Leading KPIs based on PSAs Trends in Risk Level RNNP

Transcription

1 Leading KPIs based on PSAs Trends in Risk Level RNNP Torleif Husebø

2 Trends in risk level Participants and contributors Reference group: Employers associations, unions and authorities Tripartite Safety forum The industry Data / information/ knowledge Advise on further development. Tripartite Advisory group PSA HSE Professional group Responsible for the product Professional experts

3 Basis for selecting indicators Indicators must be: - Valid - Reliable - Sensitive - Representative - Bias proof - Cost effective For RNNP: - Primarily based on existing data - Communication - Industry level A. Hale, 2009

4 Leading vs lagging Definition dependent on context Input Throughput Output Outcome (HSE, 2001) In RNNP we use a combination of leading and lagging indicators, or indicators relevant to the HSE chain Critical question: Does the indicator contribute to improvement (directly or indirectly)?

5 Trends in risk level Methodology TRENDS IN RISK LEVEL OTHER ACCIDENT PRECURSORS QUESTIONAIRE MAJOR ACCIDENT PRECURSORS BARRIERS AND MAINTENANCE OCCUPATIONAL ILLNES AND INJURY QUALITATIVE STUDIES

6 Accident precursors

7 Accident precursors / indicators Non-ignited hydrocarbon releases Ignited hydrocarbon releases Well kicks/ loss of well control Fire/ explosion non process fluids Vessel on collision course Drifting objects Collision with field related vessel, shuttle tanker Structural damage, stability, anchoring, dynamic pos failure Releases from subsea production systems, pipelines, risers Damage to subsea production systems Helicopter Man over board Serious injury personnel Occupational illness Total power failure Diving accident H2S emission Falling object Black: Major accident potential

8 Number of leaks Leaks, risk contribution Hydrocarbon releases rate > 0.1 kg/sec 0, , , ,15 0,10 0,05 >10 kg/s 1-10 kg/s >10 kg/s kg/s 1-10 kg/s kg/s 5 0 0, Release frequency Weighted in relation to potential for loss of life - risk

9 No of well incidents per 100 wells drilled No of well incidents per 100 wells drilled Loss of well control 35 Exploration drilling Production drilling Serious sh gas Shallow gas High risk Serious Regular

10 Relative risk indicator Major accident risk - production facilities Weighted risk indicator, potential loss of life Int Three year rolling average Normalized working hours 2005 = 100 R= ΣΣv ij X i j ij

11 Barriers and maintenance

12 Barriers The main focus is on barriers relating to leaks in production and process facilities, where the following barrier functions are included: - maintain the integrity of hydrocarbon production and process facilities (covered to a large extent by the DFUs) - prevent ignition - reduce cloud/spill - prevent escalation - prevent fatalities Measure = # faulty tests/ # tests, i.e. Fraction of failures

13 Average fraction of faults Mean fraction of failures for selected barrier elements, ,035 0,030 0,025 0,020 0,015 0,010 0,005 0,000 Fire detection Gas detection Total Closure test Leak test Total Closure test Leak test DHSV BDV PSV BOP Deluge valve Fire pump start Riser ESDV Wing & Master valve

14 Average fraction of faults Total fraction of failures presented per barrier element for all operators 0,16 0,14 Op1 Op2 Op3 Op4 Op5 Op6 Op8 Op9 Op10 Op11 0,12 0,10 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0,00 Fire detection Gas detection Total Closure test Leak test Total Closure test Leak test DHSV BDV PSV BOP Deluge valve Fire pump start Riser ESDV Wing & Master valve

15 D 15 F 27 G 139 H 4 J 8 L 2 M 2 N 4 P 20 Q 4 U 13 V 2 W 6 Y 2 Ø 2 AA 35 AB 27 AC 15 AD 6 AE 46 AF 153 AH 4 AI 30 AJ 12 AK 3 AL 11 AM 39 AN140 AP 8 AQ 18 AR 50 AU 39 AV 7 AW 20 AX 4 AY 8 AZ 22 AÆ 21 AØ 4 AÅ 4 BA 30 BB 12 BC 36 BE 4 BF 61 BG 9 BH 62 BJ 28 BK 42 BL 102 BM 28 BQ 12 BU 4 BV 4 BW 20 BX 2 BZ 2 BØ 2 CA 123 CB 6 CC 10 Fraction of faults Fraction of failures for closing tests of wing and master valves, pr facility 0, Average ,20 0,15 0,10 0,05 0,00

16 Well integrity 0,3 % 7,5 % 17,8 % Fraction of wells in red category Fraction of wells in orange category Fraction of wells in yellow category Fraction of wells in green category 74,3 %

17 Maintenance, Classification of tag items Production installations Antall merket ("tagged") utstyr totalt Antall "tag" som er klassifisert Antall "tag" klassifisert som HMS-kritisk

18 Number of hours backlog Preventive maintenance Production facilities PM backlog, hours HES critical PM backlog, hours other equipement

19 Qualitative studies Social science methodology - Interviews - Anthropological methods - E.g. why do certain groups score significantly worse than others? - Literature studies - Typical based on investigation reports and journal papers - Work shops - Related to specific topics e.g. framework conditions impact on safety Main purpose of these studies are to enable a more thorough understanding of the development in risk trends

20 Qualitative study in 2010 Hydrocarbon releases cause vs measures This study's main object is to identify some challenges that the industry can make use of in its own preparation of measures to reduce risk of hydrocarbon leakages on the Norwegian Continental Shelf Problems addressed in this study: What human, technical and organizational causes can be put forward to explain the occurrence of hydrocarbon leaks on the Norwegian Continental Shelf? What risk reducing measures has been proposed after post-event investigations? Is there a good correspondence between identified causes and these measures?

21 Questionnaire survey Among all employees in the offshore and onshore activities of the petroleum industry

22 Questionnaire survey The goal is to measure the employees perception of the HES conditions and HES work and how the perception develop during the years The contents - HES conditions and HES work (HES climate) Perceived risk potentials in connection with different accident scenarios (DFUs) Experience of physical and psychosocial working environment Experience of leisure time- and recreation conditions 10 - Restitution after work Health complaints, absence due to sickness and reporting of occupational injuries - 21 The questions are mainly the same offshore and onshore Reply from 6928 offshore and 3183 onshore employees (2009/2010)