Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Offshore Energy – General’ Category

Sec. 12(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA, 43 U.S. Code § 1341(a)): “The President of the United States may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the outer Continental Shelf.”

As previously posted, the Sec. 12(a) authority has been cynically exercised by Presidents from both parties and should be repealed or revised.

Unsurprisingly, there are now reports that President Biden intends to permanently withdraw large areas of the OCS from leasing consideration before he leaves office in 2 weeks. Apparently, the leasing ban will include large segments of the Atlantic, Pacific, and the eastern Gulf of Mexico.

Sec. 12(a) facilitates (encourages?) rash, politically motivated decisions that could have major long-term implications for energy security and the economy, and allows Presidents to ignore the deliberate, multi-phase review and comment process that has been established for making leasing decisions.

Note that Presidents have exercised this authority seven times. In every case, the action was taken just prior to the end of the President’s term in office.

Questions:

  • Can a President reverse a Sec. 12(a) decision made by a predecessor? That is a massive legal question that has yet to be fully considered by the legal system.
  • Could legislative action reverse a Sec. 12(a) decision? Yes, but such legislative action would be difficult to enact (just as it would have been difficult for any of the Sec. 12(a) withdrawals to have been enacted legislatively).
  • Is a revision to Sec. 12(a) being considered? Not that I am aware of. Given that the authority has been exercised by both parties and that strong opposition is likely, a revision would be challenging.

Related:

Read Full Post »

Following the 200,000 bopd decline in Sept. because of Tropical Storms Francine and Helene, Oct. GoM oil production was once again in the normal range for 2024. With the exception of Sept., average 2024 production has been remarkably consistent from month to month.

Read Full Post »

In honor of President Carter:

Opinions on Jimmy Carter’s presidency vary, but he merits praise for his administration of the OCS program from 1/1977 to 1/1981. Carter oversaw an active leasing program in all OCS regions. On the operations side, he appointed Don Kash to head the Conservation Division of the US Geological Survey, the OCS regulator at the time. Dr. Kash was an outstanding leader and a gifted communicator and program manager.

Some of the Carter administration’s impressive accomplishments during his 4 year term:

  • 15 lease sales including 3 offshore Alaska, 3 in the Atlantic, and 1 offshore California
  • Drilling activity in all 4 regions: GoM, Pacific, Alaska, and Atlantic
  • Natural gas discovery in the Mid Atlantic (Hudson Canyon Unit)
  • North, Mid, and South Atlantic District offices for permitting and inspections
  • 5300 well starts including 97 in water depths > 1000′
  • 314 new platforms including Cognac, the world’s first platform in > 1000′ of water
  • Comprehensive amendments to the OCS Lands Act (1978)
  • Annual natural gas production reached nearly 5 tcf (approximately 6 times current OCS gas production)
  • Annual oil production was approximately 1/2 current levels which is impressive given that the deepwater era was just beginning and shelf wells had relatively low productivity.

Thank you Jimmy. RIP.

Read Full Post »

Per a provision in the “Inflation Reduction Act,no offshore wind leases may be issued after 12/20/2024, the one year anniversary of the last oil and gas lease sale (no. 261).

Although the 4 leases receiving bids at the most recent wind sale (10/29/2024, Gulf of Maine) have presumably been issued, BOEM’s lease table does not reflect that. If those leases have not been issued, it’s too late now.

Assuming that the Gulf of Maine leases have in fact already been issued, the legislative restriction on issuing new leases should not be an issue. A qualifying oil and gas lease sale will likely be held in the Gulf of Mexico in the first half of 2025.

The bigger question is whether the new administration will hold any wind lease sales. Pre-election energy policy comments imply that new wind sales are unlikely.

Read Full Post »

33 years before Elon and Vivek’s DOGE, there was the Clinton-Gore Government efficiency initiative known as the National Performance Review, aka the National Partnership for Reinventing Government (NPR).

President Clinton (March 3, 1992): “Our goal is to make the entire federal government less expensive and more efficient, and to change the culture of our national bureaucracy away from complacency and entitlement toward initiative and empowerment.” 

Al Gore led this effort with gusto. While not revolutionary, the NPR was quite successful in streamlining government programs. VP Gore presented symbolic and prestigious “Hammer Awards” (image above) to initiatives that were judged to have accomplished the NPR objectives:

  • put customers first
  • cut red tape
  • empower employees
  • get back to basics

My Division in the Minerals Management was one of the few government offices to be honored with two hammers. Kudos to Bill Hauser and Kumkum Ray for leading these two efforts:

  • reducing the pressure test frequency for blowout preventers after completing a detailed statistical analysis demonstrating that there would be no increase in failure risk.
  • simplifying the operating regulations and rewriting the text in plain, easy-to-understand English.

Who would have thought Al Gore, Elon Musk, and Vivek Ramaswamy had so much in common? 😉

Read Full Post »

Addressing regulatory fragmentation will improve efficiency and lower costs for industry and government while reducing safety and environmental risks.

Unfortunately, the regulatory regime for US offshore oil and gas operations is noteworthy for redundancy, uncertainty, and complexity that divert industry and governmental attention from safety and environmental protection objectives to administrative processes, interpretations, and jurisdictional boundaries.

“Poster Child” for regulatory fragmentation?

The 12 Federal entities that have some OCS regulatory responsibilities are identified in the above chart. The organizations with core regulatory roles are included in the overlapping circles. The responsibilities of BOEM and BSEE are so inextricably intertwined that those bureaus occupy the same circle.

Coastal states also have OCS regulatory roles through authority granted in the Coastal Zone Management Act.

When multiple agencies have jurisdiction over a facility, system, or procedure, the redundancy inevitably results in inconsistency, ambiguity, and gaps in oversight. The focus of operating companies and contractors is diverted from safety and risk management to understanding and satisfying the regulators. The inevitable result is a compliance mentality that weakens the safety culture.

Interagency agreements in the form of MOUs and MOAs, which are ostensibly for the purpose of managing redundancy, are often unclear or inconclusive. They tend to be more for the benefit of the agencies than the regulated industry. The interests of the regulators and protecting turf are paramount.

Regulatory fragmentation was a contributing factor to the two most fatal US OCS incidents in the past 35 years, the 2010 Macondo blowout and the South Pass 60 “B” fire and explosion in 1989.

Solutions:

  • Where legislation is not required (e.g. BOEM and BSEE), use executive orders to combine and streamline the regulatory functions.
  • Where agencies have separate legislative authority, establish a lead regulator by executive order pending corrective legislation. Under the EO, the agencies would function as a joint authority under the direction of the lead regulator.
  • A combined BOEM/BSEE would be the logical choice for leading the joint authority given that OCS energy is their sole focus and they are accountable for the success of OCS programs.
  • Use a management system regulatory approach that holistically considers all of the legislatively enacted regulatory objectives.
  • Increase the attention given to regulator and operator performance in terms of both outcomes and efficiency.
  • Reduce and simplify permitting requirements for operating companies that have demonstrated outstanding safety and environmental performance over a sustained period.
  • See the findings and recommendations from the 2010 Vancouver IRF Conference.

 

 

Read Full Post »

W&T (lease and facility map above) claims that insurers have colluded to damage the company by jointly demanding additional collateral and premiums.

Comments on excerpts from the W&T press release follow:

At the heart of the dispute are rules from the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management – BOEM – which require energy producers in the Outer Continental Shelf to provide a bond to pay for well, platform, pipeline and facilities cleanup if the operating company fails to do so.”

Comment: Despite disagreeing with aspects of the BOEM financial assurance rule, this blog has defended the rule against unfair criticism. Better solutions are achievable, but that will require industry leaders from all factions to come to the table with a commitment to reach a balanced agreement that protects the public interest.

“These insurance companies and their unreasonable demands for increased collateral pose an existential threat to independent operators like W&T.”

Comment: If insuring offshore decommissioning is so risk-free and lucrative, why aren’t other companies entering the market?

Several states, including Texas, are challenging the BOEM rule and in one case they specifically cite W&T as an example of how the rule could be misused to irreparably harm energy producers.

Comment: As previously posted, the concerned States should propose alternative solutions that would promote production while also protecting taxpayer interests. Arguing that decommissioning financial risks are not a problem is neither accurate nor a solution.

“In over 70 years of producer operations in the Gulf of Mexico, the federal government has never been forced to pay for any abandonment cleanup operations associated with well, platform facility, or pipeline operations.”

Comment: Shamefully, from the standpoints of both the offshore industry and the Federal government, that statement is no longer true. The taxpayer has now funded decommissioning operations in the Matagorda Island Area offshore Texas (BSEE photo below) and more significant decommissioning liabilities loom.

Other thoughts:

Read Full Post »

Timeframe for government and industry actions following the 2005 hurricane season.

  

Optimally, the regulator establishes clear objectives for the operating companies and a schedule for achieving those objectives. This approach was demonstrated with great success following the 2005 hurricane season (Katrina and Rita) when numerous mooring system and other stationkeeping issues were identified.

Minerals Management Service Director Johnnie Burton sent a letter (attachment 1) to industry leaders calling for a face-to-face meeting with Department of the Interior Secretary Gale Norton. The Secretary outlined her concerns and informed offshore operators that there would be no drilling from moored mobile drilling units or jackup rigs during the next hurricane season until the issues identified during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were addressed.

The collaborative effort that followed was a resounding success (2nd attachment). In addition to addressing station keeping concerns, a comprehensive list of hurricane issues was developed. Industry and government then worked together to assess mitigations and develop new standards and procedures. The essential MODU standards were completed before the 2006 hurricane season, and all of the related concerns were effectively addressed prior to the 2009 hurricane season. Had the government elected to promulgate regulations to address all of these issues, much of this work would have never been completed.

Read Full Post »

The attached BSEE document provides guidance for determining pollution inspection frequencies for unmanned facilities. Thoughts:

  • Reasonable risk-based approach
  • A minimum of bi-weekly visual and physical inspections for low risk platforms producing dry gas
  • Any platform with significant oil production and storage, and no real time monitoring system, will have to be visually inspected at least every 3 days (daily if other risk factors apply) and boarded weekly
  • Any platform that had spillage totaling > 1 bbl in the past 2 years will have to be visually inspected every other day and boarded weekly.
  • Provides for the application of technology (cameras, drones, innovative monitoring systems) to reduce inspection frequencies.

Read Full Post »

No bids for the 3 large North Sea tracts (yellow) west of Denmark.

Danish Energy Agency: “The deadline for bidding on the first 3 GW of Denmark’s 6 GW offshore wind tendering procedure expired on Thursday. The Danish Energy Agency has not received bids for any of the three offshore wind farms in the North Sea put out to tender. The Minister for Climate, Energy, and Utilities has asked The Danish Energy Agency to engage in dialogue with the market to identify why no bids have been submitted.

Even Orsted, which is 50.1% Danish govt owned, failed to submit a bid. Perhaps the economic realities of offshore wind, as reflected in Orsted’s share price (below) are sinking in.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »