US Congressman Bart Stupak thinks that we will see companies take a much more sober view of their integrity, corporate behaviour and the consequences of an accident. And that the US needs a regulatory regime that blends prescriptive and performance based regulations.
The Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig, owned and operated by Transocean and leased to BP first made history in September 2009. Then, the rig drilled the deepest oil well in history at a vertical depth of 35,050 ft (10,683 m) in the Tiber field, approximately 250 miles (400 km) southeast of Houston, in 4,132 feet (1,259 m) of water.
Sadly, though, the Deepwater Horizon will be best known for the blow out of the Macondo Well on 20 April 2010, an ensuing explosion that killed 11 crewmen and ignited a fireball visible from 35 miles
(56 km) away. The resulting fire could not be extinguished and, on 22 April 2010, Deepwater Horizon sank, leaving the well gushing at the sea floor and causing the largest offshore oil spill in United States history.
US Congressional responses to the oil spill included at least 32 hearings in ten committees in the US House of Representatives and at least 27 hearings in eight committees in the US Senate. The US Congress introduced over 150 legislative proposals that would have a broad impact on the energy industry, particularly offshore drilling. When the 111th Congress adjourned in December, only one bill was enacted into law, Public Law 111-191, which allows the Coast Guard to advance additional funds from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund for response efforts.
In the US House of Representatives, the Energy and Commerce Committee has jurisdiction over the production, storage, supply, marketing, pricing, and regulation of energy resources. The Honorable Bart Stupak served on the Energy and Commerce Committee since 1995 and as Chairman of its Oversight and Investigation Subcommittee since 2007. As Chairman, he lead investigations into security breaches at US nuclear labs, the BP pipeline rupture in Prudhoe Bay and, most notably, the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
How has the Deepwater Horizon affected American society and the US energy industry?
“The full impact is yet to be known, but clearly it has impacted the lives of those living along the Gulf Coast and those working in both the energy and fishing industries. It is clear that American energy needs require an energy mix and now, more than ever, the public expects a full assessment and understanding of the risks involved in energy production. In the long term, I believe this will lead the United States to finally develop and implement a national energy policy to provide for energy independence and security.”
What were some of the common mistakes, lapses or errors that you observed while serving on the Energy and Commerce Committee?
“Three things immediately come to mind. First, I was surprised at the similarity of the response plans of five oil companies drilling in the Gulf of Mexico in both content and errors. This cookie cutter approach was alarming, as I would expect that the response plans were developed based upon the company’s operations, its assets and resources available or contracted, and risk assessments.
“Second, time and time again, we have observed a cavalier approach to safety, risk assessments and contingency plans and solid operating procedures, especially what I would call operational discipline. One good example is inattention to maintenance and repair.”
“Third, and this was raised several times in the hearings, is that corporate responsibility and regulatory compliance are not mutually exclusive. That is, a company must comply with the regulations, but compliance alone is no longer sufficient. After all, regulations are minimum standards, they take time to develop and implement and they usually lag technology. So, more and more, there are expectations for companies to do more than just meet a regulatory requirement. People expect companies to take responsibilities for actions that may impact the environment, employees, customers, communities – well, the full range of stakeholders. They want companies to include these interests in corporate policies and decisions. They don’t want to see companies shrug these responsibilities in the absence of a regulation. Maybe the short answer is ignoring risk, tolerating non-compliance and allowing incompetence.”
When all the investigations are completed, what do you see for the future safety, regulatory regimes, and oil exploration and production?
“Well, I see much more regulatory emphasis on safety, especially the use of new technology. I am very interested in seeing DNV’s proposed regulatory regime that blends prescriptive and performance based regulations move forward. We need a combination of the two to set the safety floor and then performance based regulations to encourage the timely implementation of best practices, lessons learned from operations, new technology and to cement safety as a cornerstone of a company culture. I believe that independent, third-party verification will be a larger part of the regulatory regime and, in fact, this was included in much of the post-Deepwater Horizon legislation in Congress. Overall, I think that we will finally see companies take a much more sober view of their integrity, corporate behavior and the consequences of an accident.”
What about the future of renewable energy in the US?
“I don’t believe that the Deepwater Horizon was the pivotal event to stimulate more activity in renewable energy in the US. The Energy and Commerce Committee has responsibility for the US Energy policy, in general, and has promoted legislation such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act. So, renewable energy, such as wind, solar, wave and geothermal, has been a part of the US energy policy. If anything, there is much more awareness that the US needs the full mix for its energy portfolio and that it must be provided safely.”