The massive Aliso Canyon gas leak was caused by microbial corrosion of a well casing, and Southern California Gas Co. did not conduct detailed follow-up inspections or analyses after previous leaks.
The California Public Utilities Commission and the state Department of Conservation’s Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources commissioned a report conducted by Blade Energy Partners, which was tapped in 2016 to perform an independent analysis of the leak’s root cause to inform parallel investigations underway by the CPUC and DOGGR.
The report identified more than 60 casing leaks at Aliso Canyon prior to the October 2015 leak, going back to the 1970s, but said no failure investigations were conducted by SoCalGas, which “lacked any form of risk assessment focused on well integrity management and lacked systematic practices of external corrosion protection and a real-time, continuous pressure monitoring system for well surveillance.”
Updated well safety practices and regulations adopted by DOGGR address most of the root causes of the leak identified during Blade’s investigation, and the leak’s direct cause was a rupture of the outer seven-inch well casing due to microbial corrosion from the outside resulting from contact with groundwater, according to the report.
“The Blade report confirms SoCalGas complied with gas storage regulations in existence at the time of the leak and that the related compliance activities conducted prior to the leak did not find indications of a casing integrity issue,” SoCalGas said in a statement.
The gas leak, which was discovered at the underground storage facility in October 2015 and continued emanating methane until February 2016, poured an estimated 109,000 tons of methane into the air. Thousands of residents in the northwest San Fernando Valley were forced out of their homes for months due to the leak.
Limited operations resumed at the facility in late July 2017 with the blessing of state regulators. Efforts by Los Angeles County officials to block the resumed operations failed in court.
A judge in February approved a $119.5 million settlement to resolve claims by several government agencies stemming from the leak, but did not resolve a still-pending class-action lawsuit involving thousands of residents who said their health and property values were damaged as a result.
