Technical Integrity Management Programme (TIMP) From TIMP to TIMP KPI December 12, 2011 Ingbjørn Refsdal This material is not to be reproduced without the permission of Statoil ASA
From TIMP to TIMP KPI Technical Integrity Management programme The challenge Building and developing the program Implementing TIMP The TIMP model Key learnings Verifications TTS and OTS Technical Integrity indicator TIMP KPI
The challenge Managing technical integrity ensures predictable and sustainable operations Industry challenges: operate in various environments with different regulatory regimes and operating conditions lack of a uniform approach to asset integrity management sharing of information
It is particularly crucial to distinguish between process safety and occupational safety. Source: 2005 "Baker Panel report"
Building and developing the program Define project mandate scope resources steering committee project risks Styringskomité, EPN ODV, CSO CHSE, EPN OWE, TNE PRT, M&M MAN HSEQ, NG PT, TNE POMM Programleder, EPN ODV Referansegruppe, TNE PRT HSET, PRT GPT TIKA, TNE PRT RT TIKAL, EPN ONS GRA INST, EPN ODV TMB, ONO ASG OPS Implementeringsteam, Leder, DNV, arbeidsprosess, kompetanse og opplæring, risikovurdering, TNE PRT POMM, ONS TRO OPS TIMP IT Tool, EPN ODV TMST TNE PRT POMM Implementeringsansvarlig UPN Bergen, EPN ODV TMB Implementeringsansvarlig UPN Nord, EPN ODV TMST Implementeringsansvarlig UPN Stav., EPN ODV TMN Implementeringsansvarlig M&M MAN OMS PL Implementeringsansvarlig NG, NG PT OMS Koordinator Koordinator Koordinator Koordinator Koordinator Leder Teknisk Leder Teknisk (AI leder) (AI leder) (AI leder) Integritet Integritet
Learning from others Airport express train (Flytoget) Avinor (airport operator) ConocoPhillips Norway Det Norske Veritas ExxonMobil Incident investigation reports Kuwait Petroleum Corporation McKinsey North Sea Roundtable Petrobras Shell Exploration & Production TATA Steel
Competence Work process TIMP B C D E F Assessment methodology Technical Integrity Management Portal
Implementing the program August September October November December January February March Installation 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 KVG Gullfaks Kristin Kårstø incl Draupner Troll Tjeldbergodden Sleipner Oseberg Kollsnes Heidrun Norne Snorre Åsgard Marginalfelt Njord Mongstad incl Sture Hammerfest LNG Statfjord Kalundborg NG rørledningsdrift Course Kick off and evaluation Evaluation subsequent installations Comprehensive preparations Ambitious plan Correlated with operating activities Support Dedicated core team Local champions / owners
Knowledge exchange SAP DISP Key SAP Maintenance administration system Discipline competence Operational competence Data sources Informations ources SYNERGI QRA DISP SYNERGI QRA STID Dispensation system HSE incident reporting Quantitative Risk Assessment Technical information SAMS STID SAMS Audit management and reporting system
TIMP model A portal visualises the status of technical barriers Overall technical integrity of the plant is assessed and documented Technical condition is assessed on equipment, system and barrier level System 1 System n Barrier 1 Barrier n Expert judgement Information through indicators form the basis for technical assessment Backlog consequence classification Backlog safety critical maintenance Availability of safety equipment Temporary dispensations Etc.
Technical Integrity Management Portal
Value creation Competence Work process Improved competence on risk and barriers More than 1600 key personnel trained Standardised approach for following up technical integrity Clarified roles and responsibilities Information through B indicators form the basis for technical assessment C Discipline evaluations D transformed to basis for management decisions E F Assessment methodology TIMP Reduced workload through simplification (automated data collection) Holistic overview of technical integrity as basis for prioritisation of risk reducing measures Technical Integrity Management Portal
Key learnings Preparation Clear objective Focus on value creation Early senior management buy-in and ownership Learning from others Development Dedicated core team Regular updating of strategy towards target Simultaneous development of all TIMP elements Implementation Strong focus on building competence Designated support function during roll-out and implementation Ensure implementation
Verification and continuous monitoring TIMP TTS OTS Technical Integrity Management Program Technical Safety Condition Operational Safety Condition Equipment System Performance Standard Plant dashboard Functionality Integrity Survivability Maintenance Competence Procedures Roles & responsibilities Management, etc. Continuous monitoring Verification 15 - Classification: Internal 2011-
Overview of the TTS/OTS structure TTS OTS TTS verify 23 defined Technical Performance Standards OTS verify 7 defined Operational Performance Standards Each barrier is divided into Performance Requirements On the basis of the checklist each Performance Requirement is given a scoring on a scale from A - F Each Performance Requirement consist of checklists The checklists are evaluated through activities such as: Document review Analyse data Interview / Questionnaire Inspection / testing Observation Gaps marked as findings! Finding 1 Finding 2 Finding n 16 - Classification: Internal 2011-
Technical integrity KPI Basis: Technical integrity for safety barriers manually quality assured evaluations Evaluation scores converted to numbers Weighting of barriers importance based on expert judgement Calculation of plant specific TI indicator TI indicator with status and trend 17
Technical integrity KPI Alt 2 Barrier score Manual evaluation Score converted to predefined numbers Weighting and calculation Pre defined barrier weighting KPI calculation TI indicator Plant specific Trend and status 18
Application Plant benchmark Performance management 19
TI indicator - Pros and cons Pros Provides incentives for continuous improvement Highlights the «best in class» -> experience transfer and learning Provides decision support for prioritization Cons May camouflage important issues through aggregation May turn focus to the indicator itself rather than underlying issues and improvement actions May give better grade than without KPI to appear good (or worse grade to get more resources) 20