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

Detail

• Expand the Life Cycle Process– Provides balance and depth to the document– Communication of goals & requirements

4

Feasibility

Concept Selection

FEED Detailed Design

Manufacturing & Assembly

SIT, Installation, & Commissioning Operation

Decommissioning

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

Deadline for comments on ‘November 1st

issue’

December 10thNovember 1st

Issue of complete document (Main section and ALL

Annexes)

October 14thAugust 21st January 31st

Final API RP 17N Issue

Deadline for comments on ‘August 21st

issue’

Issue of document (Main

section and Annexes A & C)

API RP 17N Meeting to discuss high level

comments and comments from decomworld

conference

API RP 17N Meeting November 1st to introduce

comments spread sheet and close out outstanding

comments.

API RP 17N Meetings

Key dates

October 15th October 28th January 13th

Meeting to close out outstanding comments.

Current Progress

• Progressed Plan as Presented in Previous Meetings

Progress

• Workshop held in Washington– Solicited Input from outside of 17N – Minutes and Summary Document distributed to all

participants– Feedback incorporated into 17N

Progress

• 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

Progress

• Comments have been Prioritized – Are currently being included

• Not full Fidelity for all comments / subjects– Decommissioning– Obsolescence– Field Life Extension– Human Factors– Configuration Management / MOC

– Final Document Due January 31+

17Q History• Plans for API 17Q

– Last meeting, we were asked to blend 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

17Q Plans• Path Forward

– 17Q Committee to establish current Status• January 30th

– Define an “Ideal” version– Define a “Minimum” version– Make decision on Path Forward

• Minimum Version of Document – with planned future revision

• Ideal Version plus Technical Report & Work Plan• Organizational Needs• Funding Needs• Schedule

Plans

• 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– Presentation as part of API 17 Session

Next

• Complete Planned Activities– Deliver Summary Report on Completion

• Recommended Next Steps

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

Question• How do we “Deliver” to Industry

– API University– Industry Training

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!