U.S. Proposes Arctic Drilling Regulations

although I still do not believe we’ll be seeing Shell up in Alaska this year due to the depressed market, I am still very interested to read exactly what the BSEE is going to demand from the operators to work there…

[B]U.S. Proposes Arctic Drilling Regulations[/B]

By MarEx 2015-02-20 17:54:52

The U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) have released proposed regulations to ensure that future exploratory drilling activities on the U.S. Arctic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) are done safely and responsibly, subject to strong and proven operational standards.

The proposed Arctic-specific regulations released on February 20 focus solely on offshore exploration drilling operations within the Beaufort Sea and Chukchi Sea Planning Areas.

Using a combination of performance-based and prescriptive standards, the proposed regulations codify and further develop current Arctic-specific operational standards that seek to ensure that operators take the necessary steps to plan through all phases of offshore exploration in the Arctic, including mobilization, drilling, maritime transport and emergency response, and conduct safe drilling operations while in theater.

The proposed regulations codify requirements that all Arctic offshore operators and their contractors are appropriately prepared for Arctic conditions and that operators have developed an integrated operations plan that details all phases of the exploration program for purposes of advance planning and risk assessment. With an emphasis on safe and responsible exploration, the proposed rule also would require operators to submit region-specific oil spill response plans, have prompt access to source control and containment equipment, and have available a separate relief rig to timely drill a relief well in the event of a loss of well control.

“The proposed rule codifies existing Arctic-specific standards and establishes the rules of the road for all companies interested in safe and responsible Arctic exploration,” said Assistant Secretary for Land Minerals Management Janice Schneider. “In turn, these rules would facilitate exploration planning efforts and provide regulatory certainty, while ensuring that the U.S. maintains its leadership position in overseeing safe exploration operations that protect this unique and sensitive environment.”

The Alaska OCS is an integral part of the U.S. “all-of-the-above” domestic energy strategy. The Department in January released the Draft Proposed Program (DPP) for the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2017-2022, which is an early step in a multi-year process to develop a plan to guide the nation’s offshore oil and gas leasing. The DPP proposes three potential lease sales offshore Alaska, including making available for leasing areas that contain 90 percent of undiscovered technically recoverable oil and gas resources in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas.

“As we make the vast majority of the Arctic oceans offshore Alaska available for oil and gas leasing, we have an obligation to provide the American people with confidence that these shared resources can be developed responsibly,” said Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Director Abigail Ross Hopper.

In January 2013, former Secretary Ken Salazar directed a high-level review of Shell’s 2012 offshore drilling program in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas – including the company’s preparations for the 2012 drilling season and its maritime and emergency response operations – to identify challenges and lessons learned.

In March 2013, the department released the findings of the assessment, which also included recommendations to guide future exploratory activities. The proposed regulations released on February 20 incorporate some of the lessons learned from Shell’s 2012 operations and recommendations from the department’s review.

“This proposed rule is designed to ensure safe energy exploration in unforgiving Arctic conditions,” said Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Director Brian Salerno. “It builds upon our existing Arctic-specific standards and experience with previous operations offshore Alaska, encourages further development of technology, and includes rigorous safeguards to protect the fragile environment.”

The public may submit comments on the proposed Arctic regulations during the 60-day comment period that begins when the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register. The proposed regulations are available here.

the API already clearly articulated its opinion on the issue, and seems to have a problem with the second rig (for relief well drilling)

http://www.api.org/news-and-media/news/newsitems/2015/feb-2015/api-arctic-energy-is-critical-to-us-economy-national-security

The API is full of beans. A second rig (which could be drilling a different well near by) is a very reasonable, if not a critical requirement. No drilling should be allowed anywhere in the US unless another rig is available to drill a relief well. Why object to this requirement and give Greenpeace a chance to scream how irresponsible the oil industry is? In this case, Greenpeace would be right.

Stack capping devices are an unproven technology, and at best a stop gap measure.

By all means drill in the Arctic, but spare no expense to do so with a large safety factor. Three rigs would be a lot better than two, especially considering the short season, and that there are new high spec rigs without contracts. Three rigs would get more done in the short season and provide some economy of scale.

No don’t give me that crap about a shortage of ice class equipment. There is no ice most of the drilling season. What little ice there is, is generally less than one inch thick. Ice class is not necessary for that. Especially when there is a fleet of ice management vessels to churn it to slush.

If Shell cannot do it right with the safety factor of at least two rigs, it should forget about drilling in the Arctic.

While I still disagree with tugsailor when it comes to ice class, I agree that the ice is probably not much of a problem during Shell’s proposed drilling season. However, looking at the climate conditions in e.g. Barrow, Alaska, I’m also concerned about the winterization of the topside as well as certain shipside systems of the rigs currently available in the market. It’s not very warm even during the winter months, and far offshore the wind chill effect needs to be taken into account as well on e.g. exposed piping. Of course, adding trace heating, wind walls etc. can probably be done in a few weeks without drydocking, but if you’re just picking a random rig designed primarily for temperate climates, it’s something that needs to be done…

[QUOTE=Tups;155360]While I still disagree with tugsailor when it comes to ice class, I agree that the ice is probably not much of a problem during Shell’s proposed drilling season. However, looking at the climate conditions in e.g. Barrow, Alaska, I’m also concerned about the winterization of the topside as well as certain shipside systems of the rigs currently available in the market. It’s not very warm even during the winter months, and far offshore the wind chill effect needs to be taken into account as well on e.g. exposed piping. Of course, adding trace heating, wind walls etc. can probably be done in a few weeks without drydocking, but if you’re just picking a random rig designed primarily for temperate climates, it’s something that needs to be done…[/QUOTE]

yup, agree with you. Also remember that in 2012 the Disco’s cranes didn’t even work at subzero temperatures. They’ve been replaced during the upgrade in Korea so hopefully that’s one worry less this year (if inspectors are happy with them).

[QUOTE=Drill Bill;155362]yup, agree with you. Also remember that in 2012 the Disco’s cranes didn’t even work at subzero temperatures. They’ve been replaced during the upgrade in Korea so hopefully that’s one worry less this year (if inspectors are happy with them).[/QUOTE]

Is that drill “ship” now self propelled, or even after this drydock it’s going to be towed everywhere?

[QUOTE=50thState;155365]Is that drill “ship” now self propelled, or even after this drydock it’s going to be towed everywhere?[/QUOTE]

According to AIS data, it was doing 8 knots in January.

They replaced the entire engine, no? If would still need towing after that, it should be to the scrapyard!

[QUOTE=Drill Bill;155373]They replaced the entire engine, no? If would still need towing after that, it should be to the scrapyard![/QUOTE]

A newer but unused MAN slow speed was installed I heard and she runs well under her own power. Also new generator engines.

Shell has earned every bit of criticism they have received on this project. The ignorance and arrogance displayed by Shell and their primary sub contractors namely Chouest and Noble will lead to a huge disaster. Men will lose their lives over this project.

Full disclosure, I have only been a part of this project for three years. I was in Dutch when the Discoverer was stuck in the mud. I was also there when they were putting together the tow plan for the Kulluk to leave in December. Shell failed to heed advice from people who have worked in the area for 40+ years and instead followed the arrogance of those whose primary intention was to show the locals “how it’s done” rather than how to complete it safely.

The Arctic is an extremely inhospitable environment. Shell has shown nothing but failure to learn from mistakes.

I am not against drilling but I sure don’t trust them to do it safely.

Meantime, in the Soviet Un… ahem Russia:

http://en.portnews.ru/news/195832/

Krylov State Research Center (KSRC, Saint-Petersburg) has prepared a technical project of a drill ship able to execute round-the-year exploratory drilling in any Arctic region, IAA PortNews journalist cites Sergei Alekseyev, deputy head of KSRC Commercial Department, as saying at the international conference ‘Russia Offshore’.

According to him, the vessel is estimated at $400 mln and Gazprom shows interest in such vessels. This D.P. vessel will be able to operate in ice of up to 2.5 meters thick and will be built by Sevmash shipyard (Severodvinsk) or Zvezda shipyard (Far East). The issue of replacing imports comes out here as marine drilling systems are not in production in Russia today. Uralmash has held some engineering studies in this area and it needs state financing to move on.

[QUOTE=Tups;156275]Meantime, in the Soviet Un… ahem Russia:

http://en.portnews.ru/news/195832/[/QUOTE]

mmm, haven’t there been quite a few ‘technical projects’ on that Krylov table already?

Let’s hope it’s not Sevmash that’ll build the thing when it ever gets that far, cause the Gazprom platform in the Pechora Sea also took ages to finish. On the other hand, Zvezda is still partly under construction so probably no quick start there (if any).

[QUOTE=Drill Bill;156296]mmm, haven’t there been quite a few ‘technical projects’ on that Krylov table already? [/QUOTE]

I particularly liked their shallow draft icebreaker with draft “no less than 3 metres”:

http://en.portnews.ru/news/190891/

Is 7 metres still considered shallow?

Anyway, perhaps they’re just announcing pretty much every project they have to make it appear that they are much more active than their western counterparts.

[QUOTE=Drill Bill;156296]mmm, haven’t there been quite a few ‘technical projects’ on that Krylov table already?

Let’s hope it’s not Sevmash that’ll build the thing when it ever gets that far, cause the Gazprom platform in the Pechora Sea also took ages to finish. On the other hand, Zvezda is still partly under construction so probably no quick start there (if any).[/QUOTE]

I don’t see Russia doing much actual spending on new Arctic technology for quite awhile. Once the Ukraine war really heats up, the Chechnians and the Georgians will revolt again and spread terrorism into Moscow. Increased trade sanctions and reduced oil revenue will continue to cripple the Russian economy. Russia is going to be a mess for years to come.

ok, let’s change continent and country then.

Meanwhile in Canada …

Making waves: The Navy’s Arctic ambition revealed

The regulations should include provisions requiring crews with adequate Alaska or Arctic experience.