API 53, implications, challanges, consequences and advantages of implementation

Abstract

The goal with this thesis was to look into consequences for implementing the API 53 standard for Transocean Norway. As it looks today the new requirements in the API 53 will be implemented as internal requirements within Transocean. Transocean operates in all the major oil and gas markets in the world and cannot operate with different regulations for each area. There is as of today no indication of regulatory requirements to change in Norway as a consequence of the new API 53. There may however be an updated version of Det Norske Veritas (DNVs) offshore standard (OS) with regards to drilling plant. I will in this thesis look into what Transocean Norway have to do to be in compliance with the new Standard and thereby new internal requirements. To be able to find the what actions Transocean Norway have to do I have made a GAP analysis between the new API 53 and Transocean Well Control Handbook. This has been a comprehensive work and I will in this thesis look into the findings. The API 53 contains mostly good oil field practice which has not been stated as a standard in the past, but there are also new requirements especially with regards to backup systems and secondary control systems as Emergency Shut Down (ESD), Autoshear, Deadman and ROV intervention all as a consequence of Macondo. Testing procedures is also more comprehensive than before and there are both positive and negative sides with this. The main goal of a new standard like API 53 is increased reliability and safer operation on an oil rig. For 5 out of 7 rigs Transocean Norway will have to upgrade the Blow out preventers (BOPs) and associated equipment with new technical solutions which has to be provided and engineered by Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). I will look into the different implications, challenges and advantages with an implementation.