Skip to main content

5 Critical Lessons Learned from Inspecting 25,000 Upstream Oil & Gas Assets

Image
By

5 Critical Lessons Learned from Inspecting 25,000 Upstream Oil & Gas Assets


Introduction:


The upstream oil and gas sector presents unique challenges in ensuring asset integrity and process safety.1 Extensive inspections of over 25,000 wells and associated facilities have revealed crucial insights into the common pitfalls and best practices for maintaining safe and reliable operations. 


This post will explore five key lessons learned from these inspections, highlighting critical findings and actionable recommendations for the industry.


1. Background: OSHA PSM Inclusion and RAGAGEP Compliance


The 1998 oil and gas separation facility accident, which tragically resulted in four fatalities, served as a watershed moment for safety regulations. Consequently, in 1999, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) removed the upstream exemption from its Process Safety Management (PSM) regulations. This pivotal change mandated adherence to Recognized and Generally Accepted Good Engineering Practices (RAGAGEP) across all facets of upstream operations, including well sites, processing, and separation facilities.





2. Unique Challenges in Upstream Inspections


Inspecting upstream assets differs significantly from the more centralized environment of refineries and chemical plants. Key challenges include:


  • Geographical Dispersion: Managing thousands of well sites scattered across vast terrains poses logistical and monitoring complexities unlike the concentrated units found in downstream facilities.
  • Data Management Issues: The historical evolution of the industry, marked by numerous ownership changes, has led to inconsistent naming conventions for wells and facilities, hindering accurate record-keeping across sprawling operations.
  • Scale of Equipment: While a single operator's network might possess a comparable number of pressure vessels, piping circuits, and tanks to a large refinery, the oversight is often less centralized, increasing the potential for inconsistencies.





3. Common High-Risk Findings (Near-Miss Conditions)


A consistent pattern of high-risk near-miss conditions emerged from the inspections, underscoring persistent vulnerabilities:


  • Pressure Vessel Deficiencies: Issues such as missing or incorrect relief devices, corrosion, and improper repairs were frequently identified.
  • Piping Integrity Issues: Undocumented modifications, a lack of thorough inspections, and evidence of erosion or corrosion were common findings.
  • Storage Tank Hazards: Inadequate venting mechanisms and the absence of secondary containment posed significant risks.
  • Safety System Failures: Non-functional emergency shutdown (ESD) systems and obstructed fire protection equipment were alarmingly prevalent.
  • Documentation Gaps: Missing Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs) and outdated inspection records hampered effective risk management.



4. Surprising Finding: New Well Sites Aren’t Always Compliant


Contrary to the assumption that newly constructed wells should readily pass API-510 and API-570 inspections, over 40% of new well sites presented high-priority issues requiring immediate corrective actions. Common problems in new sites included:


  • Incorrectly installed relief devices.
  • Substandard welding and overall construction quality.
  • Absence of critical safety documentation.
  • Non-compliance with RAGAGEP standards, often attributable to rushed commissioning processes.



Recognized and Generally Accepted Good Engineering Practices RAGAGEP standards





5. Recommendations for Effective Inspection Programs


Based on these lessons, implementing robust inspection programs requires a multi-faceted approach:


  • Standardized Naming & Data Tracking: Establish and enforce unified asset identification systems to improve data accuracy and management.
  • Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) Focus: Prioritize inspection efforts on high-risk equipment like pressure vessels and piping to maximize impact.
  • New Construction Audits: Mandate thorough pre-commissioning inspections to identify and rectify non-compliance issues from the outset.
  • Operator Training: Enhance training programs to emphasize PSM and RAGAGEP compliance, particularly for personnel at remote locations.







Conclusion:

The inspection of 25,000 upstream oil and gas assets highlights that while the geographical and data management challenges of the sector can amplify risks, many high-priority safety issues are recurring and can be systematically addressed through diligent inspection practices. The surprising non-compliance rates in new facilities underscore the critical need for rigorous inspection protocols from the very beginning of an asset's lifecycle.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Understanding LV Earthing Systems: TT, TN, and IT Explained

By
Understanding LV Earthing Systems: TT, TN, and IT Explained Earthing systems are crucial for electrical safety, protecting people and equipment from faults and shocks. In low-voltage (LV) installations, the IEC 60364 standard defines three main earthing systems:  TT, TN, and IT , each with distinct characteristics and applications. This blog post explains these systems, their subtypes, and key safety considerations, referencing the attached technical screenshots for clarity. 1. Classification of LV Earthing Systems Earthing systems are identified by a  two-letter code : First Letter: Neutral Connection T (Terra)  – Neutral is  directly earthed  at the transformer. I (Isolated)  – Neutral is  not earthed  or connected via high impedance (≥1000 Ω). Second Letter: Equipment Earthing T  – Frames are  locally earthed , independent of the neutral. N  – Frames are  connected to the neutral , which is earthed at the transformer. 2. Typ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Understanding Short-Circuit Analysis with ETAP and the IEC 60909 Standard

By
U nderstanding Short-Circuit Analysis with ETAP and the IEC 60909 Standard Introduction: Short-circuit analysis is a critical aspect of electrical power system design and safety. It involves calculating the magnitude of fault currents to ensure the proper selection of protective devices and to verify that equipment can withstand fault conditions. This post will discuss how ETAP software performs short-circuit analysis in compliance with the IEC 60909 standard, a key standard in this field. Why is IEC 60909 Important? The IEC 60909 standard provides a globally recognized framework for calculating short-circuit currents in AC power systems. [Ref: IEC 60909-0:2016] Its importance stems from several factors: Ensuring Safety: Accurate short-circuit calculations, as mandated by IEC 60909, are crucial for selecting appropriately rated protective devices (circuit breakers, fuses) that can safely interrupt fault currents. [Ref: Short Circuit Analysis (IEC 60909 Standard) : Extent & Requir...
1 comment
Read more

Understanding Short-Circuit Calculations in Electrical Systems

By
U nderstanding Short-Circuit Calculations in Electrical Systems Introduction: Short-circuit calculations are fundamental to the design, protection, and safety of electrical systems. Determining the magnitude of fault currents allows engineers to select appropriate protective devices (like circuit breakers and fuses), ensure equipment can withstand fault conditions, and ultimately safeguard personnel and property. This post will explore some of the key equations, formulas, and underlying principles involved in these crucial calculations. Key Concepts and Equations: When performing short-circuit calculations, several factors and formulas come into play. Here are some essential ones: Transformer Impedance: It's important to note that transformer impedance is often based on the transformer's self-ventilated rating (e.g., the OA base is used for ONAN/ONAF/OFAF transformers). Voltage Notation: Throughout these calculations, line-to-line voltage in kilovolts is represented as (kV)...
1 comment
Read more