Attachment K - 17N Task Group Status Report
advertisement
API 17N Subsea Production System Reliability, Integrity, and Technical Risk Management Don Wells Hess 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 Specification Development • Expand the Life Cycle Process Feasibility SIT, Installation, & Commissioning Operation Concept Selection Manufacturing & Assembly Decommissioning FEED Detailed Design Detail • Change to a Dual-DPIF loop – Add Remediation cycle – Facilitates Integrity Management Specification Development (Greenfield Projects) Define Goals and Requirements KP1 Feedback and Assurance KP4 Planning and Organisation KP2 Core Processes Evaluate Results KP3 Design and Deliver for reliability and Integrtity KP3 Verification and Validation KP6 Project risk management KP7 Supply Chain Management KP10 Risk and RAM Analysis KP5 Supporting Processes Performance tracking and data management KP9 Qualification of Technology KP8 Management of Change KP11 Organisational Learning KP12 Specification Development (Brownfield Projects) Plan üCorrective actions üRemediation actions üQualification actions üIntervention actions Define Define üCorrective actions üRemediation actions üQualification actions üIntervention actions üSegments üRisks üMitigations Plan üInspections üMonitoring üTesting Feedback üAssurance üLessons Learnt Operational Reliability and Integrity Assurance cycle Remediation and corrective action cycle Are Requirements met? Implement ü ü ü Intervention Changes Performance improvement Evaluate Evaluate üTests üChange implemented üAgainst requirements ü ü ..and acceptance criterion Analyse data Evaluate against requirements Implement ü Data collection ü Data analysis ü Performance evaluation Lifecycle Application of DPIEF Cycle Define Feasibility Feedback and Assurance Feasibility Evaluate • DPIEF Assurance Cycle applied at each lifecycle stage – Feasibility through to decommissioning – Normal operations – Corrective action Implement Feedback and Assurance Concept Evaluate Feed Plan Implement Define Feedback and Assurance Feed Evaluate Plan Implement Define Feedback and Assurance Detailed Design Evaluate Manufacture Assembly Test Install and Commission Operations Plan Define Concept Selection Detailed Design • Double DPIEF loop in operations . Plan Implement Define Feedback and Assurance Evaluate Plan Implement Define Corrective Action Loop Implement Plan MATIC Feedback Define Yes No Normal Operations Loop Requirements met? Evaluate Evaluate Decommissioning Define Feedback and Assurance Decommissioning Evaluate Implement Plan Plan Implement Progress Winter 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!
