Unhealthy levels of air in Twin Cities and central Minnesota

MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all. 

Turn Up Your Support

Officials from BP PLC told Congress Tuesday the  massive Gulf
oil spill was caused by the failure of a key safety device made by
another company.


      In turn, that company said BP was in charge, and that a third
company that poured concrete to plug the exploratory well didn't do
it right. The third company, which was plugging the well in
anticipation of future production, says it was only following BP's
plan.


      The blame game shot into the open Tuesday as the Senate began a
hearing into the oil spill that has been contaminating water in the
Gulf of Mexico for three weeks and threatens sensitive marshes and
marine life from Louisiana to Florida.


      Executives of the three companies, testifying before the Senate
Energy and Natural Resources Committee, acknowledged investigators
have yet to pinpoint definitively the cause of the well explosion
April 20 or why the oil was not contained, but they spent little
time before trying to shift responsibility for the environmental
crisis to each other.


      In opening the hearing, Sen. Jeff Bingaman, the committee's
chairman, said the failures that led to explosion and spill need to
be closely examined so new safety measures can be imposed.


      "I don't believe it is enough to label this catastrophic
failure an unpredictable and unforeseeable occurrence," said
Bingaman, D-N.M.


      Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, the panel's ranking Republican,
said the future of domestic oil development in this country rests
with finding out what went wrong, correcting the failures and
shortcomings and assuring the public offshore drilling can be
conducted safely.


      Murkowski and several other senators made clear they didn't like
the finger pointing.


      "I would suggest to all three of you that we are all in this
together," she told the executives, who were sitting shoulder to
shoulder at the witness table, "because this incident will have
impact on developing of our energy policy for this country."


      "I hear one message - don't blame me," said Sen. John
Barrasso, R-Wyo. "Shifting the blame game doesn't get us very
far."


      The hearing, with a second one planned by another Senate
committee later in the day, marked the first public questioning by
members of Congress of executives of BP, which owned the
exploratory well and was overall operator; Swiss-based Transocean
Ltd., which owned the drilling rig and key well safety equipment,
and Halliburton Inc., which worked on sealing the well for future
oil production.


      BP PLC focused on a critical safety device, the 450-ton blowout
protector, that was supposed to shut off oil flow on the ocean
floor in the event of a well blowout but "failed to operate."


      "That was to be the fail-safe in case of an accident," Lamar
McKay, chairman of BP America, pointedly noting that it did not own
the rig and that "responsibility for the safety of drilling
operations" belonged to Transocean.


      Of the 126 people on the Deepwater Horizon rig when it was
engulfed in flames, only seven were BP employees, he said.


      But Transocean CEO Steven Newman emphasized BP's role.


      "Offshore oil and gas production projects begin and end with
the operator, in this case BP," said Newman. 


He said it was BP
that prepared the drilling plan and BP that gave the go-ahead to
fill the well pipe with sea water before a final cement cap was
installed, reducing the downward pressure.


      The executives said this was a practice that was being used
frequently and that BP got approval from the federal Minerals
Management Service.
  

    Newman said there is "no reason to believe" its blowout
protector didn't work and that it might have been clogged by debris
shooting up the well.


      The explosion, believed likely to have originated from upward
surging methane gas within the well, came three days after the
drilling process was essentially completed, said Newman, pointing a
figure at yet a third company, Halliburton Inc., which as a
subcontractor was encasing the well pipe in cement before plugging
it.


      But Halliburton executive Tim Probert said they followed a
process dictated by BP's drilling plan and the company's work was
done "in accordance with the requirements" set out by BP and
followed accepted industry practices.


      BP and Transocean are conducting separate investigations into
what went wrong.


      Meanwhile, on the Gulf coast, crews replenished supplies,
including fuel and water, preparing for the long haul in their
struggle to stop the flow of oil. 


A supply boat, the Joe Griffin,
that brought a 100-ton containment box to the site that ultimately
didn't work, pumped roughly 100,000 gallons of fuel into the tanks
of a vessel that is drilling the relief well. It's expected to take
up to three months to complete such a well.


      Daily activity sheets for the vessels in the containment area
reviewed by The Associated Press were light on substantive plans
for several of the boats surrounding the main leak on Tuesday.
Several were standing by for further instructions.
      

Gallery

BP preps second attempt to stop oil leak

Klobuchar, Oberstar get aerial tour of Gulf oil spill

Oil blowout shows the risk of thinking the unlikely is impossible

Environmental News

Executives of three companies, testifying before a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, wasted little time before trying to shift responsibility for the environmental
crisis to each other.

Blame game begins in wake of Gulf oil spill

Go Deeper.

Like this?

News you can use in your inbox