A Method for Assessing the Quality of Proactive Operator Monitoring POM as a Safety Barrier in Service Company Operations
- Ronald W. McLeod (Ron McLeod Ltd.) | Mathew Novia (Baker Hughes, a GE company) | Lamberto Nonno (Baker Hughes, a GE company) | Sarah Acton (Baker Hughes, a GE company) | Neil Easton (Baker Hughes, a GE company)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Security, Environment, and Social Responsibility, 16-18 April, Abu Dhabi, UAE
- Publication Date
- Document Type
- Conference Paper
- 2018. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 6.3 Safety
- Human Factors, Barrier Management, Proactive Operator Monitoring
- 1 in the last 30 days
- 107 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 9.50|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 28.00|
In common with every company involved in the global upstream oil and gas industry, oilfield service companies rely to a large extent on front-line operators monitoring key operational parameters in real time, and being willing and able to intervene in the event where signs of potential trouble are detected. Many factors—personal, inter-personal, organizational, and technological—have the potential to interfere with the ability of individuals to perform monitoring tasks to the required standard. This paper presents the results of a study carried out to evaluate the quality of implementation of arrangements supporting proactive operator monitoring.
The study comprised two components elements: i) a review of incidents where operator monitoring played some role, and ii) semi-structured interviews of operator representatives including subjective ratings of monitoring quality. The situating questions allowed operator representatives a chance to reflect on the nature of the monitoring tasks, and their experience of potential disrupting factors, before attending the workshop. A bespoke tool—the Proactive Operator Monitoring Assessment Tool (POMAT)—was developed, enabling assessors to rate the quality of implementation of operator monitoring tasks. The tool is based on ratings on four dimensions (ownership, signals, context, and resilience) comprising a total of eight criteria. Based on the subjective ratings, a Proactive Monitoring Quality (PMQ) score was calculated that indicates how robust the implementation of each operator monitoring task that is relied on as a barrier is thought to be.
This paper describes the method used in the study, and explains the use of the POMAT tool and how PMQ scores are calculated. The application of the method to assess operator monitoring during coiled tubing and tubular cutting and milling operations are used as examples.
The POMAT tool and PMQ score represent novel approaches for evaluating the likely strength of proactive operator monitoring barriers where they exist in corporate bowties to determine if they can in fact be relied upon as an effective, independent, auditable barrier.
|File Size||688 KB||Number of Pages||12|