Skip to main content

Workers attempt to clean oil from the banks of the Kalamazoo River in Marshall, Mi. July 30/2010 after Enbridge's oil pipeline ruptured spewing more than 3 million liters of crude into the waterway.

Kevin Van Paassen/Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and

Enbridge Inc. has been slammed in a scathing review of its massive Michigan pipeline spill, with a U.S. watchdog saying the company acted like "the Keystone Kops" and ignored safety procedures while suffering "pervasive organizational failures."

More than 3 million litres of oil leaked into wetlands, Talmadge Creek and the Kalamazoo River after a pipeline belonging to Enbridge ruptured near Marshall, Mich., on July 25, 2010. The company expects to spend $765-million cleaning up – five times more than the next costliest onshore cleanup effort – with its insurance footing most of the bill. A worker from a local gas utility reported the spill to Enbridge's control centre 17 hours and 19 minutes after the line had failed, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board said at a hearing Tuesday.

"Learning about Enbridge's poor handling of the rupture, you can't help but think of the Keystone Kops," Deborah Hersman, NTSB's chair, said in her opening remarks at Tuesday's hearing. "Why didn't they recognize what was happening? What took so long?"

Story continues below advertisement

Enbridge noted Tuesday it has taken full responsibility for the spill from the beginning, but it will wait until the final report is issued before commenting on the board's findings. "Enbridge believes that at the time of the accident it met or exceeded all applicable regulatory and industry standards in its operations," the company said in a statement.

In its report, the NTSB said that not only was Enbridge's response to the spill slow, but the Calgary-based company knew at least five years before the massive leak that the pipeline was corroded and cracked. External corrosion and cracking caused the 471-kilometre pipeline to rupture, the NTSB said. Roughly 15,000 defects were identified in a 2005 report, a presenter at the hearing said. About 900 of those were dug up, he said, with Ms. Hersman noting the one that spilled was not among those tapped for digging.

While Enbridge has already been fined $3.7-million for the July, 2010 spill, the NTSB's review is likely to damage both the company and its competitors as they vie for permission to build even bigger oil-sands pipelines across Canada's West Coast and the United States' Gulf Coast.

Should those controversial pipeline proposals be thwarted, Canada will lose out on diversifying its export market, which proponents of the energy industry – including Prime Minister Stephen Harper – argue will dent economic growth and job opportunities.

David Mayer, a managing director at the NTSB, who delivered part of the NTSB's findings, said "pervasive organizational failures at Enbridge" added to the company's slow response and prolonged spill.

Enbridge staff twice pumped more crude – about 81 per cent of the total release – after the pipeline ruptured, Ms. Hersman said.

Enbridge, at the time, was adamant it dealt with the problem swiftly and effectively.

Story continues below advertisement

The NTSB's five-member panel argued industry regulators are also at fault.

"Delegating too much authority to the regulated [companies] to assess their own system risks and correct them is tantamount to the fox guarding the hen house," Ms. Hersman said in her closing comments.

"Regulators need regulations and practices with teeth – and the resources to enable them to take corrective action before a spill, not after."

In a statement, Enbridge said it has "already implemented, in 2010 and 2011, appropriate operational and procedural changes based on our own internal investigation.

The findings in the NTSB factual reports posted to date are generally consistent with the findings in the Enbridge report."

It added: "As a result of our detailed investigation into the accident, and as part of our ongoing continuous improvement efforts, we have taken steps to address lessons learned and make incremental improvements aimed at preventing a similar accident from happening again in the future."

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Tickers mentioned in this story
Unchecking box will stop auto data updates
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter