BP Oil Spill Law Blog

§ 1321 of The Clean Water Act of 1990 (33 USC § 1251 et seq.) requires the President to ensure effective and immediate removal of an oil discharge and, where there is substantial threat to public health or welfare, requires the President to require all Federal, State and private actions to remove the oil discharge or mitigate it.

In an apparent effort to comply with the Act, the president recently ordered his administration to triple the manpower in place to clean up areas where oil has come ashore or where it is within 24 hours of impact. He had also deployed doctors to the affected areas to check on residents' and rescue workers' health.

Additional Resources:

Obama orders boost to clean-up operation

This year is likely to be a severe Hurricane season. Dr. Jeff Masters of The Weather Underground, makes the following prediections concerning how a Gulf of Mexico Hurricane may impact the BP Oil Spill:

• If a sandy beach is already fouled by oil, a hurricane can help clean up the mess. However, the situation is different along shores with marshlands, where the many shoreline plants offer crevices and tangled roots for the oil to accumulate in. A hurricane will help scour some of the oil out of marshlands, but the majority of it will probably remain stuck.
• Shores that are already fouled by oil will probably benefit from a hurricane, but the oil cleaned off of those shores then becomes someone else's problem. A hurricane passing through the oil spill is likely to result in much higher damage to the coast.
• Oil and disburseant could ride inland on top of the surge, potentially fouling residential areas and hundreds of square miles of sensitive ecosystems with the toxic stew.
• The winds from a hurricane hurl ocean sea spray miles inland, often causing major defoliation and tree damage far beyond where the storm surge penetrates. Thus we can anticipate that a hurricane passing over the oil spill will be able to hurl oil and toxic dispersants many miles inland during landfall. In regions where little rain falls, the concentrations of the oil and dispersants may be a problem. We have no experience with this sort of situation, so the potential risks are unknown.

Source:

What would a hurricane do to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill? ( Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog)

Additional Resources:

Hurricanes and the Oil Spill (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration).pdf

Although BP has refused to switch the type of dispersant that is being used to mitigate the amount of oil leaking through the coast, they have agreed to reduce the amount of dispersant being used. The Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) reports that they expect a 50 - 80% reduction, mostly the result of limiting the amount of dispersant used on the water's surface. Subsurface use of the dispersant has been found to be more effective, while requiring lower levels of the dispersant.

BP maintains that the dispersant currently being used, Corexit, is the safest, most readily available product, and therefore, they are unable to switch to any of the E.P.A.'s alternatives. The E.P.A. disputes this finding and has stated that they will conduct their own testing in Florida to determine the validity of BP's claims regarding the chemicals toxicity and biodegradation.

Nalco has jus recently disclosed the complete chemical constituents of Corexit to EPA to assist in the government's evaluation and testing of the otherwise proprietary formula.

Additional Resources;

Material Safety Data Sheet for Corexit

'We Have Nothing to Hide,' Oil Dispersant Maker Says (NY TImes)

As bird hunters begin thinking about the start of the fall season, many may be wondering what impact the oil spill will have on the populations of these animals. There are three main concerns involved with the recent spill, the first being oil contamination of the birds themselves. When oil gets on the birds' feathers, it destroys their natural weatherproofing and can weigh the animals down. Additionally, because so many of the birds spend the majority of their time in the water, only about a tenth of the dead animals will actually wash up on shore, making it difficult to fully assess the spill's impact.

The second concern is that the oil has and will continue to affect the birds' habitat. This is especially important given that summer is the birds breeding and nesting time. Oil has the potential of affecting the birds breeding in two ways: first, because it can contaminate the nests and second, because birds will be forced to move to less than ideal breeding grounds to escape the oil.

The final concern is that the birds' food supply will become contaminated with oil, thus affecting their ability to survive as well as feed their young. There are 25 Important Bird Areas along the coast, some of which have already been reached by the spill. It is important that clean-up efforts begin immediately to mitigate the impact and so that the populations of these animals aren't devastated.

Addtional Resources:

American Bird Conservancy (Map Of Globally Important Bird Areas Most At Risk)

16 Birds Threatened by the BP Gulf Oil Spill (The Daily Green)

Oil Reaches Important Bird Areas (Audubon)

James H. Cowan Jr , Professor of The Department of Oceanolgraphy and Coastal Sciences at Louisiana State University, discovered underwater plumes of oily globules, from the size of a thumbnail to the size of a golf ball. The submarine used to detect the plumes found they extended 400 feet down to near the ocean floor. However, the edge of the plume could not be detected even thought the submarine traveled miles from side to side.

Because these plumes are underwater, containment booms would be ineffective in stopping these oily globules. Professor Cownan reported to a Washington Post reporter that the oil's threat to undersea ecosystems "is really starting to scare us."

In a separate oil plume discovery, scientists aboard a University of South Florida research vessel found an area of clear dissolved oil east of the Deepwater Horizon BP Oil Leak that is about six miles wide, and extends from the surface down to a depth of about 3,200 feet. The plum appears to stretch more than 20 miles from the site of the Deepwater Horizon BP Oil Leak.

Dispersants like Corexit may have played a role in causing these plumes

Additional Resources:

La. scientist locates another vast oil plume in the gulf

The Department of Oceanolgraphy and Coastal Sciences at Louisiana State University

BP Burying Heads in Sand on Underwater Plumes, Oil Flow

Senator Vitter has introduced legislation to raise the $75 Million Oil Pollution Act Cap on Economic Damages. What is unclear is whether this legislation is intended to limit BP's Economic Liability for this BP Oil Spill to only $20 Billion.

Under present law, the current $75 Million Cap could be lifted if BP is found to have acted with gross negligence or to have broken rules that led to this massive spill. Furthermore, under present law, BP has pledged to pay economic damages in excess of the $75-million liability cap.

However, if Senator Vitter's bill becomes law, and if BP is found to be grossly negligent and if peoples' economic damages exceed $40 Billion, would BP use the new Vitter cap to shield itself from economic liability exceeding $20 Billion where under current law no cap exists?

Senator Vitter must address this issue in his bill to avoid any potential unintended consequence and make certain that BP pays the full economic loss tab under the gross negligence scenario.

There has been an increasing amount of concern regarding the air quality around the coastal areas because of the recent BP Oil Spill. Oil is an organic compound that releases gasses, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that can have various health effects on humans depending on the level and length of time of exposure. One of oil's VOCs is benzene, a human carcinogen, which can cause headaches, vomiting, rashes and respiratory illness.

To help assess if the air quality meets the Environmental Protection Agencies requirements, a TO-15 is used to measure and detect VOCs in the air at a level of parts per trillion. TO-15 is a machine that looks for toxic organic compounds in the air, and is preferred over other methods because it is easier to use and is more effective and efficient at finding VOCs.

The TO-15 measures the air quality by sucking a sample of the air into a canister and then taken to a lab for analysis. The TO-15 is preferred over earlier models because calibration isn't required and it has its own internal quality control system.

Additional Resources:

U.S. EPA's Compendium of Methods for the Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds in Ambient Air.pdf

An Introduction to Indoor Air Quality

www.airtestingassociates.com

EPA's BP Oil Spill Test Results

How Louisiana Residents and Business Owners View the United States Governement's Response.

As a result of the April 20, 2010 oil spill many residents of Louisiana and other coastal states are developing needs for various services such as career advices, food, and financial assistance. The following is a list of contacts to assist you in accessing any needed assistance.

Small Business Services:

Seedco Financial Services: Provides financing for small businesses.

Locations: Southeast Louisiana Fisheries Assistance Center, 212 Ave G, Belle Chasse, LA; and Xavier University, 909 S. Jefferson Davis Pkwy, New Orleans, LA

Contact: 504-392-2454, 504-520-5727

Louisiana Small Business Development Center: Provides business counseling.

Locations: Southeast Louisiana Fisheries Assistance Center, 212 Ave G, Belle Chasse, LA; and UNO Jefferson Center, 3330 N. Causeway Blvd., Suite 447, Metairie, LA

Contact: 504-831-3730, 504-392-2454

Small Business Association: Provides loans to homeowners, renters, businesses, and non-profits to repair or replace real or personal property including business assets.

Deadline to Apply: February 7, 2011

Locations:

Plaquemines Parish: Southeast Louisiana Fisheries Assistance Center, 212 Ave G, Belle Chasse, LA; St. Patrick's Church Family Life Center, 28698 Hwy 23, Port Sulphur, LA; and Venice Boat Harbor Office, Tiger Pass Road, Venice, LA

St. Bernard Parish: Gulf Coast Bank & Trust Co., 1801 E. Judge Perez Dr., Chalmette, LA; and 7901 Hopedale Hwy, Hopedale, LA

Jefferson Parish: Grand Isle Community Center, 3811 Hwy 1, Grand Isle, LA; and LSBDC, UNO Jefferson Center, 3330 N. Causeway, Suite 422, Metairie, LA

Orleans Parish: Vietnamese Initiatives in Economic Training, 4655 Michoud Blvd., #D6 1st Floor, New Orleans, LA

Lafourche Parish: S. Lafourche Public Library, 16251 E. Main St., Cut Off, LA

St. Tammany Parish: 1330 Bayou Lane, Trailer 102, Slidell, LA

Contact: 800-659-2955, 504-392-2454

Social Services:

Catholic Charities: Provides food, counseling, employment and social services assistance.

Locations: St. Patrick Catholic Church, 28698 Hwy 23, Port Sulphur, LA; St. Thomas Catholic Church, 17605 Hwy 15, Pointe a la Hache, LA; and St. Bernard Community Center, 1519 E. Judge Perez Drive, Chalmette, LA

Contact: 866-891-2210, 504-281-2627

WIC Programs: Provides certain food items for families

Locations: Port Sulphur Clinic: 26853 Hwy 23; and Belle Chasse: Health Unit on Main Street

Contact: 504-247-0592

SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program): Provides food stamps

Locations:

Plaquemines Parish: St. Patrick Catholic Church (Mobile Unit), 28698 Hwy 15, Port Sulphur, LA; Council District 1 Office, 15535 Hwy 15, Port a la Hache, LA; and Venice Boat Harbor, 41093 Hwy 23, Boothville, LA

St. Bernard Parish: St. Bernard Community Center, 1107 LeBeau St., Arabi, LA; First Baptist Church, 305 East St. Bernard Hwy, Chalmette, LA; Louisiana Workforce Commission, 8201 W Judge Perez, 2nd Floor, Chalmette, LA; and Ducros Library and Museum (Mobile Unit), 1345-1347 Bayou Rd., St. Bernard Village, LA

Jefferson Parish: Grand Isle Community Center, 3811 Hwy 1, Grand Isle, LA

St. Tammany Parish: Louisiana Workforce Commission, 316 E. Howze Beach Rd., Slidell, LA

Contacts: 504-361-6111 (Plaquemines Parish), 504-599-1700 (St. Bernard Parish), 504-599-1700 (Orleans Parish), 504-361-6111 (Jefferson Parish)

Employment Services:

JOB 1: Provides job placement for work related to the oil spill

Locations: 2330 Canal Street, New Orleans, LA; and 3520 General Degaule Dr., New Orleans, LA

Contact: 504-658-4500

JOB 1 Website:

BP Vessel of Opportunity: Hiring workers and boats to work on oil spill clean-up

Locations: TBA

Contact: 281-366-5511

Email: HorizonSupport@OEGLLC.com

OSHA: Provides information and enforcement for workers rights

OSHA Website:

Today Chairmen Henry A. Waxman and Bart Stupak sent a memo to Committee members summarizing the information presented by BP to Committee staff on the progress of its internal investigation of the causes of the blowout and oil spill.

The information from BP identifies several new warning signs of problems. According to BP there were three flow indicators from the well before the explosion. One was 51 minutes before the explosion when more fluid began flowing out of the well than was being pumped in. Another flow indicator was 41 minutes before the explosion when the pump was shut down for a "sheen" test, yet the well continued to flow instead of stopping and drill pipe pressure also unexpectedly increased. Then, 18 minutes before the explosion, abnormal pressures and mud returns were observed and the pump was abruptly shut down. The data suggests that the crew may have attempted mechanical interventions at that point to control the pressure, but soon after, the flow out and pressure increased dramatically and the explosion took place. Further, BP's preliminary findings indicate that there were other events in the 24 hours before the explosion that require further inquiry.

Additional Resources:

Key Questions Arising from Inquiry into the Deepwater Horizon Gulf of Mexico

When a person unable to work or rent out propety as a result of the BP Oil Spill, he or she may be eligible for damages including loss of earning capacity or loss of profits under the Oil Pollution Act. For loss earning capacity, consideration is given to what the spill victim's ability to earn actually was prior to suffering the loss, and an analysis of the extent to which that capacity has been impaired. It is not based simply upon what the spill victim was actually earning at the time of the spill.

For example, in 2009 John Doe worked as a fishing crew member earning $23,000 per year. In February 2010, John purchase a boat. After accounting for his anticipated expenses relating to his new boat the the crew he will hire for the coming fishing season, John Doe is projeected to earn substantially more than his regular $23,000 per year. The oil spill occurs preventing John from operating in his first season as a boat owner. John would have a claim for loss of earning capacity for his projected amounts he would have earned had the boat been operable but for the BP oil spill.

In another example, in January 2010, Sue and Bob purchase a house on Grand Isle and anticipated renting it out for most of the year. They put the home up for rent and were preparing to sign the lease with a tenant when the oil spill occurred. The tenant refused to sign the lease because of the spill. Sue and Bob have made reasonable efforts to rent out the home, but no one wants to rent it because of the oil buildup on the beaches. Even though Sue and Bob have never rented out the home, they would have a claim for loss of projected profit.

To calculate the loss of earning capacity, one must determine whether the earning capacity has been diminished, the duration of the loss for which the oil spill victim should be compensated and the present value of that loss.

OR GET THE LIVE STREAM DIRECTLY FROM BP

Louisiana BP Oil Spill Photographs

CURRENT MAPS OF BP OIL SPILL (GULF OIL SPILL LAYERS COMPILED BY GOOGLE)

Photo courtesy of Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries

Just days after new satellite images were released by NASA and shortly after additional BP underwater videos were released, Steve Wereley, a professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University, testified before a Congressional committee that the two wellhead leaks combined to gush 95,000 barrels a day into the Gulf of Mexico, with 70,000 barrels from the largest leak and 25,000 from the smaller.

Wereley also said his estimate could be wrong by plus or minus 20% - so the daily rate of leakage would be between 76,000 and 104,000 barrels a day. He told the committee: "The media keeps using the 5,000 barrel a day estimate, but there is scientifically no chance... BP's estimate is nowhere near correct. It is certainly larger." He later said: "I don't see any possibility, any scenario under which their number is accurate."

If you feel you have a Economic Loss, Wage Loss or Property Damage Claim against BP resulting from the April 20, 2010 oil spill, you should go through BP's claims department first to try and resolve a potential claim; however, if BP denies your claim you probably want to present your claim to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) administered by the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) .

The following is information to assist you in determining if you have a potential claim with OSLTF:

What Claims may be submitted:

• Removal Costs
• Real or Personal Property Damage
• Loss of Profits and Earning Capacity
• Loss of Government Revenue
• Cost of Increased Public Services
• Natural Resource Damage

Who is Eligible to Submit a Claim:

• An individual
• A corporation, partnership, or association
• The United States government
• Federal, state, foreign, or Indian tribe trustee
• States, the District of Columbia, municipalities, and political subdivisions of States
• The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States.
• Certain foreign claimants

The NPFC cannot evaluate any claim if it is part of a court case including class actions. The claim holder will have to provide the NPFC with a statement saying that there has been no action taken in court, or if action has been taken, the status of the pending case. Additionally, NPFC will not pay removal costs or damages that have already been paid.

You do not have to have insurance for removal costs or damages or use insurance if you do have it. Any insurance that a claim holder has must be reported to the NPFC when a claim is made.

To submit a claim, the claim holder must first submit a claim to BP. The claim holder's submission to BP must state that you are filing under Section 2713(a) of the Oil Pollution Act. If BP denies your claim or fails to pay it within 90 days, then the claim holder can submit a claim to the NPFC.

Claim Format:

• There is not a required format for submitting an OSLTF claim; however, the NPFC does require that the claim be submitted in writing and that the claim is supported with evidence, information, and documentation. Additionally, a claim for damages must be made within three years after the date of the damage, while a claim for removal costs must be made within six years.
• Claims must include the Following Information:
• Type and amount of damages for each type of claim
• Total amount claimed
• Your full name, street and mailing address(es), and telephone numbers for your home and business
• Time, date, and geographical location of the oil spill; identification of the navigable water impacted; and an explanation of how the oil impacted the water
• Identify the vessel, facility, or person causing or suspected of causing the spill, if possible, and include an explanation of why you suspect the vessel, facility, or person to have caused the spill
• A general description of the impact of the spill, including the removal costs or damages claimed by category
• Explanation of how the damage happened, the location, and the date and time (this may/may not be the same as the location, date, or time of the spill)
• Description of actions taken to minimize or avoid damages
• Costs of assessing the damage (do not include attorney's fees or other costs for claim preparation or filing)
• Name, street and mailing address(es), and telephone numbers of any witnesses and a brief description of what the witness knows
• Copies of any written communication and content of any verbal communications with BP, including any claims submitted to BP
• Information on any attempts to submit claims to the person or company responsible for the oil pollution
• Information on any insurance claim made for removal costs or damages
• Any compensation you have received for removal costs or damages from the spill
• A Statement that no action has been taken in court or, if action has been taken, the status of the pending court case
• Certification statement of the accuracy of the claim to the best of your knowledge and belief
• Your signature and, if applicable, your legal representative's signature
• Any additional information that is needed will be requested by the NPFC and will need to be sent to the NPFC within 90 days

Once the NPFC receives the claim holder's documentation and claim information, they will send out a claim determination, which will need to be accepted or rejected within 60 days. Determinations which are accepted by the claim holder are usually paid within 30 days. Determinations which are rejected will be reconsidered by the NPFC. Any non-response to the determination will void the offer within 60 days.

If your claim is denied by the NPFC you may still then bring a suit against the responsible parties for any damages not recovered.

Claims for Personal Injuries are not covered by the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF). Personal Injury claims should first be presented to BP and, if not satisified with the outcome, suit should be timely filed.

Please consult with your attorney prior to making a claim with the OSLTA or filing suit as procedures may change due to the magnitude of the spill.

Sources:

Claimant's Guide- A Compliance Guide for Submitting Claims Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990

33 CFR Part 136

NOAA has extended the boundaries of the closed fishing area in the Gulf of Mexico into the northern portion of the loop current as a precautionary measure to ensure that seafood from the Gulf will remain safe for consumers. Though the latest analysis shows that the bulk of the oil remains dozens of miles from the loop current, the new boundaries address the possibility that a tendril of light oil has entered or will enter the loop current.
The closed area now represents 45,728 square miles, which is slightly less than 19 percent of Gulf of Mexico federal waters. This leaves more than 81 percent of Gulf federal waters--or nearly 195,000 square miles--still available for fishing. The closure will be effective at 6 p.m. EDT. Details can be found at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/.

Recently, underwater oil plumes have been discovered that could be miles long and hundreds of feet deep. These plumes of oil take oxygen out of the water, which could have an effect on the wild life and plant life in the area. The full extent and effect of the subsea oil is still being investigated and currently the oxygen levels are still within a normal range.

Another potential environmental hazard is tar balls, oil that has weathered into hard chunks. BP and various branches of the government have been working together to prevent tar balls from reaching the coastal shores of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. The tar balls that have already arrived on shore, which range in size from dimes to golf balls, have been able to be cleaned, and crews are using preventive measures to prevent further contamination. Tools such as snare booms and skimmer operations have been put in place along the coast line to collect the tar balls and prevent them from reaching shore. If you spot any tar balls in or along the coast, please contact the United States Coast Guard at 800-448-5816.

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Deepwater Horizon's Blowout - Part 1 (60 Minutes)

• Deepwater Horizon was considered one of the safest oil rigs because it hadn't had an accident in over 7 years.
• The day of the explosion, rig executives were on the ship to congratulate the crew for their work in keeping the rig safe.
• Because of setbacks in the drilling schedule, BP supervisors made the decision to push the equipment faster than they should have, causing damage to key safety equipment.
• One of the last people to escape from the rig describes the weeks before the explosion and details the moments directly before the blast.
• Right before the explosion, there was a surge of electricity causing light bulbs and computers to explode. The actual explosion was so strong that it took steel doors off their hinges and destroyed the emergency systems.
• Despite protocol requiring otherwise, the captain gave orders for the life boats to leave before all people on the rig were accounted for. Those left on the ship were forced to jump off the side of the ship.

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Deepwater Horizon's Blowout - Part 2 (60 Minutes)

• The White House is investigating the cause of the Deepwater Horizon explosion by hiring researchers from Berkley who have been called on in the past to determine the cause of other disasters.
• Thus far, the researchers have found that a key component in monitoring the rig's safety, the annular, was damaged. The annular was used to seal the well for pressure tests, which determine if gasses are leaking. Because the annular was damaged, the tests weren't reliable.
• Shortly before the explosion, BP overrode Transocean's decision on how to conduct Halliburton's cement work.
• BP decided to expedite Halliburton's work by removing mud, which acts as pressure controller, before the cement was fully set in place.
• The explosion was caused by the failure of the cement plugs, and the accident likely could have been avoided had all precautions been taking with the cement and mud removal.
• BP argues that Transocean had the responsibility of ensuring that all safety measures were taken on the rig.

It is important that clean-up workers take precautions to protect their bodies and their health when working in and around oil. Workers exposed to oil and cleaning chemicals in the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill reported a range of health problems and symptoms including but not limited to headaches, uncontrollable coughing, respiratory and sinus infections, nosebleeds and rashes from working without the proper safety equipment.

Workers assisting in the BP oil spill should be sure to wear respirators, gloves, and goggles at all times when working in and around the oil, and take special care when walking or moving around the oil because of the slippery conditions, which can lead to sprains and broken bones.

Chemical poisoning from exposure to the oil and clean-up chemicals can take time to fully develop and can appear in multiple forms. Any possibility of chemical poisoning should be addressed immediately. If you or anyone you know has been in contact with oil, it is important to immediately wash it off your skin and clothing and contact a doctor if any symptoms appear.

Additional Resources:

Storiies From The Sound

Oil Spill Worker Safety Video - Lessons Learned from Exxon Valdez

• After the Valdez spill, Exxon hired 11,000 workers to assist with the clean-up. At that time, the Exxon Valdez spill was the biggest clean-up effort in history.
• Over 1,100 of those workers reported some sort of injury ranging from cuts and sprains to latent respiratory illnesses. Although OSHA was overseeing the project, they only had 7 inspectors for the entire site.
• Workers often came into contact with the oil via fumes that evaporated out of the oil, workers removing their protective gear because of heat stress or from protective clothing breaking down from prolonged contact with the oil.
• Early on in the clean-up effort, workers often lacked the required safety equipment and were uneducated about how oil reacts to time, heat and cleaning procedures.
• It is extremely important that clean-up workers decontaminate themselves at the end of every work day to prevent indirect exposure.

Additional Resources:

Louisiana Job Injury Law Blog For Injured Workers

From the moment that local and national news sources reported 11 missing oil rig workers in the Gulf of Mexico in late April, life has changed for Louisiana residents. The scenario has evolved from a self-contained tragedy, into a troubling local disaster, and finally into the full-blown catastrophe that we see today. All it takes is to step outside and smell the distinct odor in the air to recall the BP oil spill, and how it will be a constant presence in our lives for an indeterminate period of time.

It has already come to light that the "worst case scenarios" BP anticipated have been surpassed. Initial attempts to contain and clean the spill have been largely unsuccessful. Despite implementing several innovations designed to curb the disaster, oil continues to spread throughout the Gulf. BP officials are pessimistic about the outcome; a disquieting fact in a situation where a reassuring public relations campaign is to be expected.

The effects of the oil spill in this worst case scenario context are well known. Environmental problems (affecting innumerable species in our already tenuous coastal ecology) and economic problems (largely tied to the seafood industry and gas prices) are unavoidable. In a best case scenario, these issues would still exist, but they would be fleeting and more easily overcome. In the reality that we now face, they will be long term struggles.

Without a doubt, at some point down the road this current situation will be declared stabilized. BP will have concluded its efforts to remedy the disaster, national responsiveness will decrease, and the whole situation will transform in the general consciousness from "current disaster" to "past catastrophe," à la Exxon-Valdez. But for Louisianans, and other residents along the Gulf Coast, the worst case scenario may still be playing out. Environmental and economic issues that stem from the BP oil spill will be less visible in the future, particularly on a national scale, but they will continue to hit home for Louisianans indefinitely.

As such, many of the "worst case scenario" problems for Louisiana will come after the brunt of the disaster has passed. In a situation where many elements of our lives will be permanently changed, we must be vigilant about maintaining awareness. Even though the national media will eventually cool its fervor for the oil spill, residents in the gulf region should not. The problems that have resulted from this disaster will need to be remembered beyond the "panic" stage in order for some type of meaningful assistance and change to result. Our way of life may be changed for good, but that doesn't mean we should settle down when the rest of the nation does. Difficulties such as those caused by the BP oil spill aren't resolved by complacency.

Recently, the Louisiana-based supermarket chain Rouse's has issued a seafood guarantee in the wake of the BP oil spill. According to ad campaigns and news reports, all seafood available at the chain's stores will be fresh and uncontaminated by the oil's ill effects.

Such announcements are helpful to soothe public misgivings regarding the healthfulness of seafood in the aftermath of this disaster, but they don't address one of the major components of how seafood will be affected. Economically, the shrimp and crab industries in the Gulf of Mexico are devastated. While fresh seafood may be harvested and distributed, the prices of such products will almost undoubtedly skyrocket. Food safety is assured, but costliness is not.

The expense of seafood in Louisiana will go beyond a higher price tag at the grocery store. Restaurants will likely feel the effects, and be compelled to adjust their prices accordingly. On a national scale, seafood distributers may look elsewhere for products, and settle on less expensive international markets. For Louisiana residents who make their living by harvesting shrimp, oysters, crabs and other species affected by the oil spill, the news of "safe seafood" is hollow. With catastrophically diminished seafood sources, a number of these individuals will find themselves without jobs or means for their livelihood. For a profession that is often multi-generational, physically and economically demanding, and already subject to standard environmental whims, the BP oil spill may be a tragic watershed.

Everyone in Louisiana will be affected by the oil spill's blow to the seafood industry; whether it is the average shopper who cannot afford to buy shrimp at the Winn-Dixie, or the shrimper who is financially crippled and unable to recoup his monetary losses after the disaster. Those individuals who are in the latter category may consider voicing their problems and concerns to BP representatives, or through other channels, and attempt to remedy these financial losses.

On Thursday, May 13, 2010, representatives for Transocean Ltd. filed a petition in federal court requesting that their liability for the April 20, 2010 BP spill be limited because of 46 U.S.C. §30505, Limitation of Liability Act of 1851. This act allows owners of a vessel to limit their liability to the value of the vessel after the accident if the owner is able to show that they had no knowledge of the negligence which created the accident.

Transocean will be receiving an estimated $560 million dollars in insurance money because of the explosion and destruction of their oil rig, Deepwater Horizon. If their petition is successful, their liability would be capped at approximately $27 million dollars. Transocean claims that their contract with BP holds BP liable for all costs and damages resulting from the spill; however, if Transocean failed to meet required safety standards, the judge could remove liability caps.

Currently, a federal judge is still reviewing the petition, which could result in delays for pending and upcoming lawsuits.

Additional Resources:

Transocean tries to limit liability for sunken Gulf of Mexico oil rig

46 USC CHAPTER 305 - EXONERATION AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY

§ 1321 of The Clean Water Act of 1990 (33 USC § 1251 et seq.) is the main section of the Act outlining the liability of offshore facilities. This section provides, among other things, that there should be no discharge of oil and also sets forth the owner/ operator's liability including penalties for discharge of up to $1,000 per barrel of oil discharged ($3,000 per barrel of oil discharged in the event of gross negligence).

Penalties are capped at $50 Million unless the operator/operator is grossly negligent. Under this gross negligence scenario, BP's potential penalty liability under the Clean Water Act of 1990 could be as high as $180 Million Per Day. This penalty is in addition to other damages owed. The penalty calculation of $180 Million Per Day assumes a discharge of 60,000 barrels per day and a $3,000 per barrel penalty. The present estimated flow of 5,000 barrels per day may be a gross underestimate. BP, despite having the ability to obtain a very accurate flow rate through ultrasound, does not want a more accurate measurement according to recent reports.

Additional Resources:

Calculations of Size of Gulf Spill Are Questioned (NY Times)

Continue reading "Pressure Test Failed Hours Before Explosion; Transocean Denies Employees Forced To Sign Waivers" »

The government's estimate of 5,000 barrels per day would equate to a flow rate of about 146 gallons a minute. (A garden hose flows at about 10 gallons per minute.) Does the above video reflect the flow of 14.6 garden hoses? Remember, this is only one of the breaks in the riser pipe.

While the full impact of the BP oil spill is yet unknown, it is estimated that the spill is leaking approximately 210,000 gallons (or 5,000 barrels) of oil into the coast, covering over 2,500 square miles of ocean. Additionally, the effect on wildlife, tourism and residents' livelihood is only starting to be realized.

To help grasp an understanding of the magnitude of the spill, here are some comparative numbers: the state of Louisiana is 51,843 square miles, while the city of New Orleans is 4,190 square miles. The March 1989 Exxon Valdez spill leaked an estimated 10.8 million gallons (250,000 barrels) of oil, covering 11,000 square miles, and while some habitats affected by the Exxon spill have returned back to normal, it is estimated that others could take as long as 30 years to fully recuperate.
At the Deepwater Horizon's current discharge rate, it will bypass the scope of the Exxon Valdez spill within two months, as well as Exxon's clean-up bill.

Cannot Blame the Victims - So BP, Transocean & Halliburton Blame Each Other

• Public hearings have been held to help determine the cause of the Deepwater Horizon explosion. Witnesses of the explosion have been providing testimony to help put together the series of events that lead to the accident.
• In Washington, executives of BP, Halliburton and Transocean were brought in to answer questions regarding the explosion.
• Each company executive tried to blame another for the cause of the accident.
• BP continues to state that it will pay all legitimate claims resulting from the leak, which is located about a mile below surface.
• Once the investigation is complete, a final report will be issued.

Deepwater Horizon Worker Details Survival, Pending Legal Battles

• BP argues that a failure of the cement casing, which Halliburton had recently completed work on, were the cause of the explosion.
• BP is still looking for options to stop the leak as the oil spreads and tar balls continue to wash up on shore.
• One of the survivors of the explosion, Chris Choy, details his experience right before and after the explosion.
• Choy was forced to leave one of the deceased workers on the ship because of the large fires that were consuming the ship and prevented workers' escape.
• Every survivor of the explosion was forced to fill out a form stating what they saw and experienced right before the explosion as well as a form stating that they didn't witness the explosion and that they weren't injured as a result of the explosion.
• Despite signing documents saying he wasn't injured, Choy is still bringing suit against BP because of post traumatic shock as a result of the accident. Choy claims that the form was signed under duress as he had been awake for 40 hours and had just experienced the explosion and rescue efforts.

The April 20, 2010 gulf coast oil spill has affected the livelihood of people throughout the coastal parishes of Louisiana. Many residents are experiencing financial difficulties from the continued fishing and oyster bed closures. As the oil spreads to the Mississippi River basin and Chandeleur Islands, nine oyster beds have had to be closed by the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH) because of potential contamination. The DHH continues to monitor the water and fishing conditions through its Molluscan Shellfish Program; however, it could months or even years before the waters return back to normal.

The United States Small Business Association (SBA) is opening Business Recovery Centers to assist small business owners who were affected by the oil spill. Commercial fisherman may be eligible for up to a 2 million dollar loan from the SBA. Other options the SBA may be able to offer include deferring an existing loan and bridge financing. These centers will be open in Jefferson, Lafourche, Orleans, Plaquemines, Saint Bernard, and Saint Tammany parishes starting May 10, 2010. If you have any questions regarding these centers or would like to set up an appointment, call 800-659-2955.

Workers attacking the BP Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill may face many hazards including chemical, physical, biological and psychological. Chemical exposures may include benzene and other volatile organic compounds, oil mist, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and diesel fumes. Physical hazards may include ergonomic hazards, excessive noise levels, sun exposure and heat stress. Injuries may occur due to slips, trips, and falls on slippery or uneven walking and working surfaces. Other safety hazards are associated with the use of tools, equipment, machinery, and vehicles. Biological hazards include possible exposure to biting or venomous insects or other animals. Psychological hazards may include witnessing traumatic injuries or death, inability to help affected wildlife, and fatigue. Fatigue may result from working in a fast-paced environment, working extended shifts, and doing heavy labor or demanding cognitive tasks such as problem-solving and decision-making.

Employers should train workers responding to the BP oil spill about their potential hazards and safe work practices to prevent and control these hazards. All workers should be provided with the appropriate tools, equipment, personal protective equipment (PPE) and protective clothing needed to perform their job tasks. Workers should be trained in the appropriate care and use of this equipment. PPE should be selected based on identification of the hazards, protective qualities (such as oil resistance) and suitability for the tasks performed. An occupational health and injury surveillance system should be put in place as soon as possible. The prompt reporting of injuries and illnesses should be emphasized.

BP has been circulating $5,000 settlement agreements in Bayou La Batre Alabama in an effort settle entire claims. Alabama Attorney General Troy King stated that "people need to proceed with caution and understand the ramifications before signing something like that." "They should seek appropriate counsel to make sure their rights are protected," King said.

In another development in Louisiana, BP distributed a contract to fishermen it was hiring that waived their right to sue BP and required confidentiality and other items. U.S. District Judge Ginger Berrigan of New Orleans after hearing from counsel for the fisherman and BP, indicated the language in question in the Master Vessel Charter Agreement was overbroad. Legal counsel for BP agreed to enter into a stipulated judgment holding that the provisions are without effect.

Additional Resources:

BP told to stop circulating settlement agreements

Oil company wanted cleanup volunteers to insure against accidents