GestioneRischi HSE Inglese

7/29/2019 GestioneRischi HSE Inglese

1/52


2/52

HSE Risk ManagementEni S.p.A.E&PDivision

1.3.0.03 Page 2 of52

INDEX

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS 4

1. SCOPE AND APPLICATION 12

2. RISK AND CATEGORIES OF RISK 13

2.1 EVENT RISK 13

2.2 RISKS TO PEOPLE (HEALTH AND SAFETY) 13

2.3 RISKS TO CRITICAL EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES 13

2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL RISK 14

2.5 ASSET RISK 14

2.6 REPUTATION RISK 14

3. RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS 15

3 1 IDENTIFICATIONOF HAZARDS AND EFFECTS 16


3/52


1.3.0.03 Page 3 of52

6.3 RISK REGISTERS 27

7. RESPONSIBILITY / ACCOUNTABILITY / OWNERSHIP 28

APPENDIXA. MEASUREMENT OF RISK TO PEOPLE 33

B1. EVENT RISK SCREENING MATRIX 39

B2. PERSONNEL (TASK)RISKASSESSMENT MATRIX 40

B3. RISK TO PEOPLE (OPERATIONS )ASSESSMENT MATRIX 41

B4. SOCIETAL RISK MATRIX 42

B5. ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MATRIX 43

B6. ASSET RISK MATRIX 44

B7. REPUTATION RISK MATRIX 45

B8. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 46

APPENDIX C.ALARP AND COSTS-BENEFITSANALYSIS 47

APPENDIX D RISK REGISTER PROFORMAS 50


4/52


1.3.0.03 Page 4 of52

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Risk Management is a basic requirement for the development of a Health, Safety, Environment,

Quality and Radiation Protection Integrated Management System (HSE IMS).

Eni E&P Division HSE Directives (Ref. 8) outline what must be done for Risk Management,

whereas Application Requirements address how to implement those directives to achieve a correct

management of HSE risks within the business and operations.

The purpose of this document is to establish a framework for the Risk Management processes and

the establishment of risk management criteria, according to Eni E&P Division HSE Directives and

Application Requirements, in order to ensure that the HSE risks are managed to a consistent and

acceptable level across all operations.

ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS

ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practicable


5/52


1.3.0.03 Page 5 of52

GLOSSARY

Acceptable Risk / Acceptability

See Tolerable Risk (ISO 17776:2000).

Accident

Undesired event giving rise to death, ill health, injury, damage or other loss (OHSAS 18002:2000).

An alternative simpler definition: unplanned event giving rise to undesired outcome (death, ill

health).

ACGIH

The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (see http://www.acgih.org/ )

ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable)

The point at which the effort to introduce further reduction measures become unreasonably

disproportionate to the additional risk reduction that will be obtained The concept of ALARP may


6/52


1.3.0.03 Page 6 of52

Hazard

Anything with the potential to cause harm, including ill health or injury, damage to property, plant,

products or the environment; production losses or increased liabilities. (OGP report 6.36/210, 1994

Guidelines for the development and application of health, safety and environmental management

systems).

Hazardous event

A hazardous event is synonymous with a hazard.

HSE Integrated Management System (HSE IMS)

Part of the overall management system that enables the management of the HSE risks associated

with the business of the organisation. This includes the organisational structure, planning activities,

responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes and resources for developing, implementing,

achieving, reviewing and maintaining the organisations HSE Policy.

To the purposes of this document, all references to HSE IMS are contained in Ref. 8.


7/52


1.3.0.03 Page 7 of52

LC% hmn - Lethal Concentration for Humans

A concentration by which a given percentage of the exposed population will be fatally injured,

following a certain period of exposure.

LFL - Lower Flammability LimitThe lowest concentration of the substance (vapour or gas) in air that is known to produce a flash of

fire when an ignition source is present.

NORSOK

Norwegian Technology Centre standards (see

http://committees.api.org/standards/isotc67/links_other.html)

Occupational illness

An occupational illness is any abnormal condition or disorder of an employee, other than one

resulting from an occupational injury, caused by exposure to environmental factors associated with

employment. (Record-keeping Guidelines for Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, Occupational

S f t d H lth A t OSHA USA 1986) Thi i l d b th t d h i ill


8/52


1.3.0.03 Page 8 of52

OGP

International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (seehttp://www.ogp.org.uk/)

OLF

Oljeindustriens Landsforening (see http://www.olf.no/ )

OHSAS

Occupational Health & Safety Advisory Services(seehttp://ohsas.org/)

OREDA

Offshore Reliability DAta (see http://www.sintef.org/ )

Qualitative Risk Assessment

Generic term used for techniques which allow the risk associated with a particular activity to be

estimated in relative terms such as high or low (ISO 17776:2000).


9/52


1.3.0.03 Page 9 of52

Risk Evaluation

Judgement, on the basis of risk analysis, of whether a risk is tolerable (ISO 17776:2000).

Risk Register

Document proving a brief, but complete, overview of the identified hazards, the relevant screening

criteria and the measures necessary to manage them.

Screening Criteria

Targets or standards used to judge the tolerability of an identified hazard or effect (ISO

17776:2000). For the purpose of this document, they have been developed by Eni E&P division

and are intended for use where not provided by regulators.

Societal Risk

The risks to society arising from operations; the term society in this context include communities,

residential areas and, in general, the public domain which is not connected with those operations

(the Canvey Study HSE, 1978).


10/52


1.3.0.03 Page 10 of52

INTRODUCTION

Management of HSE risks is an integral part of the management of the business and requires the

total concerted effort of the organisation, focused on the objective of protecting people, theenvironment, assets, the business and earnings from potential losses. The Eni E&P Division HSE

Integrated Management System has been developed to provide the overall framework for

management of HSE risks within the business and operations.

This document forms an integral part of the HSE IMS and sets out the Eni E&P Division Risk

Management criteria. It is intended to ensure that HSE risks associated with operations are

managed to a consistent and acceptable level across all operations.

In addition to the requirements set in the HSE IMS Directives and Application Requirements,

reference is also made to ISO 17776 Petroleum and natural gas industries Offshore production

installations Guidelines on tools and techniques for hazard identification and risk assessment

(R f 1) Th i k t d fi d i thi ISO t d d t th ith th l t HSE


11/52


1.3.0.03 Page 11 of52

Assets and Operations damage to the Companys assets and/or impacts on projects and/or

production losses.

Reputation damage to the business or to the License to Operate or to the overall value of

the Company deriving from HSE risks; it includes, inter alia, the image.

The risk management criteria must be applied as part of a broader risk management process within

the organisation.

It is important to remember that most activities which carry some degree of risk, entail risk

to more than one of the above areas. It is vital that all possible effects of a hazard are

considered together. For example an activity entailing risk to company profits must not be

considered in isolation to its effect on the HSE. It is difficult to determine a hierarchy of importance

in the risk effect areas mentioned above, but by common consent the effect of a hazard on

persons, including HSE effects, carries most weight and the effect on assets and profits least

weight.


12/52


1.3.0.03 Page 12 of52

1. SCOPE AND APPLICATION

The primary scope of this document is to provide a guidance for definition of risk tolerability criteria

which is applicable to all Eni E&P Division locations and operations and shall be kept into

consideration for all risk identification and assessment activities as required by the HSE IMS.

The application of risk tolerability criteria as a management tool requires specific skills and

expertise. Specialist advice should be sought where necessary.

Where specific regulatory requirements exist in a particular location, the most stringent

requirements apply.

The document is also aimed at giving guidance on the practical application of risk management

criteria, which shall be used only once all legislative prescriptions have been properly

applied. Chapter 2 contains an overview of risk categories.

Chapter 3 deals with the general concept of risk, providing an overview of the risk management

process.

f C


13/52


1.3.0.03 Page 13 of52

2. RISK AND CATEGORIES OF RISK

2.1 EVENT RISK

Risk is a function of the likelihood of an event and the severity of its consequences. The risk from a

particular event, the Event Risk is the HSE risk associated with a specific, discrete scenario (such

as helicopter crash, transport accident, oil spill, etc.) in terms of effects on people, environment,

assets and reputation and is usually assessed qualitatively.

2.2 RISKS TO PEOPLE (HEALTH AND SAFETY)

Hazardous activities may result in injury, fatality or diseases both to those personnel engaged in

work associated with the activity or to community. Risks to people may be divided into:

) f f f


14/52


1.3.0.03 Page 14 of52

2.4ENVIRONMENTAL RISK

The Environmental Risk is the risk to the environment from different activities that fall under the

responsibility of the Company. As a consequence, environmental risk management should take

account of the exposure of the environmental resources to a variety of activities which constitute,

as a whole, the sustainable development of the Company itself.

2.5ASSET RISK

The Asset Risk considers the probability of damage to Companys physical assets, impacts on

projects (failure to meet project objectives) and operations in terms of production loss, deferred

production and costs of replacement of damaged structures and equipment due to any incidents.

2.6REPUTATION RISK

Reputation risk is the risk to the reputation of a Company as perceived by society at large, or


15/52


1.3.0.03 Page 15 of52

3. RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS

The Risk Management Process (see Figure 1), as outlined in Eni E&P Division HSE Directives

(Ref. 8), is a continuous, iterative process, which typically consists of four major tasks:

1. Identification and definition of hazards and their potential effects.

2. Evaluation of the risk arising from identified hazards in terms of evaluation of the likelihood /

probability / frequency of occurrence of accident sequences and evaluation of severity of the

consequences.

3. Assessment of tolerability of risk to people, environment, assets and reputation by

comparing risk level with the relevant tolerability criteria.

4. Identification of risk reduction measures needed to reduce the likelihood / probability /

frequency (prevention) and/or the consequence of an accident (control and mitigation).

Identification of

Hazards andEffects


16/52


1.3.0.03 Page 16 of52

3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDS AND EFFECTS

The identification of potential HSE hazards and effects covers all phases of the Companys

processes and related activities at the appropriate level of accuracy, taking also into account all

phases in the life of any installation, including temporary conditions dictated by maintenance

activities.

For each activity, the most significant hazards are identified and the likely effects are then

assessed to determine whether each hazard is significant or not in relation to health, environment,

assets and Company reputation.

3.2 RISK EVALUATION (REF.HSEIMSB-1.3)

Risk evaluation requires consideration of both the severity of the consequences of a potential

hazard and the likelihood of their realisation.

Each risk is assessed by consideration of the following factors:

how often the hazard is likely to occur;

the likelihood of the hazard resulting in an accident;


17/52


1.3.0.03 Page 17 of52

3.4 IDENTIFICATION OF RISK REDUCTION MEASURES (REF HSEIMSB-1.5)

Risk reduction measures may prevent incidents or reduce the probability of their occurrence,

control incidents (limiting the extent and duration of a hazardous event) or mitigate adverse effects

(reducing the severity of consequences).

4. RISK IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION

A systematic approach to the identification of hazards and the evaluation of risk is a key element of

effective HSE management, providing information to support decision-making on risk-reduction

measures.

For new installations or activities hazards shall be identified as early as possible, in order that

sufficient time can be given to the most appropriate way to manage them. It is always easier to

make modifications early in the design stage of a project, when changes can be made with minimal

effect on cost and schedule.

Hazard analysis and risk assessment shall also be applied to existing facilities, but in some cases


18/52


1.3.0.03 Page 18 of52

Experience from previous analyses, safety inspections and audits

This is particularly useful where the activity under consideration is similar to activities

undertaken previously in other locations. The approach is not suitable when dealing with

innovative systems or where local conditions invalidate previous experiences.

Use of checklists and accident statistics

Checklists are normally drawn up from standards and operational experience and ensure that

known hazards have all been identified and assessed. They are easy to apply and can be

used at any phase in the project life cycle.

Examples of Hazard checklists are provided in ISO 17776 (Ref.1).

Codes and standards

Codes and standards reflect collective knowledge and experience, accumulated on the basis

of Company, national or international operations. These documents incorporate the lessons

learned from previous design, from hazard and risk assessment and from accident and

incident investigation. The compliance with prescriptive standards ensures the reduction of


19/52


1.3.0.03 Page 19 of52

simple narrative form, using multiple branch event trees and utilising more or less complex

computerised modelling techniques.

Since the majority of models provides only an approximation of what might happen, models should

only be used when they are validated in a particular application and their predictive capability is

generally accepted.

Successful application requires use by personnel with adequate training and experience.

As far as possible, consequence analysis should also assess the contribution to failure from human

and organisational factors, together with the contribution from such failures to dependent failures

(escalation).

The following analysis methods may be used for the escalation analysis:

Event Tree Analysis (ETA)

Simulation/ probabilistic analysis

More details about these techniques can be found in ISO 17776.


20/52


1.3.0.03 Page 20 of52

4.4 MEASUREMENT OF RISK

In order to interpret risk to people, reputation etc. some means of measurement of risk is required.

Since risk is in its simplest terms consequences times frequency, obvious types of measure may

be:

Fatalities / occupational illness per year ( risk to people)

Spills per transfer operation (risk to the environment)

Financial losses per year (asset losses)

Apart from financial loss which is relatively easy to measure in risk terms, all other areas presentproblems. Environmental risk is particularly difficult to define except in terms of specific items such

as spills as detailed above. Some of the problems with the measurement of environmental risk are

described below:

Some environmental discharges are continuous but have indeterminate effects

Some environmental hazards are short term in duration but have long term effects changing


21/52


1.3.0.03 Page 21 of52

5. RISK TOLERABILITY CRITERIA

Measurement of risk is the preliminary phase of assessing its acceptability (tolerability). It is

necessary to compare risk figures with acceptability/tolerability thresholds in order to determine

whether the risk is fully acceptable, completely intolerable or somewhere in between.

5.1 EVENT RISK SCREENING MATRIX

A preliminary measure in the global assessment of risk is the Event Risk Screening Matrix reported

in Appendix B1. This provides definition of consequences and a range of qualitative criteria to

estimate probability or frequency for risks to people, the environment, etc. The meaning of the

terms in the matrix, such as continuous improvement, etc is explained below in section 5.2.

This matrix is mandatory in the identification of high level HSE Risks during risk screening

(Major Hazard Analysis, Environmental Impact Assessment etc.). This matrix provides the

basis to identify significant risks or areas of risk and prioritise further assessment and

management efforts.

Risk screening matrices are suitable to be linked with other means of assessing tolerability,


22/52


1.3.0.03 Page 22 of52

The horizontal axis represents the measure of likelihood / probability / frequency of the occurrence

of a hazardous event. Such a scale is defined in general terms from 0 to E on the basis of

historical evidence or experience that such consequences have materialised within E&P industry or

the Company.

The risk matrices included in Appendices, are separated in three regions that identify the limit of

risk tolerability; such regions are:

1. Continuous

improvement

The level of risk is broadly acceptable and generic control

measures are required aimed at avoiding deterioration.

2. Risk reduction

measure

The level of risk can be tolerable only once a structured review of

risk-reduction measures has been carried out (where necessary,

the relevant guidance from the local Authorities should be adopted

for application of ALARP). ALARP is a concept that applies well

only to personnel risk. For environmental risk the concept of BPEO


23/52


1.3.0.03 Page 23 of52

significant risks or areas of risk (for example, transportation risk) and prioritise further assessment

and management efforts.

Should the qualitative risk figure be intolerable, either a quantitative risk analysis (QRA) or

the adoption of fit-for-purpose and more effective risk-reduction measures shall be

required.

5.2.2. Personnel Risk (Tasks)

When considering Occupational Health and Safety Risk Assessment related to specific tasks, a

qualitative approach is preferred, since it is usually based on past experience.

The Personnel (Task) Risk Assessment Matrix is based on the document Task Risk Assessment

Guide - A step change in safety (Ref 2) and is reported in Appendix B2

The occupational health risk (occupational illness or injury) is usually based on exposure to

hazardous agents (physical, chemical, etc.); this is covered by specific Minimum Health

Standards (Ref. 9).


24/52


1.3.0.03 Page 24 of52

As far as consequences are concerned, a list of options is shown; they are intended not to be used

contemporarily; for example, in sensitive areas, the option based onamount of spilled oil is not

suitable, and is preferable to adopt options related to protection of fauna and flora.

5.2.5. Asset Risk

The asset risk matrix is reported in Appendix B6. Even in this case, different options are shown to

describe consequences, based on times and costs for repair.

As far as probability / frequency is concerned, both quantitative and qualitative criteria are shown,

where the latter is based on reliability of technical / operational protection systems, such as

temporary refuges, control systems etc. (see also 2.3). The reliability is expressed in terms of

minimum number of failures needed for the hazard to be realized (higher the number of failures,

higher the number of barriers against the hazardous event).

5.2.6. Reputation Risk


25/52


1.3.0.03 Page 25 of52

1) Identify hazardous events, considering techniques such as Event Trees (see 4.2 and

4.3);

2) Consider the accidental loads (e.g. radiation from fires) and, hence, the damage/harm

deriving from the hazardous event to: an employee, a man of the public (risk to people), a

plant section (asset risk) etc;

3) Sum up frequencies of all hazardous events of the same nature (all gas releases, all fires,

all explosions etc.) with same consequences (harm to an employee, a man of the public, a

group of people, an area with a given occupancy see Ref. 7 - etc.);

4) Enter the suitable risk matrix and verify tolerability;

5) If unacceptable, assess what controls are viable;

6) Determine if the risk, which is residual after controls, will be manageable;

7) If still unacceptable, consider further mitigating factors (reduction of % of manning, chance

of sheltered escape, favourable wind directions, extra controls etc.) to re-conduct the event

in the acceptable area;


26/52


1.3.0.03 Page 26 of52

6.2 IDENTIFICATION,DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CONTROLS

Risk reduction measures include preventative measures (reduction of likelihood / probability /

frequency) and mitigating measures (reduction of severity of consequences). Mitigation measures

include steps to prevent escalation of developing abnormal situations and to lessen adverse effects

on Health, Safety and the Environment.

Risk reduction measures also include recovery preparedness measures, which address emergency

procedures as well as restoration and Company procedures to recover.

In identifying control measures, consideration should be given to:

The activity

The people involved

What tools, equipment and materials are to be used

The working environment

The remedial measures needed to control each of the intolerable risks should be based on good

safe working practice in order to reduce the residual risks to a level which is practicable.


27/52


1.3.0.03 Page 27 of52

Evaluation of risk-reducing measures should always be based on sound engineering principles and

common sense. The following aspects should also be observed: local conditions and

circumstances, the state of scientific and technical knowledge relating to the particular situation,

and the estimated costs and benefits. See Appendix C for further information on Costs-Benefits

analyses.

It must be clear in any case that no level of risk of fatality for anyone person is acceptable.

6.3 RISK REGISTERS

From the risk identification process a list of significant risks should be identified and transferred to

Risk Registers for that particular project / operating unit. The Risk Registers should demonstrate

that:

(probability of the hazard) x (costs if it realizes) = expected cost from the risk


28/52


1.3.0.03 Page 28 of52


29/52


1.3.0.03 Page 29 of52

Risk Screening Matrix (which includes risks related to the Company HQ) for executive management

perusal.

The Company will submit to the BU and E&P Division HSE Function the Risk Screening Matrix with

the relevant Action Plan aimed at implementing suitable risk reduction measures and demonstrating

the sustainability of residual risks.

The BUs will consolidate the Risk Matrixes in agreement with the E&P Division HSE Function and

will communicate a summary to the Eni Corporate HSE Function (Ref. 0).


30/52


1.3.0.03 Page 30 of52

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

Ref.0 Eni DIHSE: Modello di Sistema di Gestione per la tutela della salute, della sicurezza,

dellambiente e dellincolumit pubblica doc. 1.1/3 19/12/03

Ref.1 EN ISO 17776: 2000 "Petroleum and natural gas industries - Offshore productioninstallations - Guidelines on tools and techniques for hazard identification and risk

assessment ".

Ref.2 "Task Risk Assessment Guide A Step Change in Safety" UKOOA, IMCA, IADC, IAGC

OPITO, (August 2000)

Ref.3 E&P Forum QRA Data Sheet Directory 15/10/96

Ref.4 IEC 61508 "Functional safety of electrical / electronic / programmable electronic safety

related system (all parts)

IEC 61511 "Functional safety instrumented systems for the process industry sector (all

parts)

Ref.5 UKOOA 95


31/52


1.3.0.03 Page 31 of52

MHS 8 Human Factors Engineering in New Projects

BACKGROUND REFERENCES:

Ref. 10 UK HSE - (1989) "Quantified Risk Assessment an Input to Decision Making" ISBN 0

11 885499 2

Ref. 11 UK Health and Safety Executive R2P2

Ref. 12 NORSOK Standard Z-013 Rev.2 - (2002) "Risk and emergency preparedness analysis"


32/52


1.3.0.03 Page 32 of52

APPENDICES


33/52


1.3.0.03 Page 33 of52

APPENDIX A

MEASUREMENT OF RISK TO PEOPLE


34/52


1.3.0.03 Page 34 of52

Risk

Risk to people (usually, personnel or, generally speaking, workers) can be measured in terms ofrisk of exposure (Ref. 9) , risk of injury or risk of fatality. Normally in quantitative risk assessments

the fatality risk is considered, while for the other risks a qualitative approach is adopted.

Risk can be measured in a generalised way such as high, medium and low where these terms

refer to comparative indications of risk for the industry or activity under review. Alternatively it can

be measured in specific terms where an attempt is made to calculate the average probability ofinjury or death in a specific time period either to an individual or to a group of people.

General Measurement of Risk


35/52


1.3.0.03 Page 35 of52

Specific Measurement of Risk

Risk to Individuals

The method of measurement, which has become increasingly used in recent years, is individual risk

(IR). This is the risk of fatality to any person exposed to a hazard normally averaged over a year.

Individual risk can be specific to a particular individual, averaged over those individuals in a high

risk group, or averaged across all persons in a potentially high risk location (e.g. where high H2S

levels are expected in the reservoir). In measuring individual risk the changes in exposure of

persons, for example by moving away from or closer to the hazard over a period of time is taken

into account. Individual risk may also be assigned to specific locations.

Calculation of Individual Risk

Consider a particular location at risk from a hazardous event nearby. The individual risk from the

event following realisation of the hazard is calculated as follows.


36/52


1.3.0.03 Page 36 of52

IR = z(n/N)p1p3

where p1 = fatality probability

z = event frequency

n = the average number of persons present at the affected location

N = the total workforce on site (all assumed to work for similar number of hours per week)

and p3 = proportion of time for which the person is present on site

Should other information (such as % of success of escape or evacuation; % of favourable winds

etc.) become available, the overall IR figure can be progressively refined to keep account of these

parameters.

In summary, it is possible to calculate a coarse IR and a refined IR, with due regards to reliability

of available data.


37/52


1.3.0.03 Page 37 of52

Risk to Groups

Individual risk to specific persons may be low in particular situations but due to the large number of

persons exposed, the possibility of fatality may be significant. In these situations it may be

appropriate to determine the Potential Loss of Life (PLL). This is a measure of how many persons

would become fatalities from a particular site or event, normally expressed over a period of time.

Calculation of PLL

Consider a particular location at risk from a hazardous event nearby. The potential loss of life (PLL)

from the event following realisation of the hazard is calculated as follows. The event frequency is z.

PLL = zp1n

where p1 = fatality probability


38/52


1.3.0.03 Page 38 of52

APPENDIX B

RISK MATRICES


39/52

HSE Risk ManagementEni S.p.A.

E&PDivision1.3.0.03 Page 39 of51

B1.EVENT RISKSCREENING MATRIX

Consequence Increasing Annual Frequency0 A B C D E

Practically non-credible

occurrence

Rareoccurrence

Unlikelyoccurrence

Credibleoccurrence

Probableoccurrence

Likely/Frequentoccurrence

Severity

People

Environ.

Assets

Reputation

Could happen

in E&P

industry

Reported for

E&P industry

Has occurred

at least once

in Company

Has occurred

several times

in Company

Happens

several

times/y in

Company

Happens

several

times/y in

one location

1 Slight healtheffect / injurySlighteffect

Slightdamage

Slightimpact

Cont inuous Improvement

2 Minor healtheffect / injury

Minoreffect

Minordamage

Minor

impactRisk Reduction Measures

3 Major healtheffect / injury

Local

effect

Localdamage

Local

impact

4 PTD(*) or 1fatality

Majoreffect

Majordamage

Nationalimpact

Intolerable Risk

5 Multiplefatalities

Extensiveeffect

Extensivedamage

Internationalimpact

(*) Permanent Total Disability


40/52



B2. PERSONNEL (TASK)RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX

0 A B C D E

Not

Applicable

Not

Applicable

Could occur,

when

additional

factors are

present;

otherwise

unlikely.

Not certain to

happen but

an additional

factor may

result in an

accident/

exposure.

Almost

inevitable

than an

accident/

exposure

would result

Almost

inevitable

that more

than one

accident/

exposure

would resultSeverity

Personnel (Task) Risk

N/A N/AHas occurredat least once

in Company

Has occurredseveral times

in Company

Happensseveral times

a year inCompany

Happensseveral

times/y inone location

1 (NOT APPLICABLE) Cont inuous Improvement

2Minor health effect / injury:

offsite medical treatment or LTA;up to 10 days off.

Agents have reversible effects to health.

3

Major health effect / injury:more than 1 LTA; up to 30 days off.

Agents have irreversible effects to health:noise, manual handling, toxics, etc.

Risk Reduct ion

Measure

4PTD (*) or 1 fatality:

agents are capable

of serious disability or death

5Multiple fatalities

from an accident or occupational illness (e.g. chemicalasphyxiation or cancer or epidemic diseases)

Intolerable Risk

(*) Permanent Total Disability

HSE Ri k M t


41/52



B3.RISK TO PEOPLE (OPERATIONS)ASSESSMENT MATRIX

0 A B C D E1

occ/y (1)

Severity Risk for People

(E&P Operations) Could happenin E&P

industry

Reported for

E&P industry

Has occurred

at least once in

Company

Has occurred

several times

in Company

Happens

several times/y

in Company

Happens

several times/

in one location

1 Slight health effect / injury Cont inuous Improvement

2 Minor health effect / injury Risk Reduction Measures

3 Major health effect / injury

Compulsoryreduction

measures for

3rd parties

onshore

4Permanent Total Disability or 1 fatality

(small exposed population)

Intolerable for

3rd

parties

onshore

5Multiple fatalities

(exposed groups)Intolerable Risk

(1) frequency expressed in occurrencies per year

HSE Risk Management


42/52



B4.SOCIETAL RISKMATRIX

Societal Risk 0 A B C D E

Severity

Radiation

(kW/m2)

(assuming

unobstructedescape to

repair)

Flash Fire Overpres-sure

(mbar)

Toxicity

(ppm)

(based on 30

min eventduration)


43/52

Eni S.p.A.E&PDivision

1.3.0.03 Page 43 of52

B5. ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT

0 A B C D E

Severity

Environmental Risk 1occ/urrencies

per year

1Slight effect

a) No stakeholder impact b) temporary impact on the area -c) Involved area < 0.1 sq mile (0.26 km

2)

d) Onshore spill (1)< 1 m3

e) No sensitive impact on ground. Cont inuous improvement

2

Minor effecta) Some local stakeholder concern b) 1 year for natural

recovery c) Impact on small no. of not compromised species.

d) Involved area < 1 sq mile (2.6 km2)

e) Onshore spill (1)< 10 m3

f) Impact on localised ground. Risk reduct ion m easures

3

Local effecta) Regional stakeholder concern b) 1-2 years for natural

recovery c)1 week for clean-up d) Threatening to somespecies - e) Impact on protected natural areas.

f) Involved area < 10 sq miles (26 km2) g) Onshore spill (1) 5 years for natural recovery d) > 5 months

for clean-up e) Reduction of biodiversity f) Impact on specialconservation areas - g) Involved area > 100 sq miles (260 km

2)

h) Onshore spill (1)> 1000 m3.

Intolerable r isk

(1) to be reduced of a factor 10 for offshore spill and a factor 100 for sensitive areas

HSE Risk ManagementEni S p A


44/52



B6.ASSET RISK MATRIX0 A B C D E

1 occ/y

Severity

Risks to Assets/ProjectObjectives

costs in USD figures below shall not be combined

for deriving the value of a humanlife!

Always

outcome of 2 or

more

concurrent

failures (*)

Usually

outcome of 2

concurrent

failures (*)

(Very Low

Probability)

Likely outcome

of 2 concurrent

failures (*)

(Low

Probability)

Could be

outcome of 2

concurrent

failures (*)

(High

Probability)

Could be

outcome of a

single failure

Is outcome of

a single failure

1 Slight damageNo disruption to operations/business. Cont inuous improvement

2Minor damage

Possible short disruption of operations/business:repair cost < 200000; production downtime < 1 day.

Risk reduct ion m easures

3Local damage

The unit has been repaired/replaced to resume operations:

repair cost < 2500000; production downtime < 1 week.

4Major damage

Long time/Major change to resume operations/business:

repair cost < 25000000; production downtime < 3 months.

Major inquiry for the damage cost.

5

Extensive damageTotal loss of operations/business.

Revamping necessary to resume the process:

repair cost > 25000000; production downtime > 3months.Extensive inquiry for the damage cost.

Intolerable risk

(*) failures of Critical Systems protecting people (escapeways to temporary refuges, control systems, emergency systems etc.)


45/52


1.3.0.03 Page 45 of52

B7.REPUTATION RISK MATRIX

0 A B C D E

Could

happen in

E&P

industry

Reported

for E&P

industry

Has

occurred

at least

once in

Company

Has

occurred

several

times in

Company

Happens

several

times/y in

Company

Happens

several

times/y in

one

locationSeverity

Reputation Risk

Non-

credible

occurrence

Rare

occurrence

Unlikely

occurrence

Credible

Occurrence

Probable

occurrence

Likely/

Frequent

Occurrence

1Slight impact

Minor and short lived impact in the loca lity

Continuous

improvement

2Minor impact

Some loss of reputation in the area, which should berecovered


46/52


1.3.0.03 Page 46 of52

B8. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

This aspect covers a range of subject areas including inter alia: business ethics, communities,

workforce/labour, human rights, land and indigenous rights and security forces. Consequences of

poor management, breaches of legislation or standards or incidents in this respect will essentially

result in loss to people, assets or reputation of one form or another.

Where it is necessary to make an assessment of risk the risks/scenario in question should be

compared against the appropriate matrix and criteria.


47/52


1.3.0.03 Page 47 of52

APPENDIX C

ALARP AND COSTS-BENEFITS ANALYSIS


48/52


1.3.0.03 Page 48 of52

ALARP

Where risks are very low whether to personnel, the environment, assets or reputation then the

situation may be considered acceptable. On the other hand where risks are high, good operating

practices and often the law, requires that they be reduced. Where risk exists in the region in

between, normally called the ALARP region especially where the risks are safety risks, a more

structured approach is required. In the ALARP region a reduction in risk is justified unless it is

grossly disproportionate to the benefits gained. In practice many risks fall in this region and so what

is often known as an ALARP case should be made for each of these. Sometimes this is possible by

discussion alone. For example, where hazardous activity is not known to have any safer alternative

and where personnel exposure cannot be further reduced, an ALARP case may be presented in

such terms without recourse to more detailed analysis. However where a range of protective

measures exists each entailing some cost, unless the cost can be accepted, further analysis is

required.

This analysis is usually based on a cost-benefits analysis described below.


49/52


1.3.0.03 Page 49 of52

profits. For risks to personnel the easiest approach is to place a monetary value on technical and

operational efforts made to save human life.

It is implicit to this approach that low-cost measures are implemented in any case.

Costs-benefits analyses are very difficult to perform where the principal risks are to the environment

or to reputation due to the difficulties in estimating the benefits obtained from improvements in

these areas.

Limitations of Costs-Benefits Analyses

ALARP type arguments cannot and must not be made as a means of avoiding basic levels of

protection to personnel. It is a requirement of many laws and codes and standards that some

means are available to allow personnel who may be exposed to a reasonably foreseeable hazard,

of saving their life. Examples are lifejackets, lifeboats and liferafts on boats and offshore

installations, lifejackets and breathing masks on airplanes, and fire alarm systems, and escape

stairs in buildings.

HSE Risk ManagementEni S.p.A.E&P Di i i


50/52


APPENDIX D

RISK REGISTERPROFORMAS

A - High Level Risk Register (Management Summ ary)

Risk/Issue Controls in place

LikelihdCategory

(0-E)

ConseqCategory

(1-5)

RiskCategory

(H M L)

Metrics Risk Reducing Measures

Biodiversity & Environmental Sensitivity

All activities and developments will impactand interact with the surroundingenvironment in some way. Keyconsiderations:

Landuse/Footprint

Ecology

Habitats

Physical impact

Knowledge of hydrology/ hydro-geology/geology

Emerging issuesmonitoring/briefing

Effective environmental

management system

Proper project design

Environment training

Environmental/strategicimpact assessments

Habitat management

Site clean-up /rehabilitation

Contractor controls

B 3 L Numbers of peoplereceiving environ.training

Landuse Mapping

No. of EIAs for allactivities

Environmentalcertification

Ensure awareness of biodiversityissue with Senior management

Ensure EIAs are conducted to a

high standard for all activities

Baseline land use GIS for keyoperations

Rig sites/process facilities footprintdesign

Implement HSE IMS and seekenvironmental certification

Develop basic environmentalawareness training programme

Consider footprint reduction targetsfor new projects

Consider ENI R&D projects

Facilities Safety

Major accident in impacting people(workforce and/or community), environment,production etc.

Corporate Audits

Safety training/competence

C 4 M No. of equipmentfailures causingdowntime

Ensure project HSE reviews arepart of project managementprocess

HSE Risk ManagementEni S.p.A.E&P Division


51/52



LikelihdCategory

(0-E)

ConseqCategory

(1-5)

RiskCategory

(H M L)

Metrics Risk Reducing Measures

Project design

planning

construction

commissioning

decommissioning

Plant integrity

Plant age

Maintenance

Leaks and releases

Pipelines

Contractors

Project management/design standards

Maintenance standards

Containment integrity

Technology

Operating procedures

Audits/inspections

Preventative/ predictivemaintenance

Identification of safetycritical equipment

Contractor controls

No. inspections

% outstandingmaintenance

Develop criteria in the HSE IMSfor project design for newfacilities, major modification andexisting operations (HSEQ Plan).

HSE Risk ManagementEni S.p.A.E&P Division


52/52


B - G.U./Subsid iary/Si te Risk Register


LikelihdCategory

(0-E)

ConseqCategory

(1-5)

RiskCategory

(H M L)Metrics Risk Reduction Measures

Activity Exploration Project X

Biodiversity & Environmental Sensitivity

The X area contains many untouchedareas some with National Park status and awide range of fragile flora and fauna. Thereis little baseline information, as well asactual damage to the environment. In thisrespect there is also the potential forsignificant reputation issues.

(A) Seismic activities have thepotential to impact significantly throughphysical disturbance and presence ofpersonnel

(B) In the event of a good prospectand field development there existssignificant potential for permanent localimpact (water extraction, footprint, noise)

EIA and baseline studiesfor seismic

Proper project design

Habitat management

Site clean-up /rehabilitation

C

C

2

3

L

M Numbers of people

receivingenvironmenttraining

Ensure awareness of biodiversityissue with Senior Management

Identify management objectives

Include the issue in certificationcontrols

Develop basic environmentalawareness training programmefor this development

Establish links and relationshipswith nature conservation groups

Activity Production FacilityY

Facility Integrity

There are several key issues with facility Y:

Plant integrity

Plant age

Maintenance

Leaks and releases

There is an increasing risk of facility integrityissues and loss of containment with

potential for extended loss of production andsafety of workers and public.

Safety training

Operating procedures

Audits/inspections

Maintenance

C 4 H Near miss reporting

No. of Equipmentfailures causingproduction losses

Planned/completedinspections ratio

Maintenancetargets

Full condition survey underway

Detailed plant reliability analysisto be performed

Enhance maintenanceprogrammes to apredictive/preventative approach

Identification of safety criticalequipment

GestioneRischi HSE Inglese

Documents

Transcript of GestioneRischi HSE Inglese