BP Deepwater Offshore Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

1. BP Horn Mountain Spar

2. Horn Mountain Spar Basics
• Design Capacity: 75 mbopd, 68 mmscfd
• Designed with safety in mind
– Life safety systems and quarters blocked by a firewall from
process systems
– Equipment layout designed for ease of maintenance and repairs
– Materials handling considerations incorporated in design (hatches,
monorails, padeyes)
– Dry trees allow safe and less costly well interventions
– Passive vs. active ballast system requires less maintenance and
has less safety risk
– Plate deck containment

3. Horn Mountain Spar Basics (cont’d)
• Simple, proven facility design
– Used well-established equipment / vendors (Solar turbines,
Allan Bradley PLC)
– Electric motors in place of mechanical drive increase
reliability and decrease emissions
• Single Lift
– Onshore commissioning eliminated safety hazards from
offshore commissioning usually associated with a spar
– Commissioning was 91% complete when sailed
– No recordable incidents during commissioning and lift

4. Factors Influencing
Platform Design Selection
• HSE
• Operability
• Cost
• Lessons Learned

5. Horn Mountain HSE
After Two and half years of Operations:
• 0 OSHA recordable incidents since first oil
• 0 MMS INC’s
• Completed 2 COI Inspections with 0 findings
• 0 NPDES excedences
• Achieved ISO 14001 certification

6. Horn Mountain Operating Efficiency
• Ops Efficiency = Actual Production / IPC
– IPC = Installed Production Capacity
– Horn Mountain IPC = 71 mbopd
• Ops Efficiency Record
– Original Plan: 89% w/ rig, 92% w/o rig
– Actual: 90% w/ rig, 95% w/o rig

7. Horn Mountain Cost
• Capex: $$$
– Highest ROCE of all BP deepwater stand alone projects
• Opex: $$$
– Rated Best in Class in Ziff benchmarking study

8. Horn Mountain Lessons Learned
• Larger quarters
• Larger control room
• Complete onshore commissioning
– Water injection example (however, late change in the
project)
• Pipe supports to eliminate vibrations
• Check out ALL systems before project team leaves
• Take extra safety measures for dropped objects
because of open wellbay
• Inspect equipment
– Problems with compressor and dry oil tank

9. Horn Mountain Design Safety
HM is a fit for purpose design that BP
would utilize for similar projects in
the future.
Opportunities for improvement include:
• Integrate the control room into the
quarters
• Evaluate impairment of the TSR and
egress routes with respect to thermal
radiation and smoke from fires
• Integrate key studies such as fire and
blast analysis, smoke and ventilation,
dropped objects earlier in the design
process
• Evaluate potential explosions
associated with newly added gas lift
as part of the blast analysis.
• Utilize grating in areas without oil
processing or storage to mitigate
possible overpressure due to new
operating parameters
HM designed with many features that
enhance its inherent safety with
emphasis on minimizing leaks and
accumulation of HCs.
Key Features include:
• Qtrs separated from process areas
• Process and compressor equipment
located along the outside perimeter
• Layout maximizes natural ventilation
• Plated decks to minimize risk of HC
spills
• No gas fired vessels
• Laser Gas detection
• Quick exhaust of SDV’s
• No HP gas wells or process equipment
• No continuous flaring or venting
• Isolation and blow-down philosophies
integrated early into the design
• Blast analysis performed to ensure
safe operations