Regulation Class Document Class

Procedure Main Document

Regulation Title

EQUIPMENT CRITICALITY ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

Topic
This procedure defines the methodology to be used in OMV E&P Operations to assign a
criticality ranking to non-safety critical equipment (non-SCE).

Objective
This procedure provides the methodology for defining and assigning Equipment Criticality
Rankings to non-safety critical equipment (non-SCE) which in turn will be used to
drive/define the maintenance, inspection and spares strategies. Criticality Ranking may also
be used as an input to the prioritization of work.

Target Group
O&M Manager, Maintenance Manager, Integrity Manager, ORA Manager, Engineering
Manager, and all staff and contractors with responsibility for the planning and delivery of
Maintenance and Inspection activities.
Scope of Effectiveness
This procedure applies to OMV Exploration & Production GmbH, OMV Petrom and all its
controlled subsidiaries.

Editor: EPI-M Jody Lusher

Org. Unit First- Last Name Signature Date

Regulation Approver 1: EP-I Nicholas Cavaye

Org. Unit First- Last Name Signature Date

Regulation Approver 2: PE-O Roland Perdacher

Org. Unit First- Last Name Signature Date

Regulation Approver 3: E-P Garry Walker

Org. Unit First- Last Name Signature Date

As approved by the Executive Board of:

 Date

Effective as of: Publication date

Date

Please note that Regulations are amended from time to time. Only the version currently published on the REAL IT Platform is
the valid version.

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 2 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
 Index of content
1. Introduction & Intended Purpose of Regulation ........................................................... 4
1.1. Purpose and Scope ......................................................................................................... 4
1.2. Objective .......................................................................................................................... 5
2. Roles & Responsibilities.................................................................................................. 5
2.1. OMV Global Maintenance Manager ............................................................................... 5
2.2. Branch Office Maintenance Manager ............................................................................ 5
2.3. Site CMM Administrator ................................................................................................. 5
3. Definitions ........................................................................................................................ 5
4. Methodology .................................................................................................................... 6
4.1. Concept ............................................................................................................................ 6
4.2. Equipment Criticality Analysis Process .......................................................................... 7
4.2.1. Preparation ....................................................................................................................... 7
4.2.2. Data Gathering ................................................................................................................. 8
4.2.3. Function Definition .......................................................................................................... 8
4.2.4. Analysis of Data ............................................................................................................... 8
4.2.5. Recording ......................................................................................................................... 9
4.2.5.1. Criticality Approval .......................................................................................................... 9
4.2.5.2. Documenting the Equipment Criticality Ranking. ......................................................... 9
5. Equipment Criticality Analysis Consequence Matrix .................................................. 10
6. Internal Reference Links ................................................................................................ 11
7. External Reference Links ............................................................................................... 11
8. Obsolete Regulations .................................................................................................... 11
9. Certification Standards.................................................................................................. 11
10. Transitory Provisions ..................................................................................................... 11
11. Terms & Abbreviations ................................................................................................. 11
12. Keywords / Search Criteria............................................................................................ 11

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 3 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
1. Introduction & Intended Purpose of Regulation
1.1. Purpose and Scope

Equipment failure or unavailability can negatively affect business objectives in the

areas of safety, environment, production and business. However, some equipment
has potentially larger impacts than others and merits greater scrutiny.

Criticality Assessment is a risk-based process that assesses the relative importance

of the function provided to the achievement of business objectives.

The main aims of the Assessment are to identify the relative criticalities of
equipment systems, packages or equipment items and to provide an input to other
reliability and maintenance processes.

Such an assessment process gives the following benefits: -

 Concentration of efforts and resources on systems and equipment that is most
critical to the achievement of business objectives, by potentially reallocating
resources away from the less important items.
 Application of more stringent engineering standards and inspection on more
critical equipment.
 Development of detailed equipment-specific reliability and spares strategies
for highly critical items.
 Optimizing maintenance expenditure and reliability by adoption of appropriate
generic equipment maintenance strategies for less critical items.
 Providing support to a genuine risk-based work prioritization process.

The requirements of this procedure are as follows: -

 A criticality assessment shall be completed in order to derive a criticality
ranking of High/Medium/Low for systems and equipment within the facilities
that have not previously been identified as SCE. The assessment methodology
shall be in accordance with this Procedure. Criticality shall be determined
based on a 5x5 Criticality Risk Matrix which takes account of consequence and
likelihood of failure.
 Production/Business Critical Equipment shall be clearly defined and
documented.
 Operating assets shall verify that criticality assessments are in place and
maintained up to date.
 Criticality assessment shall be reviewed at least every 3 years or sooner based
upon design changes, systems modifications, and major changes in operating
regimes, changes in production profiles, major economic changes and lessons
learned from particular equipment failures.

The criticality assessment methodology described and referred to within this

document specifically excludes: -
 Identification of Safety/Environmental Critical Equipment (SCE & ECE) - this
shall be addressed in the SCE Management Standard.
 Identification of Hazardous Area Electrical Equipment - this equipment shall be
identified in the CMMS using the Ex field and is addressed by the Ex register
and associated inspection activities.
 Identification of equipment requiring Risk Based Inspection (RBI)

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 4 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
1.2. Objective
Provides the standard process for defining and assigning Equipment Criticality
Rankings to non-SC equipment, which in turn will be used to drive/define the
equipment maintenance, inspection and spares strategies. The Criticality Ranking
may also be used as an input to the prioritization of work

2. Roles & Responsibilities

The key roles and responsibilities associated with developing and assigning
Equipment Criticality Rankings for equipment listed in site Maintenance
Management System Asset Register are as follows;

2.1. OMV Upstream Maintenance Manager

The owner of this procedure has responsibility for ensuring the consistent
application across all OMV Operated sites.

2.2. Maintenance Manager (Branch Office)

Accountable for ensuring this standard process is implemented and complied with
to within their respective branch office. Where the branch office does not have a
maintenance manager, the operations manager or equivalent will hold
accountability.

2.3. Site CMMS Administrator

Maintaining and updating the site CMMS Asset Register with details of the
assigned Equipment Criticality Ranking following the assessment.

3. Definitions
Term Standard Definition
Availability Ability to be in a state to perform as required
Failure Loss of ability to perform as required, or event that results in a
fault state of that item
Failure Effect The consequence of failure mode in terms of the operation,
function or status of a system
Failure Mode The effect by which a failure is observed
Function Activity or feature that an item is required to be capable of doing
in order to meet an operational requirement
Maintainability Ability to be retained in, or restored to a state to perform as
required, under given conditions of use or maintenance
MEL Master Equipment List
Reliability Ability to perform as required, without failure, for a given time
interval, under given conditions
System Set of inter-related items that collectively fulfill a requirement

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 5 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
4. Methodology
4.1. Concept

The following concepts are essential to a successful Equipment Criticality

Assessment:
1. Understanding of the facilities processes and operation
2. Understanding and breakdown of the overall system to equipment level
3. Understanding of the function of each piece of equipment within the system
4. Consequence of failure that is potentially applicable to a system or
component
5. An understanding of the criticality assessment concept and the ranking to
be used

The criticality assessment process shall be conducted in four stages:

1. Preparation: requires the facilitator to collect sufficient and suitable quantity

and quality of data to allow the review team to develop their understanding
of the overall process. Typical information includes, but is not limited to;

a. The different systems or elements with their characteristics,

performance, roles and functions
b. Level of redundancy and nature of redundancy
c. Relevant operations manuals
d. Operating envelopes and environments

2. Boundary definition: defines the scope of the criticality review in relation to

the functional and hierarchical structure of the site.

3. Analysis: as per the process outlined in the following sections

4. Recording: the result of the analysis shall be recorded for auditing purposes
and the rankings uploaded at Equipment level into the CMMS.

The following criticality levels shall apply to Equipment based on the likelihood and
consequence of failure.
 SCE – Safety Critical Equipment. Addressed via MAH study for site, which
includes HAZOP, HAZID, Bow Tie analysis As per SCE Guideline [Document
number]
 High – As per matrix
 Medium – As per matrix
 Low – As per matrix

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 6 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
4.2. Equipment Criticality Analysis Process

Figure 1 . ECA Process

4.2.1. Preparation
For Greenfield sites, and new projects, the criticality assessment shall be
undertaken when there is sufficient information available to conduct the
assessment and before the assignment of maintenance.
For Brownfield projects, the assessment shall be conducted when there is
sufficient information available for the project, and how the equipment impacts
with the overall site operations.
The following resources will typically be required to conduct criticality assessment
study workshops:
 Facilitator
 Integrity/process safety engineer
 HSE representation
 Production engineer
 Process engineer
 Maintenance engineer
 Operations engineer

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 7 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
  Other specialists as required
The facilitator shall conduct sufficient preparation prior to the group sessions to
make most efficient use of the participants’ time.
The criticality assessment facilitator should ideally be experienced in leading
criticality studies and be familiar with the processes and equipment found in the
upstream and downstream hydrocarbon processing and storage industry.

4.2.2. Data Gathering

Sources of data include but are not limited to:
 Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs)
 Utility Flow Diagrams (UFDs)
 Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs)
 Electrical Single Line Diagrams (SLDs)
 Cause and Effect (C&E) charts
 Safety Integrity Level (SIL) Assessment and/or LOPA Studies
 Operations Manuals
 HAZOP/HAZID Studies/Reports
 Production Profiles

4.2.3. Function Definition

The system/equipment being considered shall have clearly defined boundaries.
The system/equipment main functions shall be identified and the likelihood and
consequence of failure of the equipment to fulfill its intended functions shall be
assessed in relation to facility operations.
The risks to the achievement of OMV business objectives represented by any
individual system, item of equipment or scenario are influenced by the
consequence of the loss of its functions. Therefore, the functions of the item being
assessed needs to be clearly understood and defined. Poor definition or
understanding of the function may cause the failure consequence to be
inadequately assessed.

4.2.4. Analysis of Data

Using the matrix attached [Table 1.] the team shall identify and review all
equipment within the asset register, ensuring the rules below are followed.
 The analysis shall begin at system level, for example, Oil Export.
 The items associated with that system, which can be identified within the
Master Equipment List (MEL), will then be assessed individually. Examples of
typical equipment found in the Oil Export System can include, pumps, motors,
heat exchangers and control valves.
 When the equipment is assessed, consideration shall be given to its function
within the system. In the case of the Oil Export System, this could be to deliver
crude oil at a specific flow, pressure and temperature with a water cut no
greater than X%.
 This assessment will be based on knowledge and understanding of the
function of the equipment and what impact loss of the equipment will have on
the site.
 Where equipment has full 100% redundancy, for example duty/stand-by
function, the criticality assessment shall take this into account and address
criticality in accordance with the decision process accordingly.

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 8 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
  Where the system under consideration interacts with a number of systems,
criticality shall be derived by the highest consequence failure.

4.2.5. Recording
The equipment criticality ranking resulting from the assessment shall be recorded
in the Master Equipment List at Main/Parent Tag Level as a minimum.
 For low and medium criticality equipment the defined criticality shall be
cascaded to Child Tags.
 For high criticality equipment Child Tags shall undergo the same equipment
criticality assessment to ensure sufficient analysis is carried out.

4.2.5.1. Criticality Approval

Criticality assessments shall be subject to an internal review. Having completed
the necessary quality control and assurance steps the criticality assessment shall
be provided to the asset management team for review and comment, before final
approval prior to upload into the CMMS.

4.2.5.2. Documenting the Equipment Criticality Ranking.

Documenting of criticality assessments is essential providing an auditable record
of the assessment and is a concise record of the work undertaken which asset
management will sign off accepting completion of the exercise and the validity of
the results provided. Criticality assessments shall be thoroughly documented
including the following information. This document thus provides;
 Confirmation of the scope of the criticality assessment e.g. asset upon which
the assessment has been conducted.
 Details of critical assumptions made and standard rules applied

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 9 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
5. Equipment Criticality Analysis Consequence Matrix

Health and Safety Environment Reputation Production Cost

No Impa ct No Impa ct No Impa ct No Impa ct No Impa ct
Negl i ga bl e i mpa ct wi th the
Si ngl e pers on of workforce, Awa renes s , but no externa l
bounda ri es . Actions for cl ea n < 1% of fa ci l i ties production < EUR 5,000
Fi rs t Ai d ca s e concern
up ma y be requi red
Medi um i mpa ct wi thi n a l a rge
Si ngl e pers on of workforce,
a rea outs i de the bounda ri es .
Los t Ti me Inci dent. Member of
Medi um a ctions requi red for Regi ona l concern a nd/or
publ i c wi th modera te, 2%-7% of fa ci l i ties production > EUR 5,000 up to < 50,000
res tora tion requi red. compl a i nts
revers i bl e mi d-term hea l th
Repea ted brea ches of
effect
regul a tions
Ma jor i mpa ct wi thi n a l a rge
a rea outs i de the bounda ri es .
Si ngl e workforce fa tal i ty,
Ma jor a ctions requi red for
mul tipl e workforce
res tora tion requi red. Na tiona l concern 8%-11% of fa ci l i ties production > EUR 50,000 up to < 200,000
hos pi tal i s a tion. Mul tipl e
Repea ted brea ches of
publ i c hos pi tal i s a tions
regul a tions a nd compl a i nts of
na tiona l concern
Ma s s i ve i mpa ct wi thi n a l a rge
a rea outs i de the bounda ri es .
Extens i ve a ctions requi red for
Mul tipl e workforce fa tal i ties .
res tora tion requi red. Interna tiona l concern >11% of fa ci l i ties production > EUR 200,000
Publ i c fa tal i ty
Repea ted brea ches of
regul a tions a nd compl a i nts of
i nterna tiona l concern

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 10 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>
6. Internal Reference Links
 SCE Management Standard
 E-C.3.2-HQ-STD-009 Maintenance Management Framework

7. External Reference Links

N/A

8. Obsolete Regulations
N/A

9. Certification Standards
N/A

10. Transitory Provisions

Transitory provisions will be in place to regulate the compliance with this standard
and the roadmap to full compliance will be developed with each Branch Office
individually

Head Office shall roll out this standard to Branch Offices and shall provide training
and support where required.

Branch Offices shall conduct a gap analysis against this standard within 6 months
from date of issue and shall report the results to the Global Maintenance Manager.
This gap analysis shall be used to develop a prioritized Maintenance Improvement
Plan which will be built into the Branch Office Annual MTP process.

Where Branch Offices are unable to meet the requirements of this standard a
‘Request for Deviation’ shall be raised and processed in line with E&P standard EP-
HQ-010 Deviation from the requirements of Technical Standards.

11. Terms & Abbreviations

CMMS Computerized Maintenance Management System
SCE Safety Critical Element
ECE Environmental Critical Element
RBI Risk Based Inspection
HSE Health, Safety & Environment
ECA Equipment Criticality Analysis

12. Keywords / Search Criteria

Criticality
Reliability

NA-OTP-PMT-000-OR-STA-00001 Master Language: <English>

Page 11 of 11
Revision: <DRAFT> <C.3.2 Maintain Wells & Facilities.>