OIM and master

Offshore
1

What is the advantage of having the master hold the position of OIM?

I don’t the first thing about drilling but it seems that if you have a non-floating rig there is a hierarchy in place that has evolved over a long period of time. If you shift that organization to a floating unit why not leave it in place? It seems that marine crew is there to support the drilling crew. I would think it would be somewhat analogous to the chief scientist on an oceanographic ship. What’s the thinking here? What am I missing?

K.C.

2

As far as I know there is no drilling platform out there where the master actually runs the daily drilling operation but for the master to hold the OIM removes the potential conflict between two men in a major catastrophic event. It eliminates any ambuity who is legally in command to make all critical decisions. Of course, this places the onus of a well control event on the master’s shoulders which I personally do not want. I want it to be where all legal responsibility for actions taken on the rig floor and subsea to rest with an OIM but once there is an emergency of any kind, I have full and legal authority to command and control all actions regarding the emergency response up to and including activating the EDS, ESD and ordering the rig abandonned. I also want the authority to demand all measures to protect the rig be augmented by the company and this is where there is a conflict. Are there masters who control their own budget out there? I do not want somebody to be able to deny me if I believe a certain safety system or equipment is needed or if the emergency structure or additional training be implemented.

Should a master hold OIM even if there is another OIM aboard it can put that master in a well control situation where he could be held responsible for more than we would be if he didn’t hold it. The USCG and BSEE could say in the hearing “but you were qualified to know how to prevent that blowout so why didn’t you”? If you don’t have the OIM you can say “the OIM was the well control qualified person aboard and he was legally responsible, not me”.

I have also said that I feel the required letter designating master as the PIC on the rig to be a document which can be used to hang the master at the whim of the company. It could be used to protect a long serving OIM and to throw a recently hired master under the bus. Obviously, the Kurt Kuchta example bodes good for all drillship/rig masters but TO having his back was as much to protect TO as it was the master. I am thrilled the Coast Guard left any sanction against the master to rest with the flag state. Would that happen again? I hope so now that precedent has been set.

3

I’m not going to weigh in directly on the Master/OIM issue which has been debated since the Java Sea disaster in 1983 but I do want to ask another question…

What is the Master’s level of responsibility in maintaining situational awareness aboard the rig? What does his level of knowledge need to be?

This is the question that separates research vessels (and cruise ships?) from MODU’s because the master may not understand the hard science behind the research being conducted but most of that happens [I]after[/I] the PHD’s get back to their laboratories. He does, however, understand the operations. He knows the equipment (nets, ROV’s, sonar buoys, etc) being deployed aboard his ship and the dangers inherent in each job. The OIM/Master often doesn’t.

One of the biggest problems is that these MODU’s are getting so complex that no single person has an accurate picture of the dangers present aboard the vessel. Rather, he must trust his crew. This sounds like a simple and effective solution and, 99% of the time it is, but the devil lives in the details - and the vast majority of masters do not understand the details that relate to subsea engineering, mud/liquid engineering, or the geology of drilling. “Some” OIM’s and “Some” companymen understand these complex topics (the large majority don’t!) but they don’t understand marine operations and the safety/stability of the platform.

Aboard research ships… again the “hard science” is done after the voyage but in the drilling world the “hard science” is done before. This is a major difference.

SO… the best you can do is have one person who is fluent in the language of all parties, has excellent leadership skills and the authority to stop operations. The problem is that offshore this position is held by the Rig Manager who works out of an office in Houston. Part fo the reason he works in Houston is out fo necessity - the client engineers are critical to operational safety and he needs to be able to meet with them in person - but part of the reason is so the oil companies can keep him in the “fold” (i.e. influence his decisions).

I don’t think I need to explain the problems with having the ultimate authority of the rig sit in an office hundreds of miles away but - until more masters study and understand drilling operations - the best we can hope for is a division of authority split between the master, oim and rig manager. You can join the OIM/Master positions and give the Master full authority over the rig manager (which is most good companies do) but making just 1 man in charge will not be effective unless the culture supports it AND that man has a level of knowledge equal to those he leads.

I’m reading a book about Cyrus The Great, an acient persion king, and he sums up loyalty and authority in one word… knowledge. People will not be loyal to you and respect your authority unless you know more than them because no man will willingly/happily led into danger when a bad decision is made by his boss. And Master’s are well known for making bad decisions when it comes to drilling ops… because they don’t have the knowledge to make the correct decision.

Think about your previous boss’. Did you ever have a problem following, what you thought was, a bad order when your boss was smarter and more experienced than you and had your best interests at heart? How did you feel about similar order given by a boss who only sailed as third mate a few years and spent the rest of his days pushing a desk?

So the questions isn’t authority, it’s knowledge because I don’t care who is in charge if that man knows what he’s doing. We either need to get OIM’s “knowed up” in marine operations ro we need to get masters “knowed up” in drilling ops. And BOTH need more knowledge in petroleum engineeing OR the petroleum engineers (and the rig managers?) need to move from Houston and work aboard the rigs so that they can advise the master directly.

[I]The Deepwater Horizon disaster happened because of a engineering decisions made in Houston, not FU’s aboard the rig!
[/I]
But that’s not going to happen so… what’s the solution? More training? Nope… most of us are already maxed out. I cant think of a [I]good[/I] one… the best I can think of is to add “rotational” masters to the payroll. 3 Captains assigned per rig or fully licensed captains who fly between the rigs to relieve Masters so they can spend more time in training AND more time working with the engineers (petroleum, mud, subsea and all other types) in Houston. But even this solution has problems (e.g. familiarity with your team leaders is essential to safe ops).

The solution won’t be found until one man has complete authority AND the knowledge needed to have 100% situational awareness of all operations aboard the rig AND is physically aboard the rig at all times. The problem is that these operations are getting too complicated for any one man to understand.

4

For those who I lost in the above post… he’s a simpler explanation:

A rig is no different from a ship. The Master and Chief Engineer both have specific/expert knowledge and rely on each-other to make critical decisions. BOTH ARE CRITICAL TO SAFE OPERATIONS. On a MODU you still have a Master and CE (or, at least you SHOULD) but you also have an OIM (in charge of drilling operations), a companyman (in charge of well operations) and a Well Team Leader in Houston (in charge of engineering). ALL FIVE ARE CRITICAL TO SAFE OPERATIONS.

On a ship someone needs to be designated Head Honcho and history has made this person the master.

On a ship someone needs to be designated Head Honcho and history has been ambivalent to the subject. I don’t care who the USCG decides to pick but they need to:

  1. Have a working knowledge of all 5 subjects
  2. Understand the jargon of all 5 subjects
  3. Be licensed, certified and examined
  4. Have their A$$ positioned firmly aboard the ship
5

The tasks performed aboard oceanographic ships are far simpler then aboard a drill ship. On a drill ship complex tasks and the vessel are closely entwined.

System safety engineering and deepwater.

another interesting post from the same source here

K.C.

6

I have a question to throw out on a related subject. On the ship and
rigs where you work does the senior management and office management get bonuses for
staying below budget? I have heard this but never confirmed it. It
seems to me on my rig that the drilling department gets 2 of everything
while the marine and engineering departments struggle to get essential
items ie…safety ,navigation gear etc…needed for their operation,
because the people who approve reqs dont really understand what its for and
want to keep within budget. It seems to me this would be a conflict of
interest.

7

[QUOTE=CaptTomH;67937]I have a question to throw out on a related subject. On the ship and
rigs where you work does the senior management and office management get bonuses for
staying below budget? I have heard this but never confirmed it. It
seems to me on my rig that the drilling department gets 2 of everything
while the marine and engineering departments struggle to get essential
items ie…safety ,navigation gear etc…needed for their operation,
because the people who approve reqs dont really understand what its for and
want to keep within budget. It seems to me this would be a conflict of
interest.[/QUOTE]

Usually they get a bonus based on safety, budget, productive time, etc…
Some of these same individuals do the approvals and they almost always come from the drilling end which is how the company makes it’s money. Marine and engineering departments [especially marine] don’t get some requisitions because the people approving the orders think that you are a drilling rig first and foremost.The marine department is thought of as a necessary evil by some of these same people. It’s better at some companies than others. Usually if requisitions note a regulatory requirement, safety or a potential loss of productive time issue they get approved by even the tightest ex-bit twister [I almost said former worms] if for no other reason than to cover their own butts.

8

The Deepwater Horizon disaster happened because of a engineering decisions made in Houston, not FU’s aboard the rig!

Unbelievable…

9

[QUOTE=capitanahn;68066]The Deepwater Horizon disaster happened because of a engineering decisions made in Houston, not FU’s aboard the rig!

Unbelievable…[/QUOTE]

Ah, but Transocean gives everyone “stop work” authority if they feel the plan isn’t right, situation changed, etc. TOI personnel expressed their misgivings and doubts about the plan but did not stop the work. It’s an out the risk management people dreamed up years ago to put the responsibility on the lowest ranking person with job knowledge should things go to hell in a hand basket. Remember the TOI manager Harrell disagreeing with the BP company man and saying “I guess that’s what we have those pincers for” [speaking of the BOP]? Yet he did not stop the job, probably because he wanted to keep his own job at that time. Therefore, according to the way they look at things it was not the guy in Houston’s fault but the fault belongs with the OIM, toolpusher and driller that disagreed but didn’t stop the job.
It’s an insane way to run a very dangerous, highly technical and complicated operation and yet it continues to this day.

10

Stop work authority is a decent idea but only works if it is encouraged from the top down.

11

[QUOTE=tengineer;68072]It’s an insane way to run a very dangerous, highly technical and complicated operation and yet it continues to this day.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

K.C.

12

[QUOTE=john;67905]I’m not going to weigh in directly on the Master/OIM issue which has been debated since the Java Sea disaster in 1983 but I do want to ask another question…
.[/QUOTE]
Seacrest 1989 in Thailand
was it drilling or preparing for a typhoon?

13

[QUOTE=capitanahn;68066]The Deepwater Horizon disaster happened because of a engineering decisions made in Houston, not FU’s aboard the rig!

Unbelievable…[/QUOTE]
Same issue with the Herald of Free Enterprise ferry sinking…the company had engineered an unsafe working environment and company directors got charged with manslaughter
Of course class was so far behind the times, decent specifications would have also prevented it from happening ( so as ususal if you kill enough people the rules change and they did)
Shipping is reactive not pro active

14

OIM AND MASTER…another stupid thing that the drilling world has came up with. on a jack-up rig yeah there is no master or even an anchored semi-sub. but on a floating DP vessel it is the officers of the vessel that should have the overall say in what goes on. the OIM should be under the master and he should do just drilling. it is his job to say what goes on the drill floor, and should be the masters job to be over him. but what they have now in the drill world is a man with no license to be on a vessel, who has came off a jackup and is not calling the shots above the master whose liscense is on the line and who is legally bound and liable for anything that happens on the vessel. Just like on some vessels where they have a TC who has no chiefs license in charge of the chief. Yes it is dangerous out here but when i take out a permit and i get asked by the OIM or night toolpusher who has to sign it what the OWS is…why do they even has to sign it.

15

[QUOTE=mainemafia;73384]OIM AND MASTER…another stupid thing that the drilling world has came up with. on a jack-up rig yeah there is no master or even an anchored semi-sub. but on a floating DP vessel it is the officers of the vessel that should have the overall say in what goes on. the OIM should be under the master and he should do just drilling. it is his job to say what goes on the drill floor, and should be the masters job to be over him. but what they have now in the drill world is a man with no license to be on a vessel, who has came off a jackup and is not calling the shots above the master whose liscense is on the line and who is legally bound and liable for anything that happens on the vessel. Just like on some vessels where they have a TC who has no chiefs license in charge of the chief. Yes it is dangerous out here but when i take out a permit and i get asked by the OIM or night toolpusher who has to sign it what the OWS is…why do they even has to sign it.[/QUOTE]

Not all companies operate like that.

16

[QUOTE=mainemafia;73384]OIM AND MASTER…another stupid thing that the drilling world has came up with. on a jack-up rig yeah there is no master or even an anchored semi-sub. but on a floating DP vessel it is the officers of the vessel that should have the overall say in what goes on. the OIM should be under the master and he should do just drilling. it is his job to say what goes on the drill floor, and should be the masters job to be over him. but what they have now in the drill world is a man with no license to be on a vessel, who has came off a jackup and is not calling the shots above the master whose liscense is on the line and who is legally bound and liable for anything that happens on the vessel. Just like on some vessels where they have a TC who has no chiefs license in charge of the chief. Yes it is dangerous out here but when i take out a permit and i get asked by the OIM or night toolpusher who has to sign it what the OWS is…why do they even has to sign it.[/QUOTE]

Actually every MODU must have an OIM even DP semis and drillships. An OIM is also licensed by the USCG or other nations and is an internationally recognized certificate of competency for the holder. Now what is true is that a Master can be the OIM if his license/CoC is endorsed for it so he can then wear both hats and there are some companies that operate like that GSF was one and I know Rowan will be. I don’t know about the other deepwater drilling companies. Another thing is that an OIM cannot be a Master without going to sea on a ship so it does not work in reverse.

OK, how should it be in a perfect world? There should be both a master and an OIM aboard but there should be clear unambiguous areas of responsibility for each person established by flag and/or port state regulations. An OIM should be 100% fully legally responsible for the drilling operation and all functions pertaining thereto including compliance with all BSEE regulations and the Master is fully and legally responsible for everything else.

The most important thing though is if something goes boom or floods or burns then it is the master and ONLY the master who is in command. He alone makes the decisions and I DO NOT believe that it is at all proper, fitting, respectful or otherwise acceptable that the master get paid less than an OIM.

17

the best trader in a bank ( and many of them) always get paid more than their boss’s
One has responsibilty for earning money ( why are we here) the other is to ensure we are here tomorrow

18

Just to add my thoughts onto this thread, I have a number of points I would like to comment on

  1. The statement that John made earlier in the thread concerning the rig manager been fully in charge - I direct your attention to ISM code page 14, paragraph 5.2 - The company should establish that in the company SMS the Master has full overriding authority and responsibility…
    This statement in itself provides the Master with full authority, whether you run with a drilling OIM or not. It is part of law and cannot be superceeded by a company policy.

  2. I believe that the OIM should also be the Master - at the end of the day, the Master is legally responsible for safety of the crew, platform and environment so this would be the logical way of running things - which is how the majority of the drilling companies do run at present. Having said this, there also needs to be a drilling superintendent onboard who runs the drilling side of things. The OIM/Master and drilling super need to have a good, honest and open working relationship with each other. The problem I have encountered with serving on rigs as Master but where there is a drilling OIM is that the majority of daily communication goes directly through the OIM and the Master is “overlooked”. Some of these comms deal with issues that could potentially lead to safety problems down the road which, when the Master is not kept in the loop, becomes rather for him/her to exercise overriding authority when they are not aware of what is happening - and I speak from 1st hand experience here.

  3. The statement made in earlier threads that the ultimate head huncho - whether it be the Master or OIM (assuming a drilling OIM) should be an expert in all facets of the drilling industry cannot hold true. How many CEO’s of a drilling company know anything about the rule of the road?? They rely on the expertise and experience of the people they employ. The same holds true for the personnel onboard. The Master will rarely be an expert in drilling or subsea. A drilling OIM will likewise rarely be an expert in subsea or marine related issues. This is why we have personnel onboard who are “experts” in their own field. However, there still needs to be 1 person in charge who needs to have an overall understanding and knowledge of all facets of the industry (understanding and knowledge do not make that person an expert). As the head huncho you have to take information and guidance from the various experts and process in the best possible manner and make a decision based on this information. This is the true test of a good leader and a good boss.

19

Love to see a make believe time line for the macondo well where the master taking over versus the drill crew would have lead to a different result?

20

[QUOTE=“powerabout;118148”]Love to see a make believe time line for the macondo well where the master taking over versus the drill crew would have lead to a different result?[/QUOTE]

Agreed, but the same would be interesting for the Glomar Java Sea.