which mean that there will be major cuts in education if you are a working class family, hoping that you're going to be able to send your kid to college and that you will be eligible for a pell grant, think twice about that because that pell grant may not be there. if you're a senior who relies on a nutrition program, that nutrition program may not be there. if you think it's a good idea that we enforce kathleen air and clean water provisions so that our kids can be healthy, those provisions may not be there because there will be major cuts in environmental protection. now, i have heard some people say well, you know, all that's not so good, but at least finally our republican friends are saying we need revenue and we're going to get $1 billion in

revenue. mr. president, let me ask you this, if you read the outline of the gang of six proposal -- which is admittedly big. which is admittedly big. there are very, very clear provisions making sure that we are going to make massive cuts in programs for working families, for the elderly, for the chirp. -- children. those are black and white cuts. what about the revenue? well, it's kind of vague, kind of vague. the projection is maybe we'll raise over a ten-year period $100 billion in revenue. where that's coming from? from the wealthiest people in the country? coming from large corporations who are enjoying huge tax breaks? mr. president, that is not clear at all. what happens if we don't reach that revenue of a trillion dollars? what mechanism is in place to say that it happens? that mechanism, in fact, does not exist at all. what we do know, and we don't,

and in fairness i think the authors of this proposal would acknowledge this, this is not all the details that are out there, but certainly i want middle class families to understand that when we talk about increase revenues, you know where that comes from? where it may come from? it may come from cutbacks in the home mortgage interest deduction program which is so very important to millions and millions of families. it may mean that if you have a health care program today, that health care program may be taxed. that's the way to raise revenue. it may be that there will be increased taxes on your retirement programs, your ira's, your 401k's, but we don't have the details for that. all we have a some kind of vague promise we'll raise a trillion dollars over the next 10 years, no enforcement mechanism and no clarity as to where that revenue

will come from. mr.mr. president, i think that it is terribly important that the american people become engaged in this debate which will have a huge impact, not only on them, on their parents, and on their children, and i believe very strongly that what the american people must fight for is not a big deal or a small deal, but a fair deal. at a time when the wealthiest people in this country are doing phenomenally well and their effective tax rate is the lowest on record, at a time when the top 400 individuals in this country own more wealth than 150 million americans, at a time when corporate profits are soaring, and many many instances, the same corporations

pay nothing in taxes, at a time where we've tripled military spending since 1997, there are fair ways to move towards deficit reduction which do not slash programs that working families and children and the elderly desperately depend upon, so, mr. president, i feel that the issue we're dealing with is of enormous consequence. it is clear our republican friends succeeded, and i congratulate them on getting 80%-90% of what they wanted. i'd like people to think back three years ago, three years ago to think there would be a serious proposal on the floor of the senate with all of these devastating cuts. i think very few people could have thought that possible. i congratulate the republican colleagues for their apparent vehicle try, but this senator

was going to fight back. i was not legislated to the united states senate to make devastating cuts in social security, in medicare, in medicaid, in children's programs while i lower tax rates for the wealthiest people in the country. that's not what i was elected to do, and i do not intend to do that. i hope the american people get engaged in the issue and stand up and demand that the united states congress pass a fair and responsible deficit reduction program, not what we are talking about today, and with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor. >> on c-span2 tonight, senate hearings on the recent yellowstone rifer oil spill and last year's deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of mexico, and later, the senate judiciary committee considers a repeal on the defense of marriage act.

on july first, an exxonmobil pipeline ruptures spilling criewld oil into the river. they looked into the cowses of the bill and exxonmobil's response. we'll hear from the safety administering and the president of the exxonmobile pipeline company. this committee meeting is two hours. >> the hearing will come to order. i called this hearing today to shine a bright light on a dark event. the oil spill in the yellowstone river on july 1st. montanaians suffered two disasters this year -- devastating floods and spilled oil. the evidence shows that they are related, but there is no excuse for what happened on july 1st. as montanaians, we love the

state because of the wonderful rivers. the yellowstone is god's country, and it has trout to prove it. i saw people visit montana and be transformed the first time they cast a fly in the river. it's the most undestructed river in the united states. it starts at yellowstone park and flows north and takes a right hand turn and flows towards billings and joins the missouri just the other side of the south dakota border, longest unobstructed river in the united states, and montana is very proud of that, but montana, we also have good paying jobs, crops, and can drive to our favorite fishing holes. we can do that because of the oil through the pipelines, oil

refineries, and the phac pumps. water is the most sacred resource, and oil is our most basic fuel. montana is rich in pristine waters and rich in energy, and we cannot let them mix. today, we will examine what happened before and what happened after the spill, what went right, and what could have been improved. our first priority is getting the spill cleaned up and getting it cleaned up now. i want to make sure the yellowstone is restored immediately for everyone who depends on it. just as important montana landowners be made hole. this means a fast claims process and a long term commitment that exxon will be there years down the road if the value of the land remains damaged by this spill. that commitment includes compensating the farmers and ranchers for long term impacts

on the crops they depend on to earn a living. finally, we'll look at potential lessons to be learned. we'll ask tough questions about what happened, whether it could have been prevented, were the effects of flooding in the yellowstone properly considered when the pipeline was designed? is the pipeline operated with a specific characteristics of the yellowstone in mind? this was not the first flood in montana, and it will not be the last. i also know there's many other rivers crossed by pipelines in montana. i want to know what can be done to make sure this never happens again. it's also very important to me that montana has a voice in this process. i'm proud that we have two fellow montanaians here today, here to share their stories and insights, and for folks watching back home, they want to hear from you as well. the official record will be open for two weeks.

give my officer a call or e-mail, and we'll make sure your written comments are included in the record. i look forward to the hearing, all the witnesses, and thank you very much for coming. i understand commissioner bill kennedy just got in red eye from montana. montana is not next door. it's aways a way. thank you both for coming. thank you very much. all right. i'll begin with robert perciasepe. i have high regard for him as he works for the epa. he's a deputy administer of the u.s. environmental protection agency. we also have with us the honorable cynthia quarterman, with the department of dption.

second panel includes mr. scott mcburney, a landowner in montana, thank you, scott, for coming, and the honorable kennedy, and the gary pruessing, the president of the exxonmobil pipeline company. robert perciasepe, why don't you begin first. your statement will automatically go into the record, so just summarize. >> okay. chairman, thank you for inviting us today, and we're happy to be here to discuss the role and activities of u.s. epa regarding the pipeline break into the yellowstone and resulting oil spill. epa in coordination with the federal state, tribal, and local partners is committed to protecting the yellowstone river and the communities around with

from the adverse environmental effects of the oil spill. as i think we all know now, this occurred on july 1st, late at night. the break occurred on a 12 inch pipeline owned by exxonmobil resulting as a spill of crude oil into the yellowstone river. the amount remains at 1,000 barrels based on information provided by exxonmobil, but the state of montana are investigating all elements of the incident including the amount of oil released. epa continues to hold exxonmobil accountable for clean up. the agency issued an administrative order directing the company to take a number of cleanup and removal and near term restoration efforts. we'll continually and carefully and thoroughly review the plans and responsibilities. we share in the response with the coast guard as well as

speedometer and preparedness with several other federal agencies. as a principle federal response agency for oil spills in the inland zone of the united states, epa is the unseen coordinator for the yellowstone river spill. the pipeline and safety administration is responsible for regulation and oversight of pipeline safety and my counterpart who you introduced will discuss that agency's role with respect to the pipeline and oil spill prevention response. i would also like to point out that the state and especially the governor have been integrally involved in the coordination and coordinated response of the spill and have been an important partner in this response. the governor's leadership in the deployment of several agencies in the state's consultation with experts from other states represent the effort to keep the people of montana affected by the spill informed about what is happening on the ground. as part of our mission to protect public health and

environment, we have been collecting air, surface water, and drinking water samples as the flood waters -- and as the flood waters started to recede, soil and sendment samples. they are using the skat activities, inspecting the soil and vegetation that needs to be cleaned up in a particular area. the teams are now finding quantities of oil as the river levels go down under debris piles. unobstructed stream z as you defined know that debris piles up, wood and logs and vegetative material, pile up in the streams during a flood, and under the piles there's evidence of oil that accumulated there because of the water slows down underneath the piles so the team including the state are evaluating a range of options

were remediating that oil without causing greater damage to the ecosystem, always a balancing act we have to play here. to date, water sampling conducted by epa indicates that there are no petroleum hydrocarbons in the region. in addition, our air monitoring continues to show no detections of contaminants associated with the spill in the aim bee yent -- ambient air that would pose a threat to human health. these monitoring efforts and sampling and plans taken will continue as we remain focused on taking all the necessary steps to protect public health. as additional data are collected, we'll have a more comprehensive picture of the impacts. in addition to the realtime air samples, epa follows strict scientific and protocols for the soil or sediment samples collected and sent to certified laboratories for analysis and evaluation. as soon as we have updated data, we most the information on the

website. we provide daily updates to the public and held meetings to keep the public informed. i want to take this opportunity to quickly report on the assets deployed. on july 18th, there's 17 # 2 personnel on site and 610 involved in cleanup activities. crews use the 41,000 of linnier feet with booms and 9,000 square feet of pads. they removed 505 cubic yards of oily solids. the waste is processed through a permitted wait treatment plant and the solid waste is shipped to a facility to reclaim those materials. evacuation also last weekend of the pipeline removed 370 barrels of oil liquid in about 80 barrels of oil.

next steps, and i'm just about done -- in coordination with the federal and state and local partners, epa is committed to protect the community from adverse effects of the oil. we'll transition from emergency response to the skat driven process towards a state determined cleanup standard. epa continues monitoring, identifying, and responding to potential health and environmental concerns at this time and after my partner's testimony, i'll answer any of your questions. >> thank you very much. you say scat driven, what does that mean? >> [inaudible] >> turn your microphone on. >> those of us who hike have a different view on scat, but scat is a shoreline assessment process that i think the exact

words i can't precisely remember, but it's a process along the shoreline and you evaluate what needs to be done and that goes back to the cleanup crews and the responsible party, and then that directs the cleanup activities, and that process is ongoing until we're done. >> okay. i was just curious. thank you. cynthia quarterman. >> good morning, chairman baucus. thank you for the opportunity to discuss the pipeline's investigation of and response to the july 1st exxonmobil pipeline company oil pill in laurel, montana. we are all committed to reducing safety risks to the public and the environment. more than 2.5 million miles of pipeline deliver energy to homes and businesses across america,

and our job is at phmsa is to ensure every mile is safe. the traditional measures of risk expose sure like -- exposure like population growth is rising, however the number of incidents involving on shore hazards declined. with 57% of gross barrels spilled. despite the improvements, i am deeply troubled by this recent oil spill. secretary lahood, myself, and simms are always mindful these incidents can have. i ensure you phmsa is investigating the incident and will continue to do so. we state and federal agencies and our partner, epa, in

evaluating the effects to the yellowstone river and its surrounding communities and helping with cleanup activities. due to the high river flows, the ruptured pipe is currently inaccessible for current examination. however, i can assure the subcommittee once the failed pipe becomes accessible, phmsa will complete the investigation as soon as possible. we've been -- we have contacted all operates with pipeline crossings in the yellowstone river to verify the condition and operational status of their crossings. we advise them to take appropriate preventative measures to patrol their pipeline crossings, monitor them more frequently, and coordinate their efforts with other nearby operates. before this incident occurred, phmsa was actively monitoring the silver tip pipeline and the recent flooding conditions. due to the on set of heavy flooding, starting in may of 2011, phmsa inspectors began

monitoring the flow rates in the yellowstone river on a daily basis. in response to the potential risk prior to spill, we required exxonmobil to perform a depth of cover survey that confirmed the pipeline was bury add at least 5 feet below the river bank. exxonmobil informed us later that the south bank was covered on average by 12 feet of cover. mr. chairman, i assure you that phmsa will remain vigilant in ensuring the reliability and integrity of all pipeline under its jurisdiction. we will also ensure that the pipeline is free of safety and environmental risks before exxonmobil is granted permission to restart the line. phmsa will investigate this incident fully to ensure that the pipeline is operated safely, that the public is protected, and that any violations of the federal pipeline safety regulations are swiftly addressed. thank you, and i am happy to

respond to any questions you might have. >> okay. i'd like to basically start with you robert perciasepe. just basic questions i have. obviously, at the degree of which the cleanup has been accomplished, and before i get to that, the extent of the damages. if you could just tell us, just what the damages were after the spill is what obvious, -- is somewhat obvious, but how much damage is still left? in terms of oil, contaminated ground, air pollution, homes, just damage in any sense of the term that you wouldn't

ordinarily think of at this point, and second, when do you think it will all be totally cleaned up? >> [inaudible] >> turn your microphone on first too. >> [inaudible] >> the button has to be pushed. >> let me try a couple of observations based on those questions. we have set in our order a plan that we would hope that we would be done by the fall, and with the cleanup, but that's going to be highly dependent on a lot of variables including those scat teams which i want to make sure i tell you what the actual scat stands for. shoreline cleanup assessment technique, groups of people going up and down the shoreline continuing to assess the damage, and then sometimes you have to come back again once things are

revealed. we also know the conditions from the flooding were starting to see as the water recedes, some of the soil that has been oiled along the shoreline, and we're out there monitoring and sampling that soil. we're also seeing, as i mentioned in my testimony, some oil that has accumulated under some of the debris piles that are associated also with flooding so we're in the process of assessing those with our partners including the state, and we will be aiming towards the state's defined cleanup standards that they are involved with helping us define as we go along. also, on some of the ranch and agricultural land along the river that may have been soiled with -- or oiled, soil that may have been oiled, we're also bringing the department of agriculture in to work with us

and help us assess what guidelines and cleanup standards might be appropriate for some of those areas that did get oil. >> so -- so what agencies, what governments determine what standards? i mean, you mentioned the state's got standard and mentioned usda. it sounds a little confusing. >> well, usda, we're bringing them in for their technical expertise, but we will go with what the state determines is a cleanup standard that they would like to see. we will continue that scat process until we get to those -- >> do you work with the state? >> yes. >> with that standard? >> yes. >> and do you know what the state standard is? >> well, it'll depend on whether it's soil or water or oil or sheen on the water. i mean, under the clean water act, we want to remove the oil so that and oil products so that there is no more visible sheen

or oil in the environment. the state may have some additional cleanup standards that they want us to follow that we want to incorporate. i don't want to say it's one or the other, and under the clean water act, there's certain responsibility, but there's responsibilities to work with the partner at the state. >> that's what i was going to ask. what is it under the clean water act? >> under the clean water act which sets up the oil pollution controlled program, we are responsible for directing the cleanup activities that are underway now. >> i don't want to be too technical here, but are there federal standards under the clean water act with respect to oil spills? >> the -- >> are there cleanup standards? >> there's water quality standards set for the river that we have to get back to. >> right. are there others -- are those standards -- >> those standards also, mr. chairman, i might add, are

standards the state sets under the clean water act. under cleaning up oil, there are a number of observable approaches you'd take including removal of the visible oil and the sheening on the water. >> right. i guess the question is we need to know what we're dealing with here. that is, what is the standard? if people need to know what the standard is -- >> uh-huh. >> is that -- >> there's drinking water standards. >> i know. i'm just talking about the average guy's got a place along the river, and he wants to know or should know what's the standard by which, you know, epa, the state, exxon, all related here will clean my place up to. how's he supposed to know? >> well, it's the water quality standards of the state of montana is what we will make sure we achieve. >> is that known what that is?

>> i don't have it here in front of me, but, yes, it is known. >> it should be known. >> it will be -- if it's not known, we will certainly make sure of it. >> can i ask you to do that, just work with the state, and make -- do it all you have to do so that people effected by this know what the standard is to which damage is to be cleaned up to. >> yeah. >> i mean, we need -- everybody needs to know what the standard is. sounds like we're not sure what the standard is at this point. >> well, there's a number of -- i mean, first of all, you're going to want the agricultural land to be able to be used for its agricultural purposes. >> right. >> that's why we're having technical advice from the epa, and there's drinking water standards set by the epa. we have to make sure all those

are taken into account used by the scat teams for the final -- >> right. i think so that. you're basically the lead, the epa? >> that's correct, in the cleanup. >> in the cleanup, i'm talking about cleanup here. could you take charge in putting the standards together and incorporate it into something that's easily understood by people -- >> yes. >> for example, the farmers and ranchers, you have to talk to usda, i suppose, and find out what they can help you with. >> yes, yes, we will be responsible for making sure of that. i want to say that we must do this in partnership with the state. >> yeah, we have that. >> we have very important and primary role here. >> yeah, i know we said so many times in the intersection between the states and the feds and the clean water act. that's true. >> we would be, as we go through that process of looking at the soil, the river water, and any

drinking water that may have been impacted down the line there, we're going to be circling back with those requirements for clean up to the responsible party. >> i understand that there's still odor, oil odor in some places? why is that? how can that be remedied? >> our air quality monitoring, we have not seen anything in the air that would be from the oil that would be of any immediate health concerns. in fact, the night when most of the volatile organic matter was coming off of the oil, things like benzine perhaps, working with the local fire departments and health departments, there were evacuations of people until that subsided, and it's important to know that -- and it's hard to know sometimes, but the human nose is actually more sensitive than the monitoring

devices. in other words, we can smell some of the organic chemicals at very, very low levels even below a level that would cause a health concern. >> got dogs. they are better than people. >> well, so the odor -- >> every time i drive to the capitol, i have a dog that gets out of a car. >> yes, so that doesn't mean that we're not monitoring to make sure that those levels are not at a higher level of health concerns and, of course, we don't want the odors there in the long haul, but it is possible. the point i'm trying to make is it is possible for people to continue to smell the oil odors even though the levels are not showing up on our instruments. >> well people smell them irrespective of your monitors, and it's distasful. >> that's right. >> not to mix metaphors, but it's unpleasant.

>> that will be part of -- >> potentially harmful. >> well, i would agree that people could be adversely effected by odors that are not what they are normally subjected to. removing the oil so the odors go away is part of the process here, but we're also trying to monitor, senator, in the ambient air to be sure there's not a long term cancer risk or anything of that nature. >> right. do you know the type of oil that was in the pipeline that spilled? do you know what was in it? >> well, it's generally well-known oil. it's usually a mix from the refinery from wyoming, oil from wyoming, or in some cases, a mix of canada oil sands, oil -- that general mix is generally

well-known, but we have samples, specific samples of the soil at the lab as does the state and others, and we're waiting for those lab results which will give us the more precise thing. we generally know the kind of oil this is and don't expect anything extraordinary when we see the results, but they'll confirm. as soon as we have the results from the lab, which i'm expecting any day know, we'll post that on the website and present it in the public meetings we have out that. >> for the record, could you send the results of the test to this committee, please? >> yes, yes. those results will be made public as soon as we get them. >> okay. the big question -- i mean, land oners are going to have -- who do they trust? yeah, how do they know just what

this stuff is? how do they know when this is going to be cleaned up? you know, people don't want to be left hanging and want to know if there's an end date and so forth, and i understand that you've ordered exxonmobil to remediate the contaminated areas by august 18th; is that correct? and remediate all areas by september 9th. >> right. >> what does that mean? partial remediation? >> well, we want the full remediation to the kinds of standards we were talking about earlier. we will -- we will get to every place that has oil on it as we learn of them or find them through our scat teams, and i want to say that that's -- that order was done, you know, within days of the spill to put fire in

everybody's belly on a schedule, but if we determine that more people is needed for clean up, and we're not done, we will extend that to keep working, to keep exxonmobil working on the cleanup, and so those states are out there. we're requiring the maps to be made to cover those time periods, and we still think that's possible, but the dynamic of the flood waters and what we find as those recede could extend those dates. >> is the standard 100% clean? what is the standard basically? can i be assured my place is going to be back where it was, period. >> i mean, that would be the objective, senator, to have no impact from the oil on the land where the oil has been

deposited, and one of the governing factors there would be making sure that that land can be used for what it was used before the spill. >> just so your understanding of the use of the land or what, some that graze or use for recreation, some used for crops, or what's your understanding? >> yes. there was crops, there was grazing land. there may have been recreation land. obviously some is in the billings more urbanized area, all of those previous uses and existing uses will have to be protected and enabled after the cleanup. >> okay. how much is left to be cleaned up, what percent? >> i do not know the answer to that again because of the -- because of the flood waters and the fact that we're waiting for some of those flood waters to recede to see what is under there, and as i mentioned, we're

discovering some of the oil has accumulated under some of the snags and debris piles. it's hard to say for sure how much more might still be out there, but, again, we're not going to rest until we find it all and direct the responsible party to clean it up. >> so when do you think you'll know how much more work you have to do? when do you think -- by what date? >> i can't give you -- i mean, we're hoping we can clean it up in the time frame that was in the order, and that would be what we would aim for at this time, but if we discover more than we currently know, and we need more -- we need the responsible party to have more time to clean it up, we'll amend the order to give more time to be sure we don't leave anything behind. >> i appreciate that. can you keep this committee informed of any changes?

>> yes, yes, we will. we're going to continue to have, you know, daily briefings. we're going to continue to have public meetings as we get more data. we'll put it not only on our website, but report it in public meetings in the area there, and if there is a need to extend the plan, the time for cleanup because of what we discover as the flood waters recede, that'll be a clear public discussion, and we'll definitely keep this committee notified of that. >> do you have enough resources? >> i think we do, yes. i think what we have here is the, and we've been adding as we thought we needed it. we ramped up pretty quickly, and there's over 700 people now working on this. the issue is going to be the dynamic between the flood waters receding and our discovery process through the scat teaming

that i mentioned and time may be the only other resource we need a little more of that we put in the order, but i think we're adequately personned upright -- up right now. >> questions with your relationship with exxonmobil. how much of the work are they doing? it's my responsibility or understanding that they have the responsibility. it's my understanding under law exxonmobil is responsible to pay for the cleanup. if you can tell me about the interaction between epa and exxon as you work to remediate this. >> well, the clean water act sets up a, you know, a process where there's a responsible party. exxonmobil has clearly indicate the that they are the responsible party. there's been no arguing about that. they have put the resources in it. the majority of the resources that are on site working are directly funded by exxonmobil.

we have epa, a number of epa employees as well as epa contractors augmenting that and verifying the work, all of that plus state resources or tribal resources, and we're working with the tribes as well. all of those resources will be reimbursed at -- when we get the end of the process here. there's been some funding put forward already from our oil fund, cleanup fund, and, again, the responsible party will will have to reimburse that when we see what the final bill is. >> thank you. we're honoring to be joined by senator vitter. would you like to make a statement? >> thank you, senator, but i'm beginning to wait until the second panel to ask questions there. >> thank you. a couple questions of you,

ms. quarterman. basically, if you could just go through a little bit of chronology here. it's my understanding that last -- i don't know what it was -- august or sometime that the people of laurel were a little concerned about the integrity of the pipelines, about the river potentially rising, of course, not august, but earlier on before the incident, and consulted with epa, consulted with the state, concerned about the integrity of the pipeline and maybe even exxonmobil too, and then as i read the history, basically there was review that the

pipeline and phmsa talked to ex exxon did a study, and it turned out the pipeline was okay, and then we had the incident. from your perspective, walk us through the chronology of what happened. >> absolutely. about october of 2010, we were approached by the city of laurel, i believe the city works department. i think they were trying to find among the government agencies whose responsibility it was for pipeline safety. they contacted our office saying they were concerned about the silver pipeline of the crossing. we met with them at that point and with exxon and required them to do a depth survey to

determine the depth of the pipeline and determine how much earth was on top of it -- >> that was under the river? >> correct. they came back and told us they had at least five feet of cover on the part of the pipeline that was on the river bed. that was sufficient to meet the four feet construction requirements in the pipeline safety regulations. i think the level of the river continued to rise, and on my 25th, we were contacted again by the city saying the river is very high, we still are concerned about this pipeline. again, we contacted exxon to ask them specially about the south bank of the river crossing, the concern there was that if the river were to rise to a certain level, it would get into what i

believe is riverside park, and there the pipeline could potentially be exposed completely if the river were to rise high enough, so we contacted exxon and asked them about that south bank of the river, and we were informed they had on average 12 feet of cover on top of the pipeline on the river crossing on the south river crossing. at that point, our inspector began to go out there on a daily basis to observe the pipeline river crossing just because the river waters were very high -- >> and when was this? about what date? >> i believe this was may 31st we began monitoring all of them. >> okay. >> at the same time, we began to monitor all the montana pipelines. we contacted all the operators associated with the river crossings in that area to ask them to pay special attention because the waters were very

high so that continued on, and around june, the city was again contacted, i believe, exxon, so we decided to go into exxon an look at their integrity management runs, do a fuel verification. they did an in-line inspection of the line in 2004 and 2009 so our folks went in and looked at the raw data for that in-line inspection in 2009 to see if there were any causes for concern in terms of anomalies on the pipeline at the river crossing. as a result of that inspection, i think they found one anomaly in 2009; however, the size of the anomaly was below our threshold for required fixing at that time, and the 2004

inspection run also showed the same anomaly. there hadn't been growth between 2004 and 2009 so they felt comfortable that in terms of the integrity of the line that there wasn't an issue there. >> well cutting to the quick here. we don't have a lot of time here. something went wrong. >> absolutely. >> that is, that is. at one point both exxonmobil and everyone thought everything was okay. it wasn't okay. it reasontured. what wenting from with the company and phmsa because you both agreed everything was okay, and it wasn't. >> well, you know, we're in the middle of an investigation of what happened on the pipeline. we do not operate the pipeline on a day-to-day basis.

we came in to a assist the state with their concerns about the pipeline. ultimately, the operator is responsible for operating its pipeline. they can't rely on us to say yes or no, this is a good idea to continue to operate the pipeline. >> what's your role then if they -- >> our role -- >> if the company can do what it wants to do, what's your role? >> our role is to oversee the decisions that they make. the only instance in which we can essentially tell an operator to stop operating its pipeline is if we see an imminent hazard, and i would have to say in this instance with the foresight of 20/20, obviously the pipeline should have been shut down at the time and given the data

available, i don't think that our pipeline expecter thought -- inspector thought he had the authority to order exxon to close its pipelines. >> when you look at pipeline integrity and crossings, do you look at hydraulics of the -- and the river bed, the mobility of specific river? every river is different and the river bed of every river is different. some's gravelly, some a clay, some might be granite, who knows. the flood hydraulics of every river are different. >> uh-huh. >> what do you do? do you take willie-nilly whatever the company says? the compone says, -- the company says, oh, looks okay to us, we have five foot cover

here, looks okay to us, and unless you see, quote, imminent danger, do you do something then? how does this river compare with other rivers? >> that will be the subject of our investigations. we will have to go -- we have obviously begun to interview exxon and gone to its control room, and we will go to its integrity management plan, not just the data, but the plan itself pursuant to those regulations, the operator has a responsibility to -- >> it sounds like phmsa on its own doesn't do any of that. >> our job is to review the procedures and the management integrity plan for the operators. it's the operates' responsibility to operate its

pipeline safely and pursuant to our regulations, they are supposed to put in place a continual process for improving their pipeline and ensuring, evalwaiting it, assessing the -- evaluating it, assessing the conditions, and main tinning the integrity of the pipeline including flooding and other climatic issues. >> right. do you have specific requirements as to integrity of pipeline plans? that is, requirements that what should be contained in that plan? >> we have -- yes, we have requirements. >> give examples of one or two or three? >> well, every operator is supposed to at the beginning perform a risk assessment of its pipeline systems so at every place where it crosses a river or where a soil changes, it should know the conditions of that line in terms of whether it's particularly corrosive so

it can determine what sort of testing should be done purr sunt to the integrity management plan. it should know the river crossings and know whether or not it's one that is subject to frequent flooding and make a determination as to whether they need to go beyond what is in the minimum requirements in the regulations, so we require them to do a continual improvement of their own systems. i mean, we have certain minimum requirements in our regs, but it doesn't mean that that is the only thing an operator needs to do. they really need to be active on their own pipeline and then ensuring that especially in a high consequence area like this, they set forth a plan that addresses all the concerns. >> how accurate are depth of

cover surveys? >> i don't know that. we'll have to get that information for you. >> generally, you're the outfit, you're the agency, you're phmsa. if you ask exxon to do a little investigation, and part of that is depth of cover, and they say it's okay, my question is how accurate are the surveys. that leads to another question, do you look at rivers and hydraulics of a specific river, the river bed content to a specific river. you know, all of this gets to the accuracy of a depth cover survey. >> i've heard plus or minus six inches, but i would not commit to that. i would want someone to review that response. >> to be honest, ma'am, it sounds like you're not on top of this. that's the impression i have so far, and i urge you to get more on top of it. i'll be candid.

that's the impression i'm getting. tell me about the difference between trenches and drilling and when one is more appropriate compared to the other. >> there are -- this particular pipeline was trenched or put in with an open cut technology which was the prevalent technology of use used up until i would say the early to mid-90s. more recently, the hoer horizontal drilling technology is frequently used for river crossings where you would rather than stop the water way and trench beneath and put the pipeline in, you would actually go underneath from one side to the other so it would be much

deeper. >> you know, when it is it more appropriate to drill as to trench? >> we don't have set standards in our regulations at this point in time. one of the things that we have done very recently is to put in place -- we've opened up a set of comments for our integrity management program, and essentially everything is on the table at this point. one of the things that happens at the

continuing your investigation as to what happened in this case? >> at this point, we have not been able to get the pipe out of the river. we're expecting in august the waters will be low enough so it's removed. at that point it will take probably two or three months for us to get the results and conclude our investigation. >> you probably won't know until october; is that right? >> that's probably right. if you compare it to some other investigations, i think it's probably right. >> well, i urge you, you know, to devote a lot of attention to finding out what went wrong as quickly as you can and not let this drag out, and reveal to this committee your findings, send us a copy. >> absolutely. >> okay. i just not sure frankly, ma'am,

that i'm satisfied your agency is on top of things here. in fact, i'm quite -- >> well, let me assure you our agency is very aggressively looking at pipeline safety issues, and it has been a period in which there's been a number of significant incidents after, i would say, almost a decade of few incidents, and we are looking diligently at all aspects of the pipeline safety program. as i mentioned with respect to hazard liquids, we began a review of those rules last year. we're in the middle of a rule making process on that. with respect to gas transmission pipelines, we are about to begin a rule making associated with those pipelines. at the beginning of the administration, we looked very closely -- put out a rule with respect to the distribution pipelines.

we just expedited the application of the control room management rule that we want into effect -- >> that's fine. all i know in this case is the company made a mistake that was wrong about the integrity of thepipeline. your agency made a mistake. it was wrong about the integrity of the pipeline, and it's our job to make sure there's no reoccurrence. >> i agree that we don't want a recurrence. >> in your important, tell us what needs to be done to minimize to close to the probability of zero of any reoccurrence. >> yes, that's our goal, zero. >> i look forward to. >> thank you. >> to seeing that report. thank you. no further questions. thank you very much to take the time to talk to us. we deeply appreciate it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. okay, our next panel, we have

three. mr. scott mcburney, who lives down in yellowstone. the honorable bill kennedy, commissioner of yellowstone county, and gary pruessing, president of the exxonmobil pipeline company. okay. i'll begin with you, mr. kennedy. can i make sure serving your county with distinction and for a number of years, always reelected. bill? >> thank you, senator baucus,

and thank you for inviting me to the committee for insight of the oil spill in the yellowstone river in laurel, montana. i have some statements, and after listening to the statements, i have comments on that also want the pipeline crosses yellowstone river located in my county. we are located about 140 miles from yellowstone park, and we had a lot of inquiries was there a spill in yellowstone park. it was a spill in yellowstone river and 140 miles east. we're 300 miles from the con fliewns of the yellowstone river and missouri river. as you can see, we're in the mid area, but the yellowstone flows into the missouri on to the mississippi, and senator vitte, that ends up down in louisiana.

since may, we've had flooding, and in june, we received a presidential declaration, emergency declaration on our county and statewide. the amount of snow pack is way above normal, and the yellowstone river is higher since may. this gives you a background for the july 1 oil break of the exxonmobil pipeline. i've been monitoring the flooding on the yellowstone river daily since the river hit the flood stages. our disaster and emergency service director was out there, and we've been monitoring the height of the river, and actually it's been high water since may, and we're still in the high water stages. even though redropped, we'll still in high water stages. ..

emergency personnel and exxon employees responded immediately and within the next hour, pipeline valves have been closed, shutting down much of the oil. we live in the western water is very important for us. safe drinking water irrigating our, watering livestock and to raise them on our montana rivers are very important to us. public safety and clean up our top priorities on this concept. this is a big deal and all parties hit the ground running.

at 6:30 a.m. on saturday morning, i was out there on the river and then recalled the press press conference that morning. immediately about 8:00, 8:30, we called the press and to let the public know the drinking water is safe. the city of billings municipality from the city of war is about where break was. the city of aliens, the lockwood and take him in the hotly intake, all of them should down in the wee hours of the morning on saturday morning. exxon is dirty and board in addition to her desires during emergency personnel. epa and the safety were announced in response is immediate in the july 4 weekend became a real-life disaster in our county. the cleanup process is underway, but at this time it was very evident that the local government was informed and not involved in the decisions of the next depths of what was going on. epa took charge, that samples

from results were slow to come taking from four to seven days and as you heard earlier, still waiting for the sample results. the public, especially landowners were excited with the unknown and id3 i asked to be at the table on the decisions and plan for cleaner. it was agreed to carry with it on the board and we were briefed, but dancing and cleanup are still left to the epa and deq. exxon did take our suggestions. we provided mapping and landowners named and they contacted by residents. i asked every agency to have a live person on the phone and face-to-face meetings with the public. exxon had briefings daily, the epa had daily briefings. the state set up a local office and their own samples. we all need to write together and that's very, very important on this. we need a strategy to keep local government officials on board.

we know the residents, the geography and companies in our community. this bill up in our eyes to what a leak can do and how our emergency planning works. we also know now that we need to work on being included on decisions, cleanup and future safety planning for residents. we have five other pipelines also in this vicinity under the yellowstone river. the pipelines are safer than trucking and rail and keep good paying jobs in our community. we have three refineries that have always had expectations that d.o.t. checked an assured that that everything was good. this was a wake-up call for a county to more involved. some positive outcomes that team is we are now invited to participate in the daily briefings on the status of the cleanup. we actually get e-mails every day from epa. local landowners have face-to-face meetings with x on any agencies, which we have been

listed on and they do have that back-and-forth dialogue. local elected officials are included in the refrain. exxon and epa have held public meetings, which came from our insistence. local workforce is being trained for hazardous cleanup in with 125 on the local community now that are being trained. the public now knows what to expect from a public response system, which is very important. we have assurances from exxon that the property will be cleaned up and put back the way it was before the leak. and we have independent water, air and soil monitoring through the state and epa to confirm these insurance days. what can we do better clerks publicity will take a while to explain to agricultural producers and tourists at the yellowstone river is made to irrigate the crops and water

livestock and went to her if -- that tourists can still float in fish on the yellowstone river. communication between all parties took a few days to the c. and i'll tell you, we're still working on that and it means to be from the very onset. local government officials at the amount openly included in a seesaw with d.o.t. and epa today, never once did you hear in their testimony that they mentioned local government officials. they mention they work with the state. they work with other federal thieves. but they have never worked with the local elected officials. the city of laura was brought up because they thought a problem. the ongoing dialogue with the city of laurel, with yellowstone county -- i don't think yellowstone county was even mentioned in dialogue today. as i can say, local officials were not included.

i would say all parties seem to be working together in the community. i was happy today to hear what the amount of time for the cleanup is going to be. i haven't had that date at all. the one thing that we have not known in the county is what are the rules and why standards are we going after? we've also involved our extension agent who works with all the agricultural landowners and we asked him to get involved. i spent the last week with county commissioners from across the country at the national assist nation of counties and senator vitter, i would speak your counties and the florida county commissioners and county commissioners along the coast dates as they were talking about oil cleanup. the one thing that the national association of counties and also

the county commissioners on the goal state and everyone that is that oil spills have talked about is we need policies to strength in local government involvement under the oil pollution act. we believe the federal agencies that do oversee opa must be required to consult and coordinate with local government and environmental protection, oil spill contingency planning, training and implementation of the process is. that's very -- that need it, one thing that we have seen for a this bill. we have been working with our local agencies and with her local land owners, but it seems like we are the last ones to get the call and to sit down and talk about it. and when everybody leaves town and it's all over, we are still the local elected officials are still there. thank you.

>> thank you. bill pruessing, you're next. >> chairman baucus, ranking member vitter, i appreciate the chance to speak to you about the yellowstone river in montana and update you on risk we've achieved to a date this though. before it began, however, allow me to repeat our sincere apologies to the people in montana. we deeply regret this incident occurred and we are steadfastly committed to not only complete the cleanup, but also to build the learnings from this incident into her future operations. this first requires we understand exactly what occurred. we do not yet know the precise cause, the apparent breach of the solar tech pipeline that will not likely know until our investigation is complete. we do know that the pipeline has met all regulatory requirements, including in 2009 pipeline

inspection, december 2010 cover survey and additionally as recently as last month, the u.s. department of transportation's pipeline and hazardous materials safety administration for phmsa performed a field audit of the program. of course we do know the effects of the incident. the pipeline must pressure the ninth of july 1 and within 7 minutes, our employee shut down the pumps. shortly thereafter, we began coaching dolls to isolate that and the pipeline and minimize any release. we estimate no more than 1000 barrels of oil spilled. we notified the national race on sunday and immediately began implementing our emergency response plans. drawing upon local resources from the exxon mobil billings refinery as well as experts from across the country. a unified command center, led by

the environmental protection agency, and involving more than 700 people -- 700 people now direct for response. this court made it absurd, combining resources and expertise of government, industry and others is crucial to affect the cleanup and recovery. i speak on behalf of the entire country and thanking the public service all levels of government volunteers from nongovernmental organizations contributing to the effort appeared this includes professional from phmsa, d., department of the interior, montana department of environmental quality, montana fish wildlife and parks, the yellowstone county commissioners , local response organizations, international bird rescue and many others. that's part of our cleanup strategy, we have divided the area downriver of this bill into four zones. in the cleanup some with a

combined distance of approximately 19 miles, we have deployed approximately 52,000 feet of whom, 270,000 cuts and several vacuum trucks, boats and other equipment to capture oil. our priority is to ensure the cleanup is a fanatic dave. the task made more challenging than the persistent high water levels in the yellows on river. on july 17, we completed a two-day procedure to remove any remaining crude oil from the pipeline at the yellowstone river crossing. the work was conducted under the direction and oversight at the epa and the montana department of environmental quality. to the unified command, we continue to conduct air and water quality monitoring of over 200 miles of the river as well as one of life assessments effort. today come epa monitoring confirms there is no danger to public health in the reported waters and impacts.

we've also brought and recognized experts, such as international bird rest due to actively monitor the impact on local wildlife. so far, and that's been limited in smaller number in the list is available on the website. monitoring and mitigating impact of the spill on wildlife will remain a priority of ours throughout the cleanup. as the chairman knows, the silver toe pipeline plays an important role in supplying energy to constituents in the billings area and therefore help sustain local jobs and economic growth. we are committed to replace the damaged pipe, using horizontal, directional drilling techniques with a new section we will lay approximately 30 feet low the riverbed, consistent with the phmsa direction. a paramount concern to us the impact of the local communities. we established a community information line family received more than 370 calls.

about 160 of those calls or claims related to property, our culture and how and where actively responding to each one of those. we have also sent several teams door-to-door to visit more than 200 day resonance in the most impacted areas. it is our goal to respond to individual concerns within 24 hours. i'm pleased to report that these outreach efforts have mostly received a very positive response. in fact, about 160 calls to the information line have been offers of help. this outpouring of local volunteers is immensely helpful. it testifies the resilience industry and generosity in montana and we deeply appreciate the under cnn report. to repeat exxon mobil pipeline company takes all responsible and we pledge all of the claims. but even then our work will not be done. we learn from the incident into

her future operations. >> mr. mcburney. >> senator baucus and senator vitter commit thank you for the opportunities just buy it. a special thanks to senator baucus staff. my name is scott mcburney. i have lived near the yellowstone river between laurel and we have two horses on 20 acres. we have no river frontage, but are very close to the river. we put up high quality grass hay, much of which we sell except for what we keep our own horses. the middle of our hayfield had not been cut this year because it was too monday after the big day flood. july 1st was a pretty hot that day. the river was in full flight mode for the third time this year and the geological -- u.s. geological survey forecast of the river at 14 feet. at that level it covers most of

my past year hasn't just turned getting into my shop environment less than a vertical foot from being inside my house. there were pretty nervous people at my house that day. my wife and family had gone to bed and i was ready to do the same in the laurel volunteer fire department showed up my house, my neighbors house with her lights flashing and then i met them in the driveway. yonder on transcoder was really strong and i have to tip my cap to those fire fighters trading around in the dirt for houses next to a flooding river. it was a mandatory evacuation we found a motel in billings on our fourth drive about 1:30 in the morning. when we got home like adamant pasture and found a way to problem. oil came over the ditch next to the river next to the pastures of oil line in the short grass where i had cut and hang. as we look further down the property away from the house committee and one of oil increased. oily water in the ditches and

pasture. the tall uncut head out to break a big russian stopped a lot of the heavy oil, a thick when it was shown on the edge of the uncut head. there was something now struggling to me. the water standing in the pasture during the two previous lives have been pretty clear was an ugly brown color. when we got home and saturday, i made a call to exxonmobil and we were called later in the day by proper companies that do not exxonmobil's insurance. we've had several meetings with the people from cropper and exxonmobil and they've been very helpful in more than fair. july 13, crawford was a check for the hay we had an impact and for the loss of our pasture, thinking that the crown race outcome exxonmobil will remove the grass in the affected areas. on july 15, cropper but as a check for hotel expenses. they also agreed to pay us to buy and elect a fence and water tank jupiter worsens out on the

undamaged portion of our pasture with a temporary fence. we put up the electric fence and the horses are out there getting fat. we have been talking to cropper's country and crawford and they've given tentative approval and would like announcement from the company doing the work and are now trying to find someone to do it. we attended a meeting wednesday july 13 at loyola high school. the information on air quality was good news, there was fine. not bad for a couple days. that's all. questions about soil testing was not quite as clear. the epa would do more, but a comprehensive plan was not put forward. the information or advice on agricultural matters is incorrect or nonexistent. july 12 and 13, the epa came to my house and took soil and water samples. when soil sample on 10 acres of pasture and it's seeming more like a public relations move than a quest for information about our property. they brought a television crew. i wife was interviewed and on channel eight that night.

it was exciting, but i couldn't help feeling a little disappointed. it felt like the water testing was a little overdue and that's almost a month after the pipe that broke. on the whole come epa is doing a job and it's too early in the process for that to think about long-term effects on soil and water. right now that's what they should be doing. the montana department of environment equality cannot do some samples on monday. they took three samples. i need her information. how much oil is too much oil on my property? with the launch effect of oil on my grass? will the grass be fit to use next year if it comes back? why some of my grass dying in some of it growing? it seems to me a gap that the guys don't know much about farming and the farm doesn't know much about oil spills. the biggest worry foreign donors

have his property value. the reason i went independent soil testing as i went to every port in my file cabinet can show anybody i might be considering my place sunday clean bill of health at the low for my property. if you like exxonmobil owes me this come in the same water well. i'd like the well to be tested for three years or something. i don't think that water is added. i just worry somebody else might. but there's a lot of questions from customers as well and i'd like to have some science behind the answers for them. >> thank you very much. what are some of the questions that you would like to have been asked for answers given from and by the epa folks, phmsa folks. he said his county commissioner you were not consulted. what are some of the areas you'd like to have answers to? >> senator, when the unifying

command center was started, it was the epa. it was the responsible party and it was det with the state of montana. the local government wasn't included until i made a point of going back and saying we need to be sitting at the table. then i was asked the question, you'll just go along with whatever everyone else does. and i said, i would like to see what is being talked about, and so we can answer the questions for our own local folks that have the questions to be answered. >> what are some of the things you could help them with? >> the one thing we did help them with to begin with this we wanted to make sure it was a face to every landowner that was effect didn't we provide an gis survey, but not, the names in

the address is about the local landowners. we were able to mitigate between a lot of the landowners and actually offered to go out and meet with any of the landowners and also exxon or epa if a lot of the local folks trust us and helped him through the process. the other is the public meeting process. to begin with, we called the press conference to make sure the public understood things are safe. we didn't get for days in a sampling that we could get out to the public the opportunity to tell people what was actually in the sampling. i know there's inability to sample and come back right away with at least to verify that there was no public safety

problem manner and then come back with the final results and everything that's in there. we needed to assure the public or the other piece he did his part to the table the city county health department which is our help person in the county that had to assure the public that between the drinking water, between the health effects, there was no health problems they are. they trust the local people and i think that's really what we bring in. the other thing we year, senator, is with the local elect officials, we can -- where they are years after the problem occurs and we can follow through with making sure that the plan is adhered to. but we need to be a part of the planned to know that we can at

least monitor the plan in the future after everybody leaves. >> they will be there afterwards. as commissioners, and do you have and are they your recommended to epa and to phmsa and to exxon that you want to see matt and will be adhered to five, 10, 15 years from now? what is the value of the property going to be five, 10 years from now? the file shows as we clean up 100% if some potential purchases com2 on. are there things like that? >> senator, we're going to need to be able to answer those questions and to have a standard and the scientific research and looking at the sampling we need to come back and be able to assure that those standards were

not. >> i suggest you figure out what those standards with the other lot in place now when five, 10, 15 years. >> with the those standards put into the plan. and we'll be working with her extension agent in our folks in the county. we do have some folks that are expert in the field and we can bring not. >> the two panelists would like to comment on. they may say some game that needs a response? and saying that somewhat facetiously. the panel that preceded you. either of the two witnesses say it like to respond to. >> i think -- i would like to talk about d.o.t. and the monitoring. the city of laurel did come forward and they were worried

about the high water. everyone has been worried about the high water, senator. we have had record snowpack in the mountains. we were lucky that we didn't get 90 degrees temperatures at the end of may on the first of june like we said before, but the water went to. we had major flooding in different areas. we have cowering under bridges. southern city of laurel was right to call them say they had real concerns. their concerns were very legitimate. they were that and moved on because it was high water and you couldn't get anybody on the river. but i really do think that when the local government, deity municipality, to be at the county cause, we've really do need to get into and look at what could have happened in the future and i think one thing we

are looking at now is we haven't had flooding like this since 1978, naturally in the health area back in 1998. so i think we all became a little uneasy with the drought do we need to beef it up and everyone needs to respond to high waters. >> thank you very much. i turned to senator vitter. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for this hearing. this is very important because the event is very significant. as the louisianians i take great interest because we have a sea of many, many pipelines with the same potential vulnerability. i have several questions for mr. pruessing. mr. pruessing, there's been a lot of conflicting timing on how long it took to shut down the

oil flow on the pipe line. and i've tried to follow this carefully, but i've gotten confused. can you describe that process in some detail in a particular, why couldn't you simply close the block south on either side of the yellowstone river first? >> thank you very much for your question, senator. first of all, let a run through the chronology of what occurred on july 1. this particular pipeline is operated under the control center in houston, texas. the pipelines across the united states and the typical type object for pipeline companies have trained experts for a single control center and operate pumps, valves or not. at 10:40 p.m. mountain time on july 1, we sought a pressure drop on the pipe line and our control center.

the operators did not know is actually occurring. they did not know if they pompei shut down, whether mr. minted field or something else. the analyzed the analyzed the situation for several minutes. when they could not determine, they made the situation to shut down the pumps. pumps were shut down. we then proceeded to close individual dogs along the pipeline to isolate various segments of the line. many of these obviously a remotely controlled valves with the operator in the control center could turn a button -- press a button and close some of the styles. shutting down the pipeline is not like turning off the faucet in your home. you can't just close the valve and not everything shut off. the problem is to large amounts moving at high velocity down the pipeline. when that occurs come if you close the valve all of a sudden you could overpressure line. that is an issue for liquid pipelines and so we have a

number of various dogs along the pipeline to isolate various admin and it's a rather detailed complex procedure to make sure you isolate various segments properly without additional problems. we actually isolated the pub at the riverbank at 11:36. it took us 49 minutes to close that fell from the time the pumps were shut down to the time the file was closed. we actually still at that point did not know specifically what say we may have an issue. it was not until 11:45 p.m. were approximately nine minutes later that we received a call from the fire department for the city of laurel torque control rooms for petroleum near analysis for syndication of where the issue was. we then proceeded to contact the nrc at 1219. we actually been pointed. this is the data we provided to

phmsa from the beginning. as was mentioned earlier by ms. quarterman, they have come and visit our control center gone through the log of the various steps that were taken and when the files were close. i was the actual process entailed. >> thank you. we have seen reports of planning wildlife impacts, but apart from the direct wildlife, in fact they are clearly must've been impacts to soil and plants on the banks of the river. what are you doing to address that which relates to impact that? >> we work at the epa, what do what state deq and state as responsible party. each day we go out and survey the river, using aerial flights as well as locking the river to identify where there are patches of oil to be responded to.

that is then brought back on a daily basis in the plan is amended to identify where you're going to that resource without the next day to do the cleanup work. as was mentioned earlier, we have over 500 people now on the banks of the river during the cleanup. the actual oil that was billed, probably one of three things happen. portion evaporated, a portion was going -- was broken apart and will biodegrade in the paper naturally in the portion obviously got pushed in the edges of the river where we are having to do the cleanup. as the river continues to proceed with its more areas, but we are working with the unified command on a daily basis to identify what areas to go respond to and make sure we have the resources in the right places. >> okay, before the break for weeks or even months, there was obviously high water and

flooding potential. given that before the break, what did you do to think about and ensure pipeline safety? >> we have a very detailed integrity manager program would apply to all of our pipelines. and this is just another one in that program. certainly the first step as was mentioned earlier today as we are required to do a risk assessment on all of our pipelines to make sure we understand what potential risks are there. this particular line had it in mind action in 2009 in again as was mentioned earlier, that did not uncover any issues from integrity standpoint. >> i do want to cut you off, but i'm really talking about specific to the high water flooding threat on the fairly near before the rapture. what did that provoker not provoke on your part? >> we've taken a step in december 2010 to 2 the survey to confirm an adequate depth to

cover the river. again it was mentioned earlier we been working with the city of laurel over several months as they raise concern about erosion of the thought bank. the south bank by itself has a lot of depth to cover and we confirmed that the same survey. that was about 12 feet. we did confirm the death recovery under the riverbank. in addition to shut down the pipeline for a day and may be sent back into a further risk assessment to look at all the data phmsa hat and we had to identify if there were any issues that could cause this additional concern. this is a process we would normally do when we have river flooding. i'll just give you an example of obviously are from the state of louisiana. he had to respond to issues of mississippi flooding this year. when they were talking about opening the spillway for the first time since 1973, across the trussell a river. last time that spillway with

soap and we had with our pipelines in 1973. so we did a risk assessment. we decided it was too great a risk based on history and the details of those clients. we actually shut lines to fill them with water before the kansas bill was open. we were fortunate the pipes were not damaged at the time, even when additional water was flowing in a truffle i only worked with phmsa to put them in service. we use the same kind of process on the yellowstone crossing. we looked at the risks. we looked at all the details of pipeline integrity. we looked at the adaptive cover. from a broad perspective committed to feel like we had in events or high water? at that time we concluded we had a safe pipeline is so we put it back in service. obviously something happened here we do not yet understand, something very unusual. are very anxious to complete our investigation has also become learn from it.

>> mr. chairman, if i could ask one more question. i thank you for your courtesy. he heard about epa testing air and water. it is axon conducting any independent testing? is anyone else conducting completely separate independent testing, nih, cdc, anyone like that? >> right after it occurred that we identified where it occurred, we get industrial hygiene testing of the period that was a place within several hours of the time we knew we had in issue to deal with. that did not show any particular issues from an air standpoint, but we did put that in place right away. as the unified command was in place, we try to work activities to the unified command so we alignment with the epa and the montana deq. >> thank you: mr. chairman. >> senator lautenberg. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i ask consent that my full

statement -- opening statement be entered into the record. >> no objections. >> mr. pruessing, i want to ask you, how many times has phmsa com2 axon and asked about problems with what the pipeline? >> inspections of our integrity program. they did a very detailed assessment of this particular silvertip line in june of this year. >> werther -- had you been notified of any problems that they saw over? let's talk about it. from 202003 on. >> the last time we did an in-line inspection was in 2009.

after the inspection was completed, phmsa the records in the identified four or five things that they wanted us to respond to. they were not particularly integrity issues on the pipeline, but there were items they identify if we needed to improve. that included removing vegetation near a portion of the pipeline, adding some paint on a portion on the ground, doing some additional walking patrols on the pipeline and not just aerial patrols actually correct been packing links that those three things responded to at the time this incident occurs we did not have any outstanding issues for a regulatory standpoint on this pipeline. >> well, i have a list of criticism and complaints that phmsa talk to exxonmobil about going back to january 30, 2003

proposed compliance order, notice of amendment. february 18th 2005, probable violation compliance order proposed civil penalty notice of amendment. the list goes on and on. there are nine of those and that doesn't come like it very insignificant or relatively minor aims to me. i'm sure you are aware of these. would you say they are minor? >> senatorsenator, any time an item is identified by the regulatory agency, we need to respond to it quickly. the normal process of the regulatory uses is to notify the need to respond to. this type of documents are sent to us as the mechanism by which they inform us to go respond.

>> looks slick as recently as june 8, 2010. a warning letter was spent in 2009 on the issues raised as breakout tanks that were leaking and in poor working conditions in the tank was operated by exxonmobil's refinery. in june 8, 2010 based on 2000 ninths inadequate procedures for tank maintenance and operations -- operator of its procedures. it seems to me that there is the frequency of issues that questioned whether exxonmobil here is doing what they have to to protect the safety and well-being. i mean, this accident here are

didn't come without having had several warnings before the about conditions on the type line. now, has exxonmobil reached undead to the end gotten an approval from phmsa that says these things are taken care of? >> yes, senator. by the time he received the warning letter, albeit unfettered and taken care of. >> suggest a coincidence that these things happen and here was this recount to take the kind of damage that it said? it doesn't sound very efficient to me that there seemed to be a series of things that need attention. and when they have to be called to the attention of a company like exxonmobil to avoid

problems here looks like these things were leading up to the problem and ultimately resulted in this terrible accident. >> well, we certainly take responsibility very seriously. >> well, it doesn't suggest -- mr. chairman, i'd like to put this list on the record. >> thanks very much, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. i just have a couple of questions for mr. pruessing. as you mentioned, a pressure drop noted in houston. i'm just curious how this works or it is very where people look at tiles? >> actually there is a control room about the size of this room, number of computer screens

for the bringing information for pipelines across the country. some of the information comes in on telephone line. some of the dissenters satellites, but they are able to monitor all of our pipelines, valve positions, pump conditions. >> is there somebody watching nick h. go down for is a computer program so that a certain% drop, the pressure bell goes off? a light flashes? center is what happens here. >> all of those are accurate. we have people sitting watching the screens. a number of lines have been preset in case something unusual is happening. all of those are accurate. >> do not happen in this case? >> in this particular case they did get an alarm for the drop in pressure. they immediately called in their supervisor to try to look at the screen and see if they could understand what was happening. when they couldn't figure out exactly what it occurred, they

decided to take a step to shut down the pumps. >> how many steps are there on this line between houston and laurel? >> i knock on the specific number of sensors. at the back seat to get back to you. we have a number of different flowmeters along lines to be able to monitor pipeline. i'll have to get back to a specific. >> if he would. i am curious on some timeline i thought it walked out was shot and then reopened for maybe 10, 15 minutes, something like that. what was that all about? >> that is accurate. what we did not know exactly what was occurring, but we look at what had happened and where the pressure drop occurred, the operators determined that since the line slopes down into one of our delivery points that one of the local refineries, that reopening the valve would drain oil away from that segment aligned and how that delivered to the customer. so that was done from a safety

due to save a getty oil with some portions aligned until we determine. it was reopened consciously to get the oil to drain by gravity into the delivery point. it was later repose to make sure we fully isolated the line. >> where's the blog of a question? >> that particular valve is north of the yellowstone river downstream of where the event occurred. >> so it's been reopened or chicken oil flowing downhill? >> yes. i would also add at the river crossing is a checkbox that allows only to the one-way so there is already restriction or to prevent oil from flowing back. but again it's a downhill slope. so reopening the valve would allow the oil to drain into the delivery point. >> i find it a little can mean that it took some of the not working for the company to see that you had a leak. they notified you first with a

telephone call, rather than the come to me itself at the sensors engages in computer programs figured it out. >> that is certainly something the industry continues to work on with new technology and how to monitor. lines and make sure we have the right sensors to pinpoint when there is an issue. >> exxonmobil is committed to fully clean up? >> absolutely. >> how much of the company budgeted for the cleanup? >> right now we are not worried about budget. we're worried about the resources on getting the bill claim that. >> so you're getting a clean that irrespective of the costs? >> that's correct. >> a lot of members are concerned as well as mr. mcburney of property values down the road. a lot of cleanup. i commend epa and exxonmobil falls over, but to be honest about it, mr. mcburney and the

other landowners are worried about what will be the value of the land, what would be untreated waste, oil, revenue something fighters are now coming 10 from now, 15 years from now. montanans want to know that it's going to be in good shape. i'm just going to ask you next year at erath or even five years from now, but landowners. >> let me apologize for the troubles because of a plane to stand behind a complete cleanup. as far as longer-term sampling, we want to work with epa and montana deq and other officials to make sure we have a plan and what that is and we have not had specific extended plan with the sampling will be. we work with all applicable

agencies to make sure that is put in place so we do not have any concerns. >> you really didn't answer my question. did you commit today to make them whole. it showed the land has been damage. >> we stand behind a legitimate claims. >> including drops in land values. >> i will certainly ask our people who handle these claims to get involved. certainly we now have over 40 people on the ground of their trying to respond to all of the concerns of the people in the community we want to work those all individually. we don't have any set formula for anything. we want to work with individual landowners and make sure we address all the issues with cause. >> it sounds like you're pulling your punches a little bit. on one hand, exxon says don't make everybody whole. on the other hand, if there's still damage five or six years from now, they can be demonstrated because of the oil

spill. you're not saying you're going to compensate? >> began, will stand behind honoring all legitimate claims. >> so if mr. mcburney, for example, five or six years from now has something in his file which shows there is still damage on his land because of the oil spill, he tries to sell it in the sale price is a 30% lower, no makeup that 30%? >> that's why it's really important we work with applicable agencies to make sure we do the necessary oil testing now so we can determine if there's any issue with regard to the land. we certainly want to work closely with the agencies to make sure the proper testing is done now. >> i understand. if it could be shown there still damage or reduce land value, to commit to making them all? >> yes. >> we certainly will honor that.

>> i appreciate that. thank you. >> just a couple questions about trenching versus drilling. just to be safe, exxon is going to complete the current drilling. >> that has been the recommendation that phmsa and we come to the conclusion that would need a necessary technology to replace it. the directional drilling really became a prominent in the mid-1990s. prior to that, especially when you have underwater areas or pipelines are buried, it was normal to ditch that and have it be covered over with just the riverbed. today using directional drill technologies work, commonplace, particularly in river crossings. >> what about the rivers and montana? >> where the process of the risk

assessment on all of the river crossings, again consistent with the order received from phmsa. part of the process started this week. we actually brought in a boat with sonar technology instrumentation. we've done an initial founding in the billings crossing, which is not for the incident occurred, for crosses the river to get to the exxonmobil refinery. it did not indicate any expose type, but will be working with phmsa and montana deq to do that in greater depth so we actually know what the lands are located in the crossing. so that is something we need to do and certainly agree to to make sure the river crossings are safe to the rest of the line. >> mr. mcburney, you say you're a little can turned about adjusting a little bit like the epa folks came out and really has limited sampling if i heard you correctly.

although i hear some do a pretty decent job as exxon do, but sometimes the doubles in the details. if you could just expand upon some of the cleanup and how widespread it is should that be better from your perspective. >> well, first let me say it's an evolving process and as far as -- a trait to mention most of my concerns are down the road a year from now on this is over, two years, three years. now come the next you're not going to have paid? bubble of the click? sr is my place in particular, tomorrow i have the meeting with a soil expert in billings is going to come out to my house and representative of exxon is

going to be there and were going to -- they're going to talk and see if crawford insurance company will pay to have this guy do some testing so i can have that, you know, a site-specific analysis of my property is what i feel like i need them more than once in all of my soil under my pasture. the oil impacted my pasture progressively, the more river water came in, the more oil i had. so i felt i needed multiple tests on my soil. the other thing is i have ponding of water with oil in it or not is different. it's a different impact i'm afraid than just the oil rushing over the surface of the ground and then flushing on down the river. i had a pond of water on my property. the oil came in and stayed in the water evaporated. so a little concerned about

that. but i do think epa is on the job. i heard a rumor they were going to do more -- more thorough soil is unselect parcels, but i am not in the loop so to speak on a lot of that. >> to feel better is shared, what would you like to know and who would you like to give that information? is epa? the county, exxon? >> i'd like somebody to know. like a cinnamon testimony, we went to a meeting last week -- a week ago today and there was that really anybody they are across the agricultural versus scientific oil boundary. there is kind of a café or.

i'm hoping i can hire this guy and that's his region of expertise and i cannot come at least for myself, how those issues resolved. i am not convinced my property is irreparably damaged. i really don't know. i don't know how much oil is on my property. it's an unknown, so it's a source of worry for me. >> let me ask mr. pruessing. what's the best way to help mr. mcburney out? it acted oil and so forth -- how could we help them out? >> yeah, this is a very good example of what he spoke about earlier about walking to work with each landowner individually because can ernst may be different or issues may be different. if we need additional expertise out there that needs the grids between science and agriculture, will find the resource to help address these issues.

>> mr. perciasepe, any thoughts on this one? >> is a perfect example of every individual owner affected when we say make them whole, this plan should incorporate a piece so it's individualized with the chenoa we address their issues come to be 10 acres, 20 acres, 160 acres and i think we can do that. you never what area you're talking about is between our extension agents and other experts we should be about to get his standard and now what may happen over the next five, six years and see what the sampling fire. our biggest problem is the sampling for taking so long to get the result back. and what pat, we're not quite sure the samplings have been taken and we haven't had their results back. >> why does it take so long? do you have to it set someplace? why does it take so long?

>> you know, i can't answer that question. epa has said they've taken the sampling and have not gotten results back. that was their biggest frustration for the first four or five days is how come it is taking so long that this this is an emergency situation? can we get at least some results back right away for the public? anything that is where scott is, is knowing that after he is certain areas of this property you want sample in knowing what is there and then possibly monitoring in one year and two years from now to check the and what those levels higher. and i guess that the county, we like to know what those levels are and see what the standard size so they can actually go back and say these are the standards that have been set out.

>> we all want to help each other out. what can i do to help any of you read or to help, you know, landowners especially? we're here to serve the landowners. any thoughts on what i can do to help with this song? >> senator, i was a number one is the cooperation of the agencies working together and buy you insisting on the agencies working together and expedite some of these missiles so we can get up and going and working with landowners. number two the to the pipeline is going to have to go through and being able to get the pipeline drilled so it is safe and get oil back into the refinery is another issue that we have in our community. there's 280 employees here.

number three has that what we need has that what we need to do is all of us make sure that our landowners, the people to live in our county that has been affected are satisfied with the results coming forward. and i think as we go forward on that, just you're in old mint with this brings a lot of credibility, as we work with these federal agencies. >> any help with phmsa, anybody? ..

>> i asked for soil sampling, but as i said, you know, i i think epa will get to it. i don't know if it's site-specific like i want. >> it's a good idea. i think some site specific

assessment of each person's land for the reasons you indicate, i think it makes good sense, and let's wish for that. before we finish up, i'd like -- should have done this earlier, pulled up some photographs of flooding. here's one. is that laurel? yep. you can see the oil there. it's black. the yellowstone river. it was high. okay. next. here's some folks during the cleanup. it's laborious work, but they're working at it. okay. here's another one. a photograph of the oil, river

off to the side. a lot there. okay. okay. this is another. you can see the oil caught up on the sides of trees and so forth and how high the water is. you may recognize the land year. scott, i don't know whose property that is, but it's up there. you mentioned inches within your house. this is evidence of that. of course, there's another oil site. rivers move along quick at high, so as you know, the oil was there because it was so high. okay. want just to remind everybody to -- anybody who wants to submit additional testimony, the record will be open for two weeks.

i say that especially for people who montana. if they want to submit additional testimony, the record will be open for two more weeks. it won't be the last of it, but thank you very much, everybody. meeting's adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> what would that have been like to have met these people, when you department know the ending? >> larson follows hitler. >> i looked through whose eyes i could tell that story, ideally outsiders, ideally americans, and that's when i stumbled upon the first ambassador to nazi germany. >> sunday night on c-span's q&a.

>> now, a look at the environmental effects on the oil spill in fact gulf of mexico. the senate commerce, science, and transportation committee heard from u.s. coast guard and

other federal officials in this 90-minute hearing. it's chaired by alaska senator. >> i apologize. just reviewing -- my family is in alaska now fishing. my brother-in-law just caught a 40 #-pound king salmon. the uniqueness of technology by sending me that photo saying sorry you're in washington, but by the way, look at this king salmon i just caught. [laughter] thank you all very much. give me one second here.

[inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon smed i'd like to welcome the witness and thank you for taking the time to testify before the committee today. on july 15st, 2010, just over a year ago, bp seemed to end the never ending flow of oil of the deepwater horizon spill. when the well was plugged, the people of the gulf coast and people across the country were mesmerized by the video of the sea gusher and they were able to breathe a collective sigh of relief, yet the maconod well was not the end of the tragedy. we are still understanding and accounting for the costs, the cost to the environment, the cost to the individuals in the gulf communities, and the cost to their economies. over 200 million gallons of oil spewed into the gulf for nearly three months becoming the largest accidental marine oil spill in the history.

the long term impacts of the marine life of the gulf are while still ill-defined are sure to be long lasting. 11 men lost hair lives. many other lives and livelihoods and were and continued to be effected by this spill. alaskan sympathize with the gulf in its plight. we lived through this before. in 1989, alaska suffered the exxon valdez spill. environmental impacts are still being monitored and assessed in the waters of the prince william sound. effecting the lives of many who waited decades before seeing justice in the courts still feel impacts of the trauma of which the spill caused in their communities. the effects of both spills are tragic, the greatest tragedy in both could and should have been avoided.

in each case, the responsible parties cut corners and took unnecessary risks for the promise of greater profits. although risk taking and the risks made were reckless, a response to it must be thoughtful and measured. identification has to put itself firmly on the path to energy security, and we can't do that while increasing our supply of oil. it must be part of any balanced energy plan whether in the gulf or the arctic waters of my state. we need to rededicate ourselves by taking the prudent steps to ensure those kills never happen again. we need to implement better standards and best practices, and regulators must keep them accountable while they may trust, they must also verify. in the event of a future spill, industry has to act swiftly and

decisively and make sure the front line responders like the coast guard and noaa has the expertise needed to get the job done. we must provide local stake holders with a strong voice in the process. it's their lines and prosperity on the line. we have to make sure we have the best resources available to reduce impactses and restore the damage brought by the spill. these are the reasons i'm here today. i look forward to hearing from the witnesses. i hope their insight can put us on the path towards improved spill, prevention, response, and restoration. we'll have two panels. before i introduce the first panel, let me ask senator wicker here, the representing ranking member to make his opening. >> thank you, chairman begich.

i'm standing in for ranking member snowe. she will possibly join us for a few moments but will not be able to be here for the entirety of the hearing because of scheduling conflicts. i appreciate you holding this hearing to investigate lessons learned from the gulf oil spill. the tragic explosion of the deepwater horizon claimed the lives of four mississippians and seven others and took 77 days to control the flow of oil and longer to seal the blown out well permanently. this cost extensive damage to the gulf ecosystem and significant harm to the gulf coast economy which is still not fully recovered. i hope to hear from the witnesses on both panels today, how we can prevent spills of this magnitude in the future and a responsible and sensible manner. i would like to hear how we can mitigate the economic damages that resulted from the deepwater horizon spill. the administration's moratorium

on offshore drilling added significantly to the spill's negative economic effects. 33 deep water rigs forced to suspend operations in the gulf affecting thousands of american jobs. at least eight rigs left or plan to leave the gulf in order to pursue operations elsewhere. it is highly unlikely they will ever return. at a time of record unemployment and soaring debt, we should be implementing policies that increase american jobs and income instead of ones that restrict them. it was clear at the on set that the administration and bp were not prepared to handle a spill of this magnitude. although i praise the efforts of the coast guard and noaa, the sort comings and coordination was disheartening. they lacked the proper planning and response capabilities for such an event. i'm pleased that the oil and gas industry has since responded by

establishing the marine well containment company, a non-for-profit organization to provide containment response should another significant blowout o cor in the gulf. as the coast continues to recover, it's my hope that responsible parties work with state and federal officials to restore the ecosystem and the economy. for mississippi, the long term environmental impacts are not yet fully known, but it is clear the immediate economic damages have been significant. many regular visitors to our beaches and towns have stopped coming, and our fishing industry steeped in tradition and the way of life on the coast has not recovered from the misperception that gulf seafood is tainted with oil. the truth is gulf seafood is safe to eat and continues to be tested for oil and other toxins. more than any other seafood in the world. a significant piece of the recovery is directing fines

under the clean water act directly to impacted states. i have supported this effort from the on set, and i'd like to thank my colleagues from other gulf states for their hard work. i'm confident we'll soon have a proposal supported by every gulf delegation to dedicate clean water act fines to the environmental and economic recovery of the gulf coast. thank you. >> thank you, senator wicker. senator nelson? >> mr. chairman, when you see oil floating on the surface, and you see it approaching a pass like pensacola pass, and then because the on rushing tide you see that oil come on in to pensacola bay or whatever bay, pudido bay, some of it we wanted

to move it out to another bay. i can't tell you what an awful sight it is. like some of the sights that you don't like to look at, that's what it looks like, and then once it reaches a destination either on the ocean floor or on the beach or all gathered up around the marsh grasses, then it just makes it even look all the worse and it wrecks havoc. had wrecks havoc on the environment and on the economy. i'll never forget with all the problems we've had in the gulf claims facility of getting them to try to help out people, what

about the little lady that had the advertising business in destin? now, her business was a little advertisement single owner small business, but she was advertising to go to this restaurant, that restaurant, this tourist destination. well, when the tourists stopped coming, she didn't have any business and so she had no income and so she couldn't pay her mortgage, and it went on and on and on, and sometimes the banks cooperated and sometimes the banks didn't cooperate. i looked at local government, and they're doing everything they can. it's like being the little boy sticking his finger in the dike and if the water breaks out over here, and they stick their

finger there and so it happens over and over. now, i don't want this to happen again, and there are a lot of lessons learned that we learn from your state that we didn't pay any attention, and it happened again, and if we don't pay attention to theless sops learn -- lessons learned from the gulf oil spill, it's going to happen again, and when it does, let me just give you a little preview. rest ball, the big spanish drilling company that drills in the gulf of mexico and drills according to u.s. standards, they are getting ready to drill 40 miles off the north coast of cuba in over 5,000 feet. if there's a spill there, do you

know what runs right by there? it's the gulf stream, and where does the gulf stream go? it parallels the delicate environmentally highly sensitive florida keys and all those coral reefs, and then the gulf stream comes to within one mile of the beaches of miami beach all the way up to palm beach. that is the part of the state that has an extraordinary amount of tourism. a lot of our florida beaches, oil did not get to, but the scare of oil there when they saw the pictures of the oil on pensacola beach, and you remember that newspaper photograph that had the entire beach, that white sugary sand beach was covered in black oil, and the tourists stopped coming, and they stopped coming to the

entire gulf coast of florida, so this is what we are facing. i am pleased at my request and you and the ranking member were kind enough to invite the chairman of our county commission from pensacola, escambia county, who was at the front line of this. they did a lot themselves making it up as they went because in many cases the united states government did not have its act together, and a lot of the -- and i'll just close with this. mr. chairman, i'll never forget when i went to one of the centers, the command centers, and it was explained to me that the coast guard was in control 51% and bp was in control 49%. well, that doesn't work, and we

saw that didn't work. you got to have a military chain of command and who is at the top of the chain has to have their orders carried out so that's one of the significant lessons that we learn from this spill. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator nelson. nart lautenberg, did you have any quick openings? >> well, if i could trade it for an earlier position in the questioning, i'd like to do that, but -- >> negotiations. >> mr. chairman, thanks very much. we were not -- we know how expedient you'd like to try to make the hearing. it's too important to just bypass it, but i'll relinquish my treasured position here and plead for mercy in the questioning. with that, i surrender to the chair.

thank you. >> thank you. senator cantwell. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and i thank you for the hearing today and thank the witnesses for being here. oil and response capability is a focus of mine when i was the chair of the subcommittee, and thank you for focusing on such a vital issue. we managed to strengthen the nation's oil spill safety net, the biggest improvement since opa90, but there's more to be done particularly in light of what we learned from the devastating deepwater horizon spill. i have many questions for the witnesses today on issues like steering, restoration funds to the gulf cleanup and earmarking and i'll submit those for the record. today, i was hoping to get answers from our hearing today, mr. chairman, from the administration witnesses on the emerging threat in the northwestern united states. as many of my colleagues

probably know, canada planned to double production for the alberta tar sand fields over the next decade, and much of that oil will come to the u.s., but some would also go to places like china. the next with this hearing is much of that oil without shipped by supertankers from vancouver through the fragile waters of the san juan islands. this is a major threat to the region and we accommodated barges carrying 15 billion gallons of oil many coming from alaska and refineries. we refine twice as much gasoline as we need in our state for consumption. there's always a risk there. we try to do our utmost to minimize that. the tankers need tug escorts, steered pilots, and people that know our waters just like what happened with prince william

sound. we need to have people on the ground who know what's happening. we have a very robust oil spill sons in place including vessel traffic control systems. unfortunately, these systems seem to have led to a free ride for canada. it seems that the canadian oil response plan in the pa civic northwest is to call the americans, and an internal awe did revealed that "the canadian coast guard lacks the training, equipment, and management systems to the response to the offshore incidents such as an oil spill." that's a scarry situation for us in washington state particularly when plans by one oil company alone would increase oil tanker traffic by 45%. these supertankers we are talking about can hold up to a million barrels of oil, four

times spilled in the exxon valdez. such a spill in the narrow strait would cost tens of billions of dollars in damming and have a significant impact. with that, mr. chairman, if i could just show a chart that shows you where this vessel traffic goes, and while it can go along the coast of vancouver island and out to the strait, you are talking about a very busy traffic area, a very pristine part of canada and the united states, and i think it deserves a very robust oil spill response plan. thank you for allowing me to make this opening statement, and i look forward to ask the panel questions today. thank you. >> thank you very much, and

again, thank you to our two witnesses. the first witness is royal admiral zucoff, and very impressed with your federal on sight coordination you did. a lot of kudos to the work you did. we have david kennedy from noaa's national ocean services, and thank you again, noaa, for doing what you do not only in the gulf, but around the country in the sense of protecting our natural resources and beauty. let me first open. admiral, if you want to make your opening statement, and then mr. kennedy, and then we'll open for questions. does it work? >> good afternoon, chairman and ranking member wicker and distinguished members of the committee. i'm hon tored to speak about the status of lessons learned from the deepwater horizon response and efforts the coast guard is undertaking. adds you know on april 20, 2010, and explosion aboard the unit of deepwater horizon resulted in the sinking of this and the

tragic loss of 11 lives and the worse spill in u.s. history. the spill was designated as the first ever spill of national significance and the first time we designated an incident commander. under the framework of 1990 and the national contingency plan, a response was undertaken to the unified efforts of over 47,000 federal, state, and local responders, including 7,000 active and reserve coast guard members. i served as a federal on scene coordinator for six months. today, 15 months later after the explosion, we continue the response efforts while distipght from the response, the damage assessment is occurring as well. following the deepwater horizon incident, there have been numerous reports generated and investigations conducted not only to determines cause of the casualty, but to determine the effectiveness of the spill response. this includes the president's

commission on the deepwater horizon oil spill and offshore drilling, the national incident commanders' report, and the preparedness review. they reviewed the report in addition to our own review to determine areas where the coast guard needs to take corrective action. two more reports are forthcoming. the coast guard and boemre's the joint investigation report and the coordinator's report that include perspectives of the federal on-scene coordinator regarding the effort. both reports are undergoing final agency review and should be released within the next month. as we continue to inventory and analyze the lessons from these reports in our own internal review, i want to highlight actions taken to address areas where response planning and preparedness should be improved including directorring captains of the port to review oil spill response plans for offshore

facilities, and this is already an ongoing effort. requiring area committees to include worse case discharge scenarios for facilities and the plans, developing subsea dispersant guidelines, increasing state and local outreach and participating in meetings and activities and participating in a coast guard federal emergency management agency environmental protection agency work groups to develop recommendations to harmonize the plan and national response framework and constructs. while there's areas for improvement we are pursuing overall, we concluded that the framework provided for opa90 in the national contingency plan for oil spill response served us well and the plan provided the necessary discretion and freedom of action to address the unique circumstances of the deepwater horizon response. the coast guard also committed

to ensuring the safety of activities on the outer continue thenal shelf. the coast guard is responsible for safety and drilling systems and well safety. this division of responsibilities is captured in a memorandum of understanding between our two agencies. the coast guard and boemre are working together to is ensure there's no safety seems whatsoever in the oversight responsibility in the offshore drilling domain. we blurred a coast guard boemre work group to improve coordination and community cation between the two agencies. in light of the deepwater horizon incident, there's renewed focus to the expansion of exploration in the arctic, the remote and harsh environment . we ask for congress' support

while the challenges are still faced in the region. as cuba prepares to begin offshore oil operations, we updated the plans and engage federal, state, and local entities to ensure we are ready to address a potential discharge impacting u.s. waters. i want to thank congress for their timely action in passing public law which allowed significant advancements from the principle fund within the oil spill liability trust fund in the midst of this unprecedented response. this was critical to me to ensure the sufficient funds were available to support the federal response. thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and i am pleased to take any questions that you may have. thank you. >> thank you very much, admiral. mr. kennedy? >> thank you -- [inaudible] i appreciate the opportunity to

discuss noaa's response to and lessons learned from the deepwater horizon oil spill. naoo worked tirelessly from the first day of the spill and we'll continue in our efforts until clean up of oil and assessment of the human use impactses and restoration of the injuries are complete. my testimony today will discuss the continuing challenges noaa faces in the wake of the spill, the progress of ongoing and long term removal and restoration activities, and the emerging needs for improved oil spill prevention, response, and restoration. the deepwater horizon oil spill was a grave reminder that the spills of national significance can occur despite the many safeguards and improvements in place since 1990. although our best option is still to prevent spills from occurring, the risk of spill remains a concern given the limitation and age of offshore

and on shore infrastructure and frequency of oil transported throughout the water wayings. if a spill occurs, responders have to be equipped with the appropriate tools and information and effective response based on solid science, smart decision making just does not reduce cleanup cost, but ultimately decreases environmental and economic impacts which can be more coastally in the long term. to ensure appropriate tools and information are available to responders who face the next spill of significance, the public and private sectors have to continue to invest time and resources into research and development in the aftermath of this disaster. while existing research resulted in advancement of some technologies, more must be done to strengthen the response and restoration capabilities. critical needs for further research are amplified examining challenged realized in the deepwater horizon spill and when we consider the emerging

prospects of exploration and reduction in remote and ecologically specific areas. in addition it includes better understanding of the believer of deep water releases, oil protection and modeling at the surface and in deep water, increased information in the long term effects to endangered species and habitats, and greater perspective on social dimension of spills including community effects, risk communication methods, i think are very important, and evaluation of natural resources. in addition, many of the approaches have not been extensively evaluated in remote areas like the arctic, and their utility of such environments is significant and less effective. i need to better understand oil and ice, weathering and transport, effectiveness of arctic conditions and ecosystem impacts to make responsible decisions.

this issue exem mys the need for peer review on technologies and development of new strategies in the event of an emergency. now along with our co-trustees is also charnlged with assess -- charged with assessing resources injured by the oil spill. the goal is determining the type and amount of restoration needed to compensate the public for injury and set resources. trustees are also assessing the public's lost use of the resource which includes losses of recreational fishing, boating, hunting, and swimming. the ultimate goal is to implement a package of restoration projects that company said the public for all injuries and human reck recreational loss use combined. they are planning for and beginning to implement restoration. to date, the trustees and bp agreed to implement several projects designed to curtail further injury to resources.

in particular, the trustees have a project that have immense scars on beds caused by response equipment and designated areas of mississippi wildlife areas that otherwise might gather in oil impacted areas. the trustees are also preparing a statement which will identify a range of restoration alternatives and trustees will consider to compensate the public for lost resources and services in the future. on april 21st of this year, they announced an agreement under which bp committed to make were 1 million available to fund early restoration projects. input has already begun and will continue throughout the summer. the deepwater horizon oil spill presented a challenge to noaa and all those who worked and still working to address the impacts. we have the expertise to coordinate and deliver services

during oil and other spills forgetly and effectively. as a result of the deepwater horizon, noaa examined and evaluated our capacity and ability to respond to such large scale events. for us to continue to be the scientific leader for response to spills and other hazards, it is critical to have adequate capacity and resources to conduct, lead, and coordinate scientific research and have the tools for performing effective response and damage assessment. thank you for allowing me to provide you with an update on the deepwater horizon oil spill. i want to close by assuring you we will not relent in our efforts to protect the livelihoods of gulf coast residents and mitt kate the impactses of the spill. i'll be happy to answer questions you may have. >> thank you very much. i'll ask senator wicker to go first, and i'll hold to the end. that gives senator lawsuitenberg five -- lautenberg five minutes quicker

to you. boom, boom. senator wicker first. >> thank you, it's kind of you to do that. >> first of all, admiral thank you for your service and thank you for your testimony. let me ask you first, admiral, during the height of the oil spill, there's a lot of discussion about how international stance might have been hampered by the jones act. tell us what your investigation found. did the act impact skimmer and other response equipment availability during the spill? >> yes, senator, i'd be pleased to answer that. as the federal on-scene coordinator, i approved every pollution response funding authorization, thousands of these authorizations. this is everything from domestic to international, and when i approve those, i hand them to

bp, and then bp writes the check. the responsible party pays, and that's where when we talk about the division of labor, it is driven from the federal down in holding the responsible party accountable, and if the responsible party fails to fund that, then we fund that out of the oil spill reliability trust fund. that's the process in place. when i looked at the most critical gaps, it was offshore skimming capability. we reached out to norway and the skimming capabilities they used in the north sea to get that skimming equipment to the gulf coast, not by vees vessel, but on a heavy lift on to an osv into the gulf of mexico. we invoked over 60 foreign offers of assistance where there's critical gaps that needed to be closed. there is a waiver procedure under the jones act, and at no time did the jones act impede the resources that we needed to respond to this unprecedented

spill. >> it's your testimony that the jones agent was not a problem -- the jones act was not a problem getting the skimmers in? >> correct. it was in no way an impediment. >> let me ask you about whether or not in testing for cleanups, we need to try technologies right there in the marine environment. do federal regulations restrict testing cleanup technologies and conduct response drills on controlled oil spills? for example, are there environmental protection agency rules that prohibit you or others from testing the effectiveness of new technologies in answering this type of a spill?

>> we work very closely with our natural response team that is co-chaired and with the environmental protection agency to consider controlled spills in the environment. what we -- and as a rule, we do not, and it's primarily due to environmental concerns. however, we do use a facility in new jersey called ome set where we do on a daily basis. ives just there -- i was just there six weeks ago. it's a large area. >> you spill the oil in new jersey, and that's just fine with me. [laughter] >> yeah, this is a closed facility, but a very, very large body of water, and anyone of that does get into the environment. >> okay. thank you very much for that. i have to ask you, mr. kennedy, recently there's been a high number of sea turtle deaths in the gulf of mexico. some people are blaming the

shrimpers. i don't know what the shrimpers differently this year than in previous years, have you ruled out scientifically the oil spill as a cause of the sea turtle deaths? >> no, we have not. we though are looking very, very carefully at the mortalities, trying to collect as many of those turtles as we can, conduct analysis, and look closely at what we think the cause of death might be. the studies are ongoing. >> what do your initial findings show? >> the official findings are the studies we've conducted, near shore shallow areas where the turtles are found, that the turtles are healthy and feeding normally and their mortality is

acute. all of those things are not normally sorted with some sort of exposure and longer term mortality, so what we're finding at least in a number of these is this appears to be somehow associated with by catch. >> i see, with some sort of trauma and not toxins in the water? >> yeah. having said that, we continue to up -- investigate what's going on there. there's some examples that do not fall into that category i described. we have not ruled that out, and we're aggressively continuing to look. >> thank you both. >> thank you very much. senator nelson? >> thank you, mr. chairman. gentlemen, thank you for your public service. we had a failed decision making

apparatus. the unified command to begin with did not react as hard as people were working, and as individually as they were just giving it their all. the decision making apparatus was not quick enough, and there was too much leeway for bp. i don't want to take the time, but i may as well just to remind everybody that it started out, oh, it was only going to be a thousand barrels a day, and it was revised upwards and upwards and ended up being somewhere in access of 26,000 barrels a day. what would you two recommend as

an improved decision making apparatus in a command structure that we have in place? >> well -- >> why don't i ask the civilian first, and then to you, admiral. >> sure. >> i would just start, i think, by saying i've been doing oil spill response some kind or any for 25 years. i know i look 35, but i'm actually a little older, and i have never -- i was involved in the exxon valdez spill deeply as well. i've never seen anything that even approached the complexity of the issues that we had to deal with, and i think it's not -- i think you have to start there. i think you have to start with the fact that none of us could have anticipated even with the spill of national significance

how complex the issues were and how they continued to kind of expand in their complexity, and all of this under a very, very strong, strong public spotlight and scrutiny. having said that, i think there's a number of things that we potentially could do better, but to stand up an organization of this magnitude where you had from every agency parts of it brought in that have never been in response mode before, you probably would start with more training for more of the entities within just speaking for noaa, for more of the entities within your organization to get them better equipped to know what to do on a response. response mode is kind of a special mode and it takes a lot of training and mind set as we brought more and more of noaa, for instance, and all of our

ships not normally involved in oil spills, the satellite, aircraft, and all experts from every discipline into this event. it took a little time to spin them up, and i think so communication, training -- >> all right. let me just stipulate with you there. >> yeah. >> that it was complex and extraordinary. >> uh-huh. >> but you all let bp basically direct a lot of the stuff. it wasn't until some of us up here including senator boxer forced the availability of that live streaming video that scientists could then see how much oil was coming out 5,000 feet below the surface and do their evaluations. we were not anywhere close to 1,000 barrels, so what would you do in the command structure so

that bp is not running the show, and i take nothing away from all the people who gave their heart and soul in doing this. what we're trying to do here is lessoned learned so we don't repeat the mistakes of the past. >> oil pollution act and national contingency plan as the admiral mentioned, i think do lay out what we're supposed to do. i think when you have something this complex, you may be have some learning curves on how that structure works, but there is a very specific structure in place, and i'm going to turn to the admiral and let him handle this. this is his business. >> okay. you're saying there's a specific structure in place. does that mean we need to amend the law so that we don't fall back? if you're saying the statute required the way it was operating in the past, then that's one of the lessons learned. >> i think we're all saying that we should look at the oil

pollution agent and sioux if there's amendment -- see if there's amendments needed, but i think a better understanding across the board of what the current act is and how it is executed would help us as well. >> okay. leading up to this, you know, we have a very mature contingency process working with the stake holders, response teams, identify sensitive areas, and we exercise this in our spills of national significance. those spills of national significance exercises do not get fully exercised at the local level. we're working in the gulf of mexico. for example, the state of louisiana had five ongoing federally declared disasters under the stafford agent. this was the first time that the construct under the oil pollution act saw the light of day since exxon valdez, working in communities that were used to

state-driven responses which is a co-shared expense process to now under the national contingency plan which is federally driven where the federal government holds the responsible party accountable for paying every bill associated with that response and taking every measure necessary. the challenge we had was in critical resources. because of the challenges and with the planning process and full ownership from low -- local up to state when that first drop of oil came to shore, it may not have been on an environmental sensitive area, but there was a mandate to boom the entire state of mexico. where we had 4 million feet of hard boom, another 10 million feet of other boom strung across the -- >> boom doesn't work off of a beach, so right there you have to adjust -- >> yes, sir. >> well, i don't want to take

anymore time. i want others to have a chance, but in all of this conversation i've been seeking a recommendation on how to make that command structure better. i have not heard the recommendation, so my recommendation, mr. chairman, would be if they would like to respond in writing with a specific recommendation, if we need to change the statute, then that's what we're here for, but the next time around, we sure want something crisp, chain of command. the order is given, and you don't have somebody trying to bungle it up regardless of how complicated it is. >> thank you. i make that a formal request to respond to that. that was one of my questions to both y'all so if you can give recommendations that you might think in a law could be changed

in order to make it a more crisp and efficient response, we'll make that as one of the questions for the record for the committee in total. senator lautenberg? >> thanks, mr. chairman. we are at this hearing and request for learning to what to do as a result of the intention that was paid to several serious oil spills in the past, and most recently and the gulf of mexico lost chemical disper cants to break down surface oil. there's concerns about the dispersant safety that actually predates the exxon valdez oil spill. we're still not sure about what

the effects are for cop sen traitions of the -- concentrations of the dispersants. they were never made available to the public. now, when we look and see that we are still reeling from the oil spill that took place years ago, and exxon valdez, we still have many species that have not yet returnedded to their quantity -- returned to the quantity or quality of their existence. there's long term effects before they are used and their requires exposure of the ingredients in these disperse cants. now, would more information about the dispersants affect your oil spill response

efforts? might there be an influence there, admiral? >> thank you, senator. when you used the decision to use use dispersants, we worked off a list, and they had preapproval. we're in uncharted territory reaching the magnitude of 1.8 million dispersants sprayed on the surface and subsurface. i will say as the federal on-scene coordinator, there was periods of 16 consecutive days, we had to draw down the response on two occasions because of potential approaching hurricanes and still streams live video of oil spilling, and watching that oil come into the bays and other locations, we were trying to knock this down offshore as far as possible so at the time it would be great to have that information, you know, at my disposal rather than waiting

three months for a study, but i have to make a decision within 24 hours. after that 24-hour window exspires, that dispersant is no longer effective. how do i mitigate the effect of the spill, apply dispersants as far as offshore as possible, and after the well was plugged and abandoned, we did, working with noaa, undertook the most aggressive under sea monitoring effort ever conducted in the gulf of mexico looking for oxygen depletion, con concentration of oil and oil debris on the sea floor at depths of 5,000 pete. this was determined if any further response, oil removal was necessary, and as a result of that study, no further findings were necessary. that report was made public in the late december time frame. >> so do you think we have appropriately now analyzed the material that's in the

dispersants and the dangers that they could represent? are you satisfied that because you didn't find further damage at that time that we're fully familiar with what the dispersants might bring to the continue fouling up of the accidents? >> i'm not because we don't have the whole of science peer review, and so the challenge i would deal with on a daily basis is getting whole of science concurrence. that's a challenge as well. it needs to be fully peer reviewed and concurred with. further work is needed. >> and would it not be thought for a moment that we didn't appreciate the work and the bravery of coast guard, their people, there was no task that was asked that they didn't fulfill, and we're very proud of you and your people and want you to keep up the courage and the

response that you give to things in your way. now, the coast guard and noaa played leading roles in responding to oil spills, but even in the best of times, these agencies are called on to do more with less. now, if the budgets for noaa and coast guard are cut even further as some are proposalling, would your agency be able to help -- both agencies -- be able to respond to emergencies at the same time? >> we are thankful for the proposed budget in fiscal year 12 addressing some of our shortcomings for incident response, but reflecting on the deepwater horizon, this was 87 major spills. i say that because we had one day we recovered 30,000 barrels of oil. most of this well offshore. this is not oily water.

it's burning or recovery. 1.2 million gallons, about 20% of exxon valdez. the next day, the same amount of oil, and the next day, the same amount of oil. every day the spill duplicated itself, and it almost became exponential. the fact we dealt with 87 spills with the augmentation within the budget and with our cooperation of inner agencies, this was a tremendous learning experience at the local, federal, tribal, international level and shame on us if we don't take these lessons and apply those to future challenges, especially in the arctic, in the northwest, and to cuba as well. >> admiral, are you saying -- this will be it -- that 87 spills and your response

suggests that maybe you could be doing with less funding in response to my question? >> we were soarly -- sorely stressed. we exhausted our reserve call up capability, and so we were thankful that the well was capped when it was. if we were still responding today, again, this was most spills are an instantaneous release like exxon valdez, but when you have a spill in deep water dealing with hydrates, the complexities, great depths, and access, you know, that is the new frontier we're living in, and where is that exploitable oil and gas? you know, it's in that new frontier either in deep water or the arctic or it may be in a country where we don't have diplomatic relations. >> thanks very much, mr. chairman. i have other questions which i'll submit for the