CindiK From:Skelton, 2007 Sent:WedSep12 16:10:59 Blaine P To: Segura, J Presentation Policy.

ppt on Subject: Mogford lmportance: Normal Attachments: Mogford Presentalion Policy.ppt J on

\oZt"l
CONFIDENTIAL
ExhibitNo' Worldwide Court

rters, Inc.

B P-HZN-217 eMDL015636 56

GOM SPU OMS/S&OI Review

September 12, 2007 Review J Mogford

Integration of GoM S&OI into OMS

2001 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PS/IM

IM

IM Integrity Management Standard

Process Safety/ Draft Integrity Management Texas City Incident

OMS
Point Plan

(Operating

Management System)

1 Texas City actions 2 Major Accident Risk 3 IM & CoW Standards 4 Operations Capability 5 S&OI actions 6 Compliance -Project Emerald)

Sustaining

CoW Control of Work Standard

The Baker Report

Group IM Standard & 6 Point Plan efforts Evolving into OMS Framework

OMS In Action in GOM Risk Reduction

Areas of Major Risk/Areas for Improvement Prioritized with Leadership using OMS (Risk, Integrity, Process Safety, Accountability,
Leadership, Continuous Improvement)

S&OI 6Pt Plan progress on track and with consistent implementation across all areas of SPU Process Safety/IM culture changing GoM Risk Management System now in use with continuous improvement to sustain PU Integrity QPRs/Bimonthly LT S&OI/OMS Mtg performance review/continuous improvement HAZOPs/LOPAs ongoing & HAZIDs/Risk Registers Deepwater Risk Workshops, mitigations and Management Reviews

Integrity Management Elements Barrier Model

Continuous Improvement Accountabilities Leadership

Plant & Asset Integrity Risk Assessment & Management

H A Z A R D

Process Safety

Emergency Response

EVENT

C O N S E Q U E N C E

Incident Investigations and Learning

GoM SPU 6-Point Plan Implementation

Implementation Plan 2006 2007 2008
Behind Schedule

2007 Plan Progress

On Plan Ahead of Schedule Action Complete

Comments

Close Out TXC Actions Occupied Portable Buildings Cold Vents Procedures
High risk buildings removed. Segment Standard being revised to address remaining buildings (expected 9/07). No hazardous vents

MARs Assessments Complete End 2006 Action Plans in IM Plans

All assets below Group Reporting Line

Implement IM & COW IM Implementation Plan Progress by 2008 COW Gap Analysis Complete COW Implementation Plan Progress for 2009
Competency Element remaining. SPU audit plan developed. Plan in execution. 57% complete against gaps (end 3Q07)

Assess Ops Capability Operations Technicians Operations Leadership

Safety Critical assessments complete / 82% of Overall CMAS complete Profiles complete 2Q07. Assessments to be complete 4Q08

5 6

Close Out Audit Actions Regulatory Compliance (Project Emerald)

6 Pt Plan - Close Audit & S&OI Actions

Team formed FotF, Asset/Project Reps, Paralegals All Documents in BP Servers & Documentum Developed tool and process All Documents in BP Servers & Documentum Only Specific types of Documents .doc, . xls, .pdf S&OI Documents Based on Keywords # Documents Searched Documents For Actions 2 million + Documents S&OI Docs Inventory Process Oct - Mid Nov All Audit Actions Closed Sept 2007

5 million + Documents

~ 50k Documents

~1,500 + Documents

Actions

~ 27,000 Actions

End of Jan 07

All S&OI Document Actions Closed, Removed, Planned

1Q 07

GoM SPU IM Standard Progress

Implementation on Track: 57% complete against gaps end 3Q One SPU Plan Production, Drilling, and Major Projects Consistent approach across SPU which drives efficiency and clarity

GoM SPU IM Standard Implementation Plan

1 - Accountability
SPA IM Assigned Project IM Reps Assigned SPU EA Assigned Project EAs Assigned EA & TA Accountability Process/Training

One SPU Plan Similar Plan for El. 6-10

2006 YE 1Q

2007 2Q 3Q 4Q
Comments

2 - Competency
O&M Safety Critical Assessmets O&M Staff and Site Leadership Assessments EA/TA Assessments IM Eng., Pract., Prof., Line Mgmt. Assessments Annual Plan SPU Org/Contractor Competency
EA TA 2008 milestone EA/ TA assessments delayed due to Atlantis (60%/ 94% complete). 2008 milestone 2008 milestone

3 - Hazard & Risk

Risk Management Policy MAR Assessments Risk Registers SCE Registers
5 of 9 complete. Others in progress.

4 - Facilities & Process Integrity

Operating (HC) Asset Gap Plans TH & Atl Asset Gap Plans Asset Gaps Closed IM Strategies and Plans Documented IM Data Major Projects and Drilling IM Strategies and Plans
2008 milestone 2008 milestone 2008 milestone 2008 milestone - Major Projects STP complete Gaps identified & plans in progress.

5 - Protective Systems & Devices

Key Data (Existing) Role Statements, Functionality, Reliability, and Survivability Specs Alarm, SD & Blowdown Philosophies Override/Bypass Proc.& Register
2008 milestone

Integrity Management Standard Implementation

Competence - KPI
100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0%

NaKika NaKika

Pompano Pompano

Holstein Holstein

Mad Dog Mad Dog

Thunder Horse Thunder Horse

Atlantis Atlantis

Thunder Horse Rig Thunder Horse Rig

Prod/Meas/Alloc Prod/Meas/Alloc

Horn Mt Horn Mt

Marlin Marlin

Element 2 - Competency Element 2 - Competency

Tier 1 Implementation KPI Tier 1 Implementation KPI

120.0% 120.0%
A a l t n t s i H o r n M t H o s l e t n i M a r n i l M a d D o g N a K k i a P o mp a n o T h u n d e r H o r e s P r o d / M e a s A / o l c H A a l t n t s i H o r n M t H o s l e t n i M a r n i l M a d D o g N a K k i a P o mp a n o T h u n d e r H o r e s P r o d / M e a s A / o l c

HO/MD Rig HO/MD Rig

O / M D R g i T h u

r H

r e s

g i

/ M

g i

r H

r e s

g i

O&M CMAS Gen 1 O&M CMAS Gen 1

100.0% 100.0%

Target Target

80.0% 80.0%

Risk-based approach 60.0% 60.0% started with safety critical CMAS 100% 40.0% 40.0% Overall O&M Assessments 82%
20.0% 20.0%

100.00% 100.00% 82.0% 82.0% 60% 60%

94% 94%

0.0% 0.0%

O&M CMAS O&M CMAS Gen 1 Gen 1 (31-Aug-07) (31-Aug-07)

0% 0% Site Leadership Safety Critical Site Leadership Safety Critical CMAS CMAS CMAS CMAS (31-Aug-07) (31-Aug-07)

5-EAs 5-EAs (3 out of 5) (3 out of (31-Aug-07)5) (31-Aug-07)

16-TAs 16-TAs (15 out of 16) (15 out of (31-Aug-07)16) (31-Aug-07)

0% 0% 0% 0% IM Engineers IM Professionals IM Engineers IMand Line Professionals and Practioners and Practioners Management and Line Management

Integrity Management Standard Implementation

Hazard Evaluation & Risk Assessment - KPI
Element 33 - Hazard Evaluation and Risk Management Element - Hazard Evaluation and Risk Management
Tier 1 Implementation KPI Tier 1 Implementation KPI
14 14
Holstein Rig Holstein Rig Mad Dog Rig Mad Dog Rig Thunder Thunder Horse Horse Rig Rig PMF (Houm a) PMF (Houm a) Thunder Thunder Horse Horse Pom pano Pom pano NaKika NaKika Mad Dog Mad Dog Marlin Marlin Holstein Holstein

Target Target Horn Mt Horn Mt Marlin Marlin Thunder Horse Thunder Horse Pompano Pompano under development under development PMF (Houma) PMF (Houma) Holstein Holstein Atlantis Atlantis NaKika NaKika Mad Dog Mad Dog PMF (Houma) PMF (Houma) HO/MD/TH Rigs HO/MD/TH Rigs Thunder Horse Thunder Horse Pompano Pompano NaKika NaKika Mad Dog Mad Dog Marlin Marlin Holstein Holstein Horn Mt Horn Mt Atlantis Atlantis

12 12

MAR actions closure10on track 10 - 60% complete Bottoms up engagement 6

6 8 8

Consistent SCE 4 Registers 4

2 2

Horn Mt Horn Mt Atlantis Atlantis

MAR Assessment MAR Assessment

Haz/Risk Register Haz/Risk Register

SCE Register SCE Register

Integrity Management Standard Implementation

Management of Change - KPI
Element 77 - Management of Change Element - Management of Change
Tier 1 Implementation KPI Tier 1 Implementation KPI
14 14 Target Target 12 12 Thunder Horse Thunder Horse

Puma Puma Thunder Thunder Horse Rig Horse Rig

underway underway

PMF (Houma) PMF (Houma)

10 10
underway underway

Atlantis Atlantis

and and

Standard8MOC 8 system across GoM 6 6

4 4

Mad Dog Mad Dog Holstein Holstein Pompano Pompano NaKika NaKika Marlin Marlin Horn Mt Horn Mt

Tubular Tubular Bells Bells

Holstein Rig Holstein Rig

Mad Dog Rig Mad Dog Rig Kaskida Kaskida

MOCs System Deployed in each Asset MOCs System Deployed in each Project MOCs System Deployed in each Asset MOCs System Deployed in each Project

MOCs System Deployed in D&C MOCs System Deployed in D&C

Safety Critical Work Orders Continuous Improvement

Monthly % Over Due SCE Work Orders GoM DWP

3.00% 2.8% 2.50% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 0.50% 0.0% 0.00% -0.50%
20 06 -0 20 6 06 -0 7 20 06 -0 20 8 06 -0 9 20 06 -1 20 0 06 -1 1 20 06 -1 2 20 07 -0 20 1 07 -0 2 20 07 -0 20 3 07 -0 4 20 07 -0 20 5 07 -0 6

1.4% 1.2% 1.1% 1.2%

0.3% 0.0% 0.0%

0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

GoM SPU OMS Approach

Development E&P OMS Steering Team participation E&P FEL Team Leadership Group OMS Manual Development Workshop participation and facilitation Strong networking with other Wave 1 SPUs

Planning

Implementation TOR FEL Plan S&OI Integration Resources

Assigned SPAs for each Sub-Element Risk-based Prioritization

Communication

Communication Plan Offshore & Existing Networks OMS Overviews PU LT OMS Sessions XT Deep Dive Day LT OMS Mgmt Committee OMS S&TD Biweekly .Forum NaKika Pilot 1Q, 2008 Rest of SPU 2-3Q, 2008 One SPU approach Existing Networks/mtgs

Leadership Engagement

Deployment

Continuous Improvement training

13

OMS Requirements Workshop Benefits

Requirements provide right level of detail for practitioner to implement & understand gaps Provides real examples and best practices for practitioner Early OMS embedding & ownership in SPUs Developing SME informal networks across BP Bringing practitioners together with Group/Segment SMEs to develop requirements practitioners/experts SPU FEL now as one Group team vs multiple SPU FEL teams and approaches Consistency/efficiency

GoM SPU OMS Implementation Plan

2007 4Q GoM Guide
SPU Gap Analysis NaKika Gap Analysis

2008 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q

2009 1Q

NaKika Gap Closure Ph 1 Rest of SPU Gap Closure Ph 1

Rest of SPU Gap Analysis

Phase 1 Sub-Elements
Other Sub-Elements for Gap Assess. Majority in Action through S&OI
People & Competence MOC Regulatory Compliance Operating Procedures Info & Doc Control Working w/contractors (IM, Cow) Maintenance & Turnarounds Reliability Communications & Engagement Assessment & Audits

Prioritized GoM Sub-Elements (based on Risk) Plant & Asset Integrity Risk Assessment & Mgmt Process Safety Accountability Leadership Continuous Improvement (Underpins)

GOM SPU Major Hazard and Risk Management

September 12, 2007 Review J Mogford

Why do we need a Major Hazard and Risk Management Policy in the GoM SPU?
IM Standard
(Hazard Eval, & Risk Mgmt) Req.

OMS
Risk Assessment & Management

Baker Panel Report Recommendations

gHSEr
(Risk Assessment & Mgmt) Req :

GoM SPU VISION to be #1 in the Gulf

GoM Major Hazard & Risk Management System

S&OI : Pride & excellence in personal,

process & environmental safety 2007 Key Results: No significant safety and integrity incidents Major risks understood, managed, & externally validated Aspiration S&OI agenda delivered Zero significant integrity incidents Zero MIAs, DAFWCs, HIPOs

GoM Major Hazard & Risk Management Policy

GoM SPU Risk Management System

Putting it all together
Hazard ID, Risk Assessment & Prioritization
Triggers
-New Projects -Renew al of Facilities -New Standards -Incident Response -Periodic Review s -Audits -Regulatory -Employee Concerns -Excursions

Risk M itigation Planning & Controls

Options
-Engineering Studies, FEL -Non Engineering Options, e.g.

Implementation & Operation

Execute Plan
Priority Resources Progress Tracking and Review s

Tools
-MAR -HAZID -HAZOP -LOPA -FM EA -QRA -ESSA -EERS -Blast Study

Decisions
-Partner Approval -Residual Risk -Business Decision Process -Commercial Decisions Levels of authority based on level of risk Integrated Engineering and Business Plan

Plan
-Roles & Responsibilities -M ilestones/ Dates -Action Tracking -Progress Review s

M ajor Hazard & Risk Register Common Risk M atrix

Administrative Controls -Evaluation by Risk Ow ner

Emergency Response Plan

Update

Communicate Hazards & Plan

Text Description

Continuous Risk Reduction

M anagement Review & Improvement
M anagement Review s -Quarterly -SPU Leadership -Asset Profiles & Scorecards Improvement Thru Strategic Direction -SPA IM -Alignment -Policy Review Annually Risk M anagement System -SPU EA -Annual Review -SPU Conformance
-Risk Action M anagement -Leading Indicators -Lagging Indicators

M easurement, Evaluation & Corrective Action

KPI M easurement Profile & Score Cards
-Profile Risk Action Mgmt
-Scorecard Leading & Lagging Indicators

Evaluation
-Action NonPerformance -No change in positive direction

Corrective Action
-Track

Major Hazard and Risk Register

Facility to SPU
Facility / Project / Drilling Unit
Top 20 ~ 30 risks for each Facility / Major Project / Drilling Unit

Business Unit
Understand and develop plans addressing the Top 20 ~ 30 risks within the Business Unit Quarterly progress reviews

Strategic Performance Unit

Review plans addressing the top 20 risks by the SPUXT Quarterly reviews of mitigation plans highlighting impediments to progress

Annual Engineering Plan

Top 5 risks and mitigation plans fully understood by the SPUXT and incorporated into Annual Engineering Plans. Progress on closing mitigation plans reviewed by SPUXT biannually

20 ~ 30
Major Hazards Major Hazards Major Na Kika Hazards Major Hazards Minor Hazards Minor Hazards Minor Hazards Minor Hazards

20 ~ 30
Major Hazards

Production BU
Minor Hazards

20
Major Hazards

5
Major Hazards

SPU

SPU

Minor Hazards

Minor Hazards

Major Hazards Major Hazards

Major Hazards

Puma

Minor Hazards Minor Hazards

New Developments BU
Minor Hazards

Risk Mitigation Planning and Controls

Risk Reduction plan approval performed at management levels commensurate with the risk exposure prior to mitigation
RISK LEVEL High Medium Low OPERATIONS APPROVER GoM VP Production PUL Operations Manager MAJOR PROJECT APPROVER GoM VP Development PUL Delivery Manager DRILLING & COMPLETIONS / WELLS APPROVER Accountable GoM VP (GoMX, GoMD, GoMP) PUL Wells Program Manager

Provide description of the risk and planned mitigation activities Definitively show the organization level providing the approval

Implementation and Operation

Implementation & Operation
Execute Plan
Priority Resources Progress Tracking and Review s

Emergency Response Plan

Update

Communication Tool Bow-Tie Diagram

Cause
H A Z A R D C O N S E Q U E N C E

Communicate Hazards & Plan

Cause

Initiating Event

Cause

Barriers

Recovery Measures

Atlantis Bow-Tie

Communication workshops with operations: o Highlight facility design features and their hazards management role o Visual line-of-sight helps reinforce importance of maintaining controls Job Plans associated with Barriers to link day-to-day activities with major hazards management Framework supports discussions for Continuous Risk Reduction

Clarifying what in action means

(GoM SPU Actions In Progress)
1. Engage your leaders to use OMS as the way they evaluate performance, prioritize work and drive improvements. XT OMS Day, SPU Communications, Field presentations at Nakika and Thunder Horse, Participation in Ops Academy, SPU Operations Conference, Drive to performance in 6 PT plan. Implementation of new SPU strategy & Structure. 2. Identify major risk and compliance issues and prioritize activities. Completion of MAR, S&OI Audit, OMS Readiness Assessment, Design and implementation of GoM Risk Process, update of Hazops, Deepwater Engineering Risk, Action Item Clean-up, Progress on implantation of 6 Pt plan and IM standard. 3. Move to action with plans that rapidly mitigate risk and major issues Majors efforts to mitigate risk associated with safety leadership, Subsea metallurgy, flare design issues, marine risk, SS tubing, simops, valve integrity, mitigating hurricane damage, Blast impacts, overall corrosion inspection and mitigation program, completion of Ziff Benchmark study 4. ID and resolve underlying people and process issues. Improvements to ISSOW, Implemented new MOC program, Addressed Safety leadership issues, implementation ops leadership and development program, commitment to ops training center and function,

Measurement, Evaluation and Corrective Action

Continuous Risk Reduction Profiles Continuous Risk Reduction Profiles illustrate changing risk and action completion status
Likelihood
HSE-016 CURRENT RISK MITIGATION ACTIVITIES HSE-002 Medical Services Distance from emergency service HSE-007 Operator Error Due to lack of training on compressor operations HSE-051 Boat impact on risers Due to supply vessel DP failure HSE-024 Corrosion related release Due to extended low availability of chemical injection system HSE-010 Dropped Objects Due to many lifting operations over subsea equipment while drilling HSE-019 Simulatneous Operations Due to installtion of blast walls while producing HSE-021 MODU Collides with facility Due to MODU proximity during pull-over operations HSE-016 X-High Pressure High Temperature Wells Due to integrity of equipment sealing surfaces HSE-051 FUTURE RISK MITIGATION ACTIVITIES HSE-022 Ttemporary accommodation Remove temporary accommodation initially installed to support HUC HSE-009 Corrosion Inhibition to achieve < 95% avaiability Upgrade corrosion management system and chemicals to provide improved protection to SCRs HSE-022 Damaged ViV strakes Replace ViV strakes damaged during dropped object incident

Major Hazards

HSE-010 HSE-024 HSE-021

HSE-007

HSE-002

HSE-019

Consequence Non-Major Hazards

COMPLETED RISK MITIGATION ACTIVITIES HSE-018 Collision Avoidance Radar Install collision avoidance radar and set guard rings to 12 nm HSE-015 night time personnel transfers Update procedures restricting night-time personnel transfers via personnel basket HSE-012 Llifeboats Relocate lifeboat to address exposure to potential fires from chemical storage and flare radaition levels

Key New Moved No Change

Quarterly Progress Status No Progress achieved Progress achieved

Risk Reduction Key Performance Indicators

Leading Indicators # Inspection programs overdue # Safety Instrumented Systems failures on test #SCE work orders overdue #Tr@ction/S&OI actions overdue Lagging Indicators # Releases, Spills, Leaks # HIPOs (High Potential Incidents) # MIAs (Major Incident Accidents) # Lower severity IM incidents # Integrity related incident injuries

Management Review & Improvement

Management Review & Improvement
Management Reviews Improvement Thru Strategic Direction Risk Management System

-SPU EA -Annual Review -SPU Conformance

-Quarterly -SPU Leadership -Asset Profiles & Scorecards

Participants SPU Senior Vice President & Vice Presidents (SPUXT) SPU Vice President & PUL SPA IM SPU EA Purpose

-SPA IM -Alignment -Policy Review Annually

Quarterly: Continuous Risk Reduction Profile reviews for top 20 risks in SPU, KPI scorecards, and highlights of impediments limiting mitigation plan execution. Biannual: Reviews of plans addressing the top 5 SPU risks highlighting impediments limiting mitigation plan execution. Quarterly reviews: Continuous Risk Reduction Profile for top 20 ~ 30 risks in PU and KPI scorecards

Annual: Policy review to identify improvement opportunities and strategic

direction changes. Annual: Policy conformance evaluation.

First QPR for discussing Risk Profiles and KPIS is January 2008

Back-up

Risk Reduction Plan Approval Example

High Risk Major Hazard

Pompano MAR Assessment

- High Risk: Potential hydrocarbon release on the Production Mezzanine Deck impacts Control Room personnel

Statistical Likelihood Severity

A B C D E F G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1-S

1-S

VP Approval of mitigation plans to address High Risk Major Hazard Risk Mitigation Measures
-

Note Indicative Risk Levels only Risk Before Mitigation = Bold font Risk After Mitigation = Italic font

Relocate the control room and quarters from its current location to the top deck and de-man all offices on the mezzanine and production decks

Context / Background
GoM SPU Top S&OI Risks
- Loss of Well Control - Riser Failure / Loss of Containment - Topside / Rig Equipment Failure - Helicopter Crash - Loss of Facility Stability - Damage or Loss of Critical Equipment / Pipeline

Decided in 2006 by GoM Leadership following Major Accident Risk (MAR) assessments List updated annually as part of Risk Register process (Risk Management Policy)

Risk #1 - Loss of Well Control

HAZARD Threat Initiating Event Loss of Well Control CONSEQUENCE Vapor Cloud Explosion

Formation Threat Hydrocarbons

Fire

Threat

Barriers

Recovery Measures

Spill

Key Mitigations

Key Mitigation
Follow DWOP requirements & MMS regulations with regular testing & inspection Casing design & well control standards and contingency plans in place Drilling staff resourcing and development plans Contractor selection and training EPTG & peer review of drilling/completion plans and designs

Accountability
Diehl - Drilling Porter - Wells Leary/Little Wise Leary/Little Leary/Little

Comment
MMS BOP pressure and function testing requirements in place MMS SSSV function testing requirements in place Part of CVP for Well Delivery and DWOP Mandatory MMS Subpart O - Well Control Training Plan in place MMS requirement for well control certification for drilling personnel in place Covered in CVP process for Well Delivery

Status

Risk #2 - Riser Failure / Loss of Containment

HAZARD Threat Initiating Event Riser Failure/ Loss of Containment Barriers Recovery Measures CONSEQUENCE Vapor Cloud Explosion

Formation Threat Hydrocarbons

Fire

Spill

Threat

Key Mitigations

Key Mitigation
Deepwater engineering risk study action plan Riser integrity and monitoring program implemented Dropped objects risk review completed with actions plan in place

Accountability
Petruska vonAschwege Harper

Comment
Status of 25 recommendations/actions from report are reviewed quarterly with SPU LT. Program implemented Open Water Lift Management Guide implemented & being utilized. Dropped object training provided & drills being performed. Actions with greatest risk reduction implemented & actions addressing novel technology addressed as longer term plan. O&M CMAS in place Centralized Function & resources in place

Status
10 of 25 complete Pompano remaining

Operator training and competency program Marine competency and operations support team

Seilhan Cramond

Risk #3 - Topside / Rig Equipment Failure

HAZARD Threat Initiating Event Topside/ Rig Equipment Failure Barriers Recovery Measures CONSEQUENCE Vapor Cloud Explosion

Formation Threat Hydrocarbons

Fire

Spill

Threat

Key Mitigations

Key Mitigation
Improved lifting and crane safety program being implemented

Accountability
Reidenbach

Comment

Status

Full implementation of the IM standard by end 2008 Competence assessment program in place Increased resources and improved inspection programs

Skelton Seilhan Ruehle

Completing final reviews with Wells HSSE & Ops teams. Target Face-to-face meetings to be scheduled with contractors 4Q07 to discuss changes. Target for rollout of revised GoM Lifting & Hoisting Manual is Oct. 2007. 46% complete (as of end of Aug. 2007) On track O&M CMAS in place Increase in staff needed Increase recommended for 2008

Risk #4 - Helicopter Crash

HAZARD Threat Initiating Event CONSEQUENCE

Fatalities Air Threat Transportation Helicopter Crash Environmental Release Threat Barriers Recovery Measures

Key Mitigations

Key Mitigation
Upgraded helicopter fleet to most modern & safe aircraft Aircraft include latest flight diagnostics and monitoring Contract only with top rated operators Aircraft safety program and resources in place

Accountability
Hayles Hayles Hayles

Comment
SPU is provided transportation utilizing the latest technology helicopters (S92 & S76C+) at this time. The latest technology helicopters employ either Health Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) or similar systems. Contract with one of largest & technically advanced helicopter operator in world for passenger transport and with experienced Search & Rescue specialist for Medivac/Search & Rescue. Current service provider has advanced Safety Management System (monitored by BP Aviation Assurance). A risk assessment has been done & maintained on likely crash or high risk events with risk mitigation & methods to prevent or minimize damage. Procedures in place based on industry practices, O&G Producers guidelines, & lessons learned globally. Aviation Assurance Advisor is onsite to oversee flight safety with helicopter operator & BP Aviation. Pilots, mechanics, & managers vetted by interview & work history review.

Status

Hayles

BP flight safety rules exceed industry standards

Hayles

Risk #5 - Loss of Facility Stability

HAZARD Threat Initiating Event Loss of Facility Stability CONSEQUENCE Vapor Cloud Explosion Fire Spill Property Loss

Storms Vessel Collision Technical Threat Barriers Recovery Measures Threat

Key Mitigations

Key Mitigation
Facilities designed with redundant and segmented buoyancy Marine engineering and operations support team established Emergency response scenarios expanded to marine incidents Working with regulators and industry on improved standards for MODU mooring design standards

Accountability
Cramond Cramond Cramond Diehl

Comment
Part of GMOS; Conducting design reviews; Part of HAZOPs Centralized Function & resources in place Working with HSE to incorporate GMOS requirements into ERP Preliminary efforts focused on developing ETP for Moving and Securing MODUs (GP 10-66).

Status
In progress

In progress Draft due 4Q07

Risk #6 - Damage or Loss of Critical Equipment / Pipeline

HAZARD Threat Initiating Event Damage/L oss of Critical Equip./ Pipeline Barriers Recovery Measures CONSEQUENCE Business Continuity Disruption Environmental Release Reputation Damage

Loss of Production

Threat

Threat

Key Mitigations

Key Mitigation
BCP plan is in place & Hurricane preparedness projects are underway to mitigate risks Building a risk based integrity management plan Critical equipment is identified & ops, maintenance, and sparing plans are being developed

Accountability
Johnson

Comment
BCP plan has been updated to integrate 3 BU BCPs into one consistent SPU Plan and is built around the critical processes needed to maintain business critical operations and applications (as during Severe Weather/Hurricane environments). GoM SPU Risk Management Policy complete and communication initiated. SPU Risk Management Practice being developed. SCE Registers updated & SOPs in progress.

Status

Skelton

In progress In progress

Hauser