Posted byI keep seeing comments by BP, other oil executives, and even environmental activists that we have to wait until the investigation is complete before we take action to prevent future spills in the Gulf.
Oil execs say that the proposed six month deepwater drilling moratorium is overkill. They believe they already have safeguards in place that go beyond the actions taken by BP. They argue that waiting for a final investigation is an unnecessary waste of time and a burden for those who will lose their jobs. They also explain that if rigs are moved to other non-US locations, that drilling could be disrupted for years.
However, environmental activists are saying the the drilling moratorium should cover all offshore drilling activities and should be extended until the blue ribbon Presidential Commission has completed their work. It took the CSB three years to complete their investigation of the BP Texas City explosion. Could we really wait three years to resume offshore drilling?
To me, it seems that there is lots of information already available. People who know our TapRooT® Instructors/Facilitators can understand how in a couple of weeks a dedicated, facilitated team could have a preliminary set of causal factors determined, identify areas where there is any uncertainty, and identify the root causes of problems where uncertainty is limited. This would provide significant learning without waiting years. The lessons could provide a basis for resuming drilling with interim compensatory corrective actions to assure better safety and environmental stewardship. I hate to see people lose their jobs and environmentally sound drilling be put off for no good reason.
What do you think? Do we have to wait for a Presidential Commission to learn? Or are there lessons learned that could be analyzed and applied now?
Let me know your thoughts by leaving a comment here.
Category: Accidents, Current Events, Investigations, Performance Improvement
4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
I hope there are lessons learned. I felt very disheartened when watching a video clip of oil being burned off the ocean last night. Huge fireball tornadoes burned big black billowing clouds of oil into the sky and I knew as dramatic as it looked, it was like taking a teaspoon to pick up the spill. Very, very sad and so far from over.
Comment by Barb Phillips — June 15, 2010 @ 8:34 am
……”in a couple of weeks a dedicated, facilitated team could have a preliminary set of causal factors determined, identify areas where there is any uncertainty, and identify the root causes of problems where uncertainty is limited.” This comment clearly sums it up and will enable prompt implementation of interim preventive actions. To wait for politicians, academics and the like (6 months….?) to come up with solutions/learning outcomes is unthinkable. In the interim, I believe the “subject matter experts” are definitely available to tackle this issue promptly.
A worrying fact, to my mind at least, is the focus to have unnecessarily higher levels of persons (“commensurate” with the consequence severity and political impact? hence the reason for politicians, academics with mile-long cv’s etc.???) form the core of investigation committees. Are we not losing the focus and expertise at “ground” level?
I am sure that BP does have the people with the necessary skills/expertise to do a proper investigation. Just a thought – have an independant body/person head this process up – such as persons from TapRooT® for instance that eat, sleep and breathe incident investigation daily.
Comment by Hennie Dreyer — June 22, 2010 @ 4:58 am
While I am not exactly answering Mark’s question, I say it is vital for experts to closely monitor the Inquiry’s progress & apply critical analysis & commentary & suggestions. It is possible for persons outside such an inquiry to beneficiantly influence the inquiry’s progress & output.
Comment by John O'Meara — June 22, 2010 @ 8:14 am
This incident has heralded in a new phase of politics being injected into incident investigation. This is not a new thing but the stakes are much higher than an individual’s or company’s reputation.
The decision to issue a moratorium on drilling is not based on any facts that support “unseen” dangers. It is a purely politically motivated action under the guise of environmental safety. The off shore rigs were inspected by experts and nothing was reported as a problem. Despite this, the moratorium was implemented.
Do we prohibit all car use after a serious accident on the freeway?
Dis we shutdown every refinery in the country after BP Texas City?
The Coast Guard and Mineral Management Service are conducting a joint hearing into the Deepwater Horizon accident and have published transcripts and viseo of the interviews. There seems to be some issues with whether the work was done as described in the permit. The root cause of that causal factor alone points towards auditing and monitoring being ineffective. There may also be some management of change problems with obtaining the correct level of approval before doing alternatives to the permitted process.
The answer to poor regulatory enforcement is not additional regulation.
Knee jerk reactions to please special interest groups can cause more serious consequences in time and set bad precedents.
The Chemical Safety Board may be able to do a adequate investigation but there has to be the polictical will to follow the recommendations for improvement to result.
Comment by Chris DeMott — June 22, 2010 @ 11:42 am