UK: Macondo - One Year On

Last Updated: 28 April 2011
Article by Penelope Warne and Judith Aldersey-Williams

On the first anniversary of the Macondo oil spill it is important first to remember the families of those who lost loved ones in the incident and also the communities still affected by the aftermath of the spill.  However, it is perhaps also an appropriate moment to review how government and industry has responded to those events, both in the US and here in the UK.

US Regulatory Regime Overhauled

The Macondo incident has lead to a seismic shift in oil and gas regulation in the Gulf of Mexico. Although the immediate moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf was quite rapidly overturned, the inevitable reluctance of the authorities to authorise further deepwater drilling until the new regulations were in place means that it was really only at the end of February this year that new permits began to be issued for deepwater drilling – mostly the resumption of wells which had already been planned or underway prior to the moratorium but also a handful of new wells.

The regulators have instead been focused on a radical overhaul of their structures and procedures.  Alongside criticism of the parties involved and of the prevailing safety culture in the industry, the US regulators also came in for a high degree of criticism in the Report of the US National Commission on the Macondo oil spill (despite recognition that this was in part due to a failure of resourcing which prevented adequate recruitment and training of staff).

As a consequence of the investigation, the old Minerals Management Service (MMS) is being split up into three new agencies:

  • Office of Natural Resources Revenue

  • Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

  • Bureau of Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

The National Commission also recommended a move towards more goal-based legislation – using the UK's regime as something of a model - and BOEM has already responded to this by introducing two new rules:

  • The Drilling Safety Rule - this imposes tough new standards for well design, casing, cementing and well control equipment, including BOPs; requires independent third-party inspection and certification for each stage of the proposed drilling process; and requires an engineer to certify that blowout preventers meet new standards for testing and maintenance and are capable of severing the drill pipe under anticipated well pressures.

  • Workplace Safety Rule – under this rule operators are now required to develop a comprehensive safety and environmental management program that identifies the potential hazards and risk-reduction strategies for all phases of activity.

It has also issued additional guidance (in the form of its traditional Notices to Lessees (NTLs)) to operators on complying with existing regulations. The most significant guidance is:

  • NTL-06 (June 2010) - this states that oil spill response plans must include a well-specific blowout and worst-case discharge scenario – and operators must provide the assumptions and calculations behind these scenarios.

  • NTL-10 (November 2010)  - this requires each operator to demonstrate that it has access to, and can deploy, subsea containment resources that could promptly respond to a deepwater blowout or other loss of well control.  It is this containment issue that has delayed issue of deep water permits.

There is continuing debate in the US as to whether the current $75 million cap on strict liability for oil spills under the federal Oil Pollution Act 1990 should be increased (although it should be noted that, just as in the UK, there is no limit on liability in the US for pollution caused by negligence).

UK Regulation Reviewed

The offshore oil and gas industry in the UK is regulated by the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) and the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).  Following the Gulf of Mexico disaster, both organisations conducted a review of the UK's existing safety and environmental regulatory regime and concluded that overall it was robust and fit for purpose, reflected in the fact that there has not been a blow out on the UKCS for over 20 years. 

Following a six-month enquiry, the House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee (the "House of Commons Committee") also published a report in December into the implications of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill for UK deepwater drilling and has made 25 recommendations for changes to UK regulation and operating practices (see our  LawNow).

The HSE has reinforced its existing rules and procedures by:

  • Increasing levels of peer review of well design assessments and auditing of safety case acceptance for MODUs.

  • Introducing basic well control assessment for all MODU offshore inspections.

  • Creating an internal Deepwater Horizon Advisory Group focused on monitoring the outcomes from investigations into the Gulf of Mexico disaster and the Montara blowout in Australia to ensure that any recommendations which emerge are taken account of.

DECC also decided to strengthen the environmental regime further by:

  • Increasing the number of MODU environmental inspections by DECC inspectors, effectively doubling the number of annual inspections to drilling rigs.

  • Increasing the number of HSE/DECC joint inspections of MODUs.

  • Revising and enhancing requirements for Oil Pollution Emergency Plans (OPEPs), whereby operators must:

    • Be able to respond to a worst case scenario of a potential well blow-out that cannot be controlled in the short-term, requiring the drilling of a relief well.

    • Ensure proper systems, procedures, resources and staff are established to activate a response to any pollution incident.  This includes setting out procedures for locating an alternative rig to drill a relief well.

OSPRAG – Oil Spill Prevention and Response Advisory Group. 

One of the most significant differences in terms of the culture of the oil and gas industry between the US and the UK is the extent to which the industry and regulators in the UK work closely together to achieve improvements in practice.  An example is the establishment, only a month or so after Macondo, of OSPRAG, made up of oil companies, contractors, the HSE, the DECC, the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and trade unions.  OSPRAG divided its activities into four streams:

  • Oil Spill and Emergency Response Review Group - reviewing United Kingdom Continental Shelf regulation and practices concerning pollution prevention and response.

  • Insurance and Indemnities Review Group - reviewing the adequacy of financial provisions for such a response.

  • Technical Review Group - monitoring and reviewing findings from investigations into the Gulf of Mexico disaster and assisting the implementation of any recommendations resulting from such investigations that may be relevant to the UK.

  • EU Issues Review Group - working with European and other regulatory, technical and industry bodies across the globe for purposes of information sharing and to ensure a co-ordinated response.

A huge amount of very detailed work has been carried out and is ongoing within OSPRAG on all aspects of risk mitigation in relation to oil spills including preventing problems with wells in the first place, minimising the length of time and volume of any escape of oil, ensuring effective spill response strategies and ensuring sufficient financial arrangements are in place to cover the response to any spill.  (See its latest interim  report).  Some of the main actions to come out of OSPRAG to date include:

  • The commissioning of an oil spill containment device (being constructed by Cameron Ltd. which will be available from this summer to all operators in the UKCS through Oil Spill Response Limited (an industry owned company) in the event of an uncontained well.

  • The commissioning of scenario modelling work to establish the potential damage which might be caused by a sustained uncontained oil spill on the UKCS and therefore whether the current liability limits under OPOL (see below) are adequate.

  • The identification of industry best practices in well management as well as areas with potential for on-going continuous improvement. These have published as recommendations and a new Well Life Cycle Practices Forum (WLCPF) has been established to serve as the permanent forum for the UK upstream oil and gas industry to address well life-cycle related issues, which will report to the Oil & Gas UK Board.

  • A National Contingency Plan exercise will be held on 18 and 19 May 2011. The scenario for the exercise will be based upon a drilling incident west of Shetland and will include the deployment of physical response, potentially including aerial and vessel dispersant application, at sea containment and recovery and shoreline protection. The use of vessels of opportunity, including fishing vessels, will be exercised.

Offshore Pollution Liability Association Ltd (OPOL) limits increased

For companies operating in the UK offshore industry, there is no legislative limit on liability for clean-up and compensation resulting from environmental or other damage if their installations fail.  However, in 1975 the industry formed Offshore Pollution Liability Association Ltd (OPOL) to administer a voluntary industry mutual agreement whereby third party claims can be addressed rapidly on a strict liability basis (i.e. without the need to establish fault).  OPOL also serves as a form of reinsurance in that, in the unlikely event of default by an OPOL member, the remaining members will step in and assume liability for third party costs up to the pre-determined OPOL limit.  In light of the Gulf of Mexico disaster, on 18 August 2010, OPOL members agreed to increase the OPOL limit from US$120 million to US$250 million.  Above that limit, claims could still be made against the companies responsible but it would be necessary to prove negligence or breach of duty.

The House of Commons Committee in its report expressed the view that the new limit of $250 million is still insufficient to cover the costs of dealing with a blowout in the UKCS and that the voluntary nature of the scheme weakens its force. It therefore recommended that it should be a requirement of the licensing process that licensees prove their ability to pay for the consequences of any incident that could occur and also that Government consider whether compulsory third-party insurance should be required for small E & P companies.

Initial oil spill modelling work has been carried out by OSPRAG and is ongoing.  Although at present OSPRAG has stated that with the capping device on hand for rapid deployment, the new $250 million per occurrence limit should cover the third party costs associated with the majority of spill scenarios, there may be some circumstances in which these limits may not be adequate and this is still under review. Recommendations are now being considered within OSPRAG on how to ensure that in such cases, no costs will fall on the public purse, possibly through the formation of a top-up mechanism on a case-by-case basis that is above and separate to OPOL. All such recommendations will be dependent on the outcome of further industry and governmental consultations.

Ongoing issues

Many of the issues addressed by OSPRAG will require further work in coming months, even after the group is wound up, possibly as early as the summer – a new panel within Oil & Gas UK will take on any outstanding actions.  In addition, the industry will be following closely developments in relation to:

  • NGO activity: Greenpeace has challenged DECC's award of new licenses in deepwater areas in October 2010, arguing that it should have awaited full results of Macondo investigation, and reconsidered environmental assessments in light of the incident.  A judicial review hearing will be held in the next few months (see our  LawNow on this issue).  In September, Greenpeace briefly held up the move of the Stena Carron, employed by Chevron to drill a deepwater well west of Shetland, until Chevron obtained an injunction to end the occupation.  There was also protest from environmental activists at the recent BP AGM.

  • EU regulation of safety: Macondo focused the European Commission's attention on the offshore industry for the first time and lead to a communication entitled "Facing the challenge of the safety of offshore oil and gas activities" (Nov 2010) (see our LawNow).  This rejected calls for a ban on offshore drilling but proposed a single legislative framework for offshore operations, including EU "key requirements" for licensing, uniform criteria for offshore operations and independent evaluation of national regulators. While uniform standards may be desirable, there is fear in the UK that the goal-based approach which has been so successful here might be lost in the rush to ensure minimum levels of safety in member states which do not have the UK's history and experience in offshore oil and gas development.  However we await any concrete proposals from the Commission on this issue.
  • Minimum safety standards: For fail-safe devices, the House of Commons Committee recommended that Government should adopt minimum, prescriptive safety standards, and specifically that the HSE considers prescribing two "blind shear rams" (the device which failed on the Macondo well), rather than one, for blow out preventers.  The new Well Life Cycle Practices Forum will be liaising with the HSE over this issue.

  • New pollution regulation?: While the House of Commons Committee rejected calls for increased regulatory oversight from the European Commission on the basis that "EU countries without a North Sea coastline should not be involved with discussions on regulation of the offshore industry on the UK Continental Shelf", it did suggest that the Government work with the EU to ensure a new directive is drawn up that follows the polluter pays principle and unambiguously identifies who is responsible for the remediation of any environmental damage. 

Conclusion

The UK industry should be proud of its record in relation to drilling incidents but not complacent.  Although the regulatory regime has served as a model for others, there is always scope for improvement. It is to the credit of government and industry that there has been so much co-operation in the last 12 months to find ways to ensure that no such incident as Macondo ever happens on the UKCS. 

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 21/04/2011.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.