NRDC blog: Why BP may not want spill size known - $1,000/barrel civil penalty under Clean Water Act

[highplainsdem]

From Switchboard, the National Resources Defense Council Staff Blog:


http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/lsuatoni/how_much_oil_is_spilling_in_to.html

Lisa Suatoni’s Blog

How much oil is spilling in to the Gulf of Mexico? And, yes, it does matter.

Posted May 20, 2010 in Moving Beyond Oil, Reviving the World's Oceans


-snip-

BP and the federal government repeatedly argue that measuring the volume of oil entering the Gulf is not a priority, that a more precise measure of flow rate is not important. Their rationale is that it would not influence the response in any way.

We disagree for a number of reasons:

1. Scale. The flow rate estimates differ by a factor of ten. Differences on this scale are not quibbles; they are big, fundamental differences.

2. Response. The discrepancy is sufficiently large enough to influence response strategies. For example, to promote the efficacy of dispersants, they are applied at a specific ratio to the volume of oil. This is not possible if the volume is unknown, by this large of a degree. In addition, the ability to successfully cap the well, engineer a dome, or pump the oil to the surface depends on a good estimate of the oil flow rate (both in terms of volume of oil and the force with which it is exiting the pipe).

3. Law. Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, a natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) must be conducted. This entails assessing the input of oil, its fate (i.e., where it goes, what it coats and contaminates), and the damage it caused. The ability to fully conduct this accounting – or ‘mass balance’ - requires knowing the initial volume of oil.

4. Financial Penalty. Following discharge of oil into a water body, the federal Clean Water Act allows for a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per barrel of oil spilled. This penalty can not be calculated to its fullest extent without knowing the total volume of oil.

5. Future emergency plans. Knowing the magnitude of this spill is necessary to inform future emergency response plans. Substantial underestimates of the volume of oil leaking from Deepwater Horizon will leave us unprepared in the future.

There are multiple reasons why BP may not want the true amount of oil to be known. Just take for example, the $1000 per barrel of oil spill civil penalty under the Clean Water Act. Using the “official” number of 5,000 barrels per day, their current tally is $140 million (and counting). Using some of the higher estimates provided by visual analysis of the leaking pipe, BP’s current tally is in the billions (and counting).

The bigger mystery is why the federal government is sitting on the sidelines. Why has the federal government been reluctant - and so slow - to undertake its own assessment of the size of the spill, particularly given the available expertise and alternative methods?

Emphasis added.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Some things are more important than money.

Like the life and health of the Gulf, for starters.

This is an environmental disaster unlike any we have ever seen, and they're worried about money?

Fucking unbelievable.

:grr:

[gateley]

3. "Original Message Some things are more important than money."

Not to BP, Peggy.

[BrklynLiberal]

4. To most people, yes..but not to corporate "persons".....

CalPeg..to them the only thing that matters in this universe is the bottom line, profit, stock prices, bonuses, expansion, and money, money, money. Their morality has only one tenet:GREED

[David in Canada]

18. Corporations = Psychopaths

A multinational corporation, as a "person", closely resembles Ted Bundy. Of course, their PR departments portray them as if they were the friendly shopkeeper on Main Street but the truth is far more insidious.

The question is when and how we find the proverbial corpse in the trunk that finally nails BP to the wall.

[Flipper999]

5. To them, nothing is more important than money

I went to business school. One of the few things they repeated endlessly is that the goal of a company is to maximize shareholder value. Nothing else.

For those soulless enough to accept this as a life goal, BPs endless ass covering makes good business sense.

[highplainsdem]

7. I agree with you, Peggy, but I don't think BP does. The risks they took to save money

are what created this disaster in the first place.

And finding out there's a $1,000 per barrel civil fine for every barrel spilled goes a long way toward explaining why they don't want accurate independent estimates of this gusher, even though it's obvious their own official estimate is a joke.

[Wednesdays]

12. Huh? "Money trumps peace sometimes" -- W.

nt

[David in Canada]

19. Exactly

This is an ecological disaster of unimaginable magnitude and is a threat to the United States' economic and national security as well and as such, the government needs to step in and take complete control of the situation.

Since the United States still has the USA PATRIOT Act on the books, maybe they could send the corporate executives of BP to Gitmo?

[CaliforniaPeggy]

22. Now, THAT'S a good idea!

:thumbsup:

[BrklynLiberal]

24. An idea that has occured to many of us..and should be considered in some of the higher

levels of this govt.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8377008&mesg_id=8377111

[BrklynLiberal]

2. I would bet there are billion$ of reason$ why BP does not want the true size of the spill to become

public knowledge. I am sure that money is the subject of the first 1000 reasons. There are other things that follow.

[lapfog_1]

6. Over $200 M if the "flow professor" is correct

4 gallons per sec by his calculation (computer calc) based on knowledge of the size of the pipe that is leaking plus analysis of the video.

That's 350,000 gallons a day. At 42 gallons per barrel, that makes it well over $200 M already (@ $1000 per barrel).

[highplainsdem]

8. I read a figure of 95,000 barrels/day - $2.85 BILLION in fines in 30 days

The Purdue expert who estimates the main gusher at 70,000 barrels a day thinks the smaller gusher is spilling another 25,000 barrels a day.

[notadmblnd]

9. Thye should get on this

the fines would go a long way in reducing the national debt.

[kenny blankenship]

10. It appears the Obama administration doesn't want it known either

One day we'll mobilize and elect a Democratically controlled House of Representatives, a Democratic President, and even a strong Democratic majority in the Senate. Look out then, 'cause things will really change!

Yep.

[lostnfound]

11. I posted it yesterday, invisibly apparently

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8362100&mesg_id=8362351

Plus, the damages CAP DOESN'T APPLY in case of GROSS NEGLIGENCE.

http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/lawsregs/opaover.htm#inf...
§4301(b) Civil penalties are authorized at $25,000 for each day of violation or $1,000 per barrel of oil discharged. Failure to comply with a Federal removal order can result in civil penalties of up to $25,000 for each day of violation.

The same document also says that the $75 Million cap does not apply in the case of gross negligence.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=...
(c) Exceptions

(1) Acts of responsible party

Subsection (a) of this section does not apply if the incident
was proximately caused by--
(A) gross negligence or willful misconduct of, or

<

(B) the violation of an applicable Federal safety,
construction, or operating regulation by,

the responsible party, an agent or employee of the responsible
party, or a person acting pursuant to a contractual relationship
with the responsible party (except where the sole contractual
arrangement arises in connection with carriage by a common carrier
by rail).

[BeFree]

16. It was lost, but has now been found

Sorry I missed it. Got it now. Good job, LnF.

[lostnfound]

20. C'est la Internets. But what about the gross negligence exemption?

I haven't seen it mentioned in any articles. The news media are talking about the $75 M cap but not about the gross negligence exemption..:shrug:

[BeFree]

21. It's that liberal media

They want to be careful that they don't get the libs riled up and expecting something to actually happen to the BP criminals. They are protecting us from the possibilities. It's their job, ya know?

"It's just 5,000 barrels a day". That way we don't worry too much.
"BP says they'll pay all claims" See? Not to worry about money.
"Administration wide response" The government has this under control.
"There's only been one bird oiled" See? No problem.

They really want us to not be scared to death. We should thank them for keeping it all fair and balanced for BP and Obama.

[Catherina]

13. Sock it to them. NOW. n/t

[amborin]

14. K&R and our gov't is complicit in suppressing the facts

[JDPriestly]

15. Maybe the federal government has undertaken it but just is not announcing

it because its work is not yet finished and it doesn't want people to crowd around to find out what the results are before the results are ready.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

17. Kick!

:kick:

[Bryn]

23. BP needs to grow up!

The child is hiding behind the couch. He thinks mother can't see him because he can't see her, but she can see his shoe sticking out.

BP is like that child. We can see what they're "hiding" clearly. They just can't see us.

[amborin]

25. kick

[highplainsdem]

26. kick