API RP 585 - Pressure Equipment Integrity Incident Investigation

Last update: Jan 16, 2017

API RP 585, Pressure Equipment Integrity Incident Investigation, provides owner/users with guidelines and recommended practices for developing, implementing, sustaining and enhancing an investigation program for mechanical integrity (MI) incidents. This RP describes characteristics of an effective investigation and how organizations can learn from pressure equipment integrity incident investigations. It is intended to supplement and provide additional guidance for the OSHA Process Safety Management (PSM) Standard 29 CFR 1910.119 (m) incident investigation requirements, with a specific focus on incidents caused by MI failures of pressure equipment (vessels, columns, heat exchangers, piping, storage tanks, etc.).

Catastrophic MI failures are rarely the result of one isolated issue; there are almost always less severe precursors to a major failure (i.e. leaks, unexpected, or accelerated degradation). These precursors are frequently called near-misses when they are discovered. One of the intents of this document is to highlight the value in recognizing these precursor occurrences and promote investigating them to determine the immediate, contributing and root causes. If these precursor occurrences are uncovered, investigated and the contributing and root causes are resolved, then I believe most major catastrophic MI failures of pressure equipment could be prevented. Work processes and guidelines are presented for three levels of incident investigation varying from the simplest, quickest method conducted usually by one person for minor incidents which may take only a couple days, up to a full root cause investigation for major incidents involving a team of subject matter experts, who look into the deepest causes of incident, and which may take several months to complete.

Relevant Links

Recommend changes or revisions to this definition.


Join 8,000+ fellow asset integrity professionals! Get Inspectioneering's latest information straight to your inbox. Enter your information below:

September/October 2015 Inspectioneering Journal
By Virginia Edley at Trinity Bridge, LLC.

If everyone in an industrial setting actively looked for things that were not right or seemed different, or looked at small mistakes as opportunities to prevent larger ones, what would the future look like?

New and Revised Editions of API Standards Just Published
June 2, 2014 By John Reynolds at Intertek

Three new API standards have been published, and one has been revised and updated to a new edition. The standards are described in this post.

December 23, 2013 By Nick Schmoyer at Inspectioneering

Many of you are already aware of some of the changes that have occurred within API this year. For those of you who are not, here’s a quick summary.

Does your AIM system optimize the consistency, accuracy and manageability of your facility’s Mechanical Integrity program?
Partner Content

AIM systems should ensure that the your facility’s MI software is accurately performing the calculations needed to calculate minimum thickness, long/short term corrosion rates and remaining life used to predict future inspection intervals. They should evaluate your MI software’s basic design and corrosion monitoring variables.

September/October 2011 Inspectioneering Journal
By John Reynolds at Intertek

Three new recommended practices (RP) are under way within the API Inspection Subcommittee (SCI) which will add to the list of SCI standards available to owner-users to improve their mechanical integrity (MI) and inspection programs.