Marco Polo Marine subsidiary Marco Polo Drilling (MP Drilling) revealed that 180 new cracks, not including other defects, were found on all three legs of a jackup that the company canceled with Sembcorp Marine.
Marco Polo said according to Sembcorp’s second statement, the new rig is at the final phase of construction and does not deny the existence of defects found on all three legs of the new rig during two rounds of tests as set out by MP Drilling.
MP Drilling regards the nature and number of cracks and other defects found on all three legs of the US$214.3 million rig at this stage of construction wholly unacceptable.
MP Drilling also disagrees with the allegations made by Sembcorp Marine on 18 and 25 November that the firm is in alleged repudiatory breach of contract.
In August, a full preload test commissioned by Sembcorp’s PPL Shipyard was carried out on the new rig, followed by a full-length jacking test and thereafter a 100% non-destructive testing on all leg connections to spud cans.
Among others, 70 cracks were found on all three legs of the new rig, including cracks on the parent material, with a majority of the cracks detected at or near the weld joints on both the internal and external surfaces of the spud cans.
Following completion of the repair works by PPL in October, retests were scheduled, but PPL did not carry out a full-length jacking test prior to a 100% non-destructive testing as per the first round of tests.
Instead, the builder conducted only a full preload test, followed by a partial non-destructive testing on all leg connections to spud cans between the 30 October-5 November timeframe.
“Even without a full-length jacking test being carried out, more than 180 new cracks, not including other defects were found on all three legs of the new rig during the course of the second test. This does not include the condition of the external spud cans below water line, on which non-destructive testing has yet to be conducted,” said Marco Polo in a statement.
Therefore, MP Drilling maintains that it is entitled to terminate the contract. The group through their legal counsel notified PPL’s lawyers that PPL’s intended claim for payment of the second disbursement of the contract price is unjustified.
Since PPL did not accede to MP’s Drilling’s demand for the refund of the initial payment, MP Drilling has initiated the contractual dispute resolution process. Should PPL refuse to mediate, MP Drilling said it would proceed to commence arbitration against PPL.
Image from Marco Polo Drilling
Subscribe
