1. API RP 6HP (draft 5.2) Status Presentation Tech Session II Summer Standards Conference

2. Redesign No Yes Limit Load Analysis Fracture Mechanics Analysis Design Verification Analysis Design meets strength requirements Design meets Mfg functional requirements Design meets Fatigue life requirements Redesign No Design Validation Testing Redesign No DESIGN VERIFICATION ANALYSIS

3. User’s Functional Specification –Definition of all internal and external load, cyclic load, and environmental requirements Pressure, tension, bending, temperature(s) Cyclic load requirements Environmental fluid requirements Manufacturer’s Design Verification Analysis –Thorough design analysis appropriate to typical failure modes of HPHT equipment considering all load and environmental requirements Limit load / shakedown analysis and fracture mechanics fatigue analysis Material Data –Need material performance data appropriate to the service environment requirements Toughness, fatigue crack growth(s) API RP 6HP KEY ISSUES

4. Action Item for RP 6HP Committee The work of the Materials Task Group should continue in order to develop the testing protocols needed for the materials pilot testing. The work on revision 5 of RP 6HP should continue in addressing the comments received to date, but revision 6 should not be circulated for comments in order to reduce the resource burden on reviewers, with work continuing only after the pilot materials testing has been successfully completed. Presented at 2007 Summer Conference JAN 2007 ECS MEETING

5. Action Item Summarized as Follows: Example Application For Process Clarity Finish 5 th Revision Comments Hold Until Example Complete & Action Taken Presented at 2007 Summer Conference ECS Action Item for RP 6HP 2007 Winter Conference

6. Example Application –Identify Example Component for Analysis –Perform 6HP & 6A Analysis Comparison –Identify Data Required to Materials Group –Materials Group to Specify Material Test Protocols –Perform Material Testing Using Protocols –Adjust Analysis Assumptions –Write Technical Report Presented at 2007 Summer Conference Example Application for Clarity

7. Example Analysis Status FEA Work Complete Results Are Summarized for Presentation Detail Report is in Progress Committee Comments Being Incorporated in Report Anticipate Completion July 2008

8. The Analysis Used the RP 6HP Methodology Some of the Re-Write of ASME Sec VIII Div 2 Was Used These Issues Will be Incorporated in Next Revision The F22 Material Properties From the MMS Project Were Used Report Accessible on MMS Website Available for Industry Reference Analysis Results Have been Presented Twice to the 6HP Committee Received Good Comments Identified Where More Effort is Required to Explain Process Some Areas Were Considered Beyond the Scope of Analysis The Process to Analyze These Areas Will Be Described Example Analysis Summary

9. Equipment Pressure Rating Absolute vs. Differential Three Scenarios Were Analyzed Surface – 20 KSI Internal, Ambient External Subsea Absolute – 20 KSI Internal, 4,450 External Subsea Differential – 24.450 KSI Internal, 4.450 KSI External Results Indicate The Use of Hydrostatic as a Back-Up Should Continue to be Studied For Pressure Containment Components Pressure Controlling Components Still Are Limited By Application In Gas Or Light Fluid Density Applications However, Use Of Hydrostatic as a Back-Up Has Many Questions Not Easily Answered Even For Pressure Containment Components. API Needs to Develop a Strategy for Going Forward

10. Recommendations Form a Work/Task Group To Study Issues Made-Up From Key SC’s & TG’s (ECS) Establish A Strategy to Proceed Use 6HP Analysis for Reference Until Way Forward is Established This Will Require Discussions/Input With All Industry Sectors Operators Manufacturers Regulatory Should Not Rush To A Conclusion No Experience Operating Equipment in This Manner How To Qualify (what testing is required) How To Rate (what water depth, etc.) ?