Health and Safety
Executive
Offshore Directive – HSE
legislative Changes
Jim Neilson
Head Offshore
Diving and pipelines Policy
Deepwater Horizon - 22 April 2010
11 workers killed
Pollution – 4.9 million barrels
Introduction (1)
•
Following the Deepwater Horizon incident in April
2010, the European Commission concluded that the
existing divergent and fragmented regulatory
framework applying to the safety of offshore oil
and gas operations in Europe, along with current
industry safety practices did not provide adequate
assurance that risks from offshore accidents were
minimised throughout the Union
•
On the 28th June 2013, the Offshore Directive was
published
•
The objective of this Directive is to reduce as far
as possible the occurrence of major accidents
related to offshore oil and gas operations and to
limit their consequences
Introduction (2)
•
The UK (HSE, DECC, etc.) will have to
implement the Directive by 19 July 2015
•
DECC and HSE, with support from DfT,
MCA, DEFRA etc. will work together to
deliver this implementation project
•
Today we will present our emerging thoughts
on the impact on the current UK offshore oil
and gas regime
Implementation approach (1)
•
DECC and HSE propose to transpose the Directive wherever possible
trying to retain the current safety standards in the Offshore
Installations (Safety Case) Regulations 2005 (SCR 2005), other
offshore health and safety regulations and existing environmental and
emergency response legislation
•
This approach will: fulfil the Government’s and Industry’s desire to
maintain the current world class offshore regime; maintain effective
and appropriate elements of the existing safety and environmental
regimes, while improving our approach by imbedding the new Directive
requirements; and minimising at every opportunity the impact of any
change on UK interests
•
As many of the Directive’s requirements are already implemented
through the SCR 2005, these regulations will be revoked and reintroduced as the SCR 2015, but with existing provisions expanded,
and new duties added, to implement the Directive
•
DECC will outline later the changes they think may be needed to
environmental legislation
Implementation approach (2)
•
DECC and HSE will follow ‘copy out’ when possible, but in line
with the Government’s Guiding Principles for EU Legislation,
when appropriate we propose to:
-
Elaborate the Directive’s wording in places to clarify what is
required (e.g. by adding in “as low as reasonably practicable” to
ensure consistency with the existing UK health and safety
regime
-
Not fully implementing some legal requirements on operators
as they are unenforceable
-
Implement some of the Directive’s requirements without
legislation, using administrative means (e.g. the functions of
the new offshore competent authority in Chapter 1 of the
consultation document)
Maintaining the scope of the UK
regime
•
To maintain health and safety standards during of the most
dangerous offshore activities, we propose to maintain diving
operations involving less than five people (rare events offshore)
within the definition of major accident
•
There is a risk that HSE’s interpretation of offshore installation
could be perceived as gold plating, this will ultimately come down to
how the Courts view the term “facility” (which is not defined in the
Directive) as compared with “structure”, the term used in the UK. If
we do not maintain the UK approach, it could significantly lower
standards offshore by allowing some structures undertaking
activities with major accident potential, to fall out of scope
•
The HSE monitors the movement of installations within UK waters,
and require a notification when an installation enters or leaves the
UK’s water. The Directive only requires notifications from mobile
production installations. The UK intends to maintain its current
approach, as monitoring the movements of non-production installation
(e.g. drilling rigs) is essential to ensuring they follow UK requirements
and so contributes to maintaining safety standards
Notification issues (1)
•
Notifications must now include
environmental as well as safety information
•
Operators to take CA comments on the
design notifications into account when
preparing a safety case
•
Maintaining legal defences?
•
Enter or leave notifications prior to event,
not on the day
Notification issues (2)
•
Well notification to include the
findings of ICP and describe the action
taken
•
Well operator to consult ICP before
submitting a material change
•
New requirement to ensure that
operations are conducted in line with
the plans in the notification
The Safety Case
•
Must include safety and environmental information (e.g. SEMS
and SECE)
•
Contain a description of the internal emergency Response plan
and CMAPP
•
A statement made after considering the independent verifiers
report, that the record of safety and environmental critical
elements and their scheme of maintenance as specified in the
report will be suitable
•
Need to be more explicit that the operator must revise the
safety case in respect of a material change
•
Operators to provide any other information the CA feels
necessary before a case can be accepted
Internal emergency response plan
•
Information needed generally covered in
OPEPs and PFEER emergency plan
•
Will require some additional information (e.g.
oil spill response gap)
•
New requirement to describe these in the
safety case as the internal emergency
response plan
•
Plans may need to be updated depending on
future activities and locations, this for the
operator or owner of the installation
Dismantling a fixed production
installation
•
Sufficient details to update the description
of the internal emergency response plan
•
Describe the means of isolating all
hazardous substances, and the permanent
sealing of the wells from the installation and
environment
•
Description of major hazard risks associated
with decommissioning
•
To maintain control systems for preventing a
major accident to the environment
Independent verification
•
From a safety perspective, industry already establishes an
independent verification scheme for safety critical elements.
However, substantial changes needed as the Directive
describes the verification scheme differently, there are new
requirements and also a need to include SECEs within the
verification scheme
•
Article 17(2) states that independent verification shall be
without prejudice to the responsibility of the operator or
owner for the correct and safe functioning of the SECEs. This
is a new requirement, but as this principle already broadly
applies in the UK, we do not think a legal requirement is
needed
•
This is a difficult area that we are still considering. For
example, do we need to use the SECE term, is there a
difference for non-production installations between before
enters waters or commences operation, and as this includes
well examinations do we need to add any new bits to DCR
Corporate major accident
prevention policy
•
Does this fall only on corporations?
•
To the UK, it does not make sense to only have some
of the operators and owners involved in offshore oil
and gas operations being captured by this duty to
outline their high-level commitment to prevent
major accidents
•
New requirement that operators and owners
prepare a corporate major accident prevention
policy, which covers their installations outside the
union
•
Well operators need to submit a policy with a
notification if not submitted previously
Safety and environmental
management system
•
There is already a legal requirement to have a safety management
system within UK legislation
•
DECC also have in place a voluntary agreement for operators to
produce an environmental management system, which they intend to
make a formal legal duty under their proposals
•
To minimise the changes to the UK’s offshore oil and gas regime, and
burdens on Industry, HSE and DECC plan to maintain the current
arrangements
•
To fully implement the Directive, new requirements are needed for
operators and owners to set out in a document their safety and
environment management system, explain how this is to be integrated
with the overall management system, and then describe this within
the safety case
•
Article 19(1), requires the use of suitable technical measures in order
to promote the reliability of the collection and recording of relevant
data and to prevent its manipulation. We propose to include this with
the safety and environmental management system requirements
Reporting requirements (1)
•
Update on data reporting to follow
•
When an activity carried out by an operator
(installation or well) or owner poses an
immediate danger to human health or
significantly increases the risk of a major
accident, the Directive requires that they
must take suitable measures, including
suspending the activity, until the danger or
risk is adequately controlled. When an
operator or owner takes such action, they
must notify the CA no later that 24 hrs
after taking action
Reporting requirements (2)
•
New requirements relating to companies registered in the UK,
and conducting oil and gas operations themselves (as licensees
or operators) or through subsidiaries outside the European
Union, to report on request any major accident in which they
have been involved
•
The information to be reported is not defined, and we did
consider including this within the legislation. However, it is
possible that the information needed may be slightly different
depending on the major accident, and longer-term, national
regulators may want to agree a consistent approach in terms
of the information requested. For these reasons, we are not
proposing to define the information required in legislation
•
The Directive requires the UK to have a broader requirement
to notify all major accidents, or a situation where there is an
immediate risk of a major accident
Transitional arrangements (1)
-
Existing installations are those that existed on 18 July 2013
-
Operators of production installations that came into existence, or owners of
non-production installations without a UK safety case and working in UK
waters for the first time, after the 19 July 2016 the new laws apply
immediately
-
Owners of other non-production installations, and production installations
which came into existence after 18 July 2013, must comply by the earlier date
of the 19 July 2016 or the date of their next thorough review
-
Operators of existing production installations (other than those executing well
operations) which existed prior to 18 July 2013, must comply by the earlier
date of the 19 July 2018 or the date of their next thorough review
-
Operators executing well operations, the new laws apply on the 19 July 2016,
unless this involves an existing installation with an earlier implementation date
-
To comply with the new legal requirements, it may be considered sufficient if
an existing well notification or safety case is submitted, showing clearly the
material changes and new requirements
-
This may require safety case material changes to be submitted at least three
months prior to when compliance with the new law is required
Transitional arrangements (2)
•
An analysis of the thorough review dates of non-production and
production installations in the UK has indicated that the majority of
non-production installation safety cases are due to be assessed
between April and July 2016. Most of the production installations
safety cases need assessment between April and July 2018
•
As these transitional arrangements will make it impossible for the
UK’s offshore CA to assess and accept safety cases within the
specified timeframes, and an installation cannot be operated without
an accepted safety case, DECC and HSE must work with Industry to
find an acceptable way forward
•
Initial discussions between DECC, HSE and Industry have reached an
agreement in principle that operators and owners will book an
assessment date with the new CA. This will ensure that each operator
and owner will meet these transitional arrangements, but more
importantly, that the CA will give a commitment to assess the safety
case, and if appropriate accept it, by the agreed deadline
•
In agreeing this way forward, Industry have recognised that in most
cases the timescales agreed with the CA, would be shorter than the
transitional arrangements outlined in the Directive
Regulator requirements and powers
•
Article 6(6) requires the CA to inform the licensing authority if the operator
no longer has the capacity to meet the requirements of the Directive. SCR
2015 – Regulation 33 addresses this need
•
Article 11(3) requires the CA to respond to the design notification with
comments to be taken into account by the operator in the safety case, and if
they have no comments, to make a statement to that effect. We have included
this within Regulation 6(4) of SCR 2015
•
Article 18(a) requires the CA to prohibit the operation, or commencement of
operations, on any installation where the measures outlined in the safety case
or notifications are considered insufficient. Regulation 35 of the SCR 2015
has been introduced to give the CA this power
•
Article 18(c) of the Directive “requires the operator to take such
proportionate measures as the CA considers necessary to ensure compliance
with Article 3(1). The UK argues that what steps are reasonable for an
operator or owner to take to prevent a major accident are already outlined in
our legislation and guidance. If an operator does not meet these duties, then
we can issue an Improvement Notice (with Schedule) to require them to
improve the measures taken. We have concluded that this approach meets this
requirement
Reducing the stock of regulations
•
The Offshore Installations (Safety Zones)
Regulations 1987
•
The Submarine Pipelines (Inspectors etc)
Regulations 1977 and Offshore Installations
Inspectors and Casualties Regulations 1973
•
Offshore Installations (Logbooks and
Registration of Death) Regulations 1972 and
Offshore Safety (Miscellaneous
Amendments) Regulations 2002
Additional legislative change
•
As the HSE Board requested when considering unconventional gas in
October 2013, we are proposing to bring underground coal
gasification within the scope of our onshore oil and gas major hazard
legislation
•
As hydrocarbon gas is now being stored onshore in solution mined
salt caverns and other geological formation that have never contained
oil and gas, and there are plans to do this offshore, we plan to update
our onshore and offshore legislation to bring these work activities
within our onshore and offshore oil and gas major hazard legislation
•
In 2013, we updated the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act
(Application Outside Great Britain) Order. This included changes,
which clarify when a structure is an offshore installation. For
consistency and clarity, we propose updating the definition of
offshore installation in the Offshore Installations and Pipelines
(Management and Administration) Regulations
•
We also propose to amend the definition of operator of a production
installation and well operator to ensure a duty holder can be
identified for high risk decommissioning activities, if a petroleum
license holder is no longer in place
Offshore ACoPs
•
There are two offshore ACoPs, one relates to the
Prevention of Fire and Explosion, and Emergency
Response on Offshore Installations and the other is
on Health Care and First Aid on Offshore
Installations and Pipeline Works
•
We are reviewing these at this time as part of the
Lofstedt commitment to review all ACoPs
•
HSE’s initial assessment is that these ACoPs should
remain, but be simplified and updated where
possible. A summary of the changes proposed to
update and simplify each ACoP will be in the
consultation document
Next steps
• Website developed – Launched 6 January
http://www.hse.gov.uk/offshore/directive.htm
• Impact Assessment development – Industry focus
groups in March and April
• Workshops planned 26 February and 17 March
(London)
• Formal consultation in June – September 2014
• New guidance published March 2015
• New Regulations come into force July 2015