1. Meeting the Environmental Challenge Accelerate Oil& Gas – Rio de Janeiro, 16 May 2012 Tommy Bjornsen – Director of Operation, South America

2. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. 2 DNV – Managing Risk Globally DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability DNV Maritime and Oil & Gas DNV Business Assurance

3. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. DNV’s core competence 3 identify assess manage risk

4. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved.4 Addressing the new risk agenda  DNV helps develop, implement, maintain and continually improve best practices in safety and environmental management  A complete service offering: - Risk-Based Decision Support - Management Systems and Performance Measures - Environmental Models and Management - Emergency Planning and Accident Investigation - Advanced Simulation and Modelling - Human Factors and Safety Culture - Operations Safety

5. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Effective and robust safety and environmental management system  Ensure that exploration and production is done safely and in a sustainable manner  Assure all stakeholders that activities that pose a threat to life, environment and assets are properly controlled 5  How to prevent major accidents – “black swans”  How arrange a proper response capability for major environemntal spills  How to establish predictability for the industry  How to prevent unnecessary business interruption and disturbance  How to manage all relevant legislation  How to ….

6. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Current Regulation in Brazil  Regulatory bodies for Safety and Environmental aspects: - The National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels (ANP): 17 Management Practices - Marine Authority ( the Coast and Ports Directorate, DPC): Maritime Authority Standards, NORMAM - Ministry of Labour and Employment: regulations, codes of practice and guidelines - Environmental licencing: CONAMA and IBAMA  It seems to be a continued need for better understanding of objectives and expectations and further the implementation of the regulations and criteria to be applied for developing and approval of safety and environmental studies.  Overall, it is a “learning process” that goes between the Regulators and the industry and it will take some time until all parties have the same understanding and the conditions are understood, implemented and well applied.  Some areas for improvement when comparing best practices 6

7. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Major accidents versus Occupational accidents 7 Occupational risk Major accident risk Personal safety management Process safety management

8. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Occupational Safety shows significant improvements 8

9. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Macondo/Deepwater Horizon – “a one off ” case? 9

10. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved.10 Historical major accidents and related improvements and learning's: Alexander Kielland (1980)  Structural redundancy Piper Alpha (1988)  “Offshore Safety Case” Exxon Valdez (1989)  Double hull Scandinavian Star (1990)  Corporate accountability for loss of life Texas City (2005)  Improved understanding of major accidents Occupational safety ≠ Major accident safety Deepwater Horizon (2010) Are we prepared for worst case accidents? Herald of Free Enterprise (1987)  Increased freeboard, initiation of ISM Estonia (1994)  Requirements in crowd and crisis management

11. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Need of improved quality in decisions at critical point  Importance of managing barriers and critical functions to prevent accidents and achieve corporate goals for safe and productive installations  Importance of organizing information to support decision makers  Importance of a visual, intuitive framework and “common language” for communication, consensus, and action across discipline and organization boundaries  Importance of providing practical guidance and training in challenging, high stress situations 11

12. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Design vs Operations Phase Risk approaches  Design stage – only a few specialists need to know - They decide on risk reduction based on cost-risk benefit approach - Complex risk approaches are necessary for some kinds of decisions - Broad based decisions can be concluded with Risk Matrix - Difficult decisions may require QRA (Quantitative Risk Analysis)  Operation stage – everyone involved need to know - What makes things safe - What is their role in maintaining the controls - Management and regulators need to be assured that the controls they specified / agreed to are working 12

13. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Swiss Cheese Model – barrier methodology Major Accident Emergency response E.g. escape, evacuation Mitigate E.g. drainage, fire protection Detect E.g. fire & gas detection, control systems Prevent E.g. design, maintenance, procedures, competence HAZARD

14. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Barrier philosophy linked to the safety management system 14 The Bow Tie risk model Implements the Swiss Cheese model Clearly identifies barriers in accident pathways Critical barriers can be identified Barrier ownership is assigned Barriers linked to management system – Operations, Engineering, Maintenance etc.

15. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Summing up – how to meet the environmental challenge  Legislation and regulation is in place in Brazil. However, areas for improvement both regarding interpretation and implementation  Question mark whether we have sufficient focus on the operational safety and specifically the unexpected events potentially leading to environmental catastrophes  Barrier methodology and specifically the bow tie may be a tool to enhance and improve the safety and environmental performance 15

16. © Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Safeguarding life, property and the environment www.dnv.com 16