You are on page 1of 2

HSE Incident Notification Fax

Note: This fax is intended to notify all parties concerned of an incident or near miss
situation according to AFPC HSE policies and/or established codes and standards.

Distribution TDE/95 and TDE/12 by Email


From: Name: Rene Werker Indicator : DSV Rig 5 Fax Number : 215
To: As per above distribution list…
Date & Date of NMI : 07.04.04 Location (including area): Rig 5 - Omar 1921
Location: Time of Incident : 19:00 hrs Dept. & Contractor involved : ADMASCO

Type of Incident - Tick the appropriate box(es)


Incident Classification (tick only one box): Tick √ Type of incident (tick one or more) Tick √
Fatality (FAT), counts also as LTI and TRC Road Traffic incident
Lost Workday Case (LWC), counts also as LTI & TRC Plant or workshop incident
Restricted Work Case (RWC), counts also as TRC Rig or well site incident √
Medical Treatment Case (MTC), counts also as TRC Office or accommodation incident
First Aid Case (FAC) Environmental incident (>10 litre)
Non Injurious Incident (NII) Fire / Explosion
Near Miss (NM) √ Security or Theft
Occupational Illness (TROI) Other: PTW violation

NM Incident After setting 7” casing on OMA192( small slim deep) and prior to drilling 6.0” hole section, the
Description wellhead (THS) and BOP’s were installed and pressure tested. During BOP testing – at the time of
Give a brief closing the upper pipe-rams in preparation for the pressure testing of BOPs and wellhead
description of the connection against the PTT - the TPR close function’s hydraulic hose failed / burst.
incident and of On OMA192 all BOP control hoses were (note that such operations are routinely performed after
any actions taken every Rig move and prior installing the hoses onto the BOP’s) successfully pressure tested to 3000
psi. The Coflexip type of hose which ‘failed’, was interconnecting two sections of ‘fixed / hard
piping’ one of which (hard piping) section feeds through the Rig’s sub-base, the other (fixed / hard
piping section) being located in the third ‘box / suitcase’ furthest away from the Koomey unit.
At the time of the failure, the BOPs were operated with 1500 psi manifold pressure. The TPR’s 4
way valve was immediately shifted in the ‘block’ position to depressurise the closing line and
eliminate spills. Observations:
 Inspection / testing and certification requirements for small bore control hoses (e.g. 1”
Coflexip type) are not clearly defined (manufacturer’s recommendation available for
inspection / testing / certification of such small bore hoses ?).
 What is life-time expectancy for small bore flexible type of hoses ? Is there a OEM
recommendation or do we just use until catastrophic failure.
 Whilst a 3000 psi pressure test on the ‘BOPs hydraulic circuit’ (hoses / fixed piping /
operating systems) is perceived adequate to confirm integrity for the BOPs operating
system in case of using ‘new’ hoses, it has become apparent that such ‘routine’ 3000 psi
test is probably inadequate for ‘used’ hoses (those that have been exposed to the drilling
rig environment / handling during R/U - R/D of BOP equipment and rig move etc.) Should
we ‘step-up’ to testing small bore flexible type of hoses to 1.5 x WP ?

Risk Actual Severity: 0 What’s involved? D


A (outcome of incident, 0-5) (P, A, E or R)
Potential Severity: 1 What’s involved? A Potential Exposure B
s (realistic worst case (P, A, E or R) (A, B, C, D or E)
s scenario)
e Whereby: P = People, A = Asset, E = Environment, R = Reputation
s
s
m
e
n
t
As per AFPC risk
assessment matrix
Name Indicator Signature Date
Reported by: Rene Werker DSV - Rig 5 14/04/04
Confirmed:
(Area HSE advisor)

Follow Up: If incid. Potential: Tick √ Further investigation required? Investigation team leader
(more info? See
also the AFPC Low & C/D/E-1 √ No. No further investigation Not applicable
HSE Incident Notification Fax
Note: This fax is intended to notify all parties concerned of an incident or near miss
situation according to AFPC HSE policies and/or established codes and standards.

investigation and Medium (not CDE-1) Yes. Standard AFPC incident report Section head
reporting
procedure & Risk High Yes. Standard AFPC incident report Department head
Assessment
Matrix) Serious Yes. Full written detailed report Dept. Hd., OFM or equiv.
So: report required? No If yes, name of team leader:

For Name (Department head) Indicator Signature Date


Agreement:

You might also like