J. Scott Applewhite/APFred Bartlit Jr., principal investigator of the National Commission for the BP deepwater horizon oil spill and offshore drilling at the public hearing in Washington, D.C., on Monday.
The Federal Commission investigating the BP blowout in the Gulf of Mexico has ordered his story of disaster for the first time.
Eleven men were killed. but while investigators are your version of events together, the undertakings concerned are deepwater horizon rig April 20 on the still argue about the guilt is.
So, if you are looking for a decent explanation for the oil spill, you will be disappointed safely.Bob Graham, who is former Florida Governor and Senator, co-chair the Commission says it is wise to consider the words of the Federal Panel examined the space shuttle Columbia disaster in 2003.
"Complex systems in a complex manner," said Graham at a hearing Monday in Washington, D.C.
The Commission presented to a long list of things that went wrong in Golfregion.Es begins with bad cement, followed by a bad test to see if the cement hielt.Dann, missed people on the rig warning signs that expressed a blowout and there are still great questions about how well the last line of Defense, the blowout preventer behaved during the disaster.
But with all this began the Committee of chief assistant, a theatrical trial a lawyer named Fred Bartlit, questioning far spread conviction about the disaster - namely BP cut corners to save time and money.
"We have the hell out of this studied," he said."We welcome each giving something we've missed, but we see, a person or three people who sit there security and cost at a table in the light and do not have security for costs aufzugeben.Wir seen that."
As Bartlit, explained to the pieces of information in a single short story drag, he found that he agreed with BP's own internal investigation.
For example the Commission agrees with BP of oil and gas through the middle of the pipe in the oil well, not on and around its pages came up.
Representatives from the major companies involved the disaster were invited to the hearing to bezeugen.Und if you were asked whether anyone disagree the oil came about where the man from Halliburton said.
"I do not agree with to do the conclusion that is drawn," said Richard Vargo, who introduced himself as the plastic wrapping Manager for the Gulf region.
Halliburton's view is that the oil and gas industry was gepresst.Das up along the outside of the pipe a result of a bad well design by BP, Halliburton not requested because the cement job the Halliburton was bad.
Vargo's explanation about how got the oil outside of the pipe was very technical and apparently even confusing to the BP man at the hearing, mark Bly testify.
Committee asked attorney Bartlit Bly if he agreed with Vargo's explanation.
"Could I don't follow the logic of his description," replied Bly.
As the afternoon wore on, discussed evidence for and against these and many other elements of the Katastrophe.Und Committee staff complained that you never can get some technical problems, which at the end, because certain Senators blocked the Commission to collect ability to issue subpoenas and testimony under oath.
But William Reilly, the other co-chair the Commission came to the conclusion that at heart it was not a technical problem, it was a human error - an acceptance that the problem setting this well by a mile from water and two-and a-half miles from rock routine and manageable were everything.
"It is very difficult for me to find that there was no culture of complacency affect everything with this exercise with this experience", said Reilly.
The Commission has until mid-January to achieve his final conclusions on the deepwater horizon disaster and the hearing of Experts continues Tuesday.
Environment
No comments:
Post a Comment