health and safety report 2019 · 4 healt afet epor 2019 4 1.foreword w elcome to oguk’s 2019...

HEALTH & SAFETY REPORT 2019

2


33

Contents

1. Foreword 42. Key Findings 63. 2018 Performance 8 3.1 Process and Personal Safety 10 3.2 Operator Safety Performance Benchmarking 19 3.3 Asset Integrity Performance Indicators 23 3.4 Health 264. Offshore Helicopter Operations 33 4.1 Overview 34 4.2 Current Helicopter Types 35 4.3 Offshore Helicopter Reportable Accidents 36 4.4 Accident Analysis 385. Significant Activities 39 5.1 Forums, Groups and Networks 40 5.2 Regulatory Engagement 41 5.3 Tripartite Committees 42 5.4 Other External Groups and Organisations 43 5.5 Consultations 44 5.8 Publications 45 5.9 2019 Key Activities 466. Glossary 48

The UK Oil and Gas Industry Association Limited (trading as OGUK) 2019OGUK uses reasonable efforts to ensure that the materials and information contained in the report are current and accurate. OGUK offers the materials and information in good faith and believes that the information is correct at the date of publication. The materials and information are supplied to you on the condition that you or any other person receiving them will make their own determination as to their suitability and appropriateness for any proposed purpose prior to their use. Neither OGUK nor any of its members assume liability for any use made thereof.

OGUK's vision is to ensure the UK Continental Shelf becomes the most attractive mature oil and gas province in the world with which to do business.

Read all our industry reports atwww.oilandgasuk.co.uk/publications

4


4

1. Foreword

Welcome to OGUK’s 2019 Health & Safety Report, which provides an overview of the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) offshore oil and gas industry’s health and safety performance in 2018, as well as a summary of the work undertaken by various OGUK groups to continuously improve performance and protect the

people who work in our industry.

In last year’s report, OGUK highlighted the concerns raised by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) about industry’s hydrocarbon release record and described the actions initiated to ensure that these concerns were addressed. At the time, it was acknowledged that while the overall trend was of improvement, the number of major releases had plateaued to around two per year. In 2018, the number of confirmed major releases increased to four; if left unaddressed, this situation could change from progress stalled to progress reversed.

Industry is addressing this problem. OGUK’s plan defines clear next steps to ensure that preventing hydrocarbon releases remains at the top of the agenda, including industry endorsement of a set of principles in process safety leadership. This report details the actions industry has taken and those planned for the coming months, along with a description of the intense cross-industry collaboration and co-operation in reducing hydrocarbon releases.

2018 was the second consecutive year without a fatality and the longer-term rolling reportable non-fatal injury rate continues to fall. Although 2018 remains one of the best periods on record for personal safety, the over-seven-day and specified injury rates both, however, saw year-on-year increases.

Across UKCS helicopter operations, the fatal accident rate per 100,000 flying hours dropped to zero for the first time since 2001, and the all-accident rate halved, falling to 0.26. These are welcome results and reflect the amount of work being undertaken in the areas of operational effectiveness, reliability and the introduction of new technology and equipment.

OGUK’s Aviation Seminar brought together industry aviation experts including helicopter operators, oil and gas operators, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and many others. The keynote address by the Civil Aviation Authority’s group director for safety and airspace regulation stated that North Sea helicopter operations benefited from some of the highest professional standards anywhere in the world.

As well as safety, OGUK members work to ensure that the health of the workforce is maintained or improved, and this year mental health and wellbeing has been a priority area. A review of good practice, based on a survey of members, showed that industry is making progress in providing employment conditions conducive to health and wellbeing.

The number of medical evacuations occurring offshore has seen a small increase, although it is unclear what the underlying causes for this might be. In this regard, OGUK is undertaking a detailed review and update of its medical examination guidelines to reflect current thinking and practice. The aim is to ensure that stakeholders have greater confidence in the general level of fitness in the offshore workforce and that a consistent approach is adopted by industry.

55

1

The findings from this report have informed OGUK’s focus for the year ahead. The four key health and safety topics identified are: hydrocarbon release prevention; major hazard management, particularly guidance for a safety case fit for the future; improvements in aviation safety; and the health of the offshore workforce. OGUK continues to enable and support industry improvements in the vital area of health and safety. With ongoing collaboration across all stakeholders, sustainable improvement is achievable.

All these matters and more are expanded upon within this report. We hope you find the content to be both interesting and informative. Any queries should be directed to OGUK health & safety manager Trevor Stapleton at [email protected].

Trevor Stapleton,Health & Safety Manager,OGUK

6


2. Key Findings

• There were no work-related fatalitiesin 2018

• Fractures were the most common type ofreportable injury, followed by strains andsprains

• Slips, trips and falls, and lifting andhandling injuries were the most commoncauses of injuries

• The over-seven-day injury rate has increasedby 12%, with 302 per 100,000 workers in2018, up from 269 in 2017

• The UKCS lost-time injury frequency ishigher than the all-European average, at0.72 per million man-hours compared to 0.7,but lower than Denmark and Norway

• There has been an increase in the numberof reportable incidents with 289 suchoccurrences recorded in 2018, 12% higherthan 2017

• Hydrocarbon releases (HCRs) were the singlelargest category of reportable incidents(37%), followed by dropped objects (25%)

• There were 4 confirmed major HCRs in 2018

• Safety critical maintenance backlog is 59%lower than the peak in 2015, but is beginningto show an upward trend

Personal SafetyProcess Safety

7

2

• Offshore helicopter operations in 2018 were conducted without an accident

• The fatal accident rate per 100,000 flying hours dropped to zero for the first time since 2001

• Flying hours increased by 12% to 77,286 in 2018, up from 69,005 in 2017, but there were 69,913 fewer passengers transported

• There has been no change in the number of helicopter types supporting UKCS operations from last year and the Sikorsky S92 continues to be the predominant airframe in use

• 127,474 OGUK medicals were performed by registered doctors in more than 60 countries, up from 110,688 in 2017

• Blood pressure was the most common cause for failure of an offshore medical, with 25% of all failures attributable to associated health conditions

• The most frequent cause of medevacs was for suspected cardiac incidents

AviationHealth

8


3. 2018 Performance

In Summary

The UK offshore oil and gas industry is committed to protecting people, the natural environment and assets by maintaining

safe operations. The industry continually strives to improve personal and process safety, using performance indicators to monitor how well this is being managed. Personal safety metrics point to industry’s performance in managing risks to an individual. However, to minimise harm to people, the primary focus for this major hazard industry must be on process safety, and the effective containment of hydrocarbons and associated hazards.

Major accidents occur rarely and so lagging indicators, such as hydrocarbon releases, are combined with leading indicators to give a better picture of safety performance. Leading indicators include items such as maintenance backlogs for safety-critical elements and overdue verification findings. These are used to monitor how well safety-critical elements, which are designed to prevent, control or mitigate the effects of major incidents on an installation, are being managed. Process safety performance indicators, while perhaps not as obviously about “safety” as the injury statistics, are nevertheless critical to measuring performance and ensuring the industry continues to manage major accident risk effectively.

Health & Safety Report 2019– Facts and Figures

oilandgasuk.co.uk/healthandsafetyreport

most common reportable incidents were dropped

objects at 28%

The number of significant HCR releases

under RIDDOR has decreased by 24%

There is an upward trend in major

HCR releases under RIDDOR in 2018

Slips, trips and falls account for

26% of all injuries

There were zero fatalities in 2018

OGUK has led a robust response to the HSE’s concerns over HCRs

main task finish groups were in

operation this year

302The over-seven-day

injury rate has increased by 11% to

injuries per 100,000workers in 2018

Bone fractureswere the most common reportable injury at 32%

OGUK has assisted recent consultations

including the Offshore Safety Directive and the

SCR 2015 review 6Significant Activities

Offshore Helicopter Operations

Performance

Over 100 new doctors were trained and registered in 2018

335In 2018 nearly 127,500

OGUK offshore medicals were conducted

The most common causes of failed medicals

were blood pressureand diabetes

The three-year rolling average non-fatal injury rate fell to

per 100,000workers

77,286 flight hours were flown in 2018

755,245Over

passengers were flown offshore in 2018

There were 74 active aircraft in the UKCS

Helicopter fleet, made up of 6 airframe types

Offshore helicopter operations in 2018 were

conducted without an incident

The UKCS five-year average all accident rate

has decreased from

0.52 to

0.26 per 100,000 flying hours

8




objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to





objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to


99

It is also important to manage the health and well-being of the offshore workforce effectively, given the remoteness of the worksite and the nature of the work they perform. A suite of occupational health-related legislation regulates the offshore working environment to ensure that risks to health are controlled. In addition, it is industry policy that all persons working offshore are examined regularly by a medical professional and deemed medically fit before travelling offshore. The Oil & Gas UK medical standard and the registered examining doctors who conduct assessments in line with this standard help to ensure that the workforce is medically fit for work offshore.

3

Health & Safety Report 2019 – Facts and Figures



objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to





objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to





objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to


10


3.1 Process and Personal Safety

Incident ReportingRequirements relating to reportable incidents are defined by the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013 (RIDDOR) regulations,1 and the EU Offshore Safety Directive (OSD) Implementing Regulation No 1112/2014. Under this legislation, defined incident types with high potential to cause significant injuries, termed dangerous occurrences, and other defined incidents such as failure of a safety critical element must be reported to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

The reporting requirements in the European regulations are broadly aligned with RIDDOR categories, but additional reportable incident categories have been introduced, and the category names are different.2 The section below includes information on both RIDDOR and EU reportable offshore incidents.

As seen in Figure 1 below, there remains a downward trend in the overall number of incidents since the peak in 2000–01. 2018 saw 289 such incidents, a 12 per cent increase from 2017, but still 62 per cent below the peak levels of 2000–01, and the second lowest annual total in the period. There were fewer reportable incidents in 2017 and 2018 than any other years in the period.

Figure 1: Reportable Incidents

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2000

-01

2001

-02

2002

-03

2003

-04

2004

-05

2005

-06

2006

-07

2007

-08

2008

-09

2009

-10

2010

-11

2011

-12

2012

-13

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Num

ber o

f Rep

orta

ble

Inci

dent

s

*

*Period of reporting changed from fiscal to calendar year Source: Health and Safety Executive, 2019

1 See www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1471/schedule2/made2 See https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014R1112

11

Figure 2 breaks down the reportable incidents by type. Categories from the EU Implementing Regulations and RIDDOR have been combined where appropriate, e.g. “release or escape of a dangerous substance” and “unintentional release of hazardous substances” have been combined into the loss of containment (non-HCR) category. Hydrocarbon releases (HCRs) are the largest single type of reportable incident, followed by dropped objects.

There were eight more incidents of collapse, overturning or failure last year than in 2017 (an increase of 73 per cent) and seven more loss of containment (non-HCR) incidents (an increase of 64 per cent).

Figure 2: Breakdown of Reportable Incidents, 2018

4 411

17

1

7

17

25

104

73

Other*

Evacuation

Collapse, Overturning or Failure

Loss of Containment (Non-HCR)

Weather Damage

Failure of SECEs, Well Barrier &BAWell Incidents

Pipeline

Fire or Explosion

Hydrocarbon Releases

Dropping Objects

* Other includes collision, faliure of a pressure system, loss of station, unintentional change of position, and unassigned (one each) Source: Health and Safety Executive, 2019

Hydrocarbon ReleasesThe HSE collates data on hydrocarbon releases within the offshore oil and gas industry. Most HCRs are identified as such in the figure above, but it should be noted that some incidents defined as wells, pipeline and/or fire and explosion may also include hydrocarbon releases.

In addition to introducing new reporting requirements, Implementing Regulation No 1112/2014 changed the criteria for what is deemed to be a reportable hydrocarbon release. All UKCS installations have now transitioned to the Safety Case Regulations 2015 (SCR 2015) and share a uniform system for HCR reporting.

11

3

12


The HSE assigns a severity classification to reported hydrocarbon releases, defining them as either minor, significant or major. A minor release has potential to cause serious injuries or a fatality within the immediate vicinity but would not be expected to result in a multiple fatality event or significant escalation. A significant release is one with the potential to cause serious injury or fatality to personnel within the local area and to escalate within that local area — for example, by causing structural damage, secondary leaks or damage to safety systems — while a major release is one with the potential, if ignited, to cause multiple casualties or rapid escalation affecting, for example, other modules, the temporary refuge or escape routes.

Figure 3 overleaf shows the total number of reportable hydrocarbon releases in 2018, under the RIDDOR reporting regime and under the EU regulation. The upward trend apparent in the three-year moving average in 2018 is attributable to the number of additional releases reported under the new legislation, as a comparison with Figure 4 demonstrates. The number of significant releases continues to decrease year on year, but major releases have shown an increase in 2018.

Figure 4 shows the same data with the additional EU-reportable HCRs excluded to allow for comparison. This shows that the downward trend in HCRs shown in the three-year moving average has plateaued in 2018. If the rate of hydrocarbon releases continues on the current trajectory during 2019 and 2020, there will be an increase for the first time in over a decade. However, in the period shown it is notable that year-on-year increases such as those seen in 2009–10 and 2013 have been followed by improving performance. Nevertheless, industry is not complacent, and further information about current industry activity to prevent HCRs can be found later in this report.

1313

Figure 3: Hydrocarbon Releases Occurring Offshore

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Num

ber o

f Rel

ease

s

Awaiting Classification

Minor

Significant

Major

Three-Year Moving Average

Source: Health and Safety Executive, 2019

Figure 4: RIDDOR Reportable Hydrocarbon Releases

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Num

ber o

f Rel

ease

s

Unclassified

Minor

Significant

Major


Source: Health and Safety Executive, 2019

3

14


Figure 5 shows the releases with a severity classification of major only. Annual fluctuations aside, the general trend has been of reduction, but in recent years the number of major releases had plateaued at two or three per year. Four major releases are identified in the 2018 results below, although the HSE has indicated that it believes at least one additional release is likely to be assigned to the major category, once classified. This increase in the most serious releases has driven the development of a co-ordinated industry drive to address the root causes.

Figure 5: Major Hydrocarbon Releases

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017* 2018

Num

ber o

f Rel

ease

s


Source: Health and Safety Executive, 2019* 2017 data includes one as yet unclassified release expected to be major

15

3

15

Personal Injuries and FatalitiesReportable injuries in the UK are categorised into two types: over-seven days injuries, where a work-related injury results in the injured person being unable to return to work for seven days or more; and specified injuries and fatalities. Figure 6 shows work-related fatalities at offshore installations recorded since 1996 (excluding helicopter incident figures, which are covered in section 4 of this report). In 2018 there were no work-related fatalities in the UK sector.

Figure 6: Fatal Injuries Offshore

Year Number of Fatalities Year Number of Fatalities1996–97 2 2007–08 01997–98 3 2008–09 01998–99 1 2009–10 01999–00 2 2010–11 02000–01 3 2011–12 22001–02 3 2012–13 02002–03 0 2013–14 22003–04 3 2015 02004–05 0 2016 12005–06 2 2017 02006–07 2 2018 0

The non-fatal injury rate is calculated from the number of over-seven-day and specified injuries reported to the HSE,3 as well as offshore population figures calculated from Vantage POB data. The breakdown of over-seven-day and specified injuries per 100,000 workers since 2001 is given overleaf. The over-seven-day injury rate increased from 269 to 302 injuries per 100,000 workers in 2018, although it remains lower than the 432 recorded in 2014.

The specified injury rate showed an increase in 2018, up to 66 per 100,000 workers, from 7 in 2017. Given the drop-off in specified injuries reported in 2017, the apparent increase is in fact a return to normal trends, as Figure 7 shows. This is consistent with the downward trend since 2013, which is the first directly comparable year when the RIDDOR category “major injury” was redefined to “specified injury”.

3 Defined list of reportable injuries in Regulation 4 of RIDDOR 2013

16


Figure 7: Over-Seven-Day and Specified Injury Rate per 100,000 Workers

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2000

-01

2001

-02

2002

-03

2003

-04

2004

-05

2005

-06

2006

-07

2007

-08

2008

-09

2009

-10

2010

-11

2011

-12

2012

-13

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Inju

ry R

ate

per 1

00,0

00 W

orke

rs

Over-Three/Over-Seven-Day Injury Rate

Specified Injury Rate

*

*Period of reporting changed from fiscal to calendar year Source: Health and Safety Executive, 2019; Vantage POB

The three-year rolling average non-fatal injury rate is considered in Figure 8 below. Taking a longer-term average means that annual fluctuations are smoothed and provides a clearer trend. It is notable that after a period of slight increase in the years to 2014–15, a downward trend is apparent in the years since.

Figure 8: Three-Year Rolling Average Reportable Non-Fatal Injury Rate per 100,000 Workers

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2003

/04

-20

05/0

6

2004

/05

-20

06/0

7

2005

/06

-20

07/0

8

2006

/07

-20

08/0

9

2007

/08

-20

09/1

0

2008

/09

-20

10/1

1

2009

/10

-20

11/1

2

2010

/11

-20

12/1

3

2011

/12

-20

13/1

4

2012

/13

-20

14/1

5

2014

-16

2015

-17

2016

-18

Calc

ulat

ed R

ate

of R

epor

tabl

e N

on-F

atal

Inju

rype

r 100

,000

Wor

kers

*

*Period of reporting changed from fiscal to calendar year Source: Health and Safety Executive, 2019; Vantage POB

1717

Bone fractures were the most common reportable injury in 2018, with 34 reported, followed by strains and sprains (28) and lacerations (13). The full breakdown of injury types is given in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Reportable Injuries by Type, 2018

34

28

13

13

5

5

32 1 1 1

Bone Fracture

Strain / Sprain

Laceration

Other Known Injury

Contusion

Superficial Injury

Serious Burns

Amputation

Multiple Injury

Unconsciousness

Unknown Injury

The most common cause of injury was slips, trips and falls on the same level, followed by lifting and handling injuries. A full breakdown of the type of accident involved in the injury is shown in Figure 10 below.

Figure 10: Reportable Injuries by Direct Cause

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Slip, trip, fallsame level

Lifting andhandlinginjuries

Struck against Struck byobject

Another kindof accident

Low fall (up to& inc. 2m)

Contact withmachinery

Exposure toharmful

substance

Fall (height not

known)

High fall (over 2m)

Num

ber o

f Inj

urie

s

3

Source: Health and Safety Executi ve, 2019

Source: Health and Safety Executi ve, 2019

18


Figure 11 compares the UK offshore oil and gas industry’s performance with other European offshore sectors, based on the lost-time injury (LTI) frequency data from the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP).4 This geographical comparison demonstrates that the UK is in fact higher than the European average. However, the UK had a lower LTI frequency than directly comparable sectors in the North Sea, with 0.72 LTIs per million man-hours, compared with 0.75 in the Norwegian sector.

Figure 11: Lost Time Injury Frequency for Oil and Gas Sectors Surrounding the UK

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

The Netherlands UK Norway Denmark

Lost

Tim

e Fr

eque

ncy

per M

illio

n M

an-H

ours

2017

2018

European Average

Source: International Association of Oil and Gas Producers

4 The IOGP data is voluntarily submitted by its members before being validated by its Safety Committee. It should be noted that IOGP membership is limited to international exploration and production operators, and therefore incident frequencies per country are based on submissions from member operators only.

19

3.2 Operator Safety Performance Benchmarking

Every year, OGUK conducts a benchmarking exercise so that production installation operators can compare their own safety performance against the industry average. Other industry associations monitor and report the safety performance of marine and drilling contractors, which are therefore not included.

Thirty-one installation operators were included in the benchmarking exercise this year. Participating companies receive their individual results, but for the purposes of presenting the aggregated anonymised data, each company is allocated a letter. Note that the same identifier is not assigned to the same operator for each of the categories shown.

The following figures list the participating companies and present the anonymised results from key elements of the benchmarking exercise. The average frequency rate for those companies is calculated to the industry standard of incidents per million man-hours based on a 12-hour working day.

Incident frequency rates, rather than absolute numbers, are used for comparison in this exercise, but even with that standardisation, the wide variation in frequency rates between best and worst performers is affected by the relative size of the company’s operations. In the more detailed benchmarking report issued to companies directly, organisations are therefore separated into three bands by size to minimise this effect.

Figure 12: Participating Companies

Participating Companies

Apache North Sea LtdBluewater Services

BP Exploration Operating Company LtdBumi Armada LtdBW Offshore AS

Centrica Storage LtdChevron North Sea Ltd

ChrysaorCNOOC

CNR International UK LimitedConocoPhillips (UK) Limited

Dana Petroleum LimitedENI UK Limited

EnQuest PlcEquinor UK Limited

Fairfield Energy Limited

INEOS UK E&P Holdings LimitedNeptune Energy

ONE-DyasPerenco UK Limited

Petrofac Premier Oil UK Limited

Repsol Sinopec Resources UK LimitedRockRose

SericaShell UK LtdSpirit Energy

TAQA Bratani LtdTeekay Petrojarl

Total E&P UK LimitedWintershall Nordzee B.V.

NB: companies are listed in alphabetical order and this does not correspond to the letters allocated to companies in the performance charts

19

3

20


Figure 13 shows the average frequencies for reportable incidents and reportable injuries for duty holders. The frequency of reportable incidents has risen from 4.35 per million man-hours in 2017 to 4.4 in 2018. There were 251 incidents on production installations, up from 247 last year, but below the ten-year average of 296 incidents per year. The average frequency of reportable injuries has also increased, from 1.46 per million man-hours previous year, to 1.79 in 2018.

Figure 13: Reportable Incidents and Reportable Injury Frequencies

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Freq

uenc

y (p

er M

illio

n M

an-H

ours

)

Reportable Incident Frequency

Reportable Injury Frequency

Source: Health and Safety Executive, Vantage POB and OGUK

Figures 14 and 15 overleaf show the reportable incidents and reportable injury frequency for each company against the average for the group over the past two years. Most operators (22) recorded frequencies below the 2018 average for dangerous occurrences, and most operators (22) recorded frequencies below the 2018 average for reportable injuries. Four operators completed the year having recorded no reportable incidents, while eight operators experienced no reportable injuries.

2121

Figure 14: Production Installation Operators’ Safety Performance Benchmarking Results – Reportable Incidents

0

5

10

15

20

25

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB AC AD AE

Repo

rtab

le In

cide

nts p

er M

illio

n M

an-H

ours

Company Identifier

Reportable Incident Frequencies (per Million Man-Hours)2017 Average

2018 Average

Source: Health and Safety Executive 2019, Vantage POB and OGUK

Figure 15: Production Installation Operators’ Safety Performance Benchmarking Results – Reportable Injuries

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF

Repo

rtab

le In

jurie

s per

Mill

ion

Man

-Hou

rs

Company Identifier

Reportable Injury Frequency

2018 Average

2017 Average

Source: Health and Safety Executive 2019, Vantage POB and OGUK

3

22


The table below summarises operator safety performance benchmarking for production installations in absolute numbers since 2008.

Figure 16: Benchmarking Performance Summary

Year FatalitiesMajor / Specified

InjuriesOver-Seven Day

InjuriesReportable Incidents

Man-Hours

2008 0 26 90 343 47,167,7132009 0 36 95 343 44,009,6502010 0 23 85 397 43,897,1192011 2 25 72 347 45,081,1952012 0 27 70 260 51,339,9452013 0 32 81 316 56,695,5432014 2 16 103 306 56,793,8962015 0 15 68 262 53,778,5512016 1 18 65 232 52,332,3932017 0 2 81 247 56,759,9962018 0 19 81 251 56,936,436

10-Year Average

0.5 21 81 296 51,762,472

2323

3.3 Asset Integrity Performance Indicators

The UK offshore oil and gas industry has a voluntary asset integrity key performance indicator (KPI) scheme in place using data that has been collected since 2008. The scheme is administered by OGUK, whereby data are collected at the end of every quarter and cover two-thirds of UKCS installations. The three cross-industry asset integrity-related KPIs are seen in Figure 17.

KPI-1 is a lagging indicator and is monitored by HSE through RIDDOR incident reporting mechanisms, as covered in section 3.1. KPI-2 and KPI-3 serve as leading indicators looking at performance relating to safety critical elements. They enable the industry to monitor and measure a key aspect of its overall effort and performance in relation to asset integrity management.

Figure 17: UK Asset Integrity Key Performance Indicators

LevelKPI-1 Hydrocarbon Releases

KPI-2 Verification Non-ComplianceKPI-3 Safety-Critical Maintenance Backlog

KPI-2 Verification Non-ComplianceThe Offshore Safety Case5 regime requires duty holders to identify and maintain safety and environmentally critical elements (SECE). SECE are systems that are critical to prevent, control or mitigate the safety and/or environmental impacts of potential major accident hazards (MAH) and are specific to an installation. Each SECE must comply with a defined performance standard which has been developed based on the parameters of the MAH present on the installation.

Every installation will have many SECE, including fire and gas detection systems, emergency shutdown systems and temporary refuge. To ensure that these are suitable for their intended purpose, remain in good condition and repair, and comply with the relevant performance standard, they are subject to a verification process. Verification is undertaken by an independent competent person (ICP) and the ICP must report any deficiencies in relation to the performance standards or the verification scheme itself.

Findings raised by the ICP are ranked as levels 1, 2 or 3 depending on their severity using common definitions as outlined below. OGUK collects data on the performance of these systems from duty holders on a quarterly basis. KPI-2 monitors and measures non-compliances under levels 2 and 3, as they are the more significant findings.

5 Every offshore installation has a Safety Case — accepted by HSE — that demonstrates they have the ability and means to control major accident risks effectively.

3

24


Figure 18: Current Definitions — Verification Findings

Level

1 Performance standard satisfied, but ICP may suggest an improvement to the system or may request additional information to demonstrate compliance with a performance standard.

2 Single performance standard failure with no significant threat to the installation.

3 Fundamental weakness of the SECE assurance system that involves multiple failures of a performance standard(s) or presents a significant threat to the integrity of the installation.

At the end of 2018, the average number of open (unresolved) level 2 findings per installation was four, which is an increase on the three reported in 2017. That figure was higher for floating installations (eight) and lower for normally unmanned installations (three). On a quarterly basis, the average number of level 2 findings that are raised and closed has remained consistent since 2011, at around two or three per quarter.

The industry KPI reporting further categorises open findings into 'open-overdue' and 'related to process containment', as it is the latter which are the most important type of SECE.

Level 3 findings relate to more serious matters raised by the ICP. As such, findings are relatively rare and the number per installation is small. The total number across all participating installations is monitored and reported to ensure they are being closed out in a timely manner.

KPI-3 Safety-Critical Maintenance BacklogKPI-3 produces a record of safety-critical (SC) maintenance backlog in three distinct categories:

• Planned preventative SC maintenance that has passed its scheduled completion date and is now overdue• Corrective SC maintenance where equipment undergoing SC maintenance has been found to need some form

of repair or recertification • Deferred SC maintenance that has not been carried out at its planned completion date but has been rescheduled

following a robust deferral assessment of the risk associated with deferring maintenance

Figure 19 is a high-level snapshot of industry performance since the second half of 2013. As shown, the backlog man-hours have decreased since the end of 2013. 2018 saw an increase in overall safety critical maintenance backlog from the end of 2017. However, following the peak in late 2013 there has been an overall downward trend in total safety-critical maintenance backlog hours. This trend is reflected in reduced backlog for preventative and corrective hours.

Despite there being an increase of the deferred maintenance backlog at the start of 2018, a corresponding decrease in preventative maintenance backlog meant that the downward trend resumed later in the year.

2525

Maintenance is a key activity and despite the downturn in the industry there has been a sustained downward trend in safety-critical maintenance backlog hours since the peak in 2015. This trend is reflected in the preventative and the corrective hours, however, the deferred maintenance backlog started to show an increase at the start of 2018 from the end of 2017. Deferred maintenance schemes are often used to ensure that maintenance is scheduled efficiently in line with planned shutdowns, or when the end of life of the installation is approaching. This increase may therefore be driven by installation-specific factors, or by larger infrastructural requirements such as the planned Forties Pipeline shutdown in 2020.

Variations in the quarterly performance can make it difficult to ascertain overall trends; 2017 and 2018 both saw increases in backlog between the first and second quarters which were later reversed. The annual rolling average, which shows the longer-term trend in backlog, does indicate an increase starting in 2018. OGUK will continue to monitor this closely to determine either that the increase is temporary, or, if it is not, ensure that concerted action is taken to address it.

Figure 19: Average Preventative, Corrective and Deferred Safety-Critical Maintenance Man-Hours in Backlog per Installation

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017 Q4 2017 Q1 2018 Q2 2018 Q3 2018 Q4 2018

Aver

age

Num

ber o

f Man

-Hou

rs in

Bac

klog

per

Inst

alla

tion

Deferred Maintenance

Corrective Maintenance in Backlog

Preventive Maintenance in Backlog

Rolling Average

3

26


26


3.4 Health

Examining Doctors’ Assessments and TrainingThe OGUK standard for medical fitness to work offshore is recognised as a global standard in the industry. The list of examining doctors on the OGUK register that can carry out such assessments includes practitioners from 60 countries across Europe, Asia-Pacific, the Americas and Africa.6

To register, medical professionals must complete the association’s Introduction for Oil & Gas UK Registered Doctors training. The training course is designed to give delegates knowledge of life and work offshore so that they have a better understanding of the standard of medical fitness required. Over 100 new doctors were trained and registered in 2018.

OGUK also hosts an annual Examining Doctors Conference to bring together registered doctors from across the world, providing them with essential updates and networking opportunities. Almost 100 doctors from across four continents attended the 2018 conference.

Each year, the registered doctors carry out medical assessments of offshore oil and gas employees around the globe using the Oil & Gas UK Medical Aspects of Fitness for Offshore Work: Guidance for Examining Physicians.7 The doctors submit a statistical return, indicating the total number of medicals they have performed and the numbers of cases in which individuals have failed to pass their assessments, as well as the reasons for those failures. The number of medicals performed increased again in 2018, reaching the highest level since 2010. The use of the OGUK guidelines as a global standard for working offshore means that not all those medicals were conducted for individuals working in the UKCS.

In 2018, the fail rate of examinations remained steady at around 1 per cent, lower than the average rate of 1.15 per cent for the period shown below.

Figure 20: Examining Doctors Statistics

Year Total Number of Medicals Conducted

Number of Medicals Failed Percentage Medicals Failed

2010 56,850 784 1.382011 59,900 665 1.112012 93,219 1,284 1.382013 113,006 1,333 1.182014 118,597 1,285 1.082015 111,651 1,125 1.012016 99,104 1,125 1.142017 110,688 1,339 1.212018 127,474 1,298 1.02

6 Find out more about the OGUK Register for Examining Doctors at www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/doctors7 The Medical Aspects of Fitness for Offshore Work: Guidance for Examining Physicians is available to download at

www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/product/medical-aspects-of-fitness-for-offshore-work-guidelines-for-examining-physicians/

27

A breakdown of the medical assessment failure rate by age group shows that in 2018, those aged 20–29 were around three times more likely to fail their examination than those over 40. In 2017, by contrast, the trend in fail rates increased with the age of the candidate. OGUK holds only two years of data about reasons for failure and the sample size is likely to be too small to support any wider demographic conclusions at present.

Figure 21: Percentage of Failed Assessments by Age

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

<20 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+

Failu

re R

ate

Age Group

2017 2018

Source: OGUK

3

28


As in previous years, the most common reason for individuals being declared unfit to work offshore was blood pressure (25 per cent), which was most prominent in the 40–49 age group. Diabetes (15 per cent) and cardiac illnesses (11 per cent) were also significant cause for failure and were similarly higher in that age group. Drug abuse, whilst not one of the most common reasons of examination failure (just 7 per cent of total failures), formed a larger percentage of failed examinations for those below 40 (15 per cent), and just over 4 per cent of failed examinations for those over 40.

Figure 22: Reason for Failed Assessment by Age

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018

<20 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 >60

Num

ber o

f Fai

led

Asse

ssm

ents

Delegate Age and Year of Assessment

Other

Drug Abuse

Cardiac

Diabetes

Blood Pressure

Source: OGUK

29

To enable the safe introduction of in-water Category A Compressed Air Emergency Breathing System (Cat-A EBS) training last year, an additional 'fitness to train' assessment was developed. Data collated for 2018 shows that of the 24,651 individual assessment completed, 450 individuals (nearly 2 per cent) were advised to undertake dry training only, as pre-existing health conditions put them at additional risk of injury if they undertook in-water training. In over one-third of such cases, this was due to asthma, followed by chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) at 27 per cent. The full breakdown is shown in Figure 23.

Figure 23: Medical Reasons for Dry Cat-A EBS Training, 2018

161

125

35

57

8

5

59

Asthma

COPD

ENT Problem

Pneumothorax

Pulmonary TB

Sarcoidosis

Other

Source: OGUK

3

30


Medical Evacuations As a remote and potentially hazardous workplace where support from the usual emergency services is not available, offshore installations are required to have medical facilities onboard to allow the medic, supported by a topsides doctor, to provide appropriate medical treatment and care to injured or ill personnel until they can be returned to shore. For less acute conditions or minor injuries, this may mean the person is simply treated onboard and continues to work the rest of their rota on normal or restricted duties. For some personnel, the appropriate route may be to wait until the next scheduled flight, but for the most serious conditions, which require onshore treatment as a matter of urgency, the industry and coastguard search and rescue (SAR) helicopters are used.

In 2018, emergency medevacs were requested a total of 241 times, with peak demand during the months of October and April (32 and 29, respectively). These medevacs were completed using coastguard SAR helicopters. The most common reason for a call out remains suspected cardiac incident, followed by injury and acute abdominal issues, in line with the previous year’s data.

Figure 24: Reasons for Emergency Medical Evacuations, 2018

52

43

53

22

15

13

10

9

9

87

Cardiac

Injury

Other

Acute Abdomen

CVA

GI

Collapse

Renal

Respiratory

Mental Health

Infectious Disease

Source: OGUK

31

Figure 24 shows the breakdown by age for emergency medevacs and the breakdown by age for the whole offshore workforce. The 30–39 demographic is proportionately under-represented in medevacs, with only 17 per cent of cases (despite making up 32 per cent of the offshore workforce), while the proportion of medevacs associated with the 60 and over group is higher, with 20 per cent of medevacs and only 7 per cent of the general offshore population.

Figure 25: Proportion of Medevac and General Offshore Population by Age Group, 2018

Not Given

<20

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

>60

Source: MCA, 2019; Vantage POB

<20

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

>=60

Inner - General Population

Outer - Medevacs 3

32


Mental Health and WellbeingIn 2018, the OGUK Occupational Health and Hygiene Group introduced a mental health and wellbeing theme into its work plan for the year, including a survey of member companies. The survey used the recommendations of 'Thriving at Work, the Stevenson-Farmer review of mental health and employers'8 as the basis for a questionnaire which asked member companies represented in the group and the OGUK Operators’ Health and Safety Group about their arrangements for managing mental health and wellbeing in their workforces.

The review identifies six ‘core standards’ for all organisations. The survey results showed that the industry is making good progress in this area, as shown in Figure 26, with the majority of respondents reporting that they had either implemented or partially implemented all six core standards.

Figure 26: Employers’ Mental Health and Wellbeing Arrangements

0 20 40 60 80 100

Mental Health at Work Plan or Policy

Develop Mental Health Awareness

Encourage Open Conversations

Provide Good Working Conditions

Promote Effective People Management

Routinely monitor Employee Health and Wellbeing

Responses (per cent)

In place Partially in place In development Not in place Did not answer

Source: OGUK Survey, 2019

In addition to the six core elements, Thriving at Work identified four enhanced standards. Ninety-two per cent of respondent companies reported that they met at least one these of these, the provision of tailored support through employee health insurance or employee assistance programmes. Almost half demonstrated accountability by having a nominated health and wellbeing lead at board or senior leadership level (48 per cent).

8 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/658145/ thriving-at-work-stevenson-farmer-review.pdf

32

n

33

n

33

4. Offshore Helicopter Operations

In Summary

The use of helicopters in the offshore UKCS sector remains a fundamental requirement for industry, providing a means of transportation to and

from installations and a rescue, recovery and medical evacuation service in support of the offshore workforce.

Whilst the industry can never be complacent, having suffered four fatal accidents claiming 38 lives since 1997, safety performance over the last five years would suggest that improvements in helicopter safety are having a positive effect. No accidents in 2018 means that the North Sea is recording a five-year fatal accident rate of zero for the first time since 2001.

The Sikorsky S92 remains the work horse of the North Sea industry, carrying two-thirds of passengers to and from offshore installations. It has a good global safety and reliability record (over 1.5 million fleet flight hours and an average availability above 92 per cent9).

Aviation safety continues to be a priority for OGUK and the wider industry. A number of safety-based initiatives have been implemented since the Sumburgh accident and by continuing to work with the helicopter operators, other stakeholders and various helicopter safety groups, OGUK will ensure that current and future plans — including the introduction of new and/or revised aircraft types, and industry resilience — continue to be championed.

9 https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/ sikorsky-s-92-helicopter.html

3




objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to





objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to





objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to


34


4.1 Overview

As with all modes of transportation, helicopter travel is not without risk. Over the last 30 years the UKCS offshore industry has suffered four fatal accidents, claiming the lives of 38 offshore workers and flight crew. The last fatal incident, which involved the the L2 Super Puma aircraft G-WNSB, occurred off the coast of Shetland on approach to Sumburgh Airport and the Crown Office has confirmed that a Fatal Accident Inquiry will be held.

In the five-year period since this incident there have been no fatal helicopter accidents in the UKCS sector, despite significant offshore activity. As an indicator of current UKCS operations, over 124,000 sectors were flown in 2018, totalling 77,286 flight hours and helicopters were used to transport 750,245 passengers. This marks an increase in overall activity, which in 2017 totalled 99,031 sectors flown and 69,005 flight hours, but a decrease in the numbers of personnel transported, which fell from 820,158.

In September 2013 the CAA initiated a review to examine the risks and hazards of offshore helicopter operations in the UK, conducted in conjunction with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the Norwegian Civil Aviation Authority. A report of the review was published in February 2014 entitled CAP1145: Safety review of offshore public transport helicopter operations in support of the exploitation of oil and gas.

An action from the review was to set up a CAA-led safety governance group for offshore helicopter operations in the UKCS sector, now known as the Offshore Helicopter Safety Leadership Group (OHSLG). One of the primary purposes of the group is to assess the ongoing effectiveness of implemented safety initiatives to ensure tangible measurable safety benefits are delivered. This has seen the introduction of controls measures such as flying limitations in the most severe sea conditions to improve the chances of rescue and survivability, better emergency breathing equipment, changes to the way in which pilots are trained, improved helicopter design and increased oversight of helideck safety.

Concurrent with the CAP1145 release was the formation of global industry group HeliOffshore. Its work is based around a safety strategy that identifies the most likely potential accident types and the goals that it believes must be achieved to prevent them from occurring. The group also identifies goals that need to be achieved to allow people to survive accidents if they do happen. Some of its key safety programmes includes flight path management, helicopter terrain awareness and warning, flight crew operating manuals and health and usage monitoring, among others.

In order to provide North Sea oversight, the OGUK Aviation Safety Technical Group meets quarterly. Participation from a diverse and comprehensive stakeholder group including regulators, other industry associations and helicopter operators ensures this group is ready and able to identify and resolve current and emerging aviation issues.

3535

4.2 Current Helicopter Types

At the end of 2018, the active UKCS helicopter fleet numbered 74 aircraft and comprised a mix of medium and heavy twin-engine airframe types. Since 2001, only heavy and medium twin-engine helicopters have been used for commercial air transport (CAT) on the UKCS. This is because two-pilot light helicopter operations generally do not have sufficient range or payload to meet contemporary offshore commercial requirements.

The active fleet has therefore increased slightly in 2018 compared to 2017, with four more airframes than at the end of 2016. Four more Airbus H175 aircraft have been added to the fleet, and one additional AW139, while one H155 has left service. Other types have remained unchanged.

The helicopter types in active use for UKCS offshore oil and gas support as of the end of 2018 are shown in the table below.

Figure 27: Current Helicopter Types used for UKCS Offshore Oil and Gas Support

Type Weight Class Introduced In FleetLeonardo AW139 Medium 2005 20

Airbus AS365 N3 (Dauphin) Medium 1979 2Airbus H155 Medium 2007 1Airbus H175 Medium 2016 12

Leonardo AW189 Heavy 2014 2Sikorsky S92 Heavy 2005 37

As in previous years the S92 helicopter remains the most common type in use in the UKCS, making up half of the offshore fleet and carrying two-thirds of passengers transferred in 2018 (498,478). The AW139 is second, carrying 16 per cent of passengers (121,127).

4

36


36

4.3 Offshore Helicopter Reportable Accidents

Helicopter accidents and serious incidents, as defined in Regulation (EU) No 996/2010, are reported to the CAA. In addition, all flight safety occurrences, as described by the CAA’s CAP 382, are reported to the CAA using the mandatory occurrence reporting (MOR) scheme. There are reports submitted every month, providing constant oversight of safety-related occurrences.

From 1997 to 2018, four fatal accidents claimed the lives of 38 offshore workers and flight crew. Two accidents were caused by catastrophic component failure and two were attributed to human factors. Sixteen reportable non-fatal accidents have also occurred since 1997. The causes include major component failures, pilot error, lightning strikes, major airframe damage, and main and tail rotor damage. In most cases, only the helicopter was damaged but, infrequently, these accidents have resulted in injury to personnel.

2018 was an accident-free year in offshore helicopter operations. As a result, the UKCS’ five-year average all accident rate has decreased from 0.52 to 0.26 per 100,000 flying hours. The accident rate data show that the five-year average for fatal accidents has remained between 0.2 and 0.5 per 100,000 flying hours for the last decade and in 2018 reached zero for the first time since 2001.

Figures 28 and 29 illustrate the distribution of UKCS fatal and all reportable accidents from 1997 to 2018, as well as fatal and all accident rates per 100,000 flying hours.

Figure 28: Fatal and All Accidents Distribution

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

0

1

2

3

4

5

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Num

ber o

f Fly

ing

Hour

s

Num

ber o

f Acc

iden

ts

Non-Fatal Accidents

Fatal Accidents

Flying Hours

Source: OGUK

37

Figure 29: Fatal and All Accident Rates per 100,000 Flying Hours

0

1

2

3

4

5

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Acci

dent

Rat

e pe

r 100

,000

Fly

ing

Hour

s

Five-Year Average Fatal Accident Rate

Five-Year Average All Accident Rate

Source: OGUK

4

38


4.4 Accident Analysis

A breakdown of reportable accident causes from 1997 to 2018 is provided in the following charts.10 As 2018 was an incident-free year, the data below are unchanged from last year.

From 1997 to 2018, operational causes (flight and ground) accounted for 35 per cent of accidents, 40 per cent were due to technical failures and 25 per cent caused by external factors.

All the operational accidents that occurred during flight were attributed to pilot error. Eighty-seven per cent of the technical failures were attributed to dynamic component failures (main rotor gear box, main rotor blade and tail rotor). A structural issue accounts for the remaining 13 per cent.

For the 25 per cent of accidents due to external factors, all resulted from weather-related events, including four lightning strikes and an encounter with a water spout.

Figure 30: Breakdown of Reportable Accident Causes, 1997 to 2018

Lightning Strike, 4

Water Spout, 1

Source: OGUK

Tail Rotor, 2

Main Rotor, 2

Main Rotor Gear Box, 3

Structure, 1

Technical, 8

External, 5

Opera onal, 8

Controlled Flight into Terrain (CFIT), 3

Ground Handling (RAMP), 1

Abnormal Runway Contact (ARC), 1

Unknown, 1

Operational Accidents

Technical Accidents

Collision with Obstacle During Take-Off and Landing (CTOL), 1

System/Component Failure or Malfunction (Non-Powerplant) (SCF-NP), 1

Primary Accident Causes, 1997-2018

External Accidents

10 For accident events to be identified using a recognised international code, categorisation and causation follows the International Civil Aviation Organisation/Commercial Aviation Safety Team Common Taxonomy Team Taxonomy. Operational (F) = an event related to the helicopter while in flight or abnormal contact with terrain Operational (G) = an event related to the helicopter while on the ground. Technical = an event involving system/component failure or malfunction, fire/smoke. External = an event involving icing, turbulence, wind shear, thunderstorm or bird strike.

38

39

5. Significant Activities

In Summary

Since the 2018 Health & Safety Report, considerable activity has taken place across a broad range of health and safety topics, with OGUK providing support through interaction with operators, contractors,

the regulator, the UK and Scottish governments as well as with other industry groups.

OGUK has continued to co-ordinate the resolution of issues affecting UKCS operations. The regulatory challenge to circumstances where emergency response and rescue vessels (ERRV) might not be available to provide cover was satisfactorily addressed through good collaboration between operators and the regulator and resulted in the issue of a technical note. Similarly, concerns over current venting and flaring systems are being addressed through the newly formed task finish group with a plan for next steps expected later this year.

Both the European Commission and the UK Competent Authority (CA) have been leading on their respective post-implementation reviews of the Offshore Safety Directive (OSD) and the SCR 2015 regulations. OGUK has assisted with the survey process and, in regard to the SCR 2015 review, has held a joint workshop with the CA and industry to review responses. Both reports are due to be issued in 2020.

The HSE is currently undergoing an internal process to introduce new inspection guides and update or reissue current versions. These guides cover various stand-alone topics and allow the HSE to form an opinion on an operator’s performance against the criteria set out within them. To enable a good level of feedback, OGUK has facilitated the sharing of these documents with operators and continues to work with them to ensure that comments and possible areas of improvement are communicated back to the HSE for consideration.

OGUK works to ensure greater visibility on topics of relevance by holding or planning external events. These have included the Examining Doctors' Conference, the HCR workshop, the Aviation Seminar and will conclude in November 2019 with the first combined HSE Conference, held in Aberdeen.

Challenges to health and safety remain a consistent reality and continuous improvement is paramount. The use of new technologies, the managed introduction of new processes, better understanding on subjects such as human factors and encouraging generous sharing of data across companies will be key. OGUK remains committed to ensuring that industry never becomes complacent and maintains its focus on improving health and safety for everyone working across the UKCS.

4




objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to





objects at 28%






26% of all injuries




operation this year









Performance


335In 2018 nearly 127,500





per 100,000workers


755,245Over







has decreased from

0.52 to


40


5.1 Forums, Groups and Networks

Many of OGUK’s activities are managed through forums, networks and technical and work groups made up of representatives from member companies and other invited stakeholders who have relevant expertise and responsibilities. The diagram below shows the permanent health and safety groups, but as and when required, task finish groups are established to address discrete work scopes under the direction of the relevant technical group.

These task finish groups typically produce industry good practice in the form of guidance and/or technical notes or recommend and develop improvements in existing processes (e.g. developing a sustainable process for maintaining and updating population data previously kept within the HSE’s HCR database). There were six such groups in operation in the past twelve months covering: assurance and verification; accident and failure frequency data; venting and flaring; ERRV unavailability; defining the role of the technical authority; and the carriage and notification of medications offshore.

Control & Instrumentation Electrical Helicopter

Resilience

OperatorsHealth &Safety

AviationSafety

OccupationalHealth &Hygiene

MajorHazards

Health &Safety

H&S

Network

Technical Group

Forum

Safety Related Industry Group (OGUK represented)

OMAHAC - Offshore Major Accident Hazards Advisory CommitteeEERTAG - Evacuation, Escape & Rescue Technical Advisory GroupOHSLG - Offshore Helicopter Safety Leadership Group

Technical Group (structure agreed and will be reinstated if required)

OMAHAC

EERTAG

OHSLG

41

5.2 Regulatory Engagement

OGUK maintains a productive working relationship with all relevant industry regulators. For the Health & Safety team, the primary regulator is the HSE, both in its own right and as part of the Offshore Safety Directive Regulator (OSDR) The OSDR is the Competent Authority (CA) responsible for implementing the requirements of the EU Directive on the safety of offshore oil and gas operations.

In addition to the HSE, OGUK also maintains close links with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the Maritime Coastguard Agency (MCA) in all matters pertaining to the safety of aviation and maritime operations.

A collaborative approach to maintaining and improving offshore safety standards is demonstrated in the development of offshore inspection guidance. OGUK ensures the HSE’s update process receives suitable feedback and suggested improvements from industry to guarantee they remain fit for purpose. This approach was seen to work well during the HSE’s development of their regulatory guidance concerning walk-to-work and multi-operation vessels which was published in 2019.

The current listing of published and in draft Inspection Guides can be seen in Figure 31 below.

Figure 31: HSE Inspection Guidance

Available In Development

• Control of Work• Evacuation, Escape and Rescue• Operational Risk Assessment• Safety Critical Element Management and

Verification• Temporary Refuge Integrity• Well Competence• Well Control• Well Examination• Well Integrity• Offshore Pipeline Integrity Management• Loss of Stability & Positioning• Mechanical Handling and Crane Operations• Maintenance Management• Loss of Containment• Noise and Vibration• Workforce Engagement• Thorough Review Summaries

• Inspection of Structural Integrity Management• Human Factors • Diving Operations• Audit, Monitoring and Review• Active Fire Protection• Marine Operations• Aviation Operations• Corrosion Management• Functional Safety• Cyber Security

5

42


The Maritime and Coastguard Agency also regulates the offshore industry, as it holds responsibility for the prevention of loss of life at sea. This means that emergency response, rescue and evacuation topics often fall under the remit of the MCA. The agency runs a Topside Medical Providers Search and Rescue (SAR) forum attended by the OGUK Medical Advisor and industry medical advisors, which this year produced guidance on how industry should handle the evacuation of individuals suffering acute psychiatric emergencies offshore. The MCA is also a member of the Evacuation Escape and Rescue Technical Advisory Group (EERTAG) and provides support to OGUK’s Aviation Safety Technical Group.

The aviation sector of the industry is regulated by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) which works to ensure that safety standards are met. The CAA participates in the OGUK Aviation Safety Technical Group, which works on topics such as the trialling of installation weather systems, the updating of CAP437 (Standards for Offshore Helicopter Landing Areas) or improving dangerous goods awareness across the industry.

5.3 Tripartite Committees

OGUK represents the offshore oil and gas industry on three influential and legally constituted tripartite groups. The groups and their respective remits are:

Offshore Major Accident Hazards Advisory Committee (OMAHAC) — This strategically focused group includes members who represent regulators, operators and owners and worker representatives, supporting the work of the OSDR in the management and control of offshore major accident hazards.

Broadly speaking, the group aims to encourage dialogue and cooperation between the relevant stakeholders and periodically review the quality and effectiveness of the standards and policies available for the management and control of offshore major accident hazards, recommending improvements and, by exception, help to co-ordinate research into relevant topics and the production of common guidance.

Evacuation Escape and Rescue Technical Advisory Group (EERTAG) — The scope of this group’s interest encompasses equipment and procedures to be used in emergency escape and recovery from on-platform events, or from external events such as ship collision. This therefore includes arrangements for alarm systems, access to the muster point or the temporary refuge, evacuation, escape direct to the sea and rescue and recovery to a place of safety. The scope also includes the suitability and performance of personal protective equipment for use in emergencies.

Over the last 12 months the group has expanded its interests to cover reviews of previous incidents and discussions on issues such as the role of the Marine Responsible Person and coxswain competence.

Offshore Helicopter Safety Leadership Group (OHSLG) — The primary purpose of the group is to facilitate dialogue between those involved in helicopter operations in the UKCS, monitor the progress of recommendations made to others, co-ordinate and lead the communications of the review to stakeholders and media, and assess the ongoing effectiveness of implemented safety initiatives to ensure tangible measurable safety benefits are delivered.

There is a strong collective commitment from all involved to deliver positive safety changes for all those involved in offshore helicopter travel in the UKCS.

OGUK has supported all three groups throughout 2018 and also provides secretariat support to the former two.

43

5.4 Other External Groups and Organisations

In order to ensure that a consistent focus on safety is maintained and lesson-sharing remains a top priority, OGUK continues to work with external groups and organisations both in the UKCS and Europe. Such bodies include:

Step Change in Safety — SCiS is a member-led organisation, bringing together operators, contractors, trade unions, regulators and the workforce to continuously improve the safety across the UKCS. OGUK works in close collaboration with SCiS to ensure that where overlaps exist, they are acknowledged and the lead organisation is identified.

International Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP) — OGUK is a member of the Safety Committee and the Aviation Sub-Committee, ensuring that international initiatives are suitable for UKCS operations and that all duty holders are made aware of any initiatives.

Process Safety Forum (PSF) — The Forum was set up to provide a platform whereby initiatives, good practice, incident learnings and process safety strategy can be distilled and shared across all the industry sectors, with the aim of preventing major incidents. Most onshore UK industry associations involved in managing major accident hazards are represented on the forum and OGUK attendance provides a link between offshore and onshore industries.

Pipeline Users Group (PLUG) — This is an industry-managed group focused on issues affecting the safe operation of subsea pipelines and risers. OGUK is a non-operational member of the group and works with them to address issues such as the updating of the Pipeline and Riser Loss of Containment (PARLOC) 2012 Report.

Industry Search & Rescue Helicopter Consortium (iSARH) — The consortium was formed under formal agreement to manage all matters pertaining to the operation of the iSARH. Whilst not a participant, OGUK provides a supporting role and assists the group in matters that require broader industry involvement.

Offshore Petroleum Industry Training Organisation (OPITO) — OGUK supports the development, review and policy change of competency and training standards through the UK Industry Forum (UKIF) and by attending specific industry work groups.

National Offshore Industry Associations (NOIA) — OGUK attends an annual Training Working Group meeting with the Norwegian Oil and Gas Association (NOROG), Netherlands Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Association (NOGEPA) and Olie Gas Danmark (OGDK) to maintain the mutual recognition of basic survival and emergency response training standards between national sectors. The group maintains two documents — Guidelines for Mutual Recognition of Specialised Safety and Emergency Response Training for North Sea Operations, and Mutual Recognition for Basic Safety Training — both of which can be found on the OGUK website.

HeliOffshore — This is the global, safety-focused association for the offshore helicopter industry, tasked with delivering industry-wide safety programmes that enhance safety worldwide. OGUK participates as a member of its safety strategy panel and, by working in collaboration, helps ensure the continuation of safety initiatives such as the North Sea ADS-B trial, which aims to assess the feasibility and potential safety benefits of enhanced broadcast and surveillance technology for offshore helicopter flights.

RenewableUK — OGUK involvement with this group is primarily through ad-hoc meetings relating to aviation operations.

5

44


Marine Safety Forum — The forum actively promotes good practice and initiatives to enhance safety within the marine sector of the oil and gas industry. OGUK participates in the group’s steering committee and thereby ensures that the represented organisations co-ordinate activities and share expertise effectively. Along with the MSF and other North Sea NOIAs, OGUK also sponsors the related maintenance and publication of the Guidelines for Offshore Marine Operations (GOMO), which provides international standards for safety in this area.

5.5 Consultations

In addition to regular liaison with regulatory authorities, OGUK also co-ordinates formal responses to public consultations to ensure that industry views are represented. Recent consultations are noted below.

Offshore Safety Directive ReviewThe Offshore Safety Directive (2013/30/EU) establishes minimum requirements for safety and environmental protection across the European Union for offshore oil and gas operations. The Commission has an obligation to conduct an evaluation of the Directive in order to assess whether it has achieved the objective as set out in Article 1, i.e. establish minimum requirements for preventing major accidents in offshore oil and gas operations and limiting the consequences of such accidents.

Through this evaluation, the Commission shall also take into account how Member States have implemented the Directive into national rules and legislation. As required, the Commission will submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on its assessment and shall include any appropriate proposals for amending the Directive.

The consultation has gathered views on the implementation of the Directive, its effectiveness, relevance, coherence, EU added value and efficiency, as well as any need for further development and adjustment. Input received from the public consultation will become a main element for evaluating and assessing the experiences in relation to the Directive and its implementation.

Safety Case Regulations 2015 Post-Implementation ReviewA post-implementation review (PIR) is a process to assess the effectiveness of a regulation after it has been implemented and operational for five years, and which provides the analysis required to establish whether, and to what extent, the regulation:

• has achieved its original objectives• has objectives which are still valid • is still required and remains the best option for achieving those objectives• can be improved to reduce the burden on business and its overall costs

The regulations are now due for review and in order to complete this, the Competent Authority has been working with OGUK to ensure that stakeholder views on the effectiveness of the Regulation is captured. A questionnaire was issued to duty holders and their subsequent feedback was reviewed at an HSE/OGUK workshop in September. The final report will be submitted to government for their review in 2020.

45

5.6 Publications

The review of existing OGUK health and safety guidance documents and technical notes is ongoing. It is envisaged that completion of this programme should be achieved by the end of 2020. As part of the process, some documents will be withdrawn, while others will undergo formal review and update. The following OGUK publications have been published in the last year:

Fire Risk Management in Offshore Accommodation — This note provides advice to duty holders on the assessment and management of fire risks affecting offshore accommodation cabin spaces, by describing and overall approach and suitable methodology. The document was first published in early 2018 but required a further review to bring it into line with current thinking. After further work by the group and in collaboration with the HSE, the document was reissued in 2019.

Unavailability of the Emergency Rescue and Recovery Vessel (ERRV) — The document was produced to cover situations where the ERRV might not be able to provide effective rescue and recovery arrangements, for example, during adverse weather conditions. The note describes recommended steps to follow in such circumstances and includes an in-depth check list that can be used by the offshore leadership team to assist decision-making on whether or not to cease operations.

Environmental Health for Offshore Installations — These guidelines were fully revised and updated to provide a practical approach to good practice in the provision of food, water, and accommodation offshore. It is an essential reference document to those who have a role in ensuring the safe provision, management, servicing and maintenance of food and water supplies offshore and those who would have to provide an on-site response to an outbreak of infectious disease, including food poisoning.

Medications and Medical Equipment for Offshore Installations — The first edition of this document was written in 2000 to provide additional guidance to that contained in the then Approved Code and Practice (ACOP) to the Offshore Installations and Pipeline Works (First-Aid) Regulations 1989. This revised and updated version describes the levels and type of medical provision required to meet good practice in the provision of workplace medical care to those working offshore.

5

46


5.7 2019 Key Acti viti es

Hydrocarbon Release PreventionIn response to the HSE’s concern about major hydrocarbon releases occurring in the North Sea, OGUK has been working with its members, the regulator, Step Change in Safety and the Maximising Economic Recover Asset Integrity Task Group (MER-AITG) to develop a robust release prevention plan.

Shaped by the outputs of an industry HCR prevention workshop run by OGUK in April 2019 and combining the work streams managed by SCiS and the MER-AITG, the graphic below provides an overview of the initiatives that are either underway (shown in bold) or under consideration (in grey).

The three groups will continue working together to ensure the efficacy of this high-level plan, engage with the regulator, operators and with offshore leadership in particular, and will provide industry with updates on whether the interventions are having an impact on reducing HCRs.

The development of a set of Principles of Process Safety Leadership for offshore oil and gas, building on experience gained outside the industry, is of note. The principles include clear and positive process safety leadership; senior leadership involvement in and understanding of managing major hazards; active engagement with the workforce; robust and regular auditing of major accident hazard barriers and sharing good practice and performance information across industry.

Occupational Exposure to BenzeneIn early 2018, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) recommended a reduction in occupational exposure levels (OEL) for benzene from 1 part per million (ppm) to 0.05 ppm. OGUK has been monitoring the progress of the proposal through the trilogue process, and is preparing to develop a common industry approach to meeting a new, lower standard in collaboration with other industry bodies and regulators.

People Process Plant

• Principles of Process Safety Leadership

• MAH Awareness• Webinars• Ops/OIM Forum• HCR Peer Review

• Alerts, Moments & HVL• Good Practi ce Stories• Assurance etal TFG• Human Factors• Learning from outside

our industry• Plant Reinstatement• MoC

• Covered in the MER AI Road Map

• Leadership• Competence• Engaged• Focused

• Simple• Risk based• Relevant

• Integrity• Effi ciency• Maintained• Risk based

47

Mental Health and WellbeingDuring 2019, mental health and wellbeing has been a key topic of discussion in OGUK groups and forums. As well as sharing good practice and recent experience between members, groups have also heard from guest speakers, who shared their perspectives on managing mental health and wellbeing on the offshore industry. A survey of what member organisations were doing in this area was developed, based on the recommendations from 'Thriving at Work, the Stevenson-Farmer independent review of mental health and employers.' The responses to the survey indicated that the mental health core standards are comprehensively addressed in current oil and gas industry practice, along with some of the enhanced standards.

Assessing Fitness to Work Offshore OGUK is the custodian of the offshore medical assessment process for the UKCS, defining the requirements for assessment in the publication Medical Aspects of Fitness for Work Offshore: Guidance for Examining Physicians and registering doctors approved to conduct the assessment. The medical guidelines were last updated in 2008 and are currently under review, taking into consideration feedback and requests from various stakeholders in the process, including installation operators, examining doctors, and the workforce. The review contains two major workstreams: the industry’s risk tolerance for specific health conditions, and associated assessment criteria; and the administrative approach to the process.

The deliverable for this process is an updated, fit-for-purpose Medical Aspects of Fitness for Work Offshore: Guidance for Examining Physicians accepted by industry as providing proportionate health risk management and compatible with existing mutual recognition frameworks, as well as upholding existing regulatory exemptions and approval.

Safety Case for the FutureThe safety case regime has fundamentally changed the way industry maintains safe operations, but the makeup of the case itself has largely remained the same little over the past 25 years, despite clear advances in information technology and the continually evolving approach from the industry to improve understanding and management of major hazards.

To ensure that the safety case continues as a driver for improvement in process safety, OGUK held a workshop to identify common problems or areas for improvement in the current approach, and to recommend potential solutions. The aim of the project was to identify changes with the potential to increase the benefit brought to industry and the regulator by safety cases while reducing the administrative burden of writing and maintaining them. The areas targeted were:

• Thorough Review — This initiative was undertaken by the HSE and resulted in the development and publication of its Thorough Review Inspection Guide

• Material Change — The production of example-based guidance to help users understand what is and what isn’t a material change

• Workforce Engagement — Engage with the HSE to understand the scope of regulatory requirements for workforce participation in safety case development and update, and to provide routemap to identify areas of best practice

• Guidance — To review and identify ways to consolidate and simplify the current regulatory guidance and supporting forms/templates and to reduce redundant safety case content where appropriate

HSE ConferenceIn November 2019, OGUK will hold its first combined Health, Safety and Environment Conference bringing together senior leaders, the regulator, HSE professionals, operations personnel and many others to hear what industry is doing across a range of issues including hydrocarbon prevention, mental health, fatigue, human factors and more. A key feature of the event will be the sharing of good practice in all of the above areas.

5

48


6. Glossary

BOSIET Basic Offshore Safety Induction and Emergency TrainingCAA Civil Aviation AuthorityCat-A EBS Category A Compressed Air Emergency Breathing System

A compressed air breathing system that can be deployed at very short notice and/or underwater for underwater escape

Dangerous occurrences Certain specified events as defined in RIDDOR 2013, includes events such as dropped objects, hydrocarbon releases, fires or explosions

Duty holder In relation to a production installation, this means the operator, and in relation to a non-production installation, the owner

EASA European Aviation Safety AgencyERRV Emergency response and rescue vesselFOET Further Offshore Emergency TrainingHAVS Hand Arm Vibration SyndromeHCR Hydrocarbon release(s)HSE Health and Safety ExecutiveICP Independent Competent PersonIOGP International Association of Oil & Gas ProducersKP Key ProgrammeKPI Key Performance IndicatorLagging indicator Output oriented measurement of past performanceLeading indicator Input oriented prediction of future performanceLTIF Lost time injury frequencyMAH Major accident hazardMCA Maritime and Coastguard AgencyMOR Mandatory Occurrence ReportNUI Normally unattended installationOIM Offshore installation managerOMAHAC Offshore Major Accident Hazards Advisory CommitteeOPITO The Offshore Petroleum Industry Training OrganisationOver-seven-day injuries Accidents that cause an employee to be away from work or unable

to perform their normal work activities for more than seven consecutive days

Personal safety Protecting an individual from harm Process safety Managing major hazards that may cause incidents that harm many

people e.g. fires, explosions or structural collapse Reportable injury A work-related injury that has either resulted in an employee being

away from work, or unable to perform their normal work duties, for more than seven consecutive days due to their injury, or which is listed as a specified injury

49

RIDDOR Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations

Safety critical maintenance backlog An accumulation of uncompleted maintenance associated with safety and environmental critical elements (SECE) that is still to be cleared

SAR Search and rescueSC Safety criticalSCR Safety Case Regulations 2005/2015SECE

Safety and Environmental Critical Elements

Parts of an installation and such of its plant (including computer programmes), or any part of those – (a) the failure of which could cause or contribute substantially to a major accident; or (b) the purpose of which is to prevent, or limit the effect of, a major accident

Specified injuries Defined list of reportable injuries detailed in Regulation 4 of RIDDOR 2013

Topside Doctor A registered medical practitioner providing support from onshore to the offshore medic in connection with an illness or injury

6

50


Notes

52


ISBN 978-1-913078-21-8© 2019 The UK Oil and Gas Industry Association Limited, trading as OGUKISBN 978-1-913078-21-8© 2019 The UK Oil and Gas Industry Association Limited, trading as OGUK

oilandgasuk.co.uk

[email protected]

@oilandgasuk

Oil & Gas UK

health and safety report 2019 · 4 healt afet epor 2019 4 1.foreword w elcome to oguk’s 2019...

Documents