API 17 N and Q Subsea Production System

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

History See Last Summer Minutes

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

Status • At Winter meeting it was agreed that rather that a Technical Report, a proper and separate API 17 Q would be written. – Plan was to have 17 N introduce the subject, and – The new 17 Q 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 17 Q • It was agreed that based on the survey and the planned path forward, Task Group 17 N would request any additional funds deemed necessary to complete the work.

Progress • Ballot was issued April 22, 2015 – Closing Date – June 3, 2015 • API 17 Q Survey is underway – Progress Details – John Strutt • Results received June 4 th

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 24 th to Plan Path Forward – Comments will be distributed to Working Committees – Target Completion – 4 Q 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 17 N altogether • Deliver Stand Alone “Subsea” 17 Q ASAP – With all work completed by Committee Volunteers.

Post Meeting 17 N Progress • Continue to progress addressing ballot comments • Have waited some on feedback from BP and Shell

Post Meeting 17 N Progress Negative 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 17 Q 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 Xo. M has provided support & feedback • Feedback – – Overall Purpose Level of Detail Alignment with “Other” documents Alignment with 17 N

General Comments Received • No negative comments so far – – Industry recognises need for API 17 Q. No push back from industry on any of the listed topics in the flyer. • Need to find optimal level of detail for 17 Q – – 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 17 N or a fully stand-alone document? – – Some operators looking for this to be stand-alone. Annex on Qualification in 17 N to be removed.

Themes to be Addressed 1. SQP & TQP – Using TRC to determine effort 2. TRL Ladder 3. 4. 5. 6. – Adaptation for different applications – Determination of initial TRL Assessing advancement degree of difficulty – “Slope” Guidance on definition of goals and requirements Using Q–FMECAs to develop analysis & test plans Understanding and quantifying residual risks and uncertainties 7. 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 17 Q. 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 API 17 Q Preliminary contents (headings 1 -4 standard sections not shown) • Scope Document currently being developed comprising: – Preliminary Table of Contents for API 17 Q – Brief notes under each heading – Summary of comments from industry inputs as an appendix

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

API 18 • We are in conversation with API 18 LCM – Commented on implications to Industry – Comments on how it Affects and Interrelates to 17 N – We are not working in a cave

Thanks and Questions