BP's Gulf Oil Leak

JOHN KING, USA   Aired May 25, 2010 - 19:00 ET


JOHN KING, HOST: Thank you, Wolf. We start now with breaking news. On the eve of BP's big operation to try to seal the leaking well and finally stop the Gulf oil spill, new details tonight on what went wrong. BP has sent Congress a memo showing the company was aware of several previously unreported warning signs before the April 20th explosion that caused this tragic leak.

The BP investigation has also raised concerns about the maintenance history, modification, inspection and testing of the critical blowout preventer that was supposed to have stopped any spill but obviously failed. We'll have more details tonight as they come in to us.


But let's start our conversation. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is from Arizona, a Democrat, member of the Armed Services Committee, our senior congressional correspondent Dana Bash is here. Our CNN contributor David Gergen will be joining us in just a moment. If you read this report it seems to suggest that BP should have known about some maintenance issues. What are your big questions? Obviously, it's a big night. By tomorrow they hope to at least have success plugging this leak, but as Congress investigates what are your big questions.

REP. GABRIELLE GIFFORDS (D), ARIZONA: Well Congress has a lot of questions. I think first and foremost the most important thing is to stop the leak. We don't know precisely how much is leaking out. It's a guesstimate at 5,000 gallon -- 1,000 gallon barrels every single day. I mean you know you think about what that's doing to the Gulf Coast. But our priority of course is to making -- make sure that BP pays for all the clean-up but that we get the leak stopped immediately. There is going to be a lot of accountability later. We're going to have a lot of questions but we have to focus on stopping the leak.

KING: I want to read the last page of this memo as part of this report. And again this is a House committee that asked BP for more information "A" to find out what happened but "B" because they're with the information flow they're getting from BP.

Several concerns about the blowout preventer were identified BP including the failure of its emergency disconnect system, the failure of its automated mode function or dead man switch, the failure of the BOP's (ph) sharing functions and the failure of the remote operated vehicle interventions. The BP investigation has also raised concerns about the maintenance history modification inspection and testing. Essentially, the one thing that is down there that is designed to stop this from happening wasn't working and there are questions about the maintenance history. What does it tell you about the company? But just as importantly, what does it tell you about what should the government be doing to make sure these things don't happen?

GIFFORDS: This type of deep well drilling is pretty new actually around the world. And the lack of regulation, the lack of oversight, the lack of accountability -- we're seeing a tragic, tragic situation right now. Now Commandant Thad Allen (ph) is from Tucson. He's from that area.

I have a lot of confidence in him, members of Congress as well know that in terms of trying to fix the problem, we're fusing together, BP some of the national, international experts around the world. But the fact that BP may have ignored real warning signs I think is something that you know we're going to hold them 100 percent accountable for.

KING: What is the sense, Dana, as you work sources on Capitol Hill? Obviously they're trying to investigate what went wrong. They're also trying to figure out is BP doing everything it can do to stop the leak. And is the administration -- there's been a lot of controversy about whether the administration should do more, whether the administration should lean on BP more, whether the administration should order BP do things that some think haven't been done yet.

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: A lot of controversy about all of that and what's interesting is that the committees that have jurisdiction both in the House and the Senate, right now what they're really focused on is transparency. I just actually was talking to a source in the Senate who is working on trying to keep those 12 camera feeds which we heard from Congressman Marky (ph) who is the lead on this in the House side to keep them out, keep them up and running.

And for transparency issues so that the public actually sees what's going on 5,000 feet under, but also because in Congress and you might be able to add to this, they say that they really think that it helps add to their investigation because they're actually documenting what's going on down there and ultimately they'll use that to prosecute and to give information to get money for taxpayers back from BP.

KING: And let me jump in on that point before you answer as well because we are just learning this breaking news as well. BP has just tweeted that it will continue to provide the live video feeds from the sea bed throughout the planned top kill procedure. So obviously the cries of outrage from the Congress have convinced them not to turn off that feed.

That has been another big issue, that they obviously -- BP had this video long before they showed it to the public so that we could every day -- I keep it on constantly in my office and you watch it and you just -- it depresses you to no end. GIFFORDS: Oh it makes you absolutely sick to your stomach. And we see the video coverage of the marine wildlife that's been washed up onshore and to know that particularly during the spawning season that we may lose major parts of our Gulf Coast. It is -- it is really tragic.

Again, the accountability, the oversight, the investigation all of that really matters but I think in a broader context as we've been having very large discussions about new types of energy, renewable energy, being able to pass legislation that transfers our dependency off of foreign oil and also hard-to-reach and find oil and really I think focuses on the future.

And you know I mean I'm someone who has been advocating for solar energy. Coming from the state of Arizona that sun is going to come up every single day. You're not going to have a leak. You're not going to have a problem. Again, our problems with oil and our dependency on this industry that has not been transparent with incredible profitability, I think it's a time where we can really do some deep reflection.

KING: David Gergen joins us now for the conversation. David, we're reading through this memo of this new congressional report. Now everybody obviously knew something horrible went wrong and mistakes were made. But as you read through this, they're saying the blowout preventer, essentially the safety valve that was designed to stop this tragedy from happening, there were questions about the maintenance, the modification, the inspection and the testing.

Also saying here in addition key questions exist about whether proper procedures were followed for critical activities throughout the day. Negative pressure testing was initially done on the drill pipe rather than the kill line even though the drill plant specified it should be done on the kill line. More and more questions, David, that lead to, number one, if BP was in charge when this happened and can't be trusted, can BP be trusted now?

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: John, clearly not. And I think there is -- we shouldn't be focusing on the past right now how we got here, nor should we be focusing on the future where we're going. What we need to be focusing on is the here and now, this building national emergency and somebody taking charge. I think it's -- the very reason we form government is to protect us from events like this.

So it does seem to me that it was appropriate for the Obama administration to allow BP to run this early on. But with this mounting national emergency, if this top -- if this top kill doesn't work tomorrow it's imperative that the Obama administration take charge of this overall effort and treat it like a national emergency. It's unbelievable to most Americans that our fate of our precious coastlines and of the water just off our shores is in the hands of a foreign-based company like BP. How in the world are we ever allowing ourselves to have BP determine what happens to our coastline.

BASH: But the open question and the scary question is does the government -- does the Obama administration or anybody know any better than BP? Do they know how to do this? I mean they don't know -- do they have the capability, the know-how, the technology to end this horrible spill any better than BP does?

KING: As a Democratic member of Congress, do you have questions about how the administration has handled this? The White House announced today the president will go back on Friday. He's out on the West Coast raising money tonight and a number have said you know look you can't stop everything. We're in a campaign year. That's all important. But as David notes, this is a mounting national crisis. Should the president put off all politics at the moment and take charge of this? Should he do more?

GIFFORDS: Well absolutely it's a huge crisis but I think it's also important to note that as I understand it, BP and the federal government are fused into one at this point. We have international experts that are flying in and working on this problem side by side. It's not as if we -- if BP is in a room in isolation. This is a top priority for the administration without a doubt.

Again, Democrats are critical. A lot of the reason why we have these deep drilling plans that were approved and authorized happened a long time ago. I mean first and foremost we've got to stop the leak. But then as we move forward we're going to have to analyze the process and really figure out how we want to get America's energy.

I think it's important to be critical of the administration because I've always believed they should be doing more. We have military. We have NASA. We have other organizations that I think can come in and provide technical expertise. But stopping the leak now is absolutely critical before more devastation transpires. And I think that everyone is working on that, it's fused together.

KING: Let me take a quick time-out here. When we come back we'll continue the conversation. David please stand by -- we'll continue the conversation (INAUDIBLE) this and other key questions of presidential leadership including the president's decision today to send 1,200 National Guard troops to the Arizona border and the president's deciding to overrule the objections of his top military advisers and allow Congress to go ahead -- embrace Congress going ahead with key votes to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

KING: Continue our conversation -- Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is here. Our senior congressional correspondent Dana Bash, our senior political analyst Gloria Borger joins us and David Gergen is with us from Boston. The big announcement from the president today to send 1,200 National Guard troops to the Arizona/Mexico border.

Congresswoman, this is your district. You have had the violence there, although some would look at the statistics and say violence is actually down. Question to you -- is it enough? You're colleague Senator John McCain says it's not enough. He wants more National Guard troops there. GIFFORDS: Well I was very pleased to announce the deployment of 1,200 National Guard troops to the border, the redeployment. They were here a couple of years ago under President Bush. Rob Crentz (ph), the (INAUDIBLE) County rancher who was tragically murdered on his ranch March 27th was my constituent, so what we've seen over the course of the last few years is a buildup of the Department of Homeland Security, the Tucson sector, the Border Patrol but out in the rural areas, out in the ranches we still see tremendous amount of violence, of destruction. And it's fine time -- to finally, finally have the border more secure.

KING: (INAUDIBLE) enough?

GIFFORDS: Twelve hundred should be more but it's a first step. This is not the last step. It is a first step, also 500 million in emergency supplemental appropriations that will help assist. We're going to augment, we're going to use intelligence, surveillance, we're going to be able to help the boots on the ground but I believe that these Border Patrol -- the guard on the border, he needs to be armed. They need to be able to protect and defend themselves but we need to get them down there immediately.

KING: Is the president, Gloria, in taking this step implicitly embracing what has been the Republican message border security first? Put off any conversation about comprehensive immigration reform, a new guest worker program, status for those here illegally, push it down the road.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: I wouldn't say it's the Republican message. I think it's the message that Americans are sending although the Republicans will say as Dana can tell you better than anyone this is not enough. But I was talking to a couple of Republican senators who were in this meeting they had today, this extraordinary closed-door session with the president and one of them said to me -- he said you know we were stunned that the president did not mention to us the fact that he intended to send these National Guard out and we had a long, detailed discussion about immigration. He walks out of the room and then an hour later it's announced.

BASH: Do you think, Congresswoman that as a Democrat, as a border, Congresswoman, should the White House just stop talking about comprehensive immigration reform and really just focus on the issue you're talking about which is border security for now?

GIFFORDS: Border security has to come first. And even Democrats like myself who believe that we need to work to change all of our immigration laws, we have to secure the border.


KING: After the election, nothing on immigration reform until after the election.

GIFFORDS: Chances are it's going to happen after the election, but let me tell you. I serve on the House Armed Services Committee. Last week I voted to authorize $760 billion in the National Defense Authorization Act. That's a lot of money, hundreds of billions of dollars going abroad securing other nation's borders, securing other citizens. It is time that Americans are safe on their own property, on their own land.

The hundreds of billions we spend abroad, national security should be about border security. We have to secure the border. It is porous. People know coming right through southern Arizona that basically that that is the widest, most open gap in the border.

KING: Let's move to another national security issue and David, I want you to come in on this one. I talked to General George Casey (ph) today. He is the chief of staff of the United States Army. He is in charge essentially of those 94,000 in Afghanistan, 92,000 in Iraq, thousands of other U.S. servicemen around the world.

The president has brokered a compromise with Congress to repeal "don't ask, don't tell." We know his defense secretary has said he can support the compromise language but he doesn't like it. He would prefer that that vote be put off until after he can survey the troops. Now General Casey (ph), I want to make clear, was here to be -- for an interview on another subject. But David, listen to General George Casey, the Army Chief of Staff. I asked him what he thinks of this compromise. Here's how he learned about it.



GEN. GEORGE CASEY, U.S. ARMY CHIEF OF STAFF: I actually don't know, John. I just read about it this morning in the paper and we've been told by the department to forward all questions on this to the Department of Defense. I've not seen the proposal. And so I have to look at the proposal and see what my recommendations will be based on that.

KING: And, David, I talked to the Defense Secretary Bob Gates a couple of weeks ago and he said there are smart ways and stupid ways to do things and he thought it was stupid to have any votes before he completes the survey of the troops. And General Casey said he agrees with Bob Gates. Is the president risking a rift with his military commanders by deciding that he will embrace essentially the Congress going forward with this vote now?

GERGEN: John, I doubt there will be an open rift. But I know there's going to be a lot of grumbling and unhappiness among the top military leaders that this wasn't done in a more coherent way with everybody at the table trying to figure out what works best. It's clear that this -- you know it's the right thing to do to get rid of this and it's -- but it's very clear that politics entered into the timing of it and it's going to complicate it at the military level trying to how to move forward to get this done properly.

I think Secretary Gates and the other -- and the heads of the various military -- you know the Marines in particular are going to be, I think, unhappy at the way this was -- it was -- it is clearly being pushed for political reasons because the election is around the corner and the Democrats want to mobilize that base. But even so, in the past, normally the military has been at the table to discuss how best to do this.

KING: You're on the Armed Services Committee. Would you vote for this change or do you think it's better to wait?

GIFFORDS: Well in our authorization bill that we marked up last week, there was no discussion of "don't ask, don't tell." And it's obviously imperative that everyone is on the same page. Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen needs to sign off on a plan before the implementation is actually brought forward. But this should not be a surprise to anyone. I believe that the president has been talking about this for a long time, the House leadership, the Senate leadership has been talking about this for a long time. Again, they -- the military --

KING: Are the votes there to pass it?

GIFFORDS: You know --

KING: Your chairman, Ike Skelton (ph) says he won't vote for it.

GIFFORDS: Yes, that's true. I believe the votes are probably there. I mean it's -- you know in the United States military where fewer and fewer Americans are stepping up to serve, we need to have America's best and brightest. So we know that this is a piece of legislation that needs to go away. The implementation is absolutely critical though. I've got a couple of large important military bases in my district. It needs to be implemented the right way.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But what do you think about the timing?

GIFFORDS: You know the timing of course is something that has come you know a little bit out of the blue, but --

KING: Political? Is it about --


KING: Is it about pleasing constituency in the campaign year?

GIFFORDS: Well I think it's more about how many legislative vehicles are even left that can be pulled out of the station before the end of the year. And we have Memorial Day recess coming up. We've got budget bills that are trying to move. We've got some critical pieces of legislation and we're running out of time.

BASH: So the congresswoman said -- you said that you're going to vote for this compromise on the House floor --


GIFFORDS: Yes, my plan is to vote for it if Admiral Mullen and Secretary Gates sign off on it and if they're OK with it and it's a long time before this bill actually gets a final vote, if they're all right with it, I'm all right with it. BASH: So it's going to be -- it's still going to be a nail-biter in the House we expect Thursday or Friday. Senate Armed Services Committee they need 15 yes's right now. They only have 13 or 14. They're looking for one or two more Democrats in order to pass it. Right now it's unclear whether this can even pass the Senate Armed Services Committee --

KING: One of the many issues we will follow in the days ahead. I want to thank Congresswoman Giffords for coming in. Dana and Gloria, David Gergen as well -- still a lot to come in the program.

Next when we go "Wall-to-Wall" we'll go back to that issue -- come on up here -- we'll go back to our issue of the oil spill. Plugging the leak is BP's priority. Will its latest plan work? We'll get some advice from a guy you know very well. He's good at explaining things, Bill Nye (ph), the science guy.

"One-on-One" tonight, an exclusive conversation with the president's host for lunch, the Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell joins us and guess what -- he's going to tell you the meeting was not all kumbaya (ph).

On our "Radar" tonight some fascinating discussions including the most important number you should know about intensity in this political campaign year and the latest details on the big mystery. Did the White House try to offer a congressman a job to get him to drop out of a Senate primary?

And Pete's on the street tonight doing some intrepid reporting, senators versus wrestling. No he's not talking about a sporting event. This is a question of trust.


KING: In "Wall-to-Wall" tonight the latest on day 36 of the BP oil spill. The next 24 hours are critical to the company's efforts to finally, finally stop this. These are the live images of the oil still spewing up from the ocean floor in the Gulf of Mexico. The company tries its latest plan tomorrow. Let's also take a look at some other key developments today right now.

Top kill, that is what it is called, it will start late tonight. We should have the results by tomorrow -- more on that in just a second. BP says now just this past hour those video feeds will stay live during the operation. Earlier today a key member of Congress urged the company not to shut those feeds down. And the president will travel to the region on Friday.

The White House announced that today amid some political pressure for the president to try to do more to bring this crisis to a conclusion. So what's a top kill? What exactly is the company trying to do here in its latest effort? Let's take a closer look -- excuse me for passing by. Here of course is the region obviously. This is the latest on the spill.

The spill's reach is here. The darker -- the areas, that's the heavier the concentration of oil. What is a top kill? Well we will show you a little bit of an animation. Essentially the company is going to use the pipes that are existing and start forcing down through it -- you will see as this opens up -- force down into the -- that's oil coming up. Then you force sand down and you see you try to block it like that.

Once you can get sand in there to slow it down hopefully bring some cement in as well. It's a complicated procedure. It has not been tried at this out here in the deep water before. Will it work? We put the question to someone you know very well who not only is smart when it comes to science, but very helpful in explaining things to you and to me -- Bill Nye the science guy.


BILL NYE, THE SCIENCE GUY: Well top kill is where you're going to get it from the top. So what you want to do is attach something so you can pump drilling fluid. Now, I've heard many people say mud. And in the oil field or, if you will, the oil patch, they call it drilling mud. But it's a material that locks up when you sheer it. When it goes through an orifice, it seizes.

If you have ever seen these ads for antifreeze that are anti- leak, when there's a leak and it's going through the orifice really -- or the hole really fast it seizes. And this is something you may be familiar with if you've ever played with corn starch. Corn starch is what we call a dilatant (ph) material. This is corn starch and water, it's goopy, it drips. But if I hit it real hard, it doesn't splash.

It's counter intuitive. And the reason it doesn't is this material, this property we call dilatantcy (ph), where the molecules stack up like my old boss used to call it a stack of nickels. You can break it going sideways but if you push on a stack of nickels, it doesn't move. And so it is with drilling mud. So the idea is to get in there, pump in drilling mud.

The action of the flow will make it lock and then while it's leaking very, very slowly you've slowed it way down then you just pour cement on top. Now when this thing is 21 inches in diameter, you're going to need at least 400 tons of pressure -- or rather a force. Four hundred tons of weight on top of this pipe to hold it and 400 tons sounds like a lot to you and me. If you had 400 tons of something in your kitchen, you would notice it.

But 400 tons in terms of cement is not that big. This is a doable job. And as I believe the head of BP said earlier today or late last night, if this were on the surface, if this were a surface oil well, this would be a very reasonable chance of success -- you have 95, 99 percent chance of success. But on the bottom of the ocean, with all this crazy methane ice forming, these cathrates (ph) and the flow of current and brittle materials and hot oil, it's not so clear that it will be easy. But it sure should work.

KING: Bill Nye we certainly appreciate your help. We will see if it works and if it doesn't then we'll come back to you with more questions as we go ahead. NYE: We'll try the next thing, yes.

KING: All right Bill thanks so much. I really appreciate it.