The crew of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig failed to react to “multiple indications” of problems with BP’s Macondo well before it blew out, but divergence from industry standards and plans approved by regulators also played a role in the accident, according to a new investigation report.
The report, by the Republic of the Marshall Islands, under whose flag the Deepwater Horizon sailed, also recommends changes to procedures for activating emergency well-disconnecting systems and maintaining giant well-sealing blowout preventers on the sea floor.
But, unlike previous investigation reports, it does not attempt to assign blame to BP or other companies involved in the accident.
“We were just trying to go through the findings of fact,” Bill Gallagher, senior deputy commissioner of maritime affairs for the Republic of the Marshall Islands, said in an interview Tuesday ahead of the release of the 216-page report today. “We’re not into getting into naming and blaming at this point in time.”
The Deepwater Horizon, owned by Switzerland-based Transocean, which has large offices in Houston, is one of many deep water drilling rigs that carry the flag of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. As such, the island nation in the Pacific Ocean was responsible for overseeing the safety and integrity of the vessel.
U.S. Interior Department regulators had separate oversight of drilling equipment aboard the rig.
An April investigation report by a joint Coast Guard-Interior Department panel blasted the Marshall Islands for “ineffective oversight” of the Deepwater Horizon because it delegated rig inspection activities to third parties.
But Gallagher said lax oversight, either by the Marshall Islands or U.S. regulators, was not a factor.
“You’ve had a lot of regulators on board giving the actual thumbs up as far as the rig was concerned with no deficiencies pointed out,” he said.
In an executive summary of the report, obtained by the Chronicle on Tuesday, the Marshall Islands identifies just three direct causes of the accident — the crew’s failure to detect well control problems; deviation from standards of well control engineering; and deviation from well abandonment plans approved by the former Minerals Management Service.
The summary also cites “non-causal” factors including confusion about the chain of command aboard the vessel, especially regarding who had decision-making authority at the time of the accident.
And it called for better communication between the flag state and the regulatory bodies in the country where the rig operates.
The Marshall Islands said it based its investigation on documents submitted to the joint Coast Guard-Interior Department panel, witness testimony before the panel, its own investigators’ findings and outside experts.
“There was a lot involved in doing this, and we certainly didn’t want to rush the job,” Gallagher said when asked why it took more than 15 months after the accident to complete the report.
BP, which leased the Deepwater Horizon rig, has been accused of cutting corners? to reduce costs on a well? that was behind schedule.
But the British oil giant has contended that the accident, which killed 11 workers and launched the nation’s worst oil spill, was the result of multiple failures by multiple parties, including BP and contractors aboard the rig.
A final investigation report by the joint Coast Guard-Interior Department panel had been due by July 27, but it has been delayed.
And the libs all blame W, no matter what the facts may present!
This is a load of whitewash. Does not matter what you post.
Someone at the Chronicle will delete any negative comments.
Not so fast
This is merely the cover letter to the RMI report…
Where’s the BEEF?
I don’t know what tangle of regulatory red tape leads to a rig like this being operated under the flag of the Marshall Islands. But I have been to the RMI multiple times. It is a backward third world nation located on a chain of small islands. If the well-being of the environment in the Gulf is dependent on the oversight of the RMI, we are in big trouble.
If deviation from standards – especially engineering standards – is the root source problem why keep flogging this dead horse.
Drilling for oil on the bottom of the oceans and transporting oil in ships on top of the ocean is in itself a deviation from standards – especially engineering standards.
It can’t be done without some risk.
But we must!
Just allow the engineers to do their jobs and make their studies without interference from the courts.
We’ll be fine if the extremists are managed away from the decision making process.
::
GP
Your article highlights issues of competency but just as strongly it indicates a problem of complacency. There are paralells here with the NASA Challenger launch decision. In fact, I’ve written a blog about it in response: http://blog.lr.org/2011/08/macondo-incident-deepwater-horizon-nasa-challenger-human-error-engineering-factors/
silly goose!! nothing is ever the corporations fault!!!
What is obvious is why were there millions of gallons of oil suppressant readily available for use .. and what were the effects of using it to the sea life of the Gulf. Did this spill stop the Gulf Stream as many are saying it did?
Been There
Who ever said the Gulf Stream was stopped? Sure, it was a big spill, but halting an ocean current is more than just a stretch.