The Need for a More Robust Well Design and Approval Process

The Need for a More Robust Well Design and Approval Process

Among the problems that complicated the Macondo well-containment effort was a lack of reliable diagnostic tools. The Deepwater Horizon blowout preventer had one pressure gauge accurate to plus or minus 400 pounds per square inch. This meant BP and the government could not get accurate pressure readings, which in turn hampered their ability to estimate the oil flow rate, undertake reservoir modeling, and plan for source control operations. In addition, the blowout preventer lacked a means of indicating whether and to what extent its rams and annular preventers had closed. Without such instruments, the government and BP expended significant resources on basic data-collection such as obtaining gamma-ray images of the blowout preventer and adding pressure sensors to the top hat after it was deployed. Meanwhile, the presence of rupture disks in the Macondo well's 16-inch casing led to concerns about well integrity that further complicated the source-control effort. BP had not considered the impact of these disks on post-blowout containment when it designed the well.24

¶Recommendation D4: The Department of the Interior should require offshore operators seeking its approval of proposed well design to demonstrate that:

¶
• Well components, including blowout preventer stacks, are equipped with sensors or other tools to obtain accurate diagnostic information—for example, regarding pressures and the position of blowout preventer rams.
• Wells are designed to mitigate risks to well integrity during post-blowout containment efforts.

¶E. Overcoming the Impacts of the Deepwater Horizon Spill and Restoring the Gulf

¶As described in Chapters 6 and 7, even before the Macondo well was finally capped and oil stopped flowing, major efforts were underway to mitigate and begin to repair the environmental and economic harm caused by the spill. Those efforts are continuing—and likely will for years. Nevertheless, any effort to draw lessons learned from the Deepwater Horizon spill for the purpose of developing options (as the Commission's charter states) to "guard against, and mitigate the impact of, any oil spills associated with offshore drilling in the future" would necessarily be incomplete without an early appraisal of progress toward longer-term restoration in the Gulf. This section describes the actions and initiatives that have been launched to assess and overcome the impacts of the spill, and presents the Commission's recommendations for steps that should be taken to ensure the following three goals are met:

¶
• The environment and the economy of the Gulf region recovers as completely and as quickly as possible, not only from the direct impacts of the spill, but from the decades of degradation that preceded it;
• The people of the Gulf are fairly compensated for the direct and indirect impacts of the spill; and
• Lessons learned from restoration efforts in the Gulf—including advances in scientific understanding, data collection, mitigation technologies and techniques, planning, and institutional coordination—result in enhanced capacity to remedy the impacts of future offshore oil spills and better manage the myriad economic, environmental, and social interests that must be balanced in the Gulf and other critical offshore areas.

The Need for Improved Understanding of Oil Spill Impacts, Particularly in the

¶Deepwater Environment A sophisticated understanding of the full range of impacts from a large-scale oil spill is critical to effective recovery and restoration efforts. Because, however, the concentration and toxicity of oil dissipate rapidly within the first few days to weeks of exposure to the elements, the window of opportunity to collect data in the aftermath of an accident is

narrow. For this reason, advance planning and rapid response mechanisms, are essential to capitalize on research opportunities.

Independent scientists, many of who are long-time scholars of the Gulf ecosystem or have unique capabilities, were eager to study the spill and contribute to the injury assessment. However, the independent science community's ability to participate early on was hampered by a lack of timely access to the response zone. This had the effect of diminishing what was learned from the spill.

Recommendation E1: The Coast Guard, through the Federal On-Scene Coordinator, should provide scientists with timely access to the response zone so that they can conduct independent scientific research during an oil spill response and long-term monitoring in the future.

The National Science Foundation, in consultation with the new National Ocean Council, should expand on its RAPID grant program to create a framework under which independent science during a spill can be coordinated, with an emphasis on data-sharing, communication, and timely access within the response zone. By ensuring that independent scientists can receive expedited funding after an oil spill, government will gain a more complete understanding of spill-related environmental impacts. A demonstrated commitment to independent science will also serve to bolster public confidence and trust. The rush to study the impacts of the Deepwater Horizon spill put a strain on existing scientific resources in the Gulf. Independent, industry, and government scientists all wrangled for funding, equipment and vessels, often duplicating efforts in the process. A program that effectively coordinates research initiatives and resources will provide a significant added value to the scientific community under exigent conditions.