http://www.rollingstone.com:80/politics/news/17390/111965

Rolling Stone

The Spill, The Scandal and the President

The inside story of how Obama failed to crack down on the corruption 
of the Bush years - and let the world's most dangerous oil company 
get away with murder

By Tim Dickinson

Jun 08, 2010

PART 1

This article originally appeared in RS 1107 from June 24, 2010.

On May 27th, more than a month into the worst environmental disaster 
in U.S. history, Barack Obama strode to the podium in the East Room 
of the White House. For weeks, the administration had been insisting 
that BP alone was to blame for the catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf 
- and the ongoing failure to stop the massive leak. "They have the 
technical expertise to plug the hole," White House spokesman Robert 
Gibbs had said only six days earlier. "It is their responsibility." 
The president, Gibbs added, lacked the authority to play anything 
more than a supervisory role - a curious line of argument from an 
administration that has reserved the right to assassinate American 
citizens abroad and has nationalized much of the auto industry. "If 
BP is not accomplishing the task, can you just federalize it?" a 
reporter asked. "No," Gibbs replied.

Now, however, the president was suddenly standing up to take command 
of the cleanup effort. "In case you were wondering who's 
responsible," Obama told the nation, "I take responsibility." 
Sounding chastened, he acknowledged that his administration had 
failed to adequately reform the Minerals Management Service, the 
scandal-ridden federal agency that for years had essentially allowed 
the oil industry to self-regulate. "There wasn't sufficient urgency," 
the president said. "Absolutely I take responsibility for that." He 
also admitted that he had been too credulous of the oil giants: "I 
was wrong in my belief that the oil companies had their act together 
when it came to worst-case scenarios." He unveiled a presidential 
commission to investigate the disaster, discussed the resignation of 
the head of MMS, and extended a moratorium on new deepwater drilling. 
"The buck," he reiterated the next day on the sullied Louisiana 
coastline, "stops with me."

Meet Obama's sheriff, Ken Salazar.

What didn't stop was the gusher. Hours before the president's press 
conference, an ominous plume of oil six miles wide and 22 miles long 
was discovered snaking its way toward Mobile Bay from BP's wellhead 
next to the wreckage of its Deepwater Horizon rig. Admiral Thad 
Allen, the U.S. commander overseeing the cleanup, framed the spill 
explicitly as an invasion: "The enemy is coming ashore," he said. 
Louisiana beaches were assaulted by blobs of oil that began to seep 
beneath the sand; acres of marshland at the "Bird's Foot," where the 
Mississippi meets the Gulf, were befouled by shit-brown crude - a 
death sentence for wetlands that serve as the cradle for much of the 
region's vital marine life. By the time Obama spoke, it was 
increasingly evident that this was not merely an ecological disaster. 
It was the most devastating assault on American soil since 9/11.

Like the attacks by Al Qaeda, the disaster in the Gulf was preceded 
by ample warnings - yet the administration had ignored them. Instead 
of cracking down on MMS, as he had vowed to do even before taking 
office, Obama left in place many of the top officials who oversaw the 
agency's culture of corruption. He permitted it to rubber-stamp 
dangerous drilling operations by BP - a firm with the worst safety 
record of any oil company - with virtually no environmental 
safeguards, using industry-friendly regulations drafted during the 
Bush years. He calibrated his response to the Gulf spill based on 
flawed and misleading estimates from BP - and then deployed his top 
aides to lowball the flow rate at a laughable 5,000 barrels a day, 
long after the best science made clear this catastrophe would eclipse 
the Exxon Valdez.

Meet the Environmental Protection Agency's most progressive leader 
ever, Lisa Jackson.


Hours after BP's rig sank on April 22nd, a white board in NOAA's "war 
room" in Seattle displays the administration's initial, worst-case 
estimate of the spill - 64,000 to 110,000 barrels a day.
Photo courtesy of al.com

Even after the president's press conference, Rolling Stone has 
learned, the administration knew the spill could be far worse than 
its "best estimate" acknowledged. That same day, the president's Flow 
Rate Technical Group - a team of scientists charged with establishing 
the gusher's output - announced a new estimate of 12,000 to 25,000 
barrels, based on calculations from video of the plume. In fact, 
according to interviews with team members and scientists familiar 
with its work, that figure represents the plume group's minimum 
estimate. The upper range was not included in their report because 
scientists analyzing the flow were unable to reach a consensus on how 
bad it could be. "The upper bound from the plume group, if it had 
come out, is very high," says Timothy Crone, a marine geophysicist at 
Columbia University who has consulted with the government's team. 
"That's why they had resistance internally. We're talking 100,000 
barrels a day."

The median figure for Crone's independent calculations is 55,000 
barrels a day - the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez every five days. 
"That's what the plume team's numbers show too," Crone says. A source 
privy to internal discussions at one of the world's top oil companies 
confirms that the industry privately agrees with such estimates. "The 
industry definitely believes the higher-end values," the source says. 
"That's accurate - if not more than that." The reason, he adds, is 
that BP appears to have unleashed one of the 10 most productive wells 
in the Gulf. "BP screwed up a really big, big find," the source says. 
"And if they can't cap this, it's not going to blow itself out 
anytime soon."

Get your daily dose of political muckraking from Matt Taibbi on the Taibblog.

Even worse, the "moratorium" on drilling announced by the president 
does little to prevent future disasters. The ban halts exploratory 
drilling at only 33 deepwater operations, shutting down less than one 
percent of the total wells in the Gulf. Interior Secretary Ken 
Salazar, the Cabinet-level official appointed by Obama to rein in the 
oil industry, boasts that "the moratorium is not a moratorium that 
will affect production" - which continues at 5,106 wells in the Gulf, 
including 591 in deep water.

Most troubling of all, the government has allowed BP to continue 
deep-sea production at its Atlantis rig - one of the world's largest 
oil platforms. Capable of drawing 200,000 barrels a day from the 
seafloor, Atlantis is located only 150 miles off the coast of 
Louisiana, in waters nearly 2,000 feet deeper than BP drilled at 
Deepwater Horizon. According to congressional documents, the platform 
lacks required engineering certification for as much as 90 percent of 
its subsea components - a flaw that internal BP documents reveal 
could lead to "catastrophic" errors. In a May 19th letter to Salazar, 
26 congressmen called for the rig to be shut down immediately. "We 
are very concerned," they wrote, "that the tragedy at Deepwater 
Horizon could foreshadow an accident at BP Atlantis."

Tim Dickinson blogs about all the news that fits, from the Beltway 
and beyond on the National Affairs blog.

The administration's response to the looming threat? According to an 
e-mail to a congressional aide from a staff member at MMS, the agency 
has had "zero contact" with Atlantis about its safety risks since the 
Deepwater rig went down.

It's tempting to believe that the Gulf spill, like so many disasters 
inherited by Obama, was the fault of the Texas oilman who preceded 
him in office. But, though George W. Bush paved the way for the 
catastrophe, it was Obama who gave BP the green light to drill. "Bush 
owns eight years of the mess," says Rep. Darrell Issa, a Republican 
from California. "But after more than a year on the job, Salazar owns 
it too."

During the Bush years, the Minerals Management Service, the agency in 
the Interior Department charged with safeguarding the environment 
from the ravages of drilling, descended into rank criminality. 
According to reports by Interior's inspector general, MMS staffers 
were both literally and figuratively in bed with the oil industry. 
When agency staffers weren't joining industry employees for coke 
parties or trips to corporate ski chalets, they were having sex with 
oil-company officials. But it was American taxpayers and the 
environment that were getting screwed. MMS managers were awarded cash 
bonuses for pushing through risky offshore leases, auditors were 
ordered not to investigate shady deals, and safety staffers routinely 
accepted gifts from the industry, allegedly even allowing oil 
companies to fill in their own inspection reports in pencil before 
tracing over them in pen.

"The oil companies were running MMS during those years," Bobby 
Maxwell, a former top auditor with the agency, told Rolling Stone 
last year. "Whatever they wanted, they got. Nothing was being 
enforced across the board at MMS."

Salazar himself has worked hard to foster the impression that the 
"prior administration" is to blame for the catastrophe. In reality, 
though, the Obama administration was fully aware from the outset of 
the need to correct the lapses at MMS that led directly to the 
disaster in the Gulf. In fact, Obama specifically nominated Salazar - 
his "great" and "dear" friend - to force the department to "clean up 
its act." For too long, Obama declared, Interior has been "seen as an 
appendage of commercial interests" rather than serving the people. 
"That's going to change under Ken Salazar."

Salazar took over Interior in January 2009, vowing to restore the 
department's "respect for scientific integrity." He immediately 
traveled to MMS headquarters outside Denver and delivered a beat-down 
to staffers for their "blatant and criminal conflicts of interest and 
self-dealing" that had "set one of the worst examples of corruption 
and abuse in government." Promising to "set the standard for reform," 
Salazar declared, "The American people will know the Minerals 
Management Service as a defender of the taxpayer. You are the ones 
who will make special interests play by the rules." Dressed in his 
trademark Stetson and bolo tie, Salazar boldly proclaimed, "There's a 
new sheriff in town."

Salazar's early moves certainly created the impression that he meant 
what he said. Within days of taking office, he jettisoned the Bush 
administration's plan to open 300 million acres - in Alaska, the 
Gulf, and up and down both coasts - to offshore drilling. The 
proposal had been published in the Federal Register literally at 
midnight on the day that Bush left the White House. Salazar denounced 
the plan as "a headlong rush of the worst kind," saying it would have 
put in place "a process rigged to force hurried decisions based on 
bad information." Speaking to Rolling Stone in March 2009, the 
secretary underscored his commitment to reform. "We have embarked on 
an ambitious agenda to clean up the mess," he insisted. "We have the 
inspector general involved with us in a preventive mode so that the 
department doesn't commit the same mistakes of the past." The 
crackdown, he added, "goes beyond just codes of ethics."

Except that it didn't. Salazar did little to tamp down on the 
lawlessness at MMS, beyond referring a few employees for criminal 
prosecution and ending a Bush-era program that allowed oil companies 
to make their "royalty" payments - the amount they owe taxpayers for 
extracting a scarce public resource - not in cash but in crude. And 
instead of putting the brakes on new offshore drilling, Salazar 
immediately throttled it up to record levels. Even though he had 
scrapped the Bush plan, Salazar put 53 million offshore acres up for 
lease in the Gulf in his first year alone - an all-time high. The 
aggressive leasing came as no surprise, given Salazar's track record. 
"This guy has a long, long history of promoting offshore oil drilling 
- that's his thing," says KierĂ¡n Suckling, executive director of the 
Center for Biological Diversity. "He's got a highly specific soft 
spot for offshore oil drilling." As a senator, Salazar not only 
steered passage of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act, which 
opened 8 million acres in the Gulf to drilling, he even criticized 
President Bush for not forcing oil companies to develop existing 
leases faster.

Salazar was far less aggressive, however, when it came to making good 
on his promise to fix MMS. Though he criticized the actions of "a few 
rotten apples" at the agency, he left long-serving lackeys of the oil 
industry in charge. "The people that are ethically challenged are the 
career managers, the people who come up through the ranks," says a 
marine biologist who left the agency over the way science was 
tampered with by top officials. "In order to get promoted at MMS, you 
better get invested in this pro-development oil culture." One of the 
Bush-era managers whom Salazar left in place was John Goll, the 
agency's director for Alaska. Shortly after, the Interior secretary 
announced a reorganization of MMS in the wake of the Gulf disaster, 
Goll called a staff meeting and served cake decorated with the words 
"Drill, baby, drill."

Salazar also failed to remove Chris Oynes, a top MMS official who had 
been a central figure in a multibillion-dollar scandal that 
Interior's inspector general called "a jaw-dropping example of 
bureaucratic bungling." In the 1990s, industry lobbyists secured a 
sweetheart subsidy from Congress: Drillers would pay no royalties on 
oil extracted in deep water until prices rose above $28 a barrel. But 
this tripwire was conveniently omitted in Gulf leases overseen by 
Oynes - a mistake that will let the oil giants pocket as much as 
$53 billion. Instead of being fired for this fuckup, however, Oynes 
was promoted by Bush to become associate director for offshore 
drilling - a position he kept under Salazar until the Gulf disaster 
hit.

"Employees describe being in Interior - not just MMS, but the other 
agencies - as the third Bush term," says Jeff Ruch, executive 
director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which 
represents federal whistle-blowers. "They're working for the same 
managers who are implementing the same policies. Why would you expect 
a different result?"

The tale of the Deepwater Horizon disaster is, at its core, the tale 
of two blowout preventers: one mechanical, one regulatory. The 
regulatory blowout preventer failed long before BP ever started to 
drill - precisely because Salazar kept in place the crooked 
environmental guidelines the Bush administration implemented to favor 
the oil industry.

MMS has fully understood the worst-case scenarios for deep-sea oil 
blowouts for more than a decade. In May 2000, an environmental 
assessment for deepwater drilling in the Gulf presciently warned that 
"spill responses may be complicated by the potential for very large 
magnitude spills (because of the high production rates associated 
with deepwater wells)." The report noted that the oil industry "has 
estimated worst-case spill volumes ranging from 5,000 to 116,000 
barrels a day for 120 days," and it even anticipated the underwater 
plumes of oil that are currently haunting the Gulf: "Oil released 
subsea (e.g., subsea blowout or pipeline leak) in these deepwater 
environments could remain submerged for some period of time and 
travel away from the spill site." The report ominously concluded, 
"There are few practical spill-response options for dealing with 
submerged oil."

That same month, an MMS research document developed with deepwater 
drillers - including the company then known as BP Amoco - warned that 
such a spill could spell the end for offshore operations. The 
industry could "ill afford a deepwater blowout," the document 
cautions, adding that "no single company has the solution" to such a 
catastrophe. "The real test will come if a deepwater blowout occurs."

Enter the Bush administration. Rather than heeding such warnings, MMS 
simply assumed that a big spill couldn't happen. "There was a 
complete failure to even contemplate the possibility of a disaster 
like the one in the Gulf," says Holly Doremus, an environmental-law 
expert at the University of California. "In their thinking, a big 
spill would be something like 5,000 barrels, and the oil wouldn't 
even reach the shoreline." In fact, Bush's five-year plan for 
offshore drilling described a "large oil spill" as no more than 1,500 
barrels. In April 2007, an environmental assessment covering the area 
where BP would drill concluded that blowouts were "low probability 
and low risk," even though a test funded by MMS had found that 
blowout preventers failed 28 percent of the time. And an 
environmental assessment for BP's lease block concluded that offshore 
spills "are not expected to damage significantly any wetlands along 
the Gulf Coast."

In reality, MMS had little way to assess the risk to wildlife, since 
a new policy instituted under Bush scrapped environmental analysis 
and fast-tracked permits. Declaring that oil companies themselves 
were "in the best position to determine the environmental effects" of 
drilling, the new rules pre-qualified deep-sea drillers to receive a 
"categorical exclusion" - an exemption from environmental review that 
was originally intended to prevent minor projects, like outhouses on 
hiking trails, from being tied up in red tape. "There's no analytical 
component to a cat-ex," says a former MMS scientist. "You have 
technicians, not scientists, that are simply checking boxes to make 
sure all the T's are crossed. They just cut and paste from previous 
approvals."

Nowhere was the absurdity of the policy more evident than in the 
application that BP submitted for its Deepwater Horizon well only two 
months after Obama took office. BP claims that a spill is "unlikely" 
and states that it anticipates "no adverse impacts" to endangered 
wildlife or fisheries. Should a spill occur, it says, "no significant 
adverse impacts are expected" for the region's beaches, wetlands and 
coastal nesting birds. The company, noting that such elements are 
"not required" as part of the application, contains no scenario for a 
potential blowout, and no site-specific plan to respond to a spill. 
Instead, it cites an Oil Spill Response Plan that it had prepared for 
the entire Gulf region. Among the sensitive species BP anticipates 
protecting in the semitropical Gulf? "Walruses" and other cold-water 
mammals, including sea otters and sea lions. The mistake appears to 
be the result of a sloppy cut-and-paste job from BP's drilling plans 
for the Arctic. Even worse: Among the "primary equipment providers" 
for "rapid deployment of spill response resources," BP inexplicably 
provides the Web address of a Japanese home-shopping network. Such 
glaring errors expose the 582-page response "plan" as nothing more 
than a paperwork exercise. "It was clear that nobody read it," says 
Ruch, who represents government scientists.

"This response plan is not worth the paper it is written on," said 
Rick Steiner, a retired professor of marine science at the University 
of Alaska who helped lead the scientific response to the Valdez 
disaster. "Incredibly, this voluminous document never once discusses 
how to stop a deepwater blowout."

Scientists like Steiner had urgently tried to alert Obama to the 
depth of the rot at MMS. "I talked to the transition team," Steiner 
says. "I told them that MMS was a disaster and needed to be seriously 
reformed." A top-to-bottom restructuring of MMS didn't require 
anything more than Ken Salazar's will: The agency only exists by 
order of the Interior secretary. "He had full authority to change 
anything he wanted," says Rep. Issa, a longtime critic of MMS. "He 
didn't use it." Even though Salazar knew that the environmental risks 
of offshore drilling had been covered up under Bush, he failed to 
order new assessments. "They could have said, 'We cannot conclude 
there won't be significant impacts from drilling until we redo those 
reviews,'" says Brendan Cummings, senior counsel for the Center for 
Biological Diversity. "But the oil industry would have cried foul. 
And what we've seen with Salazar is that when the oil industry 
squeaks, he retreats."

Under Salazar, MMS continued to issue categorical exclusions to 
companies like BP, even when they lacked the necessary permits to 
protect endangered species. A preliminary review of the BP disaster 
conducted by scientists with the independent Deepwater Horizon Study 
Group concludes that MMS failed to enforce a host of environmental 
laws, including the Clean Water Act. "MMS and Interior are equally 
responsible for the failures here," says the former agency scientist. 
"They weren't willing to take the regulatory steps that could have 
prevented this incident."

Had MMS been following the law, it would never have granted BP a 
categorical exclusion - which are applicable only to activities that 
have "no significant effect on the human environment." At a recent 
hearing, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse grilled Salazar about Interior's own 
handbook on categorical exclusions, which bars their issuance for 
offshore projects in "relatively untested deep water" or "utilizing 
new or unusual technology" - standards that Whitehouse called 
"plainly pertinent" for BP's rig. "It's hard for me to see that 
that's a determination that could have been made in good faith," 
Whitehouse said, noting that the monstrously complex task of drilling 
for oil a mile beneath the surface of the ocean appeared to have been 
given less oversight than is required of average Americans rewiring 
their homes. "Who was watching?"

Not the Interior secretary. Salazar did not even ensure that MMS had 
a written manual - required under Interior's own rules - for 
complying with environmental laws. According to an investigation in 
March by the Government Accountability Office, MMS managers relied 
instead on informal "institutional knowledge" - passed down from the 
Bush administration. The sole written guidance appeared on a website 
that only provided, according to the report, "one paragraph about 
assessing environmental impacts of oil and gas activities, not 
detailed instructions that could lead an analyst through the process 
of drafting an environmental assessment or environmental impact 
statement."

[continued]

_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Reply via email to