Asset Integrity Toolkit 5e1t1s

ASSET INTEGRITY

4 4 4 4 5

2.0

Introduction 1.1 Scope 1.2 Commitment Overview 2.1 Asset Integrity 2.2 Asset Integrity Management 2.3 Industry Key Performance Indicators 2.4 Six Stages of the Lifecycle Matrix

6 3.0 6 7 8–12

Good Practice Guidance 3.1 Observed Good Practise 3.2 Integrity Lifecycle Matrix 3.3 Tool Kit Inter Relationships & Audit Themes

13–18 19–22 23–24 25–26 27–34 35–37

Tool #1 Tool #2 Tool #3 Tool #4 Tool #5 Tool #6

38 39

Reference Documents Appendix 1 Setting KPIs

4.0

The diagram below depicts how this document maybe used either in part or as a whole.

Integrity Tool Kit

Tool Kit Inter-Relationships & Audit Themes

Legislation Step Change

P1

TOOL #4

Asset Lifecycle

P2 P3

TOOL #3

Observed Good Practice

TOOL #2

Six Stages of the Lifecycle Matrix

TOOL #1

Integrity Lifecycle Matrix

Planning

P1

Sufficient & Appropriate Resource

P2

Defined Contractor Management

P3

High Profile Communication

P4

Defined Interfaces

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Tool Elements

Design

Tools

Tools Referance

Integrity Lifecycle Stages

Good Practise

Competence C1 Management Commitment

This work group helped develop & collate a collection of good practice techniques & guidelines aimed to assist operators in their efforts to maintain & enhance asset integrity.

C2 Competence Assurance System C3 Robust Defined Recruitment C4 Clear Training Policy & Program

The tool kit is a collection of these good practices & provides a central reference to managers, supervisors & the workforce.

C5

Related Tool

Audit Topic

M2,Q1,C2

Do you

PLANNING TOOL #1

TOOL #5

Industry KPIs

Assurance & Verification Assessment/Control & Monitoring Competence Planning Maintenance Quality & Audit

In of Asset Integrity Inspections undertaken by the Health & Safety Executive, UKOOA established the Installation Integrity Working Group (IIWG) in 2004. Its aim was to focus industry efforts not just in improving asset integrity over the prescribed period but to promote a sustainable set of Key Performance Indicators for the long-term future of the industry.

Tool Tool Element

TOOL #6

Decommissioning

1.0

Modifications

1 2 3

Commissioning

Section

To provide a practical framework of “observed good practise” , checklists & tools, to facilitate & enable review of Asset Integrity Management throughout the “Six Stages of The Lifecycle” of any offshore installation.

Operations

page

12

1.1 Scope

Construction & Hook-up

CONTENTS

Action Required

Resources

34

2.0 OVERVIEW

1.2 Commitment Pilot (the UK Oil & Gas Industry & Government working together in partnership) has set a safety vision “In 2010, the UK is the safest place to work in the world wide oil & gas industry.” To help deliver this vision the Step Change in Safety Leadership Team has agreed to focus on three key areas. These are represented in the Step Change Temple model as three ing pillars to the vision & are underpinned by ‘Ownership & Involvement at all levels’.

2.1 Asset Integrity Asset Integrity is the ability of the asset to perform its required function effectively & efficiently whilst safeguarding life & the environment

This Toolkit provides a practical way of addressing the third pillar.

2.2 Asset Integrity Management Asset Integrity Management is the means of ensuring that the people, systems, processes & resource, which deliver integrity, are in place, in use & fit for purpose over the whole lifecycle of the asset In 2010, the UK is the safest place to work in the worldwide Oil and Gas Industry Recognise Hazard and Reduce Risk Risk Perception

Drill Floor Safety

SADIE

TRA Guide

RA Training

HIPO Learning

Existing Good Practice

Manual Handling

2.3 Key Industry Performance Indicators (KPI’s)

Personal Ownership for Safety Look This Way Changing Minds VANTAGE POB

PRFS

Safety Leadership

Asset Integrity Maintenance Assessment

Minimum Training Induction Training Employing Company Ind

KP3 Methodology

Integrity Toolkit UKOOA/HSE Workgroup Common KPIs

SCE Management

KPI #

KPI Descrpiptor

Reporting Basis

Frequency

KPI Definition

Comment

KPI #1

HC Releases

To HSE as releases occur

As releases occur

Significant & Major releases (For reporting purposes against THIS KPI)

For all reportable releases an OIR9B must be completed within 10 days followed by OIR12 Supplementary Information within 28 days

Improving Maintenance HC Release Toolkit

Not one without the other

Ownership and Involvement at all Levels Leadership Communication Co-operation

To effectively respond to the Asset Integrity challenge it is essential that the commitments made by Industry Leaders are translated into Company specific goals & objectives to communicate, implement & sustain the principles set out in this document. The health & safety of people on an installation & the sustainability of UK energy supplies are heavily dependent on good asset integrity. Industry & HSE believe that leadership & management commitment, good self-critical systems & sufficient competent people are essential ingredients to assure good asset integrity.

KPI #2

Significant verification findings

Voluntary & anonymous to UKOOA by email

Monthly (data on last of month)

Total number of open significant verification findings (for the Operator) at month end

Significant = Safety Critical Element found by Verifier to not meet its performance standard

KPI #3

Production impact from integrity failures

To DTI

Annual

DTI Plant Efficiency definition

Data is a component of the DTI stewardship initiative and is based on actual plant availability versus planned availability

A comprehensive list of ‘typical’ key performance indicators, used in industry can be found in Section 4.0, Appendix 1.

2.4 Six Stages of the Lifecycle Matrix The Lifecycle of any asset follows the six stages outlined below, over which the objectives, deliverables & activities considered fundamental to assuring Asset Integrity are listed. The table is offered as guidance in order to start the process of review & reflection in the arena of Asset Integrity Management driven by business needs in a managed & auditable manner, whilst minimising adverse impact on HSEQ performance.

3.0 GOOD PRACTICE GUIDANCE This section promotes good practise in the following ways:

Lifecycle Phase

Objectives

Typical Deliverables/Activities

Design

Design installation to achieve optimal integrity performance throughout the lifecycle, ensuring optimum technical safe solution, & that all lifecycle aspects are considered

• Safety Studies • Design, Maintenance & Inspection, Operating, Manning & Verification philosophies • Maintenance & Inspection Strategy • Operations Strategy • Create & document management systems • Design review by verifier

Construction & Hook-up

Construct in accordance with design & through Quality planning process confirm delivery up to & including ‘mechanical completion’

• • • •

Commissioning

Demonstrate through function testing & acceptance that design specification has been achieved & that Performance Standards are being met

• Commission & function test against design specification & Performance Standards • Commissioning completion packages & sign off • Verification (I)∑ • Handover to Operation ∑

Operate plant within design limits Implement & monitor management systems

• • • • •

Operations

Modifications

De-commissioning

Control changes to asset &/or operation

Remove from service entire installation

Procurement Quality plans Inspection/testing records Document completion & handover Verification/Suitability status

Ongoing evaluation of integrity risks Assurance process Maintain & Inspect plant Monitoring of mitigation controls Verification (I)

• Change management process (including design, construct new equipment/facilities & management of redundant plant & equipment) • Assure & changes

• • • •

Safety Studies De-commissioning philosophies De-commissioning Strategy De-commissioning plan

Section 3.1 Observed Good Practise: gives information on where good practise findings from industry, regulatory inspections, standards & guidance documents can be found. Uses of the various tools in this tool kit combined with the ‘Audit Topics’ will also assist in the application of good practise.

Section 3.2: Integrity Lifecycle Matrix: The matrix lists the tools and elements within this tool kit. This matrix should be used to indicate (recommended to use red/green colour coding) where an organisation has satisfied itself or not, that it has appropriate processes, procedures or systems in place, against each section of the matrix. This used in conjunction with section 3.3 ‘Audit Topics’ indicating the sorts of questions that should be answered.

Section 3.3: Tool Kit Inter-Relationships & Audit Themes: Offers audit topics against each tool within this tool kit. In addition it also offers an indication of the inter-relationships between each tool. This should not be taken as an exhaustive list, but as a guide. There will be other inter-relationships for specific requirements, which are not listed.

3.1 Observed good practise Industry good practise is constantly developing; examples of current good practise can be found at Step Change in Safety internet: (www.stepchangeinsafety.net) and HSE internet: (www.hse.gov.uk/offshore/programme.htm#kp3) The HSE website is updated on a regular basis with findings from the HSE KP3 program, which is the Asset Integrity Inspection Project. The Step Change in Safety website offers the facility to or log good practise findings from your own organisation. The reference section of this document provides details of accepted industry standards & guidance documents.

56

3.2 Integrity Lifecycle Matrix

3.3 Tool Kit Inter Relationships & Audit Themes

The matrix below identifies the various elements of each of the integrity tools contained within this tool kit & the various stages of the integrity lifecycle. In order to achieve best practise, each of the elements should have been considered against each stage of the lifecycle & any deficiencies addressed.

Tool

Tool Element

Related Tool

Audit Topics

78

AV1

SCE Identification

AV2

SCE Performance Standards

AV3

SCE Assurance

Assessment/Control & Monitoring

Competence

Planning

Maintenance

Quality & Audit

AV4

SCE Degraded Situations

A1

Regular Review of Strategy

A2

Update Integrity Management System

A3

Define Control and Monitoring Requirements

A4

Review and Analyse Data

A5

Integrity Assessment

A6

Decide Corrective Actions as Appropriate

A7

Execute Change

C1

Management Commitment

C2

Competence Assurance System

C3

Robust & Defined Recruitment

C4

Clear Training Policy & Program

C5

Demonstrate Records

C6

3rd Party Contractors

P1

Sufficient & Appropriate Resource

P2

Defined Contractor Management

P3

High Profile Communications

P4

Defined Interfaces with other processes

M1

Maintenance Management System MMS

M2

Maintenance Task Management

M3

Backlog Management Process

M4

Managing deferred Maintenance

M5

s

M6

Recording and Reporting

M7

Temporary Repair Management

Q1

Quality Management System

Q2

Monitoring and Audit

Q3

Continuous Improvement

Q4

Demonstrable Records

AV1

SCE Identification

M1, M2, M5, M6, A3, A4, A5

• Is there a clear and visible process for identifying SCE’s? • Are all involved personnel aware of the process? • Is it clear and visible how SCE’s relate to major accident hazards?

AV2

SCE Performance Standards

M1, M2, M5, M6, A3, A4, A5

• Are all involved personnel aware of ‘what performance standards’ are and their purpose? • Have Performance Standards been developed for each defined SCE? • Has Functionality, Reliability, Availability & Survivability requirements been established • Has it been made clear WHY the above need to be considered?∑ • Is there a suitable and visible means/medium of capturing and reporting on SCE performance against performance standards?

AV2

SCE Assurance

A1, A3, A4, M1, M2, M5, M6

• Have assurance schemes been developed for each SCE? • Are assurance activities scheduled into the Maintenance Management System (MMS) to maintain SCE integrity?

AV3

SCE Degraded Situations

Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, A1, A2, A3, A5, A6

• Is there sufficient information in the work order (notification) to identify that a degraded situation exists at the time that the assurance activity is being carried out? • If & when such a situation is identified is the defect recorded in the MMS? • Are identified defective/degraded SCEs that cannot be rectified immediately risk assessed & are appropriate mitigations put in place?

Modifications Decommissioning

Tool Elements

Assurance & Verification

Commissioning Operations

Tools

Tools Reference

Integrity Lifecycle Stages

Design Construction & Hook-up

Assurance & Verification Tool #1

Many of the tools have a wider applicability than the primary section in which they are located. The following section describes the interrelationship between the differing tool kit elements; these can be cross referenced to the lifecycle stages in the above matrix.

3.3 Tool Kit Inter Relationships & Audit Themes Tool

Tool Element

Related Tool

Audit Topics

Regular Review of Strategy

M1, M6, Q3, P2, A2, AV1, AV2

• Does the strategy cover the following: – Hydrocarbon Systems – Structures – Wells – Pipelines – Maintenance – Temporary repairs Under one management system? • Does the strategy describe how loss of integrity from fatigue, corrosion, erosion, or chemical effects should be managed including reference to suitable design & operating standards? ∑ • Does the strategy give example of relevant Key Performance Indicators? • Is the strategy &/or system subjected to regular review?

A2

Update Integrity Management Strategy

AV1, AV2, M1, M6

• Is the strategy &/or management system systematically updated? • Are roles & responsibilities clearly defined & maintained as current?

A3

Define Control & Monitoring Requirements

Q2

• Have appropriate control activities been defined and scheduled at suitable time intervals? • Are they formally documented?

A4

Review & Analyse Data

Q2, C5, AV2, M6

• Have all control activity findings been reviewed by a nominated responsible person? (Sponsor) • Is there a clear statement of condition and continued suitability for use based on findings? • Have anomalies been recorded and assessed

A5

A6

A7

Integrity Assessment

Decide Corrective Actions as Appropriate

Execute Change

AV1, AV2, AV3, C5, M6, Q2, Q4

Q3, M6, P4, AV3

Q2, Q3, P4, M4, M6

Tool

Tool Element

Related Tool

Audit Topics

9 10

Competence Tool #3

Assessment/Control & Monitoring Tool #2 A1

3.3 Tool Kit Inter Relationships & Audit Themes

C1

Commitment

P1, P2, M2, M1

• Are Senior Management committed to providing competent personnel & is this demonstrated through the provision of sufficient & appropriate resource?

C2

Assurance

Q1, Q2

• Are all personnel competent to undertake the task? • Are all personnel aware of the legal requirements & implications? • Are all personnel aware of their role & responsibilities from a legal perspective?

C3

Recruitment

P2, Q3, Q4

• Do employers have a recruitment & selection system, which delivers competent personnel, or which facilitates people who with training & development could readily become competent?

C4

Training

Q4, A3

• Do employers have a training program to achieve or maintain essential competence? • Are the needs of an individuals training requirements based on findings of the competence assurance system?

C5

Records

A3, Q3, Q4, M6

• Are formal recor ds of the competency assurance system maintained & available?

C6

3rd Party Contractors

Q3, M6

• Are contractors demonstrably competent? • Are competence s ystems aligned with that of the Duty Holder? • Are emplo yer competence assurance systems acceptable to Duty Holder?

Tool

Tool Element

Related Tool

Audit Topics

Planning Tool #4 P1

Resources

M2, Q1, C2

• Is general guidance available on how to manage defects found as a result of inspection? (Corrective Actions) • Are details available of the sort of inspection records that need to be retained? (Records)

• Do you have sufficient & appropriate resource to complete the work? • Has work been planned to even out peaks & so effectively manage backlog etc.? ∑ • Are all resources competent?

P2

Contractor Management

Q2, C6, Q1, M2

• Does the Duty Holder have management systems in place to cover contractors who are undertaking integrity related work? • Is the Duty Holders monitoring contractor performance against an agreed plan?

• Do all recommended corrective actions have a sponsor? • Is there a formal system for corrective action approval and execution?

P3

Communication

P4, Q3, P2

• Are communications between onshore & offshore regular & effective? • Are plans understood & agreed? • Is there a system in place to manage changes to the plan & is this communicated to all & understood by all?

P4

Interfaces

Q1, P1, P2, M2

• Are interrelated activities between contractors & duty holder clearly defined in the management system interface documents & integrated asset plan?

• Are identified corrective actions implemented using the Management of Change procedure? • Is there a system in place to ensure approved changes are implemented in accordance with an approved scope & timescales

3.3 Tool Kit Inter Relationships & Audit Themes Tool

Tool Element

Related Tool

Audit Topics

Maintenance Tool #5

3.3 Tool Kit Inter Relationships & Audit Themes Tool

Tool Element

Related Tool

Audit Topics

11 12

Quality and Audit #6

M1

Maintenance Management System

Q2, Q3, Q4, C5, C6, AV1, AV2, AV3, P1

• Does the Maintenance Management System facilitate &/or demonstrate: – The condition, functionality & operability of the machinery inventory? – The reduction of failure incidence or Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)? – A reduction of downtime after failure or Mean Time To Repair (MTTR)? – A reduction of critical incidents/near miss incidents? – Increasing maintenance personnel skills/work experience? – Increasing plant/systems/equipment reliability & availability? • Does the Maintenance Management System or produce relevant key performance indicators?

M2

Task Management

P1, Q3, Q4, A2, A5, A7

• Does the Maintenance Management System through task management: – Direct the maintenance programme so as to keep all SCE in a satisfactory, functional, reliable, safe state of repair? – Ensure the safe conduct of all maintenance tasks on SCE? – Direct the management of defective SCE equipment so as to minimise the MTTR? – the optimisation of performance ratings of relevant SCE? – Ensure accurate & complete recording of SCE maintenance findings & histories?

M3

Backlog Management Process

P1, Q3, Q4, A2, A5, A7

• Does the Maintenance Management System include the facility to maintain a of overdue maintenance tasks? • Does the Maintenance Management System incorporate a process of analysis, control & remedy of maintenance task backlogs?

M4

Managing Deferred Maintenance

P1, Q2, Q4, A6, A7, AV1, AV2, AV3

• Are changes made within the maintenance programme concerning SCE referred to the ICB &/or responsible person within the organisation? • Is there an established procedure to address the initial & continuing suitability of the maintenance programme? • Where deferment is required is this accomplished through an established procedure & are there individuals nominated within the organisation who are responsible?

M5

s

Q4, C5, A7

• Are s associated with maintenance activities (i.e. Ex, PSV) embedded within or linked to the Maintenance Management System? • Are such s readily available?

M6

Recording & Reporting

A7, Q1, Q3, Q4, C5, P1

• Are maintenance records subject to systematic review & analysis? • Is operations & maintenance experience continuously subject to assessment & review & are the results fully documented for circulation to all interested parties & actions implemented & monitored within the management structure, offshore & onshore?

M7

Temporary Repair Management

Q1, Q4, A5, A6, A7

• Are temporar y defect repairs completed to rigorous defined specifications? • Is the process of specification documented & auditable?

Q1

Quality Management System

All Tool Elements

• • • • • • •

Have clear goals & objectives been set? Has sufficient & appropriate resource been identified? Has adequate supervision & training been provided? Is effective communication in place? Are activities evaluated, aligned & implemented in a unified way? Are there defined interfaces with other processes & providers? Is ‘Quality’ demonstrably embedded into systems & processes in use?

Q2

Monitoring & Audit

All Tool Elements

• Is there clear ownership & responsibility of problems & for solving them? • Is performance against goals & objectives measured and evaluated? • Is there any form of validation/measure of compliance with systems, process & procedure? • Are there any control measures in place? • Are safe working practises enforced? • Is there any assurance process to confirm that data & information is accurate & reliable? • Is data accessible to those who need it? • Is there any analysis of data & information using valid & auditable methods? ∑ • Are decisions made & action taken based on factual analysis, balanced with experience & intuition?

Q3

Continuous Improvement

All Tool Elements

• Are activities systematically defined in order to obtain the desired result? • Are responsibilities & abilities defined and established for managing key activities? • Are the interfaces of key activities within & between the functions of the organisation defined & are responsibilities clear? • Are the factors such as resources, methods, & materials that will improve key activities of the organisation evaluated? • Are risks, consequences & impacts of activities on customers, suppliers & other interested parties evaluated?

Q4

Demonstrable Records

All Tool Elements

• Is the system structured to achieve the organisation objectives in the most effective & efficient way? • Are the interdependencies between the processes of the system clearly understood? • Are the roles & responsibilities understood whereby achieving common objectives & thereby reducing cross-functional barriers? • Are the organisational capabilities understood thereby establishing resource constraints prior to action? • Are specific activities within the system understood, communicated & thereby establishing how they should operate?

TOOL #1 ASSURANCE & VERIFICATION

The diagram below is examples of how these processes can be developed: Verification /PFEER Overview

Regulations place sole responsibility for the development & ongoing maintenance of a safe installation onto each Duty Holder. Duty Holders are required to list the Safety Critical Elements, have them subject to independent review & to develop a scheme for verification of their performance throughout the life cycle, thus allowing appropriate effort to be focussed on those items which provide the greatest contribution to providing a safe place of work.

Safety Case

Whilst not mandatory & different standards may be adopted in a particular situation where to do so would maintain an equivalent level of safety or suitability, below is intended to offer guidance on what is considered to be industry good practise, in the management of major accident hazards through the identification, assurance & verification of the suitability of Safety Critical Elements (SCE’s).

Major Accident Hazards

The Assurance Process: It is the Duty Holders responsibility to set out an assurance scheme that defines & manages the activities which ensure performance standards of Safety Critical Elements (SCE) are continually met, & apply it.

The Verification Process: It is the Duty Holder responsibility to develop a verification scheme that provides the evidence to demonstrate that the assurance scheme is operating effectively. It is also the Duty Holders responsibility to appoint an independent competent person (I) to comment on that scheme & to ensure the following:

PFEER Safety Critical Elements

DCR Safety Critical Elements

• Safety Critical Elements & Performance Standards are clearly defined • Appropriate assurance activities are applied to the SCE • Any failures &/or anomalies are reported & brought to the attention of the Duty Holder

The following definitions are offered for clarity:

Performance Standards

Safety Critical Elements: Parts of an installation & such of its plant or any part thereof, the failure of which could cause or contribute substantially to; or a purpose of which is to prevent or limit the effect of a major accident. Safety Critical: Of particular importance to preventing, controlling or mitigating the risks from a major accident. Assurance: The process whereby a Duty Holder ensures the integrity of a system. Performance Standards: A performance standard for a SCE is a statement, which can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative , of the performance required of a system; item of equipment or computer program & which is used as the basis for verification throughout the life cycle of the installation. Verification: The process whereby an independent & competent person assesses that a SCE will be, has been & will continue to be suitable. Verification Body: Any independent & competent person selected & appointed by the Duty Holder to undertake work allocated to that person, to comment on the Duty Holders record of safety SCE’s, to draw up or be consulted on a verification scheme to implement all or part of a verification scheme.

Produce Combined DCR/PFEER Examination

13 14

TOOL #1 ASSURANCE & VERIFICATION

AV1 SCE Identification A structured methodical approach should be taken to identify SCE’s. It should address each major accident hazard in turn & specifically list each of the SCE’s associated with that particular hazard. The cross reference of hazards to the particular SCEs is important as it focuses attention onto their purpose & importance. • For an existing installation this identification should comprise a structured review of existing documentation, analyses & assessment to collate & list all SCE’s • For a new design, a preliminary list of potential SCE’s should be drawn up as early as possible. This will contribute to achieving an overall risk-based approach & enable the scheme of verification to be developed & implemented as the design proceeds • A systems approach may be taken such that a whole system is a SCE but different parts are subject to different levels of verification. Alternatively only those parts of the system which provide a significant contribution to a major accident or its mitigation may be selected

The definition of Safety Critical Elements is given in The Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Regulations 2005, Regulation 2 (1). The industry has provided guidelines for the management of safety critical elements (see reference section). From the information sources identified above, the approach implemented in general by the offshore industry can be summarised as follows: • The SCEs should be derived from the major accident hazards listed in the Safety Case • The SCEs should be identified as complete systems or categories of like equipment An outline process is illustrated below: The definitions for the terminology used are: Prevention measures that are designed to reduce the likelihood of occurrence of a major accident hazard, and/or cause or contribute to a major accident hazard. Detection measures that are designed to detect the occurrence of a major accident hazard or the preceding events.

The process is centred on the development of a detailed Major Accident Hazard (MAH) /Safety Critical Element matrix based on the following measures:

Control measures that are designed to minimise the consequences of the detected major accident hazards. Their role is to limit escalation of the hazard, and control the scale, intensity and duration of the hazard.

P

Prevention

Mitigation measures that are designed to mitigate the effects or consequences of the major accident event against personnel and the Installation.

D

Detection

C

Control

M

Mitigation

ER

Emergency Response

The key inputs to the development of the matrix are: • Categories of identified MAH and • Potential SCEs, developed from the list of practicable hazard management measures These inputs are discussed in detail on the next page.

Emergency Response – measures are those that are intended to assist in the evacuation of personnel from the installation, should the major accident event escalate to such a degree. A comprehensive list of SCEs relating to all identified MAHs can be produced from this process and the methodology is transparent, auditable and linked to the MAH.

15 16

TOOL #1

AV4 SCE Degraded Situations

ASSURANCE & VERIFICATION

• There should be sufficient information in the work order (notification) to identify that a degraded situation exists at the time that the assurance activity is being carried out • When such a situation is identified the defect must be recorded in the MMS

MAH Categories from HAZID

Prevention Measures or can cause or contribute to

Detection Measures

Control Measures

• Degraded situations from defective SCEs that cannot be rectified immediately should be risk assessed & appropriate mitigations put in place

Mitigation Measures

Emergency Response (PFEER)

Management of Degraded SCE’s Degraded SCE Identified

List of Safety Critical Elements Undertake Risk Assessment

AV2 SCE performance standards The performance is the parameters which are measured or assessed so that the suitability & effectiveness of each SCE can be assured & verified. They will be the essential requirements which the SCE must maintain throughout its life in order to fulfil its role. Performance standards should be appropriate for the particular application & may need to be amended during the lifecycle if circumstances change.

Safe To Operate

In all cases: • Performance Standards are developed for each defined SCE • Functionality, Reliability, Availability & Survivability requirements are established

AV3 SCE assurance

Mitigation Required

The performance of the SCE’s is assured in two complementary ways: 1. By routine checking of their design, maintenance, inspection & testing 2. By independent & competent verification of these activities In all cases: • Assurance schemes are developed for each SCE • Assurance activities are scheduled into the Maintenance Management System (MMS) to maintain SCE integrity

Enact Mitigation

Cease Operations

Repair SCE

17 18

TOOL #2

A1 Regular Review of Strategy

ASSESSMENT/CONTROL & MONITORING

This activity includes review to determine the scope & limits to be included within the strategy. The review for each component will should include.

The statutory regime applicable to U.K. offshore oil & gas processing facilities places a requirement on the Duty Holder /Operator to maintain the integrity of the facility. Integrity is maintained through various strategies; these strategies give guidance on the methods used to control, for example; mechanical failure, fatigue, corrosion, erosion, or chemical effects throughout asset lifecycle.

• Design, fabrication & installation details • Inspection, monitoring, testing, maintenance & remedial activities information since installation • Any modifications to plant or processes since installation

Undertaken within a recognised, risk based framework, the key benefit is the delivery of a robust Integrity Management strategy once the risk profile of the component or system has been established. The process of Assessment Control & Monitoring is an Integrity Management process which should include the following key elements:

A2 Update Integrity Management Strategy

• Stringent risk assessment of potential major hazards & threats from plant equipment & operations to the personnel, the environment & the asset

The strategy will have been defined on the following basis; Strategy for control activities & their frequencies based upon qualitative &/or semi-qualitative risk assessments where necessary.

• Identification of the necessary mitigation & controls in order to lower each of the risks to a level, which is "As Low is Reasonably Practicable" (ALARP)

The risk consequence to be considered shall include:

• Recognition of which of these controls takes the form of Safety Critical Elements (SCE) & assurance that the associated Performance Standards are continually maintained

• Safety of all personnel

Assessment Control & Monitoring Elements of the Integrity Management Process

• Damage to the environment from pollution to loss of containment • Loss of plant availability

Design, Process, Historical Data Etc

Hazard Identification

A5

A1

Integrity Risk Assessment

Integrity Management Strategy

A2 Asset

The risk assessment process shall include consideration of: • All modes of failure which could result in any of the consequences The strategy shall also include other relevant legal requirements. Acceptance criteria shall be in accordance with relevant Performance Standards. This should be updated on the basis of the findings from Regular Reviews (1) A3

Failure Probability

Define Control & Monitoring Requirements

Consequence of Failure

A4

A1

Risk Ranking, Remaining Life, Failure Mode

Review & Analyse Data

Implement Strategy

Change Status

No

Yes

A6

A7

Decide Corrective Actions as Appropriate

Enact & Ensure Change

19 20

TOOL #2

A6 Decide Corrective Actions as Appropriate

ASSESSMENT/CONTROL & MONITORING

Corrective actions may be deemed necessary; this may consist of maintenance &/or repair activities or changes to inspection or operating procedures.

A3 Define Control & Monitoring Requirements

The sponsor is responsible for recommending appropriate corrective action to the relevant authority level for approval & implementation.

Appropriate control activities shall be defined & scheduled at suitable time intervals to mitigate the identified risks. The control activities shall be formally documented & Planned Maintenance shall include: • Description of control & monitoring activity (e.g. function testing, measurement inspection, planned maintenance etc) • Frequency & schedule • Allowable acceptance criteria • Immediate mitigation measures to be taken if required • Definition of reporting/recording requirements • Definition of roles & responsibilities for the above

A4 Review & Analyse Data A review of all control activity data will be carried out by the nominated responsible person (referred to in this tool kit as the sponsor) & a clear statement to the condition & continued suitability for use will be made. Where anomalies are observed, these should be reported & recorded, so that an assessment can be made, & control measures can be implemented. Inspection, maintenance & testing reports should: • Include tag location, where, when, who & technique & results of inspection • Indicate integrity status & change of risks • Include a detailed description of defect expected/proposed rectification date & consequence of failure

A5 Integrity Assessment Integrity reports will be produced by the sponsor(s) at suitable intervals detailing asset condition against its required performance standards identifying where corrective actions are required.

A7 Execute Change With a course of action decided & approved, procedures, review mechanisms & documentation should be in place to assure change. Implementation shall comply with the Management of Change Procedure. There should be a system in place to ensure that all approved changes are implemented in accordance with the recommendations in of scope & timescales.

21 22

TOOL #3

C3 Robust & Defined Recruitment

COMPETENCE

C1 Management Commitment Senior Management commitment (in of leadership, money, people, training & development) to achieve the required levels of competence of personnel is an essential component of the asset integrity management process.

23 24

Prior to recruitment a clear specification for the position should be prepared, including both technical, previous experience & personal behaviours; technical requirements taken from the established & relevant competence profiles. The interview team should be selected after the position specification has been prepared. At least one member of the interview team needs to be competent in the principal technical discipline for the position. All positions & personnel related to integrity should fit into a competence envelope. Any gaps identified at recruitment stage should be subsequently managed via supervision, training & development.

C2 Competence Assurance System In order to maintain a high standard of business efficiency & operational safety, duty holders need to have competent personnel in of its installations at all times. Fundamental to the demonstration of personnel competence is the provision of a documented Competence System.

C4 Clear Training Policy & Program Competence system shall provide for the identification of training required to underpin the competence requirements for the each position.

A definition of a Competence System is: • Verifiable by audit of training, recruitment process, development & formal assessment

C5 Demonstrable Records

• Provides demonstrable capability within their pre-defined & agreed job description

The competency assurance system needs to retain records of assessment & ing documents, accessible for the purposes of audit &/or review.

• Defines an agreed level of competence to be achieved • Based upon, equivalent to or better than a nationally or industry recognised technical standard • Current with respect to the physical plant & management systems in operation • That provides for & includes 3rd party contractors There are some qualifications to the above definition: • Temporary personnel should be demonstrated to be technically competent for the proposed position & accepted by Duty Holder, prior to mobilisation • Formal Assessment shall mean an appropriate, systematic, documented & technical test of knowledge undertaken by an Assessor independent of the candidate’s role. Independent shall mean not employed in the same role or position as the candidate

A means by which relevant & required competence for all personnel involved in the asset integrity management process should be demonstrable for both onshore & offshore positions.

C6 3rd Party Contractors Where activities have been contracted to 3rd parties, Duty Holder should ensure that competence assurance systems & processes are aligned with the requirements outlined above.

TOOL #4 PLANNING

Planning can form part of contractors Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s): • Actual job progress v planned

25 26

• Management visits % completed v planned The successful implementation of the activities within an Integrity Management Strategy relies on efficient planning. A well-planned & executed Integrity Management System provides a fully auditable trail of activities. The planning & implementation of an Integrity Management system includes:

• Timely work pack & report issue • Training & Certification plans Verification activities need to be aligned with platform operations where witnessing is required of plant in operation such as deluge testing.

• Define the processes required to manage the integrity of an Asset • Allocate roles & responsibilities • Identify performance measures against the plan • Identifying Safety Critical Elements (SCE’s) that must be included • Identifying Business Critical Elements (BCE’s) to be included • Identifying additional items to be included

P3 Communication Integrity should be represented at planning meetings to help keep focus on integrity activities. Inspection & fabric maintenance activities are often first to fall off plans when POB & budgetary limits are reached. Plans need to be understood & agreed with onshore & offshore management, especially where outages or a number of personnel are required.

• Effective prioritisation of activities

Consideration needs to be given for communication with any relevant external parties such as the HSE for notification of use of radiographic sources.

P1 Resources

Any follow up work resulting from integrity activities needs also to be fed back into Asset plans in a timely manner.

Integrity related activities such as inspections of SCE’s need to be scheduled in a Maintenance Management System (MMS), this may be at a high level for general pipe work system inspections, but also at a component level where monitoring of e.g. known defects is required. All services such as scaffolding, insulation removal or standby boat cover for over side work needs to be detailed against each activity. All parties involved in an integrity activity need to demonstrate that they have adequate planning processes in place to manage the supply of personnel & equipment to meet dem&s. The majority of integrity tasks such as over side work & shutdown scopes are carried out during the summer months resulting in increased demand for competent manpower & equipment therefore long term planning & commitment is essential to secure the required resource.

P2 Contractor Management A single integrity activity can involve a range of different contractors including Scaffolding, Maintenance, Standby Boat, Inspection & Fabric Maintenance contractors, all of which need to be managed by the Duty Holder. Plans in the oil & gas industry can change with very little notice e.g. an unplanned shutdown may bring forward the opportunity to carry out an inspection. Contracts set up to include a process to accommodate this & good Client/Contractor relationships will maximise these opportunities. Contractors may have their own plans, planning engineers, planning systems & inspection databases, all of which need to align with the Asset plans.

P4 Interfaces Long-term corporate strategies & objectives form part of the Integrity Management Strategy. Risks need to be assessed against the Asset plans to ensure the integrity activities are focussed to meet the required Asset life. Extensions to Asset life will require re-assessment of risks & subsequent activities. Integrated Planning – where the activity requires component, system or platform outages, integrated planning with the Asset & Business plans is essential. In addition, integration is required with shutdown planning teams where integrity activities such as internal vessel inspections are to be carried out. The inspection part of these activities is usually the smallest section; however, isolations, cleaning etc can involve a lot of time & manpower. Risk Based Inspection (RBI) reviews or Corrosion Risk Assessments (CRA’s) can often result in an unmanageable volume of inspections due in same year. Alignment with long term plans needs to be considered. Deferrals – where integrity activities require deferment, a robust process must be followed to ensure that all risks have been identified & it is safe to defer. Platform personnel must be aware & able to instigate this process in a timely manner i.e. not wait until activity becomes overdue. The new target date must be recorded in the MMS; however the original "due date" must remain for auditing purposes. Final approval must be from the Technical Authority.

TOOL #5 MAINTENANCE

M1 Maintenance Management System The term Maintenance Management System in this tool kit, is used as a generic term to refer to any system which is used for scheduling maintenance, inspection or testing activities A Maintenance Management System may be regarded as the process intended to regulate the organisation, scheduling, conduct, recording & analysis of maintenance tasks. A Maintenance Management System is one of the primary building blocks for the safe, successful management of capital assets in the Offshore Environment & the existence of a Maintenance Management System is fundamental to the ability of an organisation to satisfy financial, operational, & regulatory & safety goals. To best achieve satisfactory results, a Maintenance Management System should not be regarded as just a means to an end but should be viewed as a valuable, dynamic business process in its own right, built on the foundation of the required output. It may be argued that the output is more important than the process but, without the process, the output has no firm foundation, is subject to the priorities, practices & availability of individuals & loses the benefits of regulated management, record keeping & ‘closing the loop’ through analysis of the output being used to improve the maintenance programmes. Maintenance Management Systems interact with other business processes but are centred on technical concerns & considerations. Whilst they should take into other business concerns such as the availability of resources, production plans, usage levels, design lifetimes & machinery depreciation, the primary output should be defined requirements for the maintained condition, functionality & operability of structures, plant, machinery & equipment.

The elements of a Maintenance Management System must be successfully integrated to achieve the required objectives. Such objectives include the following: • Maintaining the condition, functionality & operability of the machinery inventory • Reducing failure incidence or Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) • Reducing downtime after failure or Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) • Reducing critical incidents/near miss incidents • Increasing maintenance personnel skills/work experience • Increasing plant/systems/equipment reliability & availability

A Maintenance Management System provides the process for management & control of a maintenance programme, i.e. the set of maintenance tasks & their schedules that are applied to the equipment inventory operated on by the Maintenance System.

27 28

Offshore installations are subject to the Safety Case regime. Significant aspects of an offshore installations maintenance programme are derived from the process of risk analysis, Safety Critical Element (SCE) definition, Performance Standard definition & Verification Scheme development. The coverage of a Maintenance System therefore is not rigidly demarcated across the industry but may vary within practical limits according to particular evaluations of risk, assessments of the safety criticality of component parts of an installation & differing emphases on the importance of different aspects of the functionality of component parts of an installation.

M2 Maintenance Task Management The management of maintenance tasks should address two key areas: 1. Operational issues, including resource requirements, simultaneous work scopes, Health & Safety, etc. 2. Scheduling issues, including maintenance task frequencies, linking of tasks, task backlog management, etc. • The conduct & supervision of maintenance tasks should be undertaken by appropriately skilled personnel in accordance with defined procedures. • The interface between ‘maintainers’ & the Maintenance Management System databases should be properly managed with defined responsibilities & procedures for history & data recording & for the management of inputs & outputs from Maintenance Management System software programmes • The scheduling of a maintenance programme should be based on relevant factors including manufacturers’ recommendations, operating experience & equipment criticality

29 30

TOOL #5 MAINTENANCE

Safety Critical Elements (SCE) A Maintenance Management System should be directed to maintain the integrity of Safety Critical Elements, including the following considerations: • To ensure a continuous appreciation of the performance of all SCE • To ensure appropriate mitigating measures are put in place in the event of degraded performance of SCE • To direct the maintenance programme so as to keep all SCE in a satisfactory, functional, reliable, safe state of repair • To ensure the safe conduct of all maintenance tasks on SCE • To direct the scheduling of SCE equipment running hours & maintenance so as to maximise the MTBF • To direct the management of defective SCE equipment so as to minimise the MTTR • To optimise the performance ratings of relevant SCE • To ensure accurate & complete recording of SCE maintenance findings & histories

M3 Backlog Management Process Reasons for the development of a back maintenance tasks may include:

Records should contain all the necessary data to compare the performance of equipment with original Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) data & with final commissioning test data, as accepted at h&over to operating personnel. Conformance to Performance.

• Imbalance between maintenance programme scale & available resources • Unforeseen scale of Corrective maintenance tasks • Inability to access or maintain equipment due to external factors

Standard requirements should be verified by scheduled maintenance tasks including: • Reassignment of maintenance tasks to future defined work periods • Operators’ checks & tests during routine processes & ad hoc operation of plant • Routine watch keeping inspections • Scheduled maintenance tasks

The Maintenance Management System should include the facility to maintain a of overdue maintenance tasks. This is normally a facility of maintenance software programmes. The Maintenance Management System should incorporate a process of analysis, control & remedy of maintenance task backlogs.

• Campaign maintenance programmes • Independent Competent Body [ICB] Verification Scheme

Including but not necessarily limited to: Defined authorities & responsibilities The responsibility & authority for remedy of maintenance task backlogs should rest with defined personnel. Procedure for provision of necessary resources A procedure should exist for the review of maintenance task backlogs & the initiation of required remedial action. Logging of remedial actions & final disposition of overdue maintenance tasks An organisation may usefully log the ongoing level of maintenance task backlog, causes & closeout actions required to complete tasks as an input to management review of the Maintenance Management System.

TOOL #5

M5 s

MAINTENANCE

s related to plant & equipment exists in many forms on offshore installations. Many of these s relate to the integrity of an installation, & many will have associated maintenance activities. For those s with an associated maintenance activity, it is considered good practice to have them embedded within or at the very least linked to the Maintenance Management System. Detailed below are examples of s that may be appropriate for inclusion in a Maintenance Management System.

M4 Managing Deferred Maintenance

31 32

Deferment is by definition "the postponement of a scheduled event or task. Any & All changes to, & within, a Maintenance Management System should be subject to a standard evaluation process to judge the necessity for its management & should fall under the control of a Management of Change Procedure. • Ex equipment

• Flange bolting records

There may be occasions where it is not possible to complete a scheduled maintenance task, leading to a requirement for work to be deferred or cancelled.

• Temporary repairs (inc patches)

• Portable gas sensor instruments

• Locked open locked closed valves

• Hose management

Reasons why this may occur include:

• Portable appliance test

• H& tools (for vibration assessment)

• Lifting equipment

• Spade

• Unavailability of resources

• Sealed radioactive sources

• Process alarm & trip schedule

• Unavailability of spares, tools, test apparatus etc

• Dead leg

• Small bore pipe work

• Unavailability (or lack of access) to equipment or plant

• Integrity defects (following inspection)

• Temporary & mobile equipment

• Portable fire extinguishers

• Temporary pipe work

• Lighting

• Seals & locks (to critical instruments)

• Mothballed & redundant equipment

• Pressure Safety Valves (PSV)

Changes made within a maintenance programme concerning SCE should be referred to the ICB &/or responsible person within the organisation, for information in case of possible impact on Verification Schemes. The Maintenance Management System should address the initial & continuing suitability of the maintenance programme & where deferment is required this should be accomplished through an established procedure, which should include a risk assessment, covering but not necessarily limited to the following: • Evaluation of the potential risk if a particular item of equipment, or maintenance equipment should fail • Evaluation that maintenance undertaken has met all specifications & procedures, demonstrating the equipment is fit for purpose

M6 Recording & Reporting On completion of a maintenance task, the Work Order history should be completed by the responsible person as defined by procedures. The Work Order should then be subject to an established process including such actions as review, sign off, information transcription to software databases & hard copy filing, by defined persons.

• Evaluation of operating procedures & compliance with relevant manuals & guidance documentation • Evaluation of possible impacts on defined hazards that may occur as a result of ‘not doing the maintenance task’ Information should be documented to justify & explain the alteration to original task frequency, nature of task, testing methods, etc. Changes to maintenance tasks should be based on valid criteria obtained from operating experience or manufacturer’s recommendations, or other valid sources, &, when changes are made they should be subject to on-going scrutiny to prove their continuing suitability. Changes should be recorded in the Maintenance Management System work history & in other documentation as may be required. Defined authorities & responsibilities The responsibility & authority for approval of deferred maintenance task should rest with defined personnel.

The Maintenance System software may include a section for spare parts which may automatically data from maintenance section history to spares section stock keeping. In such a case, it is essential that all references to spares used be accurate in description, reference number, quantity used, etc. If components removed are required for I or other inspection, they should be labelled with reference to asset, component part number, date removed, etc., &, if possible, accompanied by relevant photographs with date inclusion. Maintenance task recording should be evaluated for outcomes, methods & included information.

TOOL #5

M7 Temporary Repair Management

MAINTENANCE

Temporary defect repairs should be completed to rigorous defined specifications. Definition of the standard required may involve equipment manufacturers, regulatory authorities, insurance providers, specialist repair companies etc. The process of specification should be documented & auditable.

The maintenance records should be subject to systematic review & analysis to improve the effectiveness of the Maintenance System & to identify issues benefiting from remedial action. Maintenance history & data should be used to assess: • The quality of data entry • The level of achievement of Maintenance System objectives & performance indicators • Trend analysis of condition monitoring data • Equipment failure mode frequencies • Root causes of failures Maintenance record review & analysis should be evaluated for usages, methods & resultant actions. A Maintenance Management System should benefit from regular review & assessment of its performance & methods of working. Reference may be made to the H&SE publication HSG 65, including the ‘POPMAR’ methodology. Senior management commitment to the Maintenance System should be reflected in ongoing & in review & evaluation of: • Performance & relevance of the maintenance programme • Resources required • Management effectiveness • Health & safety A maintenance programme can only maintain the level of reliability inherent in the system design therefore the knowledge acquired should be available to be fed back to equipment manufacturers to improve designs & to assist future organisation projects. The full benefit of a Maintenance System is best achieved when operations & maintenance experience is continuously subject to assessment & review. The results should be fully documented for circulation to all interested parties & actions implemented & monitored within the management structure, offshore & onshore. A Maintenance Management System may be subject to internal & third party audits, organisational management review, statutory body inspection & review & verification scheme inspection. Maintenance System assessment & review should be evaluated for inputs, methods & resultant actions.

A stock of materials & standard repair gear should be available on the installation. Safety during the temporary repair of defects should be subject to the appropriate level of management, including risk analysis, precautionary measures etc. After completion a temporary repair should be subject to the appropriate process of reactivation, test & inspection to ensure proper & continuing integrity & functionality. Defects that are subject to a temporary repair should be subject to appropriate monitoring. Such monitoring should be managed & controlled within the Maintenance Management System by technical & H S & E departments as required. Defect repair by specialist companies should be subject to warranty conditions. Temporary repairs to SCE should involve review & authorisation by the ICB of repair techniques, repair specifications, repair management & control & monitoring of repair condition.

33 34

35 36

TOOL #6 QUALITY & AUDIT

Quality management & audit should be a live process embedded in every aspect of asset integrity management, through the six lifecycle stages. The process should therefore include a robust management of change system to track modifications throughout the asset lifecycle to ensure all input data accurately reflects current operations at each stage.

Principle

Application leads to

Quality Management System Q1

Inputs

Plan

Act

Key Benefits

Clear commitment, objectives & fully defined roles & responsibilities raise awareness & understanding facilitating effective implementation & quality maintenance of systems throughout the 6 lifecycle phases

• Clear goals & targets • Identification of sufficient & appropriate resource • Provision of adequate supervision & training • Effective communication • Activities evaluated, aligned & implemented in a unified way • Defined interfaces with other processes

Do

• Setting of challenging goals & objectives • Having sufficient, appropriate & competent resource to complete work at all stages • Better planning of work to balance work loads, smooth peaks & reduce backlogs as far as possible • Clearly defined roles & awareness of levels of responsibility & ability

• Quality embedded into systems in use Check

The results of all these activities should be continually reviewed & monitored & used to update & challenge the existing schemes & to close the loop in accordance with a HSG65 ‘Plan-Do-Check-Act’ approach. As well as assessing the effectiveness of the control measures, actual compliance against the defined control activities should also be monitored to ensure that both ‘input’ & ‘output’ measures are recorded (‘Did we do what we said we would do?’ & ‘Did it work?’). This cycle is illustrated above where checking represents the standard monitoring & review cycles as well as the additional level of a regular audit cycle.

The principles on which quality & audit systems are built should enable senior management to use them as a framework to guide everyone in their organizations towards performance improvement & organizational excellence. The core principles of each system encom the four C’s of control (defined roles & responsibilities), communication (clear reporting lines & record keeping), competence (training & supervision) & co-operation (interface management). There are many different ways of applying the management principles & the nature of the particular organization & the specific challenges faced will determine how they are implemented but the basis should be built on the key steps of: a robust quality management system, monitoring & audit, a clear continuous improvement process & demonstrable records as discussed in the following table.

Monitoring & Audit Q2

Principles of Improvement and Organisational Excellence:

Control

People’s full involvement improves awareness & enables their abilities & competence to be used for the organisation benefit. Routine monitoring & audit is an effective way to gather evidence of the effectiveness of a system’s implementation

• Motivated, committed & involved people within the organisation able for their own performance & able to contribute to continual improvement • Production of monitoring records as evidence of actual system implementation • Establish goals to guide, & measures to track, recording of non conformances & follow up for continual improvement

• Individual ownership of problems & responsibility for solving them • Evaluation of performance against goals & objectives. • Validation of compliance with systems & control measures. • Reinforcement of safe working practises • Ensuring that data & information are sufficiently accurate & reliable • Making data accessible to those who need it • Analysing data & information using valid & auditable methods

Communication

Competence

Co-operation

• Making decisions & taking action based on factual analysis,balanced with experience & intuition

4.0 Reference

TOOL #6 QUALITY & AUDIT

37 38

• Offshore Installation (Safety Case) Regulations (SI 2005, No 3117) • Design & Construction Regulations (SI 1996, No 913) Principle

Key Benefits

Application leads to

• Prevention of Fire & Explosion, & Emergency Response Regulations (SI 1995, No 743) • Pressure Systems Safety Regulations (PSSR) (SI 2000, No 128)

Continuous Improvement Q3

A desired result is achieved more efficiently when activities & related resources are managed as a live & continually reviewed process under the principles of: PLAN-DO-CHECK-ACT

• Pipelines Safety Regulations (SI 1996, No 825) • Review & measurement to allow incorporation of best practise & update of systems • Lower costs & shorter cycle times through effective use of resources • Improved, consistent & predictable results (by better understanding of hazards from formal risk assessment process) • Focused & prioritised improvement opportunities (new technology) • Informed decisions

• Systematically defining the activities necessary to obtain a desired result

• HSE Maintenance System Assessment Guidance (RR237)

• Analysing & measuring of the capability of key activities

• Energy Institute Offshore Technical Guidance Catalogue

• Identifying the interfaces of key activities within & between the functions of the organisation

• Energy Institute Guidelines for the Management of Safety Critical Elements • UKOOA Hydrocarbon ReleaseReduction Toolkit

• Focusing on the factors such as resources, methods, & materials that will improve key activities of the organisation

For a comprehensive list of regulations, ing guidance and good practice publications refer to the following website addresses:

• Evaluating risks, consequences & impacts of activities on customers, suppliers & other interested parties.

Energy Institute: www.energyinst.org.uk

Demonstratable Records Definition of what information is required in addition to how & where it is reported & stored is vital. Training in the use of all these tools including in house documentation e.g. up to date company policies, strategies, defined processes & safety documentation (e.g. P&IDs , cause & effect charts, permit to work systems) plus inspection & maintenance databases that allow historic information to be stored & appropriately evaluated ensure successful future planning & assessment

• HSE Corrosion Management Guidelines (HSE OTO 2001/044)

• Establishing clear responsibility & ability for managing key activities

• Continually improving the system through measurement & evaluation

Q4

• Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations (SI 1999, No 743)

UKOOA: www.oilandgas.org.uk

Health and Safety Executive: www.hse.gov.uk/offshore/programme.htm Step Change in Safety: www.stepchangeinsafety.net

Asset Integrity Discussion Forum • Integration & alignment of the processes that will best achieve the desired results (manufacturing specifications, procurement & design standards)

• Structuring a system to achieve the organisation objectives in the most effective & efficient way

The Step Change in Safety website hosts an Asset Integrity discussion forum so that s can share ideas, examples of good practice and ask questions of the wider community.

• Understanding the interdependencies between the processes of the system.

• Ability to focus effort on the key processes

Acknowledgments

• Structured approaches that harmonize & integrate processes

• Providing confidence to interested parties as to the consistency, effectiveness & efficiency of the organisation

• Providing a better understanding of the roles & responsibilities necessary for achieving common objectives & thereby reducing cross-functional barriers

• An increased ability to demonstrate the effectiveness of past decisions through reference to factual records. • Auditable • Increased ability to review, challenge & change opinions & decisions

The Step Change in Safety Leadership Team would like to acknowledge the many people who have contributed to this document and in particular the of the Industry Asset Integrity Work Group.

ASSET INTEGRITY

• Understanding organisational capabilities & establishing resource constraints prior to action. • Targeting & defining how specific activities within a system should operate

© 2006 UK Offshore Operators Association ISBN 1 903003 27 X 2nd Floor, 232-242 Vauxhall Bridge Road, London, SW1V 1AU Tel: 020 7802 2400 Fax: 020 7802 2401

4.0 Appendix 1

39 39

Overview of the six steps to setting performance indicators 1. Establish the organistional arrangements to implement indicators

Appoint a steward or champion to take the initiative forward. In larger organisations consider using a process safety steering committee. Senior management should be involved.

Select the organisational level to which indicators will apply, e.g.:

2. Decide on the scope of the indicators – consider what can go wrong and where?

• the whole organisation; • a single site or group of sites; • an installation/plant.

Base scope on:

3. Identify relevant risk control systems (RCSs) in place to prevent major accidents. Describe the safety outcome for each RCS

• main process safety risks; • areas where greater assurance on business risk is needed.

List the important RCSs that control the risks.

Set a lagging indicator to show whether each of the desired safety outcomes is achieved.

4. Identify the critical elements of each RCS, i.e. those actions or processes which must function correctly to deliver the outcome

Identify critical elements of the RCS.

Set leading indicators to monitor whether that RCS is operating as intended.

Set a tolerance for each leading indicator.

5. Establish data collection and reporting system

Ensure information/the unit of measurement for the indicator is available or can be established.

Decide on presentation format.

Review adequacy of process safety management systems.

6. Review Periodically review scope and viability of indicators.

Designed & produced by Fifth Ring Integrated Corporate Communications 15626’06

ASSET INTEGRITY