CIC takes action on ONGC rig fire incident

[sidmis]

CIC takes action on ONGC rig fire incident
As reported by Rahul Mangaonkar,TNN, 19 Aug 2008

Ahmedabad: Did the Union minister for petroleum and natural gas give
an assurance to the Parliament that the report of the TN Rao Committee
set up to investigate the ONGC's Bombay High North (BHN) rig fire of
2005 would be tabled before it? And if an assurance was given, why has
the report not yet been tabled, two years after being submitted by the
Rao committee?

This would now be revealed as the Central Information Commission (CIC)
has ordered the ministry of petroleum and natural gas (MoPNG) to
furnish proof of the minister's assurance along with reasons for the
delay in submission of the report to the Parliament.

The TN Rao Committee was formed to investigate the fire on ONGC's BHN
oil rig on July 27, 2005 after it was hit by a Shipping Corporation of
India (SCI) owned vessel , MSV Samudra Suraksha.

The massive fire left BHN completely gutted, a Pawan Hans helicopter
destroyed and five days later MSV Samudra Suraksha sank.

Noted RTI activist Shailesh Gandhi had under Right to Information
(RTI) Act sought to know from MoPNG when the TN Rao Committee was
constituted and when did it submit its report.

He also asked for a copy of the report and if any parliamentary
assurance had been given, then copy of such assurance .

The central public information officer (CPIO) of MoPNG replied that
the independent inquiry was constituted on September 15, 2005 and the
report was submitted on April 26, 2006. But denied rest of the
information stating that its disclosure would be breach of privilege
of the Parliament and it would be disclosed only after conclusion of
debate in the house.

Before the CIC, Gandhi stated that the minister had not given any
assurance to the Parliament for presenting the TN Rao Committee
report.

MoPNG had given misleading information and their invoking breach of
privilege of the Parliament for denying information was unjustified.

The CPIO submitted that the Rao committee report including the ATR are
to be presented as assured by the minister to the Parliament. Gandhi
argued that if an assurance had been given then the proof of it be
furnished.

CIC held that denial of records relating to the assurance given by the
minister to the Parliament was justified . But denial of disclosure of
the assurance to the house itself which Gandhi had sought as untenable
since it would not cause a breach of privilege of the Parliament.

"More than two years have lapsed when the report was submitted by the
Rao Committee to the government . If an assurance was given to the
Parliament by the minister, the report should have been presented by
now on the floor of the Parliament, which has, however , not been done
for reasons unknown to the larger public," observed Information
Commissioner, MM Ansari.

CIC takes action on ONGC rig fire incident -Ahmedabad-Cities-The Times of India

[krishna_bangalore]

Actually i work for a Oil company i know what is the amount of Loss it is to lose BHN. I want to remind you that Samudra Sarvachan supply vessel was an anti drift vessel & how it went so close to hit the riser is another mistery, people say it was to lift a cook who injured a finger, but then who gave the orders to lift the person using a platform crane. Did any one know how much is the production loss that has happned?? Also i want to know why still Bid have not beeen issued for a new platform (MHN) in place of BHN, because an FPSO is standing there??? any kickback these ONGC guys are getting from the FPSO operator??? Lot of money involved......to lose a platform & build the same?????

Still it is not clear why the plant was not shutdown when the riser were punchured??? wont there be devises to check the pressure drop??? why there were so much of safty lapse???

Was the whole accident a sabotage????


Many questions unanswered