Based on the detailed review of the provided quotation documents for Valtek (via “Quotation Overview GC-23-0715-R2”), Samson (via “Control Valve Quote Verification Report”), and Baker Hughes Masoneilan (via “Quote Verification Report - Baker Hughes Masoneilan Valves”), here’s a comparative analysis and selection recommendation:

Executive Summary

The Baker Hughes Masoneilan quote stands out as the most technically compliant, comprehensive, and well-documented offering among the three vendors. While Valtek offers a viable alternative, particularly with cost-saving rotary options, and Samson’s initial quote has significant critical flaws.

Recommendation: Prioritize Baker Hughes Masoneilan.

They provide the most robust technical solution, clear adherence to stringent quality and documentation requirements, and detailed material specifications that address critical process conditions like flashing/cavitating service.

Detailed Vendor Analysis

1. Valtek (via “Quotation Overview GC-23-0715-R2”)

• Strengths:

  • Cost-Effective Alternatives: Offers “alternate” rotary control valves (Valtek MaxFlo4) for several globe valves (Valtek Mark One) at significantly lower prices. This provides flexibility and potential cost savings if rotary valves are technically acceptable for those specific applications.
  • Clear Quoted Information: The provided review clearly breaks down the main and alternate options with manufacturer, model, size, material, and price.
  • Leakage Class: Often provides ASME FCI 70-2 Class V, which is superior to the minimum Class IV requirement.
  • T-Ratings: While some variations exist, higher T-ratings are sometimes offered, which is generally a positive.
  • Comprehensive Coverage: All valves listed in your original specification table are addressed in the Valtek quote (though some are alternates).

• Weaknesses/Considerations:

  • Technical Suitability of Alternates: The rotary alternatives often come with a smaller nominal pipe size (e.g., 4" vs 6" for 131-TV-0348, 1" vs 1.5" for 131-TV-0371). A detailed technical review is required to confirm that these smaller, different-type valves are suitable for the specified flow ranges and control requirements.
  • The document lacks a detailed, overarching ITP/Quality Control/Certification framework, which is crucial for major projects. General notes are provided, but not a full procedural outline.
  • Generic material callouts (WCC/LCC) without specific trim material grades for all components are less detailed than Baker Hughes, making direct compliance verification harder without further inquiry.

• Overall Assessment: A competitive option, especially if cost is a primary driver and the technical suitability of the rotary alternatives can be confirmed. Requires detailed follow-up on the general compliance aspects not explicitly covered in the summarized spec sheets.

2. Samson (via “Control Valve Quote Verification Report”)

• Strengths:

  • Provides detailed sizing reports for each valve, showing calculated Cv and noise levels.
  • Adherence to ASME FCI 70-2 Class IV leakage is consistently stated.

• Weaknesses (Critical & Major Flaws):

  • Major Sizing Discrepancies: Multiple valves (131-PV-0586, 131-FV-0065, 131-TV-0385, 131-PV-0591, 131-LV-0372) are quoted at sizes significantly different from your specified requirements, or show critical internal inconsistencies within Samson’s own sizing reports regarding valve size. For 131-PV-0586, their own calculations show a severely undersized valve if the 2" is what they are actually quoting.
  • Missing Critical Valves: Three valves (131-PCV-0583, 131-PCV-0585C, 131-PV-0581) are entirely absent from the provided Samson documentation, making this quote incomplete.
  • Inadequate Trim Material Specification for Flashing Service: For 131-TV-0371 (Ref Propane Valve), which is identified as “Flashing” (a critical condition requiring hardened stellite trim), Samson only states “METALLIC” for trim facing. This is a severe non-compliance for a service with potential for rapid erosion and damage.
  • Generic Trim Material: For most valves, only “METALLIC” is indicated for trim, making it impossible to verify compliance with “Stainless Steel plug, seat, and trim” without further clarification.
  • Lack of Detailed Accessory & Documentation Compliance: While they mention instrument air, specific details on positioner accessories (HART, NEMA 4X, bug screens, pressure gauges) and detailed documentation / testing requirements (MTRs, PMI) are not explicitly covered in the level of detail seen from Baker Hughes.
  • Material Deviation without Justification: For 131-LV-0372, LTCS is offered instead of Carbon Steel, a deviation that needs formal approval.

• Overall Assessment: Not recommended. The numerous critical errors, fundamental sizing mismatches, clear non-compliance on critical trim for flashing service, and incomplete offering indicate a significant lack of attention to detail and potentially higher project risk. Significant effort would be required to clarify and correct this quote, with no guarantee of full technical compliance.

3. Baker Hughes Masoneilan (via “Quote Verification Report - Baker Hughes Masoneilan Valves”)

• Strengths:

  • Exceptional Technical Compliance: Provides specific material grades for plugs, seats, and stems (e.g., 17-4PH, 410, Stellite 12, 316 SS). Crucially, for services identified as potentially cavitating or flashing (like 131-LV-0369 and 131-TV-0371), they specify appropriate materials and trim types (e.g., Stellite for 131-LV-0369, Anti-Cavitation trim with hard-faced parts for 131-TV-0371). This directly addresses your detailed specification.
  • Comprehensive Quality & Documentation Framework: The “General Terms & Conditions / ITP Summary” is extremely detailed and robust. It covers an extensive range of requirements, including material certifications (10204 3.1), NDT (MT, PT, RT, PMI percentages), factory tests (hydrostatic, leakage with specific standards, functional, packing, fugitive emission, stroke time, hysteresis), cleaning, packaging, welding procedures, and even minor details like tubing material (SS 316/316L with Mo), bug screens, sunshades, and specific painting standards. This demonstrates a strong commitment to quality and adherence to project specifications.
  • Clear & Consistent Valve Sizing: The nominal sizes and schedules for the quoted valves appear to consistently match your specified requirements throughout the list.
  • Detailed Actuator & Positioner Specs: Explicitly lists the Digital HART SVI3-21121210* positioners, confirming the smart/HART requirement.
  • All Specified Valves Covered: All 11 valves in the provided specification tables appear to be included and detailed in this report.
  • Specific P&ID Callouts: Each valve also lists the associated P&ID number, which is good for cross-referencing.

• Weaknesses/Considerations:

  • The provided excerpt doesn’t include overall pricing, so a direct cost comparison is not possible without that information.
  • The excerpt does not explicitly list alternate valve types or sizes, which means less flexibility in negotiation based on design alternatives.
  • The three valves missing from the Samson quote (131-PCV-0583, 131-PCV-0585C, 131-PV-0581) were not part of the provided Masoneilan excerpt either, but this report is based on the initial 11 valves in the first part of your prompt.

• Overall Assessment: Strongly Recommended. Baker Hughes Masoneilan demonstrates a superior understanding of your specifications and offers a highly compliant, well-engineered, and thoroughly documented solution. Their detailed ITP and material specifications significantly de-risk the procurement process.

Final Recommendation Breakdown

1. Eliminate Samson: Due to significant technical non-compliance, critical omissions, and high administrative burden to correct.

2. Evaluate Baker Hughes Masoneilan vs. Valtek:

   • Technical Superiority & Risk Mitigation: Baker Hughes Masoneilan is technically superior and offers significantly lower risk due to explicit compliance with complex material, testing, and documentation requirements, especially for critical services.
   • Flexibility & Cost: Valtek offers significant cost savings with their alternate rotary valves. However, this saving comes with a higher technical risk due to the change in valve type and sometimes size, requiring rigorous internal validation.
   • Completeness of Documentation: Baker Hughes Masoneilan’s detailed ITP/T&C document is a major advantage for project management and quality assurance.

Therefore, the primary recommendation is to select Baker Hughes Masoneilan for their comprehensive technical compliance and robust quality assurance.

Next Steps:

• Obtain Full Pricing: Request the complete pricing from Baker Hughes Masoneilan to understand the total cost.
• Cost vs. Risk Assessment: Compare the total cost of Baker Hughes Masoneilan against the Valtek quote (using their main globe valve prices for direct comparison, and then considering the potential savings from Valtek’s rotary alternates if they are technically suitable).
• Validate Valtek Alternates (if considering): If the Valtek alternatives offer significant cost savings, engage your process/instrumentation engineers to thoroughly review the technical suitability of the specific rotary valves and their sizing for each application, specifically for 131-TV-0348, 131-FV-0065, 131-TV-0371, 131-LV-0372, and 131-TV-0361.
• Confirm all missing valves: Ensure all valves from your complete project scope are covered by the final selected vendor, including those (131-PCV-0583, 131-PCV-0585C, 131-PV-0581) that were not in the provided Baker Hughes excerpt or missing from Samson’s quote.