METHOD: In this study, participating industrial practitioners rated the compliance status of each indicator using a numbering system adapted from the traffic light system, based on the actual performance of 10 oil platforms in Malaysia. Safety scores of the platforms were calculated based on the ratings and compared with the actual lagging performance of the platforms. Safety scores of two platforms were compared with the facility status reports' findings of the respective platforms.

RESULTS: The platforms studied generally had good performance. Total recordable incident rates of the platforms were found to show significant negative correlations with management and work engagement on safety, compliance score for number of incident and near misses, personal safety, and management of change. Lost time injury rates, however, correlated negatively with hazard identification and risk assessment. The safety scores generally agreed with findings of the facility status reports with substandard process containment found as a contributor of hydrocarbon leaks.

CONCLUSIONS: This study proves the criterion validity of the safety performance evaluation framework and demonstrates its usability for benchmarking and continuous improvement of safety practices on the Malaysian offshore oil and gas platforms.

METHODS: GHS classification for reproductive toxicity of 157 UOG-related chemicals identified as potential reproductive or developmental toxicants in a previous publication was assessed using eleven governmental regulatory agency databases. If there was discordance in classifications across agencies, the most stringent classification was assigned. Chemicals in the category of known or presumed human reproductive toxicants were further evaluated for carcinogenicity and germ cell mutagenicity based on government classifications. A scoring system was utilized to assign numerical values for reproductive health, cancer and germ cell mutation hazard endpoints. Using a Cytoscape analysis, both qualitative and quantitative results were presented visually to readily identify high priority UOG chemicals with evidence of multiple adverse effects.

RESULTS: We observed substantial inconsistencies in classification among the 11 databases. By adopting the most stringent classification within and across countries, 43 chemicals were classified as known or presumed human reproductive toxicants (GHS Category 1), while 31 chemicals were classified as suspected human reproductive toxicants (GHS Category 2). The 43 reproductive toxicants were further subjected to analysis for carcinogenic and mutagenic properties. Calculated hazard scores and Cytoscape visualization yielded several high priority chemicals including potassium dichromate, cadmium, benzene and ethylene oxide.