IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-10-67.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Risk Management Practices: Cross-Agency Comparisons with Minerals Management Service

Author

Listed:
  • Scarlett, Lynn

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Linkov, Igor
  • Kousky, Carolyn

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

This paper reviews implementation of the risk management frameworks used by eight federal and foreign agencies—including the Minerals Management Service (MMS, now the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement, or BOEMRE)—and summarizes the features of a robust tolerable risk (TR) framework. A TR framework conceptually breaks risk into three categories—acceptable, unacceptable, and tolerable—separated by numerical boundaries. Most of the agencies surveyed in this review have adopted a TR or modified TR framework, but MMS (BOEMRE) generally has not (although the agency does use an Oil Spill Risk Model to assess spill probabilities and possible trajectories). The study argues that while numerical thresholds are not essential to risk management, they provide a transparent goal against which to benchmark practices, equipment, standards, and facilities, and would be a valuable tool for BOEMRE. We also recommend that BOEMRE develop better risk assessment and management guidance; identify and more systematically collect information for understanding and evaluating risks and safety performance; and strengthen performance-based risk management by adopting proven approaches, such as those used in Norway and the United Kingdom for offshore oil and gas development.

Suggested Citation

  • Scarlett, Lynn & Linkov, Igor & Kousky, Carolyn, 2011. "Risk Management Practices: Cross-Agency Comparisons with Minerals Management Service," RFF Working Paper Series dp-10-67, Resources for the Future.
    • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-10-67
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-10-67.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jan Erik Vinnem, 2007. "Offshore Risk Assessment," Springer Series in Reliability Engineering, Springer, edition 2, number 978-1-84628-717-6, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alireza M. Gelyani & Jon Tømmerås Selvik & Eirik Bjorheim Abrahamsen, 2016. "Decision criteria for updating test intervals for well barriers," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 305-315, March.
    2. Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Abrahamsen, Håkon Bjorheim & Milazzo, Maria Francesca & Selvik, Jon Tømmerås, 2018. "Using the ALARP principle for safety management in the energy production sector of chemical industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 160-165.
    3. Zhong, Shengtong & Langseth, Helge & Nielsen, Thomas Dyhre, 2014. "A classification-based approach to monitoring the safety of dynamic systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 61-71.
    4. Aven, Terje, 2008. "A semi-quantitative approach to risk analysis, as an alternative to QRAs," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(6), pages 790-797.
    5. J Montewka & P Krata & F Goerlandt & A Mazaheri & P Kujala, 2011. "Marine traffic risk modelling – an innovative approach and a case study," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 225(3), pages 307-322, September.
    6. E B Abrahamsen & T Aven & R S Iversen, 2010. "Integrated framework for safety management and uncertainty management," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 224(2), pages 97-103, June.
    7. Birnur Özbaş & İlhan Or & Tayfur Altıok, 2013. "Comprehensive scenario analysis for mitigation of risks of the maritime traffic in the Strait of Istanbul," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(5), pages 541-561, May.
    8. Aven, Terje & Hiriart, Yolande, 2011. "The use of a basic safety investment model in a practical risk management context," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(11), pages 1421-1425.
    9. Dai, Lijuan & Ehlers, Sören & Rausand, Marvin & Utne, Ingrid Bouwer, 2013. "Risk of collision between service vessels and offshore wind turbines," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 18-31.
    10. Maryam Tabibzadeh & Najmedin Meshkati, 2014. "Learning from the BP Deepwater Horizon accident: risk analysis of human and organizational factors in negative pressure test," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 194-207, June.
    11. Skogdalen, Jon Espen & Vinnem, Jan Erik, 2012. "Combining precursor incidents investigations and QRA in oil and gas industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 48-58.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-10-67. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.