Groups Say Obama Has Chance To Protect Polar Bears

Nov 4: A Federal judge ordered the Department of the Interior (DOI) to reconsider its 2008 decision not to provide polar bears the most complete protection possible under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The ruling came in response to a lawsuit by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Greenpeace seeking additional protection for the polar bear, which they indicate is under severe threat from global warming.

 

    In response to a petition from the three conservation groups, the Bush administration in 2008 classified the polar bear as "threatened" -- rather than the more protective "endangered" -- under the ESA. The administration also issued a special rule exempting greenhouse gases -- the primary threat to the species -- from regulation under the Act. The groups indicated that such a rule can only be issued for a species listed as threatened, not endangered. The groups sued, arguing that the polar bear should be listed as "endangered," not merely "threatened."  DOI had argued that even though the polar bear will likely be extinct in most of its range by mid-century, it was not endangered because its extinction was not "imminent."

 

    In his ruling issued November 4, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan for the District of Columbia, rejected the Department's argument that the text of the ESA clearly states that extinction must be "imminent" before a species can be listed as "endangered" and ordered the Interior Department to reconsider its definition of "endangered" as it applies to the polar bear. Judge Sullivan ordered the Interior Department to reconsider its decision in light of the ruling and file a response by December 23, 2010, and he set a hearing date of February 23, 2011 to consider that response and the rest of the claims in the listing case.

    Kassie Siegel, director of the CBD's Climate Law Institute and lead author of the 2005 petition to Federally protect the polar bear said, "The judge has put the ball squarely in Obama's court. Whether or not the polar bear receives the protections it is legally entitled to and so desperately needs, is now wholly Obama's decision. We hope that rather than continue to defend the flawed policies of the Bush administration, Obama will do right by the polar bear." Andrew Wetzler, Director of NRDC's Land &Wildlife Program said, "We are convinced that any reasonable definition of 'endangered species' includes the polar bear. Climate change is an oncoming train and the bears are tied to the tracks. If nobody is around to undo the knots, it doesn't matter how fast the train is moving -- they are in trouble."

    Dan Howells, Deputy Campaign Director of Greenpeace, "Protecting the polar bear's home is the same as protecting us all from the dangers of climate change. And the best way to do that is to acknowledge the danger of climate change and act on it. The Obama administration can take a step in this direction by giving the bears the protection they deserve."

    Access a release from NRDC (click here). Access the 26-page Memorandum Opinion (click here).

Researcher Says BP Spill Is 70,000 - 120,000 Barrels/Day

May 19: The House Energy & Commerce Committee, Environment and Energy Subcommittee, Chaired by Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) held a hearing entitled, Sizing up the BP Oil Spill: Science and Engineering Measuring Methods. Witnesses testifying before the Subcommittee included: Steve Wereley, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University; Richard Camilli, Associate Scientist, Applied Ocean Physics and Engineering, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; Michael Freilich, Director of the Earth Science Division, NASA; and Frank Muller-Karger, Professor of Biological Oceanography and Remote Sensing, University of South Florida.

    Prior to the hearing Chairman Markey had sent a letter to BP America's CEO Lamar McKay asking that the company make a live stream of video from the oil leak site publicly available to give unfettered access of the accident and recovery to scientists and the American public. Markey said BP currently has several remotely controlled submersibles taking video of the accident site 24 hours a day, but has only released a fraction of the video. Markey also sent a letter to Admiral Thad Allen of the Coast Guard on the matter.

    Markey said in the letter, "Allowing the public to view this video could provide our best scientists and engineers with information that could be helpful in developing much needed solutions to the ongoing oil spill, both in terms of subsea operations and surface spill response. Congress and the American public have the right to know what is happening in real time, so that they can understand and react to the situation as it develops."

    While BP and government officials continue to claim that the best estimate of the flow rate of the Gulf oil spill is 5,000 barrels per day [See WIMS 5/19/10], Steve Wereley from Purdue University said he is confident that the rate is an "order of magnitude" higher than the BP estimate. He said, he can see no scenario where the BP estimate is accurate. He said his current estimate is in the range of 70,000 to 120,000 barrels per day. Also, while BP and government officials have also testified that they are not that concerned about the rate of the leak because they are already responding to a "worst case" situation; the research experts seem to all dispute that position and agreed that the flow rate of the leak would be important to know. Other witnesses testified on satellite mapping of the oil spill and the dynamics of the "loop current," as well as concerns about contamination under the surface and a water column of contamination that may exist.

    On May 20, BP reported the volume of oil and gas being collected by the riser insertion tube tool (RITT) containment system at the end of the leaking riser is estimated to be about 3,000 barrels a day (b/d) of oil and some 14 million standard cubic feet a day of gas. The oil is being stored and gas is being flared on the drillship Discoverer Enterprise. BP said this remains a new technology and both its continued operation and its effectiveness in capturing the oil and gas remain uncertain. BP also said it continues to develop options to shut off the flow of oil from the well through interventions via the failed Blowout Preventer (BOP).

    Access the hearing website and link to all testimony and a webcast (click here). Access a release from Chairman Markey before and after the hearing (click here) and (click here). Access the Markey letter to BP and the Coast Guard (click here) and (click here). Access Markey's Global Warming website for the live video feed which (click here). Access a release from BP (click here). Access the BP response website (click here). Access the Unified Command website for the latest updates (click here). [*Energy/Oil, *Water, *Wildlife]

House T&I Hearing On BP Gulf Spill & Latest Updates

May 19: The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Chaired by Representative James Oberstar (D-MN) held an all-day hearing to examine the circumstances surrounding the ongoing spill of crude oil from the Deepwater Horizon, including potential environmental effects, ongoing response actions, long-term cleanup challenges, and potential natural resource damages. Among other issues, the Committee examined the regulatory framework governing the safety functions of mobile offshore drilling units, the preparations made by the owners and operators of MODUs to respond to potential oil spills, and the liability responsibilities incurred by the owners and operators in the event of an oil spill. The Committee also looked at the Coast Guard's work with the Mineral Management Service and other federal agencies to implement regulations governing the management of offshore oil production facilities, as well as federal oversight and management of the ongoing oil recovery and cleanup actions of the responsible parties.

    Witnesses testifying at the hearing included: BP President Lamar McKay; Transocean Ltd. President Steven Newman; EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson; Dr. Jane Lubchenco, NOAA Administrator; S. Elizabeth Birnbaum, Director of Minerals Management Service; as well as representatives from the U.S. Coast Guard; National Geographic Society; National Wildlife Federation; Gerica Seafood of New Orleans; University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science; and the Coastal Response Research Center University of New Hampshire.

    Representative Oberstar said, "The magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill is unknown, but it appears to be a massive environmental disaster that is causing serious damage to the U.S. economy and the natural resources of the Gulf Coast region. Because this oil spill could jeopardize the livelihoods and environment of thousands of Americans who live in the region, we must closely examine what caused the disaster, the effectiveness of response of the companies responsible for the spill and the Federal government, and what steps must be taken to avoid a similar catastrophe in the future. This hearing will be a comprehensive, in-depth examination of the circumstances surrounding this oil spill, and we will hear testimony from representatives of the Federal government, industry executives, the scientific community, fishermen, and nongovernmental stakeholders."

    Oberstar continued saying, "In recent years, the T&I Committee has found several examples of an inappropriate coziness between industry and the entity that bears the responsibility of regulating that industry. The MMS has long been criticized of being too cozy with the oil drilling industry, and evidence is emerging that indicates MMS was aware of the potential failures of blowout preventers. Because the spill occurred in coastal waters, the Coast Guard is serving as the federal On-Scene Coordinator and is responsible for overseeing clean up efforts. We will examine how well MMS and the Coast Guard are addressing their joint responsibilities for oil discharge planning, preparedness, and response for offshore oil and gas."

    In other Gulf Oil developments, President Obama expressed his disappointment in the failure of the Senate to pass legislation to raise the liability limits for oil spills. The President said, "I am disappointed that an effort to ensure that oil companies pay fully for disasters they cause has stalled in the United States Senate on a partisan basis. This maneuver threatens to leave taxpayers, rather than the oil companies, on the hook for future disasters like the BP oil spill. I urge the Senate Republicans to stop playing special interest politics and join in a bipartisan effort to protect taxpayers and demand accountability from the oil companies." [See WIMS 5/14/10]. In its testimony before the T&I Committee, BP testified that it would not be using the Oil Liability Trust Fund and would pay all legitimate claims and would not in any way limit it liability to $75 million.

    Also, the American Petroleum Institute (API) President and CEO Jack Gerard issued a statement of support for President Obama's decision to form a presidential commission to investigate the Gulf oil spill [See WIMS 5/18/10]. "We support the president's decision to set up an independent commission to investigate the Gulf oil spill. Finding out what exactly happened in the tragic Deepwater Horizon blowout and spill is of paramount importance. While many Americans are understandably concerned about safety and the environmental risk associated with offshore drilling, we hope policymakers use the valuable independent insights that will result from the commission's work to inform the legislative and regulatory process to ensure that decisions made do not have the unintended consequence of reducing domestic energy supplies, weakening our energy security and costing some of the 9.2 million American jobs supported by the U.S. oil and natural gas industry." [Note: The President is expected to officially call for the independent commission soon].

    Access a release from the T&I Committee (click here). Access the hearing website and link to all testimony, a summary of the subject matter and a webcast (click here). Access an AP report on the hearing and latest events (click here). Access a statement from the President (click here). Access the API statement (click here). Access the White House website on the BP spill which contains links to all Federal agency response websites (click here). Access the BP response website (click here). Access the Unified Command website for the latest updates (click here).

Presidential Commission & Congressional Hearings On BP Oil Spill

May 17: Various media reports including the New York Times and Associated Press indicate that President Obama will establish by Executive Order, within the next two days, an independent commission to investigate the BP Gulf oil spill and the governments role in the matter. On May 4, Daniel Weiss, of the Center for American Progress (CAP's) Director of Climate Strategy, wrote, "We need an independent commission to investigate the BP disaster." Now CAP reports on its Climate Progress blog that the White House is doing just that. CAP indicated that the White House indicated that the President's action will occur on Tuesday or Wednesday.

 

    Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) issued a release saying the President's action would Follow legislation introduced by him and Representative Lois Capps (D-CA), calling for the President to appoint an independent commission to look into the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and make recommendations to avoid such disasters in the future. Markey said, "Whether it's a nuclear meltdown at Three Mile Island or an oil blowout one mile deep, appointing an independent review panel is critical to reduce the risks of future accidents. Following the Three Mile Island nuclear meltdown, President Carter appointed an independent panel to investigate the cause of the meltdown and recommend safety improvements. President Obama creating an independent blue-ribbon panel on this oil spill will help provide the recommendations to ensure that similar disasters do not happen again." Markey and Capps introduced the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster Inquiry Commission Act of 2010 (H.R. 5241) on May 6, 2010. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), with cosponsors Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and Robert Menendez (D-NJ), has introduced a companion proposal, S. 3344.

 

    Frances Beinecke, President of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) issued a statement saying, "The magnitude of the Gulf oil drilling disaster demands an equally sizable response by the White House. The establishment of a presidential commission to investigate this disaster, as was done following the Three Mile Island and Challenger disasters, is a critical step to providing an independent, unbiased assessment of what happened and how such disasters can be averted in the future. To be effective, the commission should be charged with examining the causes of the current spill as well as the adequacy of oil spill containment and clean-up measures. We also need the commission to determine whether and how such spills can be avoided in the future. And it needs to assess the implications of its findings for drilling in, or adjacent to sensitive or ecologically important areas, including in the Arctic. Finally, the commission should be called on to make recommendations on how to strengthen laws, regulations and reform agency oversight in order to keep this from happening again."

 

    Today (May 18), three Senate Committees -- Energy and Natural Resources (ENR); Commerce, Science, and Transportation (CST); and Environment and Public Works (EPW) -- are all holding hearings to examine the BP oil spill. The ENR hearing will feature testimony from Ken Salazar, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior. The CST hearing features the heads of the Coast Guard and NOAA, along with the heads of BP, Transocean and a principal with Applied Science Associates, Inc. The EPW hearing includes the representatives from EPA, DOI CEQ, Army Corps, Coast Guard and the Economic Development Administration.

 

    In addition to the Congressional hearings, Representative Markey also queried the U.S. EPA on May 17, on the dangers of applying oil-dispersing chemicals deep underwater as an effort to mitigate the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. In the letter sent to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, Markey raises questions about the potential toxicity of the trademarked formulation, called Corexit, and whether the chemical could be contributing to new reports of large undersea "plumes" of oil suspended thousands of feet below the water's surface. Markey said, "The release of hundreds of thousands of gallons of chemicals into the Gulf of Mexico could be an unprecedented, large and aggressive experiment on our oceans. The information regarding the chemical composition, efficacy and toxicity of the dispersants currently being used is scarce."

 

    In a release the same day, EPA and the Coast Guard announced they had authorized BP to use dispersants underwater, at the source of the Deepwater Horizon leak. The agencies said, "Dispersants are generally less harmful than the highly toxic oil leaking from the source and they biodegrade in a much shorter time span. The use of the dispersant at the source of the leak represents a novel approach to addressing the significant environmental threat posed by the spill." [See WIMS 5/17/10].

 

    Access a release from CAP's Climate Progress with links to related information (click here). Access a release from Representative Markey (click here). Access a release from Senator Whitehouse (click here). Access a release from NRDC (click here). Access the ENR hearing website for links to testimony and a webcast (click here). Access the CST hearing website for links to testimony and a webcast (click here). Access the EPW hearing website for links to testimony and a webcast (click here). Access a release from Rep. Markey and link to the letter to EPA (click here). Access the White House website on the BP spill which contains links to all Federal agency response websites (click here). Access the BP response website (click here).

BP Intercepts Some Flow; Disastrous Gulf Oil Spill Continues

BP Intercepts Some Flow; Disastrous Gulf Oil Spill Continues - May 17: In a release and additional information, BP provided an update on developments in the response to the MC252 oil well incident in the Gulf of Mexico. BP indicates that subsea efforts continue to focus on progressing options to stop the flow of oil from the well through interventions via the blow out preventer (BOP), and to collect the flow of oil from the leak points. The efforts are being carried out in conjunction with governmental authorities and other industry experts.

    The riser insertion tube tool (RITT) containment system was put into place in the end of the leaking riser on May 16. Operations began during the day to allow oil and gas to flow through the tool up to the drillship Discoverer Enterprise on the surface 5,000 feet above. Produced oil, estimated currently at 1,000 barrels per day, is being stored on the drillship while produced gas is being flared. It is expected that it will take some time to increase the flow through the system and maximize the proportion of oil and gas flowing through the broken riser that will be captured and transported to the drillship. It should be noted that, BP and government agencies are still using the figure of 5,000 barrels per day as the rate of the leak; however, other reputable sources are estimating far more (i.e. between 20,000 to 100,000 barrels per day).

    The RITT is a fabricated from 4-inch diameter pipe, fashioned to allow one end to be inserted into the broken riser pipe that is the source of the main oil flow from the MC252 well, and the other to be connected to a drill pipe and riser from the Discoverer Enterprise. The RITT allows the injection of methanol to mitigate against the formation of gas hydrates. This remains a new technology and both its continued operation and its effectiveness in capturing the oil and gas remains uncertain. Other containment options continue to be progressed.

    BP indicates it also continues to develop options to shut off the flow of oil from the well through interventions via the well's failed BOP. Plans continue to be developed for a so called "top kill" operation where heavy drilling fluids are injected into the well to stem the flow of oil and gas, followed by cement to seal the well. Options have also been developed to potentially combine this with so-called "junk shot", the injection under pressure of a variety of materials into the BOP to seal off upward flow. Plans for deployment of these options are being progressed with the possibility of deployment in the next week or so. Work on the first relief well, which began on May 2, continues. The DDII drilling rig began drilling the second relief well on May 16. Each of these wells is estimated to take some three months to complete from the commencement of drilling.

 

    BP reports that surface response work continues to collect and disperse oil that has reached the surface of the sea. Over 650 vessels are involved in the response effort, including skimmers, tugs, barges and recovery vessels. Intensive operations to skim oil from the surface of the water have now recovered, in total, some 151,000 barrels (6.3 million gallons) of oily liquid. The total length of boom deployed as part of efforts to prevent oil reaching the coast is now almost 1.7 million feet, including over 400,000 feet of sorbent boom. In total over 19,000 personnel from BP, other companies and government agencies are currently involved in the response to the incident. BP said that so far 15,000 claims have been filed and 2,600 have already been paid. BP has also received almost 60,000 calls into its help lines.

 

    Meanwhile concerns have been raised about reports of a large subsurface mass of oil. NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco issued a statement on the ongoing efforts to monitor subsea impacts of the BP Oil Spill and said, "Media reports related to the research work conducted aboard the R/V Pelican included information that was misleading, premature and, in some cases, inaccurate. Yesterday the independent scientists clarified three important points: (1) No definitive conclusions have been reached by this research team about the composition of the undersea layers they discovered. Characterization of these layers will require analysis of samples and calibration of key instruments. The hypothesis that the layers consist of oil remains to be verified.

    "(2) While oxygen levels detected in the layers were somewhat below normal, they are not low enough to be a source of concern at this time. (3) Although their initial interest in searching for subsurface oil was motivated by consideration of subsurface use of dispersants, there is no information to connect use of dispersants to the subsurface layers they discovered. NOAA thanks the Pelican scientists and crew for repurposing their previously scheduled mission to gather information about possible impacts of the BP oil spill. We eagerly await results from their analyses and share with them the goal of disseminating accurate information. 

    "NOAA continues to work closely with EPA and the federal response team to monitor the presence of oil and the use of surface and sub-surface dispersants. As we have emphasized, dispersants are not a silver bullet. They are used to move us towards the lesser of two environmental outcomes. Until the flow of oil is stemmed, we must take every responsible action to reduce the impact of the oil."

    This afternoon (May 17), Janet Napolitano, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Rear Admiral Peter Neffenger, Deputy National Incident Commander, U.S. Coast Guard; and Lamar McKay, Chairman and President of BP America, Inc. testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, chaired by Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) with Ranking Member Susan Collins (R-ME). 

    Also today, U.S. EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard announced they have authorized BP to use dispersants underwater, at the source of the Deepwater Horizon leak. The agencies said oil spill dispersants are chemicals that attempt to break down the oil into small drops and prevent it from reaching the surface or the U.S. shoreline. The agencies said, "Dispersants are generally less harmful than the highly toxic oil leaking from the source and they biodegrade in a much shorter time span. The use of the dispersant at the source of the leak represents a novel approach to addressing the significant environmental threat posed by the spill. Preliminary testing results indicate that subsea use of the dispersant is effective at reducing the amount of oil from reaching the surface – and can do so with the use of less dispersant than is needed when the oil does reach the surface. This is an important step to reduce the potential for damage from oil reaching fragile wetlands and coastal areas."

    Access the latest BP update release (click here). Access a fact sheet on the RITT (click here). Access the statement from the NOAA Administrator (click here). Access the Committee on Homeland Security website for links to all testimony and a webcast (click here). Access a release from EPA & the Coast Guard with links to additional information (click here). Access the joint command website for continuous updates, briefings, photos and more (click here). Access 40 high resolution Reuters photos that capture the Gulf disaster (click here).

Senate Hearings On BP Gulf Oil Blowout & Spill

May 11: The Senate Energy & Natural Resources (ENR) Committee, Chaired by Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) with Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) held a hearing to review current issues related to offshore oil and gas development including the Department of the Interior's recent five year planning announcements and the accident in the Gulf of Mexico involving the offshore oil rig Deepwater Horizon (SR-325) [See WIMS 5/10/10]. Witnesses testifying at the hearing included: Dr. F.E. Beck - Associate Professor, Texas A&M University; Elmer Danenberger - Former Chief, Offshore Regulatory Program, Minerals Management Service (MMS); Lamar McKay - President and Chairman , BP America, Inc.; Steven Newman - President and Chief Executive Officer, Transocean Limited; and Tim Probert - President, Global Business Lines; Chief Health, Safety and Environmental Officer, Halliburton.

    In his statement, MMS's Danenberger who retired in January indicated that he had closely followed the investigation of the Montara blowout in the Timor Sea northwest of Australia and the ongoing Deepwater Horizon (DWH) blowout in the Macondo field in the Gulf of Mexico. He said he wanted to "express my disappointment in certain media comments directed at my former MMS colleagues. These comments have not only been ill-informed and unsubstantiated, but malicious.  Without hesitation, I can tell you that MMS regulatory personnel - inspectors, engineers, scientists, and others – are 100% committed to their safety and pollution prevention mission.

    He indicated that he had written several papers on blowout occurrence rates and causes. The most recent paper reviews the blowout record during the 15-year period from 1992-2006.  He said, "According to these data, well control performance for deepwater drilling was significantly better than for shallow water operations. There were no fatalities or major spills associated with deepwater drilling blowouts during the 15-year study period."

    He commented on various media reports regarding the lack of an "acoustic switch" backup system [See WIMS 5/3/10] and said "At this time, there is no evidence that such systems would have made a difference in this incident. Attempts to close BOPs [blowout preventers] were reportedly made prior to the DWH evacuation. The BOP should have also been signaled when the rig lost power and when the riser disconnected. It is unlikely that additional signals sent acoustically to the stack would have prevented the blowout."

 

    BP's McKay testified that, "Our subsea efforts to stop the flow of oil and secure the well have involved four concurrent strategies: (1)  Working to activate the blow-out preventer (BOP) on the well using submersible ROVs. This would be the preferred course of action, since it would stop or diminish the flow at the source on the ocean floor. Unfortunately, this effort has so far not proved successful. (2) Work continues on a subsea oil recovery plan using a containment system, placing large enclosures or containment chambers atop the leaks and conducting flow from the ocean floor to a ship at the surface through a pipe. As we anticipated, however, there have been technical challenges. This system has never been used before at 5,000 feet. Engineers are now working to see if these challenges can be overcome. (3) We have begun to drill the first of two relief wells to permanently secure the well. These wells are designed to intercept the original MC252 #1 well. Once this is accomplished, a specialized heavy fluid will be injected into the well bore to stop the flow of oil and allow work to be carried out to permanently cap the existing well. On Sunday, May 2nd, we began drilling the first of these wells. A second drillship will mobilize to the area to begin the second relief well later this week. This relief well operation could take approximately three months. (4) A fourth effort is known as a "top kill." It is a proven industry technique for capping wells and has been used worldwide, but never in 5000 feet of water. It uses a tube to inject a mixture of multi-sized particles directly into the blowout preventer. The attempt to do this could take two or three weeks to accomplish."

 

    In response to questioning from Senator Mary Landrieu (LA), BP's McKay said that BP would pay for all "reasonable" claims and damages. He said reasonable meant legitimate. He also, said this would far exceed the $75 million limit. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) asked if BP objected to raising the liability limit to $10 billion. McKay said he could not comment on that in particular, but that BP would pay all legitimate claims.

 

    Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) mentioned that some had estimated that damages could be as much as $14 billion. She asked BP if they would pay that amount. BP responded they would not comment on specific dollar amounts but that they would pay all legitimate claims. All three companies testified that they were conducting separate investigations of their own and that those investigations would be made available to the public.

 

    On further questioning Senator Cantwell said that the Exxon Valdez claims and payments took 20 years and went to the Supreme Court. She said is that BP means, i.e. fighting it out in court over time. BP's McKay said repeatedly in response to several inquiries by Senator Cantwell that "BP would pay all legitimate claims." Senator Cantwell said that BP was saying it was "stepping up" to its responsibilities and she certainly hoped that was true.

 

    Transocean's Probert testified that, ". . .the April 20 Deepwater Horizon explosion and its possible causes. What is most unusual about the explosion in this case is that it occurred after the well construction process was essentially finished. Drilling had been completed on April 17, and the well had been sealed with cement (to be reopened by the Operator at a later date if the Operator chose to put the well into production). At this point, drilling mud was no longer being used as a means of reservoir pressure containment; the cement and the casing were the barriers controlling pressure from the reservoir. Indeed, at the time of the explosion, the rig crew, at the direction of the Operator, was in the process of displacing drilling mud and replacing it with sea water.

 

    "For that reason, the one thing we know with certainty is that on the evening of April 20, there was a sudden, catastrophic failure of the cement, the casing, or both. Therein lies the root cause of this occurrence; without a disastrous failure of one of those elements, the explosion could not have occurred. It is also clear that the drill crew had very little (if any) time to react. The explosions were almost instantaneous. . ."

 

    At 2:30 PM, the Senate Environment and Pubic Works (EPW) Committee, Chaired by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) with Ranking Member James Inhofe (R-OK) also held a hearing entitled, "Economic and Environmental Impacts of the Recent Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico." Witnesses included the same three company representatives from BP, Transocean and Halliburton. Additional witnesses included representatives from Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Governor's Office of Coastal Activities, State of Louisiana; Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association; Department of Natural Sciences, University of Maryland Eastern Shore;  Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University; and United States Air Force (Ret.).

 

    Access the Senate SNR hearing website for links to all testimony and webcast (click here). Access the Senate EPW hearing website for links to all testimony and webcast (click here).

BP Gulf Oil Spill Containment Dome Fails; Alternatives Pursued

May 10: BP provided an update on developments in the response to the MC252 oil well incident in the Gulf of Mexico. BP indicated in a company release that subsea efforts continue to focus on two fronts: first, reducing the flow of oil spilled by physical containment and second, further work on stopping the flow using a "top kill" option. Also, work on the first relief well, which began on May 2, continues. It is expected to take some three months to complete.

    The containment dome that was deployed last week has been parked away from the spill area on the sea bed. Efforts to place it over the main leak point were suspended at the weekend as a build up of hydrates prevented a successful placement of the dome over the spill area. A second, smaller containment dome is being readied to lower over the main leak point. The small dome will be connected by drill pipe and riser lines to a drill ship on the surface to collect and treat oil. It is designed to mitigate the formation of large hydrate volumes. This operation has never been done before in 5,000 feet of water.

    In addition, BP indicated that "further work on the blow out preventer has positioned us to attempt a 'top kill' option aimed at stopping the flow of oil from the well. This option will be pursued in parallel with the smaller containment dome over the next two weeks." All of the techniques being attempted or evaluated to contain the flow of oil on the seabed involve significant uncertainties because they have not been tested in these conditions before. BP said it "continues to do everything it can, in conjunction with governmental authorities and other industry experts, to find a solution to stem the flow of oil on the seabed."

    Work also continues to collect and disperse oil that has reached the surface of the sea. More than 275 vessels are being used, including skimmers, tugs, barges and recovery vessels. The volume of dispersant applied to the spill on the surface amounts to over 315,000 gallons since the spill response began. Intensive operations to skim oil from the surface of the water also continued. Some 90,000 barrels of oily liquid has now been recovered. The total length of deployed boom is now more than 1 million feet as part of the efforts to stop oil reaching the coast. BP said the cost to date of the response amounts to about $350 million, including the cost of spill response, containment, relief well drilling, commitments to the Gulf Coast States, settlements and federal costs.

 

    On May 10, Department of Interior (DOI) Secretary Ken Salazar announced that Director of the National Park Service Jon Jarvis and Acting Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service Rowan Gould have been dispatched to command centers along the Gulf Coast to help lead efforts to protect coastal communities and natural resources from BP's Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Jarvis, who is stationed in the Mobile, Alabama Incident Command Center, and Gould, who is stationed in the Houma, Louisiana Incident Command Center, are among the more than 380 DOI personnel who have been deployed as part of the oil spill response. Additional DOI personnel already stationed in the region are among the more than 10,000 personnel currently responding to protect the shoreline and wildlife. Jarvis and Gould will work with federal and state natural resource managers to help protect state and federal natural resources.

 

    DOI said that the Gulf Coast, which is one of the most ecologically complex regions in the country and site of a number of National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks protected by Interior on behalf of the American people. The National Park Service, which manages Gulf Islands National Seashore, Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve, Everglades National Park, Padre Island National Seashore, and other parks along the Gulf Coast, has activated two incident management teams in the Gulf. DOI indicated that the Fish and Wildlife Service manages 24 national wildlife refuges that could potentially be affected by the spill, including Breton National Wildlife Refuge, where oil has been confirmed on the Chandeleur Islands.

 

    U.S. EPA announced that Administrator Lisa Jackson will make another visit to the gulf region May 10-11, to oversee efforts to mitigate the environmental and human health impact of the ongoing BP oil spill. She will be meeting with EPA response managers on the scene and review the Agency's on-going air and water monitoring efforts. She will also meet with scientists from inside and outside the Federal government -- including scientists at local universities and from local organizations -- who have unique knowledge of the environmental challenges facing the gulf coast region and to discuss the potential impact of the use of dispersants on the spill on and below the surface of the water. Jackson will also meet with BP officials, the Coast Guard and other federal agencies to discuss ongoing efforts to mitigate the impact of the spill.   

 

    Greenpeace issued a release indicating that they had found the first traces of oil onshore at Port Eads, the southernmost tip of Louisiana during a visit to the area at the mouth of the Mississippi River May 9, 2010. Dan Howells, Deputy Director of Campaigns at Greenpeace, and conservation specialist Rick Steiner collected samples of the oil on the beach and documented what they saw with photographs. Greenpeace said, "The oil onshore at Port Eads shows that it is reaching the mouth of the Mississippi, putting even more species of Louisiana's coastal habitats at risk—including animal and plant species that thrive only in these wetlands. The oil was found both in globules scattered on the beach and within the wet marshy areas as discoloration and a sheen on the marsh water. Oil had collected on reeds, which prevent erosion of the coastline, highlighting more evidence of this disaster."

 

    Access a release from BP (click here). Access a release from DOI (click here). Access a release from EPA (click here). Access a release and link to photos from Greenpeace (click here). Access further updates on a joint companies and government unified command website (click here).

Update On BP Deepwater Horizon Gulf Oil Spill

May 5: BP is currently attempting to conduct a recovery operation using a specially-built "dome" to cap the leak at the sea floor and is also conducting a controlled burn; the area of concern has widened in to include the west coast of Florida and the Keys; and officials are preparing for expanded impacts. Reportedly, BP officials have admitted to Congressional members in a closed door meeting, that as much as 60,000 barrels per day may be leaking from the well -- the last estimate was 5,000 barrels per day [See WIMS 5/3/10].

 

    At the direction of President Obama, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano, Department of Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco and EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe will travel to the Gulf Coast this week to meet with Federal, state and local officials, as well as local business leaders, as part of their continued oversight of BP's efforts to plug the leak and contain the spill, and their ongoing emphasis on interagency coordination in response to the event.

    On Thursday, Secretary Napolitano, Secretary Locke and Administrator Lubchenco will travel to Biloxi, MS, to inspect response operations, meet with state, local and private sector leaders, and view firsthand staging areas for the deployment of boom to protect vital shoreline from the oil spill. Secretary Napolitano and Secretary Locke will then visit similar operations ongoing in Pensacola, FL. Administrator Lubchenco and White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley will then visit Pascagoula, MS, to visit NOAA's seafood inspection lab.

    EPA Deputy Administrator Perciasepe will also travel on Thursday to Louisiana, where he will review EPA's ongoing air and water monitoring activities, meet with local and community leaders, and assess the environmental situation on the ground. On Friday, Lubchenco and Sutley will travel to Venice and St. Bernard Parish, LA, to inspect shoreline cleanup assessment activities and meet with state, local and private sector leaders about the administration's ongoing efforts to mitigate the spill's impact on public health, the environment, and the economy. Today, Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is touring Delta National Wildlife Refuge in Louisiana, Bon Secour National Wildlife Refuge in Alabama, and the areas affected by the BP oil spill to assess the ongoing Federal response efforts.

 

    Today BP responders were preparing to conduct a controlled burn. As part of the coordinated response that combines tactics deployed above water, below water, offshore, and close to coastal areas, controlled burns remove oil from the open water in an effort to protect shoreline and wildlife. No populated areas are expected to be affected by the controlled burn operations and there are no anticipated impacts to marine mammals and sea turtles. Responders said a successful controlled burn, lasting 28 minutes on April 28 removed thousands of gallons of oil.

 

    On May 4, the White House indicated that as the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico grows and makes it way toward the coast, attention has turned to the question of who will pay for the clean-up and any possible damages to our natural habitats, businesses, and individuals who call this region home. An Administration blog posting indicates, ". . .let's be clear about a few things: BP is responsible for -- and will be held accountable for -- all of the very significant clean-up and containment costs. They will pay for the mess they've made. Beyond clean-up and containment, BP must be held responsible for the damages this spill causes." The Administration indicated that it "strongly supports efforts on Capitol Hill to raise the Oil Pollution Act damages cap significantly above $75 million."

    According to the posting, "Currently, under the Oil Pollution Act, if BP is found to be grossly negligent or to have engaged in willful misconduct or conduct in violation of federal regulations, then there is no cap under this specific law for damages. Simply put, the $75 million cap on damages under the Oil Pollution Act would not apply under these circumstances. Right now, this crisis is still very much unfolding so it will take time to determine what caused this spill and the extent of the damage that can be claimed under this one law. Changing the Oil Pollution Act so that its cap does not limit our ability to collect damages would increase our chances of collecting adequate compensation. In addition, we are examining what fines or damages BP could be liable for under additional applicable federal and state laws. The bottom line is that the Administration will aggressively pursue compensation from BP for any damages from this spill."

    Today (May 5), in response to the possibility of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill affecting the West Coast of Florida, representatives from BP, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) are meeting to plan a multi-agency response. Working together, the agencies have reviewed the area contingency plan and ensured all partners have access to, and are familiar with the plan. In meetings over the last couple days, the Coast Guard and FDEP have spoken with trustees from various national and state wildlife refugee areas, along with every county emergency management office on the West Coast of Florida. The agencies also met with over 30 members of non-governmental environmental organizations including Tampa Bay Watch, Save our Seabirds, Sarasota Bay Estuary Program, Sierra Club, etc. The latest predictions from the NOAA, indicate no impact to the western coast of Florida, from Taylor County to Collier County within the next 72 hours.

    On May 4, The United States Coast Guard at Sector Key West, FL, in conjunction with its port partners and key stakeholders, have been actively preparing for possible marine pollution effects from the spill. As part of an ongoing preparation efforts, the Coast Guard hosted a joint meeting on with Federal, state, and local partners to discuss potential impacts and response priorities should the spill affect the waters of the Florida Keys. Agencies met to review highly sensitive areas in the Keys, prepared response strategies, and to share information and discuss pollution mitigation. Capt. Pat DeQuattro, sector commander at Coast Guard Sector Key West said, "Although it is still too soon to predict if or how the Florida Keys may be impacted by the Deepwater Horizon spill, we are focused on preparing for whatever those impacts may be."

    Access a release on the Administration officials in the Gulf Coast (click here). Access a NY Times article (click here). Access a release on the controlled burn and link to additional information (click here). Access the blog posting from the White House on BP responsibility (click here). Access a release on the FL West Coast preparation (click here). Access a release on the Keys preparation (click here). Access further updates on a joint companies and government unified command website (click here). Access local media reports from the Alabama Press-Register (click here).

Major Study Shows Toxic Chemicals In Fish Tissue Nationwide

Nov 10: A new EPA study shows concentrations of toxic chemicals in fish tissue from lakes and reservoirs in nearly all 50 U.S. states. For the first time, EPA is able to estimate the percentage of lakes and reservoirs nationwide that have fish containing potentially harmful levels of chemicals such as mercury and PCBs. Peter Silva, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Water said, “These results reinforce Administrator Jackson’s strong call for revitalized protection of our nation’s waterways and long-overdue action to protect the American people. EPA is aggressively tackling the issues the report highlights. Before the results were even finalized, the agency initiated efforts to further reduce toxic mercury pollution and strengthen enforcement of the Clean Water Act – all part of a renewed effort to protect the nation’s health and environment.”

The data showed mercury concentrations in game fish exceeding EPA’s recommended levels at 49 percent of lakes and reservoirs nationwide, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in game fish at levels of potential concern at 17 percent of lakes and reservoirs. These findings are based on a comprehensive national study using more data on levels of contamination in fish tissue than any previous study. EPA said that burning fossil fuels, primarily coal, accounts for nearly half of mercury air emissions caused by human activity in the U.S., and those emissions are a significant contributor to mercury in water bodies. From 1990 through 2005, emissions of mercury into the air decreased by 58 percent. EPA is committed to developing a new rule to substantially reduce mercury emissions from power plants, and the Obama Administration is actively supporting a new international agreement that will reduce mercury emissions worldwide.

The study also confirms the widespread occurrence of PCBs and dioxins in fish, illustrating the need for federal, state and local government to continue efforts to reduce the presence of these harmful chemicals in our lakes and reservoirs and ensure that fish advisory information is readily available. EPA said it is important that women of child-bearing age and children continue to follow the advice of EPA and the Food and Drug Administration on fish consumption as it relates to mercury. The study is also a strong message to state and local governments to redouble their efforts in looking for opportunities to reduce mercury discharges, as well as developing fish advisories, especially to reach those in sensitive and vulnerable populations.

Results from the four-year National Study of Chemical Residues in Lake Fish Tissue show that mercury and PCBs are widely distributed in U.S. lakes and reservoirs. Mercury and PCBs were detected in all of the fish samples collected from the nationally representative sample of 500 lakes and reservoirs in the study. Because these findings apply to fish caught in lakes and reservoirs, it is particularly important for recreational and subsistence fishers to follow their state and local fish advisories.

EPA said it is conducting other statistically based national aquatic surveys that include assessment of fish contamination, such as the National Rivers and Streams Assessment and the National Coastal Assessment. Sampling for the National Rivers and Streams Assessment is underway, and results from this two-year study are expected to be available in 2011. Collection of fish samples for the National Coastal Assessment will begin in 2010.

Access a release from EPA (click here). Access EPA's National Lake Fish Tissue Study website for complete information (click here). Access more information on local fish advisories (click here).

600 Groups Urge Senators To Pass Climate Bill This Year

Sep 15: As it now seems that the Senate leadership is leaning toward a possible delay in attempting to pass climate change legislation this year; a release from National Wildlife Federation (NWF) says a collection of more than 600 conservation, outdoor, sportsmen, recreation and faith groups representing tens of millions of individuals all across the country are calling on the Senate to pass comprehensive climate and energy legislation that not only reduces greenhouse gas emissions, but also dedicates a significant portion of funding towards helping wildlife and natural resources that are currently threatened by global warming.

Derek Brockbank, National Wildlife Federation conservation funding campaign manager said, "Time is running out for many of America’s most treasured wildlife and landscapes. New and dedicated resources are needed to safeguard wildlife and natural resources from climate change impacts today so future generations of Americans can enjoy a thriving natural heritage tomorrow." According to the release, all the groups agree that in order to realistically tackle the existing and forecasted impacts facing our treasured wild places and animals, the Senate will need to dedicate approximately five percent of the total allowances from a climate bill towards safeguarding our natural resources from the negative impacts of climate change.

Yet as the groups mount their campaign to urge Senate passage in advance of the UN COP15 climate change meeting in Copenhagen, media reports indicate that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid warned yesterday that climate legislation might have to wait until next year because of the intensive effort necessary on health care and financial system reform legislation. The New York Times reported that although a Reid spokesman, insisted that "no decisions have been made" on floor timing for a comprehensive climate and energy bill and "We still intend to deal with health care, [Wall Street regulatory] reform and cap and trade this year;" a few hours earlier, "Reid had suggested that the global warming legislation could be tossed to the sidelines because of a packed legislative agenda that includes equally bruising battles over health care and Wall Street reform."

In a letter to Senators signed by the groups, they indicate, "As the Senate develops comprehensive climate and energy legislation, your leadership is needed to get the whole job done this year. Please ensure climate legislation both reduces the greenhouse gas emissions triggering climate change and safeguards natural resources, wildlife and our own communities threatened by the changes already set in motion."

Noah Matson, vice president for climate change with Defenders of Wildlife said, “This funding would provide crucial support for job-creating conservation initiatives to protect the natural resources which are the backbone of public health and the American economy. Without funding for efforts such as these, much of the natural resources all Americans depend on for water, food, medicine, flood protection and recreation will be seriously compromised in the near future.” The groups reminded that outdoor recreation accounts for eight percent of all consumer spending, which drives an overall annual contribution of $730 billion to the economy and supports 6.5 million jobs.

Specifically, the groups have urged the Senate to develop climate legislation that will establish a national policy framework to begin addressing the impacts of climate change on our natural resources; provide increased scientific capacity, coordination and information sharing; and dedicate five percent of the total allowance value to federal, state and tribal agencies.

In the meantime a key Administration official has suggested that the what has been termed the "critical" Copenhagen meeting may not be the end-all opportunity and that “We can come back in two to four years’ time.” Bloomberg.com is reporting that U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu who is in Vienna, Austria addressing the 53rd International Atomic Energy Agency General Conference, told reporters on September 15, that it is more important that nations make actual commitments to fight global warming. Bloomberg reported that Chu said, “Let’s not make that one particular time the be-all, end- all and say if it doesn’t happen that we’re doomed. We can come back in two to four years’ time. . . "

Access a release from NWF and link to a copy of a campaign ad (click here). Access the letter and list of groups (click here). Access a NYT article on the timing of the climate legislation (click here). Access the Bloomberg's article (click here).

DOI Salazar Keeps Controversial Bush-Era 4(d) Polar Bear Rule

May 8: Department of Interior (DOI) Secretary Ken Salazar announced that he will retain a controversial special rule issued in December under the Bush Administration for protecting the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act. But DOI said it will closely monitor the implementation of the rule to determine if additional measures are necessary to conserve and recover the polar bear and its habitat. Salazar said, “To see the polar bear’s habitat melting and an iconic species threatened is an environmental tragedy of the modern age. This administration is fully committed to the protection and recovery of the polar bear. I have reviewed the current rule, received the recommendations of the Fish and Wildlife Service, and concluded that the best course of action for protecting the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act is to wisely implement the current rule, monitor its effectiveness, and evaluate our options for improving the recovery of the species.”

Salazar's action follows his receipt of a letter from 53 law professors from around the country urging him to rescind the “special rule” created by the Bush administration which they say sharply limits protections for the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act. David Hunter, director of the environmental law program at American University’s Washington College of Law said, “The polar bear deserves the same protections all other endangered species receive. Secretary Salazar should use authority granted to him by Congress to rescind the special rule for the polar bear.” Noah Greenwald, biodiversity program director at the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) said, "For Salazar to adopt Bush's polar bear extinction plan is confirming the worst fears of his tenure as Secretary of the Interior. Secretary Salazar would apparently prefer to please Sarah Palin than to protect polar bears. It makes little sense for Salazar to rescind Bush's national policy barring consideration of global warming impacts to endangered species in general, but keep that exact policy in place for the one species most endangered by global warming -- the polar bear." [See WIMS 3/4/09]

The polar bear is listed as a threatened species under the Act [See WIMS 5/15/08], meaning it is at risk of becoming an endangered species throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The law provides civil and criminal penalties for actions that kill or injure bears and bars Federal agencies from taking actions that are likely to jeopardize the species or adversely modify its critical habitat. In addition, the polar bear is protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), which provides equal and in some cases more stringent protections, and international treaties such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

DOI says Section 4(d) of the ESA, the "special rule," allows the Fish and Wildlife Service "to tailor regulatory prohibitions for threatened species as deemed necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of the species." Thomas Strickland, assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and parks said, “In our judgment, keeping the rule is the best course of action for the polar bear. We will continue to reach out and listen to the public and a wide range of stakeholders as we monitor the rule, and will not hesitate to take additional steps if necessary to protect this iconic species.” The rule also states that incidental take of polar bears resulting from activities outside the bear’s range, such as emission of greenhouse gases (GHG), will not be prohibited under the ESA.

Salazar said, “We must do all we can to help the polar bear recover, recognizing that the greatest threat to the polar bear is the melting of Arctic sea ice caused by climate change. However, the Endangered Species Act is not the proper mechanism for controlling our nation’s carbon emissions. Instead, we need a comprehensive energy and climate strategy that curbs climate change and its impacts -- including the loss of sea ice. Both President Obama and I are committed to achieving that goal.”

DOI indicated that under the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, Congress granted Salazar authority until May 10 to revoke the 4(d) rule. If Salazar had decided to withdraw the 4(d) rule, a virtually identical “interim” 4(d) rule issued by the previous Administration when the polar bear was first listed as a threatened species would be put back in place. Salazar said, “Revoking the current 4(d) rule would return us to an interim rule that would offer no more protections for the polar bear and would result in uncertainty and confusion about the management of the species.”

CBD said that Salazar ignored strong criticism of the rule and requests to revoke it from more than 1,300 scientists, more than 50 prominent legal experts, dozens of lawmakers, more than 130 conservation organizations and hundreds of thousands of members of the public. They said the rule severely undermines protection for the polar bear by exempting all activities that occur outside of the polar bears range from review -- "The polar bear, however, is endangered precisely because of activities occurring outside the Arctic, namely emission of greenhouse gases and resulting warming that is leading to the rapid disappearance of summer sea ice."

CBD also indicated that the special rule also reduces the protections the bear would otherwise receive in Alaska from oil industry activities in its habitat. Greenwald said, “Salazar’s decision today is a gift to Big Oil and an affirmation of the pro-industry/ anti-environmental policies of the Bush administration. This is not the change Obama promised.” The Center for Biological Diversity and other organizations are challenging the polar bear special rule in court. Oil-industry organizations, trade associations, and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin have intervened in the court case to defend the rule. CBD argues that, "Addressing greenhouse gas emissions under the Endangered Species Act is no different than addressing any other pollutants that have been effectively addressed under the Act for years, such as DDT and other pesticides that had severe impacts to the bald eagle and other species."

The law professors indicated in their letter, "We have three primary concerns with these exemptions. First, the exemption for all activities outside the current range of the species is overly broad, exempting whole classes of activities that harm polar bears. For example, the majority of contaminants, ranging from petroleum hydrocarbons, persistent organic pollutants, and heavy metals that negatively impact polar bears come from outside the current range of the species. 73 Fed. Reg. 28212, 28290. Second, exemption of all greenhouse emissions outside of the current range of the polar bear from potential regulation under Section 9 undermines the
survival and recovery of the polar bear because such emissions are the primary threat to the continued existence of the polar bear.

"Finally, the take provisions of the MMPA provide less protection for the polar bear because unlike the ESA, the MMPA’s definition of 'take' does not include the term 'harm.' Compare 16 U.S.C. § 1532(19) with 16 U.S.C. § 1362(13). Under the ESA, the 'harm' prohibition has been interpreted to include habitat modification, which significantly impairs 'essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering.' 50 C.F.R § 17.3. In eliminating the 'harm' prohibition for polar bears, the special rule potentially undermines effective protections for the polar bear’s habitat from both direct and indirect impacts."

DOI pointed out in its release that President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2010 budget request includes a significant new commitment to helping conserve the polar bear. The budget request includes an increase of $7.4 million for polar bear conservation, of which $3.2 million will be invested through the Fish and Wildlife Service. The new commitment includes a $1.5 million increase for the Endangered Species program specifically to address new and reinitiated interagency consultations on oil and gas projects and to prepare for a range-wide Polar Bear Conservation Plan to guide U.S. and international work to conserve and improve the status of the species. An increase of $1.7 million will allow the FWS Marine Mammal program to intensify work with partners to prepare, review, and publish population assessments, conservation plans, and incidental take regulations.

Access a release from DOI and link to a Section 4(d) Q&A document (click here). Access a release from CBD with links to the letters from more than 1,300 scientists, 53 law professors, eight senators, U.S. representatives, California legislators and more than 130 conservation organizations (click here). Access the DOI Polar Bear Conservation and Management website (click here). Access the CBD Polar Bear website for more information (click here).

USGS Study Tracks Mercury Emissions From Asia To Seafood

May 1: According to a release from the Department of Interior (DOI), a new landmark study published today documents for the first time the process in which increased mercury emissions from human sources across the globe, and in particular from Asia, make their way into the North Pacific Ocean and as a result contaminate tuna and other seafood. Because much of the mercury that enters the North Pacific comes from the atmosphere, scientists have predicted an additional 50 percent increase in mercury in the Pacific by 2050 if mercury emission rates continue as projected.

DOI Secretary Ken Salazar said, “This unprecedented USGS study is critically important to the health and safety of the American people and our wildlife because it helps us understand the relationship between atmospheric emissions of mercury and concentrations of mercury in marine fish. We have always known that mercury can pose a risk, now we need to reduce the mercury emissions so that we can reduce the ocean mercury levels.” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson commented, "This study gives us a better understanding of how dangerous levels of mercury move into our air, our water, and the food we eat, and shines new light on a major health threat to Americans and people all across the world. With this information in hand, plus our own mercury efforts, we have an even greater opportunity to continue working with our international partners to significantly cut mercury pollution in the years ahead and protect the health of millions of people.”

Water sampling cited in the study shows that mercury levels in 2006 were approximately 30 percent higher than those measured in the mid-1990s. The study documents for the first time the formation of methylmercury in the North Pacific Ocean. It shows that methylmercury is produced in mid-depth ocean waters by processes linked to the “ocean rain.” Algae, which are produced in sunlit waters near the surface, die quickly and “rain” downward to greater water depths. At depth, the settling algae are decomposed by bacteria and the interaction of this decomposition process in the presence of mercury results in the formation of methylmercury. Many steps up the food chain later, predators like tuna receive methylmercury from the fish they consume. One unexpected finding from this study is the significance of long-range transport of mercury within the ocean that originates in the western Pacific Ocean, off the coast of Asia.

USGS scientist and coauthor David Krabbenhoft said, “Mercury researchers typically look skyward to find a mercury source from the atmosphere due to emissions from land-based combustion facilities. In this study, however, the pathway of the mercury was a little different. Instead, it appears the recent mercury enrichment of the sampled Pacific Ocean waters is caused by emissions originating from fallout near the Asian coasts. The mercury-enriched waters then enter a long-range eastward transport by large ocean circulation currents."

Scientists sampled Pacific Ocean water from 16 different sites between Honolulu, Hawaii and Kodiak, Alaska. In addition, the scientists constructed a computer simulation that links atmospheric emissions, transport and deposition of mercury, and an ocean circulation model.

USGS said that in the United States, about 40 percent of all human exposure to mercury is from tuna harvested in the Pacific Ocean. Methylmercury is a highly toxic form of mercury that rapidly accumulates in the food chain to levels that can cause serious health concerns for those who consume the seafood. Pregnant women who consume mercury can pass on life-long developmental effects to their children. That is why in 2004 EPA and FDA issued the landmark Joint Guidance on the Consumption of Fish specifically targeted towards pregnant women and nursing mothers. Previous studies show that 75 percent of human exposure worldwide to mercury is from the consumption of marine fish and shell fish.

DOI indicated that scientists have known for some time that mercury deposited from the atmosphere to freshwater ecosystems can be transformed (methylated) into methylmercury, but identifying the analogous cycles in marine systems has remained elusive. As a result of this study researchers now know more about the process which leads to the transformation of mercury into methylmercury. The paper, Mercury sources, distribution and bioavailability in the North Pacific Ocean: Insights from data and models, appeared today in Global Biogeochemical Cycles, which is published by the American Geophysical Union.

Access a release from DOI (click here). Access more information on USGS mercury research (click here). Access a report summary and links to obtaining the complete article (click here).

Obama Suspends Bush Endangered Species Rule

Mar 3: At his meeting with Department of Interior employees, President Obama announced that he "signed a memorandum that will help restore the scientific process to its rightful place at the heart of the Endangered Species Act, a process undermined by past administrations." He said, "For more than three decades, the Endangered Species Act has successfully protected our nation's most threatened wildlife, and we should be looking for ways to improve it -- not weaken it." The President's action effectively suspends the Bush Administration rule (See links below) and calls for a review of the regulation. Until such a review is completed, the President said, "I request the heads of all agencies to exercise their discretion, under the new regulation, to follow the prior longstanding consultation and concurrence practices" involving the Fish and Wildlife Services and the National Marine Fisheries Service."

According to the President's Memo, "The Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16U.S.C. 1531 et seq., reflects one of the Nation's profound commitments. Pursuant to that Act, the Federal Government has long required a process of broad interagency consultation to ensure the application of scientific and technical expertise to decisions that may affect threatened or endangered species. . . On December 16, 2008, the Departments of the Interior and Commerce issued a joint regulation that modified these longstanding requirements. See 73 Fed. Reg. 76272. . . I hereby request the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce to review the regulation issued on December 16, 2008, and to determine whether to undertake new rulemaking procedures with respect to consultative and concurrence processes that will promote the purposes of the ESA."

House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick J. Rahall (D-WV) released a statement after President Barack Obama announced, during a visit to the Interior Department, that his Administration will change course on a Bush Administration regulation that would have allowed Federal agencies to decide on their own whether or not to comply with the consultation requirement of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), one of the Nation's landmark conservation laws [See WIMS 10/27/08, WIMS 12/12/08, WIMS 12/16/08].

Chairman Rahall said, "I wholeheartedly support the President's proposal to restore the protections for endangered species that the Bush Administration spent so many years trying to undermine. It is one more indication that the new Administration truly represents change for the better and is committed to the protection of our natural resources and our environment. I think we know who would have been the winner in this fox-guarding-the-hen-house scenario advanced by the Bush Administration, and it would not be the hens."

The public interest law firm, Earthjustice who filed litigation challenging the Bush Administration changes in Federal district court in San Francisco on December 16 [See WIMS 12/18/08], issued a statement saying, ". . .we applaud the new administration's leadership in restoring scientific integrity to this agency and its mandate to protect our nation's wildlife. We're heartened that President Obama intends to return wildlife biologists to their rightful role in determining protections for America's plants and animals. What's needed now is for the Senate to defeat an attempt by Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) that seeks to make it more difficult for the Obama administration to undo this misguided rule change by the former administration. President Obama's directive sends a loud and clear signal that the former administration's political manipulation of science will no longer be tolerated. . ."

John Kostyack, Executive Director of Wildlife Conservation and Global Warming at the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) said, “This action demonstrates President Obama’s commitment to protecting America’s endangered species and the habitats that both people and wildlife depend upon. Reinstating independent scientific review of the impacts of federal actions on endangered species is a giant first step in restoring the Endangered Species Act after eight years of attacks from the Bush Administration. With just one stroke of the pen, President Obama has done more today to uphold the scientific integrity of the Endangered Species Act than President Bush did during his entire eight years in office. Members of the Senate should follow President Obama’s lead and pass the 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill , which includes language making it clear that President Obama has the authority to immediately and completely reverse President Bush's last-minute Endangered Species Act changes.” The House of Representatives approved the $410 billion omnibus FY 2009 appropriations bill (H.R. 1105), by a vote of 245-178, on February 25 [See WIMS 2/27/09]. The bill is now under consideration in the Senate.

The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), which is at the center of many endangered species act decisions said, “This is welcome news for endangered species. Obama has restored independent, scientific oversight to the heart of the Endangered Species Act. Obama’s move today puts expert scientists back in the driver’s seat for management of the nation’s endangered species,” said Suckling. “Obama has acted swiftly to meet an important campaign promise and show that he puts science and endangered species before politics. We are hopeful that the Senate will pass the Omnibus Appropriations bill and the Obama administration will fully rescind both of these rules.”

U.S. Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Mark Begich (D-AK), introduced an amendment to the FY 2009 omnibus spending bill which they said "would maintain the public process for revisions to regulations under the Endangered Species Act." They indicated in a release that, "The omnibus appropriations bill that passed the House of Representatives last week and is before the Senate this week includes language that would allow the administration to withdraw two current rules under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) within 60 days of adoption of the omnibus bill without having to go through any notice or public comment period, and without being subject to any judicial review. The first rule relates to the specific listing of the polar bear, while the second rule deals with regulation of carbon dioxide emissions nationwide, a related issue to the polar bear listing."

The Senators explained, "Last year the Bush administration listed the polar bear as a threatened species under the ESA. The listing decision specifically included a provision -- permitted by Section 4(d) of the ESA -- that prevented oil or gas or subsistence hunting from being impacted by any action plan that the Department will craft to remedy bear population issues in the future. This provision was added after full public comment and was based on a full scientific review." They said the Murkowski-Begich amendment would require that if the secretaries of the Interior and Commerce Departments withdraw or reissue the current rules under the ESA, the action would be subject to the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), with at least a 60-day comment period.
Murkowski said, "Withdrawal of the existing rule could mean that any increase in carbon dioxide or any greenhouse gas, anywhere in the country could be subject to legal challenges asserting that those activities are harming a polar bear, or that there has not been sufficient consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding activities that are funded, carried out or authorized by the federal government. The Center for Biological diversity has already stated that it wants to use the polar bear listing to regulate greenhouse gases. While I believe lawsuits by environmental groups would eventually overreach and cause a backlash against the ESA, massive economic harm could result before Congress steps in to remedy the situation.”

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member, James Inhofe (R-OK) also commented on the omnibus budget bill provision calling for "the removal of a rider . . . that would authorize the Department of the Interior to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and reverse common-sense revisions to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) consultation procedures." He said, "The omnibus rider is flagrant attempt to regulate emissions without going through the proper process of public regulatory or legislative debate. This provision is a direct attack on our economy and energy security. Rescinding the polar bear rules with the congressional stroke of the pen means that any emitter of greenhouse gases could be regulated in the name of protecting habitat regardless of whether sufficient scientific evidence justifies that action. ESA was never intended or designed to regulate greenhouse gas emissions or air quality. The fact is that activists and their Congressional supporters are selectively ignoring their commitments to transparency in order to improve their odds in court."

Access remarks from the President (click here). Access the President's Memo (click here). Access a release from Chairman Rahall (click here). Access a release from Earthjustice (click here). Access a release from NWF (click here). Access a release from CBD (click here). Access a lengthy release from Senators Murkowski & Begich (click here). Access a release from Senator Inhofe (click here). Access legislative details for H.R. 1105 including the roll call vote (click here). Access the Bush Administration final ESA rule published 12/16/08 (click here). Access the FWS ESA website for program information (click here). [*Wildlife, *Climate, *Land]