Vedlegg 9.4 Svar ifm kartlegging av krav på andre lands sokkel

Transkript

1 1 av 8 Vedlegg 9.4 Svar ifm kartlegging av krav på andre lands sokkel 1. Bakgrunn for arbeidet Arbeidet med denne deloppgaven ifm fjernoperert rørhåndtering går ut på å skaffe til veie en oversikt over hvilke krav de ulike lands myndigheter har til fjernoperert rørhåndtering og/eller hvilke planer der er for innføring av slike krav. Det ble besluttet at OD skulle gjennomføre denne deloppgaven med utgangspunkt i North Sea Offshore Authorities Forum (NSOAF). Følgende land og myndigheter er deltakere: Storbritannia / Health and Safety Executive Tyskland / Oberbergamt Frankrike / Direction des Hydrocarbures Nederland / State Supervision of Mines Danmark / Energistyrelsen Norge / Oljedirektoratet 2. Metodikk OD sendte ut brev til de respektive lands deltakere i NSOAF den , der følgende informasjon ble forespurt: 1. Referanse til relevante krav/regelverk relatert til fjernoperert rørhåndtering systemer eller krav om å unngå manuell håndtering av borestreng og foringsrør og tilhørende utstyr. 2. Kopi av relevant paragraf i regelverk, ref punkt 1 over. 3. Informasjon om eventuelt pågående vurderinger og/eller planer for å etablere krav til fjernoperert rørhåndtering systemer, dersom slike krav ikke allerede er etablert. 4. Informasjon angående hvordan nåværende krav/regelverk følges opp i forbindelse med tilsyn, risiko vurderinger/ safety case, avvik og fravik etc. 5. Informasjon om hvordan boreinnretninger med installert system følges opp og hvordan problem med system håndteres (krav om reparasjon, parkering av system inntil operatør/reder finner tid til å reparere, etc.) 6. Blir eksisterende boreinnretninger og nybygg behandlet forskjellig og/eller er det pågående vurderinger relatert til dette emnet. 3. Konklusjon OD har mottatt svar fra hhv tyske, britiske, danske og nederlandske myndigheter som er oppsummert i tabellen under. Dette anses tilstrekkelig til å foreta en vurdering av status og fremtidsvurderinger av krav til fjernoperert rørhåndtering i NSOAF området. Svarene indikerer at ODs krav ikke er tilsvarende tilnærmet av andre lands myndigheter angående dette emnet pr dato. Side: 1

2 2 av 8 Nedenfor er det foretatt en oppsummering av status p.r dato ift fjernoperert rørhåndtering i de enkelte NSOAF land: Britisk sokkel Tysk sokkel Nederlandsk sokkel Dansk sokkel Norsk sokkel Spørsmål 1 Relevante krav / regelverk Ingen spesifikke krav om rørhåndtering. Generelle krav i Manual handling regulations section 4-1 fra 1992 Ingen spesifikke krav om rørhåndtering. Generelle krav i tysk lov og regelverk mht arbeidsmiljø krav. Ingen spesifikke krav om rørhåndtering. Oppfordrer til bruk av fjernoperert rørhåndtering Ingen spesifikke krav om rørhåndtering. Generelle krav i dansk lov og regelverk mht arbeidsmiljø krav. Har mulighet til å kreve fjernoperert rørhåndtering Spesifikke krav i ODs boreforskrift 28, introdusert 1992 Spørsmål 2 Kopi av relevant regelverk Kopi av generelle krav er vedlagt svarbrevet. Kopi av generelle krav er vedlagt svarbrevet. Ikke mottatt. Kopi av generelle krav er vedlagt svarbrevet Kopi av boreforskriftens 28 med veiledning er vedlagt brev med spørsmål til NSOAF Spørsmål 3 Pågående vurderinger / planer Ingen pågående planer eller vurderinger. Vurderinger vil bli foretatt etter pågående rettssak etter en dødsulykke i Ingen pågående planer eller vurderinger Ingen pågående planer eller vurderinger, men mulig ifm nytt regelverk i For nybygg kreves ny teknologi vurdert ifm safety case. Foretas ifm godkjenning av operasjonell godkjenning av borerigger. Foretas for ca 5 år av gangen Pågående arbeidsgruppe og prosjekt mht status, erfaringer og vurdering av krav ved bruk av spesial utstyr Spørsmål 4 Oppfølging av krav / regelverk Tilsvarende som alle andre krav på britisk sokkel. HSE hadde spesifikke tilsyn i Foretar oppfølging godkjenning av planlagte aktiviteter Foretar oppfølging av nybygg i 3 faser. Tilsyn foretas mot selskapenes forbedringsplaner. Foretas ifm godkjenning av operasjonell godkjenning av borerigger. Foretas for ca 5 år av gangen. Foretas ved samtykke behandling, søknad om fravik og tilsyn. Spørsmål 5 Oppfølging ved problem med installert system Avgjørelser mht operabilitet er overlatt til operatør eller entreprenør Ingen spesiell fra Oberbergamt. Foretas av operatør og entreprenør Krav om innstenging av brønn(er) ifm nødvendig reparasjon. Krav om gransking og analyser samt ivaretakelse av påpekte forhold før oppstart etter hendelser. Anser at dagens tilgjengelige systemer er så driftssikre at de kan kreves installert fra nå av Veiledning til boreforskriftens 28 åpner for 7 dagers nedetid ved intern avviks behandling hos Operatør. Vurdering ifm eventuell søknad om fravik etter 7 dager. Spørsmål 6 Eksisterende kontra nybygg Samme krav for eksisterende og nybygg Ingen forskjell i oppfølgingen. Viser til EU s maskindirektiv. Håndterer eksisterende innretninger ulikt fra nye innretninger, ref svar ifm spørsmål 3 og 4. Kan ikke sette krav til rigger bygd utenfor Danmark. Ingen forskjell i oppfølgingen. Samme krav for eksisterende og nybygg Side: 2

3 3 av 8 4. Oversikt pr land Nedenfor er de enkelte lands svar vedlagt for informasjon. For norsk sokkel er brev med spørsmål og kopi av boreforskriften 28 med veiledning vedlagt. Side: 3

4 4 av Britisk sokkel Side: 4

5

6

7

8

9 5 av Tysk sokkel Side: 5

10

11

12

13

14

15

16 6 av Nederlandsk sokkel Side: 6

17 PIPE HANDLING REQUIREMENTS IN THE NORTH WEST EUROPEAN AREA I apologise for the late response to your request for information. Detailed below is our response to the questions that were asked in your previous letter, I hope this is of use. 1. In The Netherlands, there are no specific regulations or requirements for mechanisation of drill floor / pipe-handling activities. However, the use of automated drill floor / pipe-handling equipment is actively encouraged. A number of units are or have operated both offshore and onshore with such equipment. 2. Not applicable 3. There are no definitive plans to regulate for fully automated drilling units. Current safety and health document (safety case) legislation requires that owners/operators/designers of all new installations must demonstrate that advances in new technology have been incorporated into their design. This includes drilling units and automation. This is requirement is monitored from the concept design stage to operation as part of our internal safety and health document review and assessment process. 4. In addition to the statement made in 3 above the safety and health document review and assessment process adopted by State Supervision of Mines is implemented in three phases. The first is an administrative overview, the second a detailed technical review, whilst the third is a field review / verification to ensure that all actions and recommendations are properly executed and implemented. In addition to this process, we also initiate self-selective audits and theme inspections to monitor compliance with agreed and accepted improvement plans. 5. Any incident involving the breakdown / failure of automated systems on mobile units operating in The Netherlands, necessitates a total shutdown and safeguarding of the well activity whilst repairs are implemented. In addition a full investigation / analysis of the incident is required with all findings, conclusions and recommendations implemented before commencement of work. 6. Existing mobile drilling units are currently treated differently from new builds. However as can be seen from the table below, justification for this is becoming more difficult to defend and may necessitate reappraisal prior to implementation of our new mining regulations in The table lists the number of drill floor incidents that have taken place over the past four years, irrespective of activity. However, only four of the nine incidents that occurred on the automated rig were associated with the mechanisation of the drill floor. These four incidents all involved the star-racker. ONSHORE INCIDENTS OFFSHORE INCIDENTS MANUAL DRILLING UNIT AUTOMATED DRILLING UNIT MANUAL DRILLING UNIT AUTOMATED DRILLING UNIT

18 7 av Dansk sokkel Side: 7

19 Oljedirektoratet Prof. Olav Hanssensvei 10 P.O. Box 600 N-4001 Stavanger Norge DANISH ENERGY AGENCY Att.: Mr. Magne Ognedal File No.: Pipehandling Requirements in the NSOAF Area. Date: 10 February 1999 The Danish Energy Agency have received your letter of 5 November, 1998, in which you request information about Danish requirements on pipehandling on drilling rigs. We apologise about the late submittal of reply, but hope you still find the information useful. To your questions, we can give the following information: Re 1: In Denmark, there are no regulations or guidelines specifically addressing remote control of drilling equipment. Pursuant to section 5 of the Act on Certain Offshore Installations (Act no. 292 of 10 June 1981), the Minister is authorised to issue regulations on health and safety matters on offshore installations. These regulations shall endeavour to create a healthy and safe working environment, which at all times is in accordance with the technical and social development of the society. Section 13 in The Ministry of Energy s Order no. 711 of 16 November 1987 on Safety etc. on Offshore Installations states: Recognized norms and standards in the northwest-european area of importance to matters comprised by the Offshore Installations Act in respect of safety, health or the environment shall be complied with. With a Ministry of Environment and Energy Danish Energy Agency 44 Amaliegade DK-1256 Copenhagen K Denmark Phone Fax Telex energ dk (X.400):S=ens; P=ens; A=dk400;C=dk (Internet): ens@ens.dk

20 2 view to the installations being always in accordance with the technical and social development, reasonable consideration shall as far as possible be given to the expected development, e.g. by the use of new technology, in the construction of offshore installations and equipment for them as well as in connection with modifications of such installations. This authorises the DEA to require mechanisation of drilling equipment. Section 4.2 in The Danish Energy Agency's Order No. 60 of February 12, 1993 Order on manual handling of loads on offshore installations states: 4(2). Manual handling which may involve a risk to safety or health shall be avoided by suitable organisation of the work, including use of technical equipment. Section 7 in the same order: 7. Suitable technical equipment shall be used, where possible and appropriate, and always where the manual transport involves a risk to safety and health. Finally, there are requirements of making workplace assessments (Order no. 127 of 6 March 1996 on the Performance of Work etc. on Offshore Installations, sec. 2): (1) In all stages, the work shall be planned and organised so that it can be carried out in a fully justifiable way from a safety, health and environmental point of view. It should be observed that constructions, layout descriptions, detail solutions and working methods, which may be harmful to or otherwise impair safety are not prescribed. Furthermore, it should be ensured that the total impact to the working environment in the short or long run shall not impair the employees' safety or health. (2) Furthermore, the planning and organisation of the work shall be carried out considering the principles of prevention stated in appendix 1. The evaluation shall, to the extent it has a special importance to safety and health at work, be available in writing. (3) On the basis of the evaluation carried out pursuant to subsection 2, the employer shall take the measures necessary, cf. the principles of prevention stated in appendix 1.

21 3 These principles are: 1) Avoiding risks. 2) Evaluating the risks which cannot be avoided 3) Combating the risks at source. 4) Adapting the work to the individual, especially as regards the design of work places, the choice of work equipment and the choice of working and production methods, with a view, in particular, to alleviating monotonous work and work at a predetermined work-rate and to reducing their effect on health. 5) Adapting to technical progress. 6) Replacing the dangerous by the non-dangerous or the less dangerous. 7) Developing a coherent overall prevention policy, which covers technology, organisation of work, working conditions, social relationships and the influence of factors related to the working environment. 8) Giving collective protective measures priority over individual protective measures. 9) Giving appropriate instructions to the workers. So, in general there are provisions in the Danish legislation authorising the DEA to require mechanisation of drilling equipment. Re 2: Copies of the above-cited regulations are enclosed. Re 3 and 4: The DEA will in connection with future long-term operation permits for drilling rigs (typically 5 years) require that the drilling equipment must be upgraded during the validity of the permit. This upgrade must be included in the follow-up plan on the workplace assessment. We have just initialised this approach in a new 5-year permit for one rig in the Danish sector. Consequently, we have no experience so far, of how the industry will receive this requirement. Re 5:

22 4 Until now, we have found that a large part of the pipe handling equipment seen in use in Denmark is rather unreliable. So we have (by intuition) found that the equipment not unambiguously has been able to increase safety (because operations become unproportionately much more dangerous when the equipment does not work). Because of this we have until now not required its use. It is our opinion that the equipment available now is reliable so we can require its use in the future. Re 6: In section 13 in the above mentioned Order no. 60 is stated: The person who delivers or gives advice about a project for a piece of technical equipment, a production plant, arrangement of a work site, building and construction work or another type of working process shall take into consideration that necessary manual handling in connection with the implementation and operation of the project can take place in accordance with the provisions of this Order. This authorises the DEA to require mechanisation of drilling equipment in newbuildings if they are made in Denmark for use in Danish waters. If not, which normally is the case, the DEA have no jurisdiction to enforce the above-cited provision. Consequently, we have to handle new rigs as existing ones if they wish to operate in Denmark. We hope the above is sufficient. Otherwise, please do not hesitate to contact us. Yours sincerely, Hans Erik Christensen

23 8 av Norsk sokkel Side: 8

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34