API 17N (and Q)Subsea Production System Reliability, Integrity,

and Technical Risk Management

HistorySee Last Summer Minutes

Status

• Before Winter Meeting the committee Worked the 17N / 17Q relationship– Agreed to Combine the “existing Q” with 17N– Agreed a “New Q” was required– Plan at that time was that:• API 17N would introduce the TQ Process• A Technical Report would be written that would later be

incorporated into 17N

Status

• At Winter meeting it was agreed that rather that a Technical Report, a proper and separate API 17Q would be written.– Plan was to have 17N introduce the subject, and– The new 17Q would cover Qualification, etc. in detail

• It was agreed that Committee would request funds to support a survey of the Industry view to define the Scope and Scale of the new 17Q

• It was agreed that based on the survey and the planned path forward, Task Group 17N would request any additional funds deemed necessary to complete the work.

Progress

• Ballot was issued April 22, 2015– Closing Date – June 3, 2015

• API 17Q Survey is underway– Progress Details – John Strutt

• Results received June 4th

Progress• Results– Ballot passed with:• 17 Affirmative• 2 Negative• 4 Abstain• 5 Did not Vote

• 184 Total Comments• 8 Complex Fixes• 53 Discussion Required• 123 Simple Fixes

Plan

• Path Forward– Meeting Planned for June 24th to Plan Path Forward– Comments will be distributed to Working Committees– Target Completion – 4Q 2015

• Negative Votes– Too Prescriptive in places – Simplification Requested– Too Repetitive• Committee’s Original Intent was to have Sections Self

Sustaining

Committee 17 Feedback

• No more Funded Work– All work to be completed by Volunteers

• Pull Annex F – “New Technology Qualification” out of 17N altogether

• Deliver Stand Alone “Subsea” 17Q ASAP– With all work completed by Committee Volunteers.

Post Meeting 17N Progress

• Continue to progress addressing ballot comments

• Have waited some on feedback from BP and Shell

Post Meeting 17N ProgressNegative Votes

• Met with BP– Received Feedback– We are confident that we understand concerns– They are Positive and want to help– Confident that changes made will address concerns

• Have not met with Shell– We are Working this………….– Holding off our work until this is done– Trying to avoid rework

Post Meeting 17Q Progress

• API / Committee 17 agreed to fund Scoping Survey• Survey complete and report delivered to API July 6, 2015

– Written Survey– Follow up Conference Calls / Meetings

• Dave Wilkerson XoM has provided support & feedback• Feedback

– Overall Purpose– Level of Detail– Alignment with “Other” documents– Alignment with 17N

General Comments Received

• No negative comments so far– Industry recognises need for API 17Q.– No push back from industry on any of the listed topics in the flyer.

• Need to find optimal level of detail for 17Q– Simple enough to gain traction within the industry – Not overly complex. Readable by all engineers, not just reliability experts.– Generic enough to cover multiple different technologies – Detailed enough to be practical and support qualification.

• A safety case type approach suggested– Operators define and demonstrate achievement of their own goals and requirements.– This is the intent of Qualification Assurance Documentation

• Support to 17N or a fully stand-alone document?– Some operators looking for this to be stand-alone.– Annex on Qualification in 17N to be removed.

Themes to be Addressed

1. SQP & TQP – Using TRC to determine effort

2. TRL Ladder– Adaptation for different applications– Determination of initial TRL

3. Assessing advancement degree of difficulty – “Slope”4. Guidance on definition of goals and requirements5. Using Q–FMECAs to develop analysis & test plans6. Understanding and quantifying residual risks and

uncertainties7. Qualification Assurance Documentation

Benefits to the Industry

1. More confidence from the industry in adopting new technologies

2. Minimising the need for unique and heavily detailed qualification requirements from each operator– One operator suggested that 80% of their requirements could

be covered by 17Q.

3. Consistent, best practice approach across subsea suppliers

4. Potential to increase regulators confidence that equipment does not pose harm for people or the environment

Outline Scope Document

• Scope Document currently being developed comprising:– Preliminary Table of

Contents for API 17Q– Brief notes under

each heading– Summary of

comments from industry inputs as an appendix

API 17Q Preliminary contents (headings 1-4 standard sections not shown)

Issues / Questions

• Energy / Capacity to complete 17N revisions• Can we fund support of 17Q?• If not we will definitely leave Annex F in 17N

API 18

• We are in conversation with API 18 LCM– Commented on implications to Industry– Comments on how it Affects and Interrelates to

17N– We are not working in a cave

Thanks and Questions