What Happened To Those Responsible For One Of The Biggest US Disasters?

The worst environmental disaster in US history, the oil spill in Mexico in 2010 has already cost British oil company BP, the main company involved, more than $ 65 billion ($ 238.5 billion) - and the bill continues to increase.

After the accident, the company had its valuation downgraded by risky agencies, had its stock plummeted and had to sell billions of dollars in assets. At the height of the crisis, its economy came to be in crisis.

Almost nine years later, a BP is still recovering. Reached by BBC News Brazil, a company disclosed to the press they would remain silent.

In addition to the financial impact, the disaster has led to changes not only in BP's operations, but also in the oil and gas industry as a whole.

"The industry is safer today because the government implements updates for the security process," Marine Science Professor Donald Boesch of the University of Maryland in the United States told the BBC.

Boesch was one of seven members of an independent organization created by President Barack Obama to investigate the causes of the crash and recommend reforms.

The spill began on April 20, 2010, when the Deepwater Horizon platform, owned by BP's Transoceanic and Operated Companies, exploded and sank, killing 11 employees.

The destruction of the well of Macondo, at about 1,500 meters deep meant almost 5 million barrels of oil were dumped into the ocean, which is considered the largest oil spill in history - the largest intentional leakage was recorded during an Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, when soldiers dropped more than 6 million barrels into the sea.

Five states (Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas) were hit by the oil spill, which affected seabirds, damaged beaches and caused huge losses for the fishing and tourism industries.

BP has been the subject of multiple lawsuits, many of them government-driven, for both criminal violations and violations of civil regulations, such as the Clean Water Act. In an agreement considered the largest of its kind in American history, BP has agreed to pay about $ 20 billion to the federal government and the five states affected by the environmental disaster.

The company also had to pay billions in compensation to affected victims, families, individuals and businesses, cleaning costs, environmental damages, fines and other damages.

The final estimate of more than $ 65 billion does not include loss of revenue and damage to the company's reputation - and the cost may still increase as some of the thousands of lawsuits brought by individuals and small businesses damaged by the disaster are yet to be judged.

Despite the severity of the financial punishment, no one has been arrested, and none of the company's top executives has been held accountable. A Justice Department inquiry resulted in criminal charges against four officials.

Two supervisors on the platform were accused of not conducting the necessary pressure tests properly. One was acquitted and the other sentenced to 10 months probation.

A former vice president of the company, accused of lying to federal agents about the amount of oil spilled, was also acquitted. An engineer charged with deleting text messages received 6 months of probation.

How does the situation in the US compare with that of Brazil?

Comparing the consequences that BP faced with Vale's situation after the Brumadinho dam broke, three years after the Mariana disaster, environmental criminal law expert Luiz Carlos Vasconcellos of the Tabet Advogados office notes that in the United States, the legal entity is criminally liable for any crime committed by a company representative in the performance of his duties.

"In the United States, when a person commits an offense by reason of his or her trade, even if it is guilty - which in the criminal sense is negligence, malpractice or recklessness - his company responds criminally," Vasconcellos told BBC News Brazil.

"In Brazil, the company only responds for environmental crimes, and even then, only if the damage was caused by a decision of a leader or the managers."

When it was a negligence or something, the company does face criminal charges."

In the case of civil liability, companies respond in both countries. But Vasconcellos points out that in the United States this process is fragmented, with separate actions for infractions of each law. "In Brazil it would be global."

"Vasconcellos also points out that while most of the pending lawsuits in the BP case have already been settled, less than nine years after the accident, in Brazil this would take much longer. According to the expert, as in the United States there is the plea bargain phase, the possibility of agreement to avoid court proceedings, and because the costs of the process are high, many end up making an agreement."

For Vasconcellos, Brazil and the United States are almost at the same level in terms of environmental protection. Both have environmental agencies and national environment policy. The lawyer considers the Brazilian environmental law even more complete than the American law. "What is missing is effectiveness.

"US disaster has led to changes in oil industry practices. The American disaster triggered several investigations."

Although the industry initially insisted that the blast had been an isolated incident, it was found that defective equipment and disregard for safety protocols were more relevant than companies admitted, and extensive industry reforms were needed to prevent further disasters.

In January 2011, after six months of investigation, the Boesch board concluded that the blast was the result of "a number of mistakes made by BP, Halliburton (subcontractor) and Transocean.

"The report said that 'intentionally or unintentionally', many decisions increased the risk of explosions."

According to the paper, the disaster revealed "systemic failures in risk management" questioned "the industry-wide safety culture." In addition to significant reforms in industry practices, changes in government policies were also needed, as there were problems with oversight.

Boesch says that BP cooperated with the investigations and that the companies in the sector worked together to improve security. One of the commission's recommendations was for the government to require the industry to develop the capacity to contain deep-sea type explosions. A more integrated risk analysis was also required.

"It is impossible to protect against certain eventualities, but the chances of something like this happening again, a disaster that lasted for months, were reduced," he says.

Despite the progress, Boesch says there is concern about recent measures taken by the government to weaken safety regulations adopted after the disaster.

Since taking office in 2017, President Donald Trump has been fulfilling his promise to relax restrictions on businesses and encourage domestic energy production. The government also plans to expand the extent of territorial waters open to oil and gas exploration, including the Arctic.

Government and industry say that the rules imposed in the previous administration have created unnecessary costs for businesses and insist that loosening will not reduce security. With new measures, companies gain more autonomy to regulate their offshore exploration operations.