A couple of concerns:
- The report relies heavily on anecdotes and qualitative judgments attributed to unnamed individuals. For example, twelve sources are cited in the footnotes on page 6, but only one is mentioned by name. No information is provided about the qualifications or responsibilities of the unnamed sources, so it is difficult to assess the significance of their comments.
- The narrative ends rather abruptly without any discussion about the decision to continue with the relief well after the successful static kill operation. The report simply states that BP proceeded with the relief well to finally kill Macondo. As indicated previously on BOE, this is not entirely accurate. Macondo was already killed, and the well could have been secured through conventional plugging and abandonment procedures. The relief well was presumably continued to verify that the annulus was sealed and provide information that might be useful as part of the investigation. However, the relief well did not kill the well and the intercept was not necessary for that purpose.
Leave a Reply