Why separate? #nlpoli

Last week, the federal Auditor General pointed out many serious problems with the state of offshore search and rescue.

Last week, the usual gang grabbed any microphone they could find to call  - yet again - for everything from a provincial public inquiry into the state of search and rescue in the province to a new agency to regulate safety in the offshore oil industry.

The idea that we had to split safety from other aspects came up during the offshore helicopter inquiry.  The idea is popular.  Helicopter safety inquiry commissioner Robert Wells included it as one of his recommendations in volume one.

But here’s the thing:  what is a so-called separate safety agency supposed to do that we aren’t doing now or couldn’t accomplish any other way?

Offshore board responds to helicopter inquiry report

From the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board [paragraphing altered for readability; original here]:

The Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB) today responded to the final report of the Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry  entitled "Report and Recommendations arising from the Transportation Safety Board's Report".

The submission of this report signals the completion of the inquiry. The C-NLOPB wishes to extend its gratitude to Commissioner Robert Wells, Inquiry counsel and staff, parties with standing, families of the victims [of the Cougar 491 crash]  and to all others, most notably, Robert Decker, who contributed to the Inquiry and, in doing so, to improvements in offshore helicopter safety.

The report contains four recommendations.

Recommendation 1 is directed at the C-NLOPB and the remaining three are directed at Transport Canada
or Governments. The Board's response to each  recommendation is as follows:

Recommendation 1 - Alert Service Bulletins

We have accepted this Recommendation and have directed the Operators to develop a plan for compliance in conjunction with work they are already doing in response to Phase I Recommendation 7, dealing with Airworthiness Directives. We will ask the Phase I Implementation Team to provide oversight of the Operators' work.

Recommendation 2 - Helicopter Passenger Suit

We have referred this Recommendation to Transport Canada and the Canadian General Standards Board for consideration as part of their ongoing work to create a  new Helicopter Passenger Transportation Suit standard. There is a broadly-based committee engaged in this work,  including C-NLOPB, CNSOPB, Operators and suit manufacturers.

Recommendation 3 - TSB Recommendations

We have passed this Recommendation along to Transport Canada.

The C-NLOPB has already been engaged in a Focus Group to assist Transport Canada in their plans to respond to Recommendations in the Phase I and Phase II report. 

We have requested that the Operators determine what plans Cougar and Sikorsky have for retro-fitting the Cougar fleet.

Also, we have asked our Aviation Advisor to review with Transport Canada any plans for removal of the "extremely remote" provision. He will also discuss with them any plans to review the adequacy of the 30-minute run-dry requirement.

Recommendation 4 - Separate Regulator

We have forwarded this Recommendation to both Governments for their consideration. Recommendation 29 (b) in the Phase I report recommended that consideration be given to the creation of a separate and autonomous safety division within the C-NLOPB.

The C-NLOPB has acted on this recommendation by separating the safety and operations functions into two separate departments. The Operations Department will be headed by Mr. Howard Pike and the Safety Department will be headed by Mr. Dan Chicoyne.

Mr. Chicoyne was recently hired by the Board and he will take on the responsibility of Chief Safety Officer. He has extensive experience in safety and was the Chief Accident Investigator for the Canadian Forces, as well as the Director of Flight Safety for the Canadian Forces.

Mr. Chicoyne is also a former fixed wing and helicopter pilot in the Canadian Armed Forces and held the rank of Colonel.

While the C-NLOPB asked Commissioner Wells to review the TSB report, it also conducted its own review.

The Board's review did not identify any deficiencies or gaps in the current implementation plan. 

The Board is now satisfied that the implementation strategy developed in response to Phase I, with the change recommended by Commissioner Wells, fully encompasses all elements of the TSB report that needed to be addressed by the C-NLOPB.

Media Contact:
Sean Kelly M.A., APR, FCPRS
Manager of Public Relations
(709) 778-1418
(709) 689-0713 cell
skelly@cnlopb.nl.ca

- srbp -

Offshore board releases second part of offshore helicopter safety inquiry

From the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board:

The Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB) received the Phase II Report of the Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry today and is releasing it to the public immediately.

"The Board would like to thank Commissioner Wells along with commission counsel and staff for their continued hard work during Phase II and in completing this Report. The C-NLOPB will review the report and recommendations proposed by the Commissioner and will respond once the review has been completed,” said Max Ruelokke, Chair and CEO of the C-NLOPB.

The C-NLOPB will take up to 10 days to review the report and recommendations. The Board will not be commenting on the report until it has completed its review.

To obtain a print copy of this report, please contactinformation@cnlopb.nl.ca with a full mailing address. The report will be sent within three business days. Persons wishing to pick-up a copy of the report at the C-NLOPB office are asked to state this in their request.

Media Contact:
Sean Kelly M.A., APR, FCPRS
Manager of Public Relations
(709) 778-1418
(709) 689-0713 (cell)
skelly@cnlopb.nl.ca

- srbp -

Offshore board releases helicopter inquiry report

From the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board:

The Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board
(C-NLOPB) received the Report of the Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry today and is releasing it to the public immediately.

"On behalf of the Board, I thank Commissioner Robert Wells, commission counsel and the staff of the commission for their work during the course of Phase I of the Inquiry and with respect to the completion of this report," said Max Ruelokke, Chair and CEO of the C-NLOPB.

"I would also like to extend our thanks and appreciation to those who testified during the Inquiry for their time, commitment and contributions."

The C-NLOPB will take up to 30 days to review the recommendations and move toward the development of an implementation plan. The Board will not be commenting on the report until it has completed its review.

To obtain a print copy of this report, please contact information@cnlopb.nl.ca with a full mailing address. The report will be sent within three business days. Persons wishing to pick-up the report are asked to state this in their request.

- srbp -

A left wing Tea Bagger

Pity the poor federal New Democrats.

Just as they turn themselves in knots over a private members bill on the gun registry, along comes defence critic Jack Harris sounding like a left wing Tea Bagger but without Sarah’s Palin’s intellectual depth or subtlety of mind.

Harris managed to get himself standing before the offshore helicopter safety inquiry. The former provincial New Democratic Party leader decided that his closing remarks were a good time to launch another unfounded assault on the integrity of the men and women of the Canadian Forces who provide search and rescue service.

"As long as that Canadian Forces Response [sic] time is as slow as it is — and inadequate in my view — then there may have to be more severe restrictions on the use of helicopters to transport offshore," said Harris, MP for St. John’s East and defence critic for the federal NDP.

That’s the quote from a story carried by cbcnl.ca. Harris recommended that offshore helicopter flights be limited to daylight hours during the weekdays since, as the Telegram put it:

The Department of National Defence’s (DND) search and rescue response times are 30 minutes on weekdays from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., and two hours at all other times.

The only problem is that Harris knows the response is not slow, as he alleged, nor is it confined to certain hours during the day, as his comments suggest.  Harris knows the correct information that because of evidence presented at the inquiry.  The information is there.  Why he choses to ignore it remains a mystery.

The offshore helicopter inquiry, directed very ably by retired Supreme Court justice Robert Wells, has revealed a great many details of offshore helicopter safety and travel that many – likely including Harris  - did not know before. It is all information that should have led Harris to make other comments, ones that fit within the inquiry mandate.  That information was there as well.  Why he chose to ignore it and instead launch yet another attack against the men and women of the Canadian Forces remains a mystery.

But it is not the first time Harris has made comments contrary to the facts.  In an interview with CBC Radio, Harris called for an agency separate from the offshore regulatory board to set standards for offshore safety.  He made the comments while discussing safety standards set by Transport Canada, the agency separate from the offshore regulatory board that sets safety standards for the offshore.

On another occasion, Harris said that on the day of the Cougar incident, the Gander search and rescue squadron was “off station,” that is outside the province. They were not outside their operational area and, as evidence at the inquiry confirmed, the presence of all the region’s search and rescue aircraft in Sydney Nova Scotia for an exercise sped up some aspects of the response.

Harris has accused the Canadian Forces of failing to conduct a study of the Cougar incident out of fear of what might be revealed.  He had no basis for making the allegation  - yet another cheap shot - but yet he made it anyway.

Outside the bizarro world where Harris might be considered an expert in anything military, let alone search and rescue, it is hard to fathom why the New Democrat defence critic persists in sloganeering. Perhaps someone has told him that it plays well with the base.

Well, it is hard to imagine New Democrats being quite so stupid as Harris’ comments suppose. New Democrat voters are, in fact, considerably more intelligent than Harris’ remarks allow.  Nor are Harris’ comments consistent with what any Canadian would expect of a national party that is serious about wanting to form government.  But apparently, they do at least wish to pose as such a party.

Interestingly enough, though, when Harris had the chance to question Colonel Paul Drover at the Wells inquiry, he wasn’t quite as bold in his assertions.  Faced with someone who knew the facts, Harris would only cluck about the gold standard. In itself, that is revealing.

Harris’ anti-military comments reduce the New Democratic Party’s position to a caricature.  They diminish the men and women of the party.  What is worse, Jack Harris’ scurrilous comments attack the men and women who risk their lives to rescue others.

If Harris had the courage of his convictions, if he really is  - as some contend - some sort of an expert, he ought to do one simple thing:  go to Gander sometime soon and speak with the men and women of 103 Squadron and their families.  Not a private meeting, but one with media present.  Let Harris explain – in his expert opinion – how it is that 103 Squadron screwed up the Cougar response.  Let him point out why their response to search and rescue calls, generally,  is too slow and how they might do it better.

And then let Jack sit back and hear from the real experts. That would be something worth broadcasting in prime time.

Sadly, it will never happen.  But it won’t be because the men and women of the Canadian Forces are afraid of the results.

No.

It won’t happen for the same reason Jack says one thing to the media, but another thing when faced with a real expert.

- srbp -

If you could get him for what he knew…

Some politicians just don’t know when to stop.

On Tuesday, new Democratic Party member of parliament Jack Harris (St. John’s East) did an interview with CBC’s St. John’s morning radio show.  The subject of the interview was news yesterday that an offshore supply vessel working for Suncor had reduced its on-call fast rescue craft crewing from two crews to one. 

That met Transport Canada’s regulations, a point Harris acknowledged during the interview very early on by referring to…well… “Transport Canada regulations”.  Harris expressed some concern – others have too – have any reduction in available rescue crews in light of last year’s offshore helicopter crash.

Fair enough.  It’s a good point and, later on Tuesday, the company restored the two-crew standard.*

Had Jack stopped there he might have been okay.  As it is, the program host tossed Jack a question about the potential role in all this for the offshore regulatory board.  Jack offered the view that, as some people have been suggesting to the ongoing offshore helicopter inquiry, this might be a good occasion to review the possible need for a separate regulatory agency that just looks after offshore safety.

Minor problem.

The offshore regulatory board doesn’t do safety regulations.

Jack obviously knows this, as he demonstrated earlier in the interview. This is one of those decisions that remain the exclusive jurisdiction of the Government of Canada under the 1985 Atlantic Accord.

Therefore – try and follow the logic – if the offshore regulatory board doesn’t do offshore safety regulations, then some other entirely separate organization must do it.

Already.

So what is the frackin’ point of studying the need for a separate regulatory board  for safety when there is one already called Transport Canada?

There isn’t any. 

Obviously.

-srbp-

*  Clarification:  Suncor will only have two crews on standby when there are two rigs.  They will add the second standby crew when the Henry Goodrich is back in the fall to do additional drill work.

As the online CBC story puts it:

John Downton, communications manager for Suncor's east coast operations, said a second dedicated crew will return to the Burin Sea this fall, when the Henry Goodrich returns to work at Terra Nova.

Downton said Suncor, which merged last year with Petro-Canada and is the operating partner of the Terra Nova consortium, has been following regulations established under Canadian law, which require one fast-rescue craft per offshore installation.

"We meet regulatory requirements," Downton told CBC News. "We don't set the regulations — we follow them."

CNLOPB advises operators of changes to search and rescue practices

The Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board announced today that it has received some early recommendations from Commissioner Robert Wells of the Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry, which concern search and rescue practices.

Following a review of the recommendations, the Board advised operators of changes which are to be implemented.

The recommendations and the Board’s directions to operators are contained in  correspondence which is available on the Board’s website.

Update:

A key part of the letter from the Board to the offshore operators:

-srbp-

Cougar 491 survivor’s statement

Robert Decker survived the crash of Cougar 491 on March 12, 2009. The S-92 ditched in the ocean off St. John’s Newfoundland after aborting a routine resupply run to two of the province’s offshore oil production platforms.

He testified this week at the Wells inquiry into offshore helicopter safety. That’s an important point lost on some reporters and most of the ghouls – political and otherwise – who’ve busily been trying to capitalize on the tragedy for their own purposes. This is an inquiry primarily focussed on offshore safety.

Decker’s testimony was riveting and added considerable new detail to the events on that late winter day. The testimony was, however, tightly controlled, with Decker agreeing only to respond to previously agreed upon questions. The trauma of the event and its effect on him were painfully evident.

There’s an account of it at the Telegram. The full transcript is also available at the helicopter inquiry website.

Decker also read a prepared statement. His closing words should be heeded by all, particularly those who have used this tragedy for their own purposes. The ghouls should take note:

"If we really want to make offshore helicopter travel safe, what we have to do is to make sure that every helicopter does not crash.

"The best way to keep every offshore worker safe is to keep every helicopter in the air where it belongs.

"Safety starts with the helicopter, and I think everything else is secondary."

-srbp-

Big Oil’s New L’il Buddies and helicopter safety

While the offshore helicopter safety inquiry has given some people a platform for their false statements about search and rescue again, let’s try a scenario that is based on facts and reasonable suppositions. 

Let’s suppose, for example, that after the whole thing is over, former Supreme Court Judge Robert Wells makes some recommendations that – in the opinion of the offshore oil companies – would adversely affect the projects. 

Let’s take the Hebron project as a typical one.

Adverse affect might be cost in this case. 

For example, let’s suppose that Wells decides that – despite the very best and most intense lobbying by everyone from Jack Harris to lawyer Randall Earle – the cost burden for providing search and rescue for the offshore in St. John’s should still be borne by the oil companies.

Let’s suppose that Big Oil’s L’il Buddies fail miserably in their efforts to shift the cost to taxpayers.  Let’s imagine that – contrary to the campaign being waged -  Wells requires that the companies continue to provide SAR support for their own employees and their own helicopters. 

And let’s imagine Wells decides to up the ante arguing that they should do it 24/7.

All of that is either established fact (there is such a campaign underway, even if it is hodge-podge and disorganized) or is a likely outcome of the inquiry.

And further, let’s suppose the oil companies find that – for a whole bunch of arguable reasons – that cost is just too much to bear. 

Maybe oil prices have dropped down again to levels far below the current US$80 a barrel.  And hey, it’s not like oil prices will go up and up and up forever.

So there’s our scenario.

What does the provincial government do?

Well, the provincial cabinet would likely find themselves bound by section 5.1 of the Hebron financial agreements:

The Province shall, on the request of the Proponents…support the efforts of the Proponents in responding to any future legislative and regulatory changes that may be proposed by Canada or a municipal government in the Province that might adversely affect any Development Project, provided such action does not negatively impact the Province or require the Province to take any legislative or regulatory action respecting municipalities.

And before you start arguing that opposing the SAR regulation “negatively impact the Province”, you are really not reading carefully enough.  When the word “province” is written with a capital “P” it means the Government of the place.

So since the provincial government as such would not be negatively affected, they wouldn’t have the one and only ground that applies on which they could slip out from under their legally binding obligation to back Big Oil.

Of course, the provincial government is also really an oil company these days.  Therefore it would liable for the cost of providing those helicopters for SAR.  It  would be in the provincial government’s interest to work with the other oil companies against the Wells safety recommendation anyway. 

If money is really tight - after all  - and these extra costs threaten the Lower Churchill project too, there might be lots of reasons for the provincial government/oil company to fight such a recommendation.

This inquiry might turn out to be very interesting after all. 

Oh.

And we can expect the lobbying effort that benefits Big Oil – Jack Harris is a witness in the schedule, for example – to intensify over the next few weeks.

-srbp-

When it comes to reckless speculation…

at least CBC commentator Brian Callahan is an expert on the subject.

Since the Cougar helicopter crash this past spring Callahan has been pushing an attack on 103 Rescue Squadron based on the speculation that somehow 103 Squadron could have materially changed the outcome had it not been training at Sydney Nova Scotia at the time of the incident.

Callahan continued his irresponsible attack during a CBC commentary on Wednesday.  Give it a listen, if you will. 

Notice that he actually doesn’t make a case on this.  He never has.   

Rather, Callahan makes false statements.  He claims, for example, that the Department of National Defence will be as absent from the helicopter safety inquiry “as they were on March 12th.”  Callahan knows of course that both coast guard and the Canadian Forces were far from absent on the day of the crash and subsequently during the recovery of the bodies.  Callahan clearly knows nothing about search and rescue as he claims that 103 Squadron left its task to others on that fateful day.

And he suggests – in his reference to 26 years ago – that the recommendations of the Ocean Ranger Royal Commission were ignored.  That too is an utterly false suggestion. 

Words from last spring remain appropriate:

This sort of misrepresentation amounts to an abuse. 

It tortures the families of the victims of the crash by suggesting a hope which is false. 

This attack – and that’s what it amounts to – tortures the men and women of the search and rescue services.  103 Search and Rescue Squadron flies twice the national average in SAR missions.  Hercules from 413 Squadron join them far out to sea.  They all train hard and fly hard and risk their lives in weather when the rest of us are huddled by a fire safe at home. They do it to save the souls whose lives are at risk in the harsh North Atlantic. When lives are lost, as in this case, they will inevitably search their souls to ensure that all that could be done was done.

This attack abuses the men and women of Cougar. The company has an exemplary safety record.  The company has such a record because every single employee is committed to safe service.  Over 48,000 accident free flying hours don’t happen without such a level of personal commitment. The company’s crews also fly search and rescue services every bit as good and every bit as dangerous as the work done by 103 and its sister squadrons.

These misrepresentations abuse the members of the public who are shocked by the tragedy and who share in the grief of those who have lost loved ones. They are misled into believing things which are not true.

In a time of tragedy, it is hard to imagine more monstrous abuses. The tortures will continue until someone decides to put an end to them. Maybe a wise editorial hand needs to rest on someone’s shoulder.

In the meantime,  all that the rest of us can do is hope that somewhere in the midst of their self-absorption, the perpetrators of the abuse can realize the harm they are doing.

Sadly, Brian is not alone.  Some politicians have also taken to building platforms for themselves out of corpses and grief.

Sadder still, Callahan continues to get a paid platform from which to spread his misinformation;  the wise editorial hand is still missing.

Since the perpetrators of the abuse have clearly not realized what they doing, perhaps it remains a hope that Judge Robert Wells’ inquiry will provide enough fact to silence the reckless speculation once and for all.

-srbp-

Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry - links

The offshore board’s inquiry into offshore helicopter safety started in St. John’s on October 19.

You can find the inquiry website via the offshore board website or here: www.oshsi.nl.ca.

For the record, you can also find:

• A schedule of witnesses;
• transcripts and exhibits; and,
• live video streaming.

Transcribing is fast.  You can find the testimony from this morning already posted.

-srbp-

When politicians become ghouls

My grandmother used to tell the story of going to a funeral in a small community where one her distant relatives had passed away. 

The story happened so long ago that neither the place nor the time was important.  What is worth recollecting is her account of the people who attended at the cemetery for the committal of the body to the ground.

They didn’t stand around, a lot of them.  The onlookers  arranged themselves sitting along the top-most rail of the little white fence with the heels of their shoes hooked in the bottom rail.  My grandmother described them as being very creepy and ghoulish.

That image has come to mind several times over the last few months.  Too many politicians in Newfoundland and Labrador have tried to make a political platform out of the tragic deaths of 17 people on Cougar 491.

They were quick to rush forward with a bunch of ideas that all turned out to be completely false and they have persisted, especially in attacking the federal government generally and the brave men and women of the Canadian Forces search and rescue service.

These politicians want to have search and rescue service in St. John’s.

But here’s the thing:  their entire argument is based on the case of Cougar 491.  In that incident – as the events themselves showed – the passengers and crew died pretty much on impact. 

There is virtually no way – even in the highly unlikely situation that a rescue helicopter had been flying alongside the ill-fated Cougar helicopter – that a single additional life could have been saved.

Sad. Tragic, even. 

But true.

Now that the consensus among politicians of all stripes has taken hold, it is apparently spreading to some of the lawyers at the Wells helicopter inquiry.  To wit, we have the bizarre case of the lawyer representing offshore workers at the inquiry.    The lawyer claims that “if DND does not have the resources or the federal government is not willing to alter the distribution of  search and rescue resources,” then the oil companies will have to do the job.

That’s an “if” that is based on the false premise that additional Canadian Forces equipment would have made a difference in this case or others like it and that the only solution worth talking is that the federal government  - correction – the taxpayers like you and me - must pay instead of perhaps requiring that the offshore operating companies bear a heftier burden for life safety, including a SAR service that doesn’t take an hour to get ready and that can fly when the weather is bad or it’s dark.

That’s actually one of the rather interesting things about the position taken by politicians, Liberal Conservative and New Democrat, who have taken up the position on the fence-top calling out advice from the sidelines:  they’ve all leaped to a conclusion that doesn’t involve the offshore operators and instead fingers the feds.
And now their argument has reached one of the lawyers involved.

Maybe people should hear the evidence before they come to conclusions.

And maybe, just maybe, politicians should stop trying to make political platforms out of corpses.

-srbp-