Decision Support for Dynamic Barrier Management for Offshore Operations

PresentationEffective safety barrier management is a fundamental principle for prevention and mitigation of major accidents in offshore drilling and production operations. Barrier management methods such as bow tie diagrams are commonly used for identifying safety barriers in the development of safety case documentation and the performance of major accident risk assessments. In addition to such applications for establishing design baselines for offshore installations, some organizations are taking safety barrier management into the operational regime by establishing measures for assessing barrier health and assigning barrier owners to ensure that barriers are continuously maintained. The next step in effective safety barrier management is to develop and implement methods to continuously monitor barriers in real time and provide decision guidance for operations, maintenance, and management personnel regarding actions to be taken when barriers are degraded or failed. A systematic approach has been developed by DNV GL for identifying information requirements for dynamic barrier management, instrumentation or other sources of data for providing that information, decision criteria for determining when barriers are degraded or failed, and guidance for actions to be taken to restore degraded barriers and to prevent major accidents and mitigate their consequences. The resulting information framework can be used to support communication, consensus, decision making and action across technical disciplines and organizational boundaries. This paper summarizes the approach for the development of decision support tools for dynamic barrier management, and insights gained from application of the approach to offshore production and drilling operations with multiple industry partners. In addition, the paper summarizes industry research and development activities that are needed for effective implementation of dynamic barrier management in the offshore oil and gas industry

Risk Management in the Arctic Offshore: Wicked Problems Require New Paradigms

Recent project-management literature and high-profile disasters—the financial crisis, the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and the Fukushima nuclear accident—illustrate the flaws of traditional risk models for complex projects. This research examines how various groups with interests in the Arctic offshore define risks. The findings link the wicked problem framework and the emerging paradigm of Project Management of the Second Order (PM-2). Wicked problems are problems that are unstructured, complex, irregular, interactive, adaptive, and novel. The authors synthesize literature on the topic to offer strategies for navigating wicked problems, provide new variables to deconstruct traditional risk models, and integrate objective and subjective schools of risk analysis

Offshore petroleum and minerals: Plugging gaps in the present framework

For twenty years, it has been realized that there is a gap in New Zealand’s environmental law in that there is no general environmental legislation for the exclusive economic zone, and now for the extended continental shelf that includes areas more than 200 nautical miles offshore. The jurisdiction of regional councils under the Resource Management Act 1991 does not extend beyond the 12-mile limit, about 22 km offshore. (The jurisdiction of territorial authorities extends only to the mean low water mark.) That has meant that oil and gas operations beyond the 12-mile limit have not had proper environmental scrutiny. Public concern about such matters has sharpened in the light of petroleum exploration in the Raukumara Basin off the East Cape, although so far it has only reached the stage of seismic exploration. The Deepwater Horizon blowout on the Macondo prospect in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010 also looms large in public debate. With a lower profile but with a similar potential to cause environmental harm is the possibility of seabed mining operations. A company is gearing up for deep seabed mining off New Britain in Papua New Guinea. Globally, the main targets are cobalt-rich crusts, polymetallic nodules (on the abyssal plain), and massive sulphide deposits (near hydrothermal vents). In New Zealand iron sands are also attractive. Other possible future uses of the offshore are carbon capture and storage and the extraction of gas hydrates. Existing operations such as fishing by bottom trawling present risks of environmental harm to the benthic environment, especially to features such as seamounts. The Minister for the Environment has now announced his intention to introduce a bill to plug this legal gap, at least in relation to petroleum development and seabed mining. Action on this is most welcome. It is desirable to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal, and of the legal framework for oil and gas well drilling in general. Some surprising gaps remain even if the Minister’s proposal is enacted

What About BOEM? The Need to Reform the Regulations Governing Offshore Oil and Gas Planning and Leasing

The nature of offshore oil and gas activities is changing as companies are forced into difficult and remote areas, including the U.S. Arctic Ocean. As evidenced by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon tragedy and Shell\u27s error-plagued efforts to drill exploration wells in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas in 2012, the rules governing whether and under what conditions to allow offshore drilling in frontier areas have not kept pace with environmental and technical changes. These rules were implemented in 1979 and have remained substantively the same since. Recent changes to at the Department of the Interior to disband the Minerals Management Service, improve certain safety requirements, and move toward implementing Arctic-specific spill prevention and response requirements are important steps. Those changes, however, apply only after the decision to allow oil and gas activity has been made. Congress has not amended the governing statute, and the agency has not modified in any meaningful way the regulations that govern the initial processes through which it decides whether and under what circumstances to allow offshore oil and gas activities in a given area. This Article argues that the regulations that govern offshore oil and gas planning and leasing should be fundamentally revised to account for changes in the industry and agency, remedy broadly acknowledged deficiencies, and reflect new administrative policies. It also recommends a path to achieve the needed change

Next Steps to Reform the Regulations Governing Offshore Oil and Gas Planning and Leasing

The Department of the Interior manages offshore oil and gas activities in federal waters. While the agency has proposed and/or enacted important improvements to the rules that govern some of those activities, it has not modernized the regulations that govern offshore oil and gas planning, lease sales, or the review and permitting of exploratory drilling. These phases of the process are overseen by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), and, as was shown in our earlier publication on this topic, are ineffective and in need of modernization. In this Article, we argue that fundamental reform is necessary and highlight a series of key themes and topics that must be addressed to improve the regulatory process and promote better, more consistent management outcomes. While the Article draws on examples from frontier areas—in particular the U.S. Arctic Ocean—the recommended changes would apply to and benefit all areas of the OCS

The legal framework for offshore wind farms: A critical analysis of the consents process

The impact of the legal framework for the consents process on the rate of development of offshore wind farms in England, and the achievement of targets for renewable electricity generation have been reviewed. From the literature and consulted stakeholders it was found that the complexity of the current consents process has adversely affected the rate of development and the achievement of renewable energy targets. Future projects will be subject to a different legal framework for consents, under the Planning Act 2008 and the Marine and Coastal Access Bill. From a comparison of process diagrams for the current and future consents processes, it is concluded that the future process should be an improvement. However, uncertainties remain about the detailed procedures and operation of the future consenting authorities. The capacity and capability of key stakeholders to meet their obligations have implications for the time frame for the processes of applying for, and the granting of, consents. Furthermore improved engagement from developers and clarity about the role of local authorities are essential if progress is to be made. The need for a holistic and strategic view of the industry, including associated development of the supply chain and the transmission grid, is also highlighted. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Managing Environmental, Health, and Safety Risks: A Comparative Assessment of the Minerals Management Service and Other Agencies

This study compares and contrasts regulatory and related practices—in particular, regulatory decisionmaking, risk assessment and planning processes, inspection and compliance, and organization structure, budgets, and training—of the Minerals Management Service (MMS, now the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement, or BOEMRE) with those of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Comparing MMS practices with those of other federal agencies that also manage low-probability but high-consequence environmental risks provides a basis for identifying opportunities for enhancing regulatory capacity and safety performance in managing deepwater energy exploration and production. Our research finds important differences in processes for setting standards; peer review contribution to the rulemaking process; establishment of tolerable risk thresholds; and training of key staff. The paper concludes with several recommendations for how various EPA and FAA practices might be modified and used at BOEMRE to strengthen its regulatory and risk management processes.Minerals Management Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, risk management

Managing Well Integrity using Reliability Based Models

Imperial Users onl

Precursor Analysis for Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling: From Prescriptive to Risk-Informed Regulation

The Oil Spill Commission’s chartered mission—to “develop options to guard against … any oil spills associated with offshore drilling in the future” (National Commission 2010)—presents a major challenge: how to reduce the risk of low-frequency oil spill events, and especially high-consequence events like the Deepwater Horizon accident, when historical experience contains few oil spills of material scale and none approaching the significance of the Deepwater Horizon. In this paper, we consider precursor analysis as an answer to this challenge, addressing first its development and use in nuclear reactor regulation and then its applicability to offshore oil and gas drilling. We find that the nature of offshore drilling risks, the operating information obtainable by the regulator, and the learning curve provided by 30 years of nuclear experience make precursor analysis a promising option available to the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) to bring cost-effective, risk-informed oversight to bear on the threat of catastrophic oil spills.catastrophic oil spills, quantitative risk analysis, risk-informed regulation