Maintenance has been shown to be a contributory factor behind major accidents in both the petroleum industry and other industries and activities. The efforts of companies relating to maintenance management are therefore an area that the Norwegian Ocean Industry Authority (Havtil) monitors closely by auditing companies, collating and disseminating knowledge, and carrying out monitoring through “Trends in risk level in the petroleum activities” (RNNP).
The question is: Are companies doing enough in the field of maintenance management?
Seminar
During Havtil's seminar on maintenance management on 5 February, the industry was presented with a picture that points to a clear need for improvement.
This year, Havtil's seminar on maintenance management was entitled "Management of maintenance - more important than ever". All the presentations from the event can be found here. (In Norwegian only)
Critical deficiencies
Semsudin Leto from Havtil summarised the Authority's observations, including in particular:
1. Critical shortcomings in the basis for maintenance management
"Through our audits, we have over time seen critical shortcomings in the basis for maintenance management, such as equipment labelling, classification, maintenance programmes, maintenance history and analyses," explained Havtil’s Semsudin Leto.
Failure to carry out maintenance
2. Failure to carry out essential maintenance
"We can see from RNNP and our audits that a significant amount of preventive and corrective maintenance is planned and identified, but not carried out," said Leto.
“Some aspects of corrective maintenance are also redefined in other portfolios as projects, modifications, turnarounds, etc. This means that the overall picture is likely to be even more far-reaching than what has emerged through RNNP and the maintenance indicators of the companies themselves. More maintenance is being carried out than ever before on many offshore and onshore facilities, yet demand is outstripping implementation capacity," he continued.
“Maintenance issues that have been identified but not remedied can be attributed to insufficient capacity to carry out essential maintenance,” said Leto.
Deferment
3. Risk assessments are increasingly being used to justify the deferment of maintenance.
“Companies are reprioritising and deferring maintenance, including safety-critical maintenance, through risk assessment processes.
"Our audits and investigations have revealed that a considerable amount of maintenance is being deferred. The work is often postponed on several occasions without an adequate risk assessment, both individually and collectively,” noted Leto.
Weaknesses
4. Maintenance aimed at preventing hydrocarbon leakage must be improved
“Follow-ups after incidents and audits show that hydrocarbon-bearing pipes are not being adequately maintained. We see weaknesses both in companies’ systems for risk-based inspection (RBI) and in the work processes for prioritisation, planning, implementation and follow-up of/after inspections and maintenance.
Planning and resources
Another important message from Havtil to companies concerned a lack of realism in planning and a struggle for resources.
"This period of high activity levels on the shelf, with new projects, modifications, electrification and maintenance under way, is making it challenging to obtain the necessary capacity and expertise," noted Havtil’s Per Eivind Steen.
All activities on a facility are governed by the availability of beds, which also applies to maintenance, modifications and projects.
Mismatch
“We have seen many examples during audits where there is a mismatch between resources and the work being performed. This is often due to a lack of realism in plans and estimates, which affects the prioritisation of resources, both individually and collectively, for all activities on a facility.
“Inadequate planning often results in poor technical documentation and a lack of overview of the scope of work. If an activity overruns on cost or time, this will put pressure on HSE and quality. Good planning therefore equals good HSE,” noted Steen. He added that this was also an important lesson from the three studies of development projects carried out by Havtil between 2019 and 2023.
Read more: Three studies of development projects
Companies asked to reflect
The overall picture of maintenance management gives cause for concern, believes Gunnar Dybvig, Havtil's Head of HSE Management. He asks companies to reflect on some key questions:
“Firstly: Why don't companies identify the same shortcomings that we at Havtil uncover through our audits and investigations?
"We are talking about repeated shortcomings, over time, among operators, shipowners and onshore installations. Why is this the case? Is the follow-up being carried out by companies inadequate, or do they see the same things as us, but are unable to remedy the shortcomings they see? Is there a gap between what we expect from the industry and what they believe is good enough?”
Planning
“My second question concerns activity levels: Is there a correlation between assignments and available resources?
“Are assignment levels being planned that are not compatible with the current level of activity and available resources? Figures from “Trends in risk level in the petroleum activities” (RNNP) and observations from our audits indicate that this is the case.
“Are we seeing signs that companies are stretching themselves too thin? Is it the frameworks and budget that make things incompatible? A lot of maintenance is being carried out, but demand appears to be much greater.”
Continuous improvement
The third and final question concerns requirements imposed in order to improve safety levels: Are we able to further develop and improve established practices over time?
“The regulations require further development and improvement; this is a fundamental requirement. We see many improvement initiatives being carried out, but how effective are they? Do they achieve the desired effect? The introduction of new solutions based on artificial intelligence (AI) in the future – will this help us to improve?”