Download - Pnronline.com.au

More documents

Recommendations

Info

industry news NOPSEMA ‘Offside’ As Companies Cr y Foul Over ‘Heavy-Handed’ Regulations NOPSEMA has been accused of overstepping the boundaries of its jurisdiction by enforcing heavyhanded regulations of seismic vessels synonymous with oil producing rigs and platforms that has cost energy companies millions of dollars in downtime and caused some exploration contracts to be canned altogether. In this report, a number of industry insiders reveal how NOPSEMA has been causing a stir, subjecting seismic vessels to levels of operational compliance that are more stringent that even standards applicable to fully laden oil tankers. This resulted in the $165 MM Polarcus vessel Alima, one of the most environmentally sophisticated vessels of its kind, being anchored off Broome for five weeks – at a significant cost to Woodside, who had contracted the vessel for a $100 MM survey on the North West Shelf and, as Operator, was required to submit an environment plan that incorporated an oil spill contingency plan. In another instance a seismic sur vey program was cancelled altogether. The company is currently considering claiming force majere as a consequence of the bureaucracy and red tape surrounding NOPSEMA, which companies allege is entangling the exploration industr y in Australia. The Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) said all vessels in Australian waters were regulated for safety and environmental purposes. Some regulations may be based on the International Maritime Organisation MARPOL convention which categorised all vessels under one or more of the following annexes governing regulations for the prevention by: oil, noxious liquid substances in bulk, harmful substances carried by sea in packaged form, sewage from ships, garbage by ships and air pollution by ships. These regulations were implemented by various federal and state laws depending on the size and activity of the vessels. However, vessels are often subject to additional regulations, depending on their activity, which are enforced by the relevant government agency (for example, some fishing vessels require fishing licences administered by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority). NOPSEMA has allegedly overstepped the mark in its stringent interpretation of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act by forcing seismic operators to submit an oil spill contingency plan synonymous with offshore rigs and production platforms, among a number of other heavy handed requirements. During the process of evaluation three NOPSEMA officials spent a week on the Alima performing an audit of Woodside’s project that involved a thorough examination of the vessel including an investigation into how the company disposed of barnacles that had attached to streamers. Apparently NOPSEMA classifies barnacles as waste which should not be returned to the ocean. NOPSEMA was described as being “obsessed” with collisions at sea, despite The Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s (ATSB) marine safety database indicating that there have been no recorded instances of collisions, groundings or sinking of a seismic vessel or its support vessels in Australian waters in at least the last 30 y ears.* “In some instances, when a large vessel comes within 200 km we take notice. At 100 km we take a lot of notice and at 50 k m we start to shit ourselves. At 20 km we would bring in all the gear and the chase boat and suppor t vessel would try and put themselves between the approaching vessel and the seismic ship,” said one industry professional. Another seasoned seismic operator said with fishing activity within a 3D ‘racetrack’, based on a racetrack width of about 10 k m, a fishing vessel could be 5 km from a survey vessel with close on-water cooperation achieving a harmonious synergy. Polarcus’ vessels are double-hulled, a virtually unique safety feature exclusive to oil carriers, and subscribes to the highest global environmental standards attainable, classified as Ice Class 1A+. This year the vessel worked for Shell operating in the ice fields of the Ar ctic where it had to be robust enough to function safely in 1 m thick ice. Nevertheless, NOPSEMA still demanded that Woodside submit details of how they would avoid collisions at sea off the nor th west coast of Australia. This was despite the Alima operating in Arctic fields so saturated with icebergs and growlers moving in different directions that daily satellite images were downloaded to plan for operations. An investigation revealed that, by contrast, only 12 vessels in two years had passed through the area to be surveyed by the Alima for Woodside. Some companies are said to be incensed at being granted Federal Government approval to explore for hydrocarbons off the coast of Australia, only for another government department to subsequently scuttle operations and send costs soaring. Australia is already in the spotlight for significant cost blow-outs to major projects and high operating expenses in comparison to other parts of the world, causing energy companies to review planned operations in Australia. It is understood that the cost of commissioning a state-of-the-art seismic vessel for an exploration program can be about $350,000 a day. In the pre-NOPSEMA era, when oil companies were able to get approval from the Western Australian government for seismic operations, the process is believed to have taken days, as opposed to weeks running into months. Besides conforming to the most stringent Arctic standards of any seismic vessel to operate in harsh environmental regions where “not many can go”, the Alima had safely completed a 110,000 km 2 program in ice fairways as part of a three boat, three month operation. The vessel exceeds even Australian environmental standards by having the capacity to measure its own emissions. It is equipped with a high specification catalytic converter used to * http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/ safety-investigation-reports.aspx 24 | PESA News Resources | December 2012 / January 2013
industry news reduce nitrous oxide by 60 to 80% by converting it into nitrogen, an inert gas, and water, using a liquid form of urea imported from Rotterdam. This process also reduces soot output. In addition, the vessel has minimised emissions being powered by heavy diesel marine oil similar to the low-sulphur diesel fuel used in motor vehicles. The revolutionary X-bow design delivers 15–20% more efficient hydrodynamic properties in a head sea, fur ther reducing emissions. The vessel recently acquired a EEE worldwide environmental rating from DNV, the highest standard available conforming to green standards exceeding the criteria for cruise-liners. John Hughes, an independent geophysical operations advisor who assists a number of oil and gas companies submitting sur vey applications, is concerned that NOPSEMA’s pedantic and interpretive application of the act and regulations is not having the desired effect of improving the safety and environmental sensitivity of what he considers are already very safe and environmentally sensitive operations. He said forcing state-of-the-art vessels to comply with oil rig safety standards and standards that are significantly higher than other shipping in Australian waters is causing concern in the industry. “These actions are causing very significant and expensive suspensions and even cancellations, to work programs” added Hughes. “I’m sure NOPTA (National Offshore Petroleum Titles Authority) must have seen a significant increase in suspension and extension requests from petroleum licence holders in the last few months. “It appears that NOPSEMA’s emphasis on the wording of the OPGGS Act and Regulations which, in a number of instances needs significant re-drafting, is resulting in the regulator, operators and seismic contractors placing more effort on bureaucratic documentation than focusing on the practical aspects of the safety and environmental sensitivity of the activity. “For example, here are two requirements of the OPGGS Act/Regulations that give rise to significant misinterpretation by all and angst plus significant additional workload for no benefit for the industry. First, a ‘relevant person’ with whom the operator must consult in preparing the EP is, among other things, defined as ‘a person or organisation whose functions, interests or activities may be affected by the activities to be carried out under the environment plan’. December 2012 / January 2013 | PESA News Resources | 25
Page 1 and 2: Issue No. 121 December 2012 / Janua
Page 3 and 4: BroadSeis Marine Solution Authentic
Page 5 and 6: East Timor & JPDA Extensive 2D Mult
Page 7 and 8: www.polarcus.com RIGHTPLAN TM At Po
Page 9 and 10: ") Marla CO2012-A Moomba ") ") Marr
Page 11 and 12: West Australian Basins Symposium 18
Page 13 and 14: Duvalia 2D Seismic Survey 3,302KM -
Page 15 and 16: Quality Multi-client Data
Page 17 and 18: unconventionals maximum and decline
Page 19 and 20: The Next Generation of RokDoc RokDo
Page 21 and 22: unconventionals The Simulation Resu
Page 23 and 24: unconventionals Horizontal wells to
Page 25: anch activities Curtin Geology Stud
Page 29 and 30: + 22,000 km offshore Brazil + 14,50
Page 31 and 32: industry news Central Petroleum And
Page 33 and 34: industry news supply issues - which
Page 35 and 36: industry news DownUnder GeoSolution
Page 37 and 38: Mariner 2D Seismic Project 12,380KM
Page 39 and 40: industry news Gas Discovery At Crow
Page 41 and 42: We wish all members and clients Mer
Page 43 and 44: aussies overseas Woodside Enters Ma
Page 45 and 46: 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 New
Page 47 and 48: seismic technology: permanent reser
Page 49 and 50: onlaps Figure 32 shows a Cretaceous
Page 51 and 52: Australia eats cables for lunch. Th
Page 53 and 54: view from the top As client represe
Page 55 and 56: Advanced Seismic in Support of the
Page 57 and 58: geothermal If the impression given
Page 59 and 60: NEW NORTH WEST SHELF... ...NON-EXCL

Download - Pnronline.com.au

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?