160 likes | 432 Views
Committee on Refinery Equipment November 2010 Update to the Refining Subcommittee Michael Lubcyik, Chevron Energy & Technology Company, Chair, CRE. Purpose/Outcomes. Discuss standard revisions with significant impacts – 653 & 520 Report on Petro-Arch Database Project
E N D
Committee on Refinery Equipment November 2010 Update to the Refining Subcommittee Michael Lubcyik, Chevron Energy & Technology Company, Chair, CRE
Purpose/Outcomes • Discuss standard revisions with significant impacts – 653 & 520 • Report on Petro-Arch Database Project • Obtain RSC feedback
Standards Revisions Key Standards Revision – Standard 653, Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction: • A joint Inspection and Tanks subcommittee meeting occurred on January 28th • The effort developed proposed ballot wording to clarify the inspection intervals in Section 6 of API Standard 653, Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction • The current 4th edition text has led to confusion and compliance concerns
Standards RevisionsKey standards revision – Standard 653, Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction: • The ballot received consensus with 71% response rate (must be > 50%) and 85% approval rate (must be > 67%) • The ballot had eight negatives and 91 written comments • The comment resolution process led to a second ballot • RSC Feedback - Good Engagement by member companies. Keep working toward resolution
Standards RevisionsKey standards revision – Standard 653, Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction: Update and next steps: • RBI Team Members exchange ballot resolution language • Language would strengthen RBI process when: • internal inspection intervals exceed 25 and 30 years • release prevention barriers are used • Ballot resolution language agreed to and ballot launched • Ballot review meeting scheduled for November 15, Chair is working on resolution
Standards Revisions Key Standards Revision – Recommended Practice 520, • Sizing, Selection, and Installation of Pressure-Relieving Devices in Refineries—Part II, Installation • Proposed revision is part of regular review and maintenance process • The standard is approaching its procedural review date – 5 years (August 2003) plus two year extension to complete work • The proposed revisions update the standard and include a revision to the safety relief valve section • The initial draft ballot closed March 17
Standards Revisions Key Standards Revision – RP 520, Part II: • The proposed revisions are designed to allow operators greater flexibility on maximum inlet non-recoverable pressure drop for safety relief valves while maintaining safe operations: • Current language states that pressure drop should not exceed 3% of the valve set pressure • Proposed language states that the “pressure loss…should not exceed 3 percent of the set pressure of the pressure relief valve except as permitted in 4.2.2.4 when supported by an engineering analysis”
Standards Revisions Key standards revision – RP 520, Part II • The ballot received consensus with 66% response rate (must be > 50%) and 96% approval rate (must be > 67%) • The ballot had one negative from an operator • OSHA has provided comments • Voters submitted 200 written comments • Included in the comment resolution process was an API-OSHA meeting
Standards Revisions Key standards revision – RP 520, Part II • Proposed Ballot Resolution Language includes: • - Eliminate the words “Engineering Analysis”. Instead use words “if exceed 3%, the following shall….” • - Replace “suitable margin relative to the blowdown shall be specified by the User” with “a 2% margin relative to blowdown shall be used” • - Limit the inlet pressure drop to a maximum of 5% • - Add the requirement to reduce the allowable built-up back pressure on conventional valves, if 3% is exceeded
Standards Revisions Key standards revision – RP 520, Part II • Proposed Ballot Resolution Language includes: • - Point to API 510 and 576 and require that the User is adhering to these standards as a pre-condition to allowing higher than 3%. • - Add a stipulation that exceeding 3% should not be the standard for new systems, except in applications (i.e. low pressure) where the 3% limit is impractical to meet. • The Reballot language will be finalized during the RP 520 Part II meeting, and OSHA representative will attend the meeting and comment on the language
Standards Revisions Key standards revision – RP 520, Part II • Activities subsequent to RSC meeting materials distribution: • API received OSHA letter November 10 • Letter does not address technical ballot issues but raises concerns regarding the overall API standards process • API is reviewing letter and developing a strategy • RSC Feedback – Keep pushing to issue the revised standard. API to develop a response to OSHA letter and Mary Kay Forum. Possible survey of user experience presented to RSC – no direct feedback
Materials Database Project • Actions on Materials Database project since the April 2010 Refining Meetings: • API has signed contracts with Project Manager, Contractor, and MPC • “Use Case” analysis has been completed • Software development is 85% complete • Database schema development is 50% complete • Loading of 2.25 Cr-Mo-V data is 50% complete • Goal is to complete work on Pilot Project and be prepared to make recommendation to Refining Subcommittee at Spring 2011 meeting
RSC Feedback • The CRE subcommittees plan to ballot, publish and conduct 20 standards actions in 2010 • The Refining Subcommittee asked for information regarding significant standards revisions • Information will be helpful in conducting coordinated ballot reviews
RSC Feedback • Subcommittees report on proposed revisions that could: • Incur a significant cost or savings to equipment cost or repair; Require a significant addition or allow for a reduction in engineering effort necessary to design or specify equipment procurement; or • Noticeably improve equipment reliability or safety.
RSC Feedback • RSC would like to continue to get this type of info on standards • The CRE subcommittees have been asked to report this information, and the CRE met with its SC Officers on November 14 to discuss improvements to the process
RSC Feedback • Provide updates on standards 653 and 520, Part II • Continue to proceed with Materials Database Project • Provide update on significant standards revisions • They liked our plan developed on Sunday night to discuss one month in advance of meeting