Promised change: reviews, regulations and oversight agencies GOM drilling production

Despite his raft of suggested changes, Salazar defended the US oil industry against some senators that called it completely unregulated.

“The conclusion that this is an unregulated industry is not correct, it is a highly regulated industry,” he said.

http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article215227.ece
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/18/salazar-government-failed-ensure-safety-offshore-oil-drilling/

Interior secretary seems to be accepting partial blame for the Macondobacle.

Some of the process that failed may be the permitting as Macondo was approved without an independent environment impact and accident planning. This well started as exploration. Not a production well.

Another area this incident may highlight was final responsibility. Reads like BP owns this outright. Should the rig operator also have a veto right or show stopping oversight ability that does not jeopardize the contract and organizational relationship with the oil co? Is there no way for a driller or manager to stop an insane company man bent on finishing a well live?

For those on board who is the vested interest. What particular rules need changed and how? What new rules are called for?

Please no knee jerk reactionary ideas. That will only steer the thread south. My thoughts include forwarding or linking these ideas or this thread with regulators and legislators.

Your idea to forwarding or linking ideas with regulators and legislators is surely great. I do not want to be cynic but I believe that we really need a step change in the offshore drilling culture, it will be a big effort and will have a lot of resistance.

I also believe the tragedy in the GOM will be a turning point in offshore drilling regulations, it will be considered the “Piper Alpha” of the US and surely rules & regulations will be hugely affected by this incident. The bottom line is to understand exactly what happened and ensure that safety barriers will be in place for future exploratory wells. I envision a strict control of drilling operations with perhaps steps to follows which will be checked by the Authority, more stringent inspections and surveys of the drilling packages by classification societies and flag states. Competence, training and certification of Offshore Personnel will be assessed differently. Only one person can be in charge of an Offshore Installation, I see this coming soon, this individual can only be who is legally responsible of the emergencies.

As far as

[QUOTE=ghorouter;33054]http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article215227.ece
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/18/salazar-government-failed-ensure-safety-offshore-oil-drilling/

Interior secretary seems to be accepting partial blame for the Macondobacle.

Some of the process that failed may be the permitting as Macondo was approved without an independent environment impact and accident planning. This well started as exploration. Not a production well.

Another area this incident may highlight was final responsibility. Reads like BP owns this outright. Should the rig operator also have a veto right or show stopping oversight ability that does not jeopardize the contract and organizational relationship with the oil co? Is there no way for a driller or manager to stop an insane company man bent on finishing a well live?

For those on board who is the vested interest. What particular rules need changed and how? What new rules are called for?

Please no knee jerk reactionary ideas. That will only steer the thread south. My thoughts include forwarding or linking these ideas or this thread with regulators and legislators.[/QUOTE]

In the current USCG licensing scheme, an OIM basically needs a letter from The Company, and a couple of classes at Martin International where your chances of “Failing” are about as good as the chances of getting snowfall in LaPLace, Louisiana.
Ballast Control is not required, only for Barge Super, and the test questions are considerably less complex then those found on 100 ton license exams.

In Transocean’s case, the Master is indeed subservient to the OIM, and had better ask permission to run drills etc. (Senior Marine Roustabout).
This stems from their philosophy that Marine personnel are merely a necessary evil.

Minimum manning is kept to a minimum, which is not the intent of minimum manning.

One can only hope that this tragedy puts an end to the divisive practice of separating the Master from the OIM.

Brendan, there are many dp toi vessels that do not even meet minimum manning. Lotsa wipe your ass modu tickets filling unlimited minimum manning. For instance… vessels that require a c/e usually have a first with a c/e ticket, and he works for a maint supervisor. License prostitution is what I call it.

It’s unlikely the USCG has the grey matter to political clout to revise the cap/oim requirements. During the initial interviews, they were quite outspoken about the lack of chain of command, but during the subcommittee meetings, the USCG were defending the split position.

Moreover, if TOI were forced to comply, they would only do it in the GOM…which, at the moment looks quite grim for the future of drilling.

I call it the “Deepwater dot com” complex…we know it all and make our own rules.

[QUOTE=bnhpr;39229]Brendan, there are many dp toi vessels that do not even meet minimum manning. Lotsa wipe your ass modu tickets filling unlimited minimum manning. For instance… vessels that require a c/e usually have a first with a c/e ticket, and he works for a maint supervisor. License prostitution is what I call it.

It’s unlikely the USCG has the grey matter to political clout to revise the cap/oim requirements. During the initial interviews, they were quite outspoken about the lack of chain of command, but during the subcommittee meetings, the USCG were defending the split position.

Moreover, if TOI were forced to comply, they would only do it in the GOM…which, at the moment looks quite grim for the future of drilling.

I call it the “Deepwater dot com” complex…we know it all and make our own rules.[/QUOTE]

Thank you sir.
I know. I am a realist not an optimist.
My Daddy always said “Pray towards heaven, but row towards shore.”

The USCG went over the top interpreting the GMDSS requirements, interpreting the letter of the law rather than the intent of the law.

I reckon they could put all that enthusiasm into noting that MODU Code 14.8.1 says “The person on each unit to whom all personnel are responsible in an emergency shall be clearly defined. This person should be designated by title by the owner or operator of the unit or agent of either of them.”

So, is that the Skipper or the OIM?

[QUOTE=brendanlally;39306]Thank you sir.
I know. I am a realist not an optimist.
My Daddy always said “Pray towards heaven, but row towards shore.”

The USCG went over the top interpreting the GMDSS requirements, interpreting the letter of the law rather than the intent of the law.

I reckon they could put all that enthusiasm into noting that MODU Code 14.8.1 says “The person on each unit to whom all personnel are responsible in an emergency shall be clearly defined. This person should be designated by title by the owner or operator of the unit or agent of either of them.”

So, is that the Skipper or the OIM?[/QUOTE]

You’ve read the same policy I have.

Oim is “in charge” during drilling ops, but can give the authority to the capn at any time. Capn is in charge underway.

So, what typically happens is the OIM burns the rig down and says…“She’s all yours capn’”…