Here's a bleeding load of steaming alphabet soup for you

See if you can make any sense of this nonsense from A(BS)!

ABS introduces new standards and notations for drillships and MODU’s

Responding to the increased technical sophistication of drillships and other mobile offshore drilling units and with the greater regulatory oversight of offshore drilling, ABS has developed new classification standards and notations intended to provide MODU operators with increased confidence that their operations are being conducted to the highest demonstrable standards.

“ABS is the leading provider of classification services to the offshore sector,” said ABS President and CEO Christopher J. Wiernicki. “We have been talking with the industry, regulators and others with related interests. This has helped us to clearly define existing standards that can be improved, and to also identify those new areas that would benefit from having an independent, third party set of standards that properly address the new technologies that are being incorporated into the latest designs of drillships, semis and jackups.”

That research has indicated a broad range of both design and operational aspects that warrant additional guidance, according to Ken Richardson, ABS Vice President, Energy Development. “Obviously enhanced standards for the classification of drilling systems are key components,” he noted, “but operators are also looking for a more holistic approach to the maintenance of their assets and we have developed new notations that can be used by an operator to demonstrate the effectiveness of their maintenance programs.”

Richardson also emphasized the need, expressed by many of the ABS MODU operators, for an effective independent standard that addresses the integration of the ubiquitous, and increasingly complex, software programs that are essential for the operation of the unit as a whole. “The offshore sector has always been a leader in developing and adopting new technologies and novel concepts,” Richardson added. “There is a lot of innovative thinking that goes into the development of the individual components that are brought together in the modern drillship. The key to the safe and seamless operation of the unit is the ability of all these components to function together in a manner that can be controlled by the operational team on board. That is the basis of a lot of our research and the development of our new software notations.”

New notations that have been developed by ABS for the drilling sector include Integrated Software Quality Management (ISQM), Systems Verification (SV), DRILLSHIP, Asset Integrity Management (AIM) and Rapid Response Damage Assessment (RRDA). Existing notations that have been enhanced include Classification of Drilling Systems (CDS), Hull Inspection and Maintenance Program (HIMP), Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM), and Environmental Protection (ENVIRO-OS).

ISQM is a risk-based software development and maintenance process built on internationally recognized standards. The ISQM process validates the software installation on the unit and then monitors for consistency when there are software updates or a change in hardware. ISQM provides a process to manage software over the offshore unit’s life.

“There is growing recognition within industry that organizations will need to institute a change management process for software,” says Bret Montaruli, ABS Vice President, Offshore Technology. “Industry has traditionally focused on structures and equipment. However, software has become such an important component in the operational phase particularly since control systems for offshore installations and units become more complex. Successful implementation relies heavily on the integration of software developed by multiple vendors.”

The ABS ISQM Guide places emphasis on the verification and validation of the multiple software packages. The benefit to owners and operators is an increased level of confidence in software reliability with the goal of decreasing downtime and reducing the risk of software related incidents."

The SV notation allows operators to benefit from verifying that the software has been developed in a recognized process that meets the operator’s needs and performs as expected. Upgrades and new releases that are routinely made by vendors and which may introduce errors into the system and increase downtime or cause other operating problems are also subject to verification prior to installation.

Award of the DRILLSHIP notation indicates that the vessel has been designed and constructed to the standards contained in the Guide for Drillships. As the principal classification society for drillships, ABS is taking the lessons learned and is clarifying the criteria for these specialized vessels.

Asset Integrity Management is a concept that is well established within the offshore sector and has received renewed attention. “Operators are looking for third party confirmation that the day to day maintenance and management of their units conforms to a clear, industry accepted standard and the new ABS AIM notation provides them with such verification,” says Richardson. “It builds on the existing Hull Inspection and maintenance Program (HIMP) requirements that several operators have adopted, taking a more holistic approach to the overall management of the MODU.” A key element of this is the addition of a state-of-the-art loads and configuration approach that provides the operator with a tool to better understand the operational loads to which the unit is subject.

While HIMP is directed at the inspection and maintenance of the unit’s structure, the companion Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) notation addresses the manner in which the machinery and equipment on board the unit is maintained, including replacement and repair strategies that are pre-emptive in their approach.

The ABS RRDA program and notation is a well established offering within the shipping industry and has now been enhanced and made available to offshore operators. “The technical assessment of an offshore structure can be much more complex than for a ship such as a tanker,” explains ABS Chief Technology Officer Todd Grove. “Many offshore units are unique in their architecture so that the necessary modeling of the unit is similarly complex and the programs must be specifically tailored to the unit. Incidents affecting offshore units over the recent past have highlighted the importance of having the ability to quickly evaluate the unit in the damaged condition so that pro-active response strategies can be implemented that may be able to stabilize the situation preventing or minimizing the possibility of loss of life or ensuing pollution.”

ABS has offered the voluntary CDS notation for many years. ABS has revisited the standards with industry and other interested parties to identify those areas that should be strengthened or clarified. The newly issued Guide for the Classification of Drilling Systems includes these enhanced standards and takes a more holistic approach to the entire drilling system from the drill floor to the wellhead including the blow out preventer.

The ENVIRO-OS or ENVIRO-OS+ denotes adherence to enhanced standards for environmental protection. The notation takes into account procedures and requirements for ballast water and sewage management, anti-fouling applications, airborne pollutant discharges, fuel oil and the use of exhaust gas cleaning systems, refrigerants and the Green Passport for ship recycling.

Every bit of this is just ridiculous until the day that the industry wakes up to the fact that a modern 6th generation rig is so complex that it requires highly educated & skilled personnel to operate them. To this day, the drilling companies do not require degrees higher that high school to be held by anyone working on the rig floor. A driller “should be” both degreed and licensed to be in that position just any officer on the bridge or in the ECR. That level of knowledge of the technology must change first before any meaningful changes will happen with special notations granted by some class society.

[QUOTE=c.captain;49515]Every bit of this is just ridiculous until the day that the industry wakes up to the fact that a modern 6th generation rig is so complex that it requires [U][I][B]highly educated[/B][/I][/U] & skilled personnel to operate them. To this day, the drilling companies do not require degrees higher that high school to be held by anyone working on the rig floor. A driller “should be” both degreed and licensed to be in that position just any officer on the bridge or in the ECR. That level of knowledge of the technology must change first before any meaningful changes will happen with special notations granted by some class society.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for posting that, it’s a little buzzword heavy but basically ABS is selling cover for the big boys. ABS can safely do this because the force of any offshore explosion is so dissipated by distance, layers of bureaucracy and goobly gook that no one ashore will be hurt in any case.

Your point about training seems reasonable, my knowledge of the oil industry is all second hand however.

I watched a safety movie years ago about the oil industry in the North Sea. They have seen dramatic improvements in their safety record. One of the points I recall was the Step Change in Safety which I leaned about from Bob Couttie.

If I were to pick a key point to focus upon it would be giving workers a voice in regulations, worker safety and so forth. Everyone on board could have a double PhD but if nobody cares what they think it’s going to have limited impact. Here is a an article that supports this view[B]:[/B]Offshore RIsk Management: Myths, Worker Experiences and Reality.

K.C.

KC,

U r more of an expert on ABS than I am so please correct my assumptions as needed.

My understanding is ABS is for profit company, funded by maritime companies to make sure they operate within certain parameters so their insurance rates and other costs stay reasonable. Going with that, my logic is they are beholden to their masters (insurance companies and maritime companies) and protect the bottom line. Why would they want input from people who have no input into their (ABS’) bottomline and not concerned (in ABS’ eyes) with their bottom line and their customers? Crew r not their customers.

I agree with you about workers experiences and feel that is an important 9IF NOT the most0 part, but as you and I both know, we r the last ones from whom input is sought.

[QUOTE=BMCSRetired;49581]KC,

U r more of an expert on ABS than I am so please correct my assumptions as needed.

My understanding is ABS is for profit company, funded by maritime companies to make sure they operate within certain parameters so their insurance rates and other costs stay reasonable. Going with that, my logic is they are beholden to their masters (insurance companies and maritime companies) and protect the bottom line. Why would they want input from people who have no input into their (ABS’) bottomline and not concerned (in ABS’ eyes) with their bottom line and their customers? Crew r not their customers.

I agree with you about workers experiences and feel that is an important 9IF NOT the most0 part, but as you and I both know, we r the last ones from whom input is sought.[/QUOTE]

Yes, ABS is for profit, but they are a good outfit and their program is a good one, at least from what I’ve seen. My point is that they are outsiders and will never know the goings on aboard like the crew. I don’t think a 100% top down approach to safety will ever be as good as one the empowers the crew in a meaningful way.

K.C.

[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;49593]Yes, ABS is for profit, but they are a good outfit and their program is a good one, at least from what I’ve seen. My point is that they are outsiders and will never know the goings on aboard like the crew. I don’t think a 100% top down approach to safety will ever be as good as one the empowers the crew in a meaningful way.[/QUOTE]

I am in total agreement with ur statement. I feel the same way baout the USCG and like ABS, the only input the operators get in through statements and testimony. After that we r not really included in the solution. It used to bug me but then I realized that if I wanted to influence policy, I needed a degree or change my career path drastically (i.e. move into the office). Of course once I do that I am not an operator any more. That is why I am trying to cut back on my work schedule a little bit and get on one of the advisory committees in DC, in my case Navigation Safety. It ain’t much but I want to try and do something.

[QUOTE=BMCSRetired;49637] I feel the same way baout the USCG and like ABS, the only input the operators get in through statements and testimony. After that we r not really included in the solution. It used to bug me but then I realized that if I wanted to influence policy, I needed a degree or change my career path drastically (i.e. move into the office). Of course once I do that I am not an operator any more. That is why I am trying to cut back on my work schedule a little bit and get on one of the advisory committees in DC, in my case Navigation Safety. It ain’t much but I want to try and do something.[/QUOTE]

Glad to hear you’re doing that, impressive. My friends atTowmasters tell me those advisory committees are key leverage points. Good luck to you.

K.C.