Injury Rates on New and Old Technology Oil and Gas Rigs … · · 2014-12-24This image shows drill pipe being dragged up the pipe ramp to the rig floor. ... Here is an image of
30
Injury Rates on New and Old Technology Oil and Gas Rigs Operated by the Largest Land-Based Drilling Contractor — United States, 2003–2012 Ryan Hill
Injury Rates on New and Old Technology Oil and Gas Rigs Operated by the Largest
Land-Based Drilling Contractor — United States, 2003–2012
Ryan Hill
December 2-3, 2014
Injury Rates on New and Old Technology Rigs, 2003-2012
Ryan Hill, MPH National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Intro if necessary. Thanks participants for coming. Full title: “Injury rates on new and old technology rigs operated by the largest U.S. onshore drilling contractor”.
December 2-3, 2014
Background
• Employment has doubled, rig count increased by 70% since 2003
• Overall, number and rate of fatal workplace injuries remain elevated
• Contact injuries are the second most frequent cause of death
• Increased use of automated technologies among U.S. onshore rig fleets
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Industry overall: During 2003-2013, the number of workers in the industry doubled - 293,000 (2003) to 587,000 (2013). The number of workers in 2013 is the highest number of workers ever reported by BLS. More than 1,000 workers killed on-the-job during the past decade, resulting in a fatality rate 7 times higher than for all U.S. workers. Contact injuries = 26% of all fatalities (n=279) Note: From 2003 to 2012, U.S. land-based drilling contractor employment rose from 52,000 to 92,000, an increase of 79%.
December 2-3, 2014
Number and Rate of Fatal Work Injuries, U.S. Oil & Gas Extraction Industry, 2003-2012
85
98 98
125 122
120
68
107
112
142
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
Num
ber o
f Dea
ths
Deat
hs p
er 1
00,0
00 w
orke
rs
Fatalities Rate
N=1,077
Source: BLS/CFOI and BLS/QCEW (2014).
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Describe the slide: # fatalities / fatality rate Generally, as the number of workers and the number of rigs has increased, so too have the number of fatalities. However, despite these increases, there have been recent improvements in the industry’s fatality rate (we recently found a statistically significant decrease in the industry’s fatality rate despite increases in the number of rigs and the number of workers). Nevertheless, this remains a high-risk industry in which to work – the industry’s fatality rate (26.4/100,000) remains 7 times higher than the rate for all U.S. workers.
December 2-3, 2014
Rate of Fatal Injury by Company Type, U.S. Oil & Gas Extraction, 2003-2012
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Rate
per
100
,000
wor
kers
Operators Drilling Operations Well Servicing
Source: BLS/CFOI (2014).
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The rate varies considerably by company type Rate of fatal injury highest among DCs (every year) Rate was 47.6/100,000, which is almost 4 times higher than the rate among operators (12.8) and almost twice the rate among well servicing companies (29.0) Finally, while the fatality rate is decreasing for all three company types, the rate is decreasing more for operators and well servicing companies Note: All industry fatality rate (2003-2012)=26.4 Drilling operations: includes contractors that specialize in spudding in, drilling in, redrilling, and directional drilling.
December 2-3, 2014
Fatal Injuries to Workers Employed by Drilling Contractors, 2003-2012
Leading cause of death to workers employed by drilling contractors More than 1/3 of the fatalities – major contributor to the elevated fatality rate. Purpose of this study was to compare injury rates to workers on rigs utilizing “advanced” technologies to reduce contact injuries and rigs without those technologies.
December 2-3, 2014
Helmerich & Payne International Drilling Company (H&P)
• Largest drilling contractor in U.S. – 15% of person-hours among onshore drilling
contractors
• OSHA recordable injuries among employers and contractors, 2003–2012 – New and old rigs used during this time
Presenter
Presentation Notes
We approached H&P, who agreed to participate in this study, and share their data with us. Helmerich & Payne International Drilling Company is the largest drilling contractor in the country in terms of footage drilled and well starts, and its workers account for about 15% of the person-hours among drilling contractor employees. The company collected data on all OSHA recordable injuries occurring among employees and third party contractors from 2003 through 2012, when both new and old technology rigs were used.
December 2-3, 2014
“New” Rigs - defined
One or more engineering controls designed to reduce exposure to rig hazards:
– Top drive – Hydraulic catwalk – Power tongs
…and an AC-drive motor
Presenter
Presentation Notes
From 2003 through 2012 H&P used six categories of rigs. Each was classified as new or old based on design characteristics. A rig was ‘new’ if it contained at least one engineering control that reduced worker exposure to hazardous equipment. Examples included a hydraulic catwalk, which is a mechanized handling system for moving drill pipe from ground level to the rig floor, power tongs, which are hydraulically operated tools for gripping and torqueing drill pipe, and alternating current, or AC-drive motors, enabling remote joystick control of the traveling block from a climate-controlled cabin. This allows a driller to control pipe rotation using a top-drive system with the ability to slow or stop drilling while maintaining torque.
December 2-3, 2014
“Old” Rigs - defined • Mechanical rigs • Silicon-controlled rectifier (SCR) rigs • Includes conventional rigs on which drillers
use mechanical brake handle to operate drawworks from rig floor
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Rigs classified as old did not meet the aforementioned criteria. They were either mechanical rigs, which rely on belts, pulleys, and other mechanical devices to control drilling speed, or silicon-controlled rectifier (or SCR) rigs that rely on direct current for power. On these rigs, motor speed is controlled by changing the electrical voltage. The old rigs category also included conventional rigs, on which drillers would use a mechanical brake handle to operate the drawworks, which is a type of winch, from the rig floor.
December 2-3, 2014
Top Drive Technology
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Rotary table: the revolving or spinning section of the drillfloor that provides power to turn the drillstring in a clockwise direction. The rotary motion and power are transmitted through the kelly bushing and the kelly to the drillstring. When the drillstring is rotating, the drilling crew commonly describes the operation as simply, "rotating to the right," "turning to the right," or, "rotating on bottom.“ Top drive: the top drive is a motor that is suspended from the derrick, or mast, of the rig used to rotate the drill string during the drilling process. The AC drive top drive and operating system enables the drill string to be electronically controlled from a computer touch-screen in the driller’s cabin, resulting in drilling efficiencies for customers, particularly when drilling complex unconventional horizontal wells. Replacing the traditional Kelly or rotary table, the top drive lessens the manual labor involved in drilling, as well as many associated risks. The top drive is integrated into the mast for quick transportation during rig moves.
December 2-3, 2014
Pipe Handling
Presenter
Presentation Notes
This image shows drill pipe being dragged up the pipe ramp to the rig floor. The process is repeated for each new connection, and may place workers at risk of being struck by rolling or falling drill pipe. This is a hydraulic catwalk. It’s designed to more safely and efficiently move drill pipe to and from the rig floor.
December 2-3, 2014
Making Connections
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Here is an image of rig workers using manual tongs. This process could expose workers to pinch point injuries, muscle strain, and blunt force trauma. This image shows workers using mechanized tongs. These provide added torque capacity and rotational capabilities, and require fewer workers to be in close contact with heavy moving parts.
December 2-3, 2014
Methods
• Variables include: – Year – Rig number – Rig type – Worker’s job type – Injury severity classification – Body part(s) affected
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Now I’ll describe our analytic methods. Variables recorded by the company for each injury during the study period included year, rig number and type, worker’s job type, OSHA injury severity classification, and body part(s) affected.
December 2-3, 2014
Injury severity
• Medical attention beyond first aid • Restricted work • Lost time away from work • Fatality
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Recordable injuries were categorized from less to more severe as follows: medical attention beyond first aid, restricted work, lost time away from work, and fatal injury.
Floormen are entry-level employees who perform rig maintenance and repair, trip pipes into and out of the wellbore, and assist in rig up and down activities. Motormen operate and maintain rig equipment in addition to performing many floorman duties. Derrickmen handle pipes and maintain the drilling fluid system. Collectively, these workers are known as roughnecks, and their work tasks are generally located closer to the wellbore. Separate categories were created for managers, drillers and pithands, and for third party employees, who generally provide support services.
December 2-3, 2014
Body part(s) affected
• Body part(s) affected: – Head/neck – Trunk – Arm – Wrist/hand – Lower limb – Other
• All rates calculated per 200,000 person-hours (equal to 1,000 FTEs)
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Primary body part or parts affected was categorized as head or neck, trunk, arm, wrist or hand, lower limb, or other. Consistent with the industry standard, injury rates were calculated per 200,000 person-hours.
December 2-3, 2014
Analysis
• Company recorded person-hours for each rig • Rates compared across job type categories • Outcomes grouped according to injury
severity and body part(s) affected • All analysis conducted by NIOSH
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The company recorded total person-hours by year for individual rigs, each of which had a unique identifier. Each injury was associated with a rig number and a year, and each rig was classified as new or old. Injury rates were calculated by rig type, which allowed us to calculate incidence rate ratios and measures of statistical significance. Injury rates were compared across job categories and outcomes were grouped according to injury severity and body part affected to assess differences in injury characteristics by rig type.
December 2-3, 2014
Results
• 57.9 million person-hours on New rigs
• 19.5 million person-hours on Old rigs
H&P operated 321 rigs during 2003–2012
Presenter
Presentation Notes
H&P operated 321 rigs during the ten year study period. About ¾ of the 77 million person-hours were recorded on new rigs. By 2007, we observed a marked trend toward increased use of new rigs and decreased use of old rigs.
December 2-3, 2014
Results Injury rate on new rigs was 33% lower than on
old rigs.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
There were 445 injuries on new rigs and 226 on old rigs. The overall injury rate on new rigs was 33% lower than the rate on old rigs, and this difference was statistically significant. Although both rig types had overall injury rate declines, year-to-year change on old rigs appeared to be more sporadic after 2008, coinciding with a marked decline in person-hours worked on old rigs.
December 2-3, 2014
Results – Injury Severity
Injury Type Old Rigs New Rigs Rate
Ratio p-value
# Injuries Rate* # Injuries Rate*
Med. Attention 131 1.35 276 0.95 0.70 <0.01
Restricted Work 74 0.76 131 0.45 0.59 <0.01
Lost time 21 0.22 34 0.12 0.55 0.03
Fatality 0 0 4 0.01 n/a n/a
Total 226 2.32 445 1.54 0.66 <0.01
*Rate per 200,000 manhours.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Describe the table: injury type, number/rate by rig type, rate ratio (new/old)
December 2-3, 2014
Results – Injury Severity
Injury Type Old Rigs New Rigs Rate
Ratio p-value
# Injuries Rate* # Injuries Rate*
Med. Attention 131 1.35 276 0.95 0.70 <0.01
Restricted Work 74 0.76 131 0.45 0.59 <0.01
Lost time 21 0.22 34 0.12 0.55 0.03
Fatality 0 0 4 0.01 n/a n/a
Total 226 2.32 445 1.54 0.66 <0.01
*Rate per 200,000 manhours.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
New rigs had lower rates of injuries requiring medical attention, restricted work, and lost time away from work. Lost time injuries, which are the most severe non-fatal category, had the lowest rate ratio, with the rate on new rigs about half of that observed on old rigs. In other words, the rate was 45% lower on new rigs vs. old. Each of the four fatalities occurred on new rigs.
The difference in injury rates on old and new rigs for floormen, motormen, and derrickmen were statistically significant. There was no significant difference for the manager/driller or third party contractor categories. Floormen had the highest injury rate on both old and new rigs, while motormen had the lowest injury rate ratio. Motorman - the member of the rig crew responsible for maintenance of the engines. While all members of the rig crew help with major repairs, the motorman does routine preventive maintenance and minor repairs.
Rates of arm, wrist or hand, and lower limb injuries were lower on new rigs, but there was no statistically significant difference for other body parts. Three injuries in the ‘other’ category were related to heat or cold exposure. The four fatalities mentioned previously occurred on new rigs. Each fatality resulted from an injury to the head/neck or trunk. Two incidents involved third party employees—one was a struck by injury and one was an electrocution. One involved a driller who suffered a fatal pinch point injury, and one involved a floorman who was fatally struck by a moving object.
December 2-3, 2014
Discussion
Within the same company/fleet, injury rates lower on new, advanced rigs: • RWC/LTI rates lower on new rigs • Highest-risk occupations realized most benefit • Limb injury rates lower on new rigs
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Most serious non-fatal injuries had lowest rates Floormen had a significantly lower rate on new rigs, but it was still more than 3 times higher than the rate for any other job type. Future initiatives to improve engineering controls and safety programs should devote special attention to this category of workers. Although those in the manager/driller and third party categories didn’t have significant injury rate differences by rig type, 153 recordable injuries still occurred within these categories, and health and safety initiatives should also include considerations for these employees. Many of the advanced technologies adopted by H&P focus on limiting worker interaction with drill pipe and tongs. Injuries to arms, hands, and lower limbs were all reduced on new rigs. However, there was little difference between old/new rigs with regards to head injuries, which is another area that should receive additional attention.
December 2-3, 2014
Limitations
• May not be generalizable to all drilling contractors
• Unable to account for differences in worker experience and training
• No demographic or environmental risk factor data
Presenter
Presentation Notes
These findings may not be generalizable to all drilling contractors. To better characterize sector-wide trends in rig technology and associated injury outcomes, future work could include data from additional companies with fleets consisting of both new and old rigs. Without data on job tenure or employee certifications, we couldn’t account for differences in worker experience and training, both of which are crucial components of workplace safety promotion. Because we assessed incidence at the rig level without complementary demographic data on individual or relevant environmental factors, it could be that characteristics disproportionately associated with one rig type may explain part of the difference in injury rates. However, because H&P operated old and new rigs concurrently across a wide area, it’s unlikely that ecological factors substantially influenced results.
December 2-3, 2014
Conclusions • First study focused on relationship between
rig technology and injury rates within land-based oil and gas extraction industry
• For this large drilling contractor, new rigs appear to provide safer work environment
Presenter
Presentation Notes
To our knowledge this was the first study focused on injury rates within the onshore U.S. oil and gas extraction industry. For this large drilling contractor, newer rigs appear to provide a safer work environment, especially for employees with the most exposure to heavy equipment. Rig safety is emphasized in the National Occupational research Agenda, which targets a 50% reduction in injuries within the industry by 2020. Continued growth in U.S. natural gas production could have sweeping economic, environmental, and health implications. In light of these findings, the potential impact of industry growth on worker health is cause for increased consideration of engineering controls as a method for improving rig safety.
December 2-3, 2014
Acknowledgments
• Warren Hubler (H&P) • David Blackley (NIOSH) • Kyla Retzer (NIOSH) • Scott Laney (NIOSH)
