Will attach assignment

Oil Spill
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

Event overview of the oil spill: It should be pointed that the British Petroleum’s (BP) Gulf of Mexico Oil spill happened at around 10:45 PM in the late April. The BP Gulf of Mexico Oil spill was considered the most outrageous marine oil disaster that has ever happened in the history of the United States of America. It resulted in the death of 7 peoples and injured 17 individuals during the oil rig hence making it a fatal disaster ever witnessed. It is evidenced that the explosion was as a result of abrupt ignition of methane that had high pressure. This exercise, therefore, contributed to various events that made the oil rig to sink and begun to leak. The leaking of oil took place approximately 5,000 feet below the water table. According to the estimates, it was evidenced that almost 4.4 million to 4.9 million barrels of oil got leaked over the duration of 87 days. As a result, it affected about 70, 000 square miles of the area that was covered by the aquatic organisms. The oil spill then polluted the entire ecosystem, vegetation cover, animal habitat, and stretches further to the coastline region mostly covered by water.
It should be noted that the impact of BP Gulf of Mexico Oil spill was not only related to environmental effects but also the political and economic impacts. The spill contributed to health effects as many people were exposed to toxic substances. Additionally, the spill also affected economic production in the area.

For instance, it is believed that it impacted the fishing industry in conjunction with the offshore drilling (Griggs, 2011). Consequently, the tourism, as well as agricultural sectors, also did face challenges resulting from the abrupt spill. The cost of cleaning the spill and the accrued damages was estimated to have been more than $20 billion a fact that saw the company announcing $7 billion sales of its assets to cover for the damages. Regarding the political effects, it is noted that the spill contributed to the comprehensive scrutiny of legal enforcements precepts that are attributed to offshore drilling.
The enactment of the 1990 Pollution Act: The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990 was enacted into the laws of the country in August 1990. This was purposefully meant to address the trending public concern relating to Exxon Valdez case. Through the OPA, the government has been able to increase their responsive calls towards occurrences of the oil spill. This has been achieved since they provide the ability of federal government to expand and give financial aid and any required resources to such disasters.
Key provisions of the OPA: Oil Pollution Act of 1990 was enacted to addresses the previous occurrences of rapid oil spills that have taken place in the United States. The creation of this legislation followed the occurrence of the Exxon Valdez Spill in March 1989. This law has passed through numerous amendments geared towards consolidating response strategies as stipulated under various federal laws in America. The Act is understood to have provided detailed legal frameworks that safeguard states management and control of any subsequent occurring of oil spills. According to clause (a) of this Act, it is stated that any party from which a vessel of oil is discharged will be held into accounts of any damage caused by the discharged oil. Conversely, such parties are liable to incur the cost of cleanup. Clause (d) of this Pollution Act of 1990 posits that if the third party caused the damages caused as a result of the oil spill, then they become liable or accountable for settling the cost. This Act provides clear legal requirements as far as the oil spill is concerned.
The effectiveness of Oil Pollution Act of 1990: The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 has resulted in the establishment of the National Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. This monetary fund is meant to contribute a million dollar in every incidence of the oil discharge. The act has also initiated changes in the contingency planning done by either industries or the government agencies. For instance, the establishment of National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan implemented effective approaches. First, it is through this that the Federal Government can direct efforts of both private and public response to specific spills (Griggs, 2011). Additionally, the act has ensured that the vulnerable owners of certain facilities that are likely to pose a threat of oil spill do take the initiative to compose their detailed response plan. Finally, this Act has ensured that there exists effective management of issues related to spill disaster by fostering extreme penalties for those agents who do not comply.
Why it took longer to stop the oil spill: One of the most significant reasons as to why it took some time to stop the oil spill relates to the fact that it happened several miles below the level of the water table. As a result, the BP lacked constructive plans to deal with such oil discharge hence causing disaster. Tentatively, BP showcased poor response towards the oil spill to the extent that they worsen the situation. According to the report, it was indicated that ten approaches were employed towards capping the gusher. Some of these approaches deemed inferior and therefore had to consume a lot of time before the spill could be stopped. Finally, BP took long to stop the spill since they lacked adequate facility within the scene to enable faster recovery process.
Helpful controls: It must be noted that this disastrous event was possible to be prevented by employing the Deepwater Horizon Final Report. Most importantly, if by any chance the ideal progressive regulations according to the said act had been employed, then it was possible to control this disaster. On the other hand, BP neglected to comply with the functional safety culture that is advisable as one of the response plan. Additionally, many experts who compiled the report also spearheaded the spill. This was because there existed poor communication, management, flawed failures, poor decision making, and signal analysis. There was supposed to be fewer experts to enhance coordination and proper decision-making to boost the feasibility study on how to control the spill. Ideally, the feedforward control measure is said to be the most appropriate control measure that could be of benefit to BP in curbing the spills (Griggs, 2011). This control measure is said to have hindered such occurrence before they become a reality. This is better than preventing an already occurred disaster. The feedforward control measure is, therefore, the ideal control measure that was supposed to be employed to avoid the oil spill.

Reference
Griggs, J. (2011). Bp Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill. Energy Law Journal, 32.1, (57-79). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/869071045/13F9B6E0ACE2413E456/3?accountid=45844