Offshore Energy Forum: Enhanced risk assessment - who needs it?
08 Nov 11
The forum comprised 52 attendees from leading international insurers, brokers, Swiss Re, a leading oil company, warranty surveyor, classification society and a few independent risk consultants in a lively debate on whether enhancing the quantity or quality of risk assessment in the upstream energy insurance market was needed and achievable.
Ian Morgan (SR Global products Energy) opened the forum with a summary of the proposed discussion and some challenging questions. The hope was that attendees returned with a better understanding of the opportunities and challenges in this area and a willingness to continue the dialogue.
Tom McLaren of the Offshore Division of the UK HSE responsible for offshore installations outlined their verification work undertaken via audits and inspections, including the KP3 initiative focused on asset integrity and KP4 re decommissioning and life extension. He flagged the 3 KPIs that all UK operators are centrally reporting on (maintenance backlog / verification findings / hydrocarbon releases) and the imminent prospect that this data may no longer be anonymised in future.
DNV outlined the difference between Classification work and their verification of SCE (safety critical elements). Verification is a legal requirement for all offshore assets in the UK but is also undertaken in other regimes such as Australia, Trinidad, Vietnam, India, and Middle East etc but notably different in the USA. The terms of reference of the verification is drawn up between the Duty Holder (normally the Operator) and the Classification society with the main focus on major accident hazards rather than occupational safety.
