Military reference books and manuals (2009-2023, Volume 4)

Procedure for Machine Guards

Page 10 of 11

REVISION/REVIEW LOG

Revision Date

Authority

Custodian

Revision Details

05 October 2004

CHSSE Manager

Central Safety TL

Initial Issue

30 June 2008

Alan McNulty

Abbas Islamov

General: Throughout the Procedure the

(CH&S Manager)

(Central Safety TL)

document numbering for referred procedures has

been changed from UNIF to AzSPU.

Section 1. Introduction:

1.1 Purpose - wording changes;

1.2 Scope - wording changes.

The following inclusions to Section 1 are:

1.3 Legislation & Standards;

1.4 Company Requirements;

1.5 Stopping Unsafe Work;

1.6 Deviations;

1.7 Document Review;

1.8 SSOW Specific Cross References; 1.9

Language Facilitation

Section 2. Definition - is added.

Section 3. Roles & Responsibilities:

Paragraph 3.1 SM, SC, OIM - is added;

Changes made to the responsibilities of Area

Authority

Section 6. Selection and Use of Guards

Wording changes.

Section 8. Guard Removal

Wording changes.

Appendix A Feedback & Improvement

Suggestions has been added to the Procedure

05 December 2008

Yuliy Zaytsev

Adalat Mamedov

Authority position/name and custodian

Safety & Compliance

Central Safety TL

name have changed to reflect org

Systems Manager

changes in HSE&TD.

14 August 2009

Yuliy Zaytsev

Niyaz Mamedov

New wording in regard to MOC is added to

Safety & Compliance

HSE Systems / CoW

Paragraph 7.3

Systems Manager

Adviser

The procedure’s numbering is structurally

changed in accordance with Standardized

Document Control Procedure Template

requirements.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 14 August 2009

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00057-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 1 of 22

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2

This number supersedes UNIF-HSE-PRO-117-C1

Authority:

AzSPU Safety & Compliance

Custodian:

Lifting Operations Technical Authority

Systems Manager

Scope:

AzSPU

Document

Administrator:

Document Asset Technician

Issue Date:

05 October 2004

Issuing Dept:

Safety & Compliance Systems

Revision Date:

08 December 2010

Control Tier:

Next Review

31 December 2010

Date:

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 2 of 22

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

1.2 SCOPE

1.3 LEGISLATION & STANDARDS

1.4 COMPANY REQUIREMENTS

1.5 STOPPING UNSAFE WORK

1.6 DEVIATIONS

1.7 DOCUMENT REVIEW

1.8 SSOW SPECIFIC CROSS REFERENCE

1.9 LANGUAGE FACILITATION

1.10

PROCEDURE SUMMARY

DEFINITIONS

RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1 SITE MANAGER (SM) / SITE CONTROLLER (SC) / OFFSHORE INSTALLATION MANAGER (OIM)

3.2 PERSONNEL SUPERVISING MAN RIDING OPERATIONS

3.3 CRANE / FORKLIFT OPERATORS

3.4 BANKS-MAN

3.5 BASKET PASSENGERS

MAN (WORK) BASKET CONSTRUCTION

4.1 CONSTRUCTION

4.2 FROG / BILLY PUGH

4.3 RIDING BELTS

4.4 FORKLIFT CAGES / INTEGRATED WORKING PLATFORMS

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE

CRANE / WINCH SPECIFICATIONS FOR MANRIDING

6.1 INSPECTION, EXAMINATIONS AND CERTIFICATION

6.2 CRANE OPERATING REQUIREMENTS

6.3 WINCH REQUIREMENTS

6.4 FORKLIFT REQUIREMENTS

COMMUNICATIONS

7.1 HAND SIGNALS FROM RIDING BELTS

7.2 FORKLIFT / INTEGRATED WORKING PLATFORM COMMUNICATIONS

RISK ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING

8.1 RISK ASSESSMENT

8.2 PLANNING

HARNESSES & SAFETY EQUIPMENT

9.1 HARD HATS

10 RESCUE PLANS

11 MAN (WORK) BASKET TRANSFER OPERATING GUIDELINES

11.1

OPERATING REQUIREMENTS

11.2

SUITABILITY OF VESSELS FOR TRANSFER OPERATIONS

11.3

WEATHER CONDITIONS

11.4

COMMUNICATIONS

11.5

SAFETY RESCUE EQUIPMENT

11.6

TRAINING

11.7

PRE-TRANSFER OPERATIONS

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 4 of 22

1 INTRODUCTION

Man-riding operations should only take place if no other means can be found to carry out the task.

Man-riding operations shall be conducted under a Permit to Work, with a Level 2 Risk Assessment

conducted and in line with a site / installation specific procedure containing a rescue plan.

1.1 PURPOSE

The purpose of this Safe System of Work is to provide information and guidance on the safe use of

man-riding operations and baskets for transferring personnel between vessels and structures.

Information is provided on individual responsibilities, planning and risk assessment, basket transfer

use, and the maintenance and inspection of associated equipment.

1.2 SCOPE

The contents of this procedure are applicable to all BP owned and managed sites / installations in

Azerbaijan and Georgia. Contractors working on BP owned or managed sites / installations are also

responsible for alignment with this procedure.

- Operating Management System OMS Essentials 3.2.1 and 4.5.1

- BP Group Defined Practice for Control of Work GDP 4.5-0001(Paragraph 3.7)

This document does not replace the procedures prepared and adopted by specialist contractors.

Neither does it supersede any national and local regulatory requirements.

All guidelines contained shall be regarded as the minimum requirements for BP owned or managed

sites / installations in Azerbaijan and Georgia.

1.3 LEGISLATION & STANDARDS

The aim of this Safe System of Work is to achieve ”no accidents”, “no harm to people” and “no

damage to the environment”. To achieve this aim, this SSOW complies with National Legislation, the

terms of the Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) and mandatory BP Standards.

The best International Oil Industry practice and relevant goal setting legislation have been adopted to

reduce the level of risk to as low as reasonably practicable and therefore well below that mandated by

applicable statutory laws and regulations.

In the absence of local regulations, BP Group Standards will apply. In addition, appropriate UK and

US regulations and industry best practice have been considered in setting suitable goals and targets.

The equipment to which this document applies includes, but is not necessarily limited to:

 Man Baskets / Work Baskets / FROG / Billy Pugh

 Man-riding equipment used in drilling operations (harnesses and winches)

 Forklifts and attachments

 Cranes used for basket transfers

 All associated lifting equipment used during basket transfer (for example, slings, shackles,

etc).

1.4 COMPANY REQUIREMENTS

It is a company requirement that all tasks are subjected to an assessment of risk to demonstrate that

risks have been reduced to as low a level as reasonably practicable (ALARP). This can be achieved

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 5 of 22

by complying with the Company‟s existing standards. Where compliance with Company standards

cannot reasonably be achieved, a formal level 2 Risk Assessment will be undertaken to identify any

additional controls and demonstrate that risks remain as low as reasonably practicable. Whether by

compliance with Company Standards or through level 2 Risk Assessment, the Company‟s Golden

Rules of Safety must be complied with. Golden Rules are non-negotiable.

1.5 STOPPING UNSAFE WORK

To stop the continuation of potentially unsafe work at the earliest possible stage, the Control of Work

(CoW) Policy and this procedure for Man Riding Operations make it very clear that all personnel are

obliged and have the authority to “STOP” the work that they consider to be unsafe.

1.6 DEVIATIONS

This procedure is written in sufficient detail that it should be able to be applied consistently at all sites /

installations. There may still be the requirement for some local rules covering site / installation specific

logistical/administrative arrangements and local variations in responsibilities to reflect differences in

organisational arrangements. These local rules should not deviate from the core processes within this

document. Any form of deviation from this procedure, including but not limited to local rules, shall be

requested and authorised in accordance with SSOW, Deviations from Regulations and Procedures

(Doc. No: AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00011-2).

1.7 DOCUMENT REVIEW

This document will be reviewed on an annual basis when users from the sites / installations will have

an opportunity to propose changes to the existing processes and procedures. The document

Technical Authority will be responsible for coordinating this review.

1.8 SSOW SPECIFIC CROSS REFERENCE

This procedure shall, where appropriate, be used in conjunction with this suite of AzSPU Procedures

referenced below.

Document Number

Title of Procedure

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00011-2

Deviations from Regulations and Procedures

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00060-2

Permit To Work

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00063-2

Task Risk Assessment

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00056-2

Lifting Operations

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00002-2

BP Control of Work Standards

1.9 LANGUAGE FACILITATION

Due to the various languages spoken at sites / installations, there is a necessity to assist all with “an

ease of understanding”. Therefore, the development and use of information tools are available.

1.10 PROCEDURE SUMMARY

A Procedure Summary has been developed in a form of a leaflet, which can be carried by the Line

Supervisors while conducting their day-to-day work tasks. The Leaflet summarizes the contents of this

procedure for Man Riding Operations. The Procedure Summary can also be used as a guideline for

Line Supervisors to deliver their daily toolbox talk. (See Appendix B)

2 DEFINITIONS

Site Manager

Site Controller

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 6 of 22

OIM

Offshore Installation Manager

ALARP

As Low as Reasonably Practicable

COW

Control of Work

PTW

Permit to Work

SSOW

Safe System of Work

gHSEr

Getting HSE Right

PSA

Production Sharing Agreement

AzSPU

Azerbaijan Strategic Performance Unit

3 RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1 SITE MANAGER (SM) / SITE CONTROLLER (SC) / OFFSHORE INSTALLATION MANAGER (OIM)

The Site Manager / Site Controller

/ Offshore Installation Manager shall be responsible and

accountable for the application of this procedure in his area of responsibility, He shall ensure:

 That adequate numbers of Competent responsible persons are appointed to manage and

maintain the requirements of this procedure

 All man-riding operations are controlled under the Permit to work system and site / installation

specific procedure

 That this procedure is strictly adhered to for all occasions when it is identified that man riding

basket operations are to take place.

 He appoints a competent person to inspect and certify man riding baskets as safe to use.

 That all transfers by man basket are subjected to a Risk Assessment

 The review of all Risk Assessments

 That all equipment associated with basket operations is regularly inspected and maintained

and has all relevant up-to-date certification

 Training records are maintained and updated

3.2 PERSONNEL SUPERVISING MAN RIDING OPERATIONS

Personnel supervising man-riding operations are responsible for ensuring:

 The safety of all personnel involved in the activity

 That all required equipment is suitable for use and is within test date

 That the operation has been risk assessed and properly planned

 A rescue plan is in place

 That all personnel involved in the operation have been properly briefed on their roles and

responsibilities and their required response in an emergency

 That the activity is executed in accordance with the plan

 That all man-riding operations are halted if conditions become, or are likely to become, unsafe

 That transferred personnel are guided to registration and to the person who will provide their

induction briefing.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 7 of 22

3.3 CRANE / FORKLIFT OPERATORS

In order to be appointed, all crane operators must satisfy the requirements of Safe System of Work

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00056-2 Lifting Operations. In addition, in order to operate a crane for man

basket operations they must have at least one years operating experience.

During man-riding operations, crane drivers are responsible for:

 Ensuring that they have a full understanding of their roles and responsibilities for basket

operations

 Observing absolute care and safety at all times during man basket operations

 Not performing any other work or leaving their position at the controls until the basket has

been safely landed

 Ensuring that they have visual contact with the banks-man and the basket at all times during

the operation

 Halting operations and informing the supervisor whenever they consider the activity is unsafe

or likely to become unsafe.

3.4 BANKS-MAN

Basket transfers shall not take place without a banks-man. Banks-men are responsible for:

 Ensuring that they have a full understanding of their roles and responsibilities for man-riding

operations

 Observing absolute care and safety at all times during man-riding operations

 Maintaining visual contact with the basket and the crane operator at all times during the

operation

 Adhering to the system of communication with the crane operator that was agreed in the plan,

including radios and hand signals

 Assisting the crane operator in ensuring that the transfer is carried out safely

 Halting operations and informing the supervisor whenever they consider the activity is unsafe

or likely to become unsafe.

3.5 BASKET PASSENGERS

During work or transfer, basket passengers are responsible for:

 Behaving in a safe and responsible manner

 Complying with instructions provided by the person supervising the transfer

 Attending fully to any passenger safety and instruction briefing provided prior to the transfer

 Halting operations and informing the supervisor whenever they consider the activity is unsafe

or is likely to become unsafe

 Clear communications to banks-man or crane operator

 Wearing fall protection at all times during the transfer

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 8 of 22

4 MAN (WORK) BASKET CONSTRUCTION

4.1 CONSTRUCTION

The following guidelines apply to the construction of all man baskets used by BP in Azerbaijan and

Georgia:

Passengers must be protected from harm: man baskets should be of sound construction, in good

and safe condition, and must be fully enclosed to prevent passengers from falling, being crushed,

trapped or struck.

In an emergency, passengers should not be exposed to any further danger: should personnel

become trapped in a man basket, they should not be exposed to any further danger and they must be

capable of being freed.

The basket must be protected from falling: fall arrest devices must be in place to prevent the

basket falling if the primary means of support fails

(this can entail suitably rated ropes with

independent anchorages.

In the absence of specific design criteria for fabricated man-riding personnel baskets, guidance on

certain safety features can be adopted from the British Standard BS 2830 - which addresses

Suspended Work Platforms.

This guidance gives:

 A minimum height from the floor to the underside of the top handrail to prevent persons

toppling over.

(Minimum height = 910mm but recommended height of 1150mm preferred).

 A maximum vertical distance between the handrail/intermediate rails to prevent persons falling

through. (Max = 500mm)

 A minimum of 4 Lifting points must align to centre of lift

 Floors to be slip-proof and must be a minimum area for each person working in the basket.

(Minimum area per person recommended = 600mm x 600mm)

 A stipulation that toe boards must be fitted all around the flooring if the basket is open sided.

(Minimum depth 150mm.)

 Mesh sides to aid visibility form basket or visibility for crane operator / banks-man

 Internal handrails to prevent hands/fingers being trapped if the basket swings against an

obstruction.

 Doors (if fitted) must open inwards and have a locking mechanism to prevent inadvertent

opening. Or integral ladder for access/egress

 Basket should have internal anchor points for safety harnesses.

 The lifting slings, if fitted with a fifth leg (top lifting leg) should have a sixth leg in parallel as a

safety back-up. ( Safety Factor for wire rope slings should be not less then 10:1 )

 It must be marked with a SWL and that it is suitable for man-riding

 Certification data plate and markings board

In addition, it is recommended that the following safety features are incorporated.

Note: These are not mandatory but considered good practice/design:

 A roof to protect personnel from falling objects.

 The base of the basket should have rubber buffers to prevent jarring of the spine when being

landed.

 Certification data plate and markings board

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 9 of 22

The certification for the basket (including slings/shackles etc.) must be current, i.e.:

 It must have a proof load test certificate.

 It must have been inspected by a competent person within the previous 6 months

Note: The basket and accessories must also be inspected immediately before each use by a

competent person.

4.2 FROG / BILLY PUGH

Numbers of recorded personnel transfer basket incidents are low, but basket transfers to or from

offshore installations are considered a high-risk operation. The Billy Pugh type of personnel transfer

basket does not comply with regulation 5 of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations

1998 (LOLER) but it can be used in exceptional circumstances, ie emergencies or when transfer is

essential and it is not practicable to gain access by less hazardous means. Alternative forms of basket

such as FROG are available which duty holders should consider if they offer a safer means of

personnel transfer for their needs. These are used for transfer of personnel only and no work is

carried out from them and specific manufacturers criteria for use are to be adhered to.

For additional guidance refer to Offshore Operations Management of Marine Activities within 500

Meter Zone AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00038-3 Section 5.3 Transfers by Frog Personnel Transfer Capsule

4.3 RIDING BELTS

Riding belts are work restraint, work positioning (including rope access and positioning techniques),

fall arrest or rescue systems.

Ridding belts can be used only if:

 A risk assessment has demonstrated that work can, so far as is reasonably practicable, be

performed safely while using the ridding belt

 The use of other, safer work equipment is not justified

 The user and a sufficient number of available persons have received adequate training,

including rescue provision

 The riding belt is securely fitted

 The various components of the riding belt are of sufficient strength to support all known loads

The manufacturer‟s instructions should be checked to consider whether the item is compatible with

other equipment being used. All equipment used in conjunction with ridding belts should be strong

enough to withstand any forces placed upon it and should include an adequate margin for safety. The

equipment‟s safe working loads (or minimum static strength), working load limits or maximum (and

sometimes, minimum) rated loads should be checked.

Any equipment used for work at height is required to meet relevant European Standards (i.e. it is CE

marked and tested to relevant European norms (EN) and all new PPE should be traceable to a

certificate of conformity. The equipment should also be marked with a unique identification number so

that it can be traced back to its point of origin and any test certificates and examination reports.

The need for rapid and effective rescue is particularly important when using riding belts where

a delay may have severe consequences, i.e. when someone is left hanging motionless in a

harness after a fall resulting in „suspension trauma‟ as a result of restricted blood circulation.

The time before loss of consciousness can vary from about 6 minutes to 2 hours, depending

on physical capability and incident severity. Suitable rescue equipment and competent

personnel must be available on site at all times during the completion of tasks at height.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 10 of 22

4.4 FORKLIFT CAGES / INTEGRATED WORKING PLATFORMS

In the absence of specific design criteria for fabricated integrated working platforms guidance on

certain safety features can be adopted from the HSE Safety Notice: PM28 December 2005.



Platforms for use on the fork arms of a truck shall have fork pockets on their underside that will

accommodate the fork arms spaced at the widest practicable distance apart without excessive

clearance between the pockets and forks.



The locating (i.e. pickup) points on carriage mounted and fork arm mounted working platforms

shall be symmetrical about the centre line of the working platform.



The dimensions of the platform shall be as small as possible, compatible with the number of

persons that it is intended to carry and the work they are likely to undertake.



The platform dimension parallel to the fork arms, i.e. forward length of the platform, shall not

exceed 2 times the rated load centre distance of the truck. The width of the platform shall not

exceed the outside width over the truck load wheels by more than 250mm either side.



A positive locking device shall be included on the platform to retain it on the truck when in use.



The floor of the platform shall be of adequate strength, horizontal when attached to the truck in

its elevated position, slip resistant and designed to prevent the accumulation of liquid. Any

openings in mesh floors or between the floor and toe-guards or access gates shall be

dimensioned so as to pre vent a sphere of 15mm diameter passing through.



A top rail being between 1000mm and 1100mm from the platform floor; and at least one

intermediate rail, equally spaced between the top of the toe board and the under side of the

top rail



A toe-board, having a minimum height of 150mm



Suitably sized and positioned handholds shall be fitted within the confines of the working

platform. To allow for safe use, e.g. to allow use with gloved hands, it is recommended that

there is a gap of 90mm between any handhold and the side of the platform.



Other equally effective means of guarding between the top rail and floor, such as infilling with

robust wire mesh, panelling and/or safety glazing may be used.



Gate access should be provided and shall open inwards, upwards or sideways and return

automatically to the closed position. It is strongly recommended that a device is provided that

locks the gate automatically and ensures it cannot be opened once the platform is raised.



Safety harness anchorages shall be included on the working platform

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE

Man-riding equipment shall be inspected and maintained by a competent person in accordance with

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00056-2 Lifting Operations.

In particular, man baskets must be:

 Inspected immediately prior to use

 Thoroughly examined before first use and thereafter every six months

 In possession of all relevant up-to-date certification and have a valid thorough examination

record.

In addition to regular inspections, man baskets shall be thoroughly inspected whenever the integrity of

the basket may have been jeopardised or whenever other risks are identified.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 11 of 22

6 CRANE / WINCH SPECIFICATIONS FOR MANRIDING

6.1 INSPECTION, EXAMINATIONS AND CERTIFICATION

All cranes shall be operated and maintained in accordance with AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00056-2, Lifting

Operations.

Cranes / winches which are suitable for lifting people should be clearly marked at the crane operator‟s

location „SUITABLE FOR LIFTING PEOPLE‟ or „SUITABLE FOR MAN-RIDING‟ and marked with the

maximum number of people it can carry. Any crane that is not marked should not be used to lift

people or for man-riding.

In particular, the following guidelines apply to all cranes and associated lifting equipment used for

lifting personnel:

 All necessary certification for the crane or winch, winch ropes, crane ropes, end terminations,

hook blocks and other associated equipment must be current

 The crane / winch and associated equipment must have undergone a thorough inspection by a

suitably competent person within the previous twelve months

 The crane must be in good condition and must have a full and complete documented

inspection record

 All crane safety systems must be fully functional, including Rated Capacity Indicators, over

hoist limiters, emergency stop facilities, etc.

6.2 CRANE OPERATING REQUIREMENTS

Cranes used for lifting people should be equipped with hoist brakes that can be operated

mechanically under all load conditions. The brakes should be able to support the specified test

overload for the equipment.

The brakes should be automatically applied when the drive is in the „OFF‟ or „NEUTRAL‟ position, and

on failure of the power supply to the motor or control device. The braking operation should be

progressive, to avoid any shock loading of the hoisting system.

A second brake system should be provided for emergency use in case the normal braking system

fails. For cranes this should be fitted to both load and boom hoist systems and be located as near to

the hoist drums as possible. This brake should be strong enough to hold indefinitely the weight of the

carrier/slings and the number of people carried. For hydraulic transmission system cranes, the braking

effect of the hydraulic system itself would be considered as meeting the requirement for a secondary

brake.

Clutches or other means of disengaging the drive train are prohibited for personnel-lifting operations.

This is unless there is a fail-safe interface making it impossible to disengage the clutch when the drive

train is in motion or when there is a load on the hook. Free fall operation of load hoist or boom hoist

systems is dangerous and should be avoided. Any speed-change gearbox should be of constant

mesh type and designed so that it is not possible to change the gear ratio while the hoist system is

carrying any load.

The crane should be fitted with an emergency stop located for the operator to use. It should be

protected against accidental use. Operating the emergency stop should arrest all motions of the

crane. In the event of failure to re-start the prime mover, it should be possible to recover the carrier by

manual methods.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 12 of 22

In the event of total power failure the crane should be fitted with a means of lowering the work basket

to a safe location.

Cranes used for man basket transfers must be capable of:

 Maintaining the basket in a safe condition in the event of a power or system failure (for

example, primary brake system failure), and of allowing the safe lowering of the basket

(manually if necessary) to a safe position for the passengers to be recovered safely

 Preventing free-fall of the basket in the event of a primary brake or transmission system failure

 Preventing inadvertent free-fall when the drive train is in motion or whenever the hook is

loaded

6.3 WINCH REQUIREMENTS

Winches used for man-ridding should be specifically designed for the task and fitted with the correct

safety devices consisting of the following:

 Independent second brake system

 Limited line pull device (Normally set to 150KG)

 Slack line shut-off mechanism

 Upper and lower limit switches

 Emergency raise / lowering facilities (backup power, air supply)

 Correctly terminated winch rope / accessories with a safety factor of not less then 10:1

 Functional rope spooling device

 Rope drum guard

 Clearly marked emergency stop button within easy reach of operator‟s hand

 Clearly marked control leavers (UP, Down, Raise, lower or similar)

 A clearly visible sign „Suitable for lifting people‟

Additionally the sheave / snatch block used at the crown block shall have a minimum diameter of 19 x

the rope diameter.

6.4 FORKLIFT REQUIREMENTS

Primarily Forklift trucks are intended for lifting materials and not equipment. However, they can be

used with integrated working platforms to allow people to work at height.

It is essential that the working platform is compatible with the truck on which it is used.

Before any combination is used for the first time the working platform and truck manufacturer/supplier

must be consulted. It is particularly important to ensure that:

 The truck/working platform combination has adequate stability under all circumstances in

which it is intended to be used, and shall only be used on firm, well- maintained and level

surfaces. Gradients and uneven or inconsistent ground conditions can affect the stability of the

truck.

 The platform can be securely attached to the truck.

 People on the platform cannot reach hazardous moving parts or controls on the truck.

 The weight of the platform together with its load of people, tools, materials etc. shall be not

more than half of the actual capacity of the truck at the rated load centre distance, maximum

lift height and maximum out reach in the case of telehandlers and reach trucks.

 Personnel on the working platform must wear fall protection at all times

The following functions shall „NOT‟ be capable of movement whilst they are working; tilt, side shift,

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 13 of 22

chassis or mast levelling.

The truck should not be moved while the working platform is elevated, however, minor controlled

positional adjustments are acceptable if they are necessary to allow the task to be carried out safely.

The parking brake shall be applied whenever the working platform is elevated and all wheels choked.

Where applicable, the transmission placed in neutral before elevating the platform.

The user shall ensure that the platform is positively locked onto the truck with which it is to be used.

If the platform is fork mounted then the fork arms on the truck shall preferably extend fully into the fork

pockets. If not this is possible, they shall extend to a distance of at least 75% of the platform length

measured parallel to the axes of the fork arms.

Where possible it is advisable to have a secondary restraining sling from the platform to the mast.

Pre-use checks shall be carried out by an authorised person to ensure that the working platform is

properly located and secured to the truck each time and before it is used.

7 COMMUNICATIONS

Communications for man-riding shall be clearly defined pre task. If radios are to be used care should

be taken to have only the people involved in the operation on the radio channel. Care should be taken

to ensure the radios have sufficient battery charge for the whole operation.

Where possible a banks-man should form part of the work party to communicate to the crane

operator.

Hand signals are acceptable if the crane operator and banks-man have clear vision of the work party

at all times.

7.1 HAND SIGNALS FROM RIDING BELTS

These signals are unique to riding belt operations; the personnel involved with this operation should

be appropriately trained.

Pre task the person in the riding belt and the winch operator will confirm the hand signals that will be

used.

Hand signal posters should be readily available and posted in the appropriate areas.

7.2 FORKLIFT / INTEGRATED WORKING PLATFORM COMMUNICATIONS

There shall be adequate communication between the truck operator and persons on the platform

especially when raising and lowering. Hand held communication devices or a system of signals

should be used where communication is difficult.

When using hand signals an agreed system should be used and all involved trained in its proper use.

An example of commonly used hand signals is given in BS 7121 part 1.

8 RISK ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING

8.1 RISK ASSESSMENT

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 14 of 22

All man basket operations must undergo a Risk Assessment in accordance with AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-

00063-2 Task Risk Assessment.

The Risk Assessment shall determine:

 The nature and degree of all the risks involved

 What extra precautions should be taken to mitigate those risks, including increased levels of

supervision and the competence of the personnel involved

 Whether a practicable alternative and safer means of personnel transfer is available.

Note: If an alternative safer and practicable method of transfer is recognised, it

shall be used in preference to the use of a man basket.

8.2 PLANNING

Following a Risk Assessment, a procedure shall be produced that addresses:

 All identified risks

 The resources, procedures and responsibilities required to ensure a safe operation

 The contingency plans to be employed in the event of an emergency.

 The Equipment used for man riding is of appropriate specification

 Personnel have been trained, Have Experience of Work or transfer from baskets.

 The crane operator or winch man has been trained and assessed as competent for this type of

operation.

 An operator / Mechanic capable of operating / repairing the equipment are available in the

event of an emergency.

 A line of communication has been established between the operator and the personnel

involved in the operation. ( including a dedicated banks-man if required )

 Man-riding operations have adequate communication if working blind to winch or crane

operator.

Note: All involved personnel shall be made aware of their function and

responsibilities included in the procedure.

9 HARNE

SSES &

SAFETY EQUIPMENT

Harness must be worn at all times during man-riding operations, Harness can be worn in different

configurations and the appropriate securing equipment must be available i.e. safety reels, lanyards to

allow for work restraint, fall arrest, and work positioning.

9.1 HARD HATS

Hard hats should be fitted with a chin strap to ensure that they are NOT capable of falling from an

elevated work site.

10 RESCUE PLANS

It is difficult for one procedure to specify an appropriate rescue plan for an explicit site, however, each

BP site where people are exposed to work at height or man riding operations must have a rescue plan

and this must form an integral part of the emergency control procedures.

Most plans will deal with the rescue of a person left suspended in either fall arrest, work positioning or

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 15 of 22

rope access equipment. For the latter, the specialist contractor will already have a plan, equipment

and personnel as part of their standard procedures. In the case of fall arrest or work positioning

equipment, a separate plan should be developed as follows:



 Identify the equipment required. This may include:

o Fall arrestor with retrieval handle

o Specialist rescue equipment such as the GOTCHA System

o Crane and crane basket

o MEWP

o Man-riding winch and basket

o Forklift with personnel basket

o Scaffolds and ladders

 Identify personnel to carry out the rescue.

Note: Most service providers will supply rescue equipment and competent personnel to perform this

work. The worksite may deem this adequate however it is recommended that on sites such as

platforms, personnel in the fire team/rescue team are provided with the appropriate equipment to

perform this task.

Consider the level of medical treatment that may be required (refer to the following paragraph)

Suspension trauma is a medically recognised condition. Everybody who is suspended in a safety

harness runs the risk of shock and unconsciousness due to blood flow insufficiency. Unconsciousness

can become life threatening after only a few minutes.

Shock, caused by a lack of blood flow, is due to the blood accumulating in the lower parts of the body

as a result of the muscles relaxing and the „muscle pump‟ effect stopping. The need for rapid and

effective rescue is particularly important when using personal protective systems where a delay may

have severe consequences, i.e. when someone is left hanging motionless in a harness after a fall.

The time before loss of consciousness can vary from about 6 minutes to 2 hours, depending on

incident severity.

Further information can be found in the HSE Contract Research Report

451/2002, Harness

Suspension: Review and Evaluation of Existing Information. Contact Occupational Health for the

latest advice regarding suspension trauma.

11 MAN (WORK) BASKET TRANSFER OPERATING GUIDELINES

The use of a crane to hoist personnel from one structure or vessel to another is a potentially

hazardous operation if not carried out correctly.

The use of a man basket will only be sanctioned after a Formal Risk Assessment and may only

proceed if no other means of access is available or practicable. (This section is not applicable to Frog

Operations which are covered in Offshore Operations Management of Marine Activities within 500

Meter Zone AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00038-3 Section 5.3 Transfers by Frog Personnel Transfer Capsule)

Note: Any equipment not specifically designated for lifting persons shall not be

used in this manner.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 16 of 22

11.1 OPERATING REQUIREMENTS

The duties of people in supervising or actually carrying out the personnel basket transfer shall be

clearly defined. People usually covered are the Installation Manager, the crane operator, the Master of

the Vessel, and other people nominated by the OIM or the ship's Master to undertake specific duties.

The procedure setting out those involved in the transfer operation should cover the following:

The Offshore Installation Manager should:

 Be satisfied with the fitness, training and briefing of the people to be transferred

 Be content with the suitability of the vessel

 Know the limitations of visibility and sea state

 Be aware of the limitations on transfer by night

 Be aware of the suitability of the crane for personnel transfer

 Check the wind speed limitations on crane operations

 Establish and maintain communication with the Master of the Vessel

 Brief the Master of the Vessel

 Be satisfied with the competence and experience of the crane operator

 Ensure appropriate emergency precautions are in place, e.g. notify the standby vessel before

the transfer

 Be satisfied with the inspection and testing of the personnel basket

The Master of the Vessel should confirm to the OIM that:

 The transfer has been accepted and the procedures understood

 The vessel has a satisfactory station keeping capability

 The deck crew have been fully briefed

 The people to be transferred have been adequately briefed and are fit to be transferred

The crane operator should establish that:

 The crane is fully operational

 The wind speed is satisfactory for safe operation

 The requirements and procedures have been understood

 The banks-man has an unobstructed view and the transfer areas are clear

 Adequate communications have been established with the vessel Master and banks-man

The crane operator shall have been trained and assessed as competent for basket transfer

operations.

In addition, an operator / mechanic, capable of operating the crane, shall be available in case of an

emergency.

The Banks-man and Deck Supervisor should ensure that:

 The transfer procedure is understood

 They can be clearly identified as banks-man and deck supervisor

 The personnel basket is correctly used

 The individuals are fit to transfer and have understood the procedures

 Proper communications have been established

 They each have a full view of the transfer area

 Adequate landing area is available for the basket

Individuals to be transferred should:

 Ensure that the transfer procedure is understood

 Confirm they agree to the transfer

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 17 of 22

 Be able to use correctly the safety equipment provided

Except for emergencies, man riding operations shall only take place in daylight and in good

visibility:

 The basket shall not be used if wind speed is in excess of 7 metres/second, (14 knots) or the

limitations determined by Risk Assessment, if lower.

 Man baskets should not be used in the following conditions:

¾ Electrical storms

¾ Snow or ice

¾ Fog

¾ Sleet

¾ Other weather conditions as determined by risk assessment that could affect the safety of

personnel

11.2 SUITABILITY OF VESSELS FOR TRANSFER OPERATIONS

The type of vessel considered suitable to carry out a transfer should be determined by its ability to

maintain station alongside the installation and should have sufficient clear deck space to safely

receive the basket.

11.3 WEATHER CONDITIONS

Weather conditions are very important factors which should be taken into account, and include

visibility, wind and sea state. Duty holders should specify the maximum wind speed and sea state

beyond which basket transfer is not permissible and the wind speed limitations for the crane

operations.

11.4 COMMUNICATIONS

Both radio and visual communication should be established and maintained between the people

actually conducting the operation.

11.5 SAFETY RESCUE EQUIPMENT

People being transferred in emergencies shall wear self inflating life jackets, suitable clothing and

immersion suits. All life jackets should be equipped with suitable means of illumination during night

transfers. Appropriate rescue and recovery arrangements must be in place (e.g. standby vessel

equipped with a fast rescue craft ready to launch).

11.6 TRAINING

Personnel will be transferred by basket in greater safety and with less apprehension if they have

received training in the techniques involved. The type of training should be included in installation

drills. Inexperienced people or those not trained in the use of personnel baskets should always be

accompanied. At least one person in each transfer must have previously ridden in a man basket.

Note: Transfer by basket is voluntary.

11.7 PRE-TRANSFER OPERATIONS

Prior to transfer operations:

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 18 of 22

 A toolbox talk will be held for all relevant personnel

 The basket shall be thoroughly inspected by the person supervising the transfer

 It must be ensured that landing and lifting areas are clear of all obstructions and that there is

sufficient space to allow secure and safe operation of the basket

 The standby vessel shall be informed of the impending transfer

 People working from the basket or platform wear a safety harness throughout the operation;

 During transfer over the sea, passengers are provided with survival suits and life jackets of an

approved type.

 Effective emergency arrangements must be in place throughout the transfer, the rescue and

recovery arrangements must be capable of recovering people from the sea within specified

performance standards. Where transfer operations over water are carried out in harbours,

passengers should be provided with life jackets as a minimum requirement

11.8 TRANSFER OPERATIONS

During transfer operations:

 The crane driver shall concentrate completely on the transfer operations

 The banks man shall have visual contact with the crane operator and the basket at all times

 Direct radio contact shall be maintained at al times between the basket, crane operator, and

banks man

 All instructions shall be given in metres where radios are employed for communication

 The basket shall only be lifted to a height sufficient to clear any obstacles prior to being

lowered.

11.9 POST-TRANSFER OPERATIONS

The person supervising the transfer operation is responsible for guiding transfer personnel to

registration and to the person who will provide their induction.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 20 of 22

Revision/Review Log

Revision Date

Authority

Custodian

Revision Details

05 October 2004

Central Engineering

Man Riding

Initial Issue as controlled document

Senior Authority

Operations

Technical Authority

07 September

Alan McNulty

John Thompson

General:

2007

CHSSE Manager

Eldar Fiahardinov

Throughout the procedure the document

Barry Riddell (Man

numbering for referred procedures has been

Riding Operations

changed from UNIF to AzSPU.

Technical

Section 1. Introduction:

Authority)

2 paragraphs entered in the Introduction. 1.1

Purpose; Wording changes. Following inclusions

to Section 1 are; 1.2 Scope; Wording changes.

1.3 Legislation & Standards, 1.4 Company

Requirements, 1.5 Stopping Unsafe Work, 1.6

Deviations, 1.7 Document Review, 1.8 SSOW

Specific Cross References (new doc control

numbers), 1.9 Language Facilitation, 1.10

Procedure Summary.

Section 2. Responsibilities:

Is now “Definitions”. New section.

Section 3. Man Basket Construction:

Is now “Roles and Responsibilities”. Changes

made to the responsibilities of SM/SC/OIM,

Personnel Supervising Man Riding Operations;

3.2 Additional bullet point added - „A rescue plan

is in place‟. Crane / Forklift Operators, Banksman

and Basket Passengers; 3.5 Additional bullet point

added - „Clear communications to Banksman or

Crane Operator.

Section 4. Inspection and Maintenance:

Is now “Man Basket Construction”. Additional sub-

sections added.

Section 5. Crane Specifications for Man

Basket Transfer:

Is now “Inspection and Maintenance”. Additional

paragraph added.

Section 6. Risk Assessment and Planning:

Is now “Crane / Winch Specifications for Man

Riding”. Additional sub-section added.

Section 7. Man Basket Operating Guidelines:

Is now “Communications”.

Section 8 Is now “Risk Assessment and

Planning”. It was Section 6 in the previous

revision. It now has additional bullet points under

8.2 Planning.

The following Sections have been added

Section 9. Harnesses and Safety Equipment

Section 10. Rescue Plans

Section 11. Man Basket Transfer Operating

Guidelines

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 21 of 22

Appendices.

3 appendices included to the document as

Follows:

Appendix A: Pre-Start Checklist

Appendix B: Procedure Summary

Appendix C: Feedback & Improvement

Suggestions

16 February 2009

Yuliy Zaytsev

Eldar Fiahardinov,

Paragraph 3.5 Basket Passengers

Safety & Compliance

Lifting Operations

Additional new bullet regarding fall protection is

Systems Manager

Technical Authority

added to the paragraph

Paragraph 4.1. Construction

Additional new bullet regarding certification data

plate is added to the paragraph

Paragraph 6.3 Winch Requirements

Additional new bullet regarding visible signs is

added to the paragraph

Paragraph 6.4 Forklift Requirement

Additional new bullet regarding fall protection is

added to the paragraph.

Requirement regarding wheels choke to a working

platform is added to the content of the paragraph

as well.

Paragraph 11.1. Operating Requirements

Additional requirement regarding adequate

landing area is added to the paragraph

Paragraph 11.5 The title of paragraph is changed

and now is „Safety Rescue Equipment‟.

17 August 2009

Yuliy Zaytsev

Eldar Fiahardinov,

Paragraph 4.2 Frog / Billy Pugh

Safety & Compliance

Lifting Operations

Additional wording along with the reference to

Systems Manager

Technical Authority

Offshore Operations Management of Marine

Activities Within 500 Meter Zone Procedure is

added.

Section 11 Man Basket Transfer Operating

Guidelines.

Additional wording with the reference to Offshore

Operations Management of Marine Activities

Within 500 Meter Zone Procedure is given in

paranthesis.

26 April 2010

Yuliy Zaytsev

Eldar Fiahardinov,

Extension of review date for the procedure

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Man Riding Operations

Page 22 of 22

Safety & Compliance

Lifting Operations

requested due to need for additional research

Systems Manager

Technical Authority

time

05 August 2010

Yuliy Zaytsev

Eldar Fiahardinov,

Additional time for research requested in line with

Safety & Compliance

Lifting Operations

embedded regular frog capsule passenger

Systems Manager

Technical Authority

transfer taking place on offshore facilities

08 December

Yuliy Zaytsev

Lifting Operations

Section 1 Purpose and Scope

2010

Offshore Health &

Technical Authority

Removed reference to Getting HSE right and

Safety Manager

replaced with OMS, Group requirements

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: 05 August 2010

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00059-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED VERSION OF

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 2 of 20

Table of Contents

PURPOSE & SCOPE

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1

SAFETY GOALS

1.1.2

EXPECTATIONS

1.2 Scope

DEFINITIONS

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Legislation & Standards

3.2 Company Requirements

3.3 Stopping Unsafe Work

3.4 Deviations

AZSPU ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

4.1 Single Point of Accountability Marine (SPA Marine)

4.2 AzSPU Marine Authority Organisation

4.3 SPU Marine Authority (MA)

4.4 Operations Marine Authority (SMA)

4.5 Terminal Operations Marine Authority - Supsa (TMA)

4.6 Project Marine Authority (PMA)

4.7 Rig Audit Team

4.8 Marine Authority (MA)

4.9 Marine Discipline Experts

4.10 Marine Practitioners

MANAGEMENT OF MARINE ASSURANCE

5.1 GMS Application

5.1.1

BP SHIPPING

5.1.2

E&P………………………………………………………………………………….10

5.1.3

AZSPU

5.2 AzSPU Marine Management System

5.2.1

AZSPU SSOW FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF MARINE ACTIVITIES

5.2.2

MARINE HANDBOOK

5.2.3

MARINE OPERATIONS MANUAL

5.2.4

SUPSA TERMINAL RULES AND REGULATIONS

5.2.5

AZSPU MARINE SHAREPOINT SITE

5.3 Marine Planning

5.3.1

GENERAL

5.3.2

PLANNING MARINE ACTIVITIES

5.3.3

MARINE OPERATIONS AND MARINE REPRESENTATIVE

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 3 of 20

5.3.4

PERMIT TO WORK PROCESS

5.3.5

INCIDENT INVESTIGATION AND REPORTING

5.4 Procurement, chartering and clearance of marine service providers and

vessels

5.4.1

SCOPE

5.4.2

PROCUREMENT, LEASING OR BAREBOAT CHARTERS

5.4.3

MARINE MANAGEMENT CONTRACTS

5.4.4

TIME AND VOYAGE CHARTERING VESSELS

5.4.5

MARINE ASSURANCE CONTRACTS

5.4.6

MARINE / OFFSHORE CONTRACTORS

5.5 Vessel Assessment process (Excluding Tanker shipments from Supsa)

5.5.1

OBJECT

5.5.2

SCOPE

5.5.3

PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES

5.5.4

VETTING ASSESSMENT

5.5.5

VETTING INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5.5.6

RESPONSIBILITIES

5.5.7

PROJECT VESSEL CLEARANCE (SHORT TERM USE)

KEY DOCUMENTS/TOOLS/REFERENCES

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 4 of 20

1 Purpose & Scope

The purpose of this document is to define how AzSPU meets and implements the

requirements of the Group Marine Standard and its subordinate practices. It is applicable

across all AzSPU sites and delivery teams.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 Safety Goals

The goal of this SSoW is to achieve no accidents, no harm to people and no damage to the

environment. To achieve this goal the SSoW complies with the following:

 BP Group Marine Standard and its subordinate practices

 Azerbaijan Strategic Performance Unit Safe Systems of Work

 BP HSE management system - getting HSE right

 Compliance with applicable industry standards and practices

 Compliance with applicable international and national marine legislation

1.1.2 Expectations

The expectations of the SSoW are to:

Comply fully with all applicable legal requirements.

Provide a secure and safe working environment.

Ensure that all employees, contractors and others are well informed, well trained,

engaged in and committed to the HSE improvement process.

Provide assurance that the safety processes in place are working effectively.

Maintain confidence in the integrity of BP operations.

Confirm that the management systems of contractors fully support BP‟s commitment

to HSE performance.

1.2 Scope

This SSoW applies to the Marine Assurance of all marine activities conducted by or behalf of

the AzSPU. It does not apply to non marine mission works and systems e.g. drilling

operations, diving operations, Project installation works, but it does apply to marine elements

of the works e.g. DP Ops, Anchor handling and hull integrity.

Marine Activity is defined as:-

 Procurement, Chartering or Contracting

 Selection, Inspection, Approval

 Operation

 Design, Construction, Commissioning, and Disposal

A. Of the following Marine Vessels/Units:-

1. Vessels involved in the carriage or towage of any cargo, hydrocarbon, non-

hydrocarbon, packaged, containerised, heavy lift or project whether between ports,

within ports on inland waterways or from ports to offshore locations.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 5 of 20

2. Vessels involved in the carriage, accommodation and transfer of personnel

3. Vessels used in the provision of construction, exploration and development services

but excluding the specific Mission Systems. (E.g., diving systems on diving vessels

would be excluded.)

B. And of the Marine Structure and Systems of a Floating Production System to

include:-

1. That structure involved in the maintenance of watertight integrity of the unit and

systems for the removal of water from compartments in a routine or emergency mode

2. That structure involved in the maintenance of the integrity of hydrocarbon storage

and those systems involved with the safe transfer of hydrocarbons within the unit and

to any off take vessel

3. Stability of the unit including those systems designed to manage stability in a routine

or emergency mode

4. Propulsion and dynamic position keeping systems

5. Associated systems or equipment contained within the hull of the unit or directly

attached to it from the point of view of their impact on items 1-4 (above), in the event

of a failure or fault condition in the systems or equipment

6. The integrated nature of Floating Production Systems makes the exact demarcation

of Marine Activity complex. Where a lack of clarity exists, it is the responsibility of the

Marine Authority (referred to herein as the “MA”) and the Engineering Authority of the

BP Operation involved to agree on design and assurance of items that interface or

interact between non-marine plant and Marine Systems.

C. Operation and equipment of the ship shore interface of marine terminals including

SBMs

The decision as to whether the Group Marine Standard applies to a BP Operation rests

solely with BP Shipping and not with the BP Operation. Where there is any doubt regarding

the applicability then a judgement should be called for from the GVP & CEO Shipping and

Aviation

Joint Ventures and Contractors

In the case of Joint Ventures (JV‟s) and contractors, the following shall apply:

1. Where BP is to acquire operational control of a new JV, the adoption of the Group

Marine Standard shall be mandatory and shall be reflected in the relevant

agreements

2. Where BP has operational control of an existing JV, BP shall adopt the Group Marine

Standard for that JV. Where BP does not have operational control of a JV, BP shall,

after an appropriate Risk Assessment, endeavour to ensure the operator adopts the

appropriate elements of the Group Marine Standard and shall seek to amend

relevant agreements immediately or upon renewal to reflect the Group Marine

Standard

3. Where BP relies on a contractor to perform work that would be subject to the Group

Marine Standard, if performed by BP employees, BP shall, after an appropriate Risk

Assessment, endeavour to ensure that the contractor adopts the Group Marine

Standard and shall seek to amend relevant contracts immediately or upon renewal to

reflect the Group Marine Standard

4. Where it is not possible or feasible to require a JV or contractor to adopt the Group

Marine Standard, or where a JV or contractor has agreed to adopt the Group Marine

Standard, in the period before any standard is adopted, BP shall seek to influence or

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 6 of 20

persuade the JV or contractor to adopt a set of principles based on the Group Marine

Standard

5. Where cargo is co-freighted with another party, the majority of the cargo is owned by

that other party, and the other party is the contracting party, a risk assessment shall

be carried out to ensure that other party‟s standards are such that the risk to the BP

Group is small

2 Definitions

Refer to document AzSPU-HSSE-DOC-00021-2 HSE Definitions for definitions common to

this Procedure.

3 General Requirements

3.1 Legislation & Standards

This procedure complies with applicable national law. Applicable national law is national law

as amended by project specific agreements, e.g. the ACG Production Sharing Agreement

(PSA), and relevant International Conventions, if any, in force in Azerbaijan or Georgia, as

applicable.

In the absence of national legislation, or where national legislation is inconsistent with the

requirements of project specific agreements, BP Group Standards or applicable

requirements from UK or US legislation will be complied with.

Where requirements conflict, legal advice has been obtained and a defendable compliance

position adopted.

The standards and practices contained in this procedure are consistent with those

internationally recognized within the petroleum industry.

3.2 Company Requirements

It is a company requirement that all tasks are subjected to an assessment of risk to

demonstrate that risks have been reduced to as low a level as reasonably practicable

(ALARP). This can be achieved by complying with the Company‟s existing standards. Where

compliance with Company standards cannot reasonably be achieved, a formal level 2 Risk

Assessment will be undertaken to identify any additional controls and demonstrate that risks

remain as low as reasonably practicable. Whether by compliance with Company Standards

or through level 2 Risk Assessment, the Company‟s Golden Rules of Safety must be

complied with. Golden Rules are non-negotiable.

3.3 Stopping Unsafe Work

To stop the continuation of potentially unsafe work at the earliest possible stage, the Control

of Work (CoW) Policy and this procedure make it very clear that all personnel are obliged

and have the authority to “STOP” the work that they consider to be unsafe.

3.4 Deviations

This procedure is written in sufficient detail that it should be able to be applied consistently at

all sites / installations. There may still be the requirement for some local rules covering site /

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 7 of 20

installation specific logistical/administrative arrangements and local variations in

responsibilities to reflect differences in organisational arrangements. These local rules

should not deviate from the core processes within this document. Any form of deviation from

this procedure, including but not limited to local rules, shall be requested and authorised in

accordance with SSOW, Procedure for Deviations (Doc. No: AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00011-2).

4 AzSPU Roles and Responsibilities

4.1 Single Point of Accountability Marine (SPA Marine)

The SPA Marine is a leadership team position with line accountability for the implementation

of GMS and through application of GMS, ensuring conformance with the Standard as well as

compliance with industry and local marine related regulations. This position is currently held

by VP HSSE and Technical.

4.2 AzSPU Marine Authority Organisation

Az Spu Marine Authority Organisation

AzSpu Marine Authority

Baku

Operations Marine Authority

Terminal Operations Marine Authority

Projects Marine Authority

Baku

Supsa

London

4.3

SPU Marine Authority (MA)

The SPU Marine Authority is accountable for ensuring processes and systems are in place

within the operating business for the identification and management of marine risk and are

the absolute authority in marine matters within the SPU. The SPU MA has delivery marine

authorities who administer delivery divisions on his behalf. In addition to the delivery marine

authorities there is an interface document with Specialist Technical Support - Rig Audit

Team to provide for the marine assurance of MODUs contracted to the SPU.

The SPU Marine Authority will lead all marine practitioners, whether employed directly by BP

or contracted to BP, that are engaged in marine activities in support of the SPU. They will

ensure that processes and systems exist for identifying and managing marine risk, manage

the controlled application of the Group Marine Standard and its subordinate practices (as

applicable). AzSPU Marine Authority will ensure that competent marine discipline experts

are available to address all risks associated with the marine activities of the SPU‟s offshore

production assets and that each marine practitioner has, and understands, the limits of their

accountabilities through the provision of competency profiles and delegated job descriptions.

Responsibilities extend to ensuring that the marine activities of the SPU comply with

industry, international and local regulation and legislation. They will liaise closely with a wide

range of internal and external stakeholders concerning vessel/unit suitability, movements

and operational requirements providing marine expertise and being the focal point for all

shipping operations including reviewing performance and improving operational procedures.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 8 of 20

4.4

Operations Marine Authority (SMA)

The Operations Marine Authority (Ops MA) is accountable to the SPU MA for leading all

marine practitioners that are engaged in marine activities in support of AzSPU offshore

operations. They will ensure that processes and systems exist for identifying and managing

marine risk. Manage the controlled application of the Group Marine Standard and

subordinate Practices (as applicable). As Operations Marine Authority they will ensure that

competent marine discipline experts are available to address all risks associated with the

marine activities of the SPU‟s offshore production assets and that each marine practitioner

has, and understands, the limits of their accountabilities through the provision of competency

profiles and delegated job descriptions. Responsibilities extend to ensuring that the offshore

operation activities of the SPU comply with industry, international and local regulation and

legislation. They will liaise closely with a wide range of internal and external stakeholders

concerning vessel/unit suitability, movements and operational requirements providing marine

expertise and being the focal point for all marine activities operations including reviewing

performance and improving operational procedures.

The Operations MA is responsible to the SPU Marine Authority and will liaise closely with the

SPU MA to ensure GMS integrity is maintained.

4.5

Terminal Operations Marine Authority - Supsa (TMA)

The Terminal Operations Marine Authority (Supsa) is accountable to the AzSPU MA for

leading all marine practioners that are engaged in marine activities in support of Supsa

Terminal Marine Operations. They will ensure that processes and systems exist for

identifying and managing marine risk. Manage the controlled application of the Group Marine

Standard and its subordinate marine practices (as applicable). As Terminal Operations

Marine Authority they will ensure that competent marine discipline experts are available to

address all risks associated with the marine activities of terminal operations and that each

marine practioner whether employed directly by BP or contracted to BP, that are engaged in

marine activities in support of Supsa Terminal Operations has, and understands, the limits of

their accountabilities through the provision of competency profiles and delegated job

descriptions. Responsibilities extend to ensuring that the terminal marine activities comply

with industry, international and local regulation and legislation. They will liaise closely with a

wide range of internal and external stakeholders concerning vessel/unit suitability,

movements and operational requirements providing marine expertise and being the focal

point for all marine activities including reviewing performance and improving operational

procedures.

The Terminal Operations MA is functionally responsible to the SPU Marine Authority and will

liaise closely with the SPU MA to ensure GMS integrity is maintained.

4.6

Project Marine Authority (PMA)

The Project Marine Authority is accountable to the AzSPU MA for leading all marine

practioners that are engaged in marine activities in support of Supsa Terminal Marine

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 9 of 20

Operations. They will ensure that processes and systems exist for identifying and managing

marine risk. Manage the controlled application of the Group Marine Standard and its

subordinate marine practices (as applicable).The Project Marine Authority will lead all marine

practitioners, whether employed directly by BP or contracted to BP, that are engaged in

marine activities in support of the project. During the design and construction phases the

role will emphasize engineering and construction/commissioning aspects. During the

transition to the Installation stage, the primary focus will move toward operations. .

The Project Marine Authority will ensure that competent marine discipline experts are

available to address all risks associated with marine activities consistent with the stage of

project development and that each marine practitioner has, and understands, the limits of

their accountabilities through the provision of competency profiles and delegated job

descriptions. Responsibilities extend to ensuring that the marine activities of the project

comply with industry, international and local regulation and legislation. The Project Marine

Authority will liaise closely with a wide range of internal and external stakeholders

concerning the key marine project elements and provide marine knowledge and expertise to

the other stakeholders within the project. During the transition to Installation, the Project MA

will be expected to review performance and drive improvements in the procedures governing

the marine elements of the project.

The Project MA is functionally responsible to the SPU Marine Authority and will liaise closely

with the SPU MA to ensure GMS integrity is maintained. In particular, the SPU MA should

determine, in agreement with the Project Marine Authority, when, during the life of the

project, to introduce operational marine practitioners and when the Project Marine Authority‟s

roles and accountabilities should transition to Installation and subsequently terminate.

4.7 Rig Audit Team

The Rig Audit Team have been delegated the task of undertaking required GMS assurance

audits and inspections of SPU contracted MODU‟s by the SPU MA. Additionally the rig audit

team provides MODU mission expertise to the SPU MA and relevant delivery MA‟s. The

SPU MA remains accountable for review, appraisal and acceptance of the marine aspects of

MODU„s within the SPU and as such is the sole approving and accepting authority for these

aspects.

4.8 Marine Authority (MA)

Marine Authority is the term used throughout this document to identify the accountable

marine management person. It should be taken to mean the delivery section MA unless a

specific MA is stated. In general the SPU MA has delegated authorities to delivery section

MA‟s and they will be first point of contact for delivery issues however the SPU MA shall in

all cases be the over riding authority. Each delivery MA shall keep the SPU MA updated on

marine matters and issues for his delivery area and shall defer to the SPU MA where doubt,

concern, lack of clarity or disputes exists. Each MA is bound by the authorities set within

GMS and any further constraints imposed by the SPU MA. Each MA shall appoint a deputy

for periods of absence.

4.9 Marine Discipline Experts

Marine Discipline Experts provide expertise for / in support of the SPU at the request of the

SPU MA. They will ensure that processes and systems are followed for identifying and

managing marine risk in their area of expertise. They will ensure that all risks in their area of

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 10 of 20

expertise associated with the marine activities of the SPU‟s offshore production assets are

addressed and that individuals understand the limits of their accountabilities through

discussions with the SPU MA. Their responsibilities extend to ensuring that the marine

activities of the discipline comply with industry, international and local regulation and

legislation. They will liaise closely with a wide range of internal and external stakeholders

concerning vessel/unit suitability, movements and operational requirements providing marine

expertise and being the focal point for the discipline expertise.

4.10 Marine Practitioners

Marine Practitioners will ensure that processes and systems in conformance with the Group

Marine Standard are followed, this includes managing marine risks. Responsibilities extend

to ensuring that the marine activities of the Operation comply with industry, international and

local regulation and legislation. They will oversee vessel/unit suitability, movements and

operational activities by providing marine expertise and being the focal point for the marine

operations including reviewing performance and improving operational procedures.

5 Management of Marine Assurance

5.1 GMS Application

5.1.1 BP Shipping

BP Shipping is owner of the Group Marine Standard and is accountable for implementation

across the BP Group.

BP Shipping assures elements of the standard that have been delegated to Segments to

execute.

5.1.2 E&P

E&P are accountable for executing elements of the standard that have been delegated to the

segment by BP Shipping.

The Segment Marine Authorities are the link between the segment and BP Shipping.

The Segment Marine Authorities (SMA) appoints SPU / BU / Operations Marine Authorities

and is accountable for establishing GMS compliant systems within the segment businesses.

The E&P SMA may additionally define standards in excess of those mandated by the Group

Marine Standard.

5.1.3 AzSPU

AzSPU as part of E&P execute locally elements of GMS that have been delegated to the

segment. AzSpu has developed a local marine operating system that implements GMS

throughout the AzSpu

GMS applies at all AzSpu sites. Note: Ceyhan Terminal is not covered by GMS as this is

BOTAS operated facility.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 11 of 20

5.2 AzSPU Marine Management System

5.2.1 AzSPU SSoW for the Management of Marine Activities

Details how AzSPU manages marine activities in accordance with OMS requirements that

reflect Group Marine Standard

5.2.2 Marine Handbook

Details how the AzSPU marine organisation manages GMS works.

5.2.3 Marine Operations Manual

Details marine operational standards, processes and practices for ALL AzSPU marine

operations. It contains details of Azerbaijan offshore field installations.

5.2.4 Supsa Terminal Rules and Regulations

Details marine operational standards and practices specific to Supsa Marine Terminal

operations.

5.2.5 AzSPU Marine SharePoint Site

Provides electronic access to marine information, data and resources to customers and

stakeholders.

5.3 Marine Planning

5.3.1 General

All planning for marine operations or projects shall consider the involvement the SPU MA

throughout all stages of the planning process (Appraise, Select, Define & Execute). The SPU

MA is the head of Marine expertise within the SPU and as such is the overriding authority

within the SPU on marine matters.

Where required by element‟s 6 & 8, or 12 of the Group Marine Standard a Marine Assurance

Plan will be developed with stakeholders. The plan will detail the interfaces with BP

Shipping, other parties and the assurance processes.

Where interfaces with BP shipping are required these shall be managed through the Marine

Authority. The Marine authority will manage the interface with BP Shipping through the

Segment Marine Authority.

5.3.2 Planning Marine Activities

Work scopes and procedures must be clearly defined and reviewed by the delivery team and

MA before work can commence. They shall be written with due regard to BP expectations,

policies and practices.

The roles and responsibilities of all organizations and key personnel involved in the

emergency response, management and control of marine operation or marine project must

be clearly defined.

All activities including work scopes, generic and specific procedures must be subject to a

formal risk assessment process during the planning phase. The SPU MA is accountable for

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 12 of 20

assigning personnel with relevant marine experience to provide marine input in to risk

assessment and for signing off marine risk. The process will identify any requirement to

change the work scope and procedures and/or any mitigating measures to be applied.

Where the operation is inside a BP ROW (Right of Way) or involves work within 500 m of a

BP asset the MA shall ensure the procedures are reviewed and approved by a competent

delegated marine authority or practitioner.

The process should involve all contractors with active involvement from all parties whose

acts or omissions could adversely affect the health and safety of persons engaged in the

project or could affect plant, equipment or the environment.

Any vessel proposed for use in the operation shall be approved and agreed by the AzSPU

MA prior to acceptance or commitment.

Marine related MOC (Management of Change - AzSPU-GEN-PRC-001-C7) shall require

approval from the AzSPU MA or his delegate.

Deviations from GMS requirements will normally require the raising of an exception or

variation request by the AzSPUL as per SSOW Deviations (AzSPU HSSE DOC 00011-2). In

matters related to vessel clearance and acceptance the MA has, within defined boundaries

set by BPS and Segment, deviation approval authority.

No marine operation can commence until authorised HSE and Emergency Response

bridging documents have been approved and issued. The HSE bridging document is the

interface between BP and other parties SMS‟s. It provides scope overview, operational detail

and outlines how the HSE requirements have been met. The Emergency response bridging

document defines accountabilities between parties and details emergency coordination

details and processes between the parties. The AzBU Crisis Management Department and

Incident Management Team must receive controlled copies of emergency response bridging

documents.

5.3.3 Marine Operations and Marine representative

The SPU Marine Operations Manual defines minimum marine standards that apply to marine

operations conducted by or on behalf of the SPU. The AzSpu may appoint a Marine

Representative to operations. The representative will be issued with ToR by the MA and will

verify compliance with agreed procedures and AzSpu Marine operations Manual

requirements. The Marine representative has the right of veto over the commencement or

continuation of marine operations that he considers are in breach of agreed standards or

procedures.

5.3.4 Permit to Work Process

In addition to the marine contractor or vessel permit to work system, when working inside

AzSPU controlled areas, the BP Permit to Work (PTW) (AzSPU HSSE DOC 00060-2)

system is to be employed where required by the AzSpu SSOW. Where the PTW is for

marine operations the Marine Representative will normally act as performing authority. The

Marine Representative will not act performing authority for non marine related mission

permits.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 13 of 20

5.3.5 Incident Investigation and Reporting

All marine accidents and incidents shall be reported to the MA as per AzSpu Incident

Investigation and Reporting procedure.

5.4 Procurement, chartering and clearance of marine service providers and vessels

5.4.1 Scope

This section applies to;

 All vessels used by or on behalf of the SPU. It covers all vessels including rigs,

pleasure craft, barges or other craft used or capable of being used as a marine

platform or means of transportation on or in water by or on behalf of the SPU. It does

not however normally apply to common carriers where the SPU is one of many

public customers for the service. (A common carrier is a business that transports

people, goods, or services and offers its services to the general public under license

or authority provided by a regulatory body. A common carrier holds itself out to

provide service to the general public without discrimination for the "public

convenience and necessity”. Common carriers typically transport persons or goods

according to defined and published routes, time schedules and rate tables).

 Marine service providers, including marine contractors, that provide marine

management, consultancy and or assurance services for or on behalf of the SPU

 Marine contractors and operators who operate or charter vessels for use by or on

behalf of the SPU

 Marine contractors who manage or operate AzSPU marine facilities.

This section does not apply to Bulk Hydrocarbon Shipping which is to be managed by BP

Shipping directly.

5.4.2 Procurement, leasing or Bareboat charters

No vessel can be procured, leased or bareboat chartered by the AzSpu without involving

BP Shipping in the process. (See 6.4 for Voyage and time charter vessels)

BP Shipping shall be involved in the all aspects of acquiring a vessel from appraise through

to execute. A marine assurance plan will be required for the process. The AzSPU MA shall

be involved at all stages and is the link between the AzSPU and BP Shipping.

5.4.3 Marine Management Contracts

No contract or commitment for the provision of marine management services may be

entered into unless the company nominated for the contract has been cleared and approved

by the AzSpu MA. Management contractors will as a minimum be required to have been

assessed by BP shipping and be registered on the offshore assurance database as

approved for the type of work being proposed.

5.4.4 Time and voyage chartering vessels

Time and voyage charters will normally be managed by the AzSPU without involving BP

Shipping. No contract or commitment to voyage or time charter a vessel on behalf of the

SPU may be entered into unless the vessel nominated for the contract has been cleared and

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 14 of 20

approved by the AzSpu MA. Details of vessel assessment and acceptance process are

detailed in section 7.

5.4.5 Marine Assurance Contracts

No contract or commitment for the provision of marine assurance services may be entered

into unless the company nominated for the contract has been cleared and approved by the

AzSpu MA. Management contractors will as a minimum be required to have been assessed

by BP shipping and be registered on the offshore assurance database as approved for the

type of assurance work being proposed.

5.4.6 Marine / Offshore Contractors

No contract or commitment with marine / offshore contractors may be entered into unless the

company nominated for the contract has been cleared and approved by the AzSpu MA.

Contractors will as a minimum be required to have been assessed by BP shipping and be

registered on the offshore assurance database as approved for the type of work being

proposed.

The contract shall require that any vessels used in the contract are cleared and approved by

the AzSPU MA. The contractor shall assume any risk should they engage a vessel prior to

obtaining AzSpu MA approval. The contractor / proposed contractors shall provide the MA

with sufficient notice to allow the MA to arrange an appropriate inspection if required. Details

of vessel assessment and acceptance process are detailed in section 7.

5.5

Vessel Assessment process (Excluding Tanker shipments from Supsa)

5.5.1 Object

The purpose of the Vessel Assessment Process is to detail the process and criteria used by

the Marine Authority (MA) to assess a vessel in determining suitability for use on SPU

business. The BP Group is committed to ensuring that all marine operations in which the BP

Group has an interest are carried out safely, with the minimum risk to people, the

environment and the BP Group.

5.5.2 Scope

This process shall be used to provide assurance in support of the SPU Projects and

Operations involved with exploration, development and production activities in the SPU. It

does not cover hydrocarbon shipping from Supsa Terminal which is covered by BP Shipping

Tanker Vetting System.

This process applies to AzSPU owned and chartered vessels, contractor supplied vessels

and vessels contracted through a third party that are used by or on behalf of SPU works.

5.5.3 Processes and Procedures

5.5.3.1 General

Vessel approval will be based on satisfactory vessel inspection reports and reviews by the

SPU Marine Authority (SPU MA) or designee, taking into consideration the following:

Owner and or operating (technical and safety) managers of the vessel

Standard and competency of the manning on board.

Safety management

Operations and integrity management

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 15 of 20

Operational requirements

Standard and certification of hull, marine systems and equipment

The assessment will include, but will not be limited to, the age of the vessel, the owners or

managers, the classification society, the flag state authority, any special features of the

vessel and any industry based historical information such as, vessel inspection reports,

feedback reports, casualty data, repair history and owner assessments, as well as

assurance of compliance with all applicable local, national and international regulations,

industry guidelines and recognized standards.

All information resources must be carefully reviewed to ensure there are no issues or

behaviours that could impact the suitability of the vessel for BP Group business. Adverse

conditions should be followed up with the vessel‟s managers and cross-referenced to any

available Owner Assessment Reports.

Any outstanding issues should be highlighted to the Marine Authority (MA) or designee, and

relevant details recorded.

5.5.3.2 Frequency of Assessment

In the absence of any adverse conditions regarding the vessel, the frequency that vessels

are inspected and assessed will depend on the type of vessel, and will follow the validity

periods advised below. The Marine Authority (MA) or designee will apply the validity periods

in a practical manner, considering the Fleet Review Process.

Vessels: maximum 12 months validity.

On exception, a longer period may be deemed appropriate by the Marine Authority (MA).

Assessments may be based on either BP or International Marine Contractors Association

(IMCA) Common Marine Inspection Document (CMID) inspection reports.

5.5.3.3 Scope of Assessment

The scope of the Assessment will be determined by type and duration of charter. All

Dynamic Position (DP) vessels shall also have a DP Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA).

In addition, DP Trials are required on an annual basis (within the previous 12 months).

5.5.3.3.1 Voyage Charter

Where a vessel is contracted for a single or multiple voyage(s), the approval process will

consist of the following:

1) A physical inspection (within the previous 12 months) of the vessel by a competent vessel

inspector to a recognized inspection protocol and any additional requirements to assure:

 Fitness for intended purpose

 Physical condition of the vessel and its equipment

 Compliance with international and national legislation

 Competence and safety awareness of crew

 Presence of a safety management system

2) Review of the inspection, previous experience of the manager and vessel by a competent

person e.g. Marine Authority (MA) or designee.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 16 of 20

5.5.3.3.2 Short Term Time Charter

Where a vessel is contracted for a short term time charter (up to six months), the approval

process will consist of the following:

1) A physical inspection of the vessel (within the previous 12 months) by a competent vessel

inspector to a recognized inspection protocol and any additional requirements to assure:

 Fitness for intended purpose

 Physical condition of the vessel and its equipment

 Compliance with international and national legislation

 Competence and safety awareness of crew

 Presence of a safety management system

2) Review of the inspection report, previous experience of the vessel manager and vessel by

a competent person e.g. Marine Authority (MA) or designee.

3) Review of the vessel‟s last dry dock or major repair records to ensure there are no

outstanding structural issues by a competent person e.g. Marine Authority (MA) or designee.

5.5.3.3.3 Time Charter

Where a vessel is contracted on a time charter time charter longer than six months, the

approval process will consist of the following:

1) A physical inspection of the vessel (within the previous 12 months) by a competent vessel

inspector to a recognized inspection protocol and any additional requirements to assure:

Fitness for intended purpose

Physical condition of the vessel and its equipment

Compliance with international and national legislation

Competence and safety awareness of crew

Presence of a safety management system

2) Review of the inspection report, previous experience of the vessel manager and vessel by

a competent person e.g. Marine Authority (MA) or designee.

3) Review of the vessel‟s last dry dock or major repair records to ensure there are no

outstanding structural issues by a competent person e.g. Marine Authority (MA) or designee.

4) A structural inspection and review of the vessel‟s structural records by a competent

structural engineer.

5) A formal audit of the vessel manager by a competent person to assess:

Management, superintendence and safety systems

Maintenance systems and practice

Emergency response capability

5.5.3.4 Owner or Operating (Technical and Safety) Managers

In compliance with the appropriate type of charter, the Owner or Operating Managers can be

assessed using either or both of the following:

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 17 of 20

Fleet Review Process, which will give an overview assessment of the management

of the vessel and the effectiveness of the vessel owner or operating manager.

Owner Assessment Process that entails a visit to the offices of the Owner or

Operating Manager. The Owner Assessment will be based on a pre-set

questionnaire that allows a detailed review of the management policies and

procedures.

The Fleet Review and Owner Assessment Processes are described in more detail below.

These may be supplemented by owner or operating managers visiting BP premises to

provide information on their company activity.

5.5.3.5 Standard and Competency of the Manning on Board

The competence of vessel crews, particularly senior marine and engineering officers, can

have a significant impact on the safe operation of vessels, and poorly qualified and under-

trained staff can contribute substantially to marine incidents.

BP will only employ vessels where the certification and training of the vessel staff conform to

the International Convention on Standards of Training and Certification of Watch Keeping for

Seafarers (STCW ‟95) or comparable local regulations, or a published equivalent for the

vessel on which they are sailing.

Information regarding the standard and competency of the vessel staff can be obtained from

the following sources:

 CMID vessel inspection reports

 Owner assessment reports

5.5.3.6 Safety Management

All vessels being used by the SPU to which this Policy applies are required to comply with,

and be operated in accordance with, all applicable international and national safety

legislation, approved industry guidelines and any additional requirements set by the SPU MA

Information regarding the level of compliance towards safety standards on board the vessel

can be obtained from the following sources:

 CMID vessel inspection reports

 Owner Assessment reports

 Compliance with International Safety Management Code (ISM) - where applicable

 Incident Reports

 Industry Intelligence

5.5.3.7 Operations and Integrity Management

All vessels being used by AzSPU must be assessed to ensure they are being managed,

operated and maintained to acceptable standards, and that there are suitable management

systems in place to ensure safe, secure, healthy and environmentally sound performance.

Information regarding the operations and integrity management can be obtained from the

following sources:

 CMID vessel inspection reports

 Owner assessment reports

 Ratings review

 Casualty data

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 18 of 20

 Feedback from prior operations

5.5.3.8 Operational Limitations (Operating Subjects)

The Marine Authority (MA) may require that specific limitations (called „Operating Subjects‟)

be applied to vessels depending on the operating location, hull design, special features or on

the operability of specific pieces of equipment that the vessel may have on board.

The Marine Authority (MA) may issue conditional “subjects” including but not limited to the

following special features:

 Dynamic Positioning (DP)

 Vessel type

 Legislation

5.5.3.9 Standard and Certification of Hull, Marine Systems and Equipment

All vessels being used by the AzSPU are required to comply with all applicable international

and national legislation and be registered with a recognized Flag Administration Authority

and Classification Society.

The Marine Authority (MA) may require specific additional assurances on the vessel‟s

structure depending on the age of the vessel. Vessels over 25 years of age shall complete

the following:

 Hull structural assessment

 Condition Assessment Program (CAP) - where applicable

5.5.4 Vetting Assessment

All relevant information available should be assessed so that a complete picture of the

vessel, its operating standards and the quality of its management systems can be analysed

and any risks to the BP Group identified prior to vessel use.

5.5.5 Vetting Information Management

The SPU has established a vessel database on the Marine Assurance Team website where

data containing a vessels vetting status can be obtained. Additionally vetting reports will

down loaded to the central offshore assurance database. The central offshore database is

by registered access only.

5.5.6 Responsibilities

The SPU Marine Authority (SPU MA) has been delegated the authority to implement the

Vetting Process and associated policies and procedures within the SPU by BP Shipping

Offshore Assurance Team.

5.5.7 Project vessel clearance (short term use)

See flow chart on next page.

6 Key Documents/Tools/References

This procedure shall, where appropriate, be used in conjunction with this suite of AzSPU

Procedures referenced below.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 19 of 20

Document Number

Title of Procedure

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00011-2

Procedure for Deviations

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00060-2

Procedure for Permit To Work

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00063-2

Procedure for Task Risk Assessment

AzSPU-GEN-PRC-001-C7

AzSPU Management of Change Procedure

AzSPU-HSSE-DOC-00021-2

HSE Definitions

GRP-STD_04

Group Marine Standard

GRP STD 02

Group Standard for Control of Work

Revision/Review Log

Revision Date

Authority

Custodian

Revision Details

15 October 09

AzSPU Safety &

SPU Operations

Initial Issue

Compliance

MA - John

Manager - Y.

Mitchell

Zaytsev

and SPU Marine

Authority - Bill

Van Dipten

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Safe System of Work for Management of Marine Assurance

Page 20 of 20

Vessel Requirement for Project

related works

CMID (IMCA M149)

Is a positive CMID

carried out by BP

(IMCA M149) report

Contractor proposes vessel

approved inspection

for the specific

to Project for approval

companies on the

vessel done within

proposed vessel

the year available?

YES

Project submits CMID report to MA to

check historical backg2round of vessel

Project submits completed

CMID (IMCA M149) to MA

Full Closure of

observations

Project submits request to

Dispens

from completed

MA to issue dispensation

ation

CMID (IMCA

for open observation/s with

required

M149)?

suitable justification/s.

YES

Accepted

by MA?

Vessel accepted for use

Vessel NOT accepted for

use

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<07 October 2009>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00123-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazSPU/component/hssesms

Procedure for Operation and Maintenance of Gas Detection Fixed & Portable Equipment

Page 1 of 14

Procedure for Operation and Maintenance of

Gas Detection Fixed & Portable Equipment

AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00052-2

This number supersedes UNIF-HSE-PRO-201-C1

Authority:

AzSPU Safety & Compliance

Custodian:

Safety Systems/CoW Lead/Elman Shikhkerimov

Systems Manager/Yuliy

Zaytsev

Scope:

AzSPU

Document

Administrator:

MS Document Coordinator

Issue Date:

05 October 2004

Issuing Dept:

Safety & Compliance Systems

Revision Date:

25 January 2011

Control Tier:

Next Review

16 March 2011

Date:

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<25 January 2011>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00052-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Operation and Maintenance of Gas Detection Fixed & Portable Equipment

Page 2 of 14

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PURPOSE / SCOPE

1.1

DOCUMENT PURPOSE

1.2

SCOPE

DEFINITIONS

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1

LEGISLATION & STANDARDS

3.2

COMPANY REQUIREMENTS

3.3

STOPPING UNSAFE WORK

3.4

DEVIATIONS

KEY RESPONSIBILITIES

4.1

SITE MANAGER / SITE CONTROLLER / OIM

4.2

AREA AUTHORITY

4.3

GAS TESTERS

GAS DETECTORS

5.1

TYPE AND USE

5.1.1

All Gas Detectors

5.1.2

Fixed Gas Detectors

5.1.3

Portable Gas Detectors

5.2

FIXED GAS DETECTION SYSTEMS

5.2.1

Location and Use

5.2.2

System Failure

5.2.3

Lower Explosive Limits (Alarm and Shutdown Levels)

5.2.4

Calibration

5.3

PORTABLE GAS DETECTORS

5.3.1

Issue and Use

5.3.2

Gas Testers

5.3.3

Operation

5.3.4

Calibration

KEY DOCUMENTS / TOOLS / REFERENCES

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<25 January 2011>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00052-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Operation and Maintenance of Gas Detection Fixed & Portable Equipment

Page 3 of 14

1. PURPOSE / SCOPE

1.1 DOCUMENT PURPOSE

This Safe System of Work provides the guidelines and procedures necessary to ensure a

safe working environment through the:

 Controlled and systematic monitoring for combustible gas using:

o fixed gas detection systems

o portable gas detection equipment

 Regular maintenance of gas monitoring equipment

 Use of suitably trained and authorised Gas Testers

1.2 SCOPE

The contents of this procedure are applicable to all BP owned and managed sites /

installations in Azerbaijan and Georgia. Contractors working on BP owned or managed

sites / installations are also responsible for alignment with this procedure.

This document does not replace the procedures prepared and adopted by specialist

contractors. Neither does it supersede any national and local regulatory requirements.

This procedure contributes to compliance with Group Control of Work (CoW) standard that

the Hazards associated with BP activities are identified and that the risks are assessed and

managed.

All guidelines contained shall be regarded as the minimum requirements for BP owned or

managed sites / installations in Azerbaijan and Georgia.

The scope covers defined activities of BP and Contractors at all BP AzSPU sites and

installations.

2 DEFINITIONS

Refer to document AzSPU-HSSE-DOC-00021-2 HSE Definitions for definitions common to

this Procedure. Definitions specific to the Procedure are included below.

Site Manager

Site Controller

OIM

Offshore Installation Manager

Area Authority

SSOW

Safe System of Work

AGT

Authorised Gas Tester

COW

Control of Work

CSE

Confined Space Entry

ICC

Isolation Control Certificate

L2RA

Level 2 Risk Assessment

PTW

Permit to Work

RTC

Risk It, Talk It, Check It Pre-Task Risk Assessment

TRA

Task Risk Assessment

Technical Authority

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<25 January 2011>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00052-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Operation and Maintenance of Gas Detection Fixed & Portable Equipment

Page 4 of 14

TBT

Toolbox Talk

3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 LEGISLATION & STANDARDS

This procedure complies with applicable national law. Applicable national law is national law

as amended by project specific agreements, e.g. the ACG Production Sharing Agreement

(PSA), and relevant International Conventions, if any, in force in Azerbaijan or Georgia, as

applicable.

- Operating Management System OMS Essentials 3.2.1 and 4.5.1

In the absence of national legislation, or where national legislation is inconsistent with the

requirements of project specific agreements, BP Group Standards or applicable

requirements from UK or US legislation will be complied with.

Where requirements conflict, legal advice has been obtained and a defendable compliance

position adopted.

The standards and practices contained in this procedure are consistent with those

internationally recognized within the petroleum industry.

3.2 COMPANY REQUIREMENTS

It is a company requirement that all tasks are subjected to an assessment of risk to

demonstrate that risks have been reduced to as low a level as reasonably practicable

(ALARP). This can be achieved by complying with the Company’s existing standards.

Where compliance with Company standards cannot reasonably be achieved, a formal level

2 Risk Assessment will be undertaken to identify any additional controls and demonstrate

that risks remain as low as reasonably practicable, whether by compliance with Company

Standards or through level 2 Risk Assessment.

3.3 STOPPING UNSAFE WORK

To stop the continuation of potentially unsafe work at the earliest possible stage, the

Control of Work (CoW) Policy and this procedure for Gas Detection Equipment make it

very clear that all personnel are obliged and have the authority to “STOP” the work that

they consider to be unsafe.

3.4 DEVIATIONS

This procedure is written in sufficient detail that it should be able to be applied consistently

at all sites / installations. There may still be the requirement for some local rules covering

site

/ installation specific logistical/administrative arrangements and local variations in

responsibilities to reflect differences in organisational arrangements. These local rules

should not deviate from the core processes within this document. Any form of deviation

from this procedure, including but not limited to local rules, shall be requested and

authorised in accordance with SSOW, Procedure for Deviations (Doc. No: AZSPU-HSSE-

DOC-00011-2).

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<25 January 2011>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00052-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Operation and Maintenance of Gas Detection Fixed & Portable Equipment

Page 5 of 14

4 KEY RESPONSIBILITIES

4.1 SITE MANAGER / SITE CONTROLLER / OIM

The Site Manager / Site Controller / Offshore Installation Manager shall be responsible and

accountable for the application of this procedure in his area of responsibility, He shall

ensure:

 That adequate numbers of Competent responsible persons are appointed to manage

and maintain the requirements of this procedure

 Formally appointing suitably qualified and experienced persons to carry out:

o gas testing

o gas testing instrument calibration and testing

 Ensuring that fixed gas detection systems on the site / installation are maintained in

an operational state

 Ensuring that procedures are in place, to ensure gas testing is carried out wherever

necessary.

4.2 AREA AUTHORITY

Area Authorities are responsible for ensuring that gas tests are carried out within their area

of responsibility wherever there is any possibility that combustible gas might be present.

4.3 GAS TESTERS

Authorised Gas Testers are responsible for carrying out gas tests to the level to which they

are authorised.

5 GAS DETECTORS

5.1 TYPE AND USE

5.1.1 All Gas Detectors

Gas detectors shall:

 Be used wherever there may be a risk to people or property caused by the presence

of flammable and toxic gas

 Be designed to issue suitable audible or visual warnings that alert personnel to the

presence of flammable and toxic gas.

5.1.2 Fixed Gas Detectors

Fixed gas detectors are detectors that are permanently placed at strategic locations, and

where deemed appropriate by local management, to monitor conditions on a continuous

basis. In particular they are placed wherever it is thought that combustible gas could collect

following an uncontrolled and unplanned release.

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<25 January 2011>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00052-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Procedure for Operation and Maintenance of Gas Detection Fixed & Portable Equipment

Page 6 of 14

Note: Fixed gas detection systems may initiate specific safety actions automatically.

5.1.3 Portable Gas Detectors

Portable gas detectors are often used during activities that take place where

flammable/toxic gas could exist, for example, in confined spaces. In most cases, the use of

portable gas detection equipment will be called for by the work procedure / instruction.

It is recommended to use Multi-Gas detectors such as Triple Plus + IR (Intrinsically Safe

Portable Monitors), or Tetra (Intrinsically Safe Personal Multi-Gas Monitor).

5.2 FIXED GAS DETECTION SYSTEMS

5.2.1 Location and Use

Fixed or automatic combustible gas detectors/systems may be used to initiate a number of

automatic safety actions, including:

 Visual and audible warnings of flammable and toxic gas

 Visual and audible fault signal

 Plant / equipment shutdown

 Operation of fire extinguishing systems

 Site/installation evacuation alarm.

5.2.2 System Failure

Any malfunction, abnormal condition, or failure of the fixed gas detection system that

prevents the safe operation of plant and machinery, shall initiate visual and audible fault

signal.

Note: When the facility operates on purchased electrical power, shutdown features

must incorporate adjustable time delays to prevent plant shutdown from short

duration power outages. Automatic restart systems shall be overridden by the

shutdown system.

Partially attended sites / facilities (those which are not manned 24 hours a day) must

have suitable provisions incorporated so that affected plant

/ equipment can be

automatically shutdown for 24 hours without causing damage to the facility.

In partially attended facilities, any malfunction, abnormal condition, or failure of the fixed

gas detection system that actuates a plant or machinery shutdown must also actuate a

visual enunciator. A remote signalling device must be actuated during unattended periods.

In fully attended facilities, each any malfunction, abnormal condition, or failure of the

fixed gas detection system that actuates a plant or machinery shutdown must actuate a

visual and audible alarm prior to the shutdown. These alarms must actuate sufficiently

ahead of each shutdown point to give time for corrective measures to prevent a shutdown.

5.2.3 Lower Explosive Limits (Alarm and Shutdown Levels)

Control Tier:

<<2>>

Revision Date: <<25 January 2011>>

Document Number: << AZSPU-HSSE-DOC-00052-2>>

Print Date: 2/1/2011

PAPER COPIES ARE UNCONTROLLED. THIS COPY VALID ONLY AT THE TIME OF PRINTING. THE CONTROLLED

VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE FOUND AT http://docs.bpweb.bp.com/dkazspu/component/hssesms

Military reference books and manuals (2009-2023, Volume 4) - page 42