DOCSLIB.ORG

Deepwater Horizon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Deepwater Horizon United States Coast Guard Report of Investigation into the Circumstances Surrounding the Explosion, Fire, Sinking and Loss of Eleven Crew Members Aboard the MOBILE OFFSHORE DRILLING UNIT DEEPWATER HORIZON In the GULF OF MEXICO April 20 – 22, 2010 Volume I MISLE Activity Number: 3721503 Table of Contents Volume I (Systems and responsibilities within U.S. Coast Guard purview under the U.S. Coast Guard-Minerals Management Service Memorandum of Agreement dated March 27, 2009) Table of Contents i Prologue iii Executive Summary viii Chapter 1 | Explosion 1 Chapter 2 | Fire 34 Chapter 3 | Evacuation / Search and Rescue 46 Chapter 4 | Flooding and Sinking 72 Chapter 5 | Safety Systems (Personnel and Process) 89 Chapter 6 | Summary of Conclusions 112 Chapter 7 | Safety Recommendations 120 Chapter 8 | Administrative Recommendations 127 Appendices Appendix A | List of Abbreviations A-1 Appendix B | Lists of Figures and Tables B-1 Appendix C | Parties in Interest C-1 Appendix D | Crew Data D-1 Appendix E | Vessel Particulars E-1 Appendix F | Weather Information F-1 Appendix G | Final Action Report on the SAR Case Study into the Mass G-1 Rescue of Personnel off the Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit DEEPWATER HORIZON i Appendix H | Critical Events Timeline H-1 Appendix I | Potential Legal Issues Associated with Vessels Employing I-1 Dynamic Positioning Systems Appendix J | Synopsis of Audits and Surveys J-1 Appendix K | Examples of Transocean’s Non-compliance with the K-1 International Safety Management Code Appendix L | Post-sinking Analysis for DEEPWATER HORIZON L-1 Appendix M | Operational Risk Assessment M-1 Appendix N | BP DEEPWATER HORIZON Follow Up Rig Audit, Marine N-1 Assurance Audit and Out Of Service Period, September 2009 Appendix O | Results of Inspections & Surveys of Deepwater Horizon O-1 (2009-2010) Appendix P | Convening Order Joint Department of the Interior and P-1 Department of Homeland Security Statement of Principles and Convening Order Regarding Investigation into the Marine Casualty, Explosion, Fire, Pollution, and Sinking of Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit DEEPWATER HORIZON, with Loss of Life in the Gulf of Mexico 21-22 April 2010 Appendix Q | USCG Investigation Team Members Q-1 ii PROLOGUE On April 20, 2010, the Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) DEEPWATER HORIZON was dynamically-positioned at location 28o-44’ North 088o-21’ West in the Mississippi Canyon Block 252 of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). The MODU was performing drilling operations on the Macondo Well, which had been previously started by another vessel. That evening, a series of events began that would ultimately result in an explosion and fire, taking 11 lives, injuring 16 others, and ultimately causing the MODU to become severely crippled and sink. The casualty resulted in a continuous flow of hydrocarbons into the Gulf of Mexico for 87 days before the well was capped, causing the largest oil spill in U.S. history and significant environmental damage to the Gulf of Mexico. The tragedy affected the lives of hundreds of thousands of people who live along the Gulf Coast or rely on the various economies associated with the Gulf of Mexico. Within six days of the incident, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of the Interior determined that a joint investigation of the DEEPWATER HORIZON’s explosion, sinking, and the associated loss of life was the best strategy for determining the events, decisions, actions, and resultant consequences of this marine casualty. The joint investigation was conducted by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE). The Joint Investigation Team (JIT) used the combined investigative powers and authorities afforded to the USCG and BOEMRE. Personnel from each agency were specifically assigned to the JIT to accommodate the collection of evidence, conduct public hearings and inquiries, and coordinate forensic testing. The agencies operated under the 2009 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that identifies responsibilities of the Minerals Management Service (MMS) (predecessor to BOEMRE) and the USCG. The USCG and MMS entered this agreement under the authority of Title 14, United States Code (U.S.C.) § 141 – USCG Cooperation with other Agencies; 43 U.S.C. §§ 1347, 1348(a) – the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), as amended; 33 U.S.C. § 2712(a)(5)(A) – the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA); 43 U.S.C. §§ 1301-1315 – the Submerged Lands Act (SLA), as amended; and the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Per its Maritime Regulations, the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), the flag state for DEEPWATER HORIZON, is also responsible for investigating casualties that are categorized as “Serious Marine Casualty” under the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Casualty Investigations Code. The DEEPWATER HORIZON casualty falls in this category. To avoid duplication of efforts, the USCG and RMI investigators shared data and coordinated requests for information. Upon conclusion of the investigations, both countries are required to submit their reports to the IMO for distribution of lessons learned and possible enhancement of safety standards. Regulatory Structure The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), Title 43, United States Code, Chapter 29, Subchapter III, provides regulatory authority over activities on the outer continental shelf (OCS) iii to the Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Homeland Security, Secretary of the Army, Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Transportation and Secretary of Energy. The Secretary of the Interior and the Coast Guard (which has received a delegation of the relevant authorities from the Secretary of Homeland Security) are responsible for requiring, wherever practicable, the best available and safest technologies that are economically feasible, wherever failure of equipment would have a significant effect on safety, health, or the environment. The Coast Guard also promulgates regulations or standards applying to unregulated hazardous working conditions related to activities on the OCS when such regulations or standards are necessary. OCSLA specifically requires the Secretary of the Interior and the Coast Guard to individually or jointly enforce these safety and environmental regulations at least once a year. Such enforcement should include inspecting all safety equipment designed to prevent or ameliorate blowouts, fires, spillages, or other major accidents, and performing a periodic onsite inspection without advance notice to the operator. To meet these requirements, the Coast Guard and MMS signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to delineate inspection responsibilities between both the agencies. The MOU is further broken down into five memoranda of agreement (MOAs): OCS-01 Agency Responsibilities, OCS-02 Civil Penalties, OCS-03 Oil Discharge Planning, Preparedness and Response, OCS-04 Floating Offshore Facilities and OCS-05 Incident Investigations. OCS-01 established responsibilities for each agency and clarified overall responsibility where jurisdiction overlapped. Based on these memoranda of agreement, the Coast Guard performs annual inspections on U.S.- flagged MODUs/floating offshore installations and annual examinations on foreign-flagged MODUs. These visits focus on the safe manning and operation of MODUs and include inspection of: lifesaving, fire-fighting, hull integrity, vessel stability, means of egress, locations containing hazardous electrical equipment, machinery systems, electrical systems, helicopter facilities, cranes, navigation and occupational health and safety. In the case of foreign-flagged MODUs, the flag state has primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with applicable international standards. However, the United States can set requirements and conditions for conducting activities on the U.S.OCS, including those that are applicable to foreign-flagged MODUs. Pursuant to Coast Guard regulations specified in 33 C.F.R. § 146.205, foreign-flagged MODUs engaged in OCS activities must comply with one of three regulatory schemes, one of which is the International Maritime Organization (IMO) MODU Code, which contains recommended design criteria, construction standards, and other safety measures for MODUs. DEEPWATER HORIZON was a foreign-flagged MODU that engaged in oil drilling activities on the OCS. It was built and operated in accordance with the 1989 IMO MODU Code. Its flag state, RMI, used the American Bureau of Shipping and Det Norske Veritas as recognized organizations to conduct its required surveys and audits. The USCG periodically performed a limited safety examination, which included verifying statutory certificates, testing of safety devices, and witnessing emergency drills. At the time of the casualty, DEEPWATER HORIZON possessed all required valid documents certifying compliance with applicable international, RMI and USCG requirements. iv The Investigation Under the MOAs, BOEMRE is responsible for investigating incidents related to systems associated with exploration, drilling, completion, workover, production, pipeline and decommissioning operations for hydrocarbons and other minerals on the OCS. The USCG is responsible for investigating marine casualties involving deaths, injuries, property/equipment loss, vessel safety systems, and environmental damage resulting from incidents aboard vessels subject to U.S. jurisdiction. The MOA assigns responsibility in joint investigations according to these responsibilities. Volume I addresses the areas of USCG responsibility and Volume II
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mexico Energy Intelligence®
    www.energia.com Mexico Energy Intelligence® Titles of reports related to Macondo File # Published Updated Topic Pages Chart 1000030 • Apr 20, 14 Advances since Macondo: Well Integrity Management Systems & Halliburton’s 7 0 Technology Center This report comments on selected themes discussed at an industry conference that took place in Houston on April 15-16 on Well Integrity Management Systems (WIMS) and related topics. Presented by DECOM WORLD, it featured diverse speakers from operators and service companies, in addition to an exhibition area for vendors that included IBM as the Gold Sponsor. WIMS seems to have replaced SEMS, a post-Macondo initiative. The report includes observations of a tour of Halliburton's Houston Technology Center on April 16. Ideas from social science are offered to complement engineering advances. 093012 • Sep 30, 12 The Political Science of Industrial Safety: Have the Deeper Lessons of Deepwater 6 0 Horizon Been Learned? A visit took place to the Deepwater Horizon by a senior, joint safety audit team on the day of the Macondo blow-out. The team focused on occupational safety and ignored issues of process safety (e.g., tests of cement integrity). See The Journal of Energy & Development (Vol. XXXVI, No. 2, pp. 219-226). http://www.scribd.com/doc/112111810/%E2%80%9CThe-Political-Science-of-Ind ustrial-Safety-Have-the-Deeper-Lessons-of-Deepwater-Horizon-Been-Learned-% E2%80%9D-by-George-Baker 100103 • Oct 10, 11 The Political Science of Industrial Safety 6 3 This report seeks to abstract from the events that took place on Deepwater Horizon on April 20, 2010, in order to gain a picture of the inevitable changes ahead in law and regulation that will create a new regime in which both contractors and well owners will be jointly liability for accident prevention and accountability.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Southern District of Texas Houston Division
    Case 4:10-md-02185 Document 113 Filed in TXSD on 02/14/11 Page 1 of 182 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION In re BP plc Securities Litigation No. 4:10-md-02185 Honorable Keith P. Ellison LEAD PLAINTIFFS NEW YORK AND OHIO’S CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR ALL PURCHASERS OF BP SECURITIES FROM JANUARY 16, 2007 THROUGH MAY 28, 2010 Case 4:10-md-02185 Document 113 Filed in TXSD on 02/14/11 Page 2 of 182 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................2 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ........................................................................................11 III. THE PARTIES ..................................................................................................................11 A. Plaintiffs .................................................................................................................11 B. Defendants .............................................................................................................12 C. Non-Party ...............................................................................................................17 IV. BACKGROUND ...............................................................................................................17 A. BP’s Relevant Operations ......................................................................................17 B. BP’s Process Safety Controls Were Deficient Prior to the Class Period ...............18
    [Show full text]
  • Gulf Oil Disaster Complaint Exhibit 2: Deepwater Horizon Exploratory Plan
    United States Department of the Interior MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 120 1 Elmwood Park Boulevard New Orleans, Louisiana 701 23-2394 In Reply Refer To: MS 5231 April 6, 2009 Ms. Scherie Douglas BP Exploration & Production Inc 501 Westlake Park Boulevard Houston, Texas 77079 Dear Ms. Douglas: Reference is made to the following plan: Control No. N-09349 'n"L'e Initial Exploration Plan (EP) Received February 23, 2009, amended February 25, 2009 Lease (s) OCS-G 32306, Block 252, Mississippi Canyon Area (MC) You are hereby notified that the approval of the subject plan has been granted as of April 6, 2009, in accordance with 30 CFR 250.233(b)(1). This approval includes the activities proposed for Wells A and B. Exercise caution while drilling due to indications of shallow gas and possible water flow. In response to the request accompanying your plan for a hydrogen sulfide (H,S) classification, the area in which the proposed drilling operations are to be conducted is hereby classified, in accordance with 30 CFR 250.490 (c), as "H2S absent. 'I If you have any questions or comments concerning this approval, please contact Michelle Griffitt at (504) 736-2975. Sincerely, Dignally qncd by Michael M ic ha e 1 ~~b~~=MichaelTolbm,o. ou. go". <=us Dale: 1009 04.06 14:51!30 Tol bert -0soo' for Michael J. Saucier Regional Supervisor Field Operations UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT March 10, 2009 MEMORANDUM To: Public Information (MS 5030) From: Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231) Subject: Public Information copy of plan Control # N-09349 Type Initial Exploration Plan Lease(s) OCS-G32306 Block - 252 Mississippi Canyon Area Operator BP Exploration & Production Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Energy Corridor Year Event 1868 Louisiana's First Well, an Exploratory Well Near Bayou Choupique, Hackberry, LA Was a Dry Hole
    AAmmeerriiccaa’’ss EEnneerrggyy CCoorrrriiddoorr LOUISIANA Serving the Nation’s Energy Needs LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES SECRETARY SCOTT A. ANGELLE A state agency report on the economic impacts of the network of energy facilities and energy supply of America’s Wetland. www.dnr.state.la.us America’s Energy Corridor LOUISIANA Serving the Nation’s Energy Needs Prepared by: Louisiana Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Office of the Secretary, Scott A. Angelle Technology Assessment Division T. Michael French, P.E., Director William J. Delmar, Jr., P.E., Assistant Director Paul R. Sprehe, Energy Economist (Primary Author) Acknowledgements: The following individuals and groups have contributed to the research and compilation of this report. Collaborators in this project are experts in their field of work and are greatly appreciated for their time and assistance. State Library of Louisiana, Research Librarians U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Richard Furiga (Ret.) Dave Johnson Ann Rochon Nabil Shourbaji Robert Meyers New Orleans Region Office Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP) Louisiana Offshore Terminal Authority (LOTA) La. Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) Louisiana Oil Spill Coordinator’s Office, Dr. Karolien Debusschere ChevronTexaco and Sabine Pipeline, LLC Port Fourchon Executive Director Ted Falgout Louisiana I Coalition Executive Director Roy Martin Booklet preparation: DNR Public Information Director Phyllis F. Darensbourg Public Information Assistant Charity Glaser For copies of this report, contact the DNR Public Information Office at 225-342-0556 or email request to [email protected]. -i- CONTENTS America’s Energy Corridor LOUISIANA Serving the Nation’s Energy Needs……………………………………………... i Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… iii Fact Sheet………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231)
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT August 5, 2019 MEMORANDUM To: Public Information (MS 5030) From: Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231) Subj ect: Public Information copy of plan Control # S-07968 Type Supplemental Exploration Plan Lease(s) OCS-G36134 Elock - 629 Mississippi Canyon Area Operator LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. Description Subsea Well C and C-ALT Rig Type Not Found Attached is a copy of the subject plan. It has been deemed submitted as of this date and is under review for approval Leslie Wilson Plan Coordinator Site Type/Name Botm Lse/Area/Blk Surface Location Surf Lse/Area/Blk WELL/C G36134/MC/629 6100 FNL, 5062 FEL G36134/MC/629 WELL/C-ALT G36134/MC/629 6100 FNL, 5112 FEL G36134/MC/629 LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C. 1001 Ochsner Boulevard, Suite 100 Covington, Louisiana 70433 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G 36134 LEASE MISSISSIPPI CANYON BLOCK 629 Prepared By: Sue Sachitana Regulatory Specialist LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. 985-801-4300-Office 985-801-4716-Direct [email protected] Date: July 10, 2019 LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C. SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G 36134 MISSISSIPPI CANYON BLOCK 629 APPENDIX A Plan Contents APPENDIX B General Information APPENDIX C Geological, Geophysical Information APPENDIX D H2S Information APPENDIX E Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information APPENDIX F Waste and Discharge Information APPENDIX G Air Emissions Information APPENDIX H Oil Spill Information APPENDIX I Environmental Monitoring Information APPENDIX J Lease Stipulation Information APPENDIX K Environmental Mitigation Measures Information APPENDIX L Related Facilities and Operations Information APPENDIX M Support Vessels and Aircraft Information APPENDIX N Onshore Support Facilities Information APPENDIX O Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Information APPENDIX P Environmental Impact Analysis APPENDIX Q Administrative Information Mississippi Canyon Block 629, OCS-G-36134 Supplemental Exploration Plan APPENDIX A PLAN CONTENTS (30 CFR Part 550.211 and 550.241) A.
    [Show full text]
  • Future Supply of Oil and Gas from the Gulf of Mexico
    Future Supply of Oil and Gas From the Gulf of Mexico U.S. GEOLOGICAL SUltyEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1294 Future Supply of Oil and Gas From the Gulf of Mexico By E. D. Attanasi and]. L. Haynes U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1294 An engineering-economic costing algorithm combined with a discovery process model to forecast long-run incremental costs of undiscovered oil and gas UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1983 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR JAMES G. WATT, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Attanasi, E. D. Future supply of oil and gas from the Gulf of Mexico. (U.S. Geological Survey professional paper ; 1294) Bibliography: p. 1. Petroleum in submerged lands Mexico, Gulf of. 2. Gas, Natural, in submerged lands Mexico, Gulf of. I. Haynes, J. (John), 1954- . II. Title. III. Series: Geological Survey professional paper ; 1294. TN872.A5A87 1983 553.2'8'0916364 83-600030 ____ ____________ For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract 1 Introduction 1 Engineering-economic model 3 Methodology 3 Engineering data and assumptions 5 Field classification 5 Field design 6 Production schedules of oil and nonassociated gas wells 7 Economic assumptions and variables 8 Field development costs 8 Production costs and production related taxes 9 Assumptions for after-tax net present value calculations 10 Exploration costs 10 Industry behavior and market conditions 10 Forecasting future discoveries 11 Discovery process model 11 Estimated marginal cost functions for undiscovered recoverable oil and gas resources in the Gulf of Mexico 12 Conclusions and implications 16 References cited 16 Appendix A 17 Appendix B 20 ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Drilling Plan
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT March 10, 2009 f. I MEMORANDUM Subject : Public Information copy of plan Control # - N-09349 TYPe Initial Exploration Plan Lease (s) OCS-G32306 Block - 252 Mississippi Canyon Area Operator - BP Exploration & Production Inc. Description - Wells A and B Rig Type - SEMISUBMERSIBLE Attached is a copy of the subject plan. It has been deemed submitted as of this date and is under review for approval. Michelle Griffitt Plan Coordinator ! Site Type/Name Botm Lee/Area/Blk Surface Location Surf Lee/Area/Blk WELL/A G32306/MC/252 6943 FNL, 1036 FEL G32306/MC/252 WELL/B G32306/MC/252 7066 FNL, 1326 FEL G32306/MC/252 NOTED - SCHEXNAILDRE Initial Exploration Plan Mississippi Canyon Block 252 OCS-G 32306 Public Information CONTROL No. A'--? f9 1 RMEWER: McWe Griffitt I PHONE: (504) 738-2975 1 BP Exploration & Production Inc. February 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 Plan Contents 1.I Plan lnformation Form 1.2 Location lnformation 1.3 Safety and Pollution Prevention Features 1.4 Storage Tanks and Production Vessels 1.5 Pollution Prevention Measures 1.6 Attachments to Section 1.0 2.0 General lnformation 2.1 Applications and Permits 2.2 Drilling Fluids 2.3 New or Unusual Technology 2.4 Bonding lnformation 2.5 Oil Spill Financial Responsibility (OSFR) 2.6 Deepwater Well Control 2.7 Blowout Scenario 3.0 Geological, Geophysical, and H2S lnformation 3.1 Geological and Geophysical lnformation 3.2 H2S lnformation 3.3 Attachments to Section 3.0 4.0 Biological, Physical, and Socioeconomic lnformation 4.1 Chemosynthetic lnformation 4.2
    [Show full text]
  • Oversight Hearing Committee on Natural Resources U.S
    FINAL REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT’S NATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE BP DEEPWATER HORIZON OIL SPILL AND OFFSHORE DRILLING OVERSIGHT HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION Wednesday, January 26, 2011 Serial No. 112-1 Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html or Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 63-876 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Nov 24 2008 13:18 Mar 14, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 L:\DOCS\63876.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES DOC HASTINGS, WA, Chairman EDWARD J. MARKEY, MA, Ranking Democrat Member Don Young, AK Dale E. Kildee, MI John J. Duncan, Jr., TN Peter A. DeFazio, OR Louie Gohmert, TX Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, AS Rob Bishop, UT Frank Pallone, Jr., NJ Doug Lamborn, CO Grace F. Napolitano, CA Robert J. Wittman, VA Rush D. Holt, NJ Paul C. Broun, GA Rau´ l M. Grijalva, AZ John Fleming, LA Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU Mike Coffman, CO Jim Costa, CA Tom McClintock, CA Dan Boren, OK Glenn Thompson, PA Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI Jeff Denham, CA Martin Heinrich, NM Dan Benishek, MI Ben Ray Luja´n, NM David Rivera, FL Donna M.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas Imports and Exports Second Quarter Report 2020
    DOE/FE- 0622 Natural Gas Imports and Exports Second Quarter Report 2020 Prepared by: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Division of Natural Gas Regulation Map shows the Exports of Domestically-Produced LNG Delivered by Vessel. (Cumulative starting from February 2016 through June 2020.) NATURAL GAS IMPORTS AND EXPORTS SECOND QUARTER REPORT 2020 Division of Natural Gas Regulation Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Office of Oil & Natural Gas Office of Fossil Energy U.S. Department of Energy 202-586-7991 [email protected] Table of Contents Summary ......................................................................................... 1 1 Quarterly Summary ...................................................................... 3 Maps of Imports & Exports by Point of Entry/Exit ........................................ 5 Graphical Summaries & Comparisons ............................................................ 11 Tabular Summaries & Comparisons ............................................................... 23 1a Quarter in Review ........................................................................................................................ 25 1b All Import/Export Activities YTD 2020 vs. YTD 2019 ........................................................... 26 1c All Import/Export Activities 2nd Quarter 2020 vs. 1st Quarter 2020 ..................................... 27 1d All Import/Export Activities 2nd Quarter 2020 vs. 2nd Quarter 2019 .................................... 27
    [Show full text]
  • Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Recent Activities and Ongoing Developments
    Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Recent Activities and Ongoing Developments Updated April 17, 2015 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R42942 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Recent Activities and Ongoing Developments Summary In the wake of the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, 2010, federal agencies, state and local government agencies, and responsible parties faced an unprecedented challenge. An oil discharge continued for 87 days, resulting in the largest ever oil spill in U.S. waters. Led by the U.S. Coast Guard, response activities were extensive for several years but have diminished substantially: At the height of operations (summer of 2010), response personnel numbered over 47,000. As of April 2015, 30 response personnel, including federal officials and civilians, are working on activities related to the Deepwater Horizon incident. In February 2015, a Coast Guard memorandum announced that in March 2015, the Gulf Coast Incident Management Team (GCIMT) would “transition from Phase III (Operations) ... and reconstitute as a Phase IV Documentation Team.” As part of that transition, Coast Guard field unit commanders would respond to reports of oil spills in their respective areas of responsibility. As one of the responsible parties, BP has spent over $14 billion in cleanup operations. In addition, BP has paid over $15 billion to the federal government, state and local governments, and private parties for economic claims and other expenses, including reimbursements for response costs related to the oil spill. BP and other responsible parties have agreed to civil and/or criminal settlements with the Department of Justice (DOJ).
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production and Supply Costs Outlook (2016 – 2036)
    Study No. 159 September 2016 CANADIAN CANADIAN CRUDE OIL AND NATURAL GAS ENERGY PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY COSTS OUTLOOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE (2016 – 2036) Canadian Energy Research Institute | Relevant • Independent • Objective CANADIAN CRUDE OIL AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY COSTS OUTLOOK (2016 – 2036) Canadian Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production and Supply Costs Outlook (2016 – 2036) Authors: Laura Johnson Paul Kralovic* Andrei Romaniuk ISBN 1-927037-43-0 Copyright © Canadian Energy Research Institute, 2016 Sections of this study may be reproduced in magazines and newspapers with acknowledgement to the Canadian Energy Research Institute September 2016 Printed in Canada Front photo courtesy of istockphoto.com Acknowledgements: The authors of this report would like to extend their thanks and sincere gratitude to all CERI staff involved in the production and editing of the material, including but not limited to Allan Fogwill, Dinara Millington and Megan Murphy. *Paul Kralovic is Director, Frontline Economics Inc. ABOUT THE CANADIAN ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE The Canadian Energy Research Institute is an independent, not-for-profit research establishment created through a partnership of industry, academia, and government in 1975. Our mission is to provide relevant, independent, objective economic research in energy and environmental issues to benefit business, government, academia and the public. We strive to build bridges between scholarship and policy, combining the insights of scientific research, economic analysis, and practical experience. For more information about CERI, visit www.ceri.ca CANADIAN ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 150, 3512 – 33 Street NW Calgary, Alberta T2L 2A6 Email: [email protected] Phone: 403-282-1231 Canadian Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production and Supply Costs Outlook iii (2016 – 2036) Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Impacts of the Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry
    The Economic Impacts of the Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Prepared For Prepared By Executive Summary Introduction Despite the current difficulties facing the global economy as a whole and the oil and natural gas industry specifically, the Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry will likely continue to be a major source of energy production, employment, gross domestic product, and government revenues for the United States. Several proposals have been advanced recently which would have a major impact on the industry’s activity levels, and the economic activity supported by the Gulf of Mexico offshore oil and natural gas industry. The proposals vary widely, but for the purpose of this report three scenarios were developed, a scenario based on a continuation of current policies and regulations, a scenario examining the potential impacts of a ban on new offshore leases, and a scenario examining the potential impacts of a ban on new drilling permits approvals in the Gulf of Mexico. Energy and Industrial Advisory Partners (EIAP) was commissioned by the National Ocean Industry Association (NOIA) to develop a report forecasting activity levels, spending, oil and natural gas production, supported employment, GDP, and Government Revenues in these scenarios. The scenarios developed in this report are based solely upon government and other publicly available data and EIAP’s own expertise and analysis. The study also included profiles of NOIA members to demonstrate the diverse group of companies which make up the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry as well as a list of over 2,400 suppliers to the industry representing all 50 states.
    [Show full text]