Anda di halaman 1dari 16

Shell U.K.

Limited

21st July 2009

Report : EP200907328245
Filing key :

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT


REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY
SCAFFOLDING ON OFFSHORE
FACILITIES
FINAL REPORT
First Issue

Keywords:
This document is the property of Shell U.K. Limited, and the copyright therein is vested in
Shell U.K. Limited. All rights reserved. Neither the whole nor any part of this document may
be disclosed to others or reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form
by any means (electronic, mechanical, reprographic recording or otherwise) without prior
written consent of the copyright owner.

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON
OFFSHORE FACILITIES

Page i

Distribution List
Name

EP200907328245

Reference

July 2009

Page ii

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING
ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES

Authorised For Issue


Prepared by;

Accepted by;

Signed :

Signed :

Chris Grant (EPE-P-FP)

Chris Wilson (EPE-P-ED)

Field Productivity Team

Safety Engineering Team Leader

Reviewed by;
Alan Sherriff (EPE-P-ED)
Philip Brunton (EPE-S-HU)

July 2009

EP200907328245

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON
Page iii
OFFSHORE FACILITIES

Contents
BACKGROUND............................................................................................................. 4
PURPOSE OF HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT ....................................................... 5
KEY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................... 5
ACTION CLOSE-OUT ................................................................................................... 5
ATTACHMENTS............................................................................................................ 6
APPENDIX 1 WORKSHEETS

EP200907328245

July 2009

Page 4

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING
ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES

BACKGROUND
A Lean/Kaizen event was held on Brent Charlie during September 2008 which
established a number of improvement opportunites to improve HSE risk exposure
and efficiency of platform scaffolding operations. In summary these opportunities
included better planning, reduced manual handling and transportation wastes due to
more strategic storage of materials and also the use of alloy scaffold materials.
Brent Charlie had previously been testing an alloy system scaffold however the
Kaizen event established this was not fot for purpose due to its fixed dimensions and
as a result the use alloy scaffold tube was identified and developed as an opportunity.
Susequent performance tracking and analysis has demonstrated the improvements
on Brent Charlie have reduce carrying of materials by 50% and the overall task time
per m3 of scaffold has reduced by 32%.

July 2009

EP200907328245

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON
Page 5
OFFSHORE FACILITIES

PURPOSE OF HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT


st

A hazard identification (HAZID) exercise and risk assessment was completed on 1


July 2009 at Tullos, Aberdeen. The purpose of this HAZID/risk assessment was to
determine what hazards there are associated with using aluminium alloy scaffolding
systems offshore compared to the current practice of using steel scaffolding
systems.
A brainstorming session was used to prompt discussion of potential hazards. The
potential consequences and effects of these hazards were considered along with
the controls in place to manage them and a qualitative assessment was made of the
residual risks with these controls in place
The following personnel attended the HAZID:
Name

Role

Chris Wilson

Safety Engineering Team Leader

Chris Grant

Field Productivity Team

Scott Fraser

Brent Operations Support

Andy Fairnie

SORT4 Delivery Manager (Brent)

Roger Esson

SORT4 Delivery Manager (CNNS)

Hamid Iravani

Corrosion Engineer

Keith Greenwood

Sort 4 SHEQC Advisor

KEY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS


A number of safety concerns about the use of aluminium alloy scaffolding in an
offshore environment were addressed during the HAZID and risk assessement. The
worksheets recording the discussion from the HAZID and risk assessment are
included as Appendix 1. A presentation prepared by SORT4 addressing some of
the safety concerns raised is attached to the document.
It was concluded from the risk assessment that there are no safety reasons why
aluminium alloy scaffolding should not be used on offshore facilities provided the
controls identified in the worksheets are adhered to. This primarily concerns the use
of scaffolding systems in Zone 1 hazardous areas and areas where it could be
exposed to mecury contamination.

ACTION CLOSE-OUT
The following actions were raised during the HAZID and risk assessment session.
Responsibility for the close-out of the actions rests with Roger Esson, SORT4
Delivery Manager with Chris Grant, Field Productivity Team acting as close-out coordinator. Unless otherwise agreed with the co-ordinator, all actions should be
st
targeted for completion by 1 September 2009.

EP200907328245

July 2009

Page 6

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING
ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES

ATTACHMENTS
Presentation prepared by SORT4 addressing concerns raised about the use of
aluminuium alloy scaffolding systems in an offshore environment.

Scaffold Alum
Alloy.ppt (Compr...

July 2009

EP200907328245

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON
Page 7
OFFSHORE FACILITIES

APPENDIX 1

HAZARD IDENTIFICATION WORKSHEETS

EP200907328245

July 2009

Page 8 HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES

HAZARD

Incendive sparking

Incendive sparking is
initiated by an exothermic
reduction of iron oxide (in the
form of rust) by aluminium
particles. Three basic
mechanisms produce the
pre-requisite conditions for
incendive sparking. The first
is single impact sparking and
requires relatively high
energy (minimum 300
Joules). Subsequent impact
sparking may occur from
striking a previously
deposited aluminium smear
resulting from an earlier
impact of an aluminium
object on a rusted steel
surface. This mechanism is
the most probable as it
requires much lower impact
energies (1-5 Joules) to
initiate the spark. The third
mechanism is friction
sparking. This type of
sparking is most unlikely to
occur as the temperature
caused by sparking are

July 2009

POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCES
Ignition risk in
flammable gas
environment

Ignition of other
flammable materials
e.g. oily rags.

CONTROLS

RISK ASSESSMENT

ACTION

As per rcommended guidance in


Hazardous Are Code IP15
Standards for electrical and nonelectrical equipment for use in
hazardous areas place
restrictions on the use of light
metals on the outside of
equipment to prevent this risk. For
the same reason, the use of
aluminium ladders or scaffolding
may create an ignition source,
and this should be considered
before they are used in a Zone 1
area.

Based on the controls outlined


the risk of incendive spark
igniting flammable gas cloud on
our facilities is considered to be
very low and is acceptable.

ACTION 1 Communicate
requirement for Cat 2 Hot
Work WCC for alloy
scaffold use in Zone 1
areas.

Allloy scaffolding is already


being used in other areas of the
offshore industry e.g. Norway
and there is no evidence that
incendive sparking is a source
of ignition of hydrocarbon
releases.

Risk assessment for use


of alloy in zone 1 areas to
be built in to ISSOW
system.

To manage this risk it is


recommended that Cat 2 hot work
Work Control Certificate (WCC) is
used for alloy scaffold in zone 1
areas.

The main risk associated with


incendive sparking is associated
with erection and dismantling of
alloy scaffolding rather during
its use for work activities. This
is covered by the Cat 2 Hot
Work WCC within Zone 1 areas
for erection and dismantle only.
Once scaffold is built/in place
risk is negligible.

Alloy scaffold should not be used


in Zone 0 classified ares unless
the plant has been shutdown and
hydrocarbon free,
Any other flammable materials
e.g. oily rags should be identified
and removed prior to scaffold
erection/dismantling.

EP200907328245

C. Grant to action with


Production Services
ISSOW owners.

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES

HAZARD

POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCES

CONTROLS

Page 9

RISK ASSESSMENT

ACTION

much too low to cause


ignition.

Corrosion due to salty


environment

Degradation of
material leading failure
which could lead to
possible collapse of
scaffolding

The oxide coating formed on


Aluminium and its alloys makes
them resistant to corrosion.
Surface damage to the oxide
coating is self repairing.

Any degredation of the alloy will


be a slow process. Any signs of
corrosion will be picked up by
routine inspections before it
becomes critical.

Visual inspections of erected


structures are carried out weekly.

Alloy corrosion rates are


significantly smaller than those
for steel tube in an offshore
environment. E.g. 7g/m2 alloy
versus 933g/m2 steel over an 8
year period.

Materials are inspected at time of


build and dismantle.
Damaged materials are
quarantined. Inspection carried
out by competent person.

Incorporate guidance in to
SORT4 procedures on
how to identify corroded
alloy tubes that need to be
taken out of service.
ACTION Roger Esson

Erected structures have a


maximum 2 year build life.
Tube conforms to European
standards for temporary
structures.
Users conform to scaff tag and
erected scaffold register systems.
Poor Scaffold Integrity due to
mixture of tube materials
(Variation in dynamic
properties of steel and alloy

EP200907328245

Failure of scaffold
structure with potential
injury to personnel
and damage to

Steel tube and Aluminium tube


shall not be mixed during Scaffold
construction.
In a designed scaffold where

July 2009

With adequate training, the


obvious weight difference
between steel and alloy tubes
and inspection of the build
should ensure the risk is very

Incorporate guidance in to
SORT4 procedures to
ensure tube materials are
not mixed

Page 10 HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES
HAZARD
tubing)

POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCES
equipment

CONTROLS
ladder beams are used, Scaffold
Design Engineer sign off is
required. This applies to scaffold
structures used as lifting frames.

RISK ASSESSMENT
low.

ACTION

ACTION Roger Esson

Scaff tag system should identify


any build issues.
Corrosion due to dissimilar
metals, alloy tube and steel
fitting fittings

Failure of scaffold
structure with potential
injury to personnel and
damage to equipment

Scaffold is a temporary structure


and Company procedures specify
that the erection time should not
exceed two years.
Visual inspections of erected
structures are carried out weekly.
Materials are inspected at time of
build and dismantle.
Damaged materials are
quarantined. Inspection carried
out by competent person.

Historical use of alloy lifting


beams and alloy lifting beams
and system scaffold on Brent
Charlie has not identified any
corrosion problems if the
scaffold is dismantled within
this timeframe.
Introducing a sampled
inspection of fittings, as part of
the weekly scaff tag
recertification process, should
ensure the risk is managed.

Confirm Alloy/Steel
corrosion is not an issue
with the controls in place
via Draugen experience.
ACTION Andy Fairnie
Incorporate guidance in to
SORT4 procedures to
monitor any corrosion at
tube/fitting interface as
part of inspections. This
should continue until we
can assure ourselves this
is not an issue.
ACTION Roger Esson

Human Factors An erected


alloy structure feels different to
steel structure to walk on

Personnel feel unsafe


or uncomfortable

Communication, familiarisation
and understanding of the new
system.

Genuine concern which needs


to be address through staff
engagement

Incorprate in to SORT4
Q&A engagement pack
ACTION Roger Esson

Manual handling issues due to


perceived additional material
requirements

July 2009

Unfamiliar with build


requirements and use
of alloy tubing

Scaffold structures constructed in


line with contractor procedures
alloy bay sizes are the same as

EP200907328245

Brent Charlie pilot use analysis


shows material carry time has
been reduced by 50% and

Review locations of
scaffold storage racks to
ensure proximity to

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES

HAZARD

POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCES

CONTROLS
steel scaffold bays. This means
the number of materials is the
same, therefore no extra manual
handling.

Page 11

RISK ASSESSMENT
overall task time reduced by
30% through the use of alloy
tube and strategic storage
locations.
Alloy tube 30% of steel weight.

ACTION
worksite.
Incorporate alloy bay size
guidance in to SORT4
procedures and
commincate requiremts
with offshore scaffolder
staff
ACTION Roger Esson

Manual handling issues due to


an increased number of alloy
tubes being carried

Injury to personnel
caused by carrying too
many tubes (which are
much lighter than
steel)

The use of Aluminium tube


reduces the Manual Handling
impacts, as the Aluminium tube is
approximately one third the
density of steel.

Tubes may be slippery


when wet

Introducing guidance/caps on
number of tubes to be carried.

With adequate training and


supervision the risk is very low.

Incorporate in to training &


awareness session to
provide guidance on
number of tubes to be
carried.
ACTION Roger Esson

Site supervision to ensure rules


are adhered to.
Envrionmental conditions should
be assessed as part of worksite
task risk assessment.
Non slip gloves such as Showa
310 or 377 should be used
accoding to wearther conditions.
Alloy tube corrosion while in
storage

EP200907328245

Failure of scaffold
structure with potential
injury to personnel

The occurrence of salts,


especially chlorides marginally
reduces durability but Aluminium

July 2009

Any degredation of the alloy will


be a slow process. Any signs of
corrosion will be picked up by

Incorporate guidance in to
SORT4 procedures on
how to identify corroded

Page 12 HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES
HAZARD

POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCES
and damage to
equipment

CONTROLS
is generally better than Carbon
Steel

RISK ASSESSMENT
routine inspections before it
becomes critical

See above corrosion mitigation.


Degradation of Alloy scaffold
tube due to exposure to liquid
nitrogen

Failure of scaffold
structure with potential
injury to personnel and
damage to equipment

N2 spreads bunded as per


procedures

Degradation of Alloy scaffold


tube due to exposure to
mercury

Failure of scaffold
structure with potential
injury to personnel and
damage to equipment

Hydrorcarbon systems are


flushed and purged prior to any
breaching.

N2 spread bund is non load


bearing

Mercury test are carried out prior


to any vessel entry activities.
Any alloy tube exposed to
hydrocarbon spills should be
removed and inspected.
Link to ISSOW controls.

ACTION
alloy tubes that need to be
taken out of service.
ACTION Roger Esson

Very low likelihood of liquid


nitrogen coming in to contact
with alloy scaffold due to bund
design.

None required.

Based on the controls outlined


the risk of significant mercury
exposue on our facilities is
considered to be very low and is
acceptable.

Incorporate guidance in to
SORT4 procedures on
how to identify corroded
alloy tubes that need to be
taken out of service.

Allloy scaffolding is already


being used in other areas of the
offshore industry e.g. Norway
and there is no evidence that
Mercury exposure is an issue.

SORT4 to verify impact of


Mercury impact on alloy
tubing based on exposure
levels on Shell
installations by end of
August 2009.
In the interim, special
precautions should be
taken to ensure no
mercury spills occur.
ACTION Roger Esson

Erosion of Alloy scaffold tube


due to exposure to blasting
activities

July 2009

Failure of scaffold
structure with potential
injury to personnel

Control measures in place for


blasting to prevent damage
caused by inadvertent blasting of

EP200907328245

Task risk assessment and site


contols ensure scaffold
structures are not exposed to

None required.

HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES

HAZARD

POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCES
and damage to
equipment

CONTROLS

If any tube is blasted the job


should be stopped and structure
inspected.
Visual inspections of erected
structures are carried out weekly.
Damaged materials are
quarantined. Inspection carried
out by competent person.

EP200907328245

RISK ASSESSMENT
blasting.

the scaffold tubes

July 2009

Page 13
ACTION

Page 14 HAZID AND RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE USE OF ALLOY SCAFFOLDING ON OFFSHORE FACILITIES

July 2009

EP200907328245