Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
296,044
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 97:
Line 97: + +
→Environmental policy: SAFE Award
BP's exploration plan received in the Obama administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref> BP was granted a “categorical exclusion” by the Obama administration from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> according to reports in the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>
BP's exploration plan received in the Obama administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref> BP was granted a “categorical exclusion” by the Obama administration from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> according to reports in the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>
BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig was inspected by the Obama administration's Minerals Management Service (MMS) only two weeks before it exploded<ref>White House Press Office, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-bp-oil-spill-gulf-coast Press Briefing on the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Coast,] 29 April 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 12 May 2010.</ref> killing 11 people and dumping 30 million barrels of oil in the Gulf. The rig had been awarded the ''Safety Award for Excellence'' in 2009 by the Obama MMS.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=66303 Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn’t Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill,] Matt Cover, CNSNews.com, May 20, 2010.</ref><ref>MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE, The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref>
The Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) gave BP the green light to apply its dispersant, Corexit as cosmetic relief to the spill.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> Corexit was found to be 10 to 20 times more [[toxic]] to human and wildlife of more than a dozen other dispersants approved by the EPA.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
The Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) gave BP the green light to apply its dispersant, Corexit as cosmetic relief to the spill.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> Corexit was found to be 10 to 20 times more [[toxic]] to human and wildlife of more than a dozen other dispersants approved by the EPA.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]