Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘accidents’ Category

WA’s Mines and Petroleum Minister, Norman Moore, is firmly opposed to the Federal proposal for a single national regulator.

We are yet to be persuaded by this, or any other report, that a national regulator would be the way to go. Norman Moore

 

Read Full Post »

Montara Blowout - Timor Sea

Our virtual vigil is over.  I awoke to messages from Odd, Anthea, and Kevin that the day had finally arrived – the Montara Report has been released. Not only do we have the Inquiry report, but also the government’s response and PTTEP’s action plan.  We’ll be digesting this over the next few days (along with a turkey dinner), but below are a few key items (direct quotes from the government’s response) that are likely to be of interest to BOE readers:

  • To create a single national regulator the Government will expand the functions of the existing National Offshore Petroleum Safety Authority (NOPSA) to include regulation of structural integrity, environment plans and day-to-day operations associated with petroleum activities in Commonwealth waters. There is a fundamental connection between the integrity of structures, the safety of people, and protection of the environment. The expanded authority – to be named the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA) – will also regulate safety, integrity and environment plans for minerals extraction and greenhouse gas storage activities in Commonwealth waters.
  • In recognition of the global nature of the offshore petroleum industry, and Australia’s increasingly important role, the Government intends to host an international conference for governments, regulators and the offshore petroleum industry to share the lessons from Montara and to learn from the experience of other nations. The conference will beheld in Australia during 2011.
  • An important feature of objective-based regulation is that it encourages continuous improvement rather than acompliance mentality. It is essential that a regulatory system encourage the creator of the risk to move beyond minimum standards in a continuous effort for improvement, and not just accept the minimum standard. The risk of specific standards is that they can shift the burden of responsibility from the operator to the government and stifleinnovation. The Australian objective-based regime retains the focus clearly on the operator to evaluate risk andachieve fit for purpose design in order to reduce risk to ‘as low as reasonably practicable’.

Read Full Post »

This well-written draft report is fascinating reading for those who closely followed the various attempts to contain and kill the Macondo well.

A couple of concerns:

  1. The report relies heavily on anecdotes and qualitative judgments attributed to unnamed individuals. For example, twelve sources are cited in the footnotes on page 6, but only one is mentioned by name.  No information is provided about the qualifications or responsibilities of the unnamed sources, so it is difficult to assess the significance of their comments.
  2. The narrative ends rather abruptly without any discussion about the decision to continue with the relief well after the successful static kill operation.  The report simply states that BP proceeded with the relief well to finally kill Macondo.  As indicated previously on BOE, this is not entirely accurate. Macondo was already killed, and the well could have been secured through conventional plugging and abandonment procedures.  The relief well was presumably continued to verify that the annulus was sealed and provide information that might be useful as part of the investigation.  However, the relief well did not kill the well and the intercept was not necessary for that purpose.

Read Full Post »

Deepwater Horizon

Nothing new, but a but a very good Macondo commentary by Bill Campell, a retired Shell employee. Worth reading.

In my opinion this event is not so much about the well as designed but the well as installed. Installing a well is similar to any other civil engineering project in that what is installed has to be tested or commissioned before it is put into use, just as you would test a vessel or pipeline designed to contain hydrocarbons under pressure.   Wells, which are discovered to have a problem during integrity tests indicating for example a connection between the well and the reservoir, are worked over to rectify the problem and in a few hours after remedial activities have been undertaken, the integrity testing is re-commenced. Bill Campbell

Read Full Post »

The Petroleum Safety Authority of Norway has commented on Statoil’s report on the well control incident at Gullfaks C:

The PSA regards the incident as very serious. It involved the lengthy loss of a barrier. Only chance averted a sub-surface blowout and/or explosion, and prevented the incident from developing into a major accident.

PSA had directed Statoil to do the following:

  1. To review and assess compliance with the work processes established to safeguard the quality and robustness of the well construction process on Gullfaks. This must include an investigation of why important deficiencies were not picked up during the work. Necessary improvement measures related to the work processes and their use must be identified and implemented.
  2. To conduct an independent assessment of why measures adopted after earlier incidents, including the gas blowout on Snorre A in 2004 with similar causes, have not had the desired effect on Gullfaks. Based on the results of this work, the company must assess the need for and implement new and tailored improvement measures on Gullfaks.
  3. To assess the results of the work done under items 1 and 2 and – on that basis – implement measures in the rest of the company.
  4. To prepare a binding plan for the way this work is to be executed and followed up. This plan must be submitted to the PSA.

Read Full Post »

FILE - In this Nov. 4, 2010 file photo, firefighters ...

Sound familiar?:

The amount of failures is unprecedented,” said Richard Woodward, a fellow Qantas A380 pilot who has spoken to all five pilots. There is probably a one in 100 million chance to have all that go wrong.”

But it did.

Solution:

What we have got to ensure is that systems are separated so that no single point of failure can damage a system completely, Woodward said. In this situation the wiring in the leading edge of the wing was cut. That lost multiple systems.

Yahoo link

Read Full Post »

Judge Wells’ report is quite expansive in a way that may be unprecedented for a helicopter accident review.  His commission delves into cultural and organizational issues and regulatory philosophy. Consistent with the international trend, the commission recommends a separate safety authority (page 302):

It is recommended that a new, independent, and stand alone Safety Regulator be established to regulate safety in the C-NL offshore. Such a Safety Regulator would have to be established, mandated, and funded by both Governments by way of legislative amendment, regulation, or memorandum ofunderstanding, or other means.

In his background remarks, Judge Wells makes this comment on regulatory culuture:

I have come to believe that regulation to be effective must encompass more than a list of do’s and don’ts. It must set in place and lead an inclusive regime of many players, some very important, others less so. All the available knowledge, skills, and wisdom of all participant sshould be harnessed in the safety cause.

Read Full Post »

Robert Wells

On March 12, 2009, 17 lives were lost when a Sikorsky S-92-A helicopter crashed offshore Newfoundland.  The helicopter was en route to the Sea Rose FPSO via the Hibernia platform. The Honorable Robert Wells, a very impressive judge who spoke at the Vancouver regulators conference, directed an official inquiry into the aspects of the crash that were not related to the helicopter’s airworthiness.  The airworthiness issues are being investigated by the Canadian aviation authorities. Mr. Wells’ report was released today. If you don’t have time to read the entire report, I suggest that you go to the recommendations beginning on page 289 of volume 1.

Passengers boarding an S-92A helicopter

Read Full Post »

Link

The National Academy of Engineering and the National Research Council have released the interim report of the Committee on the Analysis of Causes of the Deepwater Horizon Explosion, Fire, and Oil Spill to Identify Measures to Prevent Similar Accidents in the Future. The interim report includes the committee’s preliminary findings and observations on various actions and decisions including well design, cementing operations, well monitoring, and well control actions. The interim report also considers management, oversight, and regulation of offshore operations.

Comment: No significant surprises.

Read Full Post »

In conveying our deep condolences and solidarity to the United States Government and while sharing in the anguish of those whose livelihoods had been seriously affected, I asked that the report ofthe investigation into the accident be submitted to IMO as soon as possible after it has been concluded, so that we may move swiftly to introduce, into the regulatory regime of the Organization, whatever lessons may be learned from the incident in order to enhance safetyand environmental protection in the offshore industry and strengthen, should that prove necessary, the provisions of any relevant IMO instrument. Remarks by Secretary-General Efthimios Mitropoulos

The Secretary-General seems to be committed to an expanded role for IMO in regulating offshore oil and gas facilities.  Questions:

  1. Is an organization with a shipping history and culture the right body to be regulating drilling and production operations? While IMO has experience with mobile drilling units, primarily the vessel aspects, the organization has had little or no involvement with well construction and integrity, production operations or pipelines.
  2. What would an expanded IMO role  mean for existing offshore regulators and their cooperative efforts (primarily through the International Regulators’ Forum) to coordinate activities and improve safety performance?  Generally speaking, the principal safety regulators for offshore facilities have had a very limited role in IMO activities.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »