Next Generation Verification of Offshore Assets

Abstract

Abstract Objective/Scope How will Verification Schemes of the future give clarity within risk management and process safety while providing increased value and cost savings to the Operator? Verification was first introduced to the UK in 1998 and is now required throughout Europe following the introduction of the 2013 EU Directive on Offshore Safety. It is intended to provide operators, the regulator and other stakeholders reassurance that the SECEs are operating as intended and therefore risks related to major accident hazards are managed. Much has changed in the industry over the last 30 years: our collective understanding of Major Accident Hazards (MAH) and the contribution made by Safety and Environmental Critical Elements (SECEs) has improved, safe systems of work have become more advanced, computerised maintenance management systems have developed and offshore communication and technology is unrecognisable compared to the 1990s. This paper will explore whether the role and scope of the verifier has moved with the times and offer suggestions as to how maximum benefit and value can be achieved by Verification. Methods/Procedures/Process We have taken a critical review of the Verifier role and whether we still meet the original intent of the legislation, we have addressed the following specific questions in this regard: –Has our technical scope of work transformed since Certification of Fitness days?–How do we assess the continuous good condition of any SECE?–How do we deliver value to the Duty Holders with respect to cumulative risk? Or reliability & availability?–Can (or should) we deliver against a more robust People, Process & Plant scope without impacting on cost? (instead of only Plant)?–Can we take more credit for work that other 2nd or 3rd party service providers perform on certain SECE’s?–How can we contribute to a holistic picture of the process safety risk to the plant?–How can Industry 4.0 support improvements in our delivery?–How can we share information with the workforce to improve their understanding of MAH risk? Results/Observations/Conclusions Consideration of these questions has propelled DNV GL to review what best practice Verification should be and how we can contribute to the visibility of any assets’ risk profile. In short: Has, or can the Verification Industry adapt & evolve to the industry’s new reality? Novel/Additive Information At DNV GL we believe we have listened to our clients and developed a new, more efficient service which follows the principles of process safety and will ensure that the verifier is looking at the right risks at the right time.