Two-thirds of energy (oil, gas, petrochemicals, and derivatives) and power companies have implemented, or are considering, cost-control measures.
Most companies are protecting critical maintenance, but many are reconsidering non-essential maintenance, according to Marsh JLT Specialty’s recent Energy and Power Spot Poll.
Deferrals may be possible if the site has well-established management systems and inspection strategies for all fixed equipment.
Best practice processes to improve owner confidence when inspections are postponed include:
A multidisciplinary assessment team should work together to consider potential issues, such as equipment integrity and capability of releasing equipment from service (that is, difficult versus impossible). This will help to ensure transparency and a strong technical basis for the postponement.
A well-documented standard that defines the deferral process — approved and owned by the inspection manager — ensures that decisions are based on process safety and asset integrity.
Process unit(s) deferrals can be complicated and require extensive reviews from a range of disciplines. These deferrals should list and assess each individual piece of equipment regardless of fluid categorisation, regulatory requirements, or risk of a loss of containment. To justify the deferral from a technical perspective, capture all unique equipment numbers and additional information, including regulatory requirements, risk prioritisation, and release options.
Although the technical basis for deferral should be formally approved by the inspection manager and asset owner as a minimum, the level of technical assessment required means that for most deferrals additional specialists should be engaged, including: