phase 4 report - DNV

RN04: ESCAPE, EVACUATION AND RESCUE OF PEOPLE // Guidance on Creating Performance StandardsBarents 2020• Engineers involved then develop the coarseFunctionality, Availability, Reliability,Survivability criteria for each SCE andInterdependencies (FARSI) with other SCEs thatresulted from the HAZEER study, for inclusionin respective Performance Standards (notingthat no decision should have been taken at thisstage as to what the evacuation solution shouldbe). It is the process that will determine it;• Perform a semi-quantitative evacuationmethod capability assessment based on thecoarse FARSI criteria to arrive at a short listof evacuation method options that could besuitable for some or all evacuation conditions/hazards and sea/ice environments;• Conduct detailed studies and analyse risks inconjunction with facility design developmentand operations availability targets to addquantitative criteria to the PerformanceStandards to arrive at perhaps two or threemost viable evacuation method options;• Continue to develop the PerformanceStandards criteria, refining the criteriabased on study results and event treeanalyses through all project stages;• Coordinate all aspects of evacuationprocess and equipment interfaces with ERV& SAR support services etc. associatedwith rescue and recovery of evacuees;• Finalise the evacuation method specification(using PS criteria) to select an evacuationmethod that either already satisfies orcan be adapted or developed to satisfy allperformance standard criteria within theproject schedule. Delaying the decision-makingprocess should be no excuse for selecting asolution that increases risks to evacuees;• Maintain the performance standardsthroughout the operating life of the facility,taking account of changes as they mayoccur, to ensure the integrity of the wholeevacuation (EER) system is maintained;It should be noted that failure of any EER systemcomponent during operations to satisfy these criteriacan lead to production cut-back or shutdown offacilities to reduce or remove threats that couldotherwise lead to incidents requiring evacuation.If the integrity of the EER system is compromised,production availability can be significantly reduced.If an evacuation solution cannot be found ordeveloped that satisfies the criteria, the entire projectmay not be viableRecognising that national rules and regulationsexist that may be relevant is important, howeverliteral adherence to rules and regulations shouldnot dictate the EER selection process. Compliancewith all relevant and appropriate (to the specificapplication) rules and regulations can however beachieved and demonstrated by correctly following theperformance standards sequence, as explained belowand in the example given for an Arctic TEMPSC.The sequence of establishing PerformanceStandard criteria, through to demonstratingcompliance with relevant or deviation from nonoptimumclauses in national rules, regulations andother codes and standards, has to work from left toright.The 4-step process, shown very simply in Figure4, can help to deliver a transparent and auditabledecision trail that aims to satisfy regulations, codesand standards that are relevant in delivering lowestrisk solutions – with the reasons documented in thereferences as to why some may require deviations(this process can reduce risks and supports theapproval process)1. SYSTEM GOAL: Explain in few words the purpose/objective of the system2. CRITERIA 3. PROJECT COMPLIANCE 4. REGULATORY/ CODES COMPLIANCEInsert qualitative criterion, addingquantitative measures whenstudied/ Established (state sources)Involved disciplines explain how thecriterion has been implemented indesign/operations (state projectInvolved disciplines then explain how by satisfyingthe performance-based criterion, the rules/ regs.have/ have not been met (state specific clauses)Figure 4 - Performance standards template and processReport no 2012-0690 143