Three Other Transocean Oil Wells Had Safety Problems

Posted in BP British Petroleum,Deepwater Horizon,Environment,Gulf Coast,Transocean on August 9, 2010

NEW YORK TIMES – According to an article in the New York Times, Transocean, the company that owned the ill-fated Deepwater Horizon, had safety concerns for several of its drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico prior to the April, 2010 disaster.

According to confidential internal reports, about a month before the explosion and subsequent loss of the Deepwater Horizon Transocean commissioned a risk management company, Lloyd’s Register, to investigate three other wells in the Gulf of Mexico plus Transocean’s Houston headquarters.

According to the New York Times article, the investigation was conducted by the company “to assess its safety culture” following “a series of serious accidents and near-hits within the global organization.”

The confidential internal reports mentioned in the article offered “an unusually candid view of safety and maintenance concerns” within Transocean. There were earlier reports of problems on the Deepwater Horizon that appeared in the Times but these new confidential internal reports showed that the drilling company had problems with other drilling rigs before the April 20th explosion on the Deepwater Horizon.

There has been a lingering mystey from the April 20 disaster – and that is, “why did the oil rig sink?” The new documents shed some light on this mystery because they show that “there were problems with the Deepwater Horizon’s ballast system that was responsible for keeping the rig afloat and stable.”

The Times article makes the important point that the disastrous oil leak might not have occurred if the Deepwater Horizon had not sunk.

The Times article also points out that there are also newly released internal reports from Transocean concerning the Deepwater Horizon’s equipment.

The article goes on to say that the equipment reports “identify dozens of deficiencies.” Some of the deficiencies that are described in the reports relate to the rig’s blowout preventer and some that are categorized as:

Critical equipment items that may lead to loss of life, serious injury or environmental damage as a result of inadequate use and/or failure of equipment.

The Times article goes on to say that a stifling bureaucracy imposed by Transocean’s onshore management in addition to a “lack of hands-on experience for workers and managers” were both contributing factors in the safety concerns at the company. Investigators found that this environment has led to “widespread resentment among rig workers.”

Source: New York Times

Published by Houston maritime lawyer Gordon, Elias & Seely, LLP