White Papers

Safety Case Thorough Review

6 Engineering have managed the Thorough Reviews of three UK North Sea Installations (Armada, North Everest and Lomond) for BG Group, during our work with Environmental Resources Management. We developed and organised the scope of the overall thorough review we developed scope for key studies and workshops, managed third-party suppliers and undertook the ALARP assessment of the potential risk reduction measures.

The scope involved:

  • Review against HSE’s Loss of Containment Manual (a Technical Audit)
  • Process Hazards Review (similar to a HAZOP study)
  • HAZID Revalidation (a desktop exercise)
  • Offshore Safety Review (a Technical Audit, combined with other activities, e.g. workforce consultation)
  • Bowtie review (a multidiscipline workshop which we facilitated)
  • Ageing Assets Review (a Technical Audit)
  • Performance Standards Review (scope development)
  • Management of third party inputs

The Technical Audits we undertook included a review (as part of the Thorough Review scope) to ascertain how well BG met Oil & Gas industry guidance for managing Ageing Assets.

This required a brand new approach, there being no precedent set for the extent of the scope ofthis work (we reviewed other examples, but we considered that they did not wholly address the requirements of the guidance). Therefore, we determined a review methodology, question set (for management interviews) and an assessment based on the salient points of the guidance, to review their existing documentation. It was an important requirement to understand the meaning of the salient point, in case it was indirectly addressed, so as to avoid raising non-conformances where in reality there were none.

We also developed similar approaches for a check against the HSE’s Loss of Containment Manual, Control of Work, and Performance Standards (scope development).

Design Notification

We managed and contributed to the preparation of a Design Notification for Premier Oil’s new Catcher FPSO, during our work with Environmental Resources Management. Feedback on the document quality and coverage was extremely positive.

Management of Change

We have provided Technical Safety input on a number of brownfield White Papers, for clients including BP (on their UK North Sea Assets: Magnus, Clair, ETAP, Andrew, Schiehallion, Bruce) and EnQuest (Thistle Alpha), during our work with Wood Group PSN. This input included chairing hazard study meetings (Construction HAZIDs, LOPA studies), as well as updating documents to reflect changes and preparation of new documentation. We also maintained the quality of close out of hazard study action responses. We have also chaired a HAZOP study for EnQuest (Piper Bravo).

Some of these White Papers were minor (replacement of pipework), whereas others were major (caisson replacement, gas turbine re-wheeling, cooler replacement).

We provided Technical Safety leadership for the refit, refurbishment and upgrade of the Maersk Gryphon FPSO, during our work with Fabricom Offshore Services. This was a significant, fast-paced project which led to the Gryphon returning to UK North Sea service.

Safety Case Authoring

We undertook the role of Technical Author for the preparation of the formal safety assessment part of the safety case for Statoil’s Mariner installation, during our work with Environmental Resources Management. This involved reviewing studies undertaken and reported by Statoil’s consultant, as well as working within Statoil’s designer’s office in London to obtain project information for input to the safety case.

Onshore Gas Processing and Storage

We provided Technical Safety input to National Grid’s compressor stations at Felindre, Wormington and Churchover, during our work with AMEC. These White Papers involved updating hazardous area drawings (following site visits to the installations), as well as HAZOP action closeout.

We provided Technical Safety Input to EDF’s new salt cavern storage facilities in Cheshire, UK, during our work with AMEC. This project involved review of site facilities against industry standards to identify gaps in design provisions.


We undertook COMAH Representative Set consequence analysis for a nuclear fuel production facility, during our work with Jacobs. The scope included:

  • Scenario Review (for confirming that the hazard was real and present)
  • Dispersion Modelling
  • Toxicity modelling

We took responsibility for interpreting the representative set and preparing the consequence analysis models for gas dispersion, fires, explosions and toxic effects on a nuclear facility. Included Hydrogen Fluoride, methane, methanol and hydrogen models using PHAST and ALOHA. The most important piece of the project was proving that PHAST was not the correct modelling tool for liquid HF acid releases.