avoided or lessened these risks. here is what the plan review said. if you use the liner, there would be less issue with landing it shallow. there would be a second barrier to gas in the annulus and higher chance for successful cement job. now you said that bp was supposed to be focused like a laser on safety, yet bp apparently overruled warnings of its own engineers and chose the more dangerous option. how can you explain that decision by bp? why were the safety recommendations of your own engineers ignored? i wasn t involved in any of the decision-making. it is clear that there was some discussion amongst the engineering team and an engineering judgment was taken. it is clear to me that you don t want to answer your questions. because, isn t it true that you have served your life in bp? you only recently become the ceo but haven t you been in this business most of your professional life?
questions. because isn t it true that you ve served your life in bp? you ve only recently become the ceo. but haven t you been in this business most of your professional life? i ve been in this business 28 years. 28 years. so you should have some knowledge about these issues. and i sent you a letter in advance asking you, you were going to be asked these questionsed a to be prepared to answer it. how can you explain this decision where you ignore not you, yourself, but people who work for you, who should have known it was your directive to be a laser on safety how could they have ignored these warnings from people right within your company? it was clearly discussion between the engineering team as to what was the most appropriate course of action to take. an engineering judgment was taken. that involved long-term integrity. it was more than an engineering judgment.
to the top of the well. the safety document says if you use the liner and tie-back approach, which is what exxonmobil and other companies said you should have used, you would have avoided or lessened these risks. and here s what the plan review said. if you use the liner there would be less issue with landing it shallow. it would be a second barrier to gas in the annulus, and a higher chance for a successful cement job. now you said that bp was supposed to be focused like a laser on safety. yet bp apparently overruled the warnings of its own engineers and chose the more dangerous option. how can you explain that decision by bp? buy were the safety recommendations of your own engineers ignored? i wasn t involved in any of the decision-making. it s clear that there was some discussion amongst the engineering team. and an engineering judgment was taken. it s clear to me that he don t want to answer our
shep, across six hours of testimony before the house energy and commerce committee bp ceo tony hayward remained composed and cool never responding to provocations and refusing to join the blame game while various investigations are pending. none the less, lawmakers hammered heyward about the comments of the series of emails sent by engineers in emails the days before the explosion. emails that showed bp personnel cutting corners to save money. safety recommendations of your own engineers ignored. i wasn t involved in any of the decision-making. it s clear that there was some discussion amongst the engineering team and an engineering judgment was taken. it s clear to me that you don t want to answer our questions. chairman waxman wept on to accuse heyward of stonewalling. hay ward said he wasn t stone walling just that he saw nothing in the evidence that anyone at bp put costs over safety. at times, shep, the lawmakers seemed annoy by the witness and cool unflappable demeanor
mobil and other companies said you should have used, you would have avoided or lessened these risks. here s what the plan review said. if you used a liner, there would be less issue wilanding it shallow. there would be a second barrier to gas in the annual is and a successful chance for a cement job. you said bp is focused like a laser on safety. yet bp apparently overruled the warnings of its own engineers and chose the more dangerous option. how can you explain that decision by bp? why were the safety recommendationse of your own engineers ignored? i wasn t involved in any of the decision making. it s clear that there was some discussion amongst the engineering team and an engineering judgment was taken. it s clear to me that you don t want to answer our questions. isn t it true that you ve served your life in bp? you ve only recently become the