1. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead SC6 Winter Meeting 2012 Eric Wehner 22 February 2012

2. Issue 1: 6A clause 10.16.6.1b) requires hydrostatic testing of electric actuators. Proposed change: Change title of 10.16.6.1: from “b) pneumatic, hydraulic or electric actuators” to “b) pneumatic or hydraulic actuators.” (Note: Would then be consistent with 10.16.6.2 a) ) Proposed action: Publish as erratum. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead

3. Issue 2: 6A Annex F has no appropriate requirements for electric actuators. Proposed change: 1.Revise second performance requirement in Table F.7 to: “Actuator seal test at room temperature (for pneumatic, hydraulic and retained-fluid powered actuators).” 2.Revise title of F.2.5 a) to “a) actuator seal test at room temperature (for pneumatic, hydraulic and retained-fluid powered actuators):” 3.Add sentence to end of subclauses F.2.5 b), F.2.5 c), and F.2.5 d): “For electric actuators, voltage and/or current supplied should be per the manufacturer’s specification.” Proposed action: Ballot and publish as addendum. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead

4. Issue 3: Serialization of actuators is not required, but traceability of actuator components is required. 7.4.9.2.1 & 7.4.9.2.2 cannot cover actuators because actuators have no PSL. If actuator is not serialized, traceability of components is lost at assembly. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead

5. Issue 3: Serialization of actuators Proposed change: 1.Add new 7.4.9.2.1 c): “for actuators, serialization requirements of 10.16 shall apply.” 2.Add new 7.4.9.2.2 c): “for actuators, traceability requirements of 10.16 shall apply.” 3.Change title of 10.16.4.4 from “Traceability” to “Traceability and serialization.” 4.Add new second paragraph to 10.16.4.4: “For hydraulic and pneumatic actuators having a maximum working pressure greater than 2,6 Mpa (375 psig), serialization is required.” Proposed action: Ballot and publish as addendum. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead

6. Issue 4: Hardness test requirements in 6A for loose connectors are confusing/conflicting. 7.4.1.5 : “Each pressure-containing or pressure- controlling part for use in H2S service shall be hardness-tested individually…” 7.4.1.5: “If the other requirements of 7.4.1 satisfy this requirement, additional testing or examination is not required.” 7.4.2.1.3a): “Loose connectors do not require hardness testing.” This could be interpreted to mean loose connectors for DD-HH do not require hardness testing. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead

7. Issue 4: Hardness test requirements in 6A for loose connectors are confusing/conflicting. Proposed change: Change the last sentence of 7.4.1.5 from, “If the other requirements of 7.4.1 satisfy this requirement satisfy this requirement, additional testing or examination is not required” to read “If other requirements of 7.4.2 – 7.4.11 satisfy this requirement, redundant testing or examination is not required.” Change the first sentence of 7.4.2.1.3.a) to read, “Loose connectors for material classes AA, BB and CC do not require hardness testing.” Proposed action: Ballot and publish as addendum. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead

8. Issue 5: Bolting requirements have no restrictions or guidance on matching properties of nuts and studs. Table 62 gives allowable bolting (stud) materials and nut materials by application. Table 62 does not preclude using studs and nuts with significantly different strength. Some evidence exists that failure could occur if stud and nut materials are mismatched. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead

9. Issue 5: Bolting requirements have no restrictions or guidance on matching properties of nuts and studs. Proposed change: Add the following to 6A clause 10.3.3.1 (General) after the first paragraph and before “The following apply:” NOTE The material requirements of Table 62 do not take into account the suitability of all possible combinations of bolt and nut materials listed. Table 62 is not intended to imply that all grades of nuts listed for an application can be used without restriction with all grades of bolting listed for the same application. It is the responsibility of the manufacturer to utilize an appropriate nut material with a specific bolting material and vice-versa. Factors that should be considered include differences in material strength, electric potential (galvanic corrosion), friction and galling resistance. It should be noted that for some materials listed in Table 62, properties may vary with bolting size and/or temperature. Proposed action: Ballot and publish as addendum. SC6 Resource Group on Trees and Wellhead