API 17NSubsea Production System Reliability, Integrity,

and Technical Risk Management

Don WellsHess Corporation

History / Status

• Document released in 2009• Specification contains:– Life Cycle Process (LCP)– Define, Plan, Implement,

Feedback (DPIF) Loop– 12 Key Practices (KP)– Technology Qualification

Process– Technology Readiness Level

Initial Plan / Path Forward

• Process– Split into 5 subgroups (now 6)– Industry Leaders– Common Template

• Introduce IM into the scope of 17N:– Define IM– Expand the Life Cycle Processes– Reassessment through remediation– Define TRL progression

• Expand the Life Cycle Process

Feasibility

Concept Selection

FEED Detailed Design

Manufacturing & Assembly

SIT, Installation, & Commissioning Operation

Decommissioning

Specification Development

Detail

• Change to a Dual-DPIF loop– Add Remediation cycle – Facilitates Integrity Management

Specification Development(Greenfield Projects)

Define Goals and Requirements

KP1

Planning and Organisation

KP2

Design and Deliver for reliability and Integrtity

KP3

Evaluate ResultsKP3

Feedback and AssuranceKP4

Verification and Validation KP6

Project risk managementKP7

Risk and RAM AnalysisKP5

Supply Chain Management

KP10

Management of ChangeKP11

Performance tracking and data management

KP9

Core Processes

Qualification of Technology

KP8

Organisational LearningKP12

Supporting Processes

Defineü SegmentsüRisksüMitigations

Planü Inspections üMonitoring ü Testing

Implementü Data collectionü Data analysisü Performance

evaluation

Evaluate ü Analyse dataü Evaluate against

requirements

Feedback üAssuranceü Lessons Learnt

Are Requirements

met?

DefineüCorrective actions üRemediation actionsüQualification actionsü Intervention actions

PlanüCorrective actionsüRemediation actionsüQualification actionsü Intervention actions

Implementü Interventionü Changesü Performance

improvement

Evaluate ü TestsüChange implementedüAgainst requirements

Operational Reliability and Integrity

Assurance cycle

Remediation and corrective action cycle

Specification Development(Brownfield Projects)

..and acceptance

criterion

Lifecycle Application of DPIEF Cycle .

• DPIEF Assurance Cycle applied at each lifecycle stage– Feasibility through to

decommissioning

• Double DPIEF loop in operations– Normal operations– Corrective action

Feasibility

ConceptSelection

Feed

DetailedDesign

ManufactureAssemblyTestInstall and Commission

Decommissioning

Feedback and Assurance

Define

Plan

ImplementEvaluate

Feedback and Assurance

Define

Plan

ImplementEvaluate

Feedback and Assurance

Define

Plan

ImplementEvaluate

Feedback and Assurance

Define

Plan

ImplementEvaluate

Concept

Feed

Detailed Design

MATIC

Operations

Feedback and Assurance

Define

Plan

ImplementEvaluate

Decommissioning

Feedback and Assurance

Define

Plan

ImplementEvaluate

Feasibility

Define

Requirements met?

Define

YesNo Normal Operations

Loop

Corrective Action Loop

FeedbackPlan

Implement Evaluate Evaluate Implement

Plan

ProgressWinter Meeting

• Workgroups Submitted Input – Using Common Template

• Edited into a Single Document– Astrimar

• Circulated for Comment within 17N Committee– 3 rounds, 1,000+– Last Comments Due Dec 10th – Clarification Discussions at Jan 13th meeting

Key Process Changes

• Kept Same 12 KPs from the First Revision

• Updated Names and Content to Accommodate the inclusion of Integrity Management

Annex Changes• Standardized and Significantly Updated

Annex A – Split into Two Separate Annexes• Annex A -Technical Risk & Uncertainty Categorization• Annex C - Risk Based Scope of Work for Reliability Technical

& Integrity Management

Annex B - Better Explanations and Guidance for Management

Annex D – New This will change to accommodate reincorporation of 17Q stuff

• Integrity Management Data Collection

Issues to be Addressed at High Level

• The following Subjects have been introduced and referenced without Full Fidelity: – Decommissioning– Obsolescence– Field Life Extension– Human Factors– Configuration Management / MOC– Integration with Other Standards / Regulatory

Documents

17Q History• Last meeting, we were asked to consider combining

17Q into 17N

• Work indicated that this was not best approach• Rationale– Different Subjects– Qualification Not Unique to 17N– Expect Revision at a Different Rate

• Qualification /Verification details from 17N will be Incorporated into 17Q– Accepted by Committee 17

17Q Plans/Progress

• Path Forward– 17Q Committee reestablished to Work Plan– Made up of members of both 17Q and 17N– Currently Working Plan

• It was recognized and last Working Meeting that 17N and 17Q can progress at separate paces as long as 17N appropriately defines, references, etc.

17N Progress

• Original Plans included a “Pre-Ballot” Workshop– Change of Plans• Not a New Document• Large Active Committee• Potential to Circulate to Washington Workshop attendees

– OK?

• OTC Paper submitted and Presented– As part of API 17 Session

17N Plans

• Astrimar to Complete incorporation of Comments and 17Q Reference– May require help from Working Committees– Deliver Summary Report on Completion

• Issue Document to API • Format, Ballot, etc.

Question• How do we “Deliver” to Industry

– API University– Industry Training

Schedule

• Being Worked

• Additional Comments

Options

• A – Complete 17N ASAP– Minimum with updates of all but Qualification

• B – Complete 17N fully incorporating Qualification / Validation– Complete incorporation of Qualification where

current 17Q becomes annex of 17N• C – Complete 17N and 17Q– 17N (see A above) which refers to the new 17Q

which will also be developed

Pros / Cons

• A – Complete 17N ASAP– Document Completed with available resources– Qualification will happen when it happens

• B – Complete 17N fully incorporating Qualification / Validation– Complete document delivered– Additional funds / time / resources needed

• C – Complete 17N and 17Q– Complete documents delivered– Benefits described before

• Updatable at separate paces• Different Subjects• Etc.

– More Additional funds / time / resources needed

Explain A-203

• We believe………….• This will be confirmed as part of work….

Question on Definitions

• Questions re definitions of Verification / Validation/ etc. have been raised

• API 17A will take responsibilities for definitions

• API 17N will provide technical input / expertise

Thanks You’s

• To Everyone Involved– Workgroup Leaders– Participants– Workshop Attendees– Astrimar– BSEE

• Large Amount of Effort by everyone• Large amount of detail developed, considered and

Worked• Even with the Growth in Scope, effort continued and

quality maintained• A great deal of quality work was completed!