Research Papers

Evaluation of the Norwegian Major Hazard Risk Management Approach for Offshore Installations in the Concept Selection Phase

[+] Author and Article Information
J. E. Vinnem

Department of Marine Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway;Preventor AS, Ulstadvn 8, PO Box 56, 7541 Klaebu, Norway e-mail: jev@preventor.no

Manuscript received March 12, 2014; final manuscript received October 16, 2014; published online February 27, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Sankaran Mahadevan.

ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Part B 1(1), 011003 (Feb 27, 2015) (12 pages) Paper No: ; doi: 10.1115/1.4026397 History: Received March 12, 2014; Accepted December 03, 2014; Online February 27, 2015

The current risk management regulatory approach for the Norwegian offshore petroleum industry came into effect in 2001, but relatively few new installations were decided after 2001 for development until quite recently. Since 2012, there have been several new installations that are being planned or have reached front-end engineering design (FEED) or engineering phases. This paper considers the risk management approach in the pre-FEED phase and builds on some case studies selected from the most recent cases. The main principles for major hazard risk management in this phase are summarized, and the experience from the case studies is discussed with respect to establishing how well they have functioned. It is demonstrated that the risk reduction approach is not as effective as it could have been. The paper proposes some improvements to the regulatory approach to risk reduction in the pre-FEED phase in order to make improvements to the management of major hazard risk and to achieve installation concepts that are more robust in relation to changes and additional requirements during the field lifetime.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Map of Norwegian offshore areas with location of producing fields and case study fields (Source: NPD)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Number of HC leaks (>0.1  kg/s) per 100 installation years, NCS average, 1996–2013

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Illustration of impairment frequencies for three design cases with respect to flexible riser location and protection

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of response times and pick up capacity of passengers in sea/raft after a helicopter ditching, for Goliat and Aasta Hansteen offshore fields




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Articles from Part A: Civil Engineering
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In