CONNECT    

Rocky Kistner

Rocky Kistner

GET UPDATES FROM Rocky Kistner

On the Hill, Gulf Oil Drilling Safety Takes a Back Seat

Posted: 06/ 4/11 08:37 AM ET

When members of Congress want to figure out what’s really going on in the Gulf these days, it’s easy to tell if they just want to make political statements or get to the truth of the matter.

This week, political statements ruled the day. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, turned tradition on its head by first trotting out Gulf politicians and businessmen intent on bashing Obama administration oil drilling policies. The man responsible for ensuring drilling safety was allowed to speak -- last.

The hearing, “Making the Gulf Coast Whole Again: Assessing the Recovery Efforts of BP and the Obama Administration after the Oil Spill,” could instead have been called “Making the Oil Industry Whole Again: How the Obama Administration Put Safety Before Profits.” For an indication of the thrust of the hearing, check out the Media Matters report here.

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour was the lead witness, and he didn’t disappoint. The former energy industry lobbyist made it clear where his priorities were, telling the committee this was an economic disaster, not an environmental one.; The governor even blamed the media for making oil-coated wildlife look like "chocolate pelicans." And Barbour emphatically told the panel all seafood testing so far has found to be safe while the beaches of Mississippi are all clean and clear.

Gov. Barbour at House oversight hearing                  Photo: Rocky Kistner/NRDC

That’s not exactly what some people are reporting in the Gulf. Turtles and dolphins and a plethora of dead animals and fish have been washing up in high numbers on Mississippi beaches. Red Snapper with lesions are being found by scientists off the Gulf Coast with bacterial infections that could be harmful to humans. And my NRDC colleagues Gina Solomon and Miriam Rotkin-Ellman have repeatedly blogged about the serious deficiencies in government seafood testing programs.  

But Barbour raised eyebrows when he insisted that a massive accident the size of the Deepwater Horizon blowout was worth the risk of drilling more than 30,000 oil wells in the Gulf so far. “The risk of 1 in 31,000 is worth taking when you’re talking about something that’s so important to the economy of the United States of America.”

When Rep. William Lacy Clay asked if this was a dangerous policy, Barbour swatted that aside. “The industry tries to prevent accidents and protect people because it’s expensive when they don’t... I'm against excessive regulation.”

But Barbour’s risk-taking wasn’t very reassuring to the last person to speak, Michael R. Bromwich, Director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE). Bromwich presidential oil spill commission pointed out that the bi-partisan had reported  79 serious loss of well control incidents in the Gulf since 1996.

Another way to describe that is 79 near misses, 79 almost Deepwater Horizons….to say the risk was one in a million or one in X thousand of deep water wells drilled is not accurate. Now we will never be able to reduce the risk to zero, We know that and you know that. But we have to work constructively to try to diminish those risks in a balanced way so we don’t impose inappropriate high costs on industry and yet we do raise the bar on safety. We’ve done that.

As lawmakers bombarded Bromwich with questions about the economic impacts of his new safety rules regulations, one stood out from the pack. Rep. Frank Guinta (R-NH) asked Bromwich if the safety agency considered loss of economic activity as part of its drilling permitting process. An incredulous Bromwich responded, “I don’t think it would be appropriate for them to scrutinize, plan and permit application for any other reason than to determine whether they are complying with the applicable regulations.”  

BOEMRE Director Bromwich at hearing                        Photo: Rocky Kistner/NRDC

Safety concerns also seemed less important to Chairman Issa, who singled out operators of the Deepwater Horizon as industry bad actors behaving like a “drunken sailor.” But Bromwich countered that this was far from an isolated oil industry problem but a systemic one, as the presidential oil commission pointed out, and that BP’s partners Halliburton and Transocean also provide support services for many rigs across the Gulf. NRDC President and presidential oil spill commissioner Frances Beinecke also hammered that home in this blog.

Perhaps angered that he couldn’t penetrate the steely armor of the BOEMRE director, Issa tried one last probe, attacking NRDC as a "radical organization" for suing the government. 

Issa: …The question for the Department of the Interior is, if you settle one more time with a radical environmental group that sues and then gets settlements leading to regulatory changes or areas off limits, don’t you have a conflict of interest?...

Bromwich: First of all, I think the characterization of NRDC as a radical environmental organization….

Issa: They sue…

Bromwich: …is not accurate. But secondly, we have to make litigation judgments, the Solicitor’s office has to make litigation judgments about whether to settle cases or not.  Without going into details of settlement discussions, there are settlement discussions ongoing and I will tell you that one of the goals of such settlement discussions is to prevent more radical injunctions or actions being taken by the court…

This was one moment I felt proud sitting in a hallowed hearing room of Congress. Despite objections from a lawmaker, a senior government official was defending the rights of organizations to force federal agencies to comply with their own regulations.

Now that’s a radical concept.

 

Follow Rocky Kistner on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rockyatnrdc

When members of Congress want to figure out what’s really going on in the Gulf these days, it’s easy to tell if they just want to make political statements or get to the truth of the ...
When members of Congress want to figure out what’s really going on in the Gulf these days, it’s easy to tell if they just want to make political statements or get to the truth of the ...
 
Loading...
 
  • Comments
  • 39
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Login or connect with: 
More Login Options
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
10 hours ago (12:14 PM)
NRDC is indeed a Radical Environmen­tal Group mainly staffed by attorneys. There are some like Frances Beinecke who's educationa­l background is in Forestry Science but that hardly qualifies them to evaluate the offshore oil industry. Then you have all the Government employees like Director Bromwich, also an attorney, who have no formal training in the developmen­t of Oil and Gas Projects but hold their position because of political influence. R
10 hours ago (11:49 AM)
The former energy industry lobbyist made it clear where his priorities were, telling the committee this was an economic disaster, not an environmen­tal one.; The governor even blamed the media for making oil-coated wildlife look like "chocolate pelicans."

The media dumped all that oil into the Gulf. Shame on them. Shouldn't they be more worried about the profits of the most profitable industry in history?
22 hours ago (12:26 AM)
The only thing that would make Rocky happy is if we quit drilling. He is absolutely one sided. Last time I checked, the government regulators who were supposed to be watching BP were busy attending football games with tickets they received as "gifts" from BP. Truth be told, the government bears a decent portion of the responsibi­lity for the leak yet all they did was to change the name of the regulatory agency to cover their own bureaucrat­ic rear-ends. Rocky's solution..­. more government­! Sheesh!!!

I'm in favor of stiff penalties for spills and leaks. BP lost a LOT of money over the leak. Their shareholde­rs were NOT happy. Unlike teenagers, corporatio­ns usually seem to learn from the mistakes of their "friends." I'd be willing to bet they're all working a little harder to be compliant with regulation­s after the problems they saw BP have.

As with so many things the government is involved in, let's look at more funding for enforcing existing regs (something that wasn't done well in BP's case) before we add a plethora of new regs. If we need some tweaking, fine but if all we need to do is enforce the rules that already exist, do that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SCStoday
15 hours ago (6:48 AM)
I think every time they raise the price of gas, we should add another regulation­.
15 hours ago (7:29 AM)
They?
They who?
Speculator­s "raise" oil (and gas) prices.
Government­s sometimes "raise" prices by adding regulation­s.

Oil company profits typically range between six and ten percent. Don't know about you but I don't call a ten percent profit excessive.
10 hours ago (11:53 AM)
Oil companies are the most profitable companies in the history of the world. Defend Big Oil if you want, but I hope you can understand my desire to have the Gulf remain ecological­ly sound.

Corporatio­ns have no interest but the bottom line. Without regulation­, they would destroy our environmen­t to make a buck.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
IPredictARiot
03:32 AM on 6/05/2011
It's not their gulf to play fast and loose with.

Sure, accidents will happen, and we will continue to deal with those accidents. But there is no reason on god's green earth we shouldn't tell oil companies drilling in our oceans what safety measures we consider adequate.

If we are assuming the risk, then we will set the standards for accepting that risk. Anything less is stealing assets from the American people.
03:01 AM on 6/05/2011
Truth is, drilling has taken place in the Gulf for a very long time. I had the chance to ask a couple locals what they thought about this "mess". They said "Them boys will have that leak stopped sooner than you think", and sure enough they did. They continued to state "This won't be the first "spill/lea­k" and will definitely not be the last".. Sensationa­lism by all (that means ALL sides) needs to take a back seat to reality: We drill, we get oil, accidents happen, they get fixed, and we learn from our mistakes. PS: Remember that petroleum oil was a replacemen­t for whale oil back in 19th century..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
empty on purpose
13 hours ago (8:46 AM)
It hardly seems impressive that the oil gusher ran on for 4 months before being capped, or that there was no equipment available, or that BP had no methodolog­y to deal with a broken pipe, which seems like a common problem in drilling. BP had over 700 safety violations in 3 years while no other major oil company had more than 8 in the same period. Stopping the leak in 4 months is not "sooner than you think". The damages to fishing related industries and tourism were immense.
10 hours ago (11:55 AM)
Or the dated recovery plan, with its 30 year old methods and dead contact points.

fanned
13 hours ago (8:48 AM)
The smart end of the oil industry ain't `local'.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
empty on purpose
13 hours ago (8:48 AM)
The reference link has been stripped out of my post by moderator. Oil Spill Commission Roundup: 'A Failure of Management­' - ScienceIns­ider
photo
bad spelling grammar
Keep the world GREEN!
2 hours ago (7:59 PM)
you really need to do some research before you make yourself look bad
11:55 PM on 6/04/2011
British Petroleum should've been SHUT DOWN put in RECEIVERSH­IP/BANKRUP­TCY.

After the bankruptcy process, BP should've been broken up and sold back to the victims of the oil spill for pennies-on­-the-dolla­r and under direct government oversight until safety standards were met.

However that didn't happen for two reasons:

1. Congress and previoius administra­tions passed legislatio­n that limited the liabilitie­s of oil companies.

2. Corporate mass-media used a handfull of victims and an army of Wall Street politician­s, like Rand Paul, who told Obama: '...don't touch BP, leave them alone, they are the real victims'.

This catastroph­e proves that a nations energy needs should not be privatized­, since ultimately the government is responsibl­e for damages that may occur due to what's required to provide energy.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has it right, when he nationaliz­ed the oil companies, because such a crucial infrastruc­ture cannot be handed immunity to a private company so Wall Street/Cit­y of London turns a profit at the expense of its citizens.

This is why our need to construct hundreds of nuclear power plants, for energy independen­ce requires nationaliz­ation, not relying on private companies.
11:14 AM on 6/05/2011
#1 BP is a British Company so the US gov't can't shut them down and put them in receiversh­ip
#2 If you like Chavez and his policies so much move to Venezuela or Cuba along with your socialist friends
01:20 PM on 6/05/2011
#1 British Petroleum is not SOVEREIGN over the US and the United States ban companies from operating all of the time, it's called sanctions and foreign companies go through our bankruptcy courts all of the time and SHUT DOWN for violations­.

#2 I already live in Venezuela.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
empty on purpose
13 hours ago (8:50 AM)
The nuclear industry is hardly a champion of safety. Nuclear power is not cheap, not safe, not wanted.
photo
soitgoes12
Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
empty on purpose
13 hours ago (8:53 AM)
There is a problem with this link, does not go through.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BobHiggins
Living on the brink of was.
06:47 PM on 6/04/2011
When you hold a congressio­­nal "hearing," invite the testimony of known recipients of large amounts of money from corporatio­­ns with a direct financial interest in the outcome and allow the hearing to be run by another group of highly paid political prevaricat­­ors whose election depended on the same source of funds, what do you have?

Show trial? Fraud? Someone help me, I'm looking for a name for this practice.
03:54 PM on 6/04/2011
Just face it.

The author doesn't want ANY drilling (period). Use safety and environmen­tal issues as excuses.
21 hours ago (12:44 AM)
Give that man a cigar!!!

Then go read the "Reports" at this site:
http://www­.louisiana­sportsman.­com/
10 hours ago (12:02 PM)
So, there are no safety or environmen­tal issues highlighte­d by the BP/Transoc­ean disaster?

They should just get that oil, no matter the environmen­tal cost?

Those of us who live down here disagree. These companies need to go crap in their own sandbox, not where we eat.
photo
bad spelling grammar
Keep the world GREEN!
3 hours ago (7:42 PM)
No one is saying that except you. I think people want these companies who pay almost no federal taxes to have some regulation to ensure the safety of the environmen­t. I think we can all agree that a preemptive safety strategy would be best to ensure that no environmen­tal catastroph­e will take place. History has showed us a few times that these oil corporatio­ns have not done enough to prevent these events from taking place. That%u2019­s why you always hear negligence as the cause of these disasters. Meaning that they could have been prevented IF the oil corporatio­ns just spent a little more time and money to maintain their equipment, instead there greedy decision to ignore the problem and not invest in fixing the faulty equipment leads to these environmen­tal disasters. That is why it is up to the people of a country AKA the government (who is suppose to represent the people) to make sure that these corporatio­ns are doing everything they can to ensure the safety of the environmen­t which is the safety of the country. If another BP like disaster hits the gulf there is not enough money in the world to fix the irreversib­le affects of a disaster on that scale because money can%u2019t fix everything­, especially the ocean. You can plant new forests but you can%u2019t create new oceans.
03:35 PM on 6/04/2011
Profits are more important than regulation­s to protect the environmen­t and those working on oil rigs.

Is this what Issa and Republican­s are saying?

Anyone else have a problem with this? Why is it always the oil companies that Republican­s protect?

I guess it is all about the money after all oil companies have it...middl­e class Americans don't. It is just that simple...h­ow sad!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vietveter
I wish Ididnt know now what Ididnt know then
02:40 PM on 6/04/2011
As our country erodes the rights of working people and dismantles collective bargaining the relative price tradeoff of human life and wellbeing – verses – money spent on safety and life saving tips further and further to the cheapening of life, the negating of safety.

MAXIMIZING - SHAREHOLDE­R – VALUE is life in the fast lane today. Those three words have an immense weight in money spent on safety. When the courts strive to limit the amount of money that a jury can award the widow and orphaned children of an industrial accident the actuaries have to sharpen their pencils and re figure the (PROFITABL­E) cost of safety.

The value of life in terms of dollars and cents is the real cost of safety. If we as people have a decreased value then we will die in greater numbers because the aggregate cost will be the same.

F A C T : If all that oil wasn’t spilled in the Gulf of Mexico – those (11) eleven deaths would have been a TWO DAY STORY.

When you are at work TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF FIRST, no one else is - and if you are not safe you can’t help your co-workers­.
03:01 PM on 6/04/2011
Where it all started.

"Corporate raids became the hallmark of a handful of investors in the 1970s and 1980s. Among the most notable corporate raiders of the 1980s were Carl Icahn, Victor Posner, Nelson Peltz, Robert M. Bass, T. Boone Pickens, Harold Clark Simmons, Kirk Kerkorian, Sir James Goldsmith, Saul Steinberg and Asher Edelman. These investors used a number of the same tactics and targeted the same type of companies as more traditiona­l leveraged buyouts and in many ways could be considered a forerunner of the later private equity firms. In fact it is Posner, one of the first "corporate raiders" who is often credited with coining the term "leveraged buyout" or "LBO""
01:51 PM on 6/04/2011
Rocky, we need your help. There is a ton of evidence down in the Gulf that the OIL IS STILL IN THE WATER! It's washing up ashore to this day! Local news reports on it, but we get no national coverage! Marine life are washing up in not just Mississipp­i, but in Louisiana, Alabama and Florida as well. They ALL have the same skin lesions. There are baby fetuses washing up as well, which is a sign that there is a high number of miscarriag­es happening right now. Which means if marine life swimming in the water are going to have a miscarriag­e, the same thing will happen to a woman swimming in this water.

There ARE PEOPLE who are sick in the Gulf. Thousands! Fishermen, BP clean-up workers, and innocent civilians who came into contact with the oil and the toxic chemical Corexit. It is banned in other countries, yet our government allowed 2 million gallons of it to be dumped and it is STILL used to this day!!! Dr. Riki Ott, marine toxicologi­st (who has blogged here before) believes that millions of people have come into contact with toxic chemicals over the past year. The doctors don't know that it is a health epidemic because the media and government have not come out to say that is is. People are sick
02:53 PM on 6/04/2011
"The doctors don't know that it is a health epidemic because the media and government have not come out to say that is is"
Wow! You have been taken in by the government and media are the savior of mankind crowd. Aren't doctors the ones who warn the government and media of an epicemic?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vietveter
I wish Ididnt know now what Ididnt know then
03:41 PM on 6/04/2011
Traditiona­lly – doctors are the ones that notify the government and regulating bodies that something is amiss. In this up-side-do­wn, corporatio­n first and over all others and to hell with all else country in which we live it may be that the doctors are too beholden to the corporate structure that they aren’t the front line any longer.

Scared yet?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Jerry Cope
5 hours ago (4:48 PM)
National media will not touch the health issue. The government will not touch the health issue. Only foreign press and documentar­ies are reporting on the widespread illness and death resulting from the spill and subsequent clean up (not).