Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: pment that we had failures with. This document wasnʹt really utilized, because what we ended up doing was the major [original equipment manufacturers] have forms, like discrepancy forms, that when you send in a piece of equipment ‐‐ Cameron, for example, uses whatʹs called an FPR form, I believe itʹs field performance report, … We felt later on it was best to just have the equipment sent back to the OEM and let them do a formal investigation of any failures and to have them submit the inspection reports back to us. 364 Although Fry testified that Transocean relies upon these reports to make changes to their maintenance and should have ready access to them, the Panel found that the component condition documentation for the Deepwater Horizon was kept on the rig, and Transocean did not appear to electronically store the reports elsewhere. 365 Section 10 of the maintenance philosophy document further explained that all subsea equipment was subject to an approved 1,825‐day test and inspection/survey and, for the...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/18/2014 for the course BEPP 305 taught by Professor Nini during the Fall '11 term at UPenn.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online