The American Petroleum Institute, International Association of Geophysical Contractors, Independent Petroleum Association of America, and National Ocean Industries Association have published a fact sheet on why seismic surveys for oil and gas are needed in the United States’ Atlantic Ocean Outer Continental Shelf. There is some political opposition to seismic surveys in this area. The fact sheet explains that the last surveys of the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) were conducted 30 years ago. Due to technological advances, existing estimates of the available energy are out-of-date.” The fact sheet emphasizes that “[e]xisting resource estimates for the Atlantic OCS are: … 3.3 billion barrels of oil … 31.3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.”
Firm sues governments over intellectual property
LETHBRIDGE — Governments have the power to regulate the use of private property nearly to the extent of actually expropriating it. And surprisingly, even though regulatory policies are acceptable under our legal system, there is no requirement that compensation be paid for the use of that property.
It is clear that, for the sake of justice, governments must protect and compensate property owners. And the same goes for intellectual property.
Geophysical Service Incorporated (GSI), a Calgary-based company specializing in marine seismic data, needs such protection. The company performs expensive offshore seismic surveys for petroleum companies.
In May 2012, the Native Village of Chickaloon and several NGOs challenged the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (“NMFS”) issuance of an “Incidental Harassment Authorization” that allowed Apache Alaska Corporation to conduct seismic surveys in Cook Inlet, Alaska. The plaintiffs alleged that the issuance of the Incidental Harassment Authorization (“IHA”) and associated documents to Apache violated the Marine Mammal Protection Act (“MMPA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1361-1421; the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544; and the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4231-4370.
Editor’s Note: CRE, in its role as a regulatory watchdog, routinely comments on the comments sent to regulatory agencies. These expost analyses are posted on this Interactive Public Docket (IPD) and the public and all stakeholders are invited to offer their comments. A copy of this post has been forwarded to NMFS.
The four leading trade associations of the petroleum industry the American Petroleum Institute, the Independent Petroleum Association of America, the International Association of Geophysical Contractors, and the National Ocean Industries Association responded to a proposal to list sperm whales as distinct population segment.
NGOs have petitioned NMFS to list the sperm whale in the northern Gulf of Mexico as a Distinct Population Segment under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. CRE’s comments opposed the requested listing for several reasons. One reason is the absence of an adequate data base to support such a listing. A DPS listing on the current data base would violate NMFS’ and OMB’s Information Quality Act Guidelines.
- Click here to read CRE’s comments
The final report,Environmental Assessment of Marine Vibroseis (EA Marine Vibroseis), is now available. This document will be useful to industry members, government agencies, and other stakeholders, by providing a desktop study of the current understanding of marine vibroseis technology and its potential environmental impacts.
The EA Marine Vibroseis project was funded by the E&P Sound and Marine Life Joint Industry Program (JIP). As the title of the document indicates, the purpose of the document is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts from surveys using next-generation marine vibroseis as the energy source, examine how those impacts would compare to impacts from airguns, and evaluate how a marine vibroseis system could be operated so as to minimize impact. In addition, the EA Marine Vibroseis evaluates mitigation measures that might be used during marine vibroseis operations and provides comments regarding key data gaps that limit the ability to currently predict the effects of the technology. The document is available on the JIP website.
CRE Comments on NMFS Proposed Rule:Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities
Mar 13
NMFS officials have been quoted as saying that the regulatory regime embodied in the aforementioned proposal could be representative of the paradigm which could emerge as a result of analyses being performed in response to the BOEM petition on takes.
in response to the possibility that the resultant proceeding could be precedent setting, CRE filed two comments:
1) The State of Seismic Regulation in the Gulf of Mexico
2) Navy’s Modeled Marine Mammal Take Estimates Conflict with Real World Observations
Numerous individual citizens have already filed comments on these proposed rules. Most of these comments criticize and oppose these proposed rules, in large part because they authorize a number of marine mammal takes that the commenters believe to be excessive.
CRE respects these individuals’ right to comment, and we commend them for exercising that right. However, they may be misguided.
The estimated takes in the proposed rules are based on Navy computer modeling that is inconsistent with real world observations.
See complete submission below.
The Marine Mammal Commission sponsorsed a meeting with NOAA’s Southeast Fisheries Center on January 25, 2013. Some of the most informed scientists in the marine science field made presentations. As a result of the kind of efforts of Dr. Ragen, the MMC Executive Director, the audio presentations and related visual presentations have made available to the public.
In the attachments below you will note the first four audio presentations are followed by briefing slides.
We call your particular attention to page 9 of the last attachment which describes work on passive acoustic monitoring.
53 and Counting: The Number of Public Comments Submitted on Navy Sonar Takes of Marine Mammals
Feb 07
One week has passed since the NMFS issuance of the Take Notice for Navy Sonar. In this short period of time, final comments are not due until March 11, the agency has received 53 comments.
As of this date, February 7, NMFS has not published the comments on Regulations.gov.
When NMFS acts, CRE will post the more influential comments on this Interactive Public Docket to allow the public to comment on the same both during and after the close of the public comment period.
