Gå til hovedinnhold

Audit of fabrication of chain for Åsgard A

In the period 22 – 30 April 2008 the Petroleum Safety Authority Norway (PSA) conducted an audit of StatoilHydro and the supplier Ramnäs Bruk AB. The audit concerned the fabrication of a new anchor chain for Åsgard A FPSO. We have identified two non-conformities in StatoilHydro’s follow-up of the delivery and in the follow-up of the supplier’s management system.


Location MapThe audit was conducted in two parts. The start-up meeting was held in StatoilHydro’s offices in Stjørdal on 22 April 2008. Verification was conducted at Ramnäs Bruk AB, which manufactures the chain, from 29 to 30 April 2008.

Background for the audit
The audit was linked to the PSA’s paramount performance measure, which is to supervise the players’ management of factors that reduce the risk of major accidents.

Mooring systems are safety-critical equipment. There have been a number of incidents on the Norwegian Shelf with mooring systems in general.

The PSA has registered improvements in mooring last year, but many incidents still occur that could have been avoided with better systems for training and transfer of experience.

The industry must maintain its commitment to a thorough enhancement of standards for mooring equipment.

Purpose of the audit
The purpose of the audit was to ensure that fabrication of a new anchor chain was managed and completed in compliance with the petroleum regulations.

The objective was also to verify StatoilHydro’s system for follow-up of suppliers.

Result of the audit
We found two non-conformities in StatoilHydro’s follow-up of the delivery and follow-up of the supplier’s management system.

The audit uncovered that StatoilHydro did not follow up this anchor chain delivery to a sufficient extent, with the result that the steel material used did not come from an approved supplier.

Nor had StatoilHydro followed up the supplier’s management system, with the result that neither the supplier nor the third party verifying the quality of the production could document compliance with the quality control plan for the delivery.

In addition, we identified three areas with a potential for improvement. Knowledge of experience, description of project organisation and the system for calibration of equipment.