Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy — Production assurance and reliability management

This document describes the concept of production assurance within the systems and operations associated with exploration drilling, exploitation, processing and transport of petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas resources. This document covers upstream (including subsea), midstream and downstream facilities, petrochemical and associated activities. It focuses on production assurance of oil and gas production, processing and associated activities and covers the analysis of reliability and maintenance of the components. This includes a variety of business categories and associated systems/equipment in the oil and gas value chain. Production assurance addresses not only hydrocarbon production, but also associated activities such as drilling, pipeline installation and subsea intervention. This document provides processes and activities, requirements and guidelines for systematic management, effective planning, execution and use of production assurance and reliability technology. This is to achieve cost-effective solutions over the life cycle of an asset development project structured around the following main elements: — production assurance management for optimum economy of the facility through all of its life cycle phases, while also considering constraints arising from health, safety, environment, and quality; — planning, execution and implementation of reliability technology; — application of reliability and maintenance data; — reliability-based technology development, design and operational improvement. The IEC 60300-3 series addresses equipment reliability and maintenance performance in general. This document designates 12 processes, of which seven are defined as core production assurance processes and addressed in this document. The remaining five processes are denoted as interacting processes and are outside the scope of this document. The interaction of the core production assurance processes with these interacting processes, however, is within the scope of this document as the information flow to and from these latter processes is required to ensure that production assurance requirements can be fulfilled. The only requirement mandated by this document is the establishment and execution of the production assurance programme (PAP). It is important to reflect the PAP in the overall project management in the project for which it applies. This document recommends that the listed processes and activities be initiated only if they can be considered to add value.

Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y compris les énergies à faible teneur en carbone — Assurance production et gestion de la fiabilité

Le présent document introduit le concept d'assurance production dans les systèmes et les opérations liés au forage, à l'exploitation, au traitement et au transport des ressources pétrolières, pétrochimiques et en gaz naturel. Le présent document couvre les installations et les activités amont (y compris sous-marines), intermédiaires et aval, la pétrochimie ainsi que les activités associées. Il est axé sur l'assurance production relative à la production du pétrole et du gaz, sur le traitement et les opérations associées et couvre l'analyse de la fiabilité et de la maintenance des composants. Cela comprend une variété de catégories d'activité et de systèmes/équipements associés au sein de la chaîne de valeur du gaz et du pétrole. L'assurance production concerne non seulement la production des hydrocarbures, mais également les activités associées telles que le forage, l'installation de conduites et les interventions sous-marines. Le présent document fournit des processus et des activités, des exigences et des lignes directrices pour la gestion systématique, la planification, l'exécution et l'utilisation efficaces de l'assurance production et des techniques fiabilistes. Le but est d'obtenir des solutions rentables sur tout le cycle de vie d'un projet de développement d'une installation de production structurée autour des éléments principaux suivants: — gestion de l'assurance production pour une économie optimale de l'installation durant toutes les phases de son cycle de vie, tout en tenant compte des contraintes résultant de facteurs liés à la santé, à la sécurité, à l'environnement et à la qualité; — planification, exécution et mise en œuvre des techniques fiabilistes; — application des données de fiabilité et de maintenance; — amélioration du développement, de la conception et de l'exploitation de technologies basées sur la fiabilité. La série IEC 60300-3 a trait à la fiabilité des équipements et à l'exécution de la maintenance. Le présent document définit douze processus, dont sept sont définis comme des processus fondamentaux de l'assurance production et sont abordés dans le présent document. Les cinq processus restants sont appelés processus en interaction et ne relèvent pas du domaine d'application du présent document. L'interaction des processus fondamentaux de l'assurance production avec ces processus interactifs s'inscrit toutefois dans le domaine d'application du présent document car le flux d'informations à destination et en provenance de ces derniers processus est requis pour s'assurer que les exigences de l'assurance production peuvent être remplies. La seule exigence spécifiée par le présent document concerne l'établissement et l'exécution du programme d'assurance production (PAP). Il est important que le PAP se reflète dans la gestion globale du projet auquel il s'applique. Le présent document recommande de ne lancer les processus et activités qu'il énumère que s'ils peuvent apporter de la valeur ajoutée.

General Information

Status
Not Published
Current Stage
5020 - FDIS ballot initiated: 2 months. Proof sent to secretariat
Start Date
20-Feb-2026
Completion Date
20-Feb-2026

Relations

Effective Date
12-Feb-2026
Effective Date
15-Mar-2025
Effective Date
09-Mar-2024

Overview

ISO/FDIS 20815:2026 is the leading international standard for production assurance and reliability management in the oil and gas industries, including lower carbon energy sectors. Developed by ISO Technical Committee 67, this standard provides a framework for ensuring optimal performance throughout the life cycle of assets and operations involved in exploration, drilling, exploitation, processing, and transport of petroleum, petrochemical, and natural gas resources. The standard spans the upstream, midstream, and downstream sectors and places a strong emphasis on systematic management of reliability and maintenance for both hydrocarbon and alternative energy activities.

Key Topics

This standard covers several essential areas critical for contemporary oil, gas, and low-carbon energy operations:

  • Production Assurance Management: Introduces strategies for achieving optimal facility economics over the asset life cycle, considering health, safety, environmental, and quality constraints.
  • Reliability Technology Planning & Execution: Provides processes for implementing and managing reliability technology and data in production and associated activities.
  • Maintenance Analysis: Establishes guidance for assessing the reliability, maintainability, and availability of system components and equipment.
  • Life Cycle Approach: Covers every phase from concept and design through operation and decommissioning, supporting cost-effective decisions over an asset’s entire service life.
  • Production Assurance Programme (PAP): Details the requirements for developing and executing a systematic production assurance programme to integrate with overall project management.
  • Core Processes: Defines seven core production assurance processes vital for effective performance management, and describes how these interact with five additional business processes.

Applications

ISO/FDIS 20815 has broad, practical value across a range of applications in the oil, gas, and lower carbon energy sectors:

  • Operators: Optimize production, enhance equipment reliability, and integrate production assurance with project management, risk management, technology development, and maintenance.
  • Contractors: Apply systematic reliability and maintenance strategies in engineering, procurement, construction, drilling, installation, and operational support.
  • Equipment Vendors: Use the standard’s framework to improve design quality, pursue technology qualification, and support clients with reliable, maintainable equipment.
  • Regulatory Authorities: Ensure compliance related to health, safety, environmental protection, and economic resource utilization by referencing standardized assurance practices.
  • Consultants and Research Institutions: Support clients or academic projects by applying the latest methodologies for production assurance, reliability management, and data analysis in energy projects, including research into method improvement.
  • Universities: Incorporate the latest reliability and production assurance principles into curriculum and industry-focused research, contributing to workforce capability in asset management.

Related Standards

ISO/FDIS 20815 is part of a suite of international standards that reinforce robust production assurance and asset management, including:

  • ISO 14224:2016 – Collection and exchange of reliability and maintenance data for equipment in petroleum, petrochemical, and natural gas industries.
  • ISO/TS 3250:2021 – Calculation and reporting production efficiency in the operating phase.
  • ISO 15663:2021 – Life cycle costing.
  • IEC 60300-3 series – General equipment reliability and maintenance performance.
  • ISO 17776 – Guidelines on the management of major accident hazards.

These standards work collectively to provide a comprehensive approach to reliability, maintenance, life cycle management, and safety in oil, gas, and related energy operations.

ISO/FDIS 20815:2026 is critical for any organization aiming to ensure operational excellence, regulatory compliance, and sustainability in the evolving energy landscape. Adopting its principles enables cost-effective, safe, and environmentally responsible management of assets throughout their life cycle.

Buy Documents

Draft

ISO/FDIS 20815 - Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy — Production assurance and reliability management Released:6. 02. 2026

English language (102 pages)
sale 15% off
sale 15% off
Draft

REDLINE ISO/FDIS 20815 - Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy — Production assurance and reliability management Released:6. 02. 2026

English language (102 pages)
sale 15% off
sale 15% off
Draft

ISO/FDIS 20815 - Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y compris les énergies à faible teneur en carbone — Assurance production et gestion de la fiabilité

Release Date:12-Mar-2026
French language (108 pages)
sale 15% off
sale 15% off

Get Certified

Connect with accredited certification bodies for this standard

ABS Quality Evaluations Inc.

American Bureau of Shipping quality certification.

ANAB United States Verified

Element Materials Technology

Materials testing and product certification.

UKAS United Kingdom Verified

ABS Group Brazil

ABS Group certification services in Brazil.

CGCRE Brazil Verified

Sponsored listings

Frequently Asked Questions

ISO/FDIS 20815 is a draft published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Its full title is "Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy — Production assurance and reliability management". This standard covers: This document describes the concept of production assurance within the systems and operations associated with exploration drilling, exploitation, processing and transport of petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas resources. This document covers upstream (including subsea), midstream and downstream facilities, petrochemical and associated activities. It focuses on production assurance of oil and gas production, processing and associated activities and covers the analysis of reliability and maintenance of the components. This includes a variety of business categories and associated systems/equipment in the oil and gas value chain. Production assurance addresses not only hydrocarbon production, but also associated activities such as drilling, pipeline installation and subsea intervention. This document provides processes and activities, requirements and guidelines for systematic management, effective planning, execution and use of production assurance and reliability technology. This is to achieve cost-effective solutions over the life cycle of an asset development project structured around the following main elements: — production assurance management for optimum economy of the facility through all of its life cycle phases, while also considering constraints arising from health, safety, environment, and quality; — planning, execution and implementation of reliability technology; — application of reliability and maintenance data; — reliability-based technology development, design and operational improvement. The IEC 60300-3 series addresses equipment reliability and maintenance performance in general. This document designates 12 processes, of which seven are defined as core production assurance processes and addressed in this document. The remaining five processes are denoted as interacting processes and are outside the scope of this document. The interaction of the core production assurance processes with these interacting processes, however, is within the scope of this document as the information flow to and from these latter processes is required to ensure that production assurance requirements can be fulfilled. The only requirement mandated by this document is the establishment and execution of the production assurance programme (PAP). It is important to reflect the PAP in the overall project management in the project for which it applies. This document recommends that the listed processes and activities be initiated only if they can be considered to add value.

This document describes the concept of production assurance within the systems and operations associated with exploration drilling, exploitation, processing and transport of petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas resources. This document covers upstream (including subsea), midstream and downstream facilities, petrochemical and associated activities. It focuses on production assurance of oil and gas production, processing and associated activities and covers the analysis of reliability and maintenance of the components. This includes a variety of business categories and associated systems/equipment in the oil and gas value chain. Production assurance addresses not only hydrocarbon production, but also associated activities such as drilling, pipeline installation and subsea intervention. This document provides processes and activities, requirements and guidelines for systematic management, effective planning, execution and use of production assurance and reliability technology. This is to achieve cost-effective solutions over the life cycle of an asset development project structured around the following main elements: — production assurance management for optimum economy of the facility through all of its life cycle phases, while also considering constraints arising from health, safety, environment, and quality; — planning, execution and implementation of reliability technology; — application of reliability and maintenance data; — reliability-based technology development, design and operational improvement. The IEC 60300-3 series addresses equipment reliability and maintenance performance in general. This document designates 12 processes, of which seven are defined as core production assurance processes and addressed in this document. The remaining five processes are denoted as interacting processes and are outside the scope of this document. The interaction of the core production assurance processes with these interacting processes, however, is within the scope of this document as the information flow to and from these latter processes is required to ensure that production assurance requirements can be fulfilled. The only requirement mandated by this document is the establishment and execution of the production assurance programme (PAP). It is important to reflect the PAP in the overall project management in the project for which it applies. This document recommends that the listed processes and activities be initiated only if they can be considered to add value.

ISO/FDIS 20815 is classified under the following ICS (International Classification for Standards) categories: 75.180.01 - Equipment for petroleum and natural gas industries in general; 75.200 - Petroleum products and natural gas handling equipment. The ICS classification helps identify the subject area and facilitates finding related standards.

ISO/FDIS 20815 has the following relationships with other standards: It is inter standard links to FprEN ISO 20815, ISO 5684:2023, ISO 20815:2018. Understanding these relationships helps ensure you are using the most current and applicable version of the standard.

ISO/FDIS 20815 is available in PDF format for immediate download after purchase. The document can be added to your cart and obtained through the secure checkout process. Digital delivery ensures instant access to the complete standard document.

Standards Content (Sample)


FINAL DRAFT
International
Standard
ISO/TC 67
Oil and gas industries including
Secretariat: NEN
lower carbon energy — Production
Voting begins on:
assurance and reliability
2026-02-20
management
Voting terminates on:
2026-04-17
Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y compris les énergies à faible
teneur en carbone — Assurance production et gestion de la
fiabilité
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT,
WITH THEIR COMMENTS, NOTIFICATION OF ANY
RELEVANT PATENT RIGHTS OF WHICH THEY ARE AWARE
AND TO PROVIDE SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTATION.
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL, TECHNO­
ISO/CEN PARALLEL PROCESSING LOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND USER PURPOSES, DRAFT
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS MAY ON OCCASION HAVE
TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THEIR POTENTIAL
TO BECOME STAN DARDS TO WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE
MADE IN NATIONAL REGULATIONS.
Reference number
FINAL DRAFT
International
Standard
ISO/TC 67
Oil and gas industries including
Secretariat: NEN
lower carbon energy — Production
Voting begins on:
assurance and reliability
management
Voting terminates on:
Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y compris les énergies à faible
teneur en carbone — Assurance production et gestion de la
fiabilité
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT,
WITH THEIR COMMENTS, NOTIFICATION OF ANY
RELEVANT PATENT RIGHTS OF WHICH THEY ARE AWARE
AND TO PROVIDE SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTATION.
© ISO 2026
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL, TECHNO­
ISO/CEN PARALLEL PROCESSING
LOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND USER PURPOSES, DRAFT
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS MAY ON OCCASION HAVE
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THEIR POTENTIAL
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
TO BECOME STAN DARDS TO WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE
MADE IN NATIONAL REGULATIONS.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland Reference number
ii
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 2
3 Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms . 2
3.1 Terms and definitions .2
3.2 Abbreviated terms .21
4 Production assurance and decision support .22
4.1 Framework conditions . 22
4.1.1 General . 22
4.1.2 Sustainability and climate change considerations .24
4.2 Optimization process . . 25
4.3 Production assurance programme . 26
4.3.1 Objectives . 26
4.3.2 Project risk categorization .27
4.3.3 Programme activities . 28
4.4 Alternative standards . 30
5 Production assurance processes and activities .31
Annex A (normative) Production assurance programme (PAP) and reliability management
programme (RMP) — Structure and content .33
Annex B (informative) Core production assurance processes and activities .35
Annex C (informative) Interacting production assurance processes and activities .46
Annex D (informative) Production performance analyses .51
Annex E (normative) Reliability and production performance data .57
Annex F (informative) Performance objectives and requirements .60
Annex G (normative) Performance measures for production assurance .64
Annex H (informative) Relationship to major accidents .71
Annex I (informative) Outline of techniques .73
Bibliography .99

iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through
ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee
has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations,
governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely
with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described
in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the different types
of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules of the
ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use of (a)
patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed patent
rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received notice of (a)
patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are cautioned that
this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent database available at
www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions
related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 67, Oil and gas industries including lower carbon
energy, in collaboration with the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) Technical Committee CEN/
TC 12, Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy, in accordance with the Agreement on technical
cooperation between ISO and CEN (Vienna Agreement).
This third edition cancels and replaces the second edition (ISO 20815:2018), which has been technically
revised.
The main changes are as follows:
— Clause 3: several new terms, definitions and abbreviated terms added;
— Clause 4: 4.1 updated, new subclause 4.1.2 added, Figure 5 and Table 2 revised;
— Main clauses and Annex A: text updated to clarify that establishment and use of production assurance
programme or reliability management programme both imply conformity to this document;
— Annex B and Annex C: text updated to align with production assurance processes for life cycle phases in
the revised Table 2;
— Annex A and Annex E: status changed to normative;
— Annex D: new text and figures added;
— Annex F: Figure F.1 revised, new text added in Clauses F.3 and F.4;
— Annex G: text updated to reflect the relationship between this document and ISO/TS 3250:2021; some
text in the second edition (ISO 20815:2018) has been removed since the next edition of ISO/TS 3250 is
planned to cover production loss categories for also midstream, downstream and petrochemical;
— Annex I: sequence of clauses changed; text updated in Clauses I.1, I.8 to I.9, I.14, I.16 to I.18.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.

iv
Introduction
The oil and gas industries, including petrochemical and lower carbon energy activities, involve large capital
expenditure (CAPEX) and operating expenditure (OPEX). The safety and profitability of the associated assets
are dependent upon the reliability, availability and maintainability of the systems and components that are
used. Therefore, production assurance and reliability management are essential for optimal production
availability. This contributes to delivering affordable energy in a sustainable manner.
The concept of production assurance, introduced in this document, enables a common understanding
with respect to use of reliability technology in the various life cycle phases. Production assurance covers
the activities implemented to achieve and maintain an optimal performance level in terms of the overall
economy, which is consistent with applicable regulatory requirements and framework conditions.

v
FINAL DRAFT International Standard ISO/FDIS 20815:2026(en)
Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy —
Production assurance and reliability management
IMPORTANT — The electronic file of this document contains colours which are considered to be
useful for the correct understanding of the document. Users should therefore consider printing this
document using a colour printer.
1 Scope
This document specifies requirements and guidance for production assurance and reliability management
as applicable to the assets and operations associated with exploration drilling, exploitation, processing
and transport of petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas resources. It covers the assets and associated
activities for upstream, midstream, downstream and petrochemical business categories. It focuses on the
production assurance of oil and gas with respect to production and associated activities and covers the
analysis of reliability and maintenance of the equipment. This includes a variety of associated systems and
equipment in the oil and gas value chain. Production assurance addresses not only hydrocarbon production,
but also associated activities such as drilling, pipeline installation and subsea intervention.
The document also supports production assurance and reliability management for lower carbon energy
assets and associated operations, e.g. carbon capture and storage (CCS), hydrogen, ammonia, and wind
energy. It describes the processes, activities, requirements and guidelines for systematic management,
effective planning, execution and use of production assurance and reliability technology.
This document defines 12 processes, of which seven are denoted as core production assurance processes
and addressed in this document. The remaining five processes are denoted as interacting processes and are
outside the scope of this document. The relationship of the core production assurance processes with these
interacting processes, however, is within the scope of this document as the flow of information to and from
these latter processes is required to ensure that production assurance requirements are fulfilled.
The document specifies how to establish and execute a production assurance programme (PAP) and a
reliability management programme (RMP).
This document lists processes and activities that can be initiated to add value for the stakeholder (e.g.
operator), where the selected process can depend on their business strategy and application area.
This document is intended for the following users and associated activities by their personnel:
— Operators: Production assurance and reliability management activities. Related activities include project
management and control, technology development, technology qualification, concept and system design,
risk management (including HSE), integrity management, and maintenance management.
— Contractors: Activities by the main contractor for engineering, procurement, construction, drilling,
installation, operation, maintenance services, etc.
— Vendors: Activities by manufacturer or supplier related to equipment design and quality management,
technology development and qualification.
— Authorities: Activities by regulatory bodies to ensure HSE, resource utilization and economics in
operations.
— Consultants: Consultancy services aimed at supporting production assurance and reliability management.
— Universities: Activities associated with educating industry professionals, as well as conducting
fundamental or applied research projects, when related to production assurance, reliability management,

and technology development. This includes improvement of the methods and frameworks described
herein.
— Research institutions: Research activities related to production assurance, reliability management,
and technology development. This includes equipment qualification testing and advanced engineering
assessments using the methods and frameworks described herein.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes
requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 14224:2016, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries — Collection and exchange of reliability
and maintenance data for equipment
ISO/TS 3250:2021, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries — Calculation and reporting
production efficiency in the operating phase
ISO 15663:2021, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries — Life cycle costing
3 Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms
3.1 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/
3.1.1
active repair time
effective time to achieve repair of an item (3.1.29)
Note 1 to entry: The expectation of the effective time to repair is called MART (mean active repair time).
Note 2 to entry: ISO 14224 distinguishes between the terms mean active repair time (MART), mean time to repair
(MTTR), mean time to restoration (MTTRes), and mean overall repairing time (MRT). See ISO 14224:2016, 3.59, 3,61,
3.63 and 3.64 for further details.
Note 3 to entry: The mean active repair time (MART) is defined as “expected active repair time” in ISO/TR 12489:2013,
3.1.34. See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, Figures 5 and 6.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.2, modified — Notes 1 to 2 to entry have been added; the original notes 1 and 2
to entry have been consolidated to become note 3 to entry.]
3.1.2
asset
item (3.1.29), thing or entity that has potential or actual value to an organization
Note 1 to entry: Assets can be physical or non-physical.
Note 2 to entry: A grouping of assets referred to as an "asset system," can also be considered as an asset.
Note 3 to entry: In this document, "asset" only refers to the physical assets, which are tangible assets. An organization
can also operate assets that are wholly owned or partly owned through joint ventures or other arrangements.
Typically, an asset is a facility or an installation, or a group of facilities. The facility corresponds to an installation
category in ISO 14224:2016, Table A.1. These installations can be subdivided into plants or units, systems (3.1.75),
equipment classes (see ISO 14224:2016, 3.18), subunits, components, etc. as described in ISO 14224:2016, Table 2.

[SOURCE: ISO 55000:2024, 3.1.1, modified — Note 3 to entry has been added.]
3.1.3
availability
ability to be in a state to perform as required under given conditions
Note 1 to entry: For a binary item (3.1.6), the measure of the availability is the probability of being in up state (3.1.79)
(i.e. in a state belonging to the up state class).
Note 2 to entry: Figure 1 shows a system that is available at time t and unavailable at time t .
1 2
Note 3 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Annex C for a more detailed description and interpretation of availability.
Note 4 to entry: Technical availability (3.1.76) or operational availability (3.1.50) can be used as derived performance
measures (3.1.51) to reflect estimate availability. Case specific definition of system availability is needed to reflect the
system (3.1.75) being addressed.
Note 5 to entry: Further terms are given in ISO/TR 12489.
Note 6 to entry: See Figure G.1 for further information.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-01-23, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by the
new notes 1 to 6 to entry.]
3.1.4
average availability
mean availability
Ā(t , t )
1 2
average value of the instantaneous availability (3.1.26) over a given time interval (t , t )
1 2
Note 1 to entry: The average availability is the ratio between the accumulated time spent in up state (3.1.79) and the
length of the considered period of observation. For example, Figure 1 shows the average availability of the system
over the interval [0, t ] which is equal to (δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ )/t , i.e. 1 ̶ δ /t where δ /t is the average
3 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 3 7 3 7 3
unavailability of the system. This formula is similar to the formula obtained for production availability (3.1.59)
calculations when only two levels, 100 % and 0 %, are considered.
Note 2 to entry: The average availability can be interpreted as the long-run proportion of time where the item is able
to function. Mathematically speaking, the average availability is the mathematical expectation of the term availability
(3.1.3), as this term does not have the mathematical property of a normal probability and cannot be handled as such.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-08-05, modified — The original note 1 to entry has been replaced by the
new notes 1 and 2 to entry.]
3.1.5
barrier
functional grouping of safeguards or controls selected to prevent a major accident (3.1.40) or limit the
consequences
[SOURCE: ISO 17776:2016, 3.1.1, modified — Notes to entry have been removed.]
3.1.6
binary item
item (3.1.29) with two classes of states
Note 1 to entry: The two classes can be up state (3.1.79) and down state (3.1.15).
EXAMPLE 1 An item that only have an up state and a down state is a binary item. Components A and B in Figure 1
are binary items.
EXAMPLE 2 A system made up of two redundant binary items, components A and B, has four states: φ (both A and
B in up state), φ (A in up state and B in down state), φ (A in down state and B in up state), φ (both A and B in down
2 3 4
state). If the system is able to operate as required in states φ , φ and φ and not able in state φ , it is a binary item
1 2 3 4
with the up state class {φ , φ , φ } and the down class {φ }. This is illustrated in Figure 1.
1 2 3 4
Key
A component A
B component B
S system
δ period of time
t time
X state of component A (binary item)
A
X state of component B (binary item)
B
φ state of the system S (multi-state item)
C class of states of system S (binary item)
NOTE The two components each have states 1 (Up) and 0 (Down). System S as a binary item has classes 1 (Up)
and 0 (Down).
Figure 1 — Illustration of availability behaviour of an 1oo2 system
3.1.7
capital expenditure
CAPEX
investment used to purchase, install and commission an asset (3.1.2)
Note 1 to entry: See further information regarding estimation of CAPEX in ISO 15663:2021, Clause C.2.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.7]
3.1.8
common cause failure
failure of multiple items (3.1.29), which would otherwise be considered independent of one another, resulting
from a single cause
Note 1 to entry: Common cause failures can also be common mode failures (3.1.9).

Note 2 to entry: The potential for common cause failures reduces the effectiveness of system redundancy.
Note 3 to entry: It is generally accepted that the failures occur simultaneously or within a short time of each other.
Note 4 to entry: Components that fail due to a shared cause normally fail in the same functional mode. The term
common mode is therefore sometimes used. It is, however, not considered to be a precise term for communicating the
characteristics that describe a common cause failure.
Note 5 to entry: Explicit and implicit common mode failures are defined in ISO/TR 12489:2013, 5.4.2.
Note 6 to entry: Regarding interpretation rules for common cause failure parameters, see also ISO 14224:2016, C.1.6.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-18, modified — Notes 3 through 6 to entry have been added.]
3.1.9
common mode failures
failures of different items characterized by the same failure mode
Note 1 to entry: Common mode failures can have different causes.
Note 2 to entry: Common mode failures can also be common cause failures (3.1.8).
Note 3 to entry: The potential for common mode failures reduces the effectiveness of system redundancy.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-19]
3.1.10
condition monitoring
obtaining information about physical state or operational parameters
Note 1 to entry: Condition monitoring is used to determine when preventive maintenance (3.1.57) may be required.
Note 2 to entry: Condition monitoring may be conducted automatically during operation or at planned intervals.
Note 3 to entry: Condition monitoring is part of condition-based maintenance. See also ISO 14224:2016, Figure 6.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-06-28, modified — The original note 3 to entry has been replaced by a
new one.]
3.1.11
corrective maintenance
maintenance (3.1.36) carried out after fault (3.1.23) detection to effect restoration
Note 1 to entry: See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, Figures 5 and 6, which illustrate terms used for quantifying corrective
maintenance.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-06-06, modified — Note 1 to entry has been replaced.]
3.1.12
deliverability
ratio of deliveries to planned deliveries over a specified period of time, when the effect of compensating
elements, such as substitution from other producers and downstream (3.1.17) buffer storage, is included
Note 1 to entry: See Figure G.1 for further information.
3.1.13
design life
planned usage time for the total system (3.1.75)
Note 1 to entry: It is important not to confuse design life with the mean time to failure (MTTF) (3.1.41). Several items
can fail within the design life of the system. As long as repair or replacement is feasible, the design life of the system is
not affected by such failures.

Note 2 to entry: The design life is decided during the life cycle phase "Define". Design life in this document can thus
mean a lifetime that can change and that can be chosen based on production assurance (3.1.58) activities or life cycle
costing (3.1.30).
3.1.14
demand availability
ability of the production facility to satisfy the demand over a specified period of time
Note 1 to entry: This performance measure (3.1.51) expresses the fraction of time or number of times the produced
volume that is exported is equal to or above demand. See also Table G.1.
3.1.15
down state
state of being unable to perform as required, due to internal fault (3.1.23), or preventive maintenance (3.1.57)
Note 1 to entry: This concept is related to a binary item (3.1.6), which can have several down states forming the
down state class of the item. All the states in the down state class are considered to be equivalent with regard to the
unavailability of the considered item.
EXAMPLE In Figure 1, the down state class of the system S comprises only one state {S } and the system S is in
down state at time t .
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-02-20, modified — The original note 1 to entry has been replaced, and
the original note 2 to entry has been removed; EXAMPLE has been added.]
3.1.16
down time
time interval during which an item (3.1.29) is in a down state (3.1.15)
Note 1 to entry: The down time includes all the delays between the item failure and the restoration of its service.
Down time can be either planned or unplanned (see ISO 14224:2016, Table 4).
Note 2 to entry: Down time can be equipment down time (see ISO 14224:2016, Figure 4 and Table 4), production down
time (see Figures I.1 and I.2) or down time for other operations (e.g. drilling). It is important to distinguish between
the equipment down time itself and the down time of the plant to which the equipment belongs.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-02-21, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by the
new notes 1 and 2 to entry.]
3.1.17
downstream
business category most commonly used in the petroleum industry to describe post-production processes
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, A.1.4 for further details.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.17, modified — EXAMPLE has been removed.]
3.1.18
failure
loss of ability to perform as required
Note 1 to entry: A failure of an item is an event that results in a fault (3.1.23) (i.e. a state) of that item. This is illustrated
in Figure 2 for a binary system S comprising two redundant components A and B.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-01, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by a
new note 1 to entry.]
3.1.19
failure cause
root cause
set of circumstances that leads to failure (3.1.18)
Note 1 to entry: A failure cause can originate during specification, design, manufacture, installation, operation or
maintenance of an item.
Note 2 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, B.2.3 and Table B.3, which define failure causes for all equipment classes.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-11, modified — Note 2 to entry has been added.]
3.1.20
failure data
data characterizing the occurrence of a failure (3.1.18) event
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Table 6.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.25]
3.1.21
failure mode
manner in which failure (3.1.18) occurs
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Tables B.6 to B.15, on the relevant failure modes, which define failure modes to
be used for each equipment class.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-17, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by a
new note 1 to entry.]
3.1.22
failure rate
conditional probability per unit of time that the item (3.1.29) fails between t and t + dt, provided that it
works over (0, t)
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Clause C.3 for further explanation of the failure rate.
Note 2 to entry: This definition applies for the first failure (3.1.18) of binary items (3.1.6).
Note 3 to entry: Under the assumptions that the failure rate is constant and that the item is as good as new after
repairs the failure rate can be estimated as the number of failures relative to the corresponding accumulated up time
(3.1.80) divided by this accumulated up time. In this case this is the reciprocal of MTTF (3.1.41). In some cases, time
can be replaced by units of use.
Note 4 to entry: The estimation of the failure rate can be based on operating time (3.1.49) or calendar time.
[SOURCE: ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.18, modified — The symbol "λ(t)" has been removed; the original notes to
entry have been replaced by the new notes 1 to 4 to entry.]
3.1.23
fault
inability to perform as required, due to an internal state
EXAMPLE Down states (3.1.15) of items A, B and system S is illustrated in Figure 2.
Note 1 to entry: A fault of an item results from a failure (3.1.18), either of the item itself, or from a deficiency in an earlier
stage of the life cycle, such as specification, design, manufacture or maintenance. See latent fault (ISO 14224:2016,
3.44).
Note 2 to entry: An item made of several sub-items (e.g. a system) which continues to perform as required in presence
of faults of one or several sub-items is called fault tolerant.
Note 3 to entry: See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.2.2.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-04-01, modified — EXAMPLE has been added; the original notes 2 to 4
to entry have been replaced by the new notes 2 and 3 to entry.]
3.1.24
fault tolerance
attribute of an item (3.1.29) that makes it able to perform a required function (3.1.69) in the presence of
certain given sub-item faults (3.1.23)

3.1.25
human error
discrepancy between the human action taken or omitted and that intended
EXAMPLE Performing an incorrect action; omitting a required action.
Note 1 to entry: Discrepancy with intention is considered essential in determining human error; see Reference [91].
Note 2 to entry: The term ‘human error’ is often attributed in hindsight to a human decision, action or inaction
considered to be an initiator or contributory cause of a negative outcome such as loss or harm.
Note 3 to entry: In human reliability assessment, human error is defined as any member of a set of human actions or
activities that exceeds some limit of acceptability, this being an out of tolerance action or failure (3.1.18) to act where
the limits of performance are defined by the system (see Reference [88]).
Note 4 to entry: See IEC 62508 for further details.
Note 5 to entry: See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, 5.5.2.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-14, modified — The words "or required" have been removed at the
end of the definition; in the EXAMPLE, "miscalculation; misreading a value" have been removed; notes 1 to 5
to entry have been added.]
3.1.26
instantaneous availability
A(t)
probability that an item (3.1.29) is in a state to perform as required at a given instant
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-08-01, modified — The admitted term "point availability" has been
removed; the symbol "A(t)" has been added.]
3.1.27
integrity
condition in which an asset (3.1.2) is safe and reliable for its purpose
Note 1 to entry: For some application areas, more specific terms and definitions exist. such as asset integrity (see
ISO/TS 3250:2021, 3.1.2), mechanical integrity, plant integrity, safety integrity (see ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.2),
structural integrity (see ISO/DIS 19900:20—, 3.58), system integrity, technical integrity and well integrity (see
ISO/DIS 16530:20—, 3.73). These integrity terms can encompass various failure (3.1.18) consequences (e.g. safety,
environmental, production, and operation; see ISO 14224:2016, Table C.2).
Note 2 to entry: Integrity is also defined for use in pipeline integrity management (3.1.28) for onshore gas infrastructure
in EN 17649:2022, 3.7. see also DNV-ST-F101:2017 and ISO 19345-1:2019, 3.1.32.
Note 3 to entry: The integrity can be expressed mathematically by using specific performance measures (3.1.51) as
described in Annex G.
[SOURCE: EN 17649:2022, 3.7, modified — Notes 1 to 3 to entry have been added.]
3.1.28
integrity management
set of processes and procedures used to proactively manage the safe, environmentally responsible and
reliable service of an asset (3.1.2) throughout its life cycle
Note 1 to entry: The integrity management program covers a set of processes and practises used in reliability
management (3.1.68). See e.g. ISO 19345-1:2019, 3.1.21.
3.1.29
item
subject being considered
Note 1 to entry: The item can be an individual part, component, device, functional unit, equipment, subsystem, or
system.
Note 2 to entry: The item may consist of hardware, software, people or any combination thereof.
Note 3 to entry: In this document, item can also be plant or unit, or installation. See ISO 14224:2016, Figure 3.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-01-01, modified — In note 1 to entry, "material", "product" and "service
or process" have been removed; in note 2 to entry, "can" has been changed to "may"; note 3 to entry has been
added.]
3.1.30
life cycle costing
process of evaluating the difference between the life cycle cost of two or more alternative options
Note 1 to entry: Life cycle costing can involve quantitative and qualitative assessment.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.27, modified — Note 1 to entry has been adjusted.]
3.1.31
life cycle phase
discrete stage in the life cycle with a specified purpose
Note 1 to entry: The different life cycle phases are further described in ISO 15663:2021, 4.5.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.28]
3.1.32
logistic delay
delay, excluding administrative delay, incurred for the provision of resources needed for a maintenance
action to proceed or continue
Note 1 to entry: Logistic delays can be due to, for example, travelling to unattended installations, pending arrival of
spare parts, specialists, test equipment and information, and delays due to unsuitable environmental conditions (e.g.
waiting on weather).
Note 2 to entry: See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, Figure 5.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-07-13, modified — The original NOTE has been replaced by the new
notes 1 and 2 to entry.]
3.1.33
lost revenue
LOSTREV
income loss that occurs when generated income are less than expected due to external or internal factors
Note 1 to entry: Production loss (3.1.61) categories are defined in ISO/TS 3250:2021. Time loss categories are described
in Clause G.3.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.29, modified — The original notes 1 and 2 to entry have been replaced by the
new note 1 to entry.]
3.1.34
maintainability
ability to be retained in, or restored to a state to perform as required, under given conditions of use and
maintenance (3.1.36)
Note 1 to entry: Given conditions would include aspects that affect maintainability, such as: location for maintenance,
accessibility, maintenance procedures and maintenance resources.
Note 2 to entry: Maintainability can be quantified using appropriate measures. See IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-07,
Maintainability and maintenance support: measures.
Note 3 to entry: See Figure G.1 for further information.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-01-27, modified — Note 3 to entry has been added.]

3.1.35
maintainable item
item (3.1.29) that constitutes a part or an assembly of parts that is normally the lowest level in the equipment
hierarchy during maintenance (3.1.36)
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.48]
3.1.36
maintenance
combination of all technical and management actions intended to retain an item in, or restore it to, a state in
which it can perform as required
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-06-01, modified — Note 1 to entry has been removed.]
3.1.37
maintenance data
data characterizing the maintenance action planned or done
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Table 8.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.51, modified — The original notes 1 and 3 to entry have been removed; new
note 1 to entry added.]
3.1.38
maintenance management
all activities of the management that determine the maintenance requirements, objectives, strategies, and
responsibilities, and implementation of them by such means as maintenance planning, maintenance control
and the improvement of maintenance activities and economics
[SOURCE: EN 13306:2017, 2.2]
3.1.39
maintenance supportability
ability to be supported to sustain the required availability (3.1.3) with a defined operational profile and
given logistic and maintenance resources
Note 1 to entry: Maintenance supportability of an item result from the inherent maintainability (3.1.34), combined with
factors external to the item that affect the relative ease of providing the required maintenance and logistic support.
Note 2 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Annex C for further details regarding the interpretation of maintainability.
3.1.40
major accident
hazardous event that results in
— multiple fatalities or severe injuries; or
— extensive damage to structure, installation or plant; or
— large-scale impact on the environment (e.g. persistent and severe environmental damage that can lead to
loss of commercial or recreational use, loss of natural resources over a wide area or severe environmental
damage that will require extensive measures to restore beneficial uses of the environment)
Note 1 to entry: In ISO 17776:2016, a major accident is the realization of a major accident hazard.
[SOURCE: ISO 17776:2016, 3.1.12, modified — The abbreviated term ‘MA’ has been removed; note 2 to entry
has been removed.]
3.1.41
mean time to failure
MTTF
expected time before the item (3.1.29) fails

Note 1 to entry: See further details in ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.29.
Note 2 to entry: IEC 60050-192:2015 defines MTTF as "expectation of the operating time (3.1.49) to failure".
Note 3 to entry: See also ISO 14224:2016, Annex C.
[SOURCE: ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.29, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by the new
notes 1 to 3 to entry.]
3.1.42
midstream
business category involving the processing, storage and transportation sectors of the petroleum industry
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, A.1.4 for further details.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.65, modified — EXAMPLE has been removed.]
3.1.43
modification
combination of all technical and administrative actions intended to change an item (3.1.29)
Note 1 to entry: In this document, the use of the term modification is primarily meant to cover major modification
activities. See further details in ISO/TS 3250:2021, 8.2.2 with respect to how such major modifications are reflected in
production efficiency (3.1.60) reporting.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.67, modified — The original notes 1 to 3 to entry have been replaced by the new
note 1 to entry.]
3.1.44
multi-state item
item (3.1.29) with more than two classes of states
Note 1 to entry: This is an extension of the binary items (3.1.6) beyond the concepts of up state (3.1.79) and down
state (3.1.15). This can characterize single items with degraded states or systems made up of several components in a
production facility.
EXAMPLE An oil production system comprising two wells, A and B, that can be considered as binary items has
four states: φ (both A and B in up state), φ (A in up state and B in down state), φ (A in down state and B in up state),
1 2 3
φ (both A and B in down state). If, when they are in up state, A produces 200 bpd and B produces 100 bpd, then the
system has four classes of production 300 bpd, {φ }, 200 bpd, {φ }, 100 bpd, {φ } and 0 bpd, {φ }. With regards to oil
1 2 3 4
production, it is a multi-state item. This is illustrated in Figure 2.

Key
A item A
B item B
S system
δ period of time
Y state capacity of item A (binary item)
A
Y state capacity of item B (binary item)
B
φ production output of system S (multi-state item) [in bpd]
t time
NOTE Max X is 200 bpd and max X is 100 bpd. System S as a multi-state item has four discrete states of
A B
production output: {φ , φ , φ , φ }, where the max production output is 300 bpd.
1 2 3 4
Figure 2 — Illustration of production availability behaviour of a multi-state system
3.1.45
observation period
time period during which production performance (3.1.62) and reliability data (3.1.67) are recorded
3.1.46
on-stream availability
ability of a production facility to deliver a volume above zero over a specified period of time
Note 1 to entry: This performance measure (3.1.51) expresses the fraction of time or number of times produced volume
is above zero. See Table G.1.
3.1.47
operating expenditure
OPEX
expenses used for operation and maintenance, including associated costs such as logistics and spares
Note 1 to entry: See further information regarding estimation of OPEX in ISO 15663:2021, Clause C.3.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.31]
3.1.48
operating state
state of performing as required

---------------------- Page
...


ISO/TC 67/WG 4
Secretariat: NEN
Date: 2026-01-1202-05
Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy — Production
assurance and reliability management
Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y compris les énergies à faible teneur en carbone — Assurance production et
gestion de la fiabilité
FDIS stage
TThhiis drs draafftt i is s susubbmmiitttteed d ttoo aa ppaarraallellel l vvoottee i inn IISSOO,, CCEEN.N.

All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication
may be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
or posting on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO
at the address below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: + 41 22 749 01 11
EmailE-mail: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii
Contents
Foreword . iv
Introduction . vi
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 2
3 Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms . 2
3.1 Terms and definitions . 2
3.3 Abbreviated terms . 25
4 Production assurance and decision support . 26
4.1 Framework conditions . 26
4.2 Optimization process . 30
4.3 Production assurance programme . 33
4.4 Alternative standards . 37
5 Production assurance processes and activities . 38
Annex A (normative) Production assurance programme (PAP) and reliability management
programme (RMP) — Structure and content . 42
Annex B (informative) Core production assurance processes and activities . 45
Annex C (informative) Interacting production assurance processes and activities . 57
Annex D (informative) Production performance analyses . 62
Annex E (normative) Reliability and production performance data . 69
Annex F (informative) Performance objectives and requirements . 72
Annex G (normative) Performance measures for production assurance . 76
Annex H (informative) Relationship to major accidents . 85
Annex I (informative) Outline of techniques . 87
Bibliography . 116

iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through
ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been
established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, governmental and
non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described
in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the different types of
ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules of the
ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use of (a)
patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed patent rights
in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received notice of (a) patent(s)
which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are cautioned that this may not
represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent database available at
www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions
related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 67, Oil and gas industries including lower carbon
energy., in collaboration with the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) Technical Committee
CEN/TC 12, Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy, in accordance with the Agreement on
technical cooperation between ISO and CEN (Vienna Agreement).
This third edition cancels and replaces the second edition (ISO 20815:2018), which has been technically
revised.
The main changes are as follows:
— Clause 3— Clause 3:: several new terms, definitions and abbreviated terms added;
— Clause 4— Clause 4: 4.1: 4.1 updated, new subclause 4.1.2subclause 4.1.2 added, Figure 5Figure 5 and
Table 2Table 2 revised;
— — Main clauses and Annex AAnnex A:: text updated to clarify that establishment and use of production
assurance programme or reliability management programme both imply conformity to this document;
— Annex B— Annex B and Annex CAnnex C:: text updated to align with production assurance processes for
life cycle phases in the revised Table 2Table 2;;
— Annex A— Annex A and Annex EAnnex E:: status changed to normative;
— Annex D— Annex D:: new text and figures added;
— Annex F— Annex F: Figure F.1: Figure F.1 revised, new text added in Clauses F.3Clauses F.3 and F.4F.4;;
iv
— Annex G— Annex G:: text updated to reflect the relationship between this document and ISO/TS
3250:2021; some text in the second edition (ISO 20815:2018) has been removed since the next edition of
ISO/TS 3250 is planned to cover production loss categories for also midstream, downstream and
petrochemical;
— Annex I— Annex I:: sequence of clauses changed; text updated in Clauses I.1Clauses I.1, I.8, I.8 to I.9,
I.14I.9, I.14, I.16, I.16 to I.18I.18.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
v
Introduction
The oil and gas industries, including petrochemical and lower carbon energy activities, involve large capital
expenditure (CAPEX) and operating expenditure (OPEX). The safety and profitability of the associated assets
are dependent upon the reliability, availability and maintainability of the systems and components that are
used. Therefore, production assurance and reliability management are essential for optimal production
availability. This contributes to delivering affordable energy in a sustainable manner.
The concept of production assurance, introduced in this document, enables a common understanding with
respect to use of reliability technology in the various life cycle phases. Production assurance covers the
activities implemented to achieve and maintain an optimal performance level in terms of the overall economy,
which is consistent with applicable regulatory requirements and framework conditions.
vi
Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy — Production
assurance and reliability management
IMPORTANT — The electronic file of this document contains colours which are considered to be useful
for the correct understanding of the document. Users should therefore consider printing this
document using a colour printer.
1 Scope
This document specifies requirements and guidance for production assurance and reliability management as
applicable to the assets and operations associated with exploration drilling, exploitation, processing and
transport of petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas resources. It covers the assets and associated activities
for upstream, midstream, downstream and petrochemical business categories. It focuses on the production
assurance of oil and gas with respect to production and associated activities and covers the analysis of
reliability and maintenance of the equipment. This includes a variety of associated systems and equipment in
the oil and gas value chain. Production assurance addresses not only hydrocarbon production, but also
associated activities such as drilling, pipeline installation and subsea intervention.
The document also supports production assurance and reliability management for lower carbon energy assets
and associated operations, e.g. carbon capture and storage (CCS), hydrogen, ammonia, and wind energy. It
describes the processes, activities, requirements and guidelines for systematic management, effective
planning, execution and use of production assurance and reliability technology.
This document defines 12 processes, of which seven are denoted as core production assurance processes and
addressed in this document. The remaining five processes are denoted as interacting processes and are
outside the scope of this document. The relationship of the core production assurance processes with these
interacting processes, however, is within the scope of this document as the flow of information to and from
these latter processes is required to ensure that production assurance requirements are fulfilled.
The document specifies how to establish and execute a production assurance programme (PAP) and a
reliability management programme (RMP).
This document lists processes and activities that can be initiated to add value for the stakeholder (e.g.
operator), where the selected process can depend on their business strategy and application area.
This document is intended for the following users and associated activities by their personnel:
— — Operators: Production assurance and reliability management activities. Related activities
include project management and control, technology development, technology qualification, concept and
system design, risk management (including HSE), integrity management, and maintenance management.
— — Contractors: Activities by the main contractor for engineering, procurement, construction, drilling,
installation, operation, maintenance services, etc.
— — Vendors: Activities by manufacturer or supplier related to equipment design and quality management,
technology development and qualification.
— — Authorities: Activities by regulatory bodies to ensure HSE, resource utilization and economics in
operations.
— — Consultants: Consultancy services aimed at supporting production assurance and reliability
management.
— — Universities: Activities associated with educating industry professionals, as well as conducting
fundamental or applied research projects, when related to production assurance, reliability management,
and technology development. This includes improvement of the methods and frameworks described
herein.
— — Research institutions: Research activities related to production assurance, reliability management,
and technology development. This includes equipment qualification testing and advanced engineering
assessments using the methods and frameworks described herein.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes
requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 14224:2016, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries — Collection and exchange of reliability
and maintenance data for equipment
ISO/TS 3250:2021, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries — Calculation and reporting
production efficiency in the operating phase
ISO 15663:2021, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries — Life cycle costing
3 Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms
3.1 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— — ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp
— — IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/
3.1.1 3.1.1
active repair time
effective time to achieve repair of an item (3.1.29(3.1.29))
Note 1 to entry: The expectation of the effective time to repair is called MART (mean active repair time).
Note 2 to entry: ISO 14224 distinguishes between the terms mean active repair time (MART), mean time to repair
(MTTR), mean time to restoration (MTTRes), and mean overall repairing time (MRT). See ISO 14224:2016, 3.59, 3,61,
3.63 and 3.64 for further details.
Note 3 to entry: The mean active repair time (MART) is defined as “expected active repair time” in ISO/TR 12489:2013,
3.1.34. See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, Figures 5 and 6.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.2, modified — Notes 1 to 2 to entry have been added; the original notes 1 and 2
to entry have been consolidated to become note 3 to entry.]
3.1.2 3.1.2
asset
item (3.1.29(3.1.29),), thing or entity that has potential or actual value to an organization
Note 1 to entry: Assets can be physical or non-physical.
Note 2 to entry: A grouping of assets referred to as an ‘"asset system,," can also be considered as an asset.
Note 3 to entry: In this document, 'asset'"asset" only refers to the physical assets, which are tangible assets. An
organization can also operate assets that are wholly owned or partly owned through joint ventures or other
arrangements. Typically, an asset is a facility or an installation, or a group of facilities. The facility corresponds to an
installation category in ISO 14224:2016, Table A.1. These installations can be subdivided into plants or units, systems
(3.1.75(3.1.75),), equipment classes (see ISO 14224:2016, 3.18), subunits, components, etc. as described in ISO
14224:2016, Table 2.
[SOURCE: ISO 55000:2024, 3.1.1, modified — Note 3 to entry has been added.]
3.1.3 3.1.3
availability
ability to be in a state to perform as required under given conditions
Note 1 to entry: For a binary item (3.1.6(3.1.6),), the measure of the availability is the probability to beof being in up state
(3.1.79(3.1.79)) (i.e. in a state belonging to the up state class).
Note 2 to entry: Figure 1 Figure 1 shows a system that is available at time t1 and unavailable at time t2.
Note 3 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Annex C for a more detailed description and interpretation of availability.
Note 4 to entry: Technical availability (3.1.76(3.1.76)) or operational availability (3.1.50(3.1.50)) can be used as derived
performance measures (3.1.51(3.1.51)) to reflect estimate availability. Case specific definition of system availability is
needed to reflect the system (3.1.75(3.1.75)) being addressed.
Note 5 to entry: Further terms are given in ISO/TR 12489.
Note 6 to entry: See Figure G.1Figure G.1 for further information.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-01-23, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by the
new notes 1 to 6 to entry.]
3.1.4 3.1.4
average availability
mean availability
Ā(t , t )
1 2
average value of the instantaneous availability (3.1.26(3.1.26)) over a given time interval (t , t )
1 2
Note 1 to entry: The average availability is the ratio between the accumulated time spent in up state (3.1.79(3.1.79)) and
the length of the considered period of observation. For example, Figure 1Figure 1 shows the average availability of the
system over the interval [0, t ] which is equal to (δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ )/t , i.e. 1 ̶ δ /t where δ /t is the
3 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 3 7 3 7 3
average unavailability of the system. This formula is similar to the formula obtained for production availability
(3.1.59(3.1.59)) calculations when only two levels, 100 % and 0 %, are considered.
Note 2 to entry: The average availability can be interpreted as the long-run proportion of time where the item is able to
function. Mathematically speaking, the average availability is the mathematical expectation of the term availability
(3.1.3(3.1.3),), as this term does not have the mathematical property of a normal probability and cannot be handled as
such.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-08-05, modified — The original note 1 to entry has been replaced by the
new notes 1 and 2 to entry.]
3.1.5 3.1.5
barrier
functional grouping of safeguards or controls selected to prevent a major accident (3.1.40(3.1.40)) or limit the
consequences
[SOURCE: ISO 17776:2016, 3.1.1, modified — Notes to entry have been removed.]
3.1.6 3.1.6
binary item
item (3.1.29(3.1.29)) with two classes of states
Note 1 to entry: The two classes can be up state (3.1.79(3.1.79)) and down state (3.1.15(3.1.15).).
EXAMPLE 1 An item that only have an up state and a down state is a binary item. Components A and B in
Figure 1Figure 1 are binary items.
EXAMPLE 2 A system made up of two redundant binary items, components A and B, has four states: φ (both A and
B in up state), φ (A in up state and B in down state), φ (A in down state and B in up state), φ (both A and B in down
2 3 4
state). If the system is able to operate as required in states φ1, φ2 and φ3 and not able in state φ4, it is a binary item with
the up state class {φ , φ , φ } and the down class {φ }. This is illustrated in Figure 1Figure 1.
1 2 3 4
Key
A component A
B component B
S system
δ period of time
t time
X state of component A (binary item)
A
B component BXB state of component B (binary item)
S systemφ state of the system S (multi-state item)
δ period of timeC class of states of system S (binary item)
t timeNOTE The two components each have states 1 (Up) and 0 (Down). System S as a binary item
has classes 1 (Up) and 0 (Down).
Figure 1 — Illustration of availability behaviour of an 1oo2 system
3.1.7 3.1.7
capital expenditure
CAPEX
investment used to purchase, install and commission an asset (3.1.2(3.1.2))
Note 1 to entry: See further information regarding estimation of CAPEX in ISO 15663:2021, Clause C.2.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.7]
3.1.8 3.1.8
common cause failure
failure of multiple items (3.1.29(3.1.29),), which would otherwise be considered independent of one another,
resulting from a single cause
Note 1 to entry: Common cause failures can also be common mode failures (3.1.9(3.1.9).).
Note 2 to entry: The potential for common cause failures reduces the effectiveness of system redundancy.
Note 3 to entry: It is generally accepted that the failures occur simultaneously or within a short time of each other.
Note 4 to entry: Components that fail due to a shared cause normally fail in the same functional mode. The term common
mode is therefore sometimes used. It is, however, not considered to be a precise term for communicating the
characteristics that describe a common cause failure.
Note 5 to entry: Explicit and implicit common mode failures are defined in ISO/TR 12489:2013, 5.4.2.
Note 6 to entry: Regarding interpretation rules for common cause failure parameters, see also ISO 14224:2016, C.1.6.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-18, modified — Notes 3- through 6 to entry have been added.]
3.1.9 3.1.9
common mode failures
failures of different items characterized by the same failure mode
Note 1 to entry: Common mode failures can have different causes.
Note 2 to entry: Common mode failures can also be common cause failures (3.1.8(3.1.8).).
Note 3 to entry: The potential for common mode failures reduces the effectiveness of system redundancy.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-19]
3.1.10 3.1.10
condition monitoring
obtaining information about physical state or operational parameters
Note 1 to entry: Condition monitoring is used to determine when preventive maintenance (3.1.57(3.1.57)) may be
required.
Note 2 to entry: Condition monitoring may be conducted automatically during operation or at planned intervals.
Note 3 to entry: Condition monitoring is part of condition-based maintenance. See also ISO 14224:2016, Figure 6.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-06-28, modified — The original note 3 to entry has been replaced by a
new one.]
3.1.11 3.1.11
corrective maintenance
maintenance (3.1.36(3.1.36)) carried out after fault (3.1.23(3.1.23)) detection to effect restoration
Note 1 to entry: See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, Figures 5 and 6, which illustrate terms used for quantifying corrective
maintenance.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-06-06, modified — The original noteNote 1 to entry has been replaced
by a new one.]
3.1.12 3.1.12
deliverability
ratio of deliveries to planned deliveries over a specified period of time, when the effect of compensating
elements, such as substitution from other producers and downstream (3.1.17(3.1.17)) buffer storage, is
included
Note 1 to entry: See Figure G.1Figure G.1 for further information.
3.1.13 3.1.13
design life
planned usage time for the total system (3.1.75(3.1.75))
Note 1 to entry: It is important not to confuse design life with the mean time to failure (MTTF) (3.1.41(3.1.41).). Several
items can fail within the design life of the system. As long as repair or replacement is feasible, the design life of the system
is not affected by such failures.
Note 2 to entry: The design life is decided during the life cycle phase ‘Define’."Define". Design life in this document can
thus mean a lifetime that can change and that can be chosen based on production assurance (3.1.58(3.1.58)) activities or
life cycle costing (3.1.30(3.1.30).).
3.1.14 3.1.14
demand availability
ability of the production facility to satisfy the demand over a specified period of time
Note 1 to entry: This performance measure (3.1.51(3.1.51)) expresses the fraction of time or number of times the
produced volume that is exported is equal to or above demand. See also Table G.1Table G.1.
3.1.15 3.1.15
down state
state of being unable to perform as required, due to internal fault (3.1.23(3.1.23),), or preventive maintenance
(3.1.57(3.1.57))
Note 1 to entry: This concept is related to a binary item (3.1.6(3.1.6),), which can have several down states forming the
down state class of the item. All the states in the down state class are considered to be equivalent with regard to the
unavailability of the considered item.
EXAMPLE In Figure 1Figure 1,, the down state class of the system S comprises only one state {S } and the system S
is in down state at time t .
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-02-20, modified — The original note 1 to entry has been replaced, and
the original note 2 to entry has been removed; EXAMPLE has been added.]
3.1.16 3.1.16
down time
time interval during which an item (3.1.29(3.1.29)) is in a down state (3.1.15(3.1.15))
Note 1 to entry: The down time includes all the delays between the item failure and the restoration of its service. Down
time can be either planned or unplanned (see ISO 14224:2016, Table 4).
Note 2 to entry: Down time can be equipment down time (see ISO 14224:2016, Figure 4 and Table 4), production down
time (see Figures I.1Figures I.1 and I.2I.2)) or down time for other operations (e.g. drilling). It is important to distinguish
between the equipment down time itself and the down time of the plant to which the equipment belongs.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-02-21, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by the
new notes 1 and 2 to entry.]
3.1.17 3.1.17
downstream
business category most commonly used in the petroleum industry to describe post-production processes
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, A.1.4 for further details.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.17, modified — EXAMPLE has been removed.]
3.1.18 3.1.18
failure
loss of ability to perform as required
Note 1 to entry: A failure of an item is an event that results in a fault (3.1.23(3.1.23)) (i.e. a state) of that item. This is
illustrated in Figure 2Figure 2 for a binary system S comprising two redundant components A and B.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-01, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by a
new note 1 to entry.]
3.1.19 3.1.19
failure cause
root cause
set of circumstances that leads to failure (3.1.18(3.1.18))
Note 1 to entry: A failure cause can originate during specification, design, manufacture, installation, operation or
maintenance of an item.
Note 2 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, B.2.3 and Table B.3, which define failure causes for all equipment classes.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-11, modified — Note 2 to entry has been added.]
3.1.20 3.1.20
failure data
data characterizing the occurrence of a failure (3.1.18(3.1.18)) event
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Table 6.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.25]
3.1.21 3.1.21
failure mode
manner in which failure (3.1.18(3.1.18)) occurs
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Tables B.6 to B.15, on the relevant failure modes, which define failure modes to be
used for each equipment class.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-17, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by a
new note 1 to entry.]
3.1.22 3.1.22
failure rate
conditional probability per unit of time that the item (3.1.29(3.1.29)) fails between t and t + dt, provided that
it works over (0, t)
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Clause C.3 for further explanation of the failure rate.
Note 2 to entry: This definition applies for the first failure (3.1.18(3.1.18)) of binary items (3.1.6(3.1.6).).
Note 3 to entry: Under the assumptions that the failure rate is constant and that the item is as good as new after repairs
the failure rate can be estimated as the number of failures relative to the corresponding accumulated up time
(3.1.80(3.1.80)) divided by this accumulated up time. In this case this is the reciprocal of MTTF (3.1.41(3.1.41).). In some
cases, time can be replaced by units of use.
Note 4 to entry: The estimation of the failure rate can be based on operating time (3.1.49(3.1.49)) or calendar time.
[SOURCE: ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.18, modified — The symbol "λ(t)" has been removed; the original notes to
entry have been replaced by the new notes 1 to 4 to entry.]
3.1.23 3.1.23
fault
inability to perform as required, due to an internal state
EXAMPLE Down states (3.1.15(3.1.15)) of items A, B and system S is illustrated in Figure 2Figure 2.
Note 1 to entry: A fault of an item results from a failure (3.1.18(3.1.18),), either of the item itself, or from a deficiency in
an earlier stage of the life cycle, such as specification, design, manufacture or maintenance. See latent fault
(ISO 14224:2016, 3.44).
Note 2 to entry: An item made of several sub-items (e.g. a system) which continues to perform as required in presence of
faults of one or several sub-items is called fault tolerant.
Note 3 to entry: See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.2.2.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-04-01, modified — EXAMPLE has been added; the original notes 2 to 4
to entry have been replaced by the new notes 2 and 3 to entry.]
3.1.24 3.1.24
fault tolerance
attribute of an item (3.1.29(3.1.29)) that makes it able to perform a required function (3.1.69(3.1.69)) in the
presence of certain given sub-item faults (3.1.23(3.1.23))
3.1.25 3.1.25
human error
discrepancy between the human action taken or omitted and that intended
EXAMPLE Performing an incorrect action; omitting a required action.
Note 1 to entry: Discrepancy with intention is considered essential in determining human error; see Reference [91[91].].
Note 2 to entry: The term ‘human error’ is often attributed in hindsight to a human decision, action or inaction considered
to be an initiator or contributory cause of a negative outcome such as loss or harm.
Note 3 to entry: In human reliability assessment, human error is defined as any member of a set of human actions or
activities that exceeds some limit of acceptability, this being an out of tolerance action or failure (3.1.18(3.1.18)) to act
where the limits of performance are defined by the system (see Reference [88[88]).]).
Note 4 to entry: See IEC 62508 for further details.
Note 5 to entry: See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, 5.5.2.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-03-14, modified — The words "or required" have been removed at the
end of the definition; in the EXAMPLE, "miscalculation; misreading a value" have been removed; notes 1 to 5
to entry have been added.]
3.1.26 3.1.26
instantaneous availability
A(t)
probability that an item (3.1.29(3.1.29)) is in a state to perform as required at a given instant
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-08-01, modified — The admitted term ‘"point availability’availability"
has been removed; the symbol "A(t)" has been added.]
3.1.27 3.1.27
integrity
condition in which an asset (3.1.2(3.1.2)) is safe and reliable for its purpose
Note 1 to entry: For some application areas, more specific terms and definitions exist. such as asset integrity (see ISO/TS
3250:2021, 3.1.2), mechanical integrity, plant integrity, safety integrity (see ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.2), structural
integrity (see ISO/DIS 19900:2025,20—, 3.58), system integrity, technical integrity and well integrity (see ISO/DIS
16530-1:2025,:20—, 3.73). These integrity terms can encompass various failure (3.1.18(3.1.18)) consequences (e.g.
safety, environmental, production, and operation; see ISO 14224:2016, Table C.2).
Note 2 to entry: Integrity is also defined for use in pipeline integrity management (3.1.28(3.1.28)) for onshore gas
infrastructure in EN 17649:2022, 3.7. see also DNV-ST-F101:2017 and ISO 19345-1:2019, 3.1.32.
Note 3 to entry: The integrity can be expressed mathematically by using specific performance measures (3.1.51(3.1.51))
as described in Annex GAnnex G.
[SOURCE: EN 17649:2022, 3.7, modified — Notes 1 to 3 to entry have been added.]
3.1.28 3.1.28
integrity management
set of processes and procedures used to proactively manage the safe, environmentally responsible and reliable
service of an asset (3.1.2(3.1.2)) throughout its life cycle
Note 1 to entry: The integrity management program covers a set of processes and practises used in reliability
management (3.1.68(3.1.68).). See e.g. ISO 19345-1:2019, 3.1.21.
3.1.29 3.1.29
item
subject being considered
Note 1 to entry: The item can be an individual part, component, device, functional unit, equipment, subsystem, or system.
Note 2 to entry: The item may consist of hardware, software, people or any combination thereof.
Note 3 to entry: In this document, item can also be plant or unit, or installation. See ISO 14224:2016, Figure 3.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-01-01, modified — In note 1 to entry, "material", "product" and "service
or process" have been removed; in note 2 to entry, "can" has been changed to "may"; note 3 to entry has been
added.]
3.1.30 3.1.30
life cycle costing
process of evaluating the difference between the life cycle cost of two or more alternative options
Note 1 to entry: Life cycle costing can involve quantitative and qualitative assessment.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.27, modified — Note 1 to entry has been adjusted.]
3.1.31 3.1.31
life cycle phase
discrete stage in the life cycle with a specified purpose
Note 1 to entry: The different life cycle phases are further described in ISO 15663:2021, 4.5.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.28]
3.1.32 3.1.32
logistic delay
delay, excluding administrative delay, incurred for the provision of resources needed for a maintenance action
to proceed or continue
Note 1 to entry: Logistic delays can be due to, for example, travelling to unattended installations, pending arrival of spare
parts, specialists, test equipment and information, and delays due to unsuitable environmental conditions (e.g. waiting
on weather).
Note 2 to entry: See also ISO/TR 12489:2013, Figure 5.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-07-13, modified — The original NOTE has been replaced by the new
notes 1 and 2 to entry.]
3.1.33 3.1.33
lost revenue
LOSTREV
income loss that occurs when generated income are less than expected due to external or internal factors
Note 1 to entry: Production loss (3.1.61(3.1.61)) categories are defined in ISO/TS 3250:2021. Time loss categories are
described in Clause G.3Clause G.3.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.29, modified — The original notes 1 and 2 to entry have been replaced by the
new note 1 to entry.]
3.1.34 3.1.34
maintainability
ability to be retained in, or restored to a state to perform as required, under given conditions of use and
maintenance (3.1.36(3.1.36))
Note 1 to entry: Given conditions would include aspects that affect maintainability, such as: location for maintenance,
accessibility, maintenance procedures and maintenance resources.
Note 2 to entry: Maintainability can be quantified using appropriate measures. See IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-07,
Maintainability and maintenance support: measures.
Note 3 to entry: See Figure G.1Figure G.1 for further information.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-01-27, modified — Note 3 to entry has been added.]
3.1.35 3.1.35
maintainable item
item (3.1.29(3.1.29)) that constitutes a part or an assembly of parts that is normally the lowest level in the
equipment hierarchy during maintenance (3.1.36(3.1.36))
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.48]
3.1.36 3.1.36
maintenance
combination of all technical and management actions intended to retain an item in, or restore it to, a state in
which it can perform as required
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-192:2015, 192-06-01, modified — Note 1 to entry has been removed.]
3.1.37 3.1.37
maintenance data
data characterizing the maintenance action planned or done
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Table 8.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.51, modified — The original notes 1 and 3 to entry have been removed; Newnew
note 1 to entry added.]
3.1.38 3.1.38
maintenance management
all activities of the management that determine the maintenance requirements, objectives, strategies, and
responsibilities, and implementation of them by such means as maintenance planning, maintenance control
and the improvement of maintenance activities and economics
[SOURCE: EN 13306:2017, 2.2]
3.1.39 3.1.39
maintenance supportability
ability to be supported to sustain the required availability (3.1.3(3.1.3)) with a defined operational profile and
given logistic and maintenance resources
Note 1 to entry: Maintenance supportability of an item result from the inherent maintainability (3.1.34(3.1.34),),
combined with factors external to the item that affect the relative ease of providing the required maintenance and logistic
support.
Note 2 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Annex C for further details regarding the interpretation of maintainability.
3.1.40 3.1.40
major accident
hazardous event that results in
— — multiple fatalities or severe injuries; or
— — extensive damage to structure, installation or plant; or
— — large-scale impact on the environment (e.g. persistent and severe environmental damage that can lead
to loss of commercial or recreational use, loss of natural resources over a wide area or severe
environmental damage that will require extensive measures to restore beneficial uses of the environment)
Note 1 to entry: In ISO 17776:2016, a major accident is the realization of a major accident hazard.
[SOURCE: ISO 17776:2016, 3.1.12, modified — The abbreviated term ‘MA’ has been removed; note 2 to entry
has been removed.]
3.1.41 3.1.41
mean time to failure
MTTF
expected time before the item (3.1.29(3.1.29)) fails
Note 1 to entry: See further details in ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.29.
Note 2 to entry: IEC 60050-192:2015 defines MTTF as "expectation of the operating time (3.1.49(3.1.49)) to failure".
Note 3 to entry: See also ISO 14224:2016, Annex C.
[SOURCE: ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.29, modified — The original notes to entry have been replaced by the new
notes 1 to 3 to entry.]
3.1.42 3.1.42
midstream
business category involving the processing, storage and transportation sectors of the petroleum industry
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, A.1.4 for further details.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.65, modified — EXAMPLE has been removed.]
3.1.43 3.1.43
modification
combination of all technical and administrative actions intended to change an item (3.1.29(3.1.29))
Note 1 to entry: In this document, the use of the term modification is primarily meant to cover major modification
activities. See further details in ISO/TS 3250:2021, 8.2.2 with respect to how such major modifications are reflected in
production efficiency (3.1.60(3.1.60)) reporting.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.67, modified — The original notes 1 to 3 to entry have been replaced by the new
note 1 to entry.]
3.1.44 3.1.44
multi-state item
item (3.1.29(3.1.29)) with more than two classes of states
Note 1 to entry: This is an extension of the binary items (3.1.6(3.1.6)) beyond the concepts of up state (3.1.79(3.1.79))
and down state (3.1.15(3.1.15).). This can characterize single items with degraded states or systems made up of several
components in a production facility.
EXAMPLE An oil production system comprising two wells, A and B, that can be considered as binary items has four
states: φ (both A and B in up state), φ (A in up state and B in down state), φ (A in down state and B in up state), φ
1 2 3 4
(both A and B in down state). If, when they are in up state, A produces 200 bpd and B produces 100 bpd, then the system
has four classes of production 300 bpd, {φ1}, 200 bpd, {φ2}, 100 bpd, {φ3} and 0 bpd, {φ4}. With regards to oil production,
it is a multi-state item. This is illustrated in Figure 2Figure 2.

Key
A item A
B item B
S system
δ period of time
Y state capacity of item A (binary item)
A
B item B  YB state capacity of item B (binary item)
S systemφ production output of system S (multi-state item) [in bpd]
δ period of timet time
NOTE Max X is 200 bpd and max X is 100 bpd. System S as a multi-state item has four discrete states of production
A B
output: {φ , φ , φ , φ }, where the max production output is 300 bpd.
1 2 3 4
Figure 2 — Illustration of production availability behaviour of a multi-state system
3.1.45 3.1.45
observation period
time period during which production performance (3.1.62(3.1.62)) and reliability data (3.1.67(3.1.67)) are
recorded
3.1.46 3.1.46
on-stream availability
ability of a production facility to deliver a volume above zero over a specified period of time
Note 1 to entry: This performance measure (3.1.51(3.1.51)) expresses the fraction of time or number of times produced
volume is above zero. See Table G.1Table G.1.
3.1.47 3.1.47
operating expenditure
OPEX
expenses used for operation and maintenance, including associated costs such as logistics and spares
Note 1 to entry: See further information regarding estimation of OPEX in ISO 15663:2021, Clause C.3.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.31]
3.1.48 3.1.48
operating state
state of performing as required
Note 1 to entry: See ISO 14224:2016, Table 4.
Note 2 to entry: In some applications, an item in an idle state is considered to be operating.
Note 3 to entry: The state capacities (3.1.72(3.1.72)) of a multi-state item (3.1.44(3.1.44)) characterize various levels of
operation and consequently, the definition of the operating state of a multi-state item depends on the situation, for
example, if:
— — no other requirement is given, any state with a capacity greater than zero is an operating state;
— — a minimum capacity is required, it provides the limit to split the states between up and down classes;
— — a given capacity is specified, then only the states with this capacity are operating states;
— — no other requirement is given, any state with a capacity greater than zero is an operating state (300 bpd, 200 bpd
and 100 bpd in Figure 2Figure 2););
— — a minimum capacity is required, it provides the limit to split the states between up and down classes (300 bpd,
200 bpd in Figure 2Figure 2,, if the minimum allowed production is 200 bpd);
— — a given capacity is specified, then only the states with this capacity are operating states (200 bpd in
Figure 2Fig
...


PROJET FINAL
Norme
internationale
ISO/TC 67
Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y
Secrétariat: NEN
compris les énergies à faible teneur
Début de vote:
en carbone — Assurance production
2026-02-20
et gestion de la fiabilité
Vote clos le:
2026-04-17
Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy —
Production assurance and reliability management
LES DESTINATAIRES DU PRÉSENT PROJET SONT
INVITÉS À PRÉSENTER, AVEC LEURS OBSERVATIONS,
NOTIFICATION DES DROITS DE PROPRIÉTÉ DONT ILS
AURAIENT ÉVENTUELLEMENT CONNAISSANCE ET À
FOURNIR UNE DOCUMENTATION EXPLICATIVE.
OUTRE LE FAIT D’ÊTRE EXAMINÉS POUR
ÉTABLIR S’ILS SONT ACCEPTABLES À DES FINS
INDUSTRIELLES, TECHNOLOGIQUES ET COM-MERCIALES,
AINSI QUE DU POINT DE VUE DES UTILISATEURS, LES
PROJETS DE NORMES
TRAITEMENT PARALLÈLE ISO/CEN
INTERNATIONALES DOIVENT PARFOIS ÊTRE CONSIDÉRÉS
DU POINT DE VUE DE LEUR POSSI BILITÉ DE DEVENIR DES
NORMES POUVANT
SERVIR DE RÉFÉRENCE DANS LA RÉGLEMENTATION
NATIONALE.
Numéro de référence
PROJET FINAL
Norme
internationale
ISO/TC 67
Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y
Secrétariat: NEN
compris les énergies à faible teneur
Début de vote:
en carbone — Assurance production
2026-02-20
et gestion de la fiabilité
Vote clos le:
2026-04-17
Oil and gas industries including lower carbon energy —
Production assurance and reliability management
LES DESTINATAIRES DU PRÉSENT PROJET SONT
INVITÉS À PRÉSENTER, AVEC LEURS OBSERVATIONS,
NOTIFICATION DES DROITS DE PROPRIÉTÉ DONT ILS
AURAIENT ÉVENTUELLEMENT CONNAISSANCE ET À
FOURNIR UNE DOCUMENTATION EXPLICATIVE.
DOCUMENT PROTÉGÉ PAR COPYRIGHT
OUTRE LE FAIT D’ÊTRE EXAMINÉS POUR
ÉTABLIR S’ILS SONT ACCEPTABLES À DES FINS
© ISO 2026 INDUSTRIELLES, TECHNOLOGIQUES ET COM-MERCIALES,
AINSI QUE DU POINT DE VUE DES UTILISATEURS, LES
Tous droits réservés. Sauf prescription différente ou nécessité dans le contexte de sa mise en œuvre, aucune partie de cette
PROJETS DE NORMES
TRAITEMENT PARALLÈLE ISO/CEN
INTERNATIONALES DOIVENT PARFOIS ÊTRE CONSIDÉRÉS
publication ne peut être reproduite ni utilisée sous quelque forme que ce soit et par aucun procédé, électronique ou mécanique,
DU POINT DE VUE DE LEUR POSSI BILITÉ DE DEVENIR DES
y compris la photocopie, ou la diffusion sur l’internet ou sur un intranet, sans autorisation écrite préalable. Une autorisation peut
NORMES POUVANT
être demandée à l’ISO à l’adresse ci-après ou au comité membre de l’ISO dans le pays du demandeur.
SERVIR DE RÉFÉRENCE DANS LA RÉGLEMENTATION
NATIONALE.
ISO copyright office
Case postale 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Genève
Tél.: +41 22 749 01 11
E-mail: copyright@iso.org
Web: www.iso.org
Publié en Suisse Numéro de référence
ii
Sommaire Page
Avant-propos .iv
Introduction .vi
1 Domaine d'application . 1
2 Références normatives . 2
3 Termes, définitions et abréviations . 2
3.1 Termes et définitions .2
3.2 Abréviations. 22
4 Assurance production et aide à la décision .23
4.1 Conditions de travail . 23
4.1.1 Généralités . 23
4.1.2 Aspects relatifs à la durabilité et au changement climatique . 25
4.2 Processus d'optimisation . 26
4.3 Programme d'assurance production . 28
4.3.1 Objectifs . 28
4.3.2 Catégorisation des risques projet . 28
4.3.3 Activités du programme . 30
4.4 Normes alternatives .32
5 Processus et activités de l'assurance production .32
Annexe A (normative) Programme d'assurance production (PAP) et programme de gestion de
la fiabilité (RMP) — Structure et contenu .34
Annexe B (informative) Core production assurance processes and activities .37
Annexe C (informative) Interacting production assurance processes and activities .48
Annexe D (informative) Production performance analyses .53
Annexe E (normative) Données de fiabilité et de performance de production .59
Annexe F (informative) Performance objectives and requirements .62
Annexe G (normative) Mesures de la performance pour l'assurance production .66
Annexe H (informative) Relationship to major accidents .75
Annexe I (informative) Outline of techniques .77
Bibliographie .104

iii
Avant-propos
L'ISO (Organisation internationale de normalisation) est une fédération mondiale d'organismes nationaux
de normalisation (comités membres de l'ISO). L'élaboration des Normes internationales est en général
confiée aux comités techniques de l'ISO. Chaque comité membre intéressé par une étude a le droit de faire
partie du comité technique créé à cet effet. Les organisations internationales, gouvernementales et non
gouvernementales, en liaison avec l'ISO participent également aux travaux. L'ISO collabore étroitement avec
la Commission électrotechnique internationale (IEC) en ce qui concerne la normalisation électrotechnique.
Les procédures utilisées pour élaborer le présent document et celles destinées à sa mise à jour sont
décrites dans les Directives ISO/IEC, Partie 1. Il convient, en particulier, de prendre note des différents
critères d'approbation requis pour les différents types de documents ISO. Le présent document
a été rédigé conformément aux règles de rédaction données dans les Directives ISO/IEC, Partie 2
(voir www.iso.org/directives).
L'ISO attire l'attention sur le fait que la mise en application du présent document peut entraîner l'utilisation
d'un ou de plusieurs brevets. L'ISO ne prend pas position quant à la preuve, à la validité et à l'applicabilité
de tout droit de propriété revendiqué à cet égard. À la date de publication du présent document, l'ISO
n'avait pas reçu notification qu'un ou plusieurs brevets pouvaient être nécessaires à sa mise en application.
Toutefois, il y a lieu d'avertir les responsables de la mise en application du présent document que des
informations plus récentes sont susceptibles de figurer dans la base de données de brevets, disponible à
l'adresse www.iso.org/brevets. L'ISO ne saurait être tenue pour responsable de ne pas avoir identifié tout ou
partie de tels droits de brevet.
Les appellations commerciales éventuellement mentionnées dans le présent document sont données pour
information, par souci de commodité, à l'intention des utilisateurs et ne sauraient constituer un engagement.
Pour une explication de la nature volontaire des normes, la signification des termes et expressions
spécifiques de l'ISO liés à l'évaluation de la conformité, ou pour toute information au sujet de l'adhésion de
l'ISO aux principes de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce (OMC) concernant les obstacles techniques au
commerce (OTC), voir www.iso.org/avant-propos.
Le présent document a été élaboré par le comité technique ISO/TC 67, Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y
compris les énergies à faible teneur en carbone, en collaboration avec le comité technique du Comité européen
de normalisation (CEN) CEN/TC 12, Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y compris les énergies à faible teneur en
carbone, conformément à l'accord de coopération technique entre l'ISO et le CEN (Accord de Vienne).
Cette troisième édition annule et remplace la deuxième édition (ISO 20815:2018), qui a fait l'objet d'une
révision technique.
Les principales modifications sont les suivantes:
— Article 3: ajout de plusieurs nouveaux termes, définitions et abréviations;
— Article 4: mise à jour du paragraphe 4.1, ajout d'un nouveau paragraphe 4.1.2, révision de la Figure 5 et
du Tableau 2;
— articles principaux et Annexe A: mise à jour du texte afin de clarifier le fait que l'établissement et
l'utilisation d'un programme d'assurance production ou d'un programme de gestion de la fiabilité
impliquent tous deux la conformité au présent document;
— Annexe B et Annexe C: mise à jour du texte pour s'aligner sur les processus d'assurance production pour
les phases du cycle de vie dans le Tableau 2 révisé;
— Annexe A et Annexe E: modification du statut, qui est désormais normatif;
— Annexe D: ajout de nouveaux textes et de nouvelles figures;
— Annexe F: révision de la Figure F.1, ajout de nouveaux textes aux Articles F.3 et F.4;

iv
— Annexe G: mise à jour du texte pour refléter la relation entre le présent document et l'ISO/TS 3250:2021;
certains passages de la deuxième édition (ISO 20815:2018) ont été supprimés étant donné que la
prochaine édition de l'ISO/TS 3250 est prévue afin de couvrir les catégories de pertes de production
pour également les secteurs en aval, intermédiaires et pétrochimiques;
— Annexe I: modification de l'ordre des articles et paragraphes; mise à jour du texte aux Articles I.1, I.8 à I.9,
I.14, I.16 à I.18.
Il convient que l'utilisateur adresse tout retour d'information ou toute question concernant le présent
document à l'organisme national de normalisation de son pays. Une liste exhaustive desdits organismes se
trouve à l'adresse www.iso.org/fr/members.html.

v
Introduction
Les industries du pétrole et du gaz, y compris les activités pétrochimiques et les énergies à faible émission
de carbone, impliquent des dépenses d'investissement importantes (CAPEX) et des charges d'exploitation
(OPEX). La sécurité et la rentabilité des actifs associés dépendent de la fiabilité, de la disponibilité et de la
maintenabilité des systèmes et des composants qui sont utilisés. Par conséquent, l'assurance production
et la gestion de la fiabilité sont essentielles pour une disponibilité de production optimale. Cela contribue à
fournir une énergie abordable de manière durable.
Le concept de l'assurance production, présenté dans le présent document, permet une compréhension
commune de l'utilisation des techniques fiabilistes dans les diverses phases du cycle de vie. L'assurance
production couvre les activités mises en œuvre pour atteindre et maintenir un niveau de performances
optimal en matière d'économie globale, qui soit cohérent avec les exigences réglementaires et les conditions
applicables du cadre de travail.

vi
PROJET FINAL Norme internationale ISO/FDIS 20815:2026(fr)
Industries du pétrole et du gaz, y compris les énergies à faible
teneur en carbone — Assurance production et gestion de la
fiabilité
IMPORTANT — Le fichier électronique du présent document contient des couleurs qui sont jugées
utiles pour la bonne compréhension du document. Il convient donc aux utilisateurs de considérer
l'emploi d'une imprimante couleur pour l'impression du présent document.
1 Domaine d'application
Le présent document spécifie les exigences et les recommandations relatives à l'assurance production et à
la gestion de la fiabilité applicables aux actifs et opérations liés au forage, à l'exploitation, au traitement et
au transport des ressources pétrolières, pétrochimiques et en gaz naturel. Il traite des actifs et des activités
associées pour les catégories d'activité en amont, intermédiaires, en aval et pétrochimiques. Il est axé sur
l'assurance production du pétrole et du gaz en ce qui concerne la production et les activités associées, et
couvre l'analyse de la fiabilité et de la maintenance des équipements. Cela inclut une variété de systèmes et
d'équipements associés au sein de la chaîne de valeur du gaz et du pétrole. L'assurance production concerne
non seulement la production des hydrocarbures, mais également les activités associées telles que le forage,
l'installation de conduites et les interventions sous-marines.
Le document soutient également l'assurance production et la gestion de la fiabilité pour les actifs à faible
émission de carbone et les opérations associées, par exemple, le captage et le stockage du carbone (CSC),
l'hydrogène, l'ammoniac et l'énergie éolienne. Il décrit les processus, les activités, les exigences et les lignes
directrices pour la gestion systématique, la planification, l'exécution et l'utilisation efficaces de l'assurance
production et des techniques fiabilistes.
Le présent document définit 12 processus, dont sept sont définis comme des processus fondamentaux de
l'assurance production et sont abordés dans le présent document. Les cinq processus restants sont appelés
processus en interaction et ne relèvent pas du domaine d'application du présent document. La relation des
processus fondamentaux de l'assurance production avec ces processus interactifs s'inscrit toutefois dans le
domaine d'application du présent document car le flux d'informations à destination et en provenance de ces
derniers processus est requis pour s'assurer que les exigences de l'assurance production sont satisfaites.
Le document spécifie la manière d'établir et d'exécuter un programme d'assurance production (PAP) et un
programme de gestion de la fiabilité (RMP).
Le présent document énumère les processus et activités qui peuvent être initiés pour apporter une valeur
ajoutée aux parties prenantes (par exemple, l'exploitant), où le processus choisi peut dépendre de leur
stratégie commerciale et de leur domaine d'application.
Le présent document est destiné aux utilisateurs suivants et aux activités associées de leur personnel:
— Exploitants: Activités d'assurance production et de gestion de la fiabilité. Les activités associées
comprennent la gestion et le contrôle de projet, le développement technologique, la qualification
technologique, la conception des concepts et des systèmes, la gestion des risques (y compris HSE), la
gestion de l'intégrité et la gestion de la maintenance.
— Entrepreneurs: Activités par l'entrepreneur principal pour les services d'ingénierie, d'approvisionnement,
de construction, de forage, d'installation, d'exploitation, de maintenance, etc.
— Fournisseurs: Activités du fabricant ou du fournisseur relatives à la conception et à la gestion de la
qualité des équipements, au développement et à la qualification technologiques.

— Autorités: Activités des organismes réglementaires destinées à garantir la HSE, l'utilisation des
ressources et l'économie d'exploitation.
— Consultants: Services de conseil visant à appuyer l'assurance production et la gestion de la fiabilité.
— Universités: Activités associées à la formation des professionnels de l'industrie, ainsi qu'à la réalisation
de projets de recherche fondamentale ou appliquée, lorsqu'ils sont liés à l'assurance production, à la
gestion de la fiabilité et au développement technologique. Cela inclut l'amélioration des méthodes et des
cadres décrits dans le présent document.
— Instituts de recherche: Activités de recherche liées à l'assurance production, à la gestion de la fiabilité
et au développement technologique. Cela comprend les essais de qualification des équipements et les
évaluations techniques avancées utilisant les méthodes et les cadres décrits dans le présent document.
2 Références normatives
Les documents suivants cités dans le texte constituent, pour tout ou partie de leur contenu, des exigences du
présent document. Pour les références datées, seule l'édition citée s'applique. Pour les références non datées,
la dernière édition du document de référence s'applique (y compris les éventuels amendements).
ISO 14224:2016, Industries du pétrole, de la pétrochimie et du gaz naturel — Collecte et échange de données de
fiabilité et de maintenance des équipements
ISO/TS 3250:2021, Industries du pétrole, de la pétrochimie et du gaz naturel — Calcul et rapport sur l'efficacité
de production en phase d'exploitation
ISO 15663:2021, Industries du pétrole et du gaz naturel — Estimation des coûts globaux de production et de
traitement
3 Termes, définitions et abréviations
3.1 Termes et définitions
Pour les besoins du présent document, les termes et définitions suivants s'appliquent.
L'ISO et l'IEC tiennent à jour des bases de données terminologiques destinées à être utilisées en normalisation,
consultables aux adresses suivantes:
— ISO Online browsing platform: disponible à l'adresse https://www.iso.org/obp
— IEC Electropedia: disponible à l'adresse https://www.electropedia.org/
3.1.1
temps de réparation active
temps réellement consacré à la réparation d'une entité (3.1.29)
Note 1 à l'article: La valeur prévisible du temps de réparation effectif est appelée MART (temps moyen de réparation
active).
Note 2 à l'article: L'ISO 14224 fait la distinction entre les termes «temps moyen de réparation active (MART)», «temps
moyen de réparation (MTTR)», «temps moyen de restauration (MTTRes)» et «temps global moyen de réparation
(MRT)». Voir l'ISO 14224:2016, 3.59, 3,61, 3.63 et 3.64 pour plus de détails.
Note 3 à l'article: Le temps moyen de réparation active (MART) est défini comme «expected active repair time» (durée
prévisible de réparation active) dans l'ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.34 (non disponible en français). Voir également l'ISO/
TR 12489:2013, Figures 5 et 6.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.2, modifié — Les Notes 1 à 2 à l'article ont été ajoutées; les Notes 1 et 2 à l'article
d'origine ont été consolidées pour devenir la Note 3 à l'article.]

3.1.2
actif
item (3.1.29), chose ou entité qui a une valeur potentielle ou réelle pour un organisme
Note 1 à l'article: Les actifs peuvent être physiques ou non physiques.
Note 2 à l'article: Un groupement d'actifs désigné par «système d'actifs» peut être également considéré comme un
actif.
Note 3 à l'article: Dans le présent document, le terme «actif» se réfère uniquement aux actifs physiques, qui sont des
actifs matériels. Un organisme peut également exploiter des actifs qui sont en propriété exclusive ou partiellement
détenus par le biais de co-entreprises ou d'autres arrangements. En général, un actif est une installation ou un
groupe d'installations. L'installation correspond à une catégorie d'installation dans l'ISO 14224:2016, Tableau A.1.
Ces installations peuvent être subdivisées en installations ou unités, systèmes (3.1.75), classes d'équipements (voir
l'ISO 14224:2016, 3.18), sous-unités, composants, etc., tel que décrit dans l'ISO 14224:2016, Tableau 2.
[SOURCE: ISO 55000:2024, 3.1.1, modifié — La Note 3 à l'article a été ajoutée.]
3.1.3
disponibilité
aptitude à être en état de fonctionner tel que requis dans des conditions données
Note 1 à l'article: Pour une entité binaire (3.1.6), la mesure de la disponibilité est la probabilité d'être en état de
disponibilité (3.1.79) (c'est-à-dire dans un état appartenant à la classe d'états de disponibilité).
Note 2 à l'article: La Figure 1 illustre un système disponible à l'instant t et indisponible à l'instant t .
1 2
Note 3 à l'article: Voir l'ISO 14224:2016, Annexe C pour obtenir une description plus détaillée et une interprétation de
la disponibilité.
Note 4 à l'article: Disponibilité technique (3.1.76) ou disponibilité opérationnelle (3.1.50) peuvent être utilisées comme
mesures de la performance (3.1.51) dérivées pour refléter la disponibilité estimée. Une définition de la disponibilité
système, propre à chaque cas, est nécessaire pour représenter le système (3.1.75) concerné.
Note 5 à l'article: D'autres termes sont donnés dans l'ISO/TR 12489.
Note 6 à l'article: Voir Figure G.1 pour de plus amples informations.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐01‐23, modifié — Les Notes à l'article d'origine ont été remplacées par
de nouvelles Notes 1 à 6 à l'article.]
3.1.4
disponibilité moyenne
disponibilité moyenne
Ā(t , t )
1 2
moyenne de la disponibilité instantanée (3.1.26) sur un intervalle de temps donné (t , t )
1 2
Note 1 à l'article: La disponibilité moyenne est le rapport du cumul de temps passé à l'état de disponibilité (3.1.79)
sur la durée de la période d'observation considérée. Par exemple, la Figure 1 montre que la disponibilité moyenne du
système sur l'intervalle [0, t ] qui est égale à (δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ + δ )/t , c'est‐à‐dire 1 ̶ δ /t où δ /t est
3 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 3 7 3 7 3
l'indisponibilité moyenne du système. Cette formule est semblable à la formule obtenue pour les calculs de disponibilité
de production (3.1.59) lorsque seulement deux niveaux sont considérés: 100 % et 0 %.
Note 2 à l'article: La disponibilité moyenne peut être interprétée comme la proportion à long terme du temps
pendant lequel l'entité est capable de fonctionner. Sur le plan mathématique, la disponibilité moyenne est l'attente
mathématique du terme disponibilité (3.1.3), car ce terme n'a pas la propriété mathématique d'une probabilité normale
et ne peut pas être traité comme tel.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐08‐05, modifié — La Note à l'Article 1 d'origine a été remplacée par les
nouvelles Notes 1 et 2 à l'article.]

3.1.5
barrière
regroupement fonctionnel de mesures de protection ou de contrôles, sélectionnés pour prévenir un accident
majeur (3.1.40) ou en limiter les conséquences
[SOURCE: ISO 17776:2016, 3.1.1, modifié — Les Notes à l'article ont été supprimées.]
3.1.6
entité binaire
entité (3.1.29) avec deux classes d'états
Note 1 à l'article: Les deux classes peuvent être «état de disponibilité» (3.1.79) et «état d'indisponibilité» (3.1.15).
EXEMPLE 1 Une entité avec uniquement un état de disponibilité et un état d'indisponibilité est une entité binaire.
Les composants A et B de la Figure 1 sont des entités binaires.
EXEMPLE 2 Un système fait de deux éléments binaires redondants, les composants A et B, a quatre états: φ (A
et B tous les deux en état de disponibilité), φ (A en état de disponibilité et B en état d'indisponibilité), φ (A en état
2 3
d'indisponibilité et B en état de disponibilité), φ (A et B tous deux en état d'indisponibilité). Si le système est capable
de fonctionner comme requis dans les états φ , φ et φ et qu'il en est incapable dans l'état φ , il s'agit d'une entité
1 2 3 4
binaire avec la classe d'états de disponibilité {φ , φ , φ } et la classe d'état d'indisponibilité {φ }. Cela est illustré à la
1 2 3 4
Figure 1.
Légende
A composant A
B composant B
S système
δ période de temps
t temps
X état du composant A (entité binaire)
A
X état du composant B (entité binaire)
B
φ état du système S (entité multi‐états)
C classe des états du système S (entité binaire)
NOTE Les deux composants ont chacun des états 1 (disponibilité) et 0 (indisponibilité). Le système S en tant
qu'entité binaire a les classes 1 (disponibilité) et 0 (indisponibilité).
Figure 1 — Représentation du comportement de disponibilité d'un système 1oo2
3.1.7
dépenses d'investissement
CAPEX
investissement utilisé pour acheter, installer et mettre en service un actif (3.1.2)
Note 1 à l'article: Pour plus d'informations concernant l'estimation des CAPEX, voir l'ISO 15663:2021, Article C.2.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.7]
3.1.8
défaillance de cause commune
défaillance de différentes entités (3.1.29), qui résulte d'une cause unique, mais auraient pu être considérées
comme indépendantes
Note 1 à l'article: Les défaillances de cause commune peuvent également être des défaillances de mode commun (3.1.9).
Note 2 à l'article: L'éventualité de défaillances de cause commune réduit l'efficacité de la redondance du système.
Note 3 à l'article: Il est généralement accepté que les défaillances se produisent simultanément ou qu'un court laps de
temps les sépare.
Note 4 à l'article: Une défaillance de cause commune affecte généralement les composants dans le même mode de
fonctionnement. Le terme mode commun est alors généralement employé. Toutefois, ce terme n'est pas considéré
comme étant assez précis pour décrire les caractéristiques d'une défaillance de cause commune.
Note 5 à l'article: Les défaillances de mode commun explicites et implicites sont définies dans l'ISO/TR 12489:2013,
5.4.2.
Note 6 à l'article: Concernant les règles d'interprétation pour les paramètres de défaillance de cause commune, voir
également l'ISO 14224:2016, C.1.6.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐03‐18, modifié — Les Notes 3 à 6 à l'article ont été ajoutées.]
3.1.9
défaillances de mode commun
défaillances des différentes entités caractérisées par le même mode de défaillance
Note 1 à l'article: Les défaillances de mode commun peuvent avoir des causes différentes.
Note 2 à l'article: Les défaillances de mode commun peuvent également être des défaillances de cause commune (3.1.8).
Note 3 à l'article: L'éventualité de défaillances de mode commun réduit l'efficacité de la redondance du système.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐03‐19]
3.1.10
surveillance structurelle
obtention d'informations relatives à l'état physique ou à des paramètres opérationnels
Note 1 à l'article: La surveillance structurelle permet de prévoir le moment où une maintenance préventive (3.1.57)
peut être requise.
Note 2 à l'article: La surveillance structurelle peut être réalisée de manière automatique pendant le fonctionnement
ou à intervalles planifiés.
Note 3 à l'article: La surveillance structurelle fait partie de la maintenance conditionnelle. Voir également
l'ISO 14224:2016, Figure 6.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐06‐28, modifié — La Note 3 à l'article d'origine a été remplacée par une
nouvelle.]
3.1.11
maintenance corrective
maintenance (3.1.36) effectuée après une détection de panne (3.1.23) pour procéder à un rétablissement
Note 1 à l'article: Voir également l'ISO/TR 12489:2013, Figures 5 et 6, qui illustrent les termes utilisés pour quantifier
la maintenance corrective.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐06‐06, modifié — La Note 1 à l'article a été remplacée.]
3.1.12
livrabilité
capacité de livraison
rapport des livraisons effectives aux livraisons prévues sur une durée spécifiée, lorsque l'effet d'éléments de
compensation tels que la substitution provenant d'autres producteurs et le stockage aval (3.1.17) en tampon
est inclus
Note 1 à l'article: Voir Figure G.1 pour de plus amples informations.
3.1.13
durée de vie de conception
durée d'utilisation planifiée pour l'ensemble du système (3.1.75)
Note 1 à l'article: Il est important de ne pas confondre la durée de vie de conception avec le temps moyen de
fonctionnement avant défaillance (MTTF) (3.1.41). Plusieurs entités peuvent connaître des défaillances au cours de la
durée de vie de conception du système. Tant que la réparation ou le remplacement sont réalisables, la durée de vie de
conception du système n'est pas affectée par ces défaillances.
Note 2 à l'article: La durée de vie de conception est déterminée pendant la phase du cycle de vie «Définir». Par
conséquent, la durée de vie de conception dans le présent document peut signifier une durée de vie qui peut changer
et qui peut être choisie en fonction des activités d'assurance production (3.1.58) ou de l'estimation des coûts globaux de
production et de traitement (3.1.30).
3.1.14
disponibilité de la demande
capacité de l'installation de production à satisfaire la demande sur une période de temps spécifiée
Note 1 à l'article: Cette mesure de la performance (3.1.51) exprime la fraction de temps ou le nombre de fois que le
volume produit qui est exporté est égal ou supérieur à la demande. Voir aussi Tableau G.1.
3.1.15
état d'indisponibilité (down state)
état ne permettant pas de fonctionner tel que requis par suite d'une panne (3.1.23) interne ou de la
maintenance préventive (3.1.57)
Note 1 à l'article: Ce concept est lié à celui d'entité binaire (3.1.6) pouvant avoir plusieurs états d'indisponibilité
formant la classe d'états d'indisponibilité de l'entité. Tous les états de la classe d'états d'indisponibilité sont considérés
équivalents en ce qui concerne l'indisponibilité de l'entité considérée.
EXEMPLE Sur la Figure 1, la classe d'indisponibilité du système S comprend seulement un état {S } et le système S
est en état d'indisponibilité à l'instant t .
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐02‐20, modifié — La Note 1 à l'article d'origine a été remplacée et la
Note 2 à l'article d'origine a été supprimée; un EXEMPLE a été ajouté.]
3.1.16
temps d'indisponibilité
intervalle de temps pendant lequel une entité (3.1.29) est en état d'indisponibilité (3.1.15)

Note 1 à l'article: Le temps d'indisponibilité comprend tous les délais survenus entre la défaillance de l'entité et sa
remise en fonctionnement. Le temps d'indisponibilité peut être programmé ou non (voir ISO 14224:2016, Tableau 4).
Note 2 à l'article: Le temps d'indisponibilité peut être lié aux équipements (voir l'ISO 14224:2016, Figure 4 et Tableau 4),
à la production (voir Figures I.1 et I.2) ou à d'autres opérations (par exemple: forage). Il est important de distinguer
le temps d'indisponibilité des équipements eux-mêmes et le temps d'indisponibilité de l'installation à laquelle les
équipements appartiennent.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐02‐21, modifié — Les Notes à l'article d'origine ont été remplacées par
de nouvelles Notes 1 et 2 à l'article.]
3.1.17
secteur aval
catégorie d'activité de l'industrie du pétrole la plus couramment utilisée pour décrire les procédés de post-
production
Note 1 à l'article: Voir l'ISO 14224:2016, A.1.4 pour de plus amples détails.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.17, modifié — L'EXEMPLE a été supprimé.]
3.1.18
défaillance
perte de la capacité à fonctionner conformément aux exigences
Note 1 à l'article: La défaillance d'une entité est un événement qui provoque une panne (3.1.23) (c'est-à-dire un état) de
cette entité. Cela est illustré à la Figure 2 pour un système binaire S comprenant deux composants redondants A et B.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐03‐01, modifié — Les Notes à l'article d'origine ont été remplacées par
une nouvelle Note 1 à l'article.]
3.1.19
cause de défaillance
cause fondamentale
ensemble de circonstances qui entraîne une défaillance (3.1.18)
Note 1 à l'article: La cause d'une défaillance peut trouver son origine pendant la spécification, la conception, la
fabrication, l'installation, l'exploitation ou la maintenance d'une entité.
Note 2 à l'article: Voir l'ISO 14224:2016, B.2.3 et le Tableau B.3, qui définissent des causes de défaillance pour toutes les
classes d'équipement.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐03‐11, modifié — La Note 2 à l'article a été ajoutée.]
3.1.20
données de défaillance
données caractérisant l'occurrence d'un événement de défaillance (3.1.18)
Note 1 à l'article: Voir l'ISO 14224:2016, Tableau 6.
[SOURCE: ISO 14224:2016, 3.25]
3.1.21
mode de défaillance
manière selon laquelle une défaillance (3.1.18) se produit
Note 1 à l'article: Voir l'ISO 14224:2016, Tableaux B.6 à B.15, sur les modes de défaillance pertinents, qui définissent les
modes de défaillance à utiliser pour chaque classe d'équipements.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐03‐17, modifié — Les Notes à l'article d'origine ont été remplacées par
une nouvelle Note 1 à l'article.]

3.1.22
taux de défaillance
probabilité conditionnelle par unité de temps pour que la défaillance de l'entité (3.1.29) se produise entre t
et t + dt, sachant que l'entité est en état de marche sur l'intervalle de temps (0, t)
Note 1 à l'article: Voir l'ISO 14224:2016, Article C.3, pour plus d'explications sur le taux de défaillance.
Note 2 à l'article: Cette définition s'applique à la première défaillance (3.1.18) des entités binaires (3.1.6).
Note 3 à l'article: En supposant que le taux de défaillance est constant et que l'entité est dans un état quasi-neuf après
les réparations, il est possible d'estimer le taux de défaillance comme étant le nombre de défaillances par rapport au
temps de disponibilité (3.1.80) cumulé correspondant, divisé par ce temps de disponibilité cumulé. Il s'agit dans ce cas
de l'inverse du MTTF (3.1.41). Dans certains cas, le temps peut être remplacé par le nombre d'utilisations.
Note 4 à l'article: L'estimation du taux de défaillance peut être basée sur le temps de fonctionnement (3.1.49) ou sur le
temps calendaire.
[SOURCE: ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.18, modifié — Le symbole «λ(t)» a été supprimé; les Notes à l'article
d'origine ont été remplacées par de nouvelles Notes 1 à 4 à l'article.]
3.1.23
panne
inaptitude à fonctionner tel que requis, due à un état interne
EXEMPLE L'état d'indisponibilité (3.1.15) des entités A, B et du système S est illustré à la Figure 2.
Note 1 à l'article: La panne d'une entité est due soit à une défaillance (3.1.18) de l'entité elle-même, soit à une
imperfection lors d'une étape précédente du cycle de vie, telle que la spécification, la conception, la fabrication ou la
maintenance. Voir «panne latente» (ISO 14224:2016, 3.44).
Note 2 à l'article: Une entité constituée de plusieurs sous-entités (par exemple: un système) qui continue de fonctionner
tel que requis en présence de pannes d'une ou plusieurs sous-entités est dite tolérante aux pannes.
Note 3 à l'article: Voir également l'ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.2.2.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐04‐01, modifié — L'EXEMPLE a été ajouté; les Notes 2 à 4 à l'article
d'origine ont été remplacées par de nouvelles Notes 2 et 3 à l'article.]
3.1.24
tolérance aux pannes
capacité d'une entité (3.1.29) à accomplir une fonction requise (3.1.69) malgré certaines pannes (3.1.23) de
ses sous-entités
3.1.25
erreur humaine
discordance entre l'action humaine effectuée ou omise et l'action prévue
EXEMPLE Action incorrecte, omission d'une action requise.
Note 1 à l'article: La discordance délibérée est considérée comme indispensable pour déterminer l'erreur humaine;
voir Référence [91].
Note 2 à l'article: Le terme «erreur humaine» est souvent attribué rétrospectivement à une décision, à une action ou à
une inaction humaine considérée comme étant un initiateur ou une cause concourante d'un résultat négatif tel qu'une
perte ou un préjudice.
Note 3 à l'article: Dans l'évaluation de la fiabilité humaine, l'erreur humaine est définie comme un élément d'un
ensemble d'actions ou d'activités humaines qui dépasse une certaine limite d'acceptabilité, cet élément étant une
action hors tolérance ou une défaillance (3.1.18) à agir lorsque les limites de performance sont définies par le système
(voir Référence [88]).
Note 4 à l'article: Voir l'IEC 62508 pour plus de détails.
Note 5 à l'article: Voir également l'ISO/TR 12489:2013, 5.5.2.

[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐03‐14, modifié — Les mots «ou requise» ont été supprimés à la fin de
la définition; dans l'EXEMPLE, «calcul erroné, mauvaise interprétation d'une valeur» a été supprimé; les
Notes 1 à 5 à l'article ont été ajoutées.]
3.1.26
disponibilité instantanée
A(t)
probabilité pour qu'une entité (3.1.29) soit en état de fonctionner tel que requis à un instant donné
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐08‐01, modifié — Le terme admis «point availability» a été supprimé
dans la version en anglais; le symbole «A(t)» a été ajouté.]
3.1.27
intégrité
condition dans laquelle un actif (3.1.2) est sûr et fiable pour l'usage auquel il est destiné
Note 1 à l'article: Pour certaines applications, des termes et définitions plus spécifiques existent, tels que l'intégrité
des actifs (voir l'ISO/TS 3250:2021, 3.1.2), l'intégrité mécanique, l'intégrité des installations, l'intégrité de la sécurité
(voir l'ISO/TR 12489:2013, 3.1.2), l'intégrité structurelle (voir l'ISO/DIS 19900:20—, 3.58) , l'intégrité du système,
l'intégrité technique et l'intégrité du puits (voir l'ISO/DIS 16530:20—, 3.73) . Ces termes relatifs à l'intégrité
peuvent couvrir diverses conséquences de défaillance (3.1.18) (par exemple, sécurité, environnement, production et
exploitation; voir l'ISO 14224:2016, Tableau C.2).
Note 2 à l'article: L'intégrité est également définie pour une utilisation dans la gestion de l'intégrité (3.1.28) des
conduites pour les infrastructures de gaz à terre dans l'EN 17649:2022, 3.7. voir également DNV-ST-F101:2017 et
l'ISO 19345-1:2019, 3.1.32.
Note 3 à l'article: L'intégrité peut être exprimée mathématiquement en utilisant des mesures de la performance (3.1.51)
spécifiques comme décrit à l'Annexe G.
[SOURCE: EN 17649:2022, 3.7, modifié — Les Notes 1 à 3 à l'article ont été ajoutées.]
3.1.28
gestion de l'intégrité
ensemble de processus et de procédures utilisés pour gérer de manière proactive le service sûr, respectueux
de l'environnement et fiable d'un actif (3.1.2) tout au long de son cycle de vie
Note 1 à l'article: Le programme de gestion de l'intégrité couvre un ensemble de processus et de pratiques utilisés
dans la gestion de la fiabilité (3.1.68). Voir par exemple l'ISO 19345-1:2019, 3.1.21.
3.1.29
entité
sujet que l'on considère
Note 1 à l'article: L'entité peut être une pièce isolée, un composant, un dispositif, une unité fonctionnelle, un
équipement, un sous-système ou un système.
Note 2 à l'article: L'entité peut être composée de matériel, de logiciel, de personnel ou d'une quelconque de leurs
combinaisons.
Note 3 à l'article: Dans le présent document, une entité peut également désigner une unité ou une installation. Voir
l'ISO 14224:2016, Figure 3.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐01‐01, modifié — Dans la Note 1 à l'article, «matériau», «produit» et
«service ou procédé» ont été supprimés; dans la Note 2 à l'article, «can» a été remplacé par «may» dans la
version anglaise; la Note 3 à l'article a été ajoutée.]
3.1.30
estimation des coûts globaux de production et de traitement
processus d'évaluation de la différence entre les coûts du cycle de vie de deux options possibles ou plus
Note 1 à l'article: L'estimation des coûts globaux de production et de traitement peut impliquer une évaluation
quantitative et qualitative.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.27, modifié — La Note 1 à l'article a été ajustée.]
3.1.31
phase du cycle de vie
étape distincte du cycle de vie associée à une finalité spécifiée
Note 1 à l'article: Les différentes phases du cycle de vie sont décrites plus en détail dans l'ISO 15663:2021, 4.5.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.28]
3.1.32
délai logistique
délai, hors délai administratif, consacré à se procurer les ressources nécessaires pour entreprendre ou
poursuivre une tâche de maintenance
Note 1 à l'article: Les délais logistiques peuvent être dus, par exemple, à des déplacements vers des installations non
surveillées, à l'attente de l'arrivée de pièces de rechange, de spécialistes, d'équipements de test ou d'informations ou à
des conditions d'environnement non appropriées (par exemple, l'attente de conditions météorologiques appropriées).
Note 2 à l'article: Voir également l'ISO/TR 12489:2013, Figure 5.
[SOURCE: IEC 60050‐192:2015, 192‐07‐13, modifié — La NOTE d'origine a été remplacée par les nouvelles
Notes 1 et 2 à l'article.]
3.1.33
revenu perdu
LOSTREV
perte de revenu qui est observée lorsque le revenu généré est inférieur au revenu attendu en raison de
facteurs externes ou internes
Note 1 à l'article: Les catégories de pertes de production (3.1.61) sont définies dans l'ISO/TS 3250:2021. Les catégories
de pertes de temps sont décrites à l'Article G.3.
[SOURCE: ISO 15663:2021, 3.1.29, modifié — Les Notes 1 et 2 à l'article d'origine ont été remplacées par la
nouvelle Note 1 à l'article.]
3.1.34
maintenabilité
aptitude à être maintenu ou rétabli dans un état permettant de fonctionner tel que requis, dans des
conditions données d'utilisation et de maintenance (3.1.36)
Note 1 à l'article: Les conditions données incluent notamment les aspects ayant un impact sur la maintenabilité, tels
que: l'emplacement de maintenance, l'accessibilité, les procédures et les ressources de maintenance.
Note 2 à l'article: La maintenabilité peut être quantifiée à l'aide de mesures appropriées. Voir IEC 60050‐192:2015,
192-07, Maintenabilité et logistique de maintenance: mesures.
Note 3 à l'article: Voir Figure G.1 p
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.

Loading comments...