Document type
Download 0.73 Mb. View original pdf
|
| Example If the layout of an offshore platform includes a blastwall, its location should be identified, but the precise blast withstand capacity that it will eventually have does not need to be provided, but the high-level process by which it will be determined and ALARP is achieved needs to be described. In addition, the process by which it was determined that the blastwall is required as opposed to, say, a solution involving a bridge-linked platform where the blastwall was not required should be described in the ALARP demonstration. Example The temporary refuge and evacuation arrangements for an offshore installation need to be designed fora certain number of people. This number is difficult to change as the design progresses and so the number of persons on the installation needs to be given in the Design Safety Case and this number should correspond to the expected operations to be carried out on the installation. Example As part of the hydrocarbon containment SCE, an overview of the corrosion management strategy is required, but without the need for specific corrosion allowances to be identified. Example If 3 × 50% fire pumps have been selected rather than 4 × 50%, this should be included in the ALARP demonstration as it is usually not possible to add an additional fire pump later in the design. If the choice has not been made, a high level description of the process that will be used to determine the layout should be given with the safety case showing that the design is equally capable of both outcomes. In relation to ongoing assurance once the plant is operational, where critical decisions are made early in the design process that have a significant bearing on the risk, the number of persons required on the petroleum infrastructure or similar, this should be described. For example, if a pipeline is such that internal inspection by a pig is not possible, this restricts the type of assurance activities that can be done and so a demonstration of why it is ALARP to do this is required. 56 7.4.6.2 Hazards and Inherent Safety The safety case must summarise the range of the options for the development and summarise how the selected concept reduces risks to a level that is ALARP. In doing so, it must demonstrate that the risk from each hazard is reduced to a level that is ALARP. This will involve the consideration of, amongst other things, inherent safety and risk reduction measures that are not in themselves SCEs including Elimination and substitution of hazards Overall concept (subsea wells, manned platforms etc Inherent safety Layout Reduction of potential leak points Location of the petroleum infrastructure Distribution and number of persons and Means of transportation. Download 0.73 Mb. Share with your friends:
|