Flash Fire DAFW Case (7 January 2010)

What happened?• BP employee was conducting routine checks and

trouble shooting the well head compressor.

• The compressor skid had been winterized which included the installation of tarps on 2 sides of the unit to prevent freezing.

• The crank case breather vent was leaking process gas because the compressor rod packing was leaking.

• The investigation team believes that static electricity was the ignition source.

Key learnings• IP did not recognize the potential hazard of gas

accumulating on the compressor skid and creating a flammable mixture

• The crank case breather vent was leaking process gas onto the skid, and gas was accumulating because two sides of the skid were covered with tarps to prevent freezing

• No hazard assessment conducted - worked deemed routine and hazard assessment not conducted

• High LEL alarm previous day didn’t alert IP to presence of gas

Fields A7A Well Head Compressor

Crank Case Breather Vent

Fall from Height DAFW Case (29 Jan. 2010)

What Happened?• IP was tightening up bolts on a cross-over flange on top

of well head, standing one foot on a ladder and the

other foot on casing valve 3’.4” off the ground

• The wrench slipped off of a bolt causing IP to fall

• IP impacted the lower right portion of his back on the rig's

hydraulic hose hanger resulting in fracture of L5 vertebrae

IP working from ladder fell backwards when wrench

slipped

Key learnings • Hazard Not Identified

• Walking/Working Surface not Adequate • Previous jobs completed utilizing the same

equipment, hazards were never identified.

• Lack of policy and/or procedure for the task being performed.

Position of Wrench

Dropped Object HiPo (15 February 2010)

What happened?• Rig crew tripping out of the hole, heard a loud

bang and stopped operations

• Slack in Kelly hose snub line caught and dislodged top drive guard

• Guard dropped ~ 130’ to the ground

• There were no injuries associated with the incident

Key learnings (investigation report pending)

• 2nd incident associated with a section of the guard becoming dislodged and dropping

• Snub line was too close to hoist sheave

• There is no established engineered solution or recommended procedure to snub rotary hose to top drive

• Different top drive and rigged differently

• Opposite crew reattached snub line to tubular guard post instead of higher attachment point during top drive repair

• Hazard of large loop hanging up on tugger sheave assembly was not recognized

Pipe Dropped ~130 to the Ground

2 3/8” Schedule 80, 24” Long – 10#

High Potential Incident (15 February 2010)

Modified 55 Gallon Drum Covering Control Valve

What Happened?

• BP Technician was in the process of taking a pipeline out of service when an electrical arcing incident occurred

• Technician was lifting a protective cover from the pipeline valves and controller to initiate isolation of the pipeline. While lifting the drum, employee heard and observed electrical arcs. The technician dropped the drum and backed away

• The source of the arcing is believed to be a section of heat trace material that is wrapped around the piping/valves under the drum. The heat trace operates in 120V, 20amp service.

• There were no injuries associated with the incident

Initial Learnings (investigation report pending)

• Makeshift valve cover exhibits a lack of Pride, Ownership, Excellence (POE).

• Job was not stopped after the initial arcing incident.

• Breaker switch for the heat trace had been inadvertently disabled. Arc Burns

Production Tank Fire (18 February 2010)

What happened?• BP Technician was on the location and had been cycling the

separator dump and regulator valve. The separator dump line feeds into a 400 bbl condensate tank

• Technician had completed cycling the dump valve when the top of the condensate tank separated and landed ~150’ to the north of the tank a position to guide a suspended load of counterweights.

• Content of the tank (condensate) ignited and was extinguished by the local fire service utilizing foam

• Courtesy notifications were made to the Forrest Service and Oklahoma Commission

• No injuries associated with the incident

Initial learnings (investigation report pending)

• Unclear if the incident was a result of overpressure or static charge

• Effectiveness of tank grounding is questionable

• Response was well managed, joint effort with local fire service

Crane Incident (22 February 2010)

What happened?• The incident involved two contract cranes, a Hydraulic Truck

Crane & a lattice Crawler Crane

• A contract crane rigger was attempting to perform maintenance on the truck crane when the boom rotated off center and fell onto the boom of the crawler crane

• A total of five individuals were potentially in harms way

• There were no injuries associated with the incident.

• This incident resulted in extensive equipment damage.

Initial learnings (investigation report pending)

• Truck crane had completed work and was released to the next location

• Truck crane was apparently operated by someone other than the crane operator

Truck Crane Tipped Over onto Crawler Crane