Activity 51 Preliminary Hazard List

Activity 51 Preliminary Hazard Listpreliminary Hazard List Phlequi

Develop a comprehensive Preliminary Hazard List (PHL) identifying hazards related to equipment, operators, failure scenarios, potential failure modes, energy sources, and process deviations for a drilling operation, specifically referencing a rig like Deepwater Horizon. The hazard list should include causes, consequences, and recommended mitigation actions. Additionally, formulate "what if" scenarios, conduct a FMeCa analysis with severity, occurrence, and detection ratings, perform an energy source hazard assessment, and utilize HAZOP methodology to analyze subsystems. Finally, prepare a hazard report for a case study on drilling safety considering past accidents and preventing recurrence.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The safety of offshore drilling operations is paramount due to the high-risk environment involving complex equipment, hazardous energy sources, and critical human factors. The Deepwater Horizon accident highlighted catastrophic potential when multiple hazards align without adequate management. This paper develops a comprehensive Preliminary Hazard List (PHL), analyzes potential failure modes, and recommends mitigation strategies to prevent such disasters in future drilling projects. The integration of systematic hazard analysis tools—such as "what if" scenarios, FMeCa, energy hazard assessments, and HAZOP—provides a thorough safety framework aligned with best practices in offshore operations.

Preliminary Hazard List (PHL): Equipment-Related Hazards

The equipment-related hazards in offshore drilling predominantly involve high-pressure blowout preventers (BOPs), risers, pumps, and drill strings. Failures or malfunctions in these components can lead to uncontrolled releases of hydrocarbons. Causes of such hazards include mechanical failure, corrosion, improper maintenance, or design flaws. For example, a failure in the BOP could result from corrosion-induced fatigue or improper installation, which may lead to blowouts, fire, or explosion. The consequences are significant—loss of life, environmental pollution, and economic damage. Mitigation includes routine inspections, maintenance, redundancy in safety systems, and adherence to operational procedures.

Preliminary Hazard List (PHL): Operator-Related Hazards

Operators play a critical role in ensuring safety through proper procedures and timely response to anomalies. Hazards associated with human error might stem from fatigue, inadequate training, or miscommunication. For instance, misinterpretation of pressure readings may lead to delayed activation of safety systems. Causes include insufficient training or procedural lapses. Consequences include inadvertent mechanical damage, unsafe manipulations, or delayed emergency responses. Recommendations include regular training, simulation exercises, clear communication protocols, and safety culture reinforcement.

"What If" / Checklist Analysis

In the "what if" analysis, scenarios such as "What if the BOP fails to activate during a blowout?" or "What if the cement fails during casing?" are formulated to identify vulnerabilities. These generate specific hazards like uncontrolled hydrocarbon release, crew injury, or environmental contamination. For example, if the BOP fails, the rig is at significant risk of explosion. Mitigation measures include redundant BOP stacks, real-time monitoring, and emergency evacuation procedures. The checklist ensures systematic consideration of failure scenarios across equipment and human factors.

FMeCa Analysis

The Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMeCa) assesses potential failure modes of components like the riser, BOP, or mud system. Each failure mode is scored based on severity (e.g., catastrophic consequences assessed as level 5), occurrence probability, and detectability. For example, a BOP hydraulic failure might be rated as critical (severity 4), with moderate occurrence (3), and low detectability (4). This systematic analysis identifies high-risk failure modes requiring priority mitigation. Recommendations include enhanced inspection regimes, design modifications, and robust diagnostic systems.

Energy Source Hazard Assessment

The energy sources such as hydraulic power, electrical systems, and chemical energy present significant hazards. Identification involves analyzing physical controls like insulation and operational procedures. For instance, hydraulic system failures can cause uncontrolled movement of the BOP or drill pipe. Known controls include physical barriers, safety interlocks, and SOPs. The Hazard Index is calculated by multiplying frequency and severity, with recommendations aimed at improving maintenance practices, installing fail-safe devices, and operator training to minimize risk.

HAZOP Analysis

Applying HAZOP, the system is segmented into nodes or subsystems like the mud circulation system, blowout preventer, and riser. Using guide words such as "more," "less," or "no," deviations like "high pressure" or "low flow" are examined for potential causes, effects, and safeguards. For example, "more pressure" in the drill pipe may result from a blockage or equipment failure, risking blowout or equipment damage. Recommended actions include installing pressure relief valves, implementing real-time monitoring, and procedural controls. Responsible personnel are assigned to ensure corrective measures.

Case Study Reflection: BP Deepwater Horizon

Analyzing the Deepwater Horizon disaster through the lens of hazard identification reveals multiple contributing hazards: faulty cementing, BOP failures, and human errors. The preliminary hazard list includes hazards such as inadequate cement barriers, design flaws, equipment corrosion, and procedural complacency. Many of these hazards could have been identified and mitigated using systematic hazard analysis tools discussed above. For example, proper hazard analysis might have prompted rigorous testing of cement integrity or redundant safety device checks. This case underscores the importance of proactive hazard identification and comprehensive safety management in offshore drilling.

Conclusion

A systematic approach combining hazard lists, "what if" scenarios, FMeCa, energy hazard assessments, and HAZOP is essential to ensuring offshore drilling safety. Learning from past incidents like the BP Deepwater Horizon demonstrates the necessity of rigorous hazard identification, continuous monitoring, and a safety-focused culture. Implementing these methodologies minimizes the risk of catastrophic failure, protects personnel, and preserves the environment.

References

• Deepwater Horizon Accident Investigation Report (2010). BP. Retrieved from https://www.bp.com
• Averill, J., & Grose, J. (2006). Offshore safety management. Marine and Offshore Safety Journal, 12(3), 45–59.
• Hale, A. R., & Hovden, J. (1998). Management and culture: The third wave in accident investigation. Safety Science, 27(1-3), 37–55.
• Leveson, N. (2011). Engineering a safer world: systems thinking applied to safety. MIT Press.
• Reason, J. (1997). Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Ashgate Publishing.
• Cañas, V., et al. (2008). Hazard analysis techniques for offshore drilling. Journal of Safety Engineering, 17(4), 22–30.
• ISO 31000:2018. Risk management – Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
• Najmeddine, A. J., et al. (2015). Fault Tree Analysis application in offshore oil and gas industry. Energy Reports, 1, 91–100.
• Vinnem, J. E. (2013). Offshore Safety Management: Falling Short or Improving? Safety Science, 57, 151–160.
• API RP 75. (2010). API Recommended Practice for Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Facilities Safety. American Petroleum Institute.