Feds: Exxon Ignored Safety Risks in Lead-up to 210,000 Gallon Oil Spill

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/51035555243@N01/5356105400/">Thomas Hawk</a>/Flickr

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Federal regulators investigating a crude oil spill in Arkansas have concluded that in the years before the accident, pipeline owner ExxonMobil dragged its feet on critical repairs and inspections, ignored evidence that the pipeline was disposed to failure, and cherry-picked data to downplay the risk of an accident.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, the federal agency that summarized these findings in a 12-page letter to Exxon last week, proposed fining the company $2.66 million for the spill, which coated an Arkansas neighborhood in some 210,000 gallons of crude oil this March. PHMSA ordered Exxon to rewrite its emergency plan for safeguarding the pipeline, called Pegasus, which spans from Illinois to Texas, from future spills.

Exxon has 30 days to pay or contest the fine. Inside Climate News, which posted PHMSA’s letter online, reports that Exxon has not officially responded to PHMSA. Exxon released a statement to the press saying that regulators “made some fundamental errors” in their assessment of the disaster.

The chief PHMSA finding was that Exxon knew it was using a poorly-manufactured pipeline prone to it bursting at its seams, but did not factor this risk into its formal risk assessments of the pipe. Federal law, the agency’s investigators noted, compels companies to build risk assessment plans that account for the physical characteristics of the pipeline in question. These same design flaws caused a break in Pegasus in the years before the Arkansas spill, meaning that Exxon had “more than adequate information for the pipe to be considered susceptible to seam failure,” the agency’s experts wrote.

“Not acknowledging manufacturing seam threats—for a company as large as Exxon, that’s just embarrassing,” Richard Kuprewicz, a pipeline safety consultant, told Inside Climate News.

The pipeline agency also accused Exxon of being slow to disclose serious risks to the pipeline to regulators, which allowed it to push back the deadline for repairs. Exxon also manipulated its internal data in order to assign the pipeline a lower risk score, the agency said.

The disclosure of these flaws to Pegasus is sure to worry those who live and work near the pipeline. A 13-mile section of Pegasus crosses over a sensitive watershed that supplies water to 400,000 Little Rock area residents. In May, a coalition of government officials, including Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor (D), cited this as a reason regulators should delay Exxon from bringing Pegasus back online before the company completed crucial safety measures.

The proposed $2.66 million fine is tiny not only compared to Exxon’s $44.9 billion in profits last year, but also compared to the $70 million Exxon has spent so far on clean-up in Arkansas. “The penalty is far too small to be a serious deterrent to the conduct leading to the Mayflower tar sands spill,” Glenn Hooks, a spokesman for Sierra Club of Arkansas, said last week. “The company earns that amount in about 30 minutes.”


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend