Gå til hovedinnhold

Audit of technical and operational integrity and follow-up of events at Mongstad

Audit: During the period 13 - 14 October 2009, the Petroleum Safety Authority Norway (PSA) conducted an audit of StatoilHydro (SH) at Mongstad. The audit followed up how SH safeguards the technical and operational integrity of the facilities, and how the organisation applies the lessons learned.

Background for the audit
The PSA is to set standards for and follow up to ensure that the players in the petroleum activities maintain high standards as regards health, safety and the environment, thereby contributing towards creating the greatest possible values for the Norwegian society.

The PSA shall also contribute towards reducing the risk level in the petroleum activities by following up the players to ensure that they promote technical and operational integrity on the facilities, and also follow up the interaction between people/technology/organisation in HSE-critical systems.

Mongstad (source: Statoil)

Mongstad (source: Statoil)

The facility has been through a long period with a high level of activity and simultaneous operation. Risk management and learning from incidents are important elements in achieving good processes to increase safety on the facility.

The audit was carried out based on the temporary regulations of 19 December 2003 relating to safety and the working environment for individual petroleum facilities on land and associated pipeline systems (the Temporary Regulations), and regulations relating to systematic health, environment and safety work in enterprises (the Internal Control Regulations).

Purpose of the audit
The purpose of the audit was to provide information on how the company works with the following issues and how the regulatory requirements are safeguarded.

The audit addressed two main issues:

Result of the audit
No nonconformities were identified in relation to the applicable regulatory regulations for the issues covered by the audit.

The cracker incident has triggered extensive improvement work, which received a lot of attention in the organisation. Reviews of other incidents and related measures indicate that a higher degree of clarification as to expected improvements of follow-up to ensure that the measures have had the desired effect, can be achieved.

Some events trigger many measures,  but fail to deal with the more underlying causes.

Journal 2009/1129 (document in Norwegian)