Feeds:
Posts
Comments

BOE contributor John Smith has shared (attached) his highlighted version of the 89 page California Coastal Commission staff report recommending imposition of a $15 million fine

John finds it noteworthy that the report documents that Santa Barbara County did not concur with the CCC, and that the California State Lands Commission approved the span remediation work. John thinks this raises legitimate questions as to whether the CCC is overreaching in terms of asserting permitting authority for the repair and maintenance work. 

John thinks it will be interesting to see how the Courts rule on this and expects an appeal regardless of the outcome. He points to the Court ruling against the CCC on Pismo Beach offroading case as being pertinent to the Sable-CCC dispute. (“Is the Friends of Oceano Dunes court victory a good omen for Sable?“)

In particular, note the text John has highlighted in green. These issues will likely be central to the Court deliberations.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-3.png

The 2024 Gulf of America Safety Compliance Leaders are ranked below according to the number of incidents of non-compliance (INCs) per facility inspection. To be ranked, a company must:

  • operate at least 2 production platforms
  • have drilled at least 2 wells during the year
  • average <1 INC for every 3 facility inspections (0.33 INCs/facility inspection)
  • average <1 INC for every 10 inspections (0.1 INCs/inspection). Note that each facility inspection may include multiple types of inspections (e.g. production, pipeline, pollution, Coast Guard, site security, etc). In 2024, there were on average 3.4 inspections for every facility inspection.

This ranking is based solely on BSEE’s published compliance data. The absence of timely public information on safety incidents (e.g. injuries, fires, pollution, gas releases, property damage) precludes inclusion of these data.

District investigation reports are more timely and provide additional insights into safety performance. Impressively, Hess had no incidents warranting a District investigation, and was the only ranked operator with this distinction. I will comment more on the District reports in a future post

Chevron’s 2024 compliance record was among the best in the history of the US OCS oil and gas program. Was it the absolute best? Were it not for the FSI INC at a Unocal (Chevron) facility, one could unequivocally assert that it was. Further evaluation of that INC would be helpful. However, details on specific INCs are not publicly available, so the significance of that violation cannot be evaluated.

operatorWCSIFSItotal INCsfacility inspINCs/
fac insp
inspINCs/
insp
Chevron10121170.023110.006
BP2305930.052510.02
Anadarko891181430.133440.05
Hess2305260.19670.07
Walter64111500.221610.07
Shell23175451990.234950.09
Cantium2480321230.265370.06
Murphy89118700.261910.09
Arena29283601890.328030.07
Gulf-wide957398109146431330.47106640.14
Notes: Numbers are from published BSEE data; INC=incident of non-compliance; W=warning INC; CSI=component shut-in INC; FSI=facility shut-in INC; INCs/fac insp= INCs issued per facility inspection; each facility-inspection may include multiple types of inspections (e.g. production, pipeline, pollution, Coast Guard, site security, etc), in 2024, there were on average 3.4 inspections for every facility inspection

Not meeting the production facilities requirement to be ranked among the top performers, but nonetheless noteworthy, was the compliance record of BOE Exploration & Production (no relation to the BOE blog 😀). See their impressive inspection results below:

WCSIFSItotal INCsfacility inspINCs/
fac insp
inspINCs/
insp
BOE1102210.1480.04

Transparency on inspections and incidents is important for a program that is dependent on public confidence. For independent observers to better evaluate industry-wide and company-specific safety performance, publication of the following information should be considered:

  • quarterly updates of the incident tables, as was once common practice
  • posting of violation summaries for inspections resulting in the issuance of one or more INCs
  • more timely publication of panel reports for more serious incidents
  • real time list of ongoing investigations including the reason for each investigation
  • status summary for civil penalties that have been proposed, including the violations and responsible parties

Santa Ynez Unit items (thanks to John Smith for the links):

Cuts in carbon capture spending coming? These are cuts that both climate activists and skeptics can support.

In a peer reviewed paper, AI (Grok-3) debunks the man-made climate crisis narrative.

Doug Burgum: Hydraulic fracturing technology is “one of the reasons why the U.S. shale revolution is a miracle. But that miracle keeps on getting better and better. It’s the thing that has literally turned around the economy.” Posted here 15 years ago: Natural Gas Bonanza – Why Aren’t We Celebrating?

Scores are for the moment; attitude and teamwork are for a lifetime

Every year since 1978, Safety in Seas Awards have been presented at NOIA’s Annual Meeting. This is the world’s oldest, and in my opinion, most prestigious safety award program for the offshore energy industry.

Last week NOIA presented the Safety Practices Award to Proceanic and the Culture of Safety Award to Seacor Marine. These comments from NOIA President Erik Milito sum up the selections nicely:

“The Safety in Seas awards spotlight an industry-wide truth: safety isn’t just a priority—it’s the heartbeat of what we do. SEACOR Marine and Proceanic exemplify this ethos with extraordinary resolve. SEACOR’s relentless safety culture, driven by innovative tools and a zero-incident vision, and Proceanic’s pioneering Mini-ROV inspections, safeguarding lives and assets with remarkable precision, reflect the best of our collective mission. Their leadership amplifies a broader tide of excellence, where every company, every worker, and every breakthrough pushes us toward a safer, stronger offshore future. We honor them, and we extend our deepest gratitude to all entrants—each one a vital contributor to a safer, more resilient offshore industry.”

As a Safety in Seas judge for many years, I can assure you that the selections are based solely on the award criteria and supporting data, and that the process is free from interference or campaigning. As is normally the case, there were many outstanding nominations.

I recommend that you review NOIA’s announcement for more information. You may also want to contact the companies directly to learn more about their safety programs. Industry adaptability is one of the selection criteria for both awards.

Great people who were dedicated to the OCS program’s safety, environmental, and resource management missions! Much wisdom was shared! 😉

The announcement was during an interview this morning (4/4/2025) with Lawrence Jones on Fox News, and is consistent with expectations and the current 5 year leasing plan.

A letter from Congressman Chris Smith (NJ) to Sec. Burgum is attached. Excerpt:

I am writing to advise you that Equinor, a Norwegian Energy multinational is planning to move forward with construction of its Empire Wind 1 project off the coast of New Jersey and New York as early as this April.
This is an alarming development and should not be allowed before the comprehensive review of offshore wind ordered by President Trump’s January 20th executive order is completed. The executive order states that the assessment is needed to review the many shortcomings of the Federal wind leasing process including, “potential inadequacies in various environmental reviews required by the National Environmental Policy Act.”

Meanwhile, Norwegian investors have expressed dissatisfaction with Equinor’s renewable energy ventures. This Norwegian article raises concerns about Empire Wind 1, saying the project “could become a new industrial scandal.”

Based on the respective financial performance of oil producers, I think it’s fair to say that investors aren’t attracted to those companies because of their wind projects.

It’s starting to look that way.

The State Fire Marshal stated on February 25 — during a packed-house meeting at La Cumbre Junior High School — that he would not issue Sable authorization to restart production at the Santa Ynez Unit until all outstanding permit issues between Sable and the eight state agencies with oversight authority are resolved.

Although Sable has a good defense against the Coastal Commission’s accusations, that statement by the Fire Marshal is ominous.

More bad news for Sable: The Center for Biological Diversity suit challenging the Federal government’s extension of the 16 Santa Ynez Unit leases is not going well. The government requested a voluntary remand of BSEE’s 2023 approval because “BSEE plans to reconsider its decision in light of Plaintiffs’ claims and conduct additional analysis, as warranted, under OCSLA and NEPA.”

In the attached decision, shared by John Smith, the judge denied the Federal government’s request. This does not bode well for the Federal government’s case going forward.