Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][subsumed]

Mr. DOWNING. Now, tell me briefly how and why the Santa Barbara spill occurred.

Mr. EDWARDS. Well, probably I am not the best one to ask not being a petroleum engineer.

I can give you an explanation from a layman's standpoint, but I think it might be best to have the Geological Survey respond to that question.

Mr. DOWNING. I would prefer it from a layman's standpoint.

Mr. EDWARDS. It is my understanding the spill occurred because of the pressures from a lower reservoir escaped to an area where there were a number of fractures or fissures on the ocean floor which would not hold the pressure, and it permitted that to be vented to the surface. However, Mr. Downing, this is in an area where there had been a number of oil seeps, continual oil seeps for hundreds of years.

There is a continuation of oil seepage along that area and that is why it occurred.

it.

Mr. DOWNING. Well, your explanation has escaped me completely. Would you repeat that?

Repeat what you just said in simpler terms.

Was there a break in the pipeline?

Mr. EDWARDS. No; there was not a break in the pipe as I understand

Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Mr. Chairman, let me try to explain it because I represent the area and have heard many explanations.

The best explanation, or the worst explanation I guess you can say, that I have heard was that because enough surface casing was not used there was an unprotected part of this fragile formation that blew out when the pressures from the lower reservoir escaped to the upper reservoir and it blew out.

go

Actually, the well blowout was controlled. The formation blew off. Mr. ANDERSON. What you are saying for simplicity is they did not down far enough for the casing.

Mr. LAGOMARSINO. That is right.

Had the casing been extended through the fragile formation, as would have been required in a State operated well, in all likelihood the spill would not have occurred, or had it been a blowout through the well itself it would have been easier to control.

Mr. DOWNING. You are saying they did not go down deep enough into the ocean bottom.

Mr. LAGOMARSINO. That is right.

They may disagree with that, but the story I get is had the State regulations been in effect and enforced on that Federal well that blowout would not have occurred.

Mr. DOWNING. But, of course, the State had no jurisdiction.

Mr. LAGOMARSINO. That is right, the State had no jurisdiction, and I think that is the question you are getting at earlier, Mr. Chairman, and was very relevant, although there was some consultation there was no consultation apparently or at least no coordination between these State and Federal regulations or enforcement of any regulations. While that is something perhaps that is not within the jurisdiction of this committee, I think we should be concerned with it. I also think there should be that kind of coordination because both the Federal Government and State are doing the same thing on the one side of the line 3 miles out.

Mr. ANDERSON. On something you might further understand as he did not give you the full explanation, it is on Federal land just outside the sanctuary established by the State.

Now, the State goes out 3 miles where we protect the sanctuaries for many reasons.

The Federal Government went out just beyond the 3-mile limit in a geological area that was not secure.

Mr. PRITCHARD. Now, let this other fellow answer.

Mr. DOWNING. There is a geologist down there.

Please identify yourself.

Mr. EDWARDS. I am Frank Edwards, Assistant Director of BLM for Minerals Management.

Mr. DOWNING. I was speaking to the geologist.

Mr. MACDONALD. I am Price MacDonald, petroleum engineer, Geological Survey.

If I may, I would just like to go back a little bit further on the blow

out.

What you said about the casing and all is basically true, and our regulations have been modified to incorporate a deeper casing setting in that area.

The Santa Barbara channel area is highly faulted.

Some of the faulting comes right up to the bottom of the ocean there, and it is somewhat splintered and fluids can escape in this way as was evidenced by the seeps in the area.

However, as you go deeper into the Earth, there is a natural reservoir pressure in accordance with the overburdened, the gradients that are involved so that wells are controlled as they are drilled by having

a mud column.

The mud serves to overburden any of these pressures.

It also serves to remove the cuttings as you drill.

Well, unfortunately, at Santa Barbara there was a human error involved.

I think the surface casing certainly would have been adequate if there had not been a mistake, but the driller inadvertently as he was pulling his dip from the hole tended to swab the well or to get the mud above his dip and he literally moved it a portion of the mud from the well bore as he was removing his dip.

Well, as he removed this mud column he took away his overburden and eventually the well came in and started to blow out.

OK, they reacted with their blowout preventers at the top and they closed them around their pipe.

Unfortunately, as the gentlemen have said there was a weak point below the surface casing and the well blew out around the pipe up through one of these fissures.

That, Mr. Chairman, is my understanding of how it happened.
Mr. DOWNING. How did you stem that flow?

Mr. MACDONALD. It tended to equalize itself.

Now, they control the well but the pressures had to sort of reach a balance.

Now, since that time and I believe it was the Drubridge Committee advocated and it was done, additional wells were drilled into the reservoir to keep the pressure down and to in effect, reduce the oil so it would not escape through a fault.

There is still some seepage from this fault even today, but it is minimized by a production process.

Mr. DOWNING. Do you agree with the gentleman's statement that had the State requirements been observed that the spill would not have Occurred?

Mr. MACDONALD. I am not right up on State requirements.

I think it is questionable that if the pipe had been set a little bit deeper whether it would have blown out or not.

I question that.

I am not positive.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, just for the record and for a matter of record, so there can be no question, had they gone down with the casing, had they cemented it down there is no question that there would not have been a blowout.

The State requirement at the time were much more rigid than the Federal Government's requirements, and the Federal Government came into an area they were totally unfamiliar with.

The State had been doing this for years.

Mr. Chairman, I was on the land commission for years.

You can go out and see manmade islands we build where there are geological problems, but this is a case where the Federal Government came into an area they knew nothing about.

Mr. Chairman, the California coast is different from the gulf coast geologically.

We are familiar with it out there, and they are not, and our rules are much more rigid and much more protective and I think every witness out there would testify that had the California State Lands Commission rules been in effect at that particular instant there would not have been a blowout.

Mr. DOWNING. Thank you, Mr. Anderson.

Let me ask you one final question.

Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Pardon me, if the gentleman will yield, I think the well may have blown out, because as the witness described when you pull the drill stem out the well would have been blown out, but that would have been a fairly simple thing to do.

And, as a matter of fact the shut-in shunting operation was successful.

The well itself did not blow out or did not remain out of control. It was the formation and as Mr. Anderson has pointed out, the State of California has drilled something like over 900 wells and this type of thing has never occurred on State lands.

Mr. DOWNING. Thank you.

I have one final question.

On page 5, Mr. Secretary, you state, we believe, it would be appropriate for individual States to have veto power over development of specific areas on the OCS which has major regional and national significance.

Mr. HUGHES. That is a critical typographical error, Mr. Chairman. It should read "inappropriate," Mr. Chairman.

Mr. DOWNING. How should that have read?

Mr. HUGHES. It should have read "inappropriate" and was inadvertently left out.

Mr. DOWNING. Thank you.

Mr. Anderson?

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, I think Mr. Edwards was the one that went a little bit historically into this, and so we do not get the record mixed up, you gave the impression that the Federal Government came in with the support of the State or without opposition from the State.

Just to remind you, at the time this started the State had been in the business of drilling oil offshore out to 3 miles for many years, and then the case came up where the Federal Government now is going to go out into the waters beyond the 3-mile limit.

Do you remember the State of California took the Interior Department to court and said you do not have the right to do this in the area out to and including the islands.

Well, you people won the case.

You said the islands are not part of the coastline, you go only 3 miles out from the land itself and you cannot draw a line that includes all of the Santa Barbara islands and so forth.

Then consistently the State has tried to upgrade and to protest the various leasings by the Federal Government and so I think it should be made very clear that we do have a concern.

Now, we are happy that you have upgraded the requirement, and we hope there will not be any more blowouts, but I just want you to realize there was opposition to the Federal Government by coming in and there is still opposition to the Federal Government doing it, unless they do it in a manner that will protect the State.

Now, I believe this is the statement I want to clarify, Mr. Hughes. On page 2, you talk about the goals sought by these measures are already achievable under the rational and well conceived mechanisms of the Coastal Zone Management Act.

You say that the act recognizes that the development of each State's coastal zone cannot proceed in disregard of program of significance on a national and regional level.

You go on and in a sense say how good that act is and I want to compliment you on endorsing the Coastal Zone Management Act because it is good to know that the Interior Department is going to recognize the Coastal Zone Management Act when it does go into effect, say in 1976, when we do get some coastal zone management programs in and at that time the person who makes the decision as to what is right or wrong will then be the Secretary of Commerce.

We are happy to know that you do endorse that as a department in this particular provision.

Now, a couple of little statements, however, I want to correct for the record.

You said the Secretary of Commerce on page 3 has the authority under paragraph (3) to substitute his judgment for that of the State by finding "that the activity is consistent with the objectives of this title or is otherwise necessary in the interest of national security."

How does the Secretary of Commerce have the authority now when there are not any coastal zone management programs adopted by the States and approved by the Secretary of Commerce?

I do not believe he has any authority until these programs are adopted and then this whole new arrangement goes into effect. Mr. HUGHES. You may be correct, sir.

I would have to defer to counsel on the exact interpretation of his authority, but it does presume so when it becomes operative. Mr. ANDERSON. That is 1976.

« PreviousContinue »