state, that is good but not enough. i do not want to wait for the world to come on our shores and then do something about it and make claims. i want to do everything to get local community folks out there, cities, state governments, to try to do everything we can to stop this oil from coming ashore. i saw something from osha that volunteers should not approach the tar balls, they should have training before doing that. that seems ridiculous to me. we need to get people involved in trying to clean up this bill. what this is going to do for tourism industry and our fishing business, what it will do for recreational boating, it cannot be overestimated. .

the ability with inside government if needed to help contain these emergencies to the best of our ability, and look forward to your testimony. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. as everyone has stated, this is an ongoing tragedy started with the loss of 11 lives and the impact on those folks families,

including pollution and economic impact along the gulf coast. i want to focus my participation on five questions, and i ameren to outline them here, because we're going to have to vote soon. we're going to have a similar hearing, and i hope the participants can respond to these questions today and/or through follow up written answers. number one, what is the most up- to-date information about the flow of oil? we are capturing some of it. presumably, that gives us more

to measure that. what is the most up-to-date estimate of using the pipe which has been successfully connected to stop the flow. why hasn't of fisheries failure been called? this would give immediate help to our fisheries. it would offer some of immediate help. it mandates the governments of the loan program to help fishery independent businesses. this is not an option. it was a mandate.

i would urge the president to act on this mandate. number four, i am concerned about it being inequitable between states. i appreciate his work, but i would love and of it on that, and no. 5 -- an update on that, and number five, what is the timeline on which you will make a decision regarding the emergency dredging built up of verio island proposal i think would be a considerable help in protecting the louisiana coast line. >> thank you. >> thank you for holding the hearing, and i, too, want to

express my condolences to the families who have lost loved ones. today's hearings along with the other ones is an important part of learning why this disaster happened and what to do to make sure this type of oil spill never happens again, and we also need to closely scrutinize the response of our federal agencies. bp is responsible party, but the federal government had the ultimate responsibility to insure the appropriate safety measures were followed and the available resources are being deployed. as we speak, there are tens of thousands likin into the gulf region of farrell's leaking into the gulf. -- tens of thousands of barrels leaking into the gulf.

much of our production will come from the oil wells, so clearly, we cannot remove deep water oil production from our current or future energy supplies. we cannot continue with business as usual. while continuing an aggressive response, we must move forward as quickly as possible with measures that will protect our environment, our coastal communities, and our supply of domestic energy. i want to thank our witnesses, and i look forward to working with this committee. i have a billion questions, and it is going to be hard to get them all in today, but i, too, am interested in knowing about the issue of the fire-resistant boom and how that is working and

what we're doing to try to prevent oil from leaking further. i am interested in knowing what bp has said. it will cover all claims of damage, but i am interested to know the historic standard for determining what the legitimate claim isn', and i have a seriesf other questions that i will try to get asked for the record, but i do appreciate the opportunity to hear from the witnesses today and to get to the bottom of why this occurred and what we can do to prevent it in the future. >> thank you. >> thank you for doing this hearing. stopping the oil spill has been marred by guesswork, failures, frustration, and now a partial solution. cleaning up this mess will be in even more daunting challenge.

this is not the first hearing, and i am sure it will not be the last. the companies will have their feet held to the fire, but i want to make a few points, and i would love to hear from the witnesses soon. i & bp has agreed to pay all of the causes -- i understand fifi has agreed to pay for the cleanup costs. bp should be prepared to go beyond the $75 million statutory cap. the epa should pay the cost of oil spills, and if you think the taxpayers are upset -- bp should pay the cost of oil spills, and if you think the taxpayers are of such, wait until they think they have to clean up this

disaster on our coastline. i am also troubled by the decision to try to limit liabilities to the $27 million in selvage value for the destroyed raid. several newspapers of a certain day they ensured it for $560 million, but never actually filled it. since the rig collapsed, the company said it has already received $401 million from the insurance policy, and finally, i am disturbed by the february document the states of blowout resulting in an oil spill is unlikely to have an impact because industry equipment, technology, and response plans were of to the task. we need to not only against failures here but to ensure this company and others in the future do not make the same

series of mistakes in the future. i really look forward to having this hearing today. >> thank you, and i am going to been voting until senator nelson comes back. >> we will i am assuming go right to you for commons. -- comments. first, thank you both for being here. as someone from all laughing, you have a three region we have experienced a still of incredible magnitude before, so we have understood what it entails, but first, to the 11 workers the parish, i express my condolences as we are dealing

with the larger cleanup, not to forget the families, but also the future in-the individual's livelihood's, that we have seen 20 years later and beyond, that they have an incredible impact. i also want to thank a lot of alaskans who have stepped up to the plate with an enormous amount of resources and efforts. i know you are stepping down soon, but your experience and understanding of these types of tragedies is a valuable aspect, and i thank you for trying to be the commander in this situation. it is a tragedy, and i think part of this is to learn and understand what went wrong, what kinds of resources we need to have on our side, but what

industry needs to be doing better. there is no question in my mind when it comes to offshore development, this country needs to be the best of the best, and there should be no hesitation in realizing what ever we can, ensuring that the agency's have the investment in resources and other issues. i know we have talked about a lot, not only here, but what is going on down in the gulf, and the arctic, and what is going to go on there. i am anxious to hear as we go through this testimony but also the efforts we are going to have over the next several months of what we can do to improve our technology. it is not realistic to think we will not have ocs. the question is how do we manage

that. i want to thank you all for the efforts you are doing with all hands on deck, so thank you for your participation today, even though this bill is moving very aggressively. i am going to close my commons, and have you spoken already i will turn it to you next. >> thank you. have you voted? >> i voted on the first one. have you done the first vote, too? >> yes. thank you for being here today. we know you have been busy and enormously involved in trying to manage this challenge. this is an important hearing to try to understand not just the

current status of the cleanup efforts, but really to explore what requirements are needed to prevent this from happening. this committee has an important jurisdiction. we have jurisdiction over the two federal agencies that hold primary responsibility for the oil spills -- but as the cleanup and management, as well as understanding the impact of those still reaching those bills on marine and -- the spills on marine environment. given our dependency on oil, given the nature of our economy i, it is unrealistic to assume that suddenly drilling is going to stop. it is not, and for the next 20

or 30 years, even if we make our best efforts with respect to the efficiency and clean coal technology, or whatever the options are going to be, we are still going to be drilling, and we're still going to be reliant on fossil fuels. the president has already made it clear that change is needed at the agency's level, and he has affected the judgment to split into two pieces so that regulators are no longer also making the deal on the industry, but they are making changes on the leadership itself. it is going to be up to the committee to ask the tough questions. over the past 72 hours, we are pleased to note it seems significant progress has been made to slow the flow of oil by

inserting a tube into the pie from which most of the oil has been leaking, and -- into the pipe from which most of the oil has been leaking, and we wish them well and hope that has happened. while i am encouraged by that progress, the chart shown by our colleague has always been a concern with respect to potential spills in the gulf, and we all have significant concerns about what went on -- down on board of the deep horizon as a result of economic and environmental harm to the coastal communities, and some of that is not even capable of being measured. i am also deeply concerned as a former chair of the ocean subcommittees about the potential disruption of the underwater ecosystem,

particularly due to the application of toxic under water dispersants. i think there are serious implications on living organisms in the gulf and perhaps elsewhere. as we were to develop the legislation that is going to create a vibrant clean energy future for our nation, let me say -- i want to recognize that bp and other oil companies are doing an important and constructive part of working towards that, and we are grateful, but we have to get serious about the management of our resources over all. i am frustrated by the discourse that appears to have dominated. that is the easy stuff. what is harder is to bear down and figure out what the options are. we need to clarify what went

wrong, determine if there was negligence, identify who is responsible, and let me say i am encouraged by the statements, which i think had been correct, that they will provide full compensation. one point i feel very strongly about is that no matter what fifi does -- bp does, so long as we are dependent on fossil fuels imported from elsewhere for the bulk of our energy needs, we will continue to run a set of risks, not only -- not always the same as what we have witnessed in the gulf, but some may be even riskier. today tankers are moving through narrow streets around the globe, some of them bordering dangerous countries with dangerous intentions in order to bring oil to our shores from abroad.

these are also oil spills waiting to happen, and it seems to me we need to understand there is a huge impact to the downside to america's economy in 7 $1 billion a day or more a broad to other nations, some of which are not particularly friendly. i do not know how many americans know it, but we pay and iran tax for our policy. every day $100 million goes to iran, even as we are poised to sanction them with respect to nuclear proliferation. we do that because of our dependency on oil for transportation, so the risks should surprise no one. i was amazed to hear some people say this film he made

passing energy independence legislation -- this bill made passing energy independence legislation more difficult. i did not know where the common sense is in that statement. nothing could be further from the truth. if the events telecine thing, it ought to be the opposite. this ought to force congress and the administration to revisit our existing laws and environmental review, but make no mistake, above all else, it ought to drive the serious national dialogue and debate and action on legislation this year to advance our energy independence, which strengthens our national security, creates jobs at home -- the jobs to stay here and the energy stays here, and finally, we will advance our nation's clean energy future by

doing something we used to take for granted, which is called hopefully, that will be the outcome of what happened in the gulf. you have had your opening. i think what we should do is go into the questioning. let's just question them. you're absolutely correct. if you will lead off, thank you for your patience. we appreciate. we will put the full text on record, and a lot of senators will be coming back after this vote, and there will be a significant amount of questions, i am sure. >> i appreciate the opportunity to testify about no of's role in

response to the oil spill. i greatly appreciate the opportunity to discuss the critical roles and to maximize our contributions to protect and restore the community's and economies that were affected. i want to first express my condolences to the families of the 11 people who lost their lives in the explosion. this is a difficult time, and our thoughts are with then as we were to deal with the aftermath. the mission is to understand and predict changes in the earth's environment and manage resources to meet our economic and environmental needs. noah is also at our resources trusty and one of the federal agencies responsible for restoring coastal national resources when they are affected

by oil spills or other releases. as such, the entire agency is deeply concerned about the immediate and long term economic and social and ties to the gulf coast and the nation as a whole from the oil spill. our experts have been assisting from the very beginning of this oil spill, providing coordinated weather and biological response services where and when they are needed most. offices have been mobilized, and hundreds of personnel are dedicating themselves to assist. over the past few weeks, noah has provided 24/7 support both on scene and through our seattle operation center. this support includes twice daily trajectories of the oil spill, information management,

flow forecasts, shoreline and restores risk assessment and modeling support. noah has also been supporting unified command in planning for remediation and analysis of various techniques for handling. hundreds of miles of coastal shoreline were surveyed to support clean of activity. we are addressing issues related to marine mammals and fishery resources, which include the closure of commercial and recreational facilities in affected portions of the gulf, and updating as necessary to ensure consumer safety without needlessly restricting commercial fisheries. as the lead federal trust before many of the nation's coastal and marine resources, the secretary of commerce has authorized

through the act of 1990 to recover damages on behalf of the public, to address injuries resulting from an oil spill. we encourage compensation in the form of restoration, and this is accomplished through the natural resource assessment project by developing a plan that appropriately compensates the public. noah is coordinating the project as a " frosty as well as in five states and representatives -- the coach rusty -- cotrustee as well as in five states. this is a reminder that spills can occur. although the best remedy is prevention, oil spills remained a grave concern given the offshore and onshore oil infrastructure-vessels that moved huge volumes of oil to our

waterways. to mitigate environmental effects, responders should be equipped with capacity to address the challenge. response exercises are necessary to maintain capabilities. continuous training, maintenance, and investment in high priority efforts will ensure the nation's response to these events remains effective. training and coordination with other agencies that might have response and restoration responsibilities is also critical to mitigating the effects of future spills. there are a number of improvements in our ability to mitigate damages for future oil spills. one of the activity is increased, if another large spill was to occur simultaneously in another location in the united states, no would have difficulty

providing a response needed. the continued development of tools and strategies can only increase the effectiveness of response. the activities that would increase response include updating sensitivity maps, data management tools, use of relevant technologies and real time operations systems. search of development is also critical to insure the latest response of fort. priority areas include behavior of oil reduce debt death -- deaths. responding at potential oil spills in the arctic, mapping oil extent, and human damaged bridges human issues like race communication methods. i would like to ensure you will not relent in our efforts to protect the livelihood of gulf coast residents and medicaid the environmental impact. our efforts have been

aggressive, strategic, and science-based. we will continue along that path. thank you for that opportunity to participate, and i am glad to answer any questions. >> thank you. >> i would like to submit my statement. >> the statement will be in the record. >> i like to start with a brief discussion of this event and move into the current status of our response operations. this occurred on the 20th of april. it started out as a massive explosion. i have my concern -- i add my condolences to the family of the men who were lost. i would like to point out that the offshore supply vessels were instrumental in saving well over 100 people, and i think if is

often not understood what they had to do with it. ibm pleased to be here with my friend, whom i have worked -- i am pleased to be here with my friend, who as i have worked with. right after we were aware of the incident itself, and i got notified an hour and a half after the coast guard was notified -- and we immediately sent a rescue units to the scene, and over the surge, covered about 500 square miles and suspended the search when there was no chance there would been survivors. early on, we brought salvage experts in to take a look of the structural issues in certain mobilizing for what we thought might be the worst case. as it turned out, several hours later, i was in the oval office

briefing the president on the implications, and in between that common and we raise the command. she has done a great job working with private industry to make sure we optimize the response. what we have found over the course of this bill is that we are dealing with something much more complicated in many ways than anything i have dealt with. the first one i was involved in was 1980's, so it has been a while. we are not dealing with a large spill any more. depending on when it came to the surface, we have a wide perimeter with different types of oil, which covers a vast area, but there is not a single large spill.

there is a chance of some of it coming to louisiana. we have seen tar balls in taxes. what we're seeing as an almost indeterminate threat. if is creating severe challenges us to where to employer resources, and this has manifested itself mostly in the requirements for the states which can be impacted. as we sit here today, there are probably 20,000 people that are employed in the gulf but our state and local volunteers and -- that are state and local volunteers and the private sector. we have about 1.3 million feet not deployed. we believe to cover everything we need we need about 1.9 million feet. the delta is being covered.

when we get everything, we will have 3 million seats available. this is important as we look at implications of the current and what might be needed we continue to attack this on the surface when conditions allow. you have to have good weather. you have to have the right air- conditioner. >> do you mind if i interrupt you? let me ask this quickly. i understand the principle thing used is corectsit. i understand it is more toxic. is that true?

>> the decision is based on the response plan and what has been used. we are going to look at the relative toxicity. >> is it more toxic than other alternatives? >> there is quite a range. >> do we know what the impact of the toxicity is with respect to organisms in the water? >> i might refer to my colleague. >> the dispersants that are approved for use in an oil spill have been through extensive testing, and they are rated for their toxicity relative to different species. they have been approved, and once they are on the list, they are available to be used. >> my question is lists are one thing. we have just heard testimony

that this is on the directional. that means it is also omni species capable of having an impact. has this been investigated with every species it has come into contact with? >> that would be impossible to do, but there are indicateor species that have been used in tests. >> like what? >> there is an assurance that has been used. there are other species that are planned tonic -- planktonic. i think it is fair to say there is legitimate concern. this is a question of trade- offs. the dispersants are less toxic

than though oil, even though some are more toxic than others. they are less toxic than the oil, and the purposes to break though oil up in tuno a small droplets so they can biodegrade national it -- naturally. this is a question of trade- offs. we do not have complete information about the likely impact on every species. we have never used dispersants in the amount we are using within u.s. waters. >> my understanding is we have never used it under water the way we have now. is that accurate? >> that is correct. >> some of it does not touched oil. some of it goes off in the ocean. does it sink to the bottom? >> because the dispersants have

never been used at steps being considered, epa required extensive testing before there was permission given to apply the dispersants. that testing was done and indicates the dispersant is doing what it was intended to do, which is due break of the oil. >> what happens to that which does not connect to the oil? doesn't sink to the bottom? >> it is inserted in a way that it goes right into the oil that is coming out, but it biodegrades rapidly. there is continuous monitoring in place as the subsurface dispersants are being used.

i think there are decisions were there is a trade-off. this is the lesser of the evils, but there are a lot of questions about what the impacts are long term, and that is why we are being aggressive, to try to get a better understanding of what the trade-offs are. there is also a mechanism where if they are not doing what is intended that we can stop using them and media italy, -- immediately, so there is ongoing monitoring. >> thank you very much. i need to go vote. it is all yours. >> i would like to address this to both of you. to be honest, i do not thin and most americans have heard -- do not think most americans have heard of what ms is and what it

does, and it appears to me they have not been very attentive. that could be over the last 10 years. i just do not know, but i have a lot of face in the coast guard and noah -- faith in the coast guard and noah, but it seems to me when it comes to permits, designs, things to be done, etc., that they ought to be sharing this with year to be a tripartite, and senator snowe said that ought to be put into law, which i would tend to agree with. you have experience. i suppose i do have experience, but it has not surfaced at this point.

what is your view on that? >> i would like to address three areas, if i could. the first is an inspection issue. as it relates to the regulatory responsibilities, we have responsibility for the drilling apparatus, and the coast guard indicates a certificate of compliance. regarding the mobil drilling unit itself, we regulate that under title 46. we have taken a look of the current set of regulations, and we think there are areas we might be able to do a better job. i would submit them. take a look of the standards. an important one is reliability.

the technology has probably gone ahead of the regulations. we need to the difference between floating production units and mobil drilling. a floating production is basically the soles or ships that are involved, and looking at the standards related to that, and finally, fire fighting e equipment. regarding the actual drilling equipment itself, they're not under any regulatory regime. they are built to specifications. there are three that are out there for the industry to use. api issues a license to

manufacturers. i think there is on opportunity to take a look at whether or not we need a regulatory regime. >> what you're saying is api is the regulator of some very sensitive machinery. >> they set industry standards. >> nobody else is regulating. >> there is no regulator at this time. finally, as you know, we approve the response plans for the drilling units. we think there needs to be a closer regulation to make sure there is a match there. >> the roll includes providing comments on their plans, their

programs, and their need to document. we do not have final approval. we simply provide comments. we also have responsibility to provide certification or authorization if there is reason to believe marine mammals might be harmed for specific activities. >> can i interrupt? i want to ask you one question. you have the environmental sensitivity index, and they are very crucial for judging exposure. my understanding is these maps are outdated even to the extent of 10 years. is that the case, and if is,

what are we doing about it? >> the numbers we have far more than 10 years old, so it is the case the many of them do not reflect current information. we have not had the resources to continually update those. this is primarily a research issue. it is my understanding it would cost more than $11 million to update the amounts that are more than 10 years old. the current request includes updating of only one of those, so this is a question where it is simply a matter of not having the resources. >> its lack of resources is causing that to happen common and that is really bad, so we have to attend to that. i thank you.

>> admiral alan, do you believe the peace is doing everything within its power and that could be done to clean up the spill? >> i think bp has been relentless in their responsibilities, but we have been relentless in his oversight. some of the things have not been faced before. they are the ones that have access to the discharge area. i think one thing that sets this apart is there is no human access to the point of discharge. everything we know is through a remote sensing, and the entire elements of production capacity rests in the private sector, so the role of government is to conduct oversight to make sure we are doing everything we can.

there has been a collection folks -- of folks at the command center that have been inserted in there. there is a vigorous conversation going on, and i would like to say it is less responsiveness and making sure it is fair for everyone. i would say it is a matter of coordination in winter, it becomes an issue for the coast guard as well. >> let me ask both of you. in looking at this group that is trying to determine what is the right thing to do and what is the consequence, the you feel like everyone has every bit of information and the decisions

being made are collaborative between the two of you end your agencies and the group? >> we have had very positive collaborative relationships with everyone and the command led by the coast guard, and there has been really good exchanges of information across the agencies, and i think the coast guard has done a spectacular job of providing leadership. one thing no a does is provide scientific support, so they have immediate access to the scientific information, but there is a lot of interaction as well. >> i think an instructive event took place on sunday. there was a conference call that

was actually entitled nonscientific summit. it involved all the engineers working in houston, the imbeded folks in the national labs, and there was a step-by-step review of the intervention being planned by british petroleum, especially regarding the implementation of mud into the well. i can tell you the questions were exhaustive. the engineers were put on the spot to provide information that would lead them to believe a certain tactic would work, and they were growing very hard, so if that as a way to explain the involvement going on as these tactics are being developed, i think that is emblematic. >> in addition to the beaches, there are the wetlands. the coastal wetlands are an

important part of the ecosystem. if they are impacted by the oil spill down the road, can they do anything that would help, and is cp going to be irresponsible for funding wetland restoration as well as speech and cleanup efforts they are also committed to making? >> you are absolutely right to focus on the key role the weapon to play in the entire region, and our efforts have been devoted to keeping the oil from reaching them, because it does have the potential to have serious impact not only on the wetlands but on many species that reside in the gulf but use the wetlands as nursery areas. around 80% tuno 90% of the fisheries have a live stage as

the seventh part of their life in those wetlands, so it is critical. it is part of the process that is intended to quantify what the impact is and to an -- radiate that, but once oil gets into the marshes -- what the impact is, but once the oil gets in, it is very difficult to remove. >> one of the significant changes made an oil pollution act was something called national resources assessment, which is recoverable to assess the damage moving forward that has been institutionalized, and we work closely together. the process will start shortly. >> can i add the add one thing

noe has done is to mobilize throughout the region to get precise information about what lands in other areas before they are impacted so we have the most current information from air coastal surveys, water samples, taking chemical information, etc., so we have had a blitzkrieg to do that. >> i appreciate that, because it will be more complicated, so i am glad both of you are committed to preventing, and if that does not work, going into litigation, and it will be difficult i know. can i ask one quick question. are you going to stay as the commander after the change of command? >> my change of command is scheduled for the 25th of may.

i am available until i am not needed any further. >> is that of july 1 cut off, or we are going to keep it open until then? >> it would have to be under a different set of circumstances after that because i would no longer be in the coast guard. >> thank you. senator nelson corrigan -- senator nelson. >> i have a letter which she sent to bp asking for full access to all information related to the oil discharge rate. why is it necessary for her to send that letter? was bp not providing full access to the footage? >> we have had full access since the even started.

we are trying to put together a technical team to establish what is going on and to try to get an estimate. we do need some archival information. we just want access to that, and she ensure that in her letter. >> you feel satisfied you are having access to all the video footage? >> it has been coming out of real time since the start of the even. i would say one thing is the scientific summit held on sunday. he made the same request involving technical data as it relates to the option being considered. >> in relation to the footage you just presented today, maybe it was bp that released it after we wrote to you, but have you

made a new as the met? >> we are pulling an interagency group of experts in. there have been a lot of prognostications about three. we are currently using 5,000 barrels a day. one of our provinces we are dealing with a discharge point that has no human access, and what we're trying to do is get the best minds in the country and say how we can come out with a more refined discharge rate. >> can i add to that. i think it is important to note that a first of the federal government have not been constrained. we have all along assume we may be dealing with more oil than is the estimate, and efforts have been very aggressive and

mobilize to deal with the possibility that it might be more than that. that does not mean it is unimportant. it is. >> you and i talked about these flights. is that costing noah, or is vp river -- reimbursing -- is bp reimbursing? >> we are funding the fights with the expectation they will be reimbursable, and there is a specific process for documenting and requesting -- for making sure all the right things are done to get that reimbursement. >> i am running out of time. i want to follow up on that. have you confirmed the existence of the origin of the deep sea plumes and terminal -- plumes?

>> have we confirmed the existence of the deep sea plume's democrats have you confirmed the existence of the deep sea plumes? >> are you talking about the oil coming out of the riser? >> i am talking about the long -- 100 yards thick, 3 miles wide. >> researchers on the research vessel but just got back identified an anomaly that is subsurface that may be oil, but that has not yet been confirmed. they took samples, and those are in the process of being analyzed, but we will not know for a number of days if it is oil or not. this is the early stages of identifying and characterizing what that is. >> you do not know whether the dispersants have affected that

oil at those depths. >> if the plume is indeed oil, we do not know what the origin is. it is highly unlikely it could be dispersants that have been used at the source of the leak, because there has not been much use yet. it has only been a small amount that has been used, so the mechanism of how that came to be is yet unknown, and i think we will be in the discovery phase as the events play out, and that will be one of them. >> what i am trying to get at is what we see on the surface is one thing. how much of it is underneath it we do not say that we will have to deal with for years?

thank you. >> thank you. >> senator snowe. >> just to follow up on that, truly the determination of the size of this bill could make a difference. >> absolutely. >> that is a difference when we see the variation in estimates. 80,000 barrels a day as opposed to 5000, and it is nearly seven times as that which was killed during the exxon valdez acrisis. the ambiguities and wide discrepancy is a serious issue, and how to grapple with a question we believe it is important to get a good estimate

of what the rate is and what the total amount of oil is and what the rate is. that is not an easy thing to do, which is why he has set up a new team to bring the best possible minds together to try to nail this down. it is important. it is just difficult to do. >> what i find confounding about this crisis is the fact that these are fundamentals that should have been established -- having a response plan for the worst-case scenario, but the worst-case scenario was not established in the exploration can land. it was sidestepped, understanding to the high estimates we have potentially have today. in the response plan, you require a vessel. can you give us some idea as to what you would have been done

differently? would you consider this adequate in a worst-case scenario? >> for a vessel response plan, we have several solutions. if we will be able to deal with some of the skills given the operating area. that is reconciled by an area committee set up by an unseen coordinator, and there is a reconciliation of the resources to be protected and the resources needed to do that. .