Aeran, A., Siriwardane, S. C., Mikkelsen, O., & Langen, I. (2017). A framework to assess structural integrity of ageing offshore jacket structures for life extension. Marine Structures, 56, 237-259.

Animah, I., & Shafiee, M. (2018). Condition assessment, remaining useful life prediction and life extension decision making for offshore oil and gas assets. Journal of loss prevention in the process industries, 53, 17-28.

El-reedy, M. (2012). Offshore structures: Gulf professional. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123854759000018

Ezanizam, M. S., Khairi, M., Irza, N., & Nurul Uyun, A. (2019). Structural reliability analysis for fixed offshore platforms.

Guédé, F. (2019). Risk-based structural integrity management for offshore jacket platforms. Marine Structures, 63, 444-461.

Hse.gov.uk. (2019). HSE Guidance for risk assessment for offshore installation. Retrieved from: http://www.hse.gov.uk/offshore/sheet32006.pdf

Mendes, P., Correia, J. A., Mourão, A., Pereira, R., Fantuzzi, N., De Jesus, A., & Calçada, R. (2020). Fatigue Assessments of a Jacket-Type Offshore Structure Based on Static and Dynamic Analyses. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 26(1), 04020054.

Moan, T. (2018). Life cycle structural integrity management of offshore structures. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 14(7), 911-927.

Okoh, C., Roy, R., Mehnen, J., & Redding, L. E. (2014). Overview of remaining useful life prediction techniques in through-life engineering services. Procedia CIRP, [online] 16, pp.158-163.

Sarhan, O., & Raslan, M (2017). Offshore petroleum rigs/platforms: An overview of analysis, design, construction and installation. Retrieved from: https://www.londontechpress.co.uk/public/OnlineFirst/10095_OnlineFirst.pdf

Soom, E. M., Abu Husain, M. K., Mohd Zaki, N. I., & Azman, N. U. (2020). A Reliable Approach for Fixed Offshore Structures Probability of Failure Determination. International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), 11(5).

Soom, E. M., Husain, M. K. A., Zaki, N. I. M., Nor, M. N. K. M., & Najafian, G. (2018). Lifetime extension of ageing offshore structures by global ultimate strength assessment (GUSA). Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering, 30(1).

Vaidya, P., & Rausand, M. (2011). Remaining useful life, technical health, and life extension. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability, 225(2), 219-231.

Zhang, Y., Beer, M., & Quek, S. T. (2015). Long-term performance assessment and design of offshore structures. Computers & Structures, 154, 101-115.

Other references

Gholizad, A., Golafshani, A. and Akrami, V. (2019). Structural reliability of offshore platforms considering fatigue damage and different failure scenarios. Retrieved from: https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0029801812000662?token=95D171ADC7AA49F820931462DAE843D60767F449ECE353B2B2B1C8769D2F8EF5F14125D1F1C1420F9AEC096E3B62E954

Iso.org. (2019). ISO 13381-1:2015. Retrieved from: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#!iso:std:51436:en

Nopsema.gov.au. (2019). What is a safety case. NOPSEMA. Retrieved from: https://www.nopsema.gov.au/safety/safety-case/what-is-a-safety-case/

Planned Progress

A representation of the milestones for the risk assessment is summarized using the Gantt chart below.

Table 1: Gantt chart

Project Risks and Remedial Mitigation Measures

1. Anticipated risks

• Delays in meeting deadlines
• Failure to make appropriate installations
• Failure to implement the matrices, equations, and flowcharts properly
• Diversion from the primary project goals.

The remedial/ mitigation measures against these risks include:

• The delays can be remediated by conducting weekly audit of activities to identify those that missed the deadlines. The delayed tasks can be rescheduled and done at a later time (Soom et al. 2020).
• To prevent installation failure, it is important to discuss the challenges with the project leader and technical consultants to find the best way to install the systems (Okoh, et al. 2014).
• The project leader has to be informed whenever the matrices, equations, and flowcharts are not installed correctly.
• Diversion from the primary goal can be prevented by regularly confirming the activities on the Gantt chart and discussing the outcomes with the project leader.

Health and Safety Assessment

The risk assessment form is represented as appendix 1.

Ethics Statement

An ethics statement is summarized as appendix 2. The primary ethical concerns for this project are summarized as follows.

• Integrity and Honesty

It is important that the stakeholders in the installation project, especially the engineers adhere to high ethical standards such as being honest, open, fair, and conducting themselves with integrity (Moan, 2018). The success of the project is dependent on the trustworthiness and reliability of the primary stakeholders in the project.

• Respect laws, life, environment, and societal wants

It is quintessential that the primary stakeholders especially the engineers adhere to regulations and laws to prevent lawsuits against the firm. In addition, they have to respect life, environmental, and societal concerns (Aeran, Siriwardane, Mikkelsen & Langen, 2017). This way, they will avoid conflicts with the different interest groups. Additional laws that could compromise the credibility of the project include safeguarding personal information against espionage and avoiding breach of intellectual property.

• Communication systems and leadership

It is important that the engineers and other stakeholders directly involved in the projects promote open, transparent, and honest communications (Guédé, 2019). Clear communication will help foster understanding and greater levels of engagement, as well as motivation, required for the successful completion of the project.