U.S. NAVY SALVAGE REPORT DEEPWATER HORIZON ... - ESSM

U.S. NAVY SALVAGE REPORT DEEPWATER HORIZON ... - ESSM U.S. NAVY SALVAGE REPORT DEEPWATER HORIZON ... - ESSM

06.01.2015 Views

Chapter 5: Operations Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) subject matter expert. SUPSALV was a member of an industry-government team that was developing and implementing a blow out preventer (BOP) diagnostic and source containment course of action. Examples of Navy support which SUPSALV identified and forwarded to NAVSEA HQ or SUPSALV’s support team included: o o o o Latch Cap design – After making headquarters aware of the need, NAVSEA enlisted the Navy Submarine Design community (Electric Boat and Newport News) to contribute to the task. Measuring oil pressure in the well - BP was trying to get a better picture on the oil pressure in the containment device on the ocean floor. SUPSALV asked our Search and Recovery contractor, Phoenix, to identify what pressure transducers they had in stock that would function with the required accuracy at the sea floor environment (2250 psi) and provide specs for consideration. Reentry Control Procedures – This request was based on SUPSALV’s undersea operations experience. Details of the effort SUPSALV provided in support of this request are addressed in Section 5-7.2. DOJ support for Underwater Survey – this request was based on SUPSALV’s experience and Navy Owned equipment that would support Department of Justice’s need to survey the scene of the blowout. Details of this task are addressed in section 5-7.3 2. Another part of this task was to provide the chain of command (NAVSEA and Navy) with an up-to-date, accurate, and highly detailed status report on the status of well head control actions. This was critical because of the extensive amount of oil containment and response equipment that was fully engaged in the Gulf of Mexico and not available for immediate use in the advent of a requirement at a Navy base or Navy ship incident. CAPT Keenan arrived in Roberts, LA on April 29th and either he or 00CB submitted SITREPs every day throughout the length of the operation. An example of the technically detailed source control info is provided in Figure 5-19. 5-22

Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Response 6/28/2010 SITREP Admiral, The attached drawing depicts the next phase of BP's MC252 well containment and disposal plan (CDP). I will discuss the principle aspects of this plan as shown in the drawing. Current situation: 1. Discoverer Enterprise is producing 15-18 M BOPD (thousands of barrels of oil per day) and 30-40 MM SCFPD (millions of standard cubic feet of gas per day) via LMRP cap #4, installed above the cut MC252 marine riser. 2. Q4000 is flaring 6-8 M BOPD and 18-19 MM SCFPD via, in series; the MC252 kill line, a flexible jumper to a manifold on the seabed (the old dynamic kill manifold), a flexible jumper to a riser termination package, the Q4000 drill string inside the Q4000 marine riser. The short term goal is to increase product capture to the point where the LMRP cap can be removed and a combination BOP stack/valve manifold installed onto the MC252 LMRP. This would allow complete capture of all product w/o the risk of over-pressurizing the well bore and releasing product into the adjacent subsea formation, and subsequently the water column. Before the well can be completely capped (vice the partial cap that is currently installed w/four vent valves releasing product into the sea) additional product must be captured to eliminate the risk of over-pressurization. Short term plan to capture additional product: 1. The MC252 choke line is already connected to the old dynamic kill manifold with a flexible jumper. Jumpers will now be connected in series from this manifold to a new manifold (CDP Manifold in the drawing) and from there to a free standing marine riser (Free Standing Riser #1 in the drawing). The CDP manifold is on the seabed and Free Standing Riser #1 has been installed. Unfortunately, the jumper installation has not gone well (missing gaskets, crimped goosenecks) and as of tonight, only one of the four required connections has been made. 2. A transfer line will be installed on top of Free Standing Riser #1 and connected to a buoy that can be pulled into a production vessel, securely latched into that vessel and then used to transfer product from the riser to the vessel. This is existing Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) technology. Once these connections have been made, and appropriate valve alignments on the manifolds completed, product can flow from the MC252 choke line, through the jumpers and two manifolds, into free standing riser #1, through the transfer line, into the buoy and then into the production vessel. In the drawing, this vessel is listed as Toisa Pisces. However there has been a change and production vessel Helix Producer (HP) will be used instead of Toisa Pisces. Tanker Loch Rannoch will be used to lighter product from HP once HP's tanks are full. This system will allow capture of 20-25 M BOPD, enough to initiate the next phase in BP's plan, removing LMRP cap #4 and attaching a BOP stack/valve manifold to the MC252 LMRP. I will not discuss subsequent phases of the overall plan in detail in this report b/c multiple options are being studied and the short term work is not yet complete. Short term prognosis: Jumper installation will probably not be completed on night shift tonight. The seas are making up and I expect that all subsea installation work will be put on hold tomorrow until the weather improves. Estimate for re-initiation of subsea work based on current track of TS Alex is Saturday 7/3. Figure 5-19. Sample SITREP from ICP Houston. 3. Lastly, NAVSEA 00 needed someone who was familiar with the activities in Houston to be able to respond to questions about the operation and suggestions for employing Navy assets. Questions ranged from those generated by U.S. Congressional staff to those asked by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. COMNAVSEA would typically forward them to SUPSALV for generating the response. Suggestions ran the full gamut from thoughtful and potentially useful to off the wall. Because many of these suggestions were not practical or would actually be detrimental to the effort, COMNAVSEA needed someone who could speak with authority on the pros and cons of those suggestions. The range of suggestions encountered included sending the SEALs in to stop the leak or to send a nuclear tipped torpedo down the well. A typical response to one of these suggestions would include the words “We have drawn on the insight and expertise of NAVSEA engineers (embedded for over a month with the crisis engineering team in Houston, TX) The proposed concept for this innovative suggestion is…”, “However, there is no current short-fall in that capability.” 5-23

Chapter 5: Operations<br />

Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) subject matter expert. SUPSALV was a member of<br />

an industry-government team that was developing and implementing a blow out preventer<br />

(BOP) diagnostic and source containment course of action. Examples of Navy support<br />

which SUPSALV identified and forwarded to NAVSEA HQ or SUPSALV’s support team<br />

included:<br />

o<br />

o<br />

o<br />

o<br />

Latch Cap design – After making headquarters aware of the need, NAVSEA<br />

enlisted the Navy Submarine Design community (Electric Boat and Newport<br />

News) to contribute to the task.<br />

Measuring oil pressure in the well - BP was trying to get a better picture on the oil<br />

pressure in the containment device on the ocean floor. SUPSALV asked our<br />

Search and Recovery contractor, Phoenix, to identify what pressure transducers<br />

they had in stock that would function with the required accuracy at the sea floor<br />

environment (2250 psi) and provide specs for consideration.<br />

Reentry Control Procedures – This request was based on SUPSALV’s undersea<br />

operations experience. Details of the effort SUPSALV provided in support of this<br />

request are addressed in Section 5-7.2.<br />

DOJ support for Underwater Survey – this request was based on SUPSALV’s<br />

experience and Navy Owned equipment that would support Department of<br />

Justice’s need to survey the scene of the blowout. Details of this task are<br />

addressed in section 5-7.3<br />

2. Another part of this task was to provide the chain of command (NAVSEA and Navy) with<br />

an up-to-date, accurate, and highly detailed status report on the status of well head<br />

control actions. This was critical because of the extensive amount of oil containment and<br />

response equipment that was fully engaged in the Gulf of Mexico and not available for<br />

immediate use in the advent of a requirement at a Navy base or Navy ship incident.<br />

CAPT Keenan arrived in Roberts, LA on April 29th and either he or 00CB submitted<br />

SITREPs every day throughout the length of the operation. An example of the technically<br />

detailed source control info is provided in Figure 5-19.<br />

5-22

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!