Energy Legislation Feeds and Links

Energy Legislation Feeds and Links
HOUSE Appropriations Appropriations news page Energy & Water subcommittee news HOUSE Ways and Means Ways & Means site Press Releases HOUSE Financial Services Financial Services Newsroom Press Releases archive Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act Read more » Frank Announces House Offer on Derivatives Read more » Frank Announces House Offer on Prudential Regulation Read more » The Wall Street Reform Bill: Tuesday, June 22nd Conference Update Read more » The Wall Street Reform Bill: Conference Update Read more » Frank Announces House Offer on Consumer Protection, Risk Retention, Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Read more » Frank Announces House Offer on Financial Stability; Orderly Liquidation Authority; Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Read more »	HOUSE Energy and Commerce Energy and Commerce website No news at present, please check back later.	Energy Legislation Tracker	Committee Hearings House & Senate No news at present, please check back later.
U.S. Senate
Sites for Research THOMAS Bills, Resolutions Calendars Congressional Record Misc. Links Energy Information Assoc., DOE DOE Dept of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Links to all committee sites Google's UncleSam Search GovTrack White House page on Energy & Environment Google map of DC hotels	SENATE Appropriations Appropriations site Press room SENATE Banking committee home page Press Releases SENATE Finance Home page Baucus Press Releases Grassley Press Releases	SENATE Energy, Nat. Resources ENR website Committee Reports 17 More Bills Read more » GAO Audit Fuels Chairman's Concerns Read more » This Week (Aug. 2-6) Read more » Murkowski Comments on Delay for Oil Spill Legislation Read more » How To Prevent the Next Disaster Read more » Murkowski calls for safety review of Alaska oil pipeline Read more » The Week Ahead (July 26-30) Read more »	SENATE Environment, Pub. Wks. EPW site Green Jobs and Economy subcommittee Boxer Statement: Los Angeles Roundtable on Job Creation, Transportation Reform and the 30/10 Initiative Read more » Boxer Opening Statement: "Oversight Hearing on the Use of Oil Dispersants in the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill" Read more » Boxer Opening Statement: "Research on Potential Environmental Health Factors with Autism and Related Neurodevelopment Disorders" Read more » President Signs Bipartisan Boxer Bill to Aid Commercial Vessels Read more » EPW Committee Approves Landmark Measures to Protect Great Water Bodies Across the U.S. Read more » EPW Committee Approves Measure to Ensure Responsible Parties Pay for Damage from Oil Spills Read more » Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Approves Feinstein-Boxer Legislation to Authorize Ten Years of Funding for EPA to Continue Wetlands Restoration in the San Francisco Bay Read more » Rep. Press Releases Inhofe critical of Obama's proposal to spend billions on transportation Read more » Inhofe Demands Transparency from EPA Region 8 on Pavillion, Wyo. Inquiry Read more » Pachauri Is Damaging The World - Why It's Time For Change At The IPCC - Climate Panel Needs Credibility Read more » Las Vegas Review-Journal: EDITORIAL: Job killer Read more » FT Editorial: Time for a change in climate research Read more » AP: Report: Climate Science Panel Needs Change At Top Read more » Inhofe Op-Ed: Bush's Response to Katrina Makes Obama Look Pitiful in Gulf Read more »
NY Times Energy & Environment Section home page No news at present, please check back later.	HOUSE Select Committee Energy Ind. & Global Warming Home page Media Center Markey Statement on Oil Drilling Platform Explosion in Gulf of Mexico September 2, 2010 – Following an explosion of an offshore drilling platform in the Gulf of Mexico today, Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the Energy and Environment Subcommittee in the Energy and Commerce Committee, issued the following statement: “This explosion highlights the significant risks associated with offshore drilling, and that much is left to be done to keep America’s workers and waters safe from those risks. “After the 13 workers on this rig are safe and sound, we have a duty to them and all oil workers to make sure the oil industry’s drilling practices are also safe and sound.” Read more » Markey: BP Refuses to Accept Flow Rate Number, Spill Size, Liability Signals Litigation Ahead on Total Fines Assessed FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chairman Ed Markey, 202-225-4012 WASHINGTON (August 25, 2010) – BP has yet again refused to accept the most recent federal government estimate of the rate of oil that leaked from the company’s Macondo well, and therefore the total estimated size of the Gulf of Mexico spill. Responding to questions from Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) on whether the company would accept the numbers reached by a scientific team dedicated to determining the size of the spill, BP told Rep. Markey in a letter that the company is “continuing to evaluate available information.” “As if we needed it, this is a clear signal that BP intends to fight the same numbers they claim to have helped create about the size of the spill,” said Rep. Markey, who chairs the Energy and Environment Subcommittee in the Energy and Commerce Committee. “I continue to urge BP to accept these numbers in order to move on to the vital task of Gulf restoration, instead of endless litigation.” The original letter sent by Rep. Markey to BP on August 11, 2010 can be found HERE. BP’s August 24, 2010 response can be found HERE. As Rep. Markey’s letter to BP noted, the most recent estimates from the Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG) were that 53,000 barrels of oil per day spilled from BP’s well immediately preceding its closure using the capping stack. However, at the beginning of the spill, 62,000 barrels per day were leaking from the well. During the 87 days that the well flowed, approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil was released. The FRTG estimate has a plus or minus 10 percent uncertainty range. However, these are currently the best estimates of the spill. BP also has provided information, including video and other data, that led to the creation of these new estimates, and has not publicly indicated disagreement with these estimates. In the letter, BP says that it is “cooperating with the various federal agencies looking into this important matter.” Under current law, BP will be assessed fines for each barrel of oil spilled. These fines will range from a minimum of $1,100 per barrel to up to $4,300 per barrel. The amount of oil spilled will also be used in assessing the extent of natural resource damages. The 53,000-62,000 barrel per day figure far exceeds BP’s initial estimates of 1,000-5,000 barrels per day and much more closely resembles the potential “worst case” scenario cited by BP officials to Congress of 60,000 barrels per day in early May. # # # Read more » Markey: BP Must Own Up to Flow Rate Number, Compensate the Gulf In Letter to BP, Congressman ask Oil Company to Accept 4.9 million barrel flow rate number produced by U.S. Scientific Team August 11, 2010 – In response to silence from BP following the release of an official flow rate estimate produced by the U.S. Scientific Team’s Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG), Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee and the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, is calling on the oil company to accept the 4.9 million barrel of oil number so that damage claims can move forward. In a letter to BP’s President and CEO Lamar McKay, Rep. Markey cited BP’s participation in the Unified Command process that produced the current estimate of 53,000 barrels of oil per day leaking from BP’s well immediately preceding its closure using the capping stack. The FRTG also indicated that, at the beginning of the spill, 62,000 barrels per day were leaking from the well. Because the well flowed for 87 days, 4.9 million barrels flowed into the gulf. The FRTG estimate has a plus or minus 10 percent uncertainty range. “BP acceptance of a flow rate number is fundamental to its claim that it “is doing everything it can to make this right” for the families and businesses of the Gulf,” said Markey. “Oil may have stopped flowing from the well, but the suffering in the region continues. Low-balling or litigating the flow rate estimate would be just one more insult to the people of the Gulf.” To read a copy of the letter to BP from Rep Markey, please click here. Under current law, BP will be assessed fines for each barrel of oil spilled. These fines will range from a minimum of $1100 per barrel to up to $4300 per barrel. The amount of oil spilled will also be used in assessing the extent of natural resource damages. The 53,000-62,000 barrel per day figure far exceeds BP’s initial estimates of 1000-5000 barrels per day and much more closely resembles the so called “worst case” scenario cited by BP officials of 60,000 barrels per day. If BP is found guilty of gross negligence, the fines for the oil spill will increase. For instance, for every 10,000 barrels of oil spilled per day at $4,300 per barrel, over the more than 80 days that oil spilled into the ocean, the fine would be increased by $3.5 billion. The total size of the spill will also affect the amount of damages BP would have to pay for the spill’s effect on natural resources in the Gulf of Mexico. “BP bears the black eye of the worst environmental disaster in our nation’s history,” said Markey. “It’s high time BP own up to the true size of this oil spill once and for all.” Full text of the letter follows: August 11, 2010 Mr. Lamar McKay President and CEO, BP America, Inc. 501 Westlake Park Boulevard Houston, Texas, 70779 Dear Mr. McKay: On August 2, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon Unified Command released updated flow rate estimates for the amount of BP oil that flowed into the Gulf of Mexico prior to the initial capping of the Deepwater Horizon well on July 15, 2010. These estimates reflect the collaborative work and discussions of the National Incident Command’s Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG), led by United States Geological Survey Director Marcia McNutt, and a team of Department of Energy scientists and engineers, led by Energy Secretary Dr. Steven Chu. According to the FRTG estimate, 53,000 barrels of oil per day were leaking from BP’s well immediately preceding its closure using the capping stack. However, at the beginning of the spill, 62,000 barrels per day were leaking from the well. Because the well flowed for 87 days, approximately 4.9 million barrels flowed into the gulf. The FRTG estimate has a plus or minus 10 percent uncertainty range. As you know, BP is a participant in the Unified Command and assisted in the preparation of these estimates. BP has not publicly indicated disagreement with these estimates. Under current law, BP will be assessed fines for each barrel of oil spilled. These fines will range from a minimum of $1100 per barrel to up to $4300 per barrel. The amount of oil spilled will also be used in assessing the extent of natural resource damages. The 53,000-62,000 barrel per day figure far exceeds BP’s initial estimates of 1,000-5,000 barrels per day and much more closely resembles the so called “worst case” scenario cited by BP officials of 60,000 barrels per day. I am writing to ask whether BP will accept this more definitive FRTG estimate as the basis for its per barrel spill liability and for other legal purposes, including the assessment of natural resources damages, as well. As is evident, each per day change in the flow rate, when compiled over the 87 day life of the spill, may be worth billions of dollars to BP if in fact it is found guilty of gross negligence with regard to this spill. For instance, for every 10,000 barrels of oil spilled per day at $4,300 per barrel, over the more than 80 days that oil spilled into the ocean, the fine would be increased by $3.5 billion. The total size of the spill will also affect the amount of damages BP would have to pay for the spill’s effect on natural resources in the Gulf of Mexico. BP’s official website: (http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=40&contentId=7061813a) declares that: “BP is doing everything we can to make this right. We continue to work to stop the flow of oil, clean up the environmental damage, and help make sure that people are compensated for their losses.” A similar message has been conveyed through BP’s extensive advertising campaign relating to its Gulf spill response activities. In light of BP’s stated commitment to “make this right,” the American public deserves to know whether BP plans on accepting the federal government’s official flow-rate estimate for liability purposes or whether it plans on litigating this number and low-balling the amount of oil that actually flowed into the gulf. Accordingly it is incumbent upon BP to stipulate that it will accept the FRTG’s latest flow rate estimates when the government seeks to collect its fine and assess other damages caused by the Deepwater Horizon Macondo well blowout. We know that this has been the worst environmental disaster in our nation’s history and it is high time for BP to legally “own up” to that fact as well. Thank you very much for your attention to this important matter. If you have any questions or concerns, please have your staff contact mine. Sincerely, Edward J. Markey Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Environment Cc: Honorable Henry Waxman, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce Honorable Joe Barton, Ranking Member Honorable Fred Upton, Ranking Member Dr. Marcia McNutt, United States Geological Survey and Chair, Flow Rate Technical Committee Read more » Briefing on aEURoeGreenland Ice Sheet: Global WarmingaEUR(TM)s Impacts on Arctic RegionaEUR? Select Committee to Examine Dramatic Sea Ice Event with Scientists and Experts VISUALS including Greenland satellite images and other recent data will be on display August 9, 2010 – Last week an ice sheet covering 100 square miles broke off Greenland. This dramatic sea ice event follows the warmest six months on record and is the largest piece of Arctic ice to break free since 1962. On Tuesday, the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will hold a briefing with scientists and experts who study the Arctic region to discuss this event and its relationship to climate change. The briefing, “The Greenland Ice Sheet: Global Warming’s Impacts on the Arctic Region,” will be held on Tuesday, August 10th, at 9:30 A.M. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building. WHAT: Select Committee Briefing, “The Greenland Ice Sheet: Global Warming’s Impacts on the Arctic Region” WHEN: Tuesday, August 10th, at 9:30 A.M. WHERE: Room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building, Capitol Complex. WHO**: Dr. Richard B. Alley, Professor of Geosciences, and Earth and Environmental Systems, The Pennsylvania State University Dr. Robert Bindschadler, Senior Research Scientist at University of Maryland Baltimore County, who has 30 years of service with NASA Dr. Andreas Muenchow, Professor of Physical Ocean Science and Engineering, University of Delaware Read more » Markey: Giant Ice Sheet Breaks Off Greenland, Global Warming Deniers Should Call it Home August 7, 2010 – An ice sheet covering 100 square miles has broken off Greenland. This giant ice island is more than four times the size of New York’s Manhattan Island and comes following the warmest six months on record. Today, Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, released the following statement: “An iceberg four times the size of Manhattan has broken off Greenland, creating plenty of room for global warming deniers to start their own country. “So far, 2010 has been the hottest year on record, and scientists agree arctic ice is a canary in a coal mine that provides clear warnings on climate. “Last summer, the House passed landmark legislation to create clean energy jobs that cut carbon pollution. However, it’s still unclear how many giant blocks of ice it will take to break the block of Republican climate deniers in the US Senate who continue hold this critical clean energy and climate legislation hostage.” Read more » FTC says Resellers of Toxic FEMA Trailers to Gulf Cleanup Workers Could Face Criminal Charges Lawmakers urge FTC, GSA and other law enforcement to aggressively investigate and monitor sale and use of contaminated trailers August 6, 2010 – Today Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La), released a letter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) indicating that resellers of the former FEMA trailers that were contaminated with the carcinogen formaldehyde may be subject to criminal penalties for failing to disclose the health risk to purchasers and by implying that the structures were appropriate to be used for housing. According to the FTC, while civil penalties could not be levied, the Commission could take a variety of enforcement actions including equitable monetary relief, cease and desist orders, bans and disclosure remedies. However, in light of the nature of the violation and the obligations imposed on purchasers of the FEMA trailers at the time of their sale, the FTC said “criminal action would likely yield the strongest remedy for consumers” who have been victimized by the deceptive sale practices. “Like a zombie from a bad horror film, FEMA’s toxic trailers just keep coming back to haunt the people of the Gulf coast,” said Markey. “We need to ensure that the appropriate law enforcement agencies are thoroughly and vigilantly looking into these sales so that no one is unwittingly and needlessly exposed to the formaldehyde in these trailers again.” “The fumes from toxic FEMA trailers cause serious respiratory illnesses, especially for children and seniors, and no one should be living in them,” said Rep. Melancon. “Federal and local law enforcement must actively investigate any reports of trailers being sold for housing, to protect Louisiana families from breathing hazardous chemicals while they sleep.” The FTC letter was in response to an inquiry from Reps. Markey and Melancon who have also questioned the General Services Administration (GSA) on their oversight of the resale of these trailers, the response from GSA has not been received. According to several cases now being investigated by the Inspector General’s office at GSA, companies that bought the trailers directly through GSA auction may have removed warning labels or otherwise not informed buyers that the trailers are not intended to be repurposed as homes. As a result several reports have indicated that these tainted trailers are being used to house some workers cleaning up oil from the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. To read the response letter from the FTC, please click here To read Reps. Markey and Melancon’s original letter to the FTC, please click here Read more » Markey Releases FDA Seafood Response Indicating Low Chance of Dispersant-Contamination in the Gulf Questions remain on long-term effects on food chain and marine life August 5, 2010 – Today Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee, released a letter from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indicating that the agency determined that chemical dispersants used to combat the Deepwater Horizon oil spill have a low potential for bioaccumulation in seafood species and do not pose a significant public health risk through human consumption. Rep. Markey is still awaiting an FDA analysis responding to his inquiry regarding reports of arsenic and other toxic byproducts of the BP oil spill that may pose a greater risk of bioaccumulating in seafood meant for human consumption. “This bit of good news is a great first step in restoring public confidence in the safety of seafood from the Gulf region,” said Rep. Markey. “However, many significant questions still remain on the long-term consequences that these dispersant chemicals will have on the marine food chain. Now that the oil has stopped flowing vigilance in monitoring must continue to ensure that tainted seafood never makes it to the dinner table.” Response letter from the FDA Chairman Markey's original letter to the FDA Long concerned about health and environmental issues relating to the dispersants, Rep. Markey has written to the EPA, FDA and the Coast Guard questioning the use of unprecedented volumes of dispersants in the Gulf, as the chemicals had not undergone a thorough review of their toxicity or effects. After receipt of one of Markey’s first letters written on May 17th the EPA along with the Coast Guard directed BP to eliminate surface application of the chemicals except in “rare cases” for which exemptions had to be requested. Data released by Rep. Markey’s Energy and Environment Subcommittee staff just last week indicated that these “rare cases” occurred on a daily basis since the directive was issued. On several occasions EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has also raised serious concerns about the unknown effects of dispersants, characterizing them as an “environmental tradeoff.” The most recent data released by EPA earlier this week indicates that while the chemicals do not appear to be acutely toxic, the long term effects these chemicals will have on the Gulf of Mexico are still unknown. Just yesterday NOAA and the Department of the Interior jointly released a report indicating that only 8% of the oil released into the Gulf of Mexico was chemically dispersed. This data suggests that dispersants were highly ineffective, since every gallon of dispersant used only dispersed just over 9 gallons of oil. By contrast, the report said that 16% of the oil was naturally dispersed without the use of these chemicals. “I remain concerned about the long-term consequences that these dispersants mixed with oil and other toxic materials will have on our waters and on our health.” said Rep. Markey. “Continued safety and oversight of the seafood in the Gulf will protect families while helping the regions fishing and tourism industries recover.” Read more »
Newspapers
Wall Street Journal NY Times Washington Post		Congress Daily main page log in page

Markey Statement on Oil Drilling Platform Explosion in Gulf of Mexico

September 2, 2010 – Following an explosion of an offshore drilling platform in the Gulf of Mexico today, Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the Energy and Environment Subcommittee in the Energy and Commerce Committee, issued the following statement:

“This explosion highlights the significant risks associated with offshore drilling, and that much is left to be done to keep America’s workers and waters safe from those risks.

“After the 13 workers on this rig are safe and sound, we have a duty to them and all oil workers to make sure the oil industry’s drilling practices are also safe and sound.”

Markey: BP Refuses to Accept Flow Rate Number, Spill Size, Liability

Signals Litigation Ahead on Total Fines Assessed

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Chairman Ed Markey, 202-225-4012

WASHINGTON (August 25, 2010) – BP has yet again refused to accept the most recent federal government estimate of the rate of oil that leaked from the company’s Macondo well, and therefore the total estimated size of the Gulf of Mexico spill. Responding to questions from Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) on whether the company would accept the numbers reached by a scientific team dedicated to determining the size of the spill, BP told Rep. Markey in a letter that the company is “continuing to evaluate available information.”

“As if we needed it, this is a clear signal that BP intends to fight the same numbers they claim to have helped create about the size of the spill,” said Rep. Markey, who chairs the Energy and Environment Subcommittee in the Energy and Commerce Committee. “I continue to urge BP to accept these numbers in order to move on to the vital task of Gulf restoration, instead of endless litigation.”

The original letter sent by Rep. Markey to BP on August 11, 2010 can be found HERE.

BP’s August 24, 2010 response can be found HERE.

As Rep. Markey’s letter to BP noted, the most recent estimates from the Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG) were that 53,000 barrels of oil per day spilled from BP’s well immediately preceding its closure using the capping stack. However, at the beginning of the spill, 62,000 barrels per day were leaking from the well. During the 87 days that the well flowed, approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil was released.

The FRTG estimate has a plus or minus 10 percent uncertainty range. However, these are currently the best estimates of the spill. BP also has provided information, including video and other data, that led to the creation of these new estimates, and has not publicly indicated disagreement with these estimates. In the letter, BP says that it is “cooperating with the various federal agencies looking into this important matter.”

Under current law, BP will be assessed fines for each barrel of oil spilled. These fines will range from a minimum of $1,100 per barrel to up to $4,300 per barrel. The amount of oil spilled will also be used in assessing the extent of natural resource damages. The 53,000-62,000 barrel per day figure far exceeds BP’s initial estimates of 1,000-5,000 barrels per day and much more closely resembles the potential “worst case” scenario cited by BP officials to Congress of 60,000 barrels per day in early May.

# # #

Markey: BP Must Own Up to Flow Rate Number, Compensate the Gulf

In Letter to BP, Congressman ask Oil Company to Accept 4.9 million barrel flow rate number produced by U.S. Scientific Team

August 11, 2010 – In response to silence from BP following the release of an official flow rate estimate produced by the U.S. Scientific Team’s Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG), Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee and the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, is calling on the oil company to accept the 4.9 million barrel of oil number so that damage claims can move forward.

In a letter to BP’s President and CEO Lamar McKay, Rep. Markey cited BP’s participation in the Unified Command process that produced the current estimate of 53,000 barrels of oil per day leaking from BP’s well immediately preceding its closure using the capping stack. The FRTG also indicated that, at the beginning of the spill, 62,000 barrels per day were leaking from the well. Because the well flowed for 87 days, 4.9 million barrels flowed into the gulf. The FRTG estimate has a plus or minus 10 percent uncertainty range.

“BP acceptance of a flow rate number is fundamental to its claim that it “is doing everything it can to make this right” for the families and businesses of the Gulf,” said Markey. “Oil may have stopped flowing from the well, but the suffering in the region continues. Low-balling or litigating the flow rate estimate would be just one more insult to the people of the Gulf.”

To read a copy of the letter to BP from Rep Markey, please click here.

Under current law, BP will be assessed fines for each barrel of oil spilled. These fines will range from a minimum of $1100 per barrel to up to $4300 per barrel. The amount of oil spilled will also be used in assessing the extent of natural resource damages. The 53,000-62,000 barrel per day figure far exceeds BP’s initial estimates of 1000-5000 barrels per day and much more closely resembles the so called “worst case” scenario cited by BP officials of 60,000 barrels per day.

If BP is found guilty of gross negligence, the fines for the oil spill will increase. For instance, for every 10,000 barrels of oil spilled per day at $4,300 per barrel, over the more than 80 days that oil spilled into the ocean, the fine would be increased by $3.5 billion. The total size of the spill will also affect the amount of damages BP would have to pay for the spill’s effect on natural resources in the Gulf of Mexico.

“BP bears the black eye of the worst environmental disaster in our nation’s history,” said Markey. “It’s high time BP own up to the true size of this oil spill once and for all.”

Full text of the letter follows:

August 11, 2010

Mr. Lamar McKay
President and CEO,
BP America, Inc.
501 Westlake Park Boulevard
Houston, Texas, 70779

Dear Mr. McKay:

On August 2, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon Unified Command released updated flow rate estimates for the amount of BP oil that flowed into the Gulf of Mexico prior to the initial capping of the Deepwater Horizon well on July 15, 2010. These estimates reflect the collaborative work and discussions of the National Incident Command’s Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG), led by United States Geological Survey Director Marcia McNutt, and a team of Department of Energy scientists and engineers, led by Energy Secretary Dr. Steven Chu.

According to the FRTG estimate, 53,000 barrels of oil per day were leaking from BP’s well immediately preceding its closure using the capping stack. However, at the beginning of the spill, 62,000 barrels per day were leaking from the well. Because the well flowed for 87 days, approximately 4.9 million barrels flowed into the gulf. The FRTG estimate has a plus or minus 10 percent uncertainty range.

As you know, BP is a participant in the Unified Command and assisted in the preparation of these estimates. BP has not publicly indicated disagreement with these estimates.

Under current law, BP will be assessed fines for each barrel of oil spilled. These fines will range from a minimum of $1100 per barrel to up to $4300 per barrel. The amount of oil spilled will also be used in assessing the extent of natural resource damages. The 53,000-62,000 barrel per day figure far exceeds BP’s initial estimates of 1,000-5,000 barrels per day and much more closely resembles the so called “worst case” scenario cited by BP officials of 60,000 barrels per day.

I am writing to ask whether BP will accept this more definitive FRTG estimate as the basis for its per barrel spill liability and for other legal purposes, including the assessment of natural resources damages, as well. As is evident, each per day change in the flow rate, when compiled over the 87 day life of the spill, may be worth billions of dollars to BP if in fact it is found guilty of gross negligence with regard to this spill. For instance, for every 10,000 barrels of oil spilled per day at $4,300 per barrel, over the more than 80 days that oil spilled into the ocean, the fine would be increased by $3.5 billion. The total size of the spill will also affect the amount of damages BP would have to pay for the spill’s effect on natural resources in the Gulf of Mexico.

BP’s official website: (http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=40&contentId=7061813a) declares that:

“BP is doing everything we can to make this right. We continue to work to stop the flow of oil, clean up the environmental damage, and help make sure that people are compensated for their losses.”

A similar message has been conveyed through BP’s extensive advertising campaign relating to its Gulf spill response activities. In light of BP’s stated commitment to “make this right,” the American public deserves to know whether BP plans on accepting the federal government’s official flow-rate estimate for liability purposes or whether it plans on litigating this number and low-balling the amount of oil that actually flowed into the gulf. Accordingly it is incumbent upon BP to stipulate that it will accept the FRTG’s latest flow rate estimates when the government seeks to collect its fine and assess other damages caused by the Deepwater Horizon Macondo well blowout. We know that this has been the worst environmental disaster in our nation’s history and it is high time for BP to legally “own up” to that fact as well.

Thank you very much for your attention to this important matter. If you have any questions or concerns, please have your staff contact mine.

Sincerely,
Edward J. Markey
Chairman
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment

Cc:
Honorable Henry Waxman, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce
Honorable Joe Barton, Ranking Member
Honorable Fred Upton, Ranking Member
Dr. Marcia McNutt, United States Geological Survey and Chair, Flow Rate Technical Committee

Briefing on aEURoeGreenland Ice Sheet: Global WarmingaEUR(TM)s Impacts on Arctic RegionaEUR?

Select Committee to Examine Dramatic Sea Ice Event with Scientists and Experts

**VISUALS including Greenland satellite images and other recent data will be on display

August 9, 2010 – Last week an ice sheet covering 100 square miles broke off Greenland. This dramatic sea ice event follows the warmest six months on record and is the largest piece of Arctic ice to break free since 1962.

On Tuesday, the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will hold a briefing with scientists and experts who study the Arctic region to discuss this event and its relationship to climate change. The briefing, “The Greenland Ice Sheet: Global Warming’s Impacts on the Arctic Region,” will be held on Tuesday, August 10th, at 9:30 A.M. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building.

WHAT: Select Committee Briefing, “The Greenland Ice Sheet: Global Warming’s Impacts on the Arctic Region”

WHEN: Tuesday, August 10th, at 9:30 A.M.

WHERE: Room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building, Capitol Complex.

WHO:
Dr. Richard B. Alley, Professor of Geosciences, and Earth and Environmental Systems, The Pennsylvania State University
Dr. Robert Bindschadler, Senior Research Scientist at University of Maryland Baltimore County, who has 30 years of service with NASA
Dr. Andreas Muenchow, Professor of Physical Ocean Science and Engineering, University of Delaware

Markey: Giant Ice Sheet Breaks Off Greenland, Global Warming Deniers Should Call it Home

August 7, 2010 – An ice sheet covering 100 square miles has broken off Greenland. This giant ice island is more than four times the size of New York’s Manhattan Island and comes following the warmest six months on record. Today, Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, released the following statement:

“An iceberg four times the size of Manhattan has broken off Greenland, creating plenty of room for global warming deniers to start their own country.

“So far, 2010 has been the hottest year on record, and scientists agree arctic ice is a canary in a coal mine that provides clear warnings on climate.

“Last summer, the House passed landmark legislation to create clean energy jobs that cut carbon pollution. However, it’s still unclear how many giant blocks of ice it will take to break the block of Republican climate deniers in the US Senate who continue hold this critical clean energy and climate legislation hostage.”

FTC says Resellers of Toxic FEMA Trailers to Gulf Cleanup Workers Could Face Criminal Charges

Lawmakers urge FTC, GSA and other law enforcement to aggressively investigate and monitor sale and use of contaminated trailers

August 6, 2010 – Today Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La), released a letter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) indicating that resellers of the former FEMA trailers that were contaminated with the carcinogen formaldehyde may be subject to criminal penalties for failing to disclose the health risk to purchasers and by implying that the structures were appropriate to be used for housing.

According to the FTC, while civil penalties could not be levied, the Commission could take a variety of enforcement actions including equitable monetary relief, cease and desist orders, bans and disclosure remedies. However, in light of the nature of the violation and the obligations imposed on purchasers of the FEMA trailers at the time of their sale, the FTC said “criminal action would likely yield the strongest remedy for consumers” who have been victimized by the deceptive sale practices.

“Like a zombie from a bad horror film, FEMA’s toxic trailers just keep coming back to haunt the people of the Gulf coast,” said Markey. “We need to ensure that the appropriate law enforcement agencies are thoroughly and vigilantly looking into these sales so that no one is unwittingly and needlessly exposed to the formaldehyde in these trailers again.”

“The fumes from toxic FEMA trailers cause serious respiratory illnesses, especially for children and seniors, and no one should be living in them,” said Rep. Melancon. “Federal and local law enforcement must actively investigate any reports of trailers being sold for housing, to protect Louisiana families from breathing hazardous chemicals while they sleep.”

The FTC letter was in response to an inquiry from Reps. Markey and Melancon who have also questioned the General Services Administration (GSA) on their oversight of the resale of these trailers, the response from GSA has not been received. According to several cases now being investigated by the Inspector General’s office at GSA, companies that bought the trailers directly through GSA auction may have removed warning labels or otherwise not informed buyers that the trailers are not intended to be repurposed as homes. As a result several reports have indicated that these tainted trailers are being used to house some workers cleaning up oil from the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

To read the response letter from the FTC, please click here

To read Reps. Markey and Melancon’s original letter to the FTC, please click here

Markey Releases FDA Seafood Response Indicating Low Chance of Dispersant-Contamination in the Gulf

Questions remain on long-term effects on food chain and marine life

August 5, 2010 – Today Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee, released a letter from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indicating that the agency determined that chemical dispersants used to combat the Deepwater Horizon oil spill have a low potential for bioaccumulation in seafood species and do not pose a significant public health risk through human consumption. Rep. Markey is still awaiting an FDA analysis responding to his inquiry regarding reports of arsenic and other toxic byproducts of the BP oil spill that may pose a greater risk of bioaccumulating in seafood meant for human consumption.

“This bit of good news is a great first step in restoring public confidence in the safety of seafood from the Gulf region,” said Rep. Markey. “However, many significant questions still remain on the long-term consequences that these dispersant chemicals will have on the marine food chain. Now that the oil has stopped flowing vigilance in monitoring must continue to ensure that tainted seafood never makes it to the dinner table.”

Response letter from the FDA
Chairman Markey's original letter to the FDA

Long concerned about health and environmental issues relating to the dispersants, Rep. Markey has written to the EPA, FDA and the Coast Guard questioning the use of unprecedented volumes of dispersants in the Gulf, as the chemicals had not undergone a thorough review of their toxicity or effects. After receipt of one of Markey’s first letters written on May 17th the EPA along with the Coast Guard directed BP to eliminate surface application of the chemicals except in “rare cases” for which exemptions had to be requested. Data released by Rep. Markey’s Energy and Environment Subcommittee staff just last week indicated that these “rare cases” occurred on a daily basis since the directive was issued.

On several occasions EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has also raised serious concerns about the unknown effects of dispersants, characterizing them as an “environmental tradeoff.” The most recent data released by EPA earlier this week indicates that while the chemicals do not appear to be acutely toxic, the long term effects these chemicals will have on the Gulf of Mexico are still unknown.

Just yesterday NOAA and the Department of the Interior jointly released a report indicating that only 8% of the oil released into the Gulf of Mexico was chemically dispersed. This data suggests that dispersants were highly ineffective, since every gallon of dispersant used only dispersed just over 9 gallons of oil. By contrast, the report said that 16% of the oil was naturally dispersed without the use of these chemicals.

“I remain concerned about the long-term consequences that these dispersants mixed with oil and other toxic materials will have on our waters and on our health.” said Rep. Markey. “Continued safety and oversight of the seafood in the Gulf will protect families while helping the regions fishing and tourism industries recover.”