Operational integrity and primary process management€¦ · Investigations normally conclude...
26
Operational integrity and primary process management From theory into a turnaround operation
Transcript of Operational integrity and primary process management€¦ · Investigations normally conclude...
Operational integrity and primary process management
From theory into a turnaround operation
2
Why am I here to speak?
Winter 2009 / 2010 I and my
team were in trouble !
Through close cooperation and
support from our client we
turned trouble into success!
Supported by “Risk
Management Pro” we identified
our real weaknesses.
This is not a “golden bullet” –
only some experience from an
endless journey when
improving process safety.
West Navigator –
harsh environment deep water operation
Ormen Lange
Ormen Lange –
harsh environment
subsea field
development
Water depth 1000m
Worlds largest gas
producing wells
4
Setting the scene – What happened:
The West Navigator had long been a „pearl
in the crown‟ in Shell‟s ranking
Several High Potential incidents through
2009 / 2010 lead to serious concern
Despite a considerable effort to improve,
our initiatives did not lead to „real
changes‟
The technical utilization of the unit and
the number of High Potential incidents
required a strategy change
5
Guide roller (8,5 kg.) dropped 35m
Riser chute bucket run from drill floor to riser setback
Several HIPO’s in a short period of time
DDM hose had collided with the platform
HIPOS – The standard route of actions:
Management shut down operations. STOP.
Management and teams under pressure
One day a ”Star” to the next day ”a Looser” is painful.
Investigations are kicked off.
Management seek ”root course” and what to do?
Investigations normally conclude insufficient:
Leadership
Compliance and procedures
Risk evaluation
Competence.
Actions are recommended and implemented.
Situation normalized – back in business
7
Setting the scene
We agreed with Norske Shell to attack this differently
“Risk Management Pro” assisted us in the process setting up
the program.
The program involved meta analysis of the High Potential
incident supported by Tripod Beta and a Tripod Delta survey.
Rules of Engagement project was established
Prime objective: to achieve structural changes in the way we
operated, how we interacted with the operator.
Strengthen our core processes
To make a change –
I as the leader need to:
1. Acknowledge there is a problem and that the problem is
mine. Don‟t go into denial. There is nowhere to hide!
2. Have tools that identify the problem and our core process
weaknesses. There is no “silver bullet”!
“Where are our strengths?”
“Where are our weaknesses?”
3. Have the will, ability and capacity, to force the required
improvements through!
Why Tripod:
Recognized and in use within Shell with good results
International tool to identify Basic Risk Factors with a potential
to fail.
Has the ability to identify gaps and weaknesses in our core
processes.
Is recognized and acknowledged within the academic society.
Give us an opportunity to find our strengths and weakness
“prior” to an incident / accident.
Rig, tools and equipment Competent People
Efficient Management System
Quality Operations!! The TRIPOD tools is evaluating our defenses in all
three areas.
Client
The Tripod Model:
Delta Beta
After Before
Design (DE) Hardware (HW) Maintenance Management (MM) Housekeeping (HK)
BRF : Basic Risk Factors Enhanced Conditions (EC)
Procedures (PR) Training (TR) Communication (CO) Incompatible Goals (IG) Organization (OR)
Emergency Preparedness (DF)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
DE HW MM HK EC PR TR CO IG OR DF
Seadrill - West Navigator Disciplines
Marine Drilling Technical Onshore
13
The Tripod Delta profile – Starting point Spring 2010
Main focus: Design, Hardware, Maintenance Management & Onshore Organisation!
14
Communication structure had to be changed:
15
Clear roles and responsibilities (The “Crane”- model):
Together, with clear roles and expectations
Seadrill Shell
Occupational Safety vs Process Safety
Incident reporting.
Personnel Safety. Process Safety.
. . .
. . .
.
. .
.
. . . .
.
. .
. . .
. . .
. .
. .
.
.
. . . .
. . . .
Significance
Fre
quency
Piper Alpha
Alexander Kielland Macondo
Montara
.
.
.
. .
. .
. . . .
.
When investigating the ”red – use the opportunity to identify the ”blue”
Occupational Safety vs Process Safety
Incident reporting.
Personnel Safety. Process Safety.
.. .
...
.
..
.
.. ..
.
. .
...
...
..
. .
.
.
. .. .
.. . .
Significance
Frequency
Piper Alpha
Alexander KiellandMacondo
Montara
.
.
.
..
..
....
.Process Safety Personnel Safety
Death
LTA‟s
MTC‟s
FAC‟s
Blow outs, loss of unit, multiple death, significant environmental impact
Significant cost and time impact, death, loss of well, gas leaks, well control incidents etc.
Near misses
Incidents, HIPOS, NPT, equipment failure, leaks, maintenance defects, tests failing, operational mistakes etc.
Defects KPI‟s
KPI‟s, Controls & Leadership
Occupational Safety vs Process Safety
Incident reporting.
Personnel Safety. Process Safety.
.. .
...
.
..
.
.. ..
.
. .
...
...
..
. .
.
.
. .. .
.. . .
Significance
Frequency
Piper Alpha
Alexander KiellandMacondo
Montara
.
.
.
..
..
....
.Process Safety Personnel Safety
Death
LTA‟s
MTC‟s
FAC‟s
Loss of units, multiple death, environmental consequences
Significant cost and time impact, death, delays, gas leaks, well control incidents etc.
Near misses
Incidents, HIPOS, NPT, equipment failure, maintenance defects, tests failing, operational mistakes etc.
Defects
A main challenge is to avoid ”factory blindness” and “complacency” when things are going ok!
Occupational Safety vs Process Safety
Incident reporting.
Personnel Safety. Process Safety.
.. .
...
.
..
.
.. ..
.
. .
...
...
..
. .
.
.
. .. .
.. . .
Significance
Frequency
Piper Alpha
Alexander KiellandMacondo
Montara
.
.
.
..
..
....
.Process Safety Personnel Safety
”Process safety” is hard work, cost $$$ and depends
on upper management. Core process improvements gives long term effect and is
a sound investment
”Occupational safety” is often mixed with “process safety” and becomes an easy way out for leaders pushing the problem to
crews and first line managers offshore
21
Some other issues and observations:
Lack of clear distinction and responsibilities
Our High Potential incidents were just symptoms of
underlying issues
We had allowed the operator to take over decisions and
priorities on our behalf
The organization was stressed and had become reactive
23
Some immediate actions taken:
Some crew rotation to get a fresh start
Prioritize and align on actions and tasks (Design, Hardware,
Maintenance Management and Organization)
Agree and communicate our plan - follow up
Align with senior management and key stake holders on the
way forward
Allocate recourses and funding ($$$ - budgets / people)
Increase the number of key resources to deliver
Then “just DO IT!”
25
Perception or reality? (14 months later, Summer 2011)
Improvements also in areas outside our main focus..
All BRF DE HW MM HK EC PR TR CO IG OR DF
WNA total
Management
Supervisors
Operational Personell
Marine
Drilling
Technical
Onshore
26
Summary (1):
„Tripod results was unpleasant but was used to make
real change to our core processes
Process safety‟ is a move from being reactive to
become proactive
Management needs to acknowledge and understand
the problem and have the ability to do something
about it.
Tripod can be a proactive approach to identify our
basic risk factors.
27
Summary (2):
Without the „buy-in‟ from the operator, it’s hard for
the contractor alone
Post Macondo learning's – well control and process
safety in balance with occupational safety (KPI‟s)
We saw improvements in other areas outside what
managements focused on
28
Feedback some year later:
“We have now finished 2 successful Lower Completions and
3 successful Upper Completions way ahead of budget (28
days ahead of plan). You have managed to deliver the
scope in a safe manner without any LTI’s and Spills to
Environment.” (27 July 2011)
“Last week the West Navigator became the first rig in the
world to demonstrate compliance with Shells
new requirements on equipment traceability for the well
control envelope!” (2 August 2011)
“Rig of the year award! (November 2012)
And more important, “We may have saved two lives in this
period”
Recommended to study:
“Process Safety” vs “ Occupational Safety”:
1 2
Thank you for your attention.
30
