canbe vaualy decid shel bg recorded and Iimeslayropoed o POMC. Examples of eo damage wold Inaude gouge, Sng ra and out rondrees 25 LUT vias Thnaus Meesuemeis ‘Uveeonk wal Blas salbe kana very Guadant on Bopp lo eaieh ‘rgirafnering wat acknes.Incaees where an ICDA pro aseasriont he been famed AUT pf sal ao bo obtained the 80 bean along af tect ‘retail ot mia. Ge den salba "Tha amo toss, ‘maasurec in each gdb ehal be rocrde. Tha gt sabe aied al he lw endo epi, MSIGDA os ond og enabn sab resorts on pgs 61000 Om 26 Wet Furescent Magnet Parle Inspection For dtemiing he presanceosbeone of SCC Wis el sabe pacar. On Bo ‘AG ona tio sabe used. Sure preperation shalt Ih soncbasg. On Fepot. Tho PGAE PM hal bored ined of ary net found. 27 Phogapi semen o Cotes ‘eco aes sb kad erat he dace te ecanent ‘ba morpoepy and enent of te coven. The photo og n page ct 1c te tHarm hol be fea ot wt any necestay Genco ote potgraphes ark. “a ovovon ep of coreded wea sal be stiches ot ono te fom, Enough dea 2.8 | overtewmaporcorcdedavea, | R _| shade sad to ete dozsment hers snd ow lng cored eae ‘Thor elerance at shllbe a frost upset akon Dat epee Page “Te pee isnaton angle nde op rte shal be ssid ns eos ot Page | excaraon Oring . ‘Sees above the grid nd th depth prt shall be measured an documenta hog PRDeptn Measurement Git Shoat ‘Coreen erage shal bo measured wih suerte io onal accurate RSTRENG bealyes 5 colon are, Age wad loss rastremerts sha be aen over ie ‘rr coroded sree. The gi hal be oerted ve fal coumns we ceumferenaly ‘ontg ea ho lp and re rows pra! oho gh oo o pp. Tha git ‘Se anoud ba etelenty to o cocuman ihe vation of wal icoess bun case ‘Salibe geate hana onesnch mesh. Th gc shale doeumenle on popes 410 snd set toonta hom. Record ype of media use sand fo copper lg ae a acepiate. Use of shot [nprchitod” Also recor th inal ancher prof measure ug th TsTex Press > Fim tepometod. 23 Ro-coatng Type. Recor th oan ype used to reoat the pipe. Epveonments Consens zon sete yy cont bee ag a ise, a Parson oe 0 degen dees F tor he ‘olne tau bumaty matt l rent 34 Repel Coating Harinss or epony years meature and recite tl barnes before He pipe hes been abed er bul 36 ‘CoangTcness Teneo sala ipa ios SSA ge Saag itemise Gerace oer Etima crema mameanteal ened, irae inmate ae ‘Coupon Test ton insttoton ‘scant tho ype of we stato et bein. For coupons, tl recommended Balti ‘arg shoul begin no toon Ban 3 meh etalon. Thos salon ‘Shouldbe nae lho ocr end oe bole adacnt rh econ ‘ate NOT bang econo, a7 Boca Mato ‘teva mats wae used for ac and wheter or nope polecon va aed, 38 PrsResdogs ‘Perfor at lait 1 PIS on reading over the pipeline ater backiting but BEFORE paving oF any conette verte done. In ee cats prormaleal"ov svey a esora ‘Axi fe le arrose al a ace, shoving i apacig a wel on ‘assured dstnoes rm psa fears sucha one, bling, datace fm {param gt wold (eval), a The purpose woul be lobe shoo Stemina Ne Itc ung pyc markers oe fe (wut ving GPS) eho he sea bo paved ‘tr and cat he lato of ose aructres in GSAVE: RMP-11 6.6.3 Evaluating Remaining Strength: The RSTRENG or KAPA (Failure pressure calculation software developed by Kieiner & Associates) calculations are performec and the summary is recorded on Form | “DIRECT EXAMINATION SUMMARY’ for the exposed corroded areas 10 evaluate the remaining strength of the pipe. The RSTRENG or KAPA calculations are used to determine the following: + Prodicted Fallure Pressure: A Pf shall be calculated using RSTRENG or KAPA for each corroded area that is direct examined and determine if action needs to be taken. Other analytical techniques ‘may be used if approved by the Manager of Technical Services or his designate. An individual trained and qualified to use RSTRENG or KAPA shall make these calculations. Records of the qualification shall be maintained in the Integrity Management Program fi. ‘© Reassessment Interval: The ratio of PMAOP of the field examined ‘anomalies and PP'/MAOP of the un-examined anomalies remaining on the pipeline (Table 5.6) are key factors in determining the reassessment Interval 5.6.4 Comparing Flold Data with ILIT Data: A comparison shall be made between field data and ILI data; and to be provided as input for the Long ‘Term Integrity Management Plan. Performing Repairs on Excavated Anomalles: In general, all corroded areas with Pflass than those shown in Table 5.6.6 shall be repaired so that the maximum re-inspection interval can be achleved. IL! Engineer to inform Pipeline Engineer and follow the Utilly Work Procedure WP4100-05 to determine if and how the anomalies should be repaired. Any exceptions shall be documented on Form M "EXCEPTION RePoRr” and approved by the Manager of Technical Services. BLE 5,65 MIN ‘MaximuM RE-INSPECTION INTERVE | Aron Asove 60% SMYS | ‘Less TH4N 30% SMS Pfabove 1.30 times. PF above 3.3 times MAOP 7 MAOP 87 MAOP Restoration Review/Goneurrence : If the pipeline pressure has been reduced, the ILI Program Manager shall evaluate the repairs and determine the timing of restoring the MAOP. He shall notily GT&D GE Director and the Manager of Technical Services, and gain concurrence trom the Manager of Pipeline Engineering and the Manager of Technical Services to restore the MAOP, communicate and document all required operational/pressure changes to Gas ‘System Operations (GSO). 8.7.4 Oporational/Pressure Change: GSO shall execute and order the required changes and the responsible district superintendent or T&R ‘Supervisor shall ensure that the changes executed by GSO are implemented. 3 ASME B31.88 2004, Supplement fo B31.8 on Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipelines, Section 7, Figure 4 27 RMP-11 58 59 Root Cause Analysis Procedure: The ILI Project Manager shall ensure that a root cause analysis Is performed on ail Direct Examined pipe. Where itis determined that a significant number of direct examined anomalies are due to the same cause, a common single root cause report shail be sufficient. Where multiple causes are implicated, the number of root cause investigation shall be increased to adequately document the individual causes. Documentation: The root cause of al Dect Examined pipe shall be documented ‘on Form K*RooT CAUSE ANALYSIS REPORT” and be completed within 90 days of receipt ofthe field examination report. 5.8.4 Description of Damage: Types of damage observed e.g. coating, pipe, ‘and damage mechanism (external corrosion, third party, etc.) 5.8.2 Extent of Damage: Review GIS and other historical maintenance data to determine if they may assis: in quantifying the extent of the damage or the needed extent of the mitigation activities. 5.8.3 Review of Existing Damage Mitigation Measures: Review of the ‘existing mitigative measures that should address the threat causing the damage. Descrive any problems with existing mitigation. 6.8.4 Root Cause of Damage: As a result of the review of the damage, historical data, and the existing miigative measures, describe the root ccause of the damage found 5.8.5 Review of Damage Mitigation Measures Taken: Describe the actions taken to mitigate the damage found as a result ofthe ILI 5.8.6 Evaluation of additional Nitigation Efforts: Describe any additional mitigation efforts that may help address the root cause of the damage. ‘This may include coating reolacement, the installation of additional CP, Landowner notifications, etc, 5.8.7 Evaluation of need for additional testing: If the root cause analysis identifies a mechanism that the IL! process is not well suited to detect, then it shall be documented on Form M and brought to the attention of the ‘Manager of Technical Services. RMP-11 Final Report: This report includes: ILI Vendor Report, Bellhole Inspection Report and PG&E Final Report 6.8.1 ILI Vendor Report: This report includes the hard copy, associated software, and electronic data provided by the ILI vendor. 5.9.2 _Bollhole Inspection Report: This report includes all “H-Forms* and is provided by the betlhole inspection vendor. 5.9.3 PG&E Final Report: Within 46 days after direct examinations and root cause analyses are complete, the ILI engineer shall be responsible for developing the PGE final report. The report shall have the following content. + Project Summary: Project Manager shall complete a discussion of Job details by project phase including lessons learned, results and critiques. (Attach Job estimate) ‘© Pre-Assessment: Documentation of the IL! feasibility, Forms A, B and C, and the Pipeline Features List. 28 RMP-11 ILI Planning: Documentation of AGM locations, Form D. Documentation of the ILIT vendor qualification, Form E. (Attach ILt specification and IL! contract.) ILIT Operation: Project Manager shall summarize how the ILIT field operation went. (Attach Tracking Spreadsheet and Clearance Procedure) Direct Examination; Documentation of all direct examinations, Forms F,G, and |. Post Field inspection Pipeline Listing: Pipeline anomalies ist with all digs and repairs marked (Excel fie). Root Cause Analysis: Documentation of root cause analysis, Form Exception: Documentation of exceptions report, Form M. 5.10 GIS Anomaly Documentation : All anomalies listed in the ILI Vendor Report and the Bellhole Inspection Report shall be mapped in GIS inciuding but not limited to the following information for data integration and future monitoring: Geographic Locatlon: In UTM, Zone 10, NADB3, meters. ILI Log Distance ‘Severity Prioritization: Whether itis Immediate, Scheduled-one year, ‘Scheduled-other, or Monitored ‘Type of Anomaly: Ext ML, Int ML, Dent, etc. Relative Location of Anomaly: Anomaly on pipe, weld or close to girth weld O'clock position: Location around the circuntflerence Size: Maximum depth, length and width per ILIT Box: Cluster and Cluster ID ILIT Pf: Calculated (Pf) derived from Vendor's ILIT report Direct Examination {¥ of N) Actual Size: Maximum depth, length and width per direct examination, if available. RSTRENG Pf: Calculated (Pf) derived from direct examination, if available PAMAOP: Use RSTRENG failure value for Pt, if available. Otherwise, use ILIT report Pf. Record of Repairs: Type of repair, date of repair, if avaliable Quality Assurance IL date: Date of the IL! run Vendor Name: IL! Vendor 6:11 Distribution: A hard copy of the RMP-11 Final Report shall be provided to the Integrity Management Program Manager for filing in the Integrity Management brary (Ket leman Conference Room 200). Additional copies of the ILI Vendor Report and Bellhole Inspection Report shall be distributed to the following persons: ILI Program Manager ILI Project Manager ILI Engineer Pipeline Engineer responsible for the pipeline District Superintondent/Distribution T&R Supervisor responsible for the pipeline 25 RMP-11 6.0 Post ASSESSMENT Objective: The objective of the Post Assessment process is to develop a Long Term Integrity Management Plan (LTIMP) to mitgate any significant deficiencies identified by the RMP-11 Final Report. The LTIMP shall include assigning re-inspection intervals and assessinglmonitoring the overall effectiveness of the ILI process. Responsibility: After completing the RMP-11 Final Report, the IL! Program Manager will turn over the project to the Integrity Menagement Program Manager who shall be responsible for determining and documenting the re-inspection interval,-ensuring the re- inspection occurs prior to the end of the Interval, and that a project is planned to mitigate any significant deficiencies Identified by tha RMP-11 Final Report. The Manager of ‘Technical Services shall approve the LTIMP. Documentation: The LTIMP including re-inspection interval for the pipeline segment shall be documented In the Integrity Management Areas (IMAs) per RMP-08. 641 Reinspection Intervals: The Integrity Management Program Manager will review the anomalies in the IL Vencor Report that are not direct examined and the toot cause analysis to determine the appropriate re-inspection intervals per Figure 5.5.2 or Maximum re-inepection inteval in Table 6.1, and recommend any additional long-term mitigation that reeds to be done. ‘TABLE 6.1 TWMING SCHEDULE RESPONSES ~TME DEPENDENT THR aaa CRITERIA ie | aug one Aton annie SM, os a 5 | PEOrPr) above 125.and | Pr(orPF) above 14and | Pf (or PF) above 1.7 and <<=1.39 tines MAOP <= 1.71imes MAOP- <= 2.2 mes MAOP 10 | Pllc PP) above 1.291imas | Pr (or PP) above :7and | PF (ort) above 22 MAOP. ‘<= 2.0times MAOP and <= 2.8 times MAOP PH (or Pr) above 20tines | PF (or Ph) above 28 oan a ohowed MAOP ‘and <= 3.3 times MAOP PI(GrPH) above 3:3 20 | NotAliowed NotAbwod oe 6.2. Data Integration The folowing systems wil be updated to ensure on-going data integration GIS: All anomalies will be incorporated into the ILI anomaly theme. In addllion, the Risk Mitigation theme will be updated to reflect the recent inspection of the pipeline segment. Ifthe inspection reveals any data discrepancies in GIS, these will also be updated. Integrity Management Plan: The integrity management plan for the pipeline segment wil be updated to reflect the ILI inspection results. Integrity Management Schedule: The integrity management schedule will ba updated with the re-inspection date forthe pipeline segment. Long-term Mitigation: Mitigation activities wil be scheduled to address any significant deficiencies identified by the LTIMP. + ASME B31.8S 2004, Supplement to B31.8 on Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipelines, pg. 27-6, Figure 4 (Section 5, Figure 5.5) 30 RMP-11 70 EXCEPTION PROCESS Objective: The objective of this section isto provide control and docurnentation of ‘exceptions taken. This control and documentation is required to ensure the compliance withthe ILI process, to continuously improve the process by providing feedback, and to have an aucitable trail. Its expected that all requirements ofthis procedure be met in ‘conducting an ILI. However, when itis not feasible to meet certain requirements then ‘exceptions can be taken by obtaining approval; and documenting the exceptions as prescribed in this section. Documentation: Document the above steps on Form M - EXGEPTION REPORT. Include all exception reports in the PG&E Final Report. 7A Exception Requirements: The folowing process Is required for taking an exception with this procedure. It shall be documented on Form M - EXCEPTION Reporr: + Paragraph Number of Exception: State the specific paragraph number where the exception is being taken. ‘* Requiremonts of Paragraph: Briefly state In your own words the requirements of the paragraph, + Alternative Plan: To state what is proposed instead of what is required in the procedure. ‘© Reason for Exception: Provide the reason the exception is needed. + Recommendation: Indicate if itis recommended to change the procedure or if this exception is project specific. ‘© Approval: Obtain approval from the Manager of Technical Services or his designate prior to acting on the exception. © Notification: Rofer to RMP-C6, Section 15 for CPUCIOPS notification requirements. 31 RMP-11 80 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORD KEEPING Purpose: Table 8,0 summarizes the required forms and associated responsibilities. ‘TABLE 8.0 - DOCUMENTATION AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS SIE Form: RESPONSIBILITIES 3.0 PRE ILI Engineer fee ‘A | Data Element Check List 1 i B | Sufficient Data Analysis TL Engineer TET Program Manager —| ILI Engineer c | Feasiblity Analysis form incudes the authorization of Forms A&B also.) TO WLNE ao D> | AGM Locations IU Engineer | ILI Vendor Qualification Form TUT Engineer LT — Program Manager BO DIRECT = : IU Engineer / ILI Examination | F . | Immediate Anomalies Analysis Bee ~ IL1 Engineer Indication Prioritization and Direct | Examination Form (Inspection/Repair | ‘'t! Program Manager Plan) Manager of Technical Services | 4, | Document attimmediato Engineer or ‘and scheduled anomalies Corrosion Engineer 1__| Direct Examination Summary iLi Program Manager - [Left Blank Intentional ‘Sr Corrosion ‘ause Analyst Engineer ee ‘Manager of Technical Services Ath K | PGRE Final Repot ILI Program Manager “6.0 POST ‘ASSESSMENT L | ete Blank intentionaly TL Engineer ILI Program Manager a lier cee Manager of Technical Services 32 RMP-11 ATTACHMENT 7) emmnou aovn| meen eT : ' Lo , | rsxaw | i i : | i Lt i t $ i 4 i fo seBeueyy } i pmo | { ° ° & s0pu9A ITT Vvauewyoeny Td eel 7 5 uopewea/” | “TS 30-8 uny Big mi] ayeq vodey, i reuig 19pUE TH seo wesBolg WI } APuPATTE H sis Re He Gop “poooeu ‘sassnu ea seen 3 (enemony “mary 205 v6 wonanpenysanssss 9m) 10) save yoda young masa shea S9F MHA Vauewyseny Td RMP-11 APPENDIX ILI Forms 36 pases oN = WN ‘pavepiswog = ‘paanbee =, (suorewop 4 5° udesbered ees) parsog =a "paunbeel =, Say 7 a ee ee x|x]x]ojfule -co8 sy sour unoey, veep | inomnerdanieppoow | SRT mw “Tepened amrENsAuL va ae a x > | o [a]. seamenpea te yumoo nn ee so mp ge So a SAR vx] x| x w lola welsumanomme | cz pen ‘sy saammag hed rises x] x [| wn] o | reese cpmndat ron mon fe peas | rz eet anos ee 90 9 a pi en seemed x] x] o |u| a| “Rimocrmeceoomerurc | pqs | — raremanmn | st Seated pao aga a sae Sapoe at ey one eS) admassies ong 209 et ao syanes x |x| o | aw] a | “Sitmadeon apo aes eeteie sams | vt Soreeocat San ere ep Sun gs 98670 a x}x|« fwle Drs Pam wo | et sry sammy ve “une x|xfafaly sms Amos eons soetay | yayyed 0 Angee seopmzina | cr _vowparap sonpay Key, oe Tapa! a ele el ee seona | oo © pevmme ssi itd 10 * ssaeuy poe conmssd Sar a uamig yom waa vuvar#V NNO sor 8 wodspvona| x | X 9 Ju] a] seams sop meee aos nas nodéng waning | SY vi 7 a conn weoravan] x | x > fan] a] cunssto pe mci: dg — W sooeuveo] x | x © [um] a] soumesto por sie ares oar ueing ee es somouven] x | x fam] a] count sto pee sean ores oor ping soompeog massa | cy x] x 9 « try wing S| repuanod pie Sip Sud asod 395 ans; $2009 Pra SEE ee Aee 2 | | | rrauanod pus ap sunstid sod sy ass a0 pile suoc90$ FoMmIEOPIN] ba x x | 2 | 0 | a] strcmp t,epu scene ao sed mpsomeerams |p sash no 8 Arab x |x| x 2 [aw] ng erg ane opi samozocameor | 9% ARTIST = sa suo popes pg apn man, x a jute scot mpromaja mie vapneg | cman | peenarstpyen | sz —_ wpiba sant “Speen 70 wo Smee : : Fele i ee = gsi i 2 |22) | 2) o/f2i] 2} e 2919 OL. saree BER EE} S| -8/2e2) 8) 2 ‘ginsny wonzedsuyj uopadsyy | | wonduzeoq ’ Aecle Le Bae z ay pue uonedaqay arr ‘wawoig Hea a et 94n0g EE. ond yIseq sear x | x [ux] « op mae men I's sms po (pononnd opto serosa Sn psrey ‘wa Sage era x |x x] [wl w] cuepsec ean dee andy aH ‘ava Becxp hand pao Smee pst air saad x x] oo fm] c | ommmmndgeernin mia ce ST ; So ae Sa x}oo fam] a] yeas: x x oom 9 te oma Rinmpoiaress aay RT Ee ouvees | x x [2 [ew] | emevactoroonmenenit notrmpetnsia | TH “onporimanons rer T=) salen > |u| o peor! eka rt sanded sosoren | 7 = Soe RT ana ws1°059 xfulule sevironc emiorentat | gtmramoning | jaotsaar bamnto imino sass 9 poo : rr 0 ee om ar ng somes memaven| x @ | Guns go pm anno ames eornetng Sa apa raed | @ orate mmo nas gi eH Se SRO PRT ae sexo mann pis ag pono pro am a ao SD opsoune seas ny SAAS AEN oss So po shan ses yoo woding sire mums sod Pas, mo soar onde apron dy sins woppodsor 10 snstay pur uoneasdionay [sora ae om votasd apeLLT npoe a SP athdaend ‘nsKpee eg oy ENTE, pou age mAL ov req spomSug 11 ETT pos sopstan ayant om pa und ip x x lo | | a | suddaod neces os tox eng seoiaommoy | ey id pos vonmanl gpa an po end sonooi sans oup og xo | 5 | a | sunssd sia sem i0u meng eae tA sods perysospwony | ZL "a bose Seco aie onpas ce ‘adopt = smomesnom nso x > fan] a | pero aastonme ay soe acure = Tornion met ena a SD wen x = share ERLE San erst | x | x x[al[ala ci iy Pad eon cones sneer | £9 x Lx x} alfalfa wip teennd mon setvor oma ae | Fo x xp [spa wip ethan momo wreitea| 69 wii Seated aaa Ra zs 2 ES spun ‘i Termnod 305 weap ySTgESD OL two 3 pannorg | 9 x > z Sap AT ST , Seay arene EN ee oj ext a 30 soongat 9 9 SONRE AO 2x8 ras00ge 30 worse | OTS x | x 2 fwx| a trap foe eA ee x] x] [ax] a “oho any RINE RY aomidenpinanin | 9s st Ae oom fl sl Elo onceg (0 Seem BPEL eS] 3 -sunsoyy nop2eds0] 50 vopoadsuy opdusse # : = seiteay paw sonresds0a1 oT wowrrmea | at anos Get woadioed a ee ae ON © ——S°A BEG qUeFOUINS re eee oa TERT eeu eg pees SISATWNY VIVG INSOLES “aod THN ONS aniog FIM aoa ABN uuog sisheuy meq woroyng +A UuOS “O-v SUMO} Jo UOReZHOYINe sUMYIOD ULIOY SILA BUIUEIS “3LON sq eBeuey wesBorg mi 9g eos rt ON sea, roasted 1 #1. ABO MON Loar ROS lous sonny SSGNEN BN? uo, siskteuy Ayiqisees 5 WO5 “aye “eulys pue [WEL ‘seqad “adid UoN! 'aye!U0D - epnjout sejdwiexs (¢) ‘seoueuoyndde edjd sofew ‘eul| Uo io - epniouy serdwerc (2) ‘did yo dor o4 (4) tea _ 503 1 sabevey poled ea WA ON Cea —_ 0 on Bois leqwnn oun PUREST -uoqoos sovaje ‘suopeoo7 1942 puncip aroqy GUTS 3 LINE ‘TLL TIN CD meq soBeuepy mesSoud rT eq ‘usamiSog rT —— uo, uopeoyttend sopuon ry “FT UHOT son se paypuep! are seyewoue ajeipouu 919 @wR 9yp PUR UNL LIT] 8M UseMYoq eunssaid LuNWURReW ey 40 UTU LF] @\p BULNp aunsseud ysayBIY at siento Sip (b) . " veg sie “mj9‘Sjuep "eUssj-980 EOL TEUIBTXE-650 ‘Rewoue eye;peuuy ue 0 FBO SeyROU 4epueA ITH BUR SIEP aed tro et wresB0¥g FL rea TTT NB FT ANIA) CuonIpUCD payee Keyes jonanpay ainssezd re1eq woneounON OSD is} eanssoid Buneiedo ayes ou3 ‘onoge uonenjens up od r0)eq VOREDYNON ‘59, 31 - eal ml + Pilg? a i i| fe lie || @ El 2|5 a] 2 |e] ele z Els 3 z/2| 3 8 ee e g z| os | even pols ea en ope {sro tenepen at0 ea en Sms "segura ra sagan en FETT fens (peniaoas are seyeuouy ayerpeuitu| usuM pere[dui0> oq OL) sisheuy seyewouy syejpouuyy -FUOF 15's 2198} 295 (2) <0“ ewes] ts ows se0 ION () sow senses potas 0 s08 2021 ‘area ete wetone :oeq a proousua rt _ T : a ae = g 2 |eee Bz/zele)*| 2] be | ge 2g 2 |g) 2 [282] 2) 2] 2/8lfele}

    Potrebbero piacerti anche