Responsive Document - CREW: NOAA: Regarding BP Oil Spill: 4/3/2012 - (Part 2) Pages From FOIA 2010-377 ORR OHC Interim 4 1 To 3596 Final

Regional Response Teams on the advisability of continuing the current level of
dispersant operations.
Science Summit:
On June 3, the USG (NOAA, OSTP, EPA, NSF, DOI, Coast Guard) is co-
sponsoring a science meeting being organized by the Consortium for Ocean
Leadership at Louisiana State University.
This meeting will bring together representatives from federal response agencies
with a broader representation (100 150 participants) of the non-federal research
community. The meeting will also provide an opportunity for representatives of
the agencies involved in the Federal response to present the work and science that
is being done, solicit input to enhance understanding of the magnitude and
impacts of the spill, and support the federal response.
Anticipated outcomes include novel approaches for characterizing the magnitude,

fate, and transport of the oil and dispersants; and recommendations for short- and
long-term research priorities for evaluating ecological and human impacts; and
novel approaches to data accessibility, quality and integrity.
Given the challenge, we expect the formation of semi-permanent working groups

to focus on specific research questions arising from this meeting. Admiral Thad
Allen (USCG) will present the keynote, Shere Abbott (OSTP), and Marcia
McNutt (USGS) will report on previous summits. Dr. Lubchenco will also likely
attend. DHS has the lead on the communications plan.
Seafood Safety:
NOAA and FDA have been working with EPA and OMB to ensure that seafood
harvested from the Gulf of Mexico is safe for consumers.
To date, a re-opening protocol for areas closed to commercial and recreation
fishing has been agreed to, and all federal partners continue to work on a
surveillance sampling plan to test for contaminants in areas outside of the closure
area. Three additional steps: dockside sampling, long-line trawl sampling, and
market-based sampling are all in some stage of development.
A roll-out of the re-opening protocol, as well as baseline and post-spill testing

results, is tentatively planned for June 2, 2010.
Barrier Island Proposal:
The State of Louisiana has submitted a modified permit request to the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers to construct sand berms as an oil spill response mechanism.
The Corps of Engineers has requested comments on the proposal from the natural
resource agencies, including NOAA, EPA, and DOI.
The National Incident Commander will make the final decision on whether the
proposed activity is an appropriate response mechanism.
Currently, there are many concerns about the environmental impacts and efficacy
of the proposal.
SENSITIVE AND PRIVILEGED: DO NOT COPY WITHOUT PERMISSION
Document ID: 0.7.19.1779.1
Received(Date): Tue, 25 May 2010 17:49:59 -0400

From: Linda belton <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Pre-brief at 9:05 on Wednesday
To: [email protected], 'Monica Medina' <[email protected]>,'David Kennedy'
<[email protected]>, [email protected],'Margaret Spring'
<[email protected]>,'Sally Yozell' <[email protected]>, "'Gray, John'"
<[email protected]>,'Amanda Hallberg Greenwell' <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected],"'Jacqueline J. Rousseau'" <[email protected]>
Monica and David Kennedy are scheduled for W ednesday, Thursday and Friday.
From: McGrath, Shaun L. [mailto:Shaun L. [email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 4:55 PM
To: McGrath, Shaun L.; Belton, Linda; Monica Medina; [email protected]; Tennyson, Stephanie L;
[email protected]; Lori Faeth; Kayyem, Juliette; Murk, David CDR
Subject: Pre brief at 9:05 on W ednesday
All,
Draft agenda for the pre-call tomorrow is below. Please let me know if there are any changes.

Wednesday, May 26 Call with Governors

9:05 a.m. pre-brief; 9:15 Governors
HOST Pin
[Guest Pin

DRAFT AGENDA
Speakers
Observations and Trajectory Monica Medina and David Kennedy, Medina, NOAA
NOAA will provide the latest observations and trajectories
Document ID: 0.7.19.1931
o Jindal Will the eastern currents continue to hold the oil from moving further West into the
Cappolias (sp!)?
o Jindal Will the currents/conditions continue to keep the oil from moving North up the MS
Sound?
o
Situation &Leak Stabilization Update RADM Peter Neffenger, NIC
o Latest information from National Incident Command, including current status of efforts to
stabilize the leaks.
o Jindal are we seeing decreased amounts of oil coming ashore given all of the skimming,
burns, dispersants? Neffenger, not sure, but we are getting a lot of oil out of the water.
o Neffenger
in Houma today will meet with Gov. Jindal

will try to meet Gov. Barbour later this week
riser insertion now down to 1200-1500 barrels/day (any explanation to this?)
Top Kill starts tomorrow
Barrier/berm expect a decision later today
Preliminary numbers on flow rate and volume from task force soon

Operations Report RADM Mary Landry, UAC
o o o o Response Plans and Boom
Moving skimmers and vessels concentrating on 15 mi offshore from Chandeleurs
Enclosing wildlife refuges with boom; Biloxi Marsh
Boom is over 100% of plans for many of the areas in LA
o Barbour are you deploying boom to Wrigleys? Yes Jindal why, that doesnt seem to
track with NOAA report that oil not moving that far. Answer we are leaning forward.
o Jindal Want to reconcile Coast Guards boom numbers. Hearing from Plaquemines Parish
Pres. that numbers do not match what they are counting. They think CG is counting boom that is
just passing through to somewhere else.
o Jindal will the Coast Guard start directing the boom deployment? Answer = Yes, CG is
tactically directing the boom and Gov should weigh in with his CG liaison.
EPA Update EPA Dep Admin BobPerciasepe
Open discussion and Q&A with Governors and state officials
Next call 9:15 a.m. EDT (8:15 CDT) Thursday, May 26, 2010
Received(Date): Wed, 26 May 2010 12:15:10 +0100

From: "St John, Karen" <[email protected]>
Subject: BP Gulf of Mexico Update: May 25
Update Regarding ROV Monitoring of 'Top Kill' Procedure
BP today confirmed that following detailed discussion with the National Incident Commander, Admiral
Thad Allen, it will continue to provide live video feeds from the seabed throughout the planned 'top kill'
procedure - the attempt to stop the flow from the damaged MC252 well by pumping heavy drilling fluids
into it.
Preparations for this procedure are continuing with the expectation that it could be activated on the
morning of Wednesday May 26, 2010.
Throughout the extended top kill procedure - which may take up to two days to complete - very significant
changes in the appearance of the flows at the seabed may be expected. These will not provide a reliable
indicator of the overall progress, or success or failure, of the top kill operation as a whole. BP will report
on the progress of the operation as appropriate and on its outcome when complete.

Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Response Update

05/25/2010 7:00pm EDT
BP is working as part of the Unified Command to accomplish three main objectives in the Gulf of Mexico:
1. 2. 3.
On the Sea Floor to stop the flow of oil through various strategies;
On the Surface to minimize impacts of the spill; and
Onshore to protect the shoreline and inform the public.
Highlights
x x x x x x
16,578
personnel responding as part of the Unified Command.
4,362 trained volunteers engaged in assisting Unified Command.

Lower Marine Riser Package cap fabricated and shipped to location.

1,225 cleanup vessels deployed, including 80 skimmers.

14 controlled burns conducted on Monday.

3 new claims offices opened.
$29.4 million in total claims paid to date.

Offshore Sea Floor
BPs priority is to reduce and stop the flow of oil subsea and minimize environmental impacts through
multiple strategies:

1. Riser Insertion Tube The riser insertion tool continues to capture oil and natural gas. This remains
a new technology and both its continued operation and its effectiveness in capturing the oil and gas
remain uncertain.
2. Dispersant injection on the sea floor The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
determined that subsea application of the currently-used dispersant can continue. Surface use of
dispersant can continue, but at reduced levels. In addition, EPA will conduct its own toxicity testing of the
available dispersant types and will continue working with BP on alternatives. Remote Operated Vehicles
(ROVs) are currently injecting approximately 14,000 gallons of dispersant per day at the main riser leak
source on the sea floor.
3.
Top Kill Activities
x The top kill

system includes bypass lines, a manifold, and valves that are being
pressure tested. An animated description of the procedure can be found on the Deepwater Horizon
Unified Command website at: http://wwwdeepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/site/2931/
x
Final preparations and safety reviews continued today.

x Once diagnostics are completed, engineers expect to pump heavy fluids and/or

fibrous materials directly through the blowout preventer in an attempt to kill the well.
4.
Drilling relief wells
The first relief well (work being performed by the Development Driller III) is at approximately

x 10,100 feet below sea level. This well was spudded on May 2. Currently cementing the casing.
x The second relief well (work being performed by Development Driller II) is at approximately 8,650

feet below sea level. Drilling began on May 16. Currently cementing casing.
x Both
are situated approximately one-half mile from the Macondo well and will attempt to
wells intercept the existing wellbore at approximately 18,000 feet below seal level. It is estimated the total
drilling process for each well will take at least 90 days
5.
Containment Recovery System
x A Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) cap has been fabricated and shipped to the location.

This cap is designed to fit directly over the LMRP on top of the blowout preventer once the broken riser
pipe is removed. If needed, the cap would be attached to a riser pipe to convey oil and gas from the well
directly to the Enterprise drill ship on the surface.
Additionally, a containment dome, called a top hat, is deployed on the sea floor and readied to

x be placed over the main leak, if needed.

Offshore Surface Spill Response
x Cleanup Vessels 1,167 specialty response vessels are now deployed, including tugs, barges

and recovery boats.
x Skimming Vessels 80 of the cleanup boats are skimmers, designed to separate oil from

water. Approximately 262,100 barrels of oil-water mix (more than 11 million gallons) have been
recovered and treated.
x Surface Dispersant More than 705,500 gallons of dispersant have been applied on the

surface by aircraft. BP is working with the EPA to identify alternative effective dispersants for
deployment.
x In-Situ
Burning The Unified Command conducted an additional 14 in-situ burns on Monday.
In-situ burning occurs on the surface using special fire-boom that collects surface hydrocarbons which are
then burned off. Note: 53 burns have been conducted to date; removing approximately 62,000 barrels of
oil from the surface.
Onshore - Shoreline Protection and Community Outreach
x
Oil Containment and Shoreline Protection 1,912,064 feet of containment boom have been
deployed or staged to protect sensitive areas identified in the states Area Contingency Plans (ACPs).
1,160,075 feet of containment boom is on order. 534,400 feet of sorbent boom is deployed, with another
1,280,000 million feet staged and ready for deployment.
x
Claims for Damages - BP has opened 25 claims offices to help claimants through the process.
Vietnamese and Spanish translators are in some offices. 24,650 claims have been filed and
approximately 9,500 claims have been paid totalling $29.4 million. Most of the claims are for loss of
income or wages in commercial fishing, shrimping and oyster harvest, and associated facilities. Note: No
person asserting a claim or receiving payment for interim benefits will be asked or required to sign a
release or waive any rights to assert additional claims, to file an individual legal action, or to participate in
other legal actions associated with the Deepwater Horizon incident. The contact number for claims is
(800) 440-0858. In person claims can be filed at office locations listed below. Claims can also be filed
online at: http://www.bp.com/iframe.do?categoryId=9033722&contentId=7062138
x
$500 Million for 10-year Research Program to Study Spill Impacts On Monday, BP
announced it will contribute $500 million to fund an open research program studying the impact of the
Deepwater Horizon incident, and its associated response, on the marine and shoreline environment of the
Gulf of Mexico.
x
BP Provides $70 million in Tourism Grants to States BP has made $70 million available to
Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida to promote tourism.
x
$25 Million Block Grants to 4 States On May 4, BP announced it would provide Louisiana,
Florida, Mississippi and Alabama $25 million each to accelerate implementation of the States Area
Contingency Plans.
Vessels of Opportunity Program

Nearly 5,200 contracts have been signed and 1,114

x vessels are currently active. Community Outreach Centers are working with the contractors to ensure
they have the appropriate training.
x Volunteers and Training BP has opened 22 Community Outreach Centers across

the Gulf where people can go for more information, to find out about the spill, and to connect with
volunteer opportunities. Volunteers are being trained in five different modules that range from safety for
beach clean-up, to wildlife monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and vessel operation for laying
boom. As of today, 16,239 individual training modules had been completed, an increase of 1,600 since
Sunday. Information about training can be found on the incident website at
www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com under volunteers.
x Wildlife Activities 6 additional reports of impacted wildlife were received in the past 24 hours,

bringing the total number to 138. Wildlife rehabilitation sites are located in Venice, LA and Mobile, AL.
Summary of Regional Operations and Outreach
Robert Unified Area Command
Louisiana
Sites:
Houma Incident Command Post

Pointe A La Hache Community Outreach Center
Venice Community Outreach Center, Staging Area

Grand Isle Staging Area
Port Fourchon Staging Area
Cocodrie Staging Area
Shell Beach Staging Area
Slidell Staging Area
St. Mary Staging Area

Amelia Staging Area
Belle Chasse
Claims Office
2766 Belle Chasse

Hwy
Belle Chasse, LA
70037
Cut Off Claims Office
Tarpon Heights Shopping Center
Unit 2
16263 E. Main Street
Cut Off, LA 70345
Grand Isle Claims Office
3811 LA 1
Grand Isle, LA 70358
Hammond Claims Office
Worley Operations Center
303 Timber Creek
Hammond, LA 70404
Houma Claims Office
Plaza Caillou Shopping Center
814 Grand Caillou Road
Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363
New Orleans Claims Office
4375 Michoud Blvd
New Orleans, LA 70461

Pointe A La Hache Claims Office
1553 Hwy 15
Pointe A La Hache, LA
Slidell Claims Office
2040 Gause Blvd., Suite 10
Slidell, LA 70461
St. Bernard Claims Office
1345 Bayou Rd
Saint Bernard, LA 70085
Venice Claims Office
41093 Hwy LA 23
Boothville, LA 70038

x New claims office in St. Tammany Parish at Slidell, and new claims office for Orleans Parish in

New Orleans.
x
$17.2 million has been paid in claims in Louisiana.

Mississippi
Sites:
Pascagoula Community Outreach Center, Staging Area

Biloxi Community Outreach Center, Staging Area
Waveland Community Outreach Center

Pass Christian Staging Area
Bay St. Louis
Claims Office
1171 Highway 90
Bay St. Louis, MS
39520
Biloxi Claims Office
920 Cedar Lake Rd, Suite K
Biloxi, MS 39532
Pascagoula Claims Office
5912 Old Mobile Hwy
Suite 4
Pascagoula, MS 39563

x Containment boom has been deployed or staged in all Tier 1 locations in the Mississippi Area

Contingency Plan.
Alabama Sites:
Mobile Incident Command Post, Community Outreach Center

Theodore Staging Area
Orange Beach Staging Area
Dauphin Staging Area

Bayou
LaBatre
Claims
Office
13290 N.
Wintzell
Avenue
Bayou
LaBatre,
AL 36509
Foley Claims Office
(Orange Beach/Gulf Shores/Bon Secour)
1506 North McKenzie Street (HWY 59),
Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535
Gulf Shores / Orange Beach Claims Office
24039 Perdido Beach Blvd
Suite 1
Orange Beach, AL 36561

x Containment boom has been deployed or staged in all Tier 1 locations in the Alabama Area

Contingency Plan.
St. Petersburg
Incident
Pensacola Community Outreach Center, Staging Area
Florida Sites: Command Post
Panama City Staging Area
St. Joe Staging Area
St. Marks Staging Area
Apalachicola Claims Office
th
194 14
Street
Suite 105
Apalachicola, FL 32320
Crawfordville Claims Office
3010 Crawfordville Hwy
Suite A&B
Crawfordville, FL 32327
Ft. Walton
Claims
Office
348 SW
Miracle
Strip Pkwy
Suite 13
Fort
Walton
Beach, FL
32548
Gulf Breeze Claims Office
5668 Gulf Breeze Pkwy
Unit B-9
Gulf Breeze, FL 32563
Panama City Claims Office
7938 Front Beach Road
Panama City Beach, FL 32408
Pensacola Claims Office
3960 Navy Boulevard
Suite 16-17
Pensacola, FL 32507
Port St. Joe Claims Office
106 Trade Circle
Suite A
Port St. Joe, FL 32456
Santa Rosa Beach Claims Office
5008 US Hwy 98W
Unit 6&7
Santa Rosa Beach, FL 32459

Claims
office opens in Wakulla County at Crawfordville.
Contact Information
Environment / Community Hotline to report oil on the beach or shoreline

(866) 448-5816
or other environment or community impacts and access the Rapid Response
Team
Wildlife to report and access care for impacted, i.e. oil wildlife Volunteers to request volunteer information Services to register as consultant, contractor, vendor, or submit
information on alternative response technology, services, products or
suggestions
(866) 557-1401
(866) 448-5816
(281) 366-5511
Vessels of Opportunity to report and register boats available to assist
with response
and to sign up\
(281) 366-5511
Training for questions about training requirements, times and locations,

(866) 905-4492 or (866) 647-
2338
(281) 366-3123
(800) 440-0858
(985) 902-5231 or (985) 902-
5240
(251) 445-8965
(832) 587-8554
(888) 318-6765
(281) 366-5578
Ideas to Submit File online at http://www.horizonedocs.com/index.html

Investor Relations Claims by phone Joint Information Center Robert, LA Media and information center
Joint Information Center Mobile, AL Media and information center Transocean Hotline MI Swaco Hotline BP Family and third-party contractor hotline Twitter: Oil_Spill_2010
Facebook: Deepwater Horizon Response
Joint Incident Command website: www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com
Claims http://www.bp.com/iframe.do?categoryId=9033722&contentId=7062138
Karen St John
BP America
Sr. Director, Regulatory Affairs
(202) 457-6594
(202) 351-1399 (cell)
[email protected]
Received(Date): Wed, 26 May 2010 07:52:48 -0400

From: Tim Gallagher <[email protected]>
Subject: Morning Notes - DWH-MC252
To: [email protected], Joe Inslee <[email protected]>,Ken Barton
<[email protected]>
Daily Update - 26May10.docx
Please see attached for the latest.
For Internal Use
DeepWater Horizon
MC252
May 26, 2010
Yesterday overflight @ source and in vicinity observed considerably less oil than noted
previously. Whether attributed to 27 in situ burns conducted since Sunday, subsea dispersant
injection operations, high efficiency rates of skimmers, or the high draw of the sipper tube - the
end result appears to be less oil on the surface. That assessment corroborated by aerial dispersant
aircraft and skimmers experiencing difficulty finding target oil yesterday.
However, oil continues to wash ashore in the delta areas. Overflights did observe less oil & more
sheens offshore & in convergence zones potentially giving SCAT in the area an opportunity to
remediate some of the impacted shores. Decent wx will allow the shoreline cleanup efforts to
continue.
Overflight toward the Loop Current observed significantly less oil in the elephants trunk and
only sheens SE of 28N 88W. NGA SeaStar imagery indicated an anomaly 90 miles to the west of
Tampa. Although NESDIS observed the same feature they were able to determine that it wasnt
oil. However to resolve the discrepancy, we scheduled a flight from St Petersburg, FL to
investigate.
Final checks conducted to prepare for the Top Kill procedure to begin this morning. As
previously reported the process should take approximately one - two days to complete. It
involves injecting drilling mud @ a rate in excess of 50 bbls/min through the BOP into the well
bore to choke the flow. Followed by cement to kill the well.
The Top Kill comes on the heels of yesterdays announcement that the D/S Enterprise
temporarily drew 8000 bbls/day through the sipper tube. The implication @ minimum oil
discharges from the riser @ 8000 bbls/day & most likely much more. The Flow Rate Technical
Group should complete its calculations by the end of today with the President scheduled to
announce the results tomorrow. Not to diminish the FRTGs tremendous effort, but hopefully a
successful Top Kill will make those calculations no longer necessary.
AC Robert established data management plan for the science cruises underway or scheduled to
take place. Still ongoing discussions concerning standardizing sampling protocols, reporting
requirements, calibration of sensors & sample analysis. The WxBird indicated anomalous
fluoremetry in the near surface & at depth approximately 45 miles from the source water
samples indicate no visible oil. The WxBird is operating independently of the coordinated
science effort as a result data flow into the Unified Command is not through prescribed
channels. (Its fluorometer is calibrated for Chlorophyll A which could give a false positive for
oil. Even if the water samples indicate the presence of oil it dispels the theory that there is a big
subsurface blob of oil. Again - you have people looking for oil that never have before. But the
most significant problem with the WxBird is that they are not communicating emphasizes the
necessity to communicate)
The Gulf of Mexico dispersant conference gets underway this morning. With more than 830,000
gallons of dispersant applied so far in the response, the groups main objectives are to discuss
dispersant loading in the Gulf and determine strategies to go forward.
For Internal Use
Document ID: 0.7.19.2145.1
For Internal Use
DeepWater Horizon
MC252
May 26, 2010
Amid growing concerns of submerged oil heading toward them, Florida is developing plans to
establish an Area Command out of Miami with unified commands in St Petersburg, Key West &
JAX.
Reports yesterday of a shrimper hauling in oil with his catch to the west of the Dry Tortugas
were confirmed to be a single tarball which was not retained for analysis.
For Internal Use
Document ID: 0.7.19.2145.1

Subject: FW: Urgent
To: [email protected]
This is what is happening...

-----Original Message-----
From: Monica Medina [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:07 AM
To: Sarri, Kristen; Medina, Monica; Belton, Linda; Medina, Monica; Stevens,
Adele; Kennedy, David
Cc: Spring, Margaret
Subject: RE: Urgent
They are mad because we are testing the fish for toxicity of dispersants.
Not just testing to see if the fish have dispersants in them. But rather
testing the impact of dispersants on fish.
Monica Medina
Principal Deputy Under Secretary
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Department of Commerce
(202) 482-3567
[email protected]
From: Sarri, Kristen [mailto:[email protected]]
To: Medina, Monica; Belton, Linda; Medina, Monica; Stevens, Adele; Kennedy,
David
Subject: RE: Urgent
What's up?
From: Monica Medina [mailto:[email protected]]
To: Belton, Linda; Medina, Monica; Stevens, Adele; Sarri, Kristen; Kennedy,
David
Subject: RE: Urgent
Talking to EPA - Bob P and Diane T now
Monica Medina
(202) 482-3567
[email protected]
From: Linda belton [mailto:[email protected]]
To: 'Monica Medina'; 'Adele Stevens'

Subject: FW: Urgent
Please call her
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Subject: Urgent
Hi Linda,
We are trying to reach David Kennedy, and Monica. Can you have them call
Diane Thompson 202-564-1580?

From: Monica Medina <[email protected]>
Subject: EPA sensitivity
To: "Fitzpatrick, Michael A." <[email protected]>,"Beck, Nancy"
<[email protected]>,Steven Wilson <[email protected]>, John Rapp
<[email protected]>,"Spring, Margaret"
<[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,"Kennedy,
David" <[email protected]>,"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,John E
Stein <[email protected]>, Nancy Thompson <[email protected]>
Hi all Our fisheries labs are doing testing using the dispersant samples we have received to
look at the impact (toxicity) of dispersant on fish. W e are doing this related to our seafood
safety work. W e talked about this testing in response to a question from Gov Jindal today on the
Govs call. EPA is now mad because they did not realize (at least at the top levels) that we were
doing this work. I thought EPA had been part of all the discussions on the protocols for seafood
safety and what we are doing to test for impacts of oil and dispersants on fish. I need some
assistance figuring out who at EPA has been part of all the protocol process so that I can make
sure those people are connecting with their leadership within EPA. I told EPA that while we
NOAA were doing this testing, we were not making toxicity determinations on our own that
is not strictly our responsibility typically FDA would do that. However, when asked who was
making this determination now, I said I thought it was this interagency group being run by
OMB/OIRA and that EPA was involved. That is my understanding, but if I am wrong about that
I need to correct the record with EPA.

Michael and Nancy can you assist in particular? I think Bob P and Diane T there may need
some reassurance that they have not been left out of the process.

Thanks! Monica

Monica Medina
(202) 482-3567
[email protected]

Subject: Fw: FW: EPA sensitivity
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Cc: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Hi all - See below. OK it has been almost a week since the initial request. Why does the NW lab not have
a sample of the dispersant yet? Dave and John - can you make sure this happens today? Also if they are
not testing the actual samples in NW, is the Pascagoula lab doing that testing. It was reported on our
morning call that our labs are testing impacts of dispersants on fish. We at HQ need some basic
information -- which labs are doing what tests on what types of fish. Administrator Jackson could complain
to Dr L about what we are doing here. I have do doubt that we should be doing these tests but I need to
know exactly what we are doing in order to defend it.
John Rapp - do you have time to run this to ground - I need a definite answer on this.
Thanks, Monica
From: Usha Varanasi <[email protected]>

To: Monica Medina <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed May 26 10:51:21 2010
Subject: Re: FW: EPA sensitivity
I can only speak for our lab. Just so you know, we are still trying to get the current dispersant
from NOAA's OR&R folks who I assume are authorized for such exercise.
Meanwhile we are testing for some of our exposure set up for zebrafish embryo for sub lethal
effects (such as cardiac dysfunction) using old sample of COREXIT dispersant. W e are not
doing classic toxicity test for water or fish.
Monica Medina wrote:

Monica Medina
(202) 482-3567
[email protected]

From: Monica Medina

To: 'Fitzpatrick, Michael A.'; 'Beck, Nancy'; Steven Wilson; 'John Rapp'; Spring, Margaret;
'[email protected]'; Kennedy, David; '[email protected]'; John E Stein; Nancy
Thompson
Subject: EPA sensitivity
Hi all Our fisheries labs are doing testing using the dispersant samples we have
received to look at the impact (toxicity) of dispersant on fish. We are doing this
related to our seafood safety work. We talked about this testing in response to a
question from Gov Jindal today on the Govs call. EPA is now mad because they
did not realize (at least at the top levels) that we were doing this work. I thought
EPA had been part of all the discussions on the protocols for seafood safety and
what we are doing to test for impacts of oil and dispersants on fish. I need some
assistance figuring out who at EPA has been part of all the protocol process so
that I can make sure those people are connecting with their leadership within
EPA. I told EPA that while we NOAA were doing this testing, we were not
making toxicity determinations on our own that is not strictly our
responsibility typically FDA would do that. However, when asked who was
making this determination now, I said I thought it was this interagency group
being run by OMB/OIRA and that EPA was involved. That is my understanding,
but if I am wrong about that I need to correct the record with EPA.

Michael and Nancy can you assist in particular? I think Bob P and Diane T
there may need some reassurance that they have not been left out of the process.

Thanks! Monica

Monica Medina
(202) 482-3567
[email protected]

Usha Varanasi, Ph.D.

Science and Research Director
Northwest Fisheries Science Center, and
Acting Science and Research Director
Southwest Fisheries Science Center
DOC/NOAA/NMFS
Seattle: La Jolla: Phone Phone (206) 860 6795, (858) 546 7067, http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov
http://swfsc.noaa.gov
Mahatma Gandhi
"We must be the change we wish to see in the world..."

From: John Rapp <[email protected]>
Subject: Dispersant sample
To: Dave Westerholm <[email protected]>
Cc: David Kennedy <[email protected]>,_HQ Deep Water Horizon Staff
<[email protected]>
Dave,
Dave Kennedy suggested that I contact you about securing a sample of
dispersant for NW Fisheries Science Center to use as a part of their
seafood testing protocols. Can you either handle this directly for me
while you're down there or direct me to someone who I can work with? I
need 2 liters expressed to Seattle. Address is:
Walt Dickhoff
2725 Montlake Blvd East
Bldg - East, Room 401
Seattle, WA 98112-2097
Thanks,
John

From: Justin Kenney <[email protected]>
Subject: Fw: Understanding OR&R
<[email protected]>
Oil Spill Media Spill Political Spill.doc
Justin Kenney
NOAA Director of Communications
and External Affairs
Office: 202-482-6090
Cell: 202-821-6310
Facebook: www.facebook.com/noaa.lubchenco
(Sent from my BlackBerry)
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene Louden <[email protected]>
To: Justin Kenney <[email protected]>; Scott Smullen <[email protected]>; Chris Vaccaro
<[email protected]>; David Miller <[email protected]>; David L. Hall
<[email protected]>; Keeley.Belva <[email protected]>; Jana Goldman
<[email protected]>; Linda Joy <[email protected]>; Fred Gorell <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed May 26 06:04:09 2010
Subject: Understanding OR&R
Great article on what OR&R does. Will be in the clips package of course.
Best description I've seen on the work of this under-recognized office.
FOOD SAFETY NEWS: Oil Spill, Media Spill, Political Spill
Gene
--
Gene Louden
Senior Media Analyst
NOAA Communications and External Affairs
Telework Office
Cell: (301) 518-6795
Land line: (301) 384-7183
Fax: (301) 384-9641
Email: [email protected]
Join us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/noaa.lubchenco
Join us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/usnoaagov
see NOAA highlights on YouTube: www.youtube.com/usnoaagov
FOOD SAFETY NEWS

Science & Research
Oil Spill, Media Spill, Political Spill
by Ross Anderson | May 26, 2010
When BP's Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico last month, phones started
ringing at the desks of federal scientists 2,200 miles away on the shores of Seattle's Lake
Washington. Five weeks later, they're still ringing.
The scientists at NOAA's Office of Response and Restoration, or OR&R, are the nation's experts
on oil spills. They attempt to quickly analyze what is at risk, and then advise the Coast Guard
and other agencies what to do about it.
In a typical year, they deal with up to 200 spills, large and small, ranging from a beached barge
on the Florida coast to a leaky pipeline on Alaska's North Slope. Some have been at this job for
more than 20 years, dating back to before the infamous Exxon Valdez spill of 1989.
Like most scientists, they prefer to work quietly, leaving the press conferences and politics to
state and local officials closer to the scene. Their job is to quickly apply science and experience
to the immediate crisis, unfettered by oil politics or environmental passions.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1890.1
But the BP crisis soon became an oil spill in a league of its own, creating ugly and enormous
challenges that didn't fit OR&R's playbook. The initial explosion and fire killed people. It
happened a mile underwater. It was big, getting bigger by the hour, and they had no way to
measure how big.
And suddenly, those mild-mannered scientists found themselves in the middle not just of an oil
spill, but of a national media storm that was morphing into a political war zone.
In particular, they've been accused, by no less than the New York Times, of systematically
understating the amount of oil that is gushing into the Gulf.
"It's the numbers game," says Doug Helton, who has had to deal with the press and politics while
his colleagues deal with the oil. "I've learned a lot about the media age we're in."
It began April 20 as a "search and rescue" problem, Helton says. The rig was on fire, 11 oil
workers were missing, and the platform included a storage tank filled with diesel fuel. The next
day, the rig sank in 5,000 feet of water, and oil started gushing from broken pipes at the bottom.
Since then, the OR&R staff has worked virtually round-the-clock. They have command posts in
Louisiana and Alabama, all linked into the windowless "War Room" in Seattle. Retired
scientists have come back to help out.
But they've been stymied by the sheer scale, depth, and vast uncertainties swirling with that oily
plume. Here's a glimpse at some of the challenges:
Numbers
While the initial estimate was 5,000 barrels per day, the NOAA experts knew it could be much
larger. Early on, somebody scribbled the figure "64k-110k bbls/day" on a whiteboard, which
was caught on a visitor's video. Critics took this as evidence that NOAA knew the leak was
much worse than the official estimate, but was concealing the bad news.
That notation was a "worst case scenario," Helton says, scribbled during an early-morning
briefing. Ultimately, the actual volume may prove to be that bad. "At some point, the actual
volume doesn't matter," he says. "We don't know the number, and if we did there is nothing we
would do any differently."
More important, he says, is the difference between a leaking tanker and a blown oil rig. "A
tanker has a finite volume. You can reach out and touch it." But the leaking pipe just keeps
gushing oil, under pressure, day by day until somebody figures out how to plug it.
History
OR&R's expertise stems strictly from experience. They analyze and recommend responses
based on what they've seen with hundreds of previous spills. Much of that experience has been in
the Gulf of Mexico, which sits atop massive oil deposits. Millions of gallons per year seep
naturally into the gulf, and hardly a week passes without something spilling there. Tankers
collide or run aground. Aging pipelines fail. Oil platforms spring leaks.
North America's largest had been the Mexican Ixtoc platform, which blew out in 1979 and
spewed up to 300 million gallons into gulf waters over the span of nine months. Two months
later, oil began to wash up on Texas beaches. It was an unholy mess, but the environment
Document ID: 0.7.19.1890.1
seemed to recover within a year or two.

But the Ixtoc spill occurred in about 200 feet of water. BP's spill is something else again.
Depth
NOAA scientists have no experience with a spill 5,000 feet beneath the surface. The water at
that depth is about 40 degrees Fahrenheit, which is colder than Alaskan waters. Oil being less
dense than water, the stuff immediately goes to the surface, but they don't know what happens on
the way up. And they don't know how to accurately measure how much oil is leaking.
"We've had some experience with oil from sunken vessels at the depth," Helton says. "But that
oil is in smaller quantities and it isn't under pressure."
NOAA stores vast amounts of data on marine life along US shores, but scientists know relatively
little about what lives a mile beneath the surface, let alone how deepsea organisms react to oil. A
year or two from now, they'll know more, having learned the hard way.
Dispersants
Early on, OR&R recommended injecting chemical dispersants at the pipe. Scientists believe the
chemicals are helping break huge plumes down into smaller drops that will evaporate or disperse
more quickly.
But reporters and environmentalists wondered if pouring more chemicals into the sea wouldn't
just exacerbate the problem. It's a tradeoff, Helton says. The chemistry of dispersants is similar
to dish detergent, he says. "It spreads more oil at the surface."
But the questions keep coming.
Boom
State and local officials demand to know why the government hasn't installed oil booms along
gulf shores to protect beaches. But NOAA's experience suggests that oil boom has limited uses,
and you can't protect an entire seashore--especially when you don't know where or when the oil
is going to come ashore.
"You don't want to shoot all your ammunition in the first few minutes of the battle," one scientist
explains.
Once deployed, oil boom has a limited lifetime. Battered by waves and currents, plastic booms
soon lose their effectiveness. So the trick is to have it available to protect specific shorelines as
the slick approaches.
That strategy is not terribly comforting to gulf fishermen and others frustrated that nothing seems
to be happening to protect their fishing grounds and beaches.
Which way did it go?
Whatever the size of the spill, it has taken its sweet time finding its way to Gulf beaches. In part,
this may be because chemical dispersants are working as hoped--breaking the slick up into
smaller particles that mix quickly with seawater or evaporate at the surface. Scientists also
Document ID: 0.7.19.1890.1
believe that the spring outflow from the Mississippi River has washed much of the oil away from
Louisiana shores.
The good news is that NOAA and other officials gained valuable time to prepare. The bad news
is that hundreds of TV camera crews and reporters who converged on the scene, expecting to get
film of oiled beaches, soon ran out of news to report. Questions about chemical dispersants and
the exact volume of the spill became a national story.
Another wave of reports suggested a huge underwater plume of oil, 10 miles long, moving
toward Florida. If this is the case, the NOAA scientists explain, "you'd have to suspend the laws
of physics." Oil is lighter than water, so goes immediately to the surface. But the story persists.
And so it goes. Helton and his colleagues are hunkered down for the long haul. The "media
spill" will wane and the politics will shift somewhere else. But the oil will keep gushing out of
that hole in the bottom of the ocean.
Image Credit: NASA Earth Observatory. Sunlight illuminated the lingering oil slick off the
Mississippi Delta on May 24, 2010. The Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer
(MODIS) on NASA's Terra satellite captured this image the same day.
Oil smoothes the ocean surface, making the Sun's reflection brighter in some places, and
reducing the scattering of sunlight in other places. As a result, the oil slick is brighter than the
surrounding water in some places (image center) and darker than the surrounding water in others
(image lower right). The tip of the Mississippi Delta is surrounded by muddy water that appears
light tan. Bright white ribbons of oil streak across this sediment-laden water.
Tendrils of oil extend to the north and east of the main body of the slick. A small, dark plume
along the edge of the slick, not far from the original location of the Deepwater Horizon rig,
indicates a possible controlled burn of oil on the ocean surface.
To the west of the bird's-foot part of the delta, dark patches in the water may also be oil, but
detecting a manmade oil slick in coastal areas can be even more complicated than detecting it in
the open ocean.
Tags: BP, Deepwater Horizon, gulf oil spill, NOAA, oil spill
Copyright Marler Clark
Document ID: 0.7.19.1890.1

From: Kent Laborde <[email protected]>
Subject: DOC-NOAA DWH update-5-26-10 1700 notes
To: _HQ Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>
DOC-NOAA DWH update-5-26-10 1700 notes.docx
Please see attached document for today's notes.

Kent
--
Kent Laborde
NOAA Program Coordination Office
U.S. Department of Commerce
1401 Constitution Ave., NW, Room 5811
Washington, DC 20230
phone: 202-482-3313
fax: 202-482-4116
cell: 202-425-2220
email: [email protected]

Image not available for this document, ID: 0.7.19.1698.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.1698.1

Subject: FW: Pre-brief at 9:05 on Thursday
<[email protected]>, [email protected],"'Gray, John'"
<[email protected]>,'Amanda Hallberg Greenwell' <[email protected]>,'Margaret Spring'
<[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected],"'Jacqueline J. Rousseau'" <[email protected]>
H ere is the agenda for tom orrow

I have let Shaun know that David Kennedy will be the only NOAA principal on for tomorrow


Sent: W ednesday, May 26, 2010 6:07 PM
[email protected]; Lori Faeth; Kayyem, Juliette; Murk, David CDR; Moilanen, Stephen S.
Subject: Pre brief at 9:05 on Thursday
All,

Thursday, May 27 Call with Governors

b6
HOST Pin:
[Guest Pin:
b6
Speakers
b6
Please let me know if there are any changes to the speakers below. Also, please be prepared to cover the
action items that came up on yesterdays call.

DRAFT AGENDA
Opening remarks (Valerie Jarrett)
o Observations and Trajectory Monica Medina and David Kennedy, Medina, NOAA
o NOAA there is less oil around the rig. Checking to see if it is due to subsea dispersants,
burns, skimming.
o Jindal how long does it take for the oil to move from leak site (rig) to land?
o Latest information from National Incident Command, including current status of efforts to
stabilize the leaks.
o Top kill will happen today. It will look real bad live. Will know after 3-4 hours if
successful.
o Working on other options: containment cap; valve; BOP
o Jindal if top kill fails, are the alternatives partial or complete solution. (Cap is partial; the
other 2 are complete)
o Jindal regarding the barrier proposal, he was supposed hear from Adm Allen yesterday but
did not. Neffenger Allen will call him today. Will it be update or decision? Hope for
decision by COB.
o Response Plans and Boom
o Barbour With the skimmers east of Chandeleurs and North, did you find oil? Landry, yes,
skimming today. We will provide you more details at the end of the day. Landry: 2 issues: 1)
skimmers 29 mi off of Chandeleur; 2) Test project entrance to Born and Ponchatraine. NEED to
send this out to Jindal and Barbour
o Landry/Neffenger there will be more oil released today (due to top kill)
o Jindal St. Bernard how do we alert you to availability of vessels? Contact CG? Yes, in
each bay and each parish, there is a USCG rep. NEED to get the names and contact info out!
o o Landry flying today to meet with Michael Baudet (sp?)
Jindal Asked that we give locals a sense of how much boom is coming. They need to be
able to prepare.
o Jindal with NOAAs projections, we need to be prepared for oils new movement to
Chandeleur and north
EPA Update EPA Dep Admin Bob Perciasepe
o Admin Jackson We need Govs help in discussing dispersants. Need to keep it science-
based and factual, particularly in relation to seafood. Will send out TPs to the Govs.
o o
Jindal asked for constituents of the dispersant.
NOAA also working on sampling of the seafood. Coordinating with EPA??
Next call 9:15 a.m. EDT (8:15 CDT) Thursday, May 26, 2010
Received(Date): Thu, 27 May 2010 06:54:19 -0400

Subject: Fwd: Stranding Q&As
Cc: [email protected]
Historical comparisons turtle and mammal combined 5-19-10 FINAL
StrandingQuestions-response FINAL 5-19-10 1754.rtf
Brian T Pawlak.vcf
Attachment
Richard,
Also for today's briefing books, please print and add the historical
comparisons document from this email.
Thanks,
John
Begin forwarded message:

> From: Brian Pawlak <[email protected]>
> Date: May 20, 2010 1:36:00 PM EDT
> To: Jenni Wallace <[email protected]>, Christopher Meaney <[email protected]
> >, John Rapp <[email protected]>
> Cc: "Lauren.B.Lugo" <[email protected]>, John Oliver <[email protected]
> >, Beth Lumsden <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Stranding Q&As
>
> Full suite of responses attached, this includes the Historical
> comparisons information as well...
>
> Jenni Wallace wrote:
>> Chris,
>> Attached are NMFS cleared Stranding Q&As.
>>
>> Jenni
>>
>
> --
> Brian Pawlak
> Deputy Director
> NOAA Fisheries Service
> Office of Habitat Conservation
> 301-713-2325 (167)
> 301-713-1043 (Fax)
>
>
>
>
>
Richard,
Also for today's briefing books, please print and add the historical comparisons document from
this email.
Thanks,
John
Begin forwarded message:
From: Brian Pawlak <[email protected]>

Date: May 20, 2010 1:36:00 PM EDT
To: Jenni Wallace <[email protected]>, Christopher Meaney
<[email protected]>, John Rapp <[email protected]>
Cc: "Lauren.B.Lugo" <[email protected]>, John Oliver
<[email protected]>, Beth Lumsden <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Stranding Q&As
Full suite of responses attached, this includes the Historical comparisons

information as well...
Jenni Wallace wrote:
Chris,
Attached are NMFS cleared Stranding Q&As.
Jenni
--
Brian Pawlak
Deputy Director
NOAA Fisheries Service
Office of Habitat Conservation
301-713-2325 (167)
301-713-1043 (Fax)
Summary of Recent Marine Mammal Stranding Data in the Northern Gulf of Mexico
x
The number of marine mammal strandings during the period of May 1-15 was slightly elevated
during 2010 compared to the five-year historical average of strandings in the state of Louisiana,
and consistent with the five-year historical averages for Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida
(Figure 1). NOTE: no oiled mammals have been confirmed.
x
Table 1 below provides the 5-year average marine mammal strandings and associated summary
statistics, by month (April through August) and state for the northern Gulf of Mexico (LA, MS,
AL, FL panhandle). The most recent available and validated 5 year time period, 2003-2007, was
used. The primary species reported is the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus).
x
Three caveats apply to the numbers reported below: 1. In the Florida Panhandle, Unusual
Mortality Events were declared in 2004 and 2006, during which an elevated number of
strandings was reported. These events were determined to be caused by biotoxins. The data
from these years are included in calculating the 5 year averages. 2. In Louisiana, systematic
beach surveys were conducted in April 2003, resulting in a report of 14 stranded dolphins. 3.
Dolphin strandings for 2010 were unusually high (at or well above the average stranding rates)
in March and April, prior to the spill, for the Gulf region. The reason(s) are under investigation.
x
Marine mammal stranding reports in the northern Gulf of Mexico rely upon opportunistic
reporting, generally from members of the public. Remote coastlines and barrier islands are
rarely surveyed. Due to the oil spill response, survey effort and human presence/awareness
(aerial and ground) are higher than previous years and we believe that some unquantifiable
portion of the increased stranding reports are likely a direct result of the increase in survey
effort and human presence/awareness.
Figure 1. Comparison between the historical averages (error bars represent standard deviation)
for reports from 2003-2007 and the number of confirmed marine mammal stranding reports in
2010 in the four Gulf Coast states. Both data sets represent the time period of May 1-14.
Comparison with Marine Mammal Historical (2003-2007) Stranding Rates for May 1-14
Number of Animals
Historical Ave.
2010 (Spill)
1
1
LA
MS
State
AL
FL Panhandle
Document ID: 0.7.19.1674.1
Summary of Recent Sea Turtle Stranding Data in the Northern Gulf of Mexico
x
Figure 1 and Table 1 illlustrate and provide the 5-year average sea turtle strandings and associated
summary statistics, by month (April through August) and state for the northern Gulf of Mexico (LA, MS,
AL, FL panhandle). The most recent available and validated 5 year time periods for each state were
used.
x
The total number of sea turtle strandings documented from the Louisiana/Texas border through the
Florida panhandle from April 30 through mid May is 156 (LA 36, MS 83, AL 26, FL - 11). This is
significantly higher than the number of turtle strandings that have been documented in recent years in
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama during this time frame. For example, from 2005 2009 the number
of turtle strandings for the full month of May has ranged from 1 to 15 in Louisiana, 0 to 13 in Mississippi,
and 1 to 15 in Alabama. In the Florida panhandle, from 2003 has ranged from 13 to 37.
2007, the number of strandings in May
x
Sea turtle stranding coverage in the northern Gulf of Mexico, outside of Florida, has been incomplete in
recent years. In LA, MS, and AL the majority of reported strandings are primarily opportunistic due to
more remote coastlines and limited dedicated stranding surveys. In Louisiana systematic surveys,
funded by NOAA, were conducted over approximately 30 miles of western Louisiana beaches in 2005,
2006, 2007 and through August 2008. The majority of strandings reported during those survey years are
from the western beaches where dedicated surveys were conducted.
x
Due to the oil spill response, survey effort and human presence/awareness (aerial and ground) is higher
than previous years and we believe that some portion (unquantifiable) of the increased stranding
reports now are likely a direct result of the increase in survey effort and human presence/awareness,
however we do not believe it explains the full increase.
Figure 1. Comparison between historical averages for strandings from May 1-31 for 2003-2007 (FL
panhandle) or 2005-2009 (LA,MS,AL), and the number of confirmed strandings May 1-15, 2010 from LA,
MS, AL and FL panhandle. Error bars represent standard deviation.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1674.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.1674.1
<date> Draft Internal Q&As Regarding Marine Mammal and Turtle Strandings
Question 1: NOAA asked that the report on marine mammals and turtles - be clearer regarding how
many are deceased due to oil and what is not known; share a total each day (ORR/ICC reports).
This will now be reported daily through a summary of information on stranding and by providing tables
that depict daily strandings and initial assessment of oiling status. Knowing if a stranded animal is
stranded due to oil is not necessarily easy and quickly discernable. NOAA expects that many animals will
be classified as Pending determination for some time until chemical analysis can be completed. Given
the circumstances of this spill event and the exposure and effects that may be expected for marine
mammals and sea turtles, the expression of external oiling may not be a viable sole assessment of impact
or injury in these species. For birds this may make sense in that the principle cause of acute morbidity
and mortality is from external oiling. That is likely not the case for marine mammals and sea turtles.
Complete assessment of the role of this event (oil and dispersant) in morbidity and mortality of marine
mammals and sea turtles will entail full necropsies with sample collection, analyses, and assessment.
During this investigation phase, animals will be placed in the pending category, even when they have
no gross evidence of oil. In some cases the cause of death may never be known, particularly if the
carcass is decomposed when found. Therefore this information can be found in the text of the report as
well as a new Summary Totals tab in the daily Excel spreadsheet.
Question 2: NOAA requested to create daily chart showing mortality in relation to: #of total dead
turtles, # sent for necropsies, # necropsies completed, and # dead due to oil.
We have added a new table (Excel spreadsheet tab Necropsy Status) to show this in the daily Excel
spreadsheet. Please note that the completion of a necropsy does not necessarily complete the analyses
needed to attempt to determine cause of death.
Question 3: We were asked to assess capacity to conduct necropsy work needed - request to review
this and if more people are needed (marine mammal stranding, necropsy processing, etc). Where do
these animals go for processing or rehabilitation? Who does the necropsy and rehabilitation. NOAA
would benefit from a fuller explanation of how the stranding networks work. Main point here is are
we anticipating what we need, and if we think we need more we should be asking for help.
At the current rate of strandings, the network has the needed capacity to verify and examine all stranded
animals that are accessible. Through Unified Command we have secured additional contract help where
identified to date. Given the expected length of this event, additional resources may be needed to
supplement existing capacity. Should stranding rates increase and additional necropsy and pathology
support be necessary, several other pathologists and biologists have been identified and are currently on
standby to assist if requested. No large whales have stranded to date but the MMHSRP has a large whale
necropsy manual and a few operational teams for response. All large whale necropsies would be
conducted in the field. Due to the specialized experience required, there are only a few identified Large
Whale Necropsy Team leaders; all are on standby and can travel to the Gulf coast if needed. The local
stranding network responders would secure the carcass, and the necropsy could begin the next morning
after the team was assembled.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1674.2
Currently, four facilities are prepared to receive and care for live, distressed sea turtles: Audubon
Aquarium of the Americas in New Orleans, LA, Institute of Marine Mammal Studies in Gulfport, MS,
Gulfarium in Fort Walton Beach, FL, and Gulf World Marine Park in Panama City, FL. Three of these
facilities (Audubon Aquarium, IMMS, and Gulf World) are also prepared to rehabilitate live stranded
small cetaceans. These facilities were identified for the projected geographic area where marine
mammals and sea turtles impacted by the oil spill may strand. Should the operations area change, the
plan will be revised. All facilities have been augmented through the Unified Command for an expected
moderate increase in stranding rates, and have been provided with the necessary equipment and
supplies to collect samples according to the standardized protocols.
Stranding networks for both marine mammals and sea turtles have existed throughout the United States
for decades prior to this event. In the Gulf of Mexico states (TX, LA, MS, AL, FL), there are numerous
organizations authorized to respond to stranded or distressed marine animals (authorization is through
agreements issued under the Marine Mammal Protection Act for marine mammals, under the
Endangered Species Act for sea turtles, and under any applicable state laws). Each state has a designated
coordinator for sea turtle strandings and TX, LA and FL have a state coordinator for the multiple
organizations responding to marine mammal strandings; MS and AL are coordinated by the participating
facilities. In the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, the sea turtle stranding network is operated under the
guidance of a National Coordinator at the Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL. The marine
mammal stranding network has established NMFS regional coordinators. Reports of stranded animals
may be called in by the general public, by resource managers, or during the spill response, by one of the
many field operations teams. Normally, most strandings are reported through a passive system, in that a
member of the public observes a stranding event and calls it in to the local network. During the
Deepwater Horizon oil spill response, a more active surveillance system is in place. Strandings are
reported by phone calls made either directly to the facilities, to another network contact (such as the
State or Regional Coordinators), or to the wildlife hotline established for the oil spill response (1-866-557-
1401). From any of these avenues, information is relayed to the appropriate response group, which
conducts field operations to confirm the report and take appropriate action - either rescuing a live animal
or collecting a carcass or appropriate samples from a dead animal. Responders consist of biologists or
volunteers trained in stranding response. Each rehabilitation facility has an attending veterinarian who
oversees the medical care and treatment of the animal while it is in rehabilitation.
All reports of distressed or stranded marine mammals or sea turtles are responded to as rapidly as
possible. Although the aim is for these responses to be conducted the same day the report is received,
delays may occur due to weather or logistics of accessing more remote areas.
For cetaceans, once the animal is verified, the network is conducting necropsies either in the field or in
the laboratory whenever possible. Sea turtle necropsies have been conducted to date by Dr. Brian Stacy
(NMFS and University of Florida School of Veterinary Medicine). For the majority of dolphins that have
been reported during this response, necropsies and sampling have been conducted in the field because
the animals have been decomposed, and the logistics of retrieving carcasses has been difficult. No
stranded manatees have been reported to date, but they would be collected if possible and transported
to pre-identified centers for rehabilitation or necropsy, under the authorization of USFWS.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1674.2
For more information on the facilities involved in the Marine Mammal Stranding Network in the Gulf
Coast region (LA-FL), see the attached Directory.
Question 4: Are the deaths and strandings investigated for causes other than oil? Specifically, does the
necropsy provide for testing other than oil, including dispersant?
The full necropsy investigations of stranded marine mammals and sea turtles is not limited to detection
of oil, oil exposure, or oil-associated injury but includes examination of human interactions, HAB-
associated biotoxicosis, infectious agents and other causes. Environmental information, circumstances of
stranding, and other potential mortality factors in an area are all considered during assessment. An
inevitable limitation of necropsy is that many stranded animals are recovered in a decomposed state,
which makes determination of a definitive cause of death difficult or impossible in many instances and
impairs toxicological testing, such as PAH analysis. Microscopic examination (histopathology) is possible
on very few stranded animals due to decomposition. The specific chemical composition of the
dispersants have not been made available to those advising on the toxicological and medical aspects of
the response, thus specific considerations relevant to detection of the dispersant or exposure are
unknown. The protocol in place includes collection of samples suitable for a broad array of diagnostic
testing and a suite of samples that may be useful for any forthcoming considerations related to
dispersants.
Question 5: NOAA is still waiting for the historical data and trends on strandings in this area at this
time of year for baseline understanding of what we are seeing now, what is the status of getting this
report/data?
Please see the two attached documents which contain historical data and trends for sea turtle and
marine mammal strandings in the northern Gulf of Mexico.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1674.2
Brian Pawlak
Deputy Director

1315 East-West Hwy

Silver Spring, MD 20910
301-713-2325 ext 167 ( Work )

301-713-1043 ( Fax )
[email protected] ( Internet )
Formatted Name
Brian Pawlak
Name
Family: Pawlak
First: Brian
Middle:
Prefix:
Suffix:
Organization
Address
( Domestic )
P.O. Address:
Extended Address:
Street: 1315 East-West Hwy
Locality: Silver Spring
Region: MD
Postal Code: 20910
Country:
Electronic Mail Address ( Internet )

[email protected]
Title
Deputy Director
Telephone Number ( Work )

301-713-2325 ext 167
Telephone Number 301-713-1043
( Fax )
Document ID: 0.7.19.1674.3
Version
2.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.1674.3
Received(Date): Thu, 27 May 2010 15:12:36 -0400

From: "Lauren.B.Lugo" <[email protected]>
Subject: [Fwd: Seafood Safety]
To: John Rapp <[email protected]>
Cc: Eric Schwaab <[email protected]>, John Oliver <[email protected]>,Samuel
Rauch <[email protected]>,Nancy Thompson <[email protected]>,Steve Murawski
<[email protected]>,Beth Lumsden <[email protected]>,Gloria Thompson
<[email protected]>,Rebecca Chiampi <[email protected]>, Deb Lambert
<[email protected]>
2010 0526 Opening Protocol NMFS FDA clean copy.doc
John R.-- Despite our best efforts on the protocol, a sentence got through our review that we
believe is not correct. The sentence is on page 3 under the "Re-opening Process" section that
reads:
"Based on this assessment, NMFS may re-open federal waters subject to the closure and FDA
may approve the fishery for interstate commerce."
NOAA Fisheries is not aware that FDA has authority to "approve a fishery for interstate
commerce." W e request that this sentence be revised to reflect FDA's correct authority.
W ill you please pass this up the line?
Lauren
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Seafood Safety

Date:Thu, 27 May 2010 15:04:54 -0400
From:Beck, Nancy <Nancy [email protected]>
To:Beck, Nancy <Nancy [email protected]>,
Fitzpatrick, Michael A.
<Michael A. [email protected] >,
Cuellar, Mariano-Florentino <Mariano-
Florentino [email protected]>, Mancini,
Dominic J.
<Dominic J. [email protected]>,
Malanoski, Margaret A.
<Margaret A. [email protected]>,
Rostker, David
<David [email protected]>, Perraut,
Andrew B.
<Andrew B. [email protected]>, Stebbins,
Michael J.
<Michael J. [email protected]>,
Schmeissner, Peter J.
<Peter J. [email protected]>,
Murawski, Steve <[email protected]>,
[email protected], Hansen, Timothy
<[email protected]>, W ilson, Steven
<Steven.W [email protected]>, Lugo, Lauren
<[email protected]>, Rapp, John
<[email protected]>, Sarri, Kristen
<[email protected]>, Medina, Monica

<[email protected]>,
[email protected], Dickey, Robert
W <[email protected]>, Boots,
Michael J. <Michael J. [email protected]>,
Higginbottom, Heather A.
<Heather A. [email protected]>,
Onek, Matthew M.
<Matthew M. [email protected]>, Monje,
Carlos A. <Carlos A. [email protected]>,
Weatherly, Mark A.
, Lyon,
Randolph M.
<Randolph M. [email protected]>, Reilly,
Thomas M.
<Thomas M. [email protected]>, Fontenot,
Keith J. <Keith J. [email protected]>,
Garufi, Marc <Marc [email protected]>,
Levenbach, Stuart
<Stuart [email protected]>, Frey,
Nathan J. <Nathan J. [email protected]>,
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected], Buffa, Nicole
<Nicole [email protected]>, Neyland, Kevin
F. <Kevin F. [email protected]>, Hagan,
Michael B.
<Michael B. [email protected]>, Hart,
Nicholas R.
<Nicholas R. [email protected]>, Weiss,
Michael I. <Michael I. [email protected]>,
Monica Medina
Palm, Mary E.
<Mary E. [email protected]>, Usha
Varanasi <[email protected]>,
Davenport, Joanne Chow
<Joanne Chow [email protected]>,
[email protected], Linda Chaves
<[email protected]>, Barringer, Jody M.
<Jody M. [email protected]>,
Uhlenbrock, Kristan M.
<Kristan M. [email protected]>,
[email protected], Bolger,
Philip M <[email protected]>, Fong,
Tera L. <Tera L. [email protected]>,
[email protected],
[email protected], Evelyn
Washington/DC/USEPA/US
Radosevich, Tara J.
<Tara J. [email protected]>, Malhotra,
Stefan <Sanjay S. [email protected]>,
[email protected], Kimani Kimbrough
Koufopoulos, Peter N
<[email protected]>, John E.
Stein <[email protected]>, Walton
Dickhoff <[email protected]>,
McCarthy, Nell
<Nell [email protected]>
Attached please find the revised protocol.
Lauren B. Lugo
Seafood Inspection Program
(301)713 2355 x145
fax: (301)713 1081
5/26/2010
PROTOCOL FOR INTERPRETATION AND USE OF SENSORY TESTING AND

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY RESULTS FOR RE-OPENING OIL-IMPACTED AREAS
CLOSED TO SEAFOOD HARVESTING
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) operates a mandatory safety program for all fish
and fishery products under the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the
Public Health Service Act and related regulations. Actions and criteria discussed in this protocol
should be followed in addition to the provisions already in place. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) administers the status of Federal waters for seafood
harvest. After an oil spill has occurred, Federal and State agencies are faced with the issue of
determining when the seafood from the previously contaminated area may once again be safe for
harvest and human consumption. NOAA Office of Response and Restoration (OR&R)
publication entitled Managing Seafood Safety after an Oil Spill
provides agencies guidance in
such situations. This guidance and other input from both NOAA and the FDA have been used in
consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish this protocol.
In establishing this protocol it is important to understand the following principles:
NOAA and the FDA are working with other federal and state agencies to protect
consumers from adulterated and unsafe seafood, while minimizing undue economic
burden on any impacted seafood industries.
Once oil or chemical contaminants are visually observed on the surface, it is

recommended that the fishery be closed until free of sheen, and subsequent testing has
been completed to confirm that seafood from affected areas are wholesome and safe for
human consumption and use in animal feed.
After the initial fishery closure, the best approach for determining the safety and
acceptability of seafood from oil-contaminated areas is one that involves organoleptic
analysis of products (i.e. sensory testing) followed by chemical analysis.
In establishing the closure areas, NMFS has placed a buffer zone around known
contaminated waters to make certain a wide enough closure is in place. Areas within this
closure may be re-opened when as it is determined oil contamination did not occur and
the area was closed only as a precautionary measure. This protocol does not apply to re-
openings of this nature.
Oil contamination presents two kinds of risks: the presence of petroleum taint that renders
seafood unfit for human consumption, and the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) that are chemical hazards. Federal government and state agencies therefore close oil-
contaminated harvest areas for health reasons.
Oil-contaminated seafood is adulterated if the contamination is perceivable by olfaction (taint),
or in the absence of taint, chemical analysis determines that the level of PAHs in it exceeds FDA
levels of concern. Consequently, after an oil spill, seafood suspected of oil contamination can
only be brought into interstate commerce when it passes both sensory testing for petroleum taint,
and chemical analysis for PAHs. 1
Document ID: 0.7.19.1730.1
5/26/2010
The purpose of this protocol is to specify how the results of sensory testing and chemical
analyses will be used in re-opening seafood closure areas. The principles of the protocol are as
follows:
Generally:
1. 2. The closure of a fishery assumes a worst case scenario, and is intended to protect
seafood consumers until the safety of the seafood can be established.
Area re-opening will be based on an acceptable reduction of the threat of seafood
exposure to oil contamination, and analyses that assure the safety and wholesomeness
of the seafood. Threat of exposure will be based on past observations and the status
of the spill and conditions.
3. Once seafood samples from an area pass sensory testing, area samples must also pass
chemical analysis for PAHs before that fishery may be reopened.
Specific Re-opening Criteria:
1. Threat of exposure Threat of exposure is sufficiently reduced based on past
observations of previous spills, any baseline information collected, and the status of
the spill and conditions.
2. Evaluation of oil movement Confirmation that the closure area is free of sheen on
the surface by visual observation and/or aerial reconnaissance, or the presence of oil
in the water column through visual observation or water testing.
3. Assessment of seafood contamination by sensory testing Determine if the seafood is
contaminated by tissue collection and sensory testing. panel following the protocol reviewed by the FDA.
4. Assessment of seafood contamination by chemical analyses Chemical analyses are
performed 5. on samples that pass sensory assessment to confirm that PAH
concentrations are below the applicable FDA levels of concern for human health.
Opening boundaries will be based on results of analyses (sensory and chemical) that
demonstrate the product is:
a. 6. 7. Untainted.
b. Safe for human consumption.
Establish buffer zones between open and closed areas using chemical and sensory
testing indices.
Re-openings may be fisheries specific.
The acceptable condition is
that all specimens must pass sensory testing conducted by an NMFS-FDA sensory
ANALYSIS
1. 2. NMFS sensory testing protocol reviewed by FDA.
2,3
When sensory tested samples are acceptable, verify sensory testing outcomes with
chemical analyses performed using the NMFS PAH method.
ONGOING STUDIES
Additional investigation protocols may continue to be designed to assess sediment
contamination, ecological injury and other environmental parameters. These investigations are
not directly related to or considered a part of this protocol. However, data from these
2
Document ID: 0.7.19.1730.1
5/26/2010
investigations will be reviewed prior to making any decisions to reopen an area or a fishery and
may be the basis for requiring additional sampling/analysis as per this protocol. For example,
sediment chemical data from fishery areas may be used to identify contaminant hot spots.
Water analysis for PAHs may be used to gain an understanding of the effectiveness of the
containment and cleanup of the spill. In addition water analysis may be used to determine the
concentration and effect of the dispersants used. Such water analysis may be performed on
The necessary sampling criteria will be
With regard to
representative samples of the affected water column.
based on many factors including the area of the closure, depth of the water within the closure,
and sites and species considered for re-opening of harvest areas or fishery. inshore fisheries such as molluscan shellfish, sediment samples may also be analyzed.
Surveillance of fisheries should be conducted in response to identified hot spots or other
relevant changes in environmental conditions (e.g., increases in PAH levels in water or seafood)
if warranted, based on the protocol defined.
RE-OPENING PROCESS
NOAA and the FDA will review the data generated as a result of the implementation of this
protocol, evaluate the accuracy and quality of the data and assess compliance with the agreed
criteria. Based on this assessment, NMFS may re-open federal waters subject to the closure and
FDA may approve the fishery for interstate commerce. NMFS and FDA will coordinate with
State agencies for the re-opening of State commercial waters to ensure orderly and appropriately
enforced re-openings. No partial re-openings will be allowed which are unenforceable, i.e., gear
that requires harvesters to segregate their catch and discard catch from fisheries that remain
closed.
Sensory testing based on NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OR&R 9: Guidance on Sensory
Testing and Monitoring of Seafood for Presence of Petroleum Taint Following an Oil Spill
will
be utilized. A panel of ten expert assessors from NMFS and the FDA will conduct sensory
testing. Samples will be examined by organoleptic methods both in the raw and cooked states.
If a particular fishery passes sensory testing within a defined sampling area, chemical analyses
. will be performed on that particular fishery and area
If the chemical analyses pass the risk
based assessment criteria for the species in question, that zone will be considered for re-opening.
If an area fails sensory testing it will be retested within a designated time period.
4
2
SELECTION OF TARGET PAHs and LEVELS OF CONCERN

Most petrochemical products such as diesel oil and crude oil contain aromatic components:
mono-, bi-, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Well-established liquid chromatography

(LC)/fluorescence detection (FD) and gas chromatography (GC)/mass spectrometry (MS)
methods are used to separate and quantify these contaminants in seafood.
PAHs are abundant in our environment; in addition to sources from petrochemical products they
are generated by nearly all pyrolytic processes including forest fires, char-grilled and smoked
meat, and fuel combustion in automobiles. Crude petroleum is composed of a complex mixture
of many hundreds of compounds. Most of the compounds are volatile, and evaporate to produce
the pungent odor of petroleum. Others are less volatile and persist in the environment (e.g.
Formation of tar balls or sink to the bottom). The polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in
petroleum mixtures are of greatest concern for human health because of their persistence (i.e. 3
Document ID: 0.7.19.1730.1
5/26/2010
Lower evaporation rates), and their potential for toxic or carcinogenic effects. The subset of 8
PAHs and their alkylated homologues (16) selected for critical analysis in the Deepwater
Horizon Spill (Table I) are among the most studied PAHs in petroleum mixtures. These
compounds have been found through experience with many previous oil spills (e.g. North Cape
Oil Spill, 1996, Rhode Island) to reflect the potential for toxic or carcinogenic effects of the
.
mixture of compounds present in crude petroleum
Most seafood risk assessments conducted after oil spills in the U.S. have followed an approach
used by the FDA in 1990 after the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska
.
This approach uses a set of calculations to determine finfish or shellfish (harvested for human
consumption) PAH tissue concentrations, expressed in benzo[a]pyrene (BaP) equivalents
(g/kg), above which an appropriate risk level for cancer is exceeded. Non-cancer levels of
concern are also evaluated. The values for several variables in these calculations can be adjusted
on a case-by-case basis, depending on seafood consumption rates of the exposed population,
average body weight of the exposed population, estimates of exposure time for a particular spill,
and the cancer risk level deemed appropriate. This approach to calculating seafood advisory
levels has since been used after several other oil spills, including the North Cape spill in Rhode
Island, the Julie N spill in Maine, the Kure spill in California, and the New Carissa spill in
Oregon.
The level of appropriate risk is the maximum level of individual lifetime carcinogenic risk that is
considered appropriate by risk managers. cancer risk calculations is 1 x 10
.
-6
6,7
5
The relative risk level used by FDA for low dose
This implies that exposure to PAH in seafood below a
-6
specified tissue concentration, at a defined consumption rate, and over a defined exposure period
would yield a lifetime cancer risk of no greater than 1 in 1,000,000. A risk level of 1 x 10
was
used in the risk calculations by FDA for the Exxon Valdez oil spill, as well as those done by the
State of Rhode Island for the North Cape oil spill, the State of California for the Kure oil spill,
and the State of Oregon for the New Carissa oil spill. Some states have considered higher risk
levels, such as 1 x 10
(a lifetime cancer risk of no greater than 1 in 100,000) to be appropriate.
For instance, a risk level of 1 x 10
was used in the risk assessment conducted by the State of
.
Maine for the Julie N oil spill and the State of Alaska for the Kuroshima oil spill
Depending upon levels of petrogenic PAHs accumulated by aquatic species, consumption of
petroleum contaminated fishery products may pose a health risk to seafood consumers. The risk
is exacerbated among those who are considered high level consumers of fishery products.
These concerns necessitate consideration of consumption rates for high-level eaters of fish,
shrimp, crab and shellfish in order to avoid errors inherent in extrapolating average per capita
consumption values to distinct subpopulations. FDA uses the 90th percentile of national
consumption data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for
fish, shrimp, crab and shellfish for calculating risk of PAH exposure in high-level consumers of
commercial seafood products.
Table I shows the criteria for re-opening based upon non-cancer risks and a 1 x 10
cancer risk
for different PAHs.
8
-6
1
-5
-5
For
the
non-cancer
evaluation
(naphthalene,
flourene
and
anthracene/phenanthracene) the EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) reference dose
. (RfD) values were used
For the cancer evaluation (fluoranthene, pyrene, benz(a)anthracene,
chrysene and benzo(a)pyrene), the EPA IRIS cancer slope factor values were used
.
th
9
As
discussed above, 90
percentile consumption values were used for generating calculations for 4
Document ID: 0.7.19.1730.1
5/26/2010
consumption of shrimp and crabs, oysters and finfish. exposures are assumed to last for 5 years.
For generating cancer risk values,
Recent results from PAH chemical analysis of finfish (grouper, red snapper and red drum)
collected by NOAA from the unaffected Dauphin Island area in early May show that PAH target
levels shown in Table I are below detection limits (LOD <0.4 ppb). An evaluation of PAH
Nevertheless, final
chemical analysis data collected by the NOAA mussel watch program showed that in 2007-2008
average concentrations were below FDA levels of concern in oysters. determinations of opening status of oil spill affected fisheries and areas will take into
consideration available PAH background level data, and assumptions on duration of exposure.
Criteria for Determining Sensory Testing Acceptability

A minimum of 6 sub-samples per species from each area under consideration is required. A sub-
sample will consist of an individual organism for finfish and multiple organisms for shrimp and
shellfish, depending on the intact animal type (e.g. 3 to 6 blue crabs, 6 oysters, 0.4 0.5 lb
shrimp). The samples will be evaluated by a panel of a minimum of 10 expert assessors in the
raw and cooked state.
For a closed fisheries area to be considered for reopening, all of the following tests must be
performed (these criteria are based on past oil spill information and ensure a high confidence
level that the seafood is not tainted by oil):
A minimum of seventy percent (70%) of the expert assessors must find NO detectable
petroleum or dispersant odor from each raw sub-sample. If any sub-sample fails, the site
fails.
petroleum or dispersant odor from each cooked meat sub-sample. If any sub-sample
fails, the site fails.
petroleum or dispersant taste (or flavor) in the cooked state. If any sub-sample fails, the
site fails.
In establishing the closure areas, NMFS has placed a buffer zone around known
contaminated waters to make certain a wide enough closure is in place. Areas within this
closure may be re-opened when as it is determined oil contamination did not occur and
the area was closed only as a precautionary measure. This protocol does not apply to re-
openings of this nature.
Sampling Criteria for Chemical Analyses

For crabs: Chemical analysis of edible muscle from a minimum of ten (10) individuals, of legal
size if available, will be collected from each sampling site. Tissue samples from individual crabs
will be combined to make separate composite samples of the muscle tissue and hepatopancreas.
All crabs will be collected from sites selected as commonly used fishing grounds.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1730.1
5/26/2010
For all other seafood: Chemical analysis of a sample of edible tissue from a composite (of at
least 200 grams) from a minimum of 10 or more individuals collected at or near the locations
specified.
Table I
Criteria for Reopening Areas Closed from Oil Spills Based on Concentrations of Chemical Contaminants in
Seafood
Levels of Concern (ppm) at a 10

cancer risk level
Chemical
1
-6
90 g/day
(Shrimp and
Crabs)
120 gday
(Oysters)
160 g/day
(Finfish)
Basis
Napthalene
Flourene
Anthracene/phenanthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo(a)pyrene
31 31 233 0.026 0.041 0.38 0.41 0.005
23 23 175 0.020 0.031 0.28 0.31 0.004
20
20
150
0.015
0.025
0.20
0.25
0.003
Non cancer EPA RfD; 70 kg bw

Cancer 0.02 B(a)P equivalency
Cancer 0.13B(a)P equivalency
10
Cancer risk =
(34ng/p/d)(70/5yr)
5
6
Includes alkylated homologues, specifically C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4 napthalenes; C-1, C-2, C-3 fuorenes; C-1, C-2, C-3
anthracenes/phenanthracenes; C-1, C-2 pyrenes .
With respect to the Basis:
RfD based criteria:

Napthalene: Fluorene: Anthracene:
RfD
(0.04 mg/kg/d x 70kg)/Daily Intake (kg)

(0.04 mg/kg/d x 70kg)/ Daily Intake (kg)
(0.30 mg/kg/d x 70kg)/ Daily Intake (kg)
Alkylated homologues assumed to have similar toxicities to the parent compound. Anthracene and phenanthracene were combined because
routine chemical analysis does not distinguish between the analogues of these two compounds.
Cancer risk-(q*)-based criteria: q*
Fluoranthene: [34ng x (70/5)]/[ Daily Intake (g ) x 0.02]
Pyrene: Benz(a)anthracene: Chrysene: Benzo(a)pyrene: [34ng x (70/5)]/[ Daily Intake (g ) x 0.13]
[34ng x (70/5)]/[ Daily Intake (g ) [34ng x (70/5)]/[ Daily Intake (g ) x 0.014]
x 0.013]
10
[34ng x (70/5)]/[ Daily Intake (g )]
One-in-a-million increase in the lifetime upper bound cancer risk adjusted to account for exposures which are expected to last longer than 5 years
(70/5 yr). For any sample containing fluoranthene, pyrene, benz(a)anthracene, chrysene, or benzo(a)pyrene, the sum of the individual ratios of
the detected levels cannot exceed 1.
References:
1. Yender, R., Michel, J., and Lord, C. (2002). Managing Seafood Safety after an Oil Spill.
Seattle: Hazardous Materials Response Division, Office of Response and Restoration, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 72 pp. Available:
http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/book shelf/963 seafood2.pdf
2. Reilly, T.I., and York, R.K. (2001) Guidance on sensory testing and monitoring of seafood
for presence of petroleum taint following an oil spill. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS
OR&R 9. Seattle: Office of Response and Restoration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. 109 pp. 6
Document ID: 0.7.19.1730.1
5/26/2010
3. Yender, R. (2003). Improving Seafood Safety Management after an Oil Spill. In:
Proceedings of the 2003 International Oil Spill Conference. 8 pp. Available:
http://www.iosc.org/papers/IOSC%202003%20a416.pdf
4. Sloan, C.A., Brown, D.W., Pearce, R.W., Boyer, R.H., Bolton, J.L., Burrows, D.G., Herman,
D.P., and Krahn, M.M. (2004). Extraction, Cleanup, and Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry Analysis of Sediments and Tissues for Organic Contaminants. U.S. Dept.
Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-59, 47 pp.
5. Bolger, M. and Carrington, C. (1999). Hazard and risk assessment of crude oil in subsistence
seafood samples from Prince William Sound: Lessons learned from the Exxon Valdez. In L. Jay
Field et al. (eds.). Evaluating and Communicating Subsistence Seafood Safety in a Cross-
Cultural Context: Lessons Learned from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Pensacola: Society of
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Pp. 195-204.
6. Bolger, M., Henry, S.H., and Carrington, C.D. (1996). Hazard and risk assessment of crude
oil contaminants in subsistence seafood samples from Prince William Sound. Proc. EXXON
VALDEZ Oil Spill Symposium, S.D. Rice, R.B. Spies, D.A. Wolfe, and B.A. Wright (eds.).
American Fisheries Symposium Vol. 18, pp. 837-843.
7. Bolger, M. and Carrington, C. (1999). Estimation of Risk Associated with consumption of
Oil-Contaminated Fish and Shellfish by Alaskan Subsistence Fishermen using a Benzo[a]pyrene
Equivalency Approach. In L. Jay Field et al. (eds.). Evaluating and Communicating Subsistence
Seafood Safety in a Cross-Cultural Context: Lessons Learned from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill.
Pensacola: Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Appendix 3: Report of the
Quantitative Risk Assessment Committee, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S.
food and Drug Administration, 9 August 1990, pp. 295-304
8. The RfD value is an estimate (with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude) of a
daily oral exposure to the human population (including sensitive subgroups) that is likely to be
without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. limitations of the data used.
9. Slope factor values represent an upper bound, approximating a 95% confidence limit, on the
increased cancer risk from a lifetime exposure to an agent. This estimate, usually expressed in
units of proportion (of a population) affected per mg/kg-day, is generally reserved for use in the
low-dose region of the dose-response relationship, that is, for exposures corresponding to risks
less than 1 in 100.
10. US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2000. Guidance for assessing contaminant
data for use in fish advisories, Volume 2: Risk assessment and fish consumption limits, Third
Edition. EPA 823/B/00/008. Washington, DC: Office of Science and Technology, USEPA. It can be derived from a
NOAEL, LOAEL or benchmark dose, with uncertainty factors generally applied to reflect
Document ID: 0.7.19.1730.1
Received(Date): Fri, 28 May 2010 15:15:33 -0400

From: Beth Dieveney <[email protected]>
Subject: BP Oil Dispersants
To: DWH leadership <[email protected]>
4distribution-1.doc
Information on Dispersant make-up.
--
Beth Dieveney
Office of the Under Secretary
14th & Constitution Ave., NW, Room 5811
phone: cell: fax:
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
The following list of chemicals has been developed for distribution by EPA.
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
CAS
Registry
Number
57-55-6 111-76-2
577-11-7 1338-43-8 9005-65-6 9005-70-3 29911-28-2 64742-47-8
Chemical Name (TSCA Inventory)
1,2-Propanediol
Ethanol, 2-butoxy-
Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, 1,4-bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester, sodium salt (1:1)
Sorbitan, mono-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate
Sorbitan, mono-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivs.
Sorbitan, tri-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivs
2-Propanol, 1-(2-butoxy-1-methylethoxy)-
Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light
Document ID: 0.7.19.2023.1

Subject: FW: Pre-brief at 9:05 on Saturday
<[email protected]>,'Dave Westerholm' <[email protected]>,"'Gray, John'"
<[email protected]>,'Margaret Spring' <[email protected]>,'Sally Yozell'
<[email protected]>
Cc: 'Jen Pizza' <[email protected]>,"'Jacqueline J. Rousseau'"
<[email protected]>,'Adele Stevens' <[email protected]>

Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 5:10 PM
[email protected]; Lori Faeth; Kayyem, Juliette; Murk, David CDR; Moilanen, Stephen S.;
[email protected]; Tate, Gail; Munoz, Cecilia
Subject: Pre brief at 9:05 on Saturday
All,

Saturday, May 29 Call with Governors

HOST Pin
[Guest Pin

Speakers
DRAFT AGENDA
Call with Governors 9:05 a.m. pre-brief; 9:15 Governor

Observations and Trajectory Monica Medina and David Kennedy, Medina, NOAA
o
o

Response Plans and Boom
EPA Update EPA Dep Admin Bob Perciasepe

EPA Bob P. said we would get the talking points on dispersants out to the Governors today.
Interior Update Tom Strickland
Next call 9:15 a.m. EDT (8:15 CDT) Saturday, May 29, 2010

From: Helen Golde <[email protected]>
Subject: [Fwd: Unified Command Report]
Cc: Brian Pawlak <[email protected]>,Rebecca Chiampi <[email protected]>
John-- In reference to getting info on the ORR website, it has come to our attention the
Deepwater Horizon response website (see links below) is posting wildlife info and tables. This
information doesn't have any of the context and additional info that our stuff has. It really would
really be great if we could have a wildlife section of the ORR website to provide more context
and info. Note that FW S is also doing this already (see additional link below). Right now
wildlife stuff on ORR website is buried in a long narrative, instead of a clear location (which
NMFS and OPR could also link to).
Thanks for anything you can do.
-- Helen
Subject: Unified Command Report

Date:Fri, 28 May 2010 16:51:21 -0400
From:Alexis Gutierrez <[email protected]>
To:Helen Golde <[email protected]>
http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/posted/2931/FWNumbers WEB 28May Final.

571947.pdf
<http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doctype/2931/55963>
http://www.fws.gov/home/dhoilspill/index.html
Helen M. Golde
Deputy Director
Office of Protected Resources
301 713 2332 x 108

Subject: Fw: BP Oil Dispersants
<[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"
4distribution-1.doc
Pls distribute as needed

Sent: Fri May 28 15:15:33 2010
Subject: BP Oil Dispersants
Information on Dispersant make-up.
--
Beth Dieveney
phone: cell: fax:
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
CAS
Registry
Number
57-55-6 111-76-2
577-11-7 1338-43-8 9005-65-6 9005-70-3 29911-28-2 64742-47-8
1,2-Propanediol
Ethanol, 2-butoxy-
Document ID: 0.7.19.1701.1
Received(Date): Sat, 29 May 2010 08:46:48 -0400

From: "Christopher.S.Moore" <[email protected]>
Subject: ICC Report _ May 29, 2010
may 29 slb.pdf
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY / NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

CAPT Christopher S. Moore, NOAA

Director, NOAA Homeland Security Program Office
Office: (301) 713 3310 x 129
Fax: (301) 713 1641
Cell:
B6 Privacy
E mail: christopher.s.m oore@ noaa.gov
Deepwater Horizon MC252

NOAA Incident Coordination Center
Situation Report For activities through COB 28 May 2010

International Affairs has coordinated a meeting with Cuban officials for Tuesday, 01 June @ 3pm
and a video conference with the Bahamians on Thursday, 03 June @ 3pm.

A new fisheries closure area became effective yesterday at 6 PM Eastern Time. The new closure
boundary was extending the eastern and southern boundaries of the previous closure area.
o
The new closure measures 60,683 sq mi (157,169 sq km), which is about 25% of the GOM
EEZ.

NOAA Assets
People
o
Unified command post - Captain Mark Pickett will relieve LCDR Demian Bailey on Saturday
as Research Chief of Operations/Platforms Czar. LTJG Chamberlain enroute to support.
o
SST Michael Allen from NOAA ship PISCES will perform technical support on the M/V Ryan
Chouest for oil spill monitoring after a request from UC.

COASTAL CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES
o
Florida Keys Shallow Water Coral Field Team has deployed to the Fl Keys and is composed of
2 FTEs and 2 contract personnel.
o Chandeleur Dolphin Tissue Sampling Team composed of 3 contract personnel on team and
is deployed to Chandeleur Sound

Yesterday, a joint NCCOS and NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science Center team
collected tissue samples from 3 dolphins in Chandeleur Sound, bringing the total
samples up to 10 for the week. The team focused on northeast end of the Sound
and no oil was observed. None of the dolphins encountered showed evidence of
oiling. The team will continue sampling in Chandeleur Sound on Friday and then
return home on Saturday.

MARINE CONATAMINATION ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES
o
Plume Mapping & Dispersant Efficacy 1 FTE on team, deployed to sea near the Deepwater
Horizon site
o
An NCCOS biologist is en route to the R/ Brooks McCall a vessel contracted by the
V responsible party (BP) to characterize the water column in the vicinity of the main release
in order to inform responders and monitor dispersant effectiveness. The ship is scheduled to
depart Port Fourchon on Saturday May 29.

NOAA Aircraft Operations Summary

o
May 27 Flight totals NOAA Aircraft logged 17.3 Hours
o
May 28 scheduled Flights NOAA Aircraft have 13 flight hours scheduled for Multispectral
scanning and coastal mapping & photography
Total flight time to date is 303.4 hrs
o
o
May 28 Space A status 2

([email protected])
301-713-0136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1799.1


Successful P-3 flight yesterday with Videographer and print photographer were
aboard the P-3 yesterday. N42RF dropped AXBT, ACTD, and dropsondes. And CAPT
Kearse and Dr.

Nick Shay (U. of Miami) did interviews with the local Fox affiliate and
a freelance writer for Nature magazine and other publications.

NOAA Ship Operations Summary

o
NOAA Ship Gordon Gunter

reporters and photographers from NYT, CNN, AP, and the
Times-Picayune visited the ship while u/w yesterday.

Preliminary data results from the acoustic survey are beginning to circulate

o
NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson

Alongside conducting repairs and media interview

Staging for upcoming acoustic and water sampling

o
NOAA Ship Pisces & NOAA Ship Oregon II alongside in a repair status

NOAA Partners

Gliders
o
There are 6 gliders operating in and around the oil spill area

2 NavO gliders deployed from the NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson

Glider RU21 Rutgers/IOOS Glider Zone East

Sam USF / IOOS Glider Zone East

Waldo Mote Marine Lab / IOOS Glider Zone East

Seaglider 515 USM/Irobot (Univ of Washington)
o
All IOOS Glider data is being provided to NDBC in KKYY format for GTS access
o
And additionally an FTP site is being established for data access & download
o
Navy data is being visualized in graphic form, but the data is not yet publicly available.

HF Radar
th
o
The May 11
Radar proposal submitted to UC and NOAA from IOOS and CODAR is still
HF pending a funding determination. The proposal would establish radar coverage for from
South of Fourchon and past the Birds Foot region of LA and finally to the East side of Birds
Foot.

External Requests

Requests from GOM fisherman to the Gulf VMS manager are increasing for historical VMS vessel
tracks that show where they have fished.
([email protected])
301-713-0136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1799.1


Received an information request from NORAD/NORTHCOM requesting verification of a submerged
plume of oil that was headed to Mobile Bay.
Received a request from USACE HQ asking if NOAA was going to model the effect of a tropical storm
on a submerged oil plume and when would the results be released.
Command, Information Centers and Staging Areas
Total NOAA Staff:

10
29
19
3
4
Area Command Post Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd - Source Control
ROBERT, LA HOUMA, LA MOBILE, AL ST. PETERSBURG, FL KEY WEST, FL HOUSTON, TX
0
Staging Areas Venice, LA Pascagoula, MS Venice, LA Pascagoula, MS TOTAL DEPLOYED NOAA STAFF:
2
15
82

Miscellaneous/Various Locations: Total Deployed NOAA Staf: f

23
105
([email protected])
301-713-0136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1799.1


([email protected])
301-713-0136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1799.1
Received(Date): Sat, 29 May 2010 13:48:20 +0100

Subject: BP GUlf of Mexico Update May 28

05/28/2010 9:00pm EDT
1. 2. 3.
On the sea floor to stop the flow of oil through various strategies;
On the surface to minimize impacts of the spill; and
Highlights
Top kill procedure continues.
x x x
Shoreline protection efforts redoubled.

Subsea
dispersant use continues.
No reports of oil onshore in Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

Offshore Sea Floor

1. Riser Insertion Tube riser insertion tool remains staged on the sea floor and is not currently in
use. To date, the tool has collected approximately 22,000 barrels of oil.
2. Dispersant injection on the sea floor approximately 14,000 gallons of dispersant was used
subsea today. EPA is allowing subsea application of the currently-used dispersant to continue.
3.
Top Kill Activities
Operations continue and are expected to continue for the next 24-48 hours.

x The top kill

system includes bypass lines, a manifold, and valves through which
heavy fluids are being delivered into the BOP. An animated description of the procedure can be found
on the Deepwater Horizon Unified Command website at:
http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/site/2931/
x Plans and equipment are in place to combine the top kill process with the injection

under pressure of bridging material into the BOP to prevent or limit upward flow through the BOP. This
procedure has never been performed in 5,000 feet of water.
4.
x The first relief well (work being performed by the Development Driller III) is at approximately

10,100 feet below sea level. This well was spudded on May 2. The liner is cemented and preparing to
resume drilling.

feet below sea level. Drilling began on May 16.
Both
wells x intercept the existing wellbore at approximately 18,000 feet below seal level. It is estimated the total

5.
Containment Recovery System
x A Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) cap has been fabricated and shipped to the location.

This cap is designed to fit directly over the top of the blowout preventer once the broken riser pipe is
removed. If needed, the cap will be attached to a riser pipe to convey oil and gas from the well directly to
the Enterprise drill ship on the surface.

Cleanup Vessels approximately 1,400 response vessels are now deployed (tugs, barges and recovery
boats). 93 are skimmers.
Skimming Operations 7,200 barrels of oily-water mix collected yesterday. Ttotal to date = 280,949
barrels.
Surface Dispersant Limited surface dispersant was applied yesterday. dispersant remain available.
Over 400,000 gallons of
In-Situ Burning The Unified Command conducted an additional 13 in-situ burns on Thursday. In-situ
burning occurs on the surface using special fire-boom that collects surface hydrocarbons which are then
burned.

Shoreline Protection both Coast Guard and BP are redoubling efforts with additional senior operations
managers coming into field locations to improve responsiveness and speed cleanup operations. The
response organization has been restructured into three main branches - east, west and offshore.
Additional forward operating bases and staging areas are being established in western Louisiana.
Shoreline Protection - Boom Report over 1,800,000 feet of containment boom has been deployed
(with an additional 200,000 feet staged). Over 1,500,000 feet of sorbent boom has been deployed (with
an additional 1,000,000 feet staged)

Claims - BP has 24 claims offices (across LA., MS., AL., FL.) open to help claimants through the
process. Over 27,500 claims totalling over $37 million have been paid ($17 million in Louisiana).
15,000 claims are waiting on documentation from claimants. Most claims are for loss of income or wages
in commercial fishing, shrimping and oyster harvest, and associated facilities. Note: No person asserting
a claim or receiving payment for interim benefits will be asked or required to sign a release or waive any
rights to assert additional claims, to file an individual legal action, or to participate in other legal actions
associated with the Deepwater Horizon incident. The contact number for claims is (800) 440-0858. In
person claims can be filed at office locations listed below. Claims can also be filed online at:
http://www.bp.com/iframe.do?categoryId=9033722&contentId=7062138

State specific websites established - BP today announced four informational web sites designed to
offer state-specific (LA., MS., AL., FL) oil spill information to residents of communities affected by the
Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Residents are encouraged to visit these sites frequently and sign up for the
mailing list to receive the most current information about the spill response. These sites are dedicated to
providing information about activities and events most important to residents of each state.
Alabama: www.alabamagulfresponse.com
Florida: www.floridagulfresponse.com
Louisiana: www.louisianagulfresponse.com
Mississippi: www.mississippigulfresponse.com

Independent Claims Mediator established - BP is appointing an Independent Mediator so that we have

as fair a process as possible for everyone in the Gulf region. BP has always said will pay legitimate claims
for loss and damage caused by the spill, and were committed to paying claims promptly. In those cases
in which a claimant and BP cannot agree on resolution of a claim, the mediator is a way for them to get
an independent review.
$500 Million for 10-year Research Program to Study Spill Impacts BP is contributing $500 million
over 10 years to fund an open research program studying the impact of the Deepwater Horizon incident,
and its associated response, on the marine and shoreline environment of the Gulf of Mexico.

$25 Million Block Grants to 4 States On May 4, BP announced it would provide Louisiana, Florida,
Mississippi and Alabama $25 million each to accelerate implementation of the States Area Contingency
Plans.

Over 5,000 contracts have been signed and nearly 1,000 vessels
are currently active. Community Outreach Centers are working with the contractors to ensure they have
the appropriate training.
Volunteers and Training 15,000 volunteers are registered. BP has opened 22 Community Outreach
Centers across the Gulf where people can go for more information, to find out about the spill, and to
connect with volunteer opportunities. Volunteers are being trained in five different modules that range
from safety for beach clean-up, to wildlife monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and vessel
operation for laying boom. Information about training can be found on the incident website at
Wildlife Activities Wildlife rehabilitation sites are located in Venice, LA and Mobile, AL.

Louisiana
Sites:


Amelia Staging Area
Belle Chasse Claims Office
2766 Belle Chasse Hwy

Belle Chasse, LA 70037
Unit 2
Cut Off, LA 70345
3811 LA 1
303 Timber Creek
Hammond, LA 70404
Houma Claims Office
Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363
4375 Michoud Blvd
Slidell, LA 70461
1345 Bayou Rd
41093 Hwy LA 23

Mississippi
Sites:

Bay St. Louis
Claims Office
1171 Highway 90
Bay St. Louis, MS
39520
Biloxi, MS 39532
5912 Old Mobile Hwy
Suite 4
Alabama Sites:

Bayou
LaBatre
Claims
Office
13290 N.
Wintzell
Avenue
Bayou
LaBatre,
AL 36509
Foley Claims Office

Suite 1
Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535
Karen St John
BP America
B6 Privacy

From: Joe Inslee <[email protected]>
Subject: [Fwd: Prep for NRT Meeting, May 29, 2010]
To: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],[email protected], [email protected]
NRT Agenda 29 May 1100 mtg.doc
Below and attached are prep materials for the May 29, 11 AM NRT call
For Official Use Only

May 29, 2010
National Response Team Meeting at 1100:
B6 Privacy b6 Call in Number: 1and participation pin is Please dial in 15 minutes before the call for a roll call starting at
10-minutes before the scheduled start time.
/
/NOAA SSC Charlie Henry will be with RADM Landry at the Unified Area
Command in Robert, LA. Any detailed or technical questions may be
referred to him.
DOC/NOAA Objectives for the Meeting:
1. Convey substantive messages about NOAA involvement in the response.
2. Acquire current status of response, coordination and outreach efforts.
3. Answer questions on NOAA activities and products.
The agenda for the NRT meeting is attached. There are no agenda items
assigned to NOAA and the agency does not have a priority message to
convey at today's meeting.
The following NOAA products have been distributed to the NRT agencies
prior to the meeting:
* Most recent Spot Weather Forecast
* Coastal trajectory prediction for location of surface oil with
72-hour outlook
* Offshore trajectory prediction for location of surface oil with
72-hour outlook
* Shoreline Impact Outlook showing likely new landfalls of oil over
the coming 5 days
* Loop Current location relative to oil slick
Overview of NOAA products
* _Weather _
o NW winds today will switch to the S and SW tonight,
increasing the likelihood of additional oil coming to shore
over the next several days. Seas will be calm with a light
chop. Isolated thunderstorms may disrupt spill operations
again late in the day.
* _Coastal Trajectory _
o Southerly winds will tend to push the oil back onshore with
fresh deposits possible on the east side of eh Delta. By
mid-week, it is possible that oil could spread to the east,
possibly involving the Mobile Bay area and even Pensacola
(see Coastal Impact Outlook).

* _Loop Current with Offshore Trajectory _
o The northern part of the LC remains separated, and has
formed a large clockwise eddy over 100 miles south of the
spill site. As a result, any small amounts of oil that may
reach this eddy will be moved in a large circular pattern in
the middle of the Gulf, and not threaten any shorelines.
There is also minimal risk of the LC serving as a
significant mechanism to transport oil toward any shorelines
and there is no evidence to suggest significant amounts of
oil are moving toward the LC. The eddy discussed above will
likely re-attach to the Loop Current over the next week or
two. Only non-contiguous sheens and scattered tarballs are
visible in this eddy.
* _Agenda Item:_ Polling of NRT Secretaries
No priority messages have been identified for NOAA to contribute.
--
William G. Conner, Ph.D.
Chief, HAZMAT Emergency Response Division
NOAA Office of Response and Restoration
b6 Phone: (190)
b6 Cell:
--
Joe Inslee
Policy/Outreach Assistant
Assessment and Restoration Division
1305 East-West Highway SSMC 4, Rm. 10219
b6 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Office ext. 202
b6 Cell
b6 Fax
BP Oil Spill Response Gulf of Mexico Incident

National Response Team (NRT) Phone Conference Meeting
AGENDA
Conference call-in phone number: 1and participation pin is: b6 May 29, 2010 11:00 AM EDT
b6
Objective: Secretary Napolitano and the National Incident Commander (NIC) have requested a
conference call with NRT Agency Heads (Secretary Level) today at 11:00 AM EDT. This
meeting should last no longer than 30 minutes.
Audience: NRT Agency Heads (Secretary Level) plus one member. Regional Response Team
IV and VI Co-Chairs may call in.
May 29, 2010
Call In
Roll Call Significant Activities SubSurface Response Status
On Water Recovery Status
Shoreline Response Status
Weather/Oil Trajectories
Polling of NRT Secretaries Communication Update Legal Affairs Update Intergovernmental Affairs Update Congressional Affairs Update Secretarys Closing Remarks Meeting Adjourned USCG
OPA
OGC
IGA
OLA
S-1
USCG
NIC
UNCLASSIFIED
Document ID: 0.7.19.1795.1

From: John Oliver <[email protected]>
Subject: Deepwater Horizon MC252 LMR report for May 29
To: _HQ Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Mammal and Turtle Stranding Report 28 May-FINAL.doc
Fishery Closure
There was no change to the closed area for May 29
The closed area from May 28th remains in effect
The closed area measures 60,683 sq mi (157,169 sq km), which is about 25% of the
GOM EEZ
The map of the current closed area is attached (same map from yesterday's report)
Seafood Inspection

We are reviewing a new draft re opening protocol today with changes
requested by both EPA and FDA. not five. FDA changed one of the criteria to a more
appropriate level in that it is based on two year consumption data and
It is less stringent and offers far more flexibility.
EPA proposed changes at the same time that were not included in the draft
protocol OMB circulated last night but came from EPA in a separate email.
DOC is working with OMB, helping NOAA, make it clear that we will review
EPA water quality data that is available or if practicable or whenever
possible an area. some qualifier that means we will try but not be required to
We are seeking flexibility here as well.
review EPA's water quality data from a particular site before we re open
Marine Mammal and Turtle Health and Stranding Reports

The updated report is attached along with the current turtle stranding map
Update through 28 May 2010 (as of 1800)
Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Health and Response

Noteworthy Developments During this Reporting Period:
x
Increase of 2 turtle and 1dolphin strandings
* For this event, a true stranding is defined as a turtle that washes ashore dead or debilitated or is
found floating dead or debilitated in the course of non-directed turtle surveys. Turtles observed
and/or captured during directed sampling efforts are not categorized as strandings.
Sea Turtles:
240 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 2 from May
27)
x
237 Stranded (increase of 2 from May 27)
o
224 of the stranded were found dead (increase of 2 from May 27)
x
1 stranded dead and oiled (no change from May27)
o
3 recovered alive but died in care (no change from May 27)
o
1 turtle released alive (no change from May 27)
o
9 live turtles in rehabilitation (no change from May 27)
x
3 collected during directed sampling efforts (no change from May 27)
o
3 live turtles in rehabilitation (no change from May 27)
Turtle Necropsy Status (of the 224 dead stranded and 3 that died in rehab):
x
7 assessed and unable to perform necropsies (i.e. advance decomposition) (no change
from May 27)
x
17 partial necropsies (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (no change from May 27)
x
50 full necropsies performed (no change from May 27)
x
44 carcasses not collected due to decomposition state or unable to recover but marked
and/or buried (no change from May 27)
x
109 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increase of 2 from May
27)
x
Of the 67 full or partial necropsies completed, the two primary considerations for the
cause of these strandings are forced submergence or acute toxicosis.
Information on Signs of Oiling:
x
To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 1 dead stranded sea
turtle that has been examined.
x
To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 3 live collected sea
turtles that have been examined.
Historical Strandings:
x
The total number of sea turtle strandings that we have documented from the
th
th
Louisiana/Texas border through the Florida panhandle from April 30
through May 27

is 237.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2043.2
x
This is much higher than the number of turtle strandings that have been documented in
recent years in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama during this time frame (combined
range of 4-30 for LA, MS, and AL)
o
Overall Northern Gulf range for recent years has been 18-46.
o
From 2005 2009 the number of turtle strandings for the month of May has
ranged from 1 to 15 in Louisiana
o
From 2005 2009 0 to 13 in Mississippi
o
From 2005 2009 1 to 15 in Alabama.
o
In the Florida panhandle, from 2003 2007, the number of strandings in May has
ranged from 13 to 37.
x
There has been an increase in awareness and human presence in the northern Gulf of
Mexico, which likely has resulted in some of the increased documentation of stranded
turtles; however, we do not believe this factor fully explains the increase.
Marine Mammals:
x
25 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (an increase of 1
from May 27).
o
All 25 were dead stranded dolphins (an increase of 1 from May 27)
Dolphin Necropsy Status:
x
9 assessed and unable to perform necropsies (e.g. advanced decomposition) (increase of 1
from May 27)
x
7 partial necropsies performed (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (no change from May
27)
x
3 full necropsies performed (no change from May 27)
x
6 Verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of decomposition or unable
to recover (no change from May 27)
x
0 Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants
x
One of the dolphins had evidence of external oil on its tongue and body and therefore is
classified as oiled. Since the carcass was first reported in the water/oil line on the oiled
beach, we are unable at this time to determine whether the animal was externally covered
in oil post mortem when the carcass came on shore or was oiled prior to death.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2043.2
Historical Strandings
th
, x
Since April 30
the stranding rate of dolphins in Louisiana is higher than the historic
numbers, but this may be a reflection of increased detection and reporting and the
lingering effects of the earlier observed spike in strandings.
Summary of Action Plan Items:
x
At least one BP affiliated observer will accompany vessels departing today to remove
and dispose of a large mat of boomed oiled Sargassum off the Alabama coast.
Information received from this observer upon return will guide the protocols and
observer plans for this clean-up activity should it continue.
x
Working with Jessica White from ORR to evaluate the risk of sea turtle take associated
with oil removal from skimmer operations to deploy observers on specific vessels that
pose the highest risk. Team members are enroute to LA to re-start the on-water dedicated
turtle search efforts this week. The team will be led by the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission and also includes staff from NMFS, Georgia DNR, and BP
contracted staff from In-water Research Group (an FFWCC sea turtle permit holder).
One FWC vessel and two VOO will be used. Logistics for the operation, including
transport of captured turtles to Audubon Aquarium are in place.
x
Planning is ongoing to transfer the five live turtles currently in rehab at IMMS to Florida
aquaria as early as tomorrow. USFWS, NMFS, and FFWCC are coordinating with
USCG to bring the animals to SW Florida via USCG helicopter. Two of the turtles are
likely ready for release after we re-confirm their health status following transport.
FFWCC will coordinate the release under permit from USFWS. The other three turtles
will need additional time in rehab. These turtles are being relocated to free up IMMS to
receive oiled turtles - they are the only de-oiling facility in MS.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2043.2
Document ID: 0.7.19.2043.3

Subject: [Fwd: Fw: BP Oil Dispersants]
To: Lois Schiffer <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
4distribution-1.doc
email trail regarding BP oil dispersant
The list is a combined list for both Corexit 9500 and Corexit 9527. At this
point, a detailed formula will not be available from EPA until May 29th, and
that list would be subject to CBI rules. We are working on getting the
detailed list to you faster and without the CBI limitation.
Subject: Fw: BP Oil Dispersants

Date:Mon, 24 May 2010 17:55:11 +0000
From:Robert Haddad <[email protected]>
Reply-To:[email protected]
To:Beth Dieveney <[email protected]>
This list of ingredients is partial and for both corexit products. I'll send
you the next email. Bob
Robert Haddad PhD
NOAA/ORR
Chief ARD
B6 Privacy
Original Message
From: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 12:15:19
To: Robert.Haddad<[email protected]>
Cc: 'Brian Julius'<[email protected]>; 'William
Conner'<[email protected]>; 'Lois Schiffer'<[email protected]>;
<Craig.R.O'[email protected]>
Subject: Re: BP Oil Dispersants
Bob,
EPA has provided me with the attached list of component chemicals. This list
is publicly cleared and not subject to CBI rules. I am working on obtaining a
more detailed formula, but it appears that EPA's regulations are cumbersome. I
will let you know when there is news on the front. Please let me know if you
have any questions. Thank you.
Jamon
Original Message
From: "Robert.Haddad" <[email protected]>

Date: Saturday, May 22, 2010 1:53 pm
Subject: RE: BP Oil Dispersants
To: 'Brian Julius' <[email protected]>, 'Jamon Bollock'
<[email protected]>
Cc: 'William Conner' <[email protected]>, 'Lois Schiffer'
<[email protected]>, Craig.R.O'[email protected]
> Brian and Jamon: > of our
Any news yet?
I just want to keep others appraised
> efforts to get this information.

>
> Thanks, Bob
>
> Robert Haddad, Ph.D.
> Chief, Assessment & Restoration Division
> NOAA/Office of Response & Restoration
> Office: > Cell:
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
> www.darrp.noaa.gov
> www.response.restoration.noaa.gov
>
>
> Original Message
> From: Brian Julius [
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 6:11 PM
> To: Jamon Bollock
> Cc: William Conner; Robert Haddad
> Subject: Re: BP Oil Dispersants
>
> Jamon,
>
> I have heard from both Dr. Conner and Dr. Haddad, and none of us have
>
> received this information to date.
>
> >
> Jamon Bollock wrote:
> > Dr. Conner and Mr. Julius,
> >
> > Lois Schiffer asked me to find out whether OR&R has received a list
> of
> > the constituent chemical ingredients in the dispersants being used
> by
> > BP. EPA informed me that the maker of the chemicals had agreed to
> > allow the information to be made public and that EPA's OSWER would
> > provide the list to NOAA. We want to make sure OR&R has the
> > information it needs.
> >
> > Could you please let me know if you've received the list and whether
>
> > it provides sufficient information? I also sent a message to Dr.
> > Haddad with the same question. Thanks.
> >
> > > >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________
> Brian Julius Jamon
Brian
> Deputy Director

> NOAA Office of Response and Restoration
> N/ORR, SSMC4, Rm. 10110
> 1305 East West Highway
> Silver Spring, MD 20910
> Ph: > Cell: > Fax: >
>
>

Beth Dieveney
phone: cell: fax:
B6 Privacy B6 Privacy B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy B6 Privacy
> Email: [email protected]
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
CAS
Registry
Number
57-55-6 111-76-2
577-11-7 1338-43-8 9005-65-6 9005-70-3 29911-28-2 64742-47-8
1,2-Propanediol
Ethanol, 2-butoxy-
Document ID: 0.7.19.1095.1
Received(Date): Sun, 30 May 2010 07:42:06 -0400

Subject: Deepwater Morning Reports
os forecast 20100601 1200CDT 20100529 1900CDT rs.pdf
landfall5 29 complete.pdf
Deepwater Horizon Report 42.pdf
forecast 20100601 1200CDT 20100529 2100CDT.pdf


Office: (301) 713 3310 x 129
Fax: (301) 713 1641
B6 Privacy
NOAA Emergency Response Division (ERD)

Report # 42: May 29, 2010- 1800 PDT
MC 252 DEEPW ATER HORIZON Incident, Gulf of Mexico, Major Spill Incident

Situation Update, Day 40:
After 3 days of trying to kill the well with drilling fluids and debris, BP has conceded that the
effort has not been successful in stemming the flow of oil from the ruptured riser. In an early
evening press conference, BP said it was unclear why the top kill failed but said it was time to
move to other options.
The next approach for stopping the well leak is the lower marine riser package approach, or
LMRP. The LMRP cap is a newly made version of a device formerly referred to as a "top hat."
In this operation BP will cut the bent riser pipe from the blowout preventer and place an
engineered cap over the opening. The cap would be connected to the drillship via a riser pipe.
The material and equipment required to complete this operation are already in place but the
effort is still expected to take four to seven days. BP believes that the system could capture
much of the leaking oiling, but acknowledges that the relief wells remain the primary solution.
ORR scientists continue produce daily trajectories of the surface oil. For the nearshore region,
moderate southerly winds are forecast to resume and continue through Monday at 5-10 kts.
These winds may begin moving oil that has been tending to the southwest from the source
towards the Delta. In addition to continued threats to shorelines in Breton and Chandeleur
Sounds, model results indicate that some oil may move north to threaten the barrier islands off
Mississippi and Alabama later in the forecast period. ORR continues to track the light tendril of
oil near the northern end of the loop current. Overflights to this region have observed streamers
of emulsified oil no further south than approximately 28 degrees N, with contiguous, colorless
sheens continuing in a narrow band as seen in the satellite imagery. Trajectories for remaining
observed oil within this region suggest some of these scattered sheens will continue to be
entrained into a counter-clockwise eddy, while some may move into the Loop Current Eddy and
persist as very widely scattered tarballs not visible from imagery.

The Regional Response Team (RRT) is exploring alternative response methods for protecting
and cleaning up marshes. The Department of Agricultures National Resource Conservation
Service continues to push forward a plan to deploy organic sorbents to help protect marshes from
oil. The material would be placed on the marshes before oiling. There is little to no evidence
that this technique will succeed and the potential impacts from the release of oil organic material
from the marsh has not been adequately addressed. The method has the potential to generate
large amounts of oily debris. ORR suggested a small pilot study to determine if the approach
could be effective in protecting marshes and how the organic sorbents behave when oiled.

The presence of submerged oil plumes off the coast of Florida and Alabama remains a top
news story. plumes. There is still no analytic confirmation of the nature and concentration of oil in these
The R/V Pelican first reported these plumes last week. A NOAA contracted lab at
Louisiana State University bas analyzed the first set of samples from the Pelican cruise and
Document ID: 0.7.19.2037.3
found no evidence of oil. Additional samples are being run. Several issues with sample
handling limit interpretation of these results. Samples of the plume area from the R/V
Weatherbird II have arrived at Alpha lab and are priority for analysis. The Weatherbird was met
with a media frenzy when they arrived at the dock, and it is still unclear whether the scientists
were misquoted when they reported finding huge additional plumes this week.

Management of the various cruises continues to be a major scientific coordination activity. A
Deepwater Monitoring group has been established to improve coordination and data flow
between the vessels on scene and the Unified Command.

nt
S,
fe
an
ch
re
he
g,

.
: 0.7.19.2037.3
BP Oil Spill Response Gulf of Mexico Incident

National Response Team (NRT) Phone Conference Meeting
AGENDA
Conference call-in phone number: 1and participation pin is: May 30, 2010 11:00 AM EDT
Objective: Secretary Napolitano and the National Incident Commander (NIC) have requested a
conference call with NRT Agency Heads (Secretary Level) today at 11:00 AM EDT. This
meeting should last no longer than 30 minutes.
Audience: NRT Agency Heads (Secretary Level) plus one member. Regional Response Team
IV and VI Co-Chairs may call in.
May 30, 2010
Call In
Roll Call Significant Activities SubSurface Response Status
On Water Recovery Status
Shoreline Response Status
Weather/Oil Trajectories
Polling of NRT Secretaries Communication Update Legal Affairs Update Intergovernmental Affairs Update Congressional Affairs Update Secretarys Closing Remarks Meeting Adjourned USCG
OPA
OGC
IGA
OLA
S-1
USCG
NIC
UNCLASSIFIED
Document ID: 0.7.19.1778.1
Received(Date): Sun, 30 May 2010 14:35:44 -0400

From: "Jainey.Bavishi" <[email protected]>
Subject: [Fwd: Seafood safety fact sheet]
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,John Rapp <[email protected]>
Seafood safety fact sheet.eml
Andy,
This is the latest version of the seafood safety fact sheet I have. To
my knowledge, it has not been cleared. John will be "on call" tomorrow
and can provide more information on its status.
Jainey

Subject: Seafood safety fact sheet
To: "Gilson, Shannon" <[email protected]>
Cc: Scott Smullen <[email protected]>,Jennifer Austin <[email protected]>,_HQ
Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>,Lauren B Lugo <[email protected]>, Brian
Pawlak <[email protected]>
2010 0521 seafood safety two pager with FDA letter.docx
Shannon,
NOAA prepared the attached fact sheet on seafood safety. Can you let me
know if DOC clears it and, if so, whether you or I should push it
forward for clearance at OMB?
Thanks,
John
Document ID: 0.7.19.1694.1
Received(Date): Mon, 31 May 2010 11:57:32 -0400

Subject: Modification to closed area for May 31
[email protected],[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],[email protected], [email protected],Jessica Kondel
<[email protected]>,Brian Pawlak <[email protected]>,
[email protected],Steve Murawski <[email protected]>, John Oliver
<[email protected]>,Gloria Thompson <[email protected]>,
[email protected],Bonnie Ponwith <[email protected]>,
[email protected],Emily Menashes <[email protected]>,Eric Schwaab
<[email protected]>, [email protected],Michael S Gallagher
<[email protected]>, [email protected],[email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],[email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],[email protected], Laurel Bryant
<[email protected]>,[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],_HQ Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>,
[email protected],Beth Dieveney <[email protected]>
Happy Memorial Day, all -

We are extending the northern boundary of the closure to encompass a
portion of the slick moving toward the state-federal water line off
eastern Mississippi/western Alabama. The new closure map is attached.
PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE UNTIL POSTED ONLINE. We intend to post the map
(and supporting materials) at or before noon today. The new closure
would become effective at 6 PM Eastern Time tonight.
The new closure measures 61,854 sq mi (160,200 sq km), or about 26% of
the GOM EEZ, compared to the May 28 closure comprising 60,683 sq mi
(157,169 sq km), or about 25% of the GOM EEZ. jo

Subject: Agenda for Governor's Call Tuesday, June1
[email protected],[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
All,
Tuesday, June 1 Call with Governors
1- Exemption 6 Agency In...

HOST Pin: Exemption ... Speakers
action item s that cam e up on yesterdays call.
DRAFT AGENDA

o o Observations and Trajectory David Kennedy, NOAA
NOAAfishery closure today due to change in wind
Situation & Leak Stabilization Update RADM Peter Neffenger, NIC
PeterBP will be submitting its new dispersants management plan given the top hat/cap
procedure. W e expect it today
Jindalasked about the flow, and whether it is unimpeded now (i.e., now riser insertion
tube). Yes
Jindalasked when they will commence the cut. (possibly by later this evening)
Allen reported on the Tuesday Barrier/Berm meeting. It will take place in New Orleans
from 1-4:30. W e need to get the following information out to all of the states:
o o Logistics where, when, contact (Scott Lundgren)
Agenda
Attendees (who we want there)
Adm. Allen said we are moving forward on the remaining 5 projects (permitted not funded).
Laid out the issues: 1) feasibility; 2) is it bonefied spill response; 3) part of Corps plan; and
applicability to other berm projects. Gov. Jindal asked when final decision. Allen said we will
forward recommendation out of meeting to POTUS for his consideration. We need to do our
due diligence for President, but expects a good outcome. Gov. Jindal pressed that this is his top
prioritiy. He hopes feds will be forthcoming on information that the state has not yet received,
i.e., why the 1 project (most difficult) was permitted and funded, and the other 5 were not
funded. It has created confusion for the state. Adm. Allen said we will have total visibility on
the issues. Gov. Jindal said any time the Corps has asked for information, the state has provided
it, but they have never heard back whether there were any concerns about the information
provided. Gov. Rileys homeland security director asked who from AL do we want at the
meeting. Allen said a technical rep with expertise on berms and barrier islands.

o Operations Report RADM Admiral Watson, UAC

Update on the Flow Rate Task Force Marcia McNutt, USGS
o Jindal asked if we have any estimate on the amount of oil that remains on top of water. Adm
Watson said we need to develop methodology for that question, but that we could probably get
an answer

Next call 9:15 a.m. EDT (8:15 CDT) Wednesday, June 2, 2010 Open discussion and Q&A with Governors and state officials
All,
Tuesday, June 1 Call with Governors
1- Exemption 5 Deliberati...
HOST Pin:
Exemption 6 Agency Intern...
DRAFT AGENDA

Observations and Trajectory David Kennedy, NOAA
o o NOAA will provide the latest observations and trajectories
NOAAfishery closure today due to change in wind
PeterBP will be submitting its new dispersants management plan given the top hat/cap
procedure. W e expect it today
Jindalasked about the flow, and whether it is unimpeded now (i.e., now riser insertion
tube). Yes
Jindalasked when they will commence the cut. (possibly by later this evening)
Allen reported on the Tuesday Barrier/Berm meeting. It will take place in New Orleans
from 1-4:30. W e need to get the following information out to all of the states:
o o o Logistics where, when, contact (Scott Lundgren)
Agenda
Attendees (who we want there)
Adm. Allen said we are moving forward on the remaining 5 projects (permitted not funded).
Laid out the issues: 1) feasibility; 2) is it bonefied spill response; 3) part of Corps plan; and
applicability to other berm projects. Gov. Jindal asked when final decision. Allen said we will
Document ID: 0.7.19.1675.1
forward recommendation out of meeting to POTUS for his consideration. We need to do our
due diligence for President, but expects a good outcome. Gov. Jindal pressed that this is his top
prioritiy. He hopes feds will be forthcoming on information that the state has not yet received,
i.e., why the 1 project (most difficult) was permitted and funded, and the other 5 were not
funded. It has created confusion for the state. Adm. Allen said we will have total visibility on
the issues. Gov. Jindal said any time the Corps has asked for information, the state has provided
it, but they have never heard back whether there were any concerns about the information
provided. Gov. Rileys homeland security director asked who from AL do we want at the
meeting. Allen said a technical rep with expertise on berms and barrier islands.

o Operations Report RADM Admiral Watson, UAC

Update on the Flow Rate Task Force Marcia McNutt, USGS
o Jindal asked if we have any estimate on the amount of oil that remains on top of water. Adm
Watson said we need to develop methodology for that question, but that we could probably get
an answer


Next call 9:15 a.m. EDT (8:15 CDT) Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1675.1

Subject: May 31 NOAA Deepwater Horizon End of Day Update
DWH BP OilSpill FisheryClosureMap 0528 3110.pdf
Mammal and Turtle Stranding Report 30 May data FINAL.doc
Proposed OMAO Asset DWH Response Schedule 053110.doc
OMAO Assets Gantt Chart 053110.xlsx
DWH ACTIONS and UPDATES 5.31.2010.xlsx
Significant updates for May 31 are below and attached in the Excel spreadsheet. Additional
documents are also attached.
ISSUE TEAMS:
Response Operations (Bill Conner)
ICC
Stood up an integrated analysis team to examine the Brooks McCall (near-field) data to-
date. Initial report due 2 June. NOAA, EPA, and BP all represented.
A longer-term synthesis team is also being established to analyze data integrated from
multiple vessels, AUVs and air-dropped sondes. The outcomes will help inform the Area
Command and the modeling teams.
Began drafting a "strawman" overall sampling needs document to document the response
phase needs. This can then be vetted by others to enable better mission planning.
Established feedback loop call series with NOAA modeling teams and sampling leads.
Multi-party (NOAA, BP, EPA) discussion about longer-term sampling needs (will be
picked up by NOAA Research Council and others).
Continued coordination between NOAA, EPA, and BP on integrated mission planning.
Continued development of ERMA data layers to reflect growing sub-surface sampling
activities.
Stood of a formal Subsurface Monitoring Branch, within the Environmental Unit, with
base of operations in Houma.
3 additional vessels now transmitting daily reports and/or data (W alton Smith, Gordon
Gunter, Ocean Veritas)
6 IOOS community gliders on active missions and transmitting data
(http://rucool.marine.rutgers.edu/deepwater).
Initial development of three new graphics (all will be ready for distro in next 24-48 hours):
Overall conceptual graphic to convey the range of sub-surface observations
Theater-wide informational map of operating zones for vessels, gliders, and air-
dropped sondes (weekly)
Operations graphic showing active grid zones based on USAF grid that is used for all
other operations (air, marine, etc.)
NRT
Cutting the riser pipe above the BOP will not start before tomorrow. After completing the
cut, dispersants will be injected to mitigate the increased flow of oil while work continues
on the Cap.
Tar mats are being recovered today 30 miles off Mobile Bay as well as tar paddies 13 miles
off Dauphin Island. These occurrences of oil are consistent with the NOAA surface oil
trajectory for coastal areas.
RADM Landry will rotate out of the response to be replaced by RADM Watson.
NIC A ctivities

By 0800 tomorrow NOAA IASG tasked to provide update on status of efforts to establish
location, trajectory and content of any subsurface plumes. Juliette Kayyem will need this
info for tomorrow's Governors' call. Input solicited from the Science group and UAC as
well as the modelers in Seattle working on the 3D sub surface issue. In addition detailing
proposed charter for the NIC requested Subsurface Oil Technical team to be lead by
NOAA.
NOAA provided an updated version of the Marsh Response Options fact sheet that
included incident specific text and pictures. Incorporates comments from USDA, DOI &
UAC. Must be reviewed again by the IASG prior to distribution as a joint document.
NOAA reviewing all the Cuba related documents to determine if changes must be made as
a result of the latest trajectory uncertainty being within 100 miles of Cuba. Cuba briefing
scheduled for 1500 tomorrow (Tuesday) at DoS.
Science (Steve Murawski)
NOAA FSV GORDON GUNTER continues to sample in the vicinity of the wellhead using
simrad EK-60, ADCP, water-on-a-wire, GULPER AUV, Sipper video plankton recorder
and MOCNESS for biological community as well as full suite of CTD including
flurometer. There objective is to separate biological phemonena and naturally occurring
vs. MC 252 hydrocarbons. Working in concert with Walton Smith and Pelican
NOAA R/V THOMAS JEFFERSON in port at New Orleanbs embarking acoustics and
water sampling science parties to udertake hunt for sub-surface oil from SW Pass west
Chartered vessels SIMPLE MAN, HST, BEAU RIVAGE collecting samples for seafood
safety analysis
NOAA Vessels CARETTA and GABDT taking seafood baseline samples
several academic vessels also in vicinity including PELICAN and WALTON SMITH
Contract Vessels BROOKS McCall, OCEAN VERITAS and FRITZ also sampling near
well head for oil/dispersants and toxicity
Living Marine Resources (John Oliver)
Fisheries Closure
The northern boundary of the closed area has been extended to encompass a portion of the
slick moving toward the state-federal water line off eastern Mississippi/western Alabama.
The new area goes into effect at 6pm EST, May 31, 2010.
The new closure measures 61,854 sq mi (160,200 sq km), or about 26% of the GOM EEZ,
compared to the May 28 closure comprising 60,683 sq mi (157,169 sq km), or about 25%
of the GOM EEZ.
The Gulf Regional Team science lead is working with the Science issue box to address the
following data processing
needs:
CTD data processing: bin average and de-spike all casts, make results available as ascii
files
Profile plots of all ctd data, with bottle sample results on same plot at correct depths
map view contour plots of all ctd data at standard WODB depths, by cruise as well as
cumulative.
map view contour plots of bottle data at standard bottle depths (3 or 11 depths depending
on cruise) [ DO, Fluorescence, and the hydrocarbon analysis]
cross section and contour plots of historical data [Fluorescence too if in WOD]
representative profile plots of ctd variables (including fluorometry)
anomaly product with particular emphasis on Fluorescence and DO [mean - ob with
WOA variance]
translation of all data to netcdf using common variable names; make available via TDS )
Comms./Public Affairs (Justin Kenney):
Dr. Samuel Walker (NOAA IOOS) and LCDR Demian Bailey (NOAA Corps) took part in
a press event regarding the NOAA Ship Gordon Gunter mission. CNN and AP covered the
cruise
Data and Information Management (Joe Klimavicz):
Data on geoplatform.gov is updating as expected, and site performance is sufficient to

allow Unified Command full and open access tomorrow.
Received confirmation on tomorrow's deliveries of additional servers for geoplatform.gov
and our data centers are ready for deployment.
Received(Date): Tue, 01 Jun 2010 09:32:57 -0400

Subject: May 31 ICC Sitrep
may 31 slb.pdf


Office: Fax: Cell:
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy


Fisheries Closure

The northern boundary of the fisheries closure area was extended last night and now covers
about 26% of the GOM EEZ.

Working daytime and nighttime acoustic transects and water sampling within a 5 nm perimeter
of well head.

Water consumption rate is on track for scheduled endurance until 04 June.


Alongside New Orleans staging for DWH Western Sentry Project.

Departure delayed until Wednesday, June 2 to spool on CTD wire and install the Moving Vessel
Profiler (MVP) on Tuesday.

R/V Beau Rivage

West of the Mississippi River in LA waters and working East. They are trawling in non-oiled
areas to collect baseline samples for the National Seafood Inspection Laboratory. ETA
Pascagoula is Friday.

R/V Jack Fitz (a CSA International vessel)

Yesterday was conducting ROV operations 2 1/2 km to NNE of discharge point

Today Alongside in Port Fouchon

Visually observed oil droplets in water column at 3300 ft at location 2km SSW of well head.
Mounted collection grid on ROV to sample accumulation of oil droplets.

R/V Walton Smith (UNOLS/RSMAS)
Deep water sampling and deploying underwater camera.

Tracking subsurface oil plume feature they are describing as extending 8-9 nm WSW of the well
head at a depth of 1100-1300m.

R/V Brooks McCall (Carrying an NCCOS scientist)
3-4 CTDs/day to define the outer edge of plume boundaries.

R/V Ocean Veritas (BP Contract vessel)

In port following a CTD malfunction

R/V Pelican
No Report

Gliders

6 IOOS community gliders on active missions and transmitting data

([email protected])
301-713-0136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1961.1

Aircraft Operations Summary

Total flight time flown for 30 May 2010: 0.0 Hours
Total flight time flown for 31 May 2010: 3.9 Hours

Total flight time scheduled for 01 June : 6.5 Hours for Coastal Mapping & Photography

Total DWH/PEE flight time to date: 303.4 hrs

Twin Otter N46 is down today for unscheduled maintenance
Command, Information Centers and Staging Areas

Area Command Post Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd - Source Control ROBERT, LA HOUMA, LA MOBILE, AL ST. PETERSBURG, FL KEY WEST, FL HOUSTON, TX
Total NOAA Staff:

10
29
19
3
4
0
Staging Areas Venice, LA Pascagoula, MS Venice, LA Pascagoula, MS TOTAL DEPLOYED NOAA STAFF:
2
15
82


23
105
([email protected])
301-713-0136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1961.1


([email protected])
301-713-0136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1961.1
Received(Date): Wed, 02 Jun 2010 12:00:14 +0100

Subject: Gulf of Mexico update for June 1
Technical Update Post Top Kill v2.ZIP
Herein you will find two items:

1)
2)

Technical Update Slides
st
Update for June 1

06/01/2010 10:00pm EDT
1. 2. 3.
Highlights
x x x x
Lower Marine Riser Package Cap procedure is underway.

Additional containment options under development.

$40 million in claims paid -- 500 claims adjustors working across the Gulf Coast.

Subsea
Both
wells are progressing.
relief
Offshore Sea Floor

ContainmentRecovery Systems - Note: see attached PDF which contains slides highlighting the
following options

Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap containment option now being actively deployed involves
removing the damaged riser from the top of the BOP, leaving a cleanly-cut pipe at the top of the BOPs
LMRP. Live feed shows saws cutting/removing pipework and riser to allow easy access. The LMRP cap,
an engineered containment device with a sealing grommet, would be connected to a riser from the
Discoverer Enterprise drillship and then placed over the LMRP with the intention of capturing most of the
oil and gas flowing from the well and transporting it to the drillship on the surface.
Two further containment strategies are planned:
Q 4000
Direct Connect: this option will use the hoses and manifold that were deployed for the
x top kill operation to take additional oil flow directly from the failed Deepwater Horizon blow-out preventer
(BOP) through a separate riser to the Q4000 vessel on the surface. This system, currently expected to be
available for deployment in mid-June, is intended to increase the overall efficiency of the containment
operation by possibly increasing the amount of oil and gas flow that can be captured from the well.
x Long-term Containment Option: this operation will take oil from the LMRP via a manifold to a

new free-standing riser ending approximately 300 feet below sea level. A flexible hose will attach it to a
containment vessel at surface. This long-term option is designed to more effectively disconnect and
reconnect the riser to provide the greatest flexibility for operation during a hurricane. Implementation is
expected in late June or early July.
Dispersant injection on the sea floor dispersant used subsea continues. EPA is allowing subsea
application of the currently-used dispersant to continue.

12,000 feet below sea level and drilling. This well was spudded on May 2.

feet below sea level and drilling. Drilling began on May 16.
Both
wells x intercept the existing wellbore at approximately 18,000 feet below seal level. It is estimated the total


boats). 104 skimmers are in use.
Skimming Operations 9,132 barrels of oily-water mix collected yesterday. Total to date = 329,842
barrels.
Surface Dispersant Limited surface dispersant was used yesterday with 11,686 gallons applied. 380,000 gallons of dispersant remain available.
Over
In-Situ Burning The Unified Command conducted an additional 17 in-situ burns on Monday. In-situ
burning occurs on the surface using special fire-boom that collects surface hydrocarbons which are then
burned.

Shoreline Protection Coast Guard and BP are redoubling efforts with additional senior operations
Shoreline Protection - Boom Report over 1,961,445 feet of containment boom has been deployed
(with an additional 624,077 feet staged). Over 2,085,590 feet of sorbent boom has been deployed (with
an additional 1,747,460 feet staged)

Claims
x Approximately 30,000 claims have been received. Roughly 15,000 checks have been

written, totalling $40 million. Nearly 15,000 claims are awaiting documentation from claimants.
x calls.
500 claims adjustors are working across the Gulf Coast, 125 operators are answering phone

BP has 24 claims offices (across LA., MS., AL., FL.) open to help claimants through

x the process. Most claims are for loss of income or wages in commercial fishing, shrimping and oyster
harvest, and associated facilities. Note: No person asserting a claim or receiving payment for interim
benefits will be asked or required to sign a release or waive any rights to assert additional claims, to file
an individual legal action, or to participate in other legal actions associated with the Deepwater Horizon
incident. The contact number for claims is (800) 440-0858. In person claims can be filed at office
locations listed below. Claims can also be filed online at:

Total costs: the cost of the response to date amounts to about $990 million, including the cost of the
spill response, containment, relief well drilling, grants to the Gulf states, claims paid and federal costs.



and its associated response, on the marine and shoreline environment of the Gulf of Mexico. In
coordination with other baseline efforts underway, BP will enter into programs with Louisiana State
University, and other gulf coast research institutions, to establish a baseline of the coastal and marine
ecosystem to serve as a control against which future impacts will be assessed.

Plans.


Volunteers and Training 15,000 volunteers are registered. BP has opened 22 Community Outreach
Centers across the Gulf where people can go for more information, to find out about the spill, and to
connect with volunteer opportunities. Volunteers are being trained in five different modules that range
from safety for beach clean-up, to wildlife monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and vessel
operation for laying boom. Information about training can be found on the incident website at
Wildlife Activities 10 new wildlife impacts reported yesterday. Wildlife rehabilitation sites are located
in Venice, LA and Mobile, AL.

Louisiana
Sites:


Amelia Staging Area

Unit 2
Cut Off, LA 70345
3811 LA 1
303 Timber Creek
Hammond, LA 70404
Houma Claims Office
Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363
4375 Michoud Blvd
Slidell, LA 70461
1345 Bayou Rd
41093 Hwy LA 23

Mississippi
Sites:

Bay St. Louis
Claims Office
1171 Highway 90
Bay St. Louis, MS
39520
Biloxi, MS 39532
5912 Old Mobile Hwy
Suite 4

Alabama Sites:


Bayou
LaBatre
Claims
Office
13290 N.
Wintzell
Avenue
Bayou
LaBatre,
AL 36509
Foley Claims Office
Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535
Suite 1

Florida Sites:
St. Petersburg Incident Command Post

th
194 14
Street
Suite 105
Suite A&B
Ft. Walton
Claims
Office
348 SW
Miracle
Strip Pkwy
Suite 13
Fort
Walton
Beach, FL
32548
Unit B-9
3960 Navy Boulevard

Suite 16-17
Pensacola, FL 32507
106 Trade Circle
Suite A
5008 US Hwy 98W
Unit 6&7

Contact Information
(866) 448-5816
Team
suggestions
(866) 557-1401
(866) 448-5816
(281) 366-5511
with response
and to sign up\
(281) 366-5511

(866) 905-4492 or (866) 647-
2338
(281) 366-3123
(800) 440-0858
(985) 902-5231 or (985) 902-
5240
(251) 445-8965
(832) 587-8554
(888) 318-6765
(281) 366-5578

Karen St John
BP America
B6 Privacy
(cell)
B6 Privacy
[email protected]
Double Containment:
LMRP Cap w/ Q4000 Direct Connect
Document ID: 0.7.19.1654.1
Long Term Containment Fabrication
Buoyancy Can
Overshot Tool
Document ID: 0.7.19.1654.1
Best and Brightest Relentless at the Task
Document ID: 0.7.19.1654.1
Received(Date): Wed, 02 Jun 2010 07:58:53 -0400

From: Tim Gallagher <[email protected]>
Subject: Morning notes
Cc: Ken Barton <[email protected]>
Daily Update DWH-MC252 - 2JUN10.docx
Good Morning! Please see attached for this morning's notes. --Tim
For Internal Use
DeepWater Horizon
MC252
June 1, 2010
Yesterday afternoon oil in the form of mousse-like tarballs began impacting the SW shore of
Petit Bois Island. The expansive field of tarballs, tarmats and tar paddies stretched as far east as
Perdido Key according to overflight observations. Predicted S to SW winds will continue to push
that oil shoreward during the forecast period. Oil examined about 45 miles offshore Alabama
appeared highly viscous somewhat different than the typical emulsified moussey-textured
product.
Trajectories also suggest that Timbalier & Barrataria Bays should anticipate shoreline impacts as
the week progresses. Because these areas were hit hard during the last period of onshore winds,
anticipate attention to refocus on marsh mitigation & cleanup procedures. SCAT guidelines
already address the sensitivities of these unique habitats and represent compromises between
immediate cleanup and preserving their integrity.
Aerial dispersant applications were suspended again yesterday as BP investigated the complaints
of ill health from adjacent drilling platforms nearly 80 miles away. Erring on the side of safety,
BP stated that they take all complaints seriously. Amid those health concerns and the
approaching oil, discussions began in sector Mobile about using dispersants nearer to shore as
compared to Louisiana. The reduced efficacy of dispersants against highly weathered oil should
be the limiting factor.
With fluorometers the Pelican reported finding submerged oil in vicinity of the source at
approximately 1000m deep. Additionally they collected water samples that visibly appeared to
contain oil. This is consistent with the reports of the several other research vessels transecting the
area. Prior to their departure, NOAA provided the Pelican crew with water sampling guidelines
which recommends specific collection containers and preservation techniques. As a result, we
anticipate their samples to provide a productive analysis.
Yesterday NOAA participated in the briefing of the Cuban government concerning the
trajectories, fate & characterization of oil in the Gulf. DoS essentially led from the previously
determined brief. Overall it seemed to be well received. Cuba expressed interest in being
included in the Science Summit later this week.
Yesterday BP began preparations for installation of the Lower Marine Riser Package Top
Hat/Cap. The riser was crimped & cut at the seafloor about 100 ft downstream of the BOP. Still
waiting for confirmation concerning the success of the upper cut of the riser just above the BOP.
For Internal Use
Document ID: 0.7.19.1784.1

Subject: Notes from June 2, 11 AM NRT Call
To: [email protected], [email protected],[email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],[email protected]
Morning-
Below are notes from the June 2, 11 AM NRT call
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
National Response Team Call
June 2, 2010
11:00 AM
The next NRT meeting is June 3 at 11 AM.
Situation Status:
- The initial cut of the riser pipe has been made. A second cut is currently halted because the
cutting blade is pinched in the pipe. Operations are trying to deciding how to deal with this
issue.
- The relief wells remain at approx 12,000 and 8,000 ft below sea level.
- Skimming operations recovered approximately 9,000 bbls of an oil/water mix yesterday.
Skimming operations continue today.
- Approximately 2,500 surface and 13,000 of sub-surface gallons of dispersants were applied
yesterday. These operations will continue today.
- 4 burns occurred yesterday, these will be attempted again today but the sea state is becoming
more active.
Intergovernmental Affairs Update:
- Gov. Riley continues to express concerns over a lack of resources.

- The feedback from the Parish Presidents liaison program is receiving positive feedback
Congressional Affairs
- Today there are scheduled briefings with the Appropriations committee regarding the
emergency fund.
Legal Affairs
- A few weeks back Trans Ocean filed a claim attempting to limit their liability under old
maritime laws. Last night the Federal Government filed opposition to this request stating that
their liability should fall under more recent and appropriate laws such as OPA 90.

Joe Inslee
1305 East West Highway SSMC 4, Rm. 10219
Silver Spring, MD 20910 Office Cell Fax
ext. 202

Subject: (no subject)
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
NOAA Science Summit 2 pager Final.doc
--
Beth Dieveney
phone: cell: fax:
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy
SCIENCE IN SUPPORT OF DEEPWATER HORIZON OIL SPILL

RESPONSE
NOAA
http://response.restoration.noaa.gov
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dhos/index.php
Introduction
Authorities for NOAAs role:
Scientific support to U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) under the Oil Pollution Act of
1990 (OPA-90): NOAA provides scientific support to USCG in their role as
Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) for Oil Spill Response Actions
Seafood Safety Management under Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSRA).
Living Marine Resource protection under MSRA, Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), and Endangered Species Act (ESA) as well as other statutes such as the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. Marine Health and Stranding Response Act
Natural Resource Damage Assessment under OPA-90: NOAA, as a Trustee for
natural resources, works with other federal and state trustees to assess the injuries
to natural resources from the oil spill and the oil spill response actions.
Oceans and human health effects, including effects on ecosystem health, marine
organism health, and human health under Oceans and Human Health Act,
Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Act.
Immediate Actions (event to 2 months)
NOAA is providing scientific support to the Response Incident Command, through the
USCG FOSC. This includes daily trajectories for fate and transport of surface oil, higher
resolution of the interaction between surface oil and the Loop Current, daily predictions
of shoreline oil impacts, on-scene assessment of shoreline oiling through overflights and
Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Technology Technique (SCAT) models describing
likely fate and transport of oil dispersed at the well head, daily observations and
evaluations of marine mammal and turtles, estimates of oil flow rates, organization of
scientific data, and ongoing science briefs to local, state, and national groups. NOAA
currently staffs command posts in Robert LA, Houma LA, Venice LA, Mobile AL, St.
Petersburg FL, Miami FL, and Key West FL. NOAA also has a scientific support group
in Seattle WA and provides staff for the National Incident Command in Washington, DC.
As of the end of May, NOAA has four aircraft, two NOAA ships, and is supporting/has
supported five contract ships involved in this incident. Additionally, through
partnerships, NOAA is supporting several additional cruises and is working closely with
non-federal as well as federal partners in coordinating information derived from a fleet of
AUVs and gliders operating throughout the northeastern Gulf of Mexico.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1709.1
NOAA is closing federal waters to fishing based on oil trajectories, initiating training for
seafood safety assessment for oil and dispersant contamination - via both organoleptic
and chemical analyses - and collecting untainted seafood for these tests and trainings. As
a Trustee for natural resources, NOAA is working with USFWS, NPS, DoD, LA, MS,
AL, FL, and TX to collect samples of both baseline and impacted resources. To date,
over 2000 were collected.
A summary of past and on-going NOAA immediate response actions include:
Scientific support to the Incident Command through the USCG FOSC;

Collecting a broad suite of Mussel Watch and other samples for determination of
baseline environmental conditions immediately prior to coastal/shoreline
contamination by the DWH oil;
Assessing the safety of seafood and inform appropriate closures of federal waters;
Evaluating dispersant and oil related to seafood safety conduct baseline
contaminant studies and include post-Katrina data;
Calculating oil flow from the DWH site to estimate total release of oil;
Tracking surface oil and dispersant fate and transport;
Measuring distribution and magnitude of subsurface dispersed oil and dispersant
through acoustics, fluorescence studies, water sampling, and other technologies
with NOAA Research Vessels and partners, Participate in interagency Joint
Analysis Group (JAG);
Measuring impact of subsea dispersed oil on hypoxia events;

Conducting aerial surveys of protected species distribution and abundance;
Updating state of the Loop Current hydrodynamics aircraft deployed ocean
profilers and oceanographic cruises;
Conducting baseline studies of natural resources (water, sediment, biota, human
use);
Developing and conducting studies to measure injuries of trust resources (water,
sediment, biota, human use) by oil and or response actions; and,
Initializing studies on effects of dispersants on marine organisms
Near-Term Actions
Assuming oil continues to flow from the well head through August, many of the near-
term actions will look similar to the immediate actions. Some longer-term NOAA studies
may be developed and undertaken, such as those designed to demonstrate and quantify
oceanographic observations and modeling to predict trajectories, injury to natural
resources, continued testing of seafood for fishery closure and seafood safety
considerations, and studies to gain higher resolution on extent and fate of subsea
dispersed oil. Restoration planning will likely commence.
Continued scientific support to the IC through USCG FOSC (including trajectory

predictions, Loop Current evaluation, predicted shore line impacts, etc.).
Mass balance calculations to understand surface and sub-surface fractions of total
release
Document ID: 0.7.19.1709.1
Continued assessment of shoreline oil impacts and support for scientifically

appropriate clean-up actions.
Continued surveys to assess the magnitude, characteristics, fate, transport and
near-term effects of subsurface dispersed oil
Surveys of potential oil and dispersants in seafood species in closed and open
areas
Identification and initiation of studies to quantify natural resource injuries.
Additional human dimensions studies to understand the impact of the event on
coastal community, including outreach efforts by Sea Grant
Exploring novel mechanisms for engaging the broader scientific community
Long-Term Actions (2 months-decadal)
Long-term impacts of the spill are likely ecosystem-wide, with particular relevance to
various habitat types from salt marshes to deep coral/biogenic communities to human
communities. Studies are needed to establish baselines, which are essential to determine
the extent of natural resource damages. These studies and baselines include:
Natural Resource Damage Assessment injury studies;

Long-term studies of impacted areas, salt marsh productivity, species
composition, and geochemistry;
Ecosystem level restoration needs and opportunities along the northern GOM;
Long-term assessment of surface ocean productivity (e.g., following the long-term
impact(s) to neuston) including ecosystem-wide impacts;
Long-term impacts to deep communities (e.g., deep water corals);
Long-term connections between dispersed oil and GOMEX hypoxia events;
Planning for and initiation of long-term ecosystem and socio-economic impact
studies;
Effects of oil, dispersants, and dispersant-oil mixtures at the surface, sub-surface
and atmosphere on LMR and ecosystem processes, productivity, and services;
and,
Effects on key habitats and natural biodiversity, with special emphasis on coastal
wetlands and estuarine nursery areas.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1709.1
Seafood Safety Daily Report

Reported from Seafood inspection Program, National Seafood Inspection Laboratory and Northwest
Fishery Science Center
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Seafood Inspection Program (SIP):
SIP sensory experts began the first of the State sensory training sessions today in Pascagoula,
MS on Tuesday. This first class has 20 participants from MS, AL, and TX. Two other sessions are
planned for next week again in Pascagoula.
Steven Wilson is revising the surveillance protocol for final review by the seafood safety team
and NMFS management.
Northwest Fishery Science Center (NWFSC):
Analysis of seafood samples including finfish, shrimp and oysters for PAH contamination is
continuing.
NWFSC staff are adding sensory data to the seafood safety information for the internal website
National Seafood Inspection Laboratory
Summary & Status of samples: 416 field samples processed and shipped to NWFSC for PAH
analysis, 118 field samples provided to SIP for sensory analysis, 640 field samples received from
18 vessel trips, 224 field samples to be processed.
Processing baseline trawl samples provided by Dauphin Island Sea Lab collected 5/3/10.
Working with SEFSC biologists to identify species collected in baseline trawl samples during
Simple Man Cruise (a few weeks) ago.
No new field samples coming in today.

Hosting SIP Sensory Analysts and FDA representatives.
Hosting state personnel for SIP sensory training started today.
Working out logistical problems with SEFSC on obtaining GIS mappings of sampling locations vs.
cruise tracks in order to facilitate combining seafood species samples from nearby sites into
amounts needed to perform sensory analysis on.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.2
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.5
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.6
Update through 1 June 2010 (as of 1800)


Increase of 10 turtle strandings (all in MS)
Decrease of 1 turtle stranding in FL, removal of duplicate record
Increase of 14 live turtles captured during directed turtle search efforts
Increase of 1 dead turtle captured during directed turtle search efforts
It is becoming increasingly apparent, based on our on-water observations and enhanced
understanding of cleanup operations (i.e., skimmer vessels and surface burns) that sea
turtles are being significantly impacted including substantial takes. For example, the
material that is being targeted by at least some of the in situ burn operations is the same
surface material (rafts of Sargassum, oil, weathered oil, and mousse) that we are
searching and recovering live, oiled turtles in.
Increase of 1 previously stranded dolphin fully necropsied; no visible external or internal

oil was observed
Sea Turtles:
277 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 24 from 1800
June 1)
252 stranded (increase of 9 from 1800 June 1)

o 232 of the stranded were found dead (increase of 4 from 1800 June 1)
20 of the stranded were found alive (increase of 5from 1800 June 1)
3 recovered alive but died in rehab (no change from 1800 June 1)
1 turtle released alive (no change from 1800 June 1)
16 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 5 from 1800 June 1)
25 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (increase of 15from 1800 June
1)
o o
24 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 14 from 1800 June 1)

1 turtle collected dead (increase of 1 from 1800 June 1)
Turtle Necropsy Status (of the 232 dead stranded, 1 dead directed capture, and 3 that died
in rehab):

from 1800 June 1)
17 partial necropsies (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (no change from 1800 June 1)
50 full necropsies performed (no change from 1800 June 1)
and/or buried (no change from 1800 June 1)
118 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increase of 4 from 1800
June 1)
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.7
Of the 67 full or partial necropsies completed, the two primary considerations for the
cause of these strandings are forced submergence or acute toxicosis.

turtle, and 2 live stranded sea turtles caught in skimming operations.
To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 24 live sea turtles and
one dead sea turtle captured during directed turtle surveys.
Historical Strandings:
Louisiana/Texas border through the Florida panhandle from April 30
through 1800 June
1
is 252.
st
th
recent years in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama during this time frame (combined
range of 4-30 for LA, MS, and AL)
o o o o o
From 2005 2009 1 to 15 in Alabama.
In the Florida panhandle, from 2003 2007, the number of strandings in May has
ranged from 13 to 37
Marine Mammals:
29 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (no change from
1800 June 1).
All 29 were dead stranded dolphins (no change from 1800 June 1)
* Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act Section 409.3, a marine mammal stranding is
defined as an event in the wild where:
A marine mammal is dead and is on the beach or shore of the United States or in waters
under the jurisdiction of the United States (including any navigable waters); OR
A marine mammal is alive and is on a beach or shore of the United States and unable to
return to the water, on a beach or shore of the United States and, although able to return
to the water, is an apparent need of medical attention or in the waters under the
jurisdiction of the United States (including any navigable waters), but is unable to return
to its natural habitat under its own power or without assistance.
Dolphin Necropsy Status:
12 assessed and unable to perform necropsies (e.g. advanced decomposition) (no change
from 1800 June 1)
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.7
7 partial necropsies performed (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (no change from
1800 June 1)
4 full necropsies performed (increase of 1 from 1800 June 1)
6 Verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of decomposition or unable
to recover (no change from 1800 June 1)
0 Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (decrease of 1 from 1800
June 1; animal necropsied on June 1)
One of the dolphins had evidence of external oil on its tongue and body and therefore is
classified as oiled. Since the carcass was first reported in the water/oil line on the oiled
beach, we are unable at this time to determine whether the animal was externally covered
in oil post mortem when the carcass came on shore or was oiled prior to death.
Historical Strandings
Since April 30th, the stranding rate of dolphins in Louisiana is higher than the historic
numbers, but in part, this may be a reflection of increased detection and reporting and the
lingering effects of an earlier observed spike in strandings for the winter of 2010.
During this time frame, this is higher than the number of dolphin strandings that have
been documented in recent years (2003-2007) in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama
and the combined range of 0-10 for LA, MS, and AL. For the entire Northern Gulf of
Mexico, the combined range is 0-14 for the years 2003 to 2007 in LA, MS, AL, FL
(Panhandle). The breakdown by state for the range of animals historically stranding in the
month of May (2003-2007) is as follows:
o o o
o
Louisiana: 0-4 stranded dolphins

Mississippi: 0-3 stranded dolphins
Alabama : 0-3 stranded dolphins
Florida panhandle: 0-4 stranded dolphins
.
The on water directed survey for turtles under Unified Command continued on June 1
Ten turtles (8 Kemps ridleys, 1 loggerhead, 1 hawksbill) were captured working
approximately 40 miles offshore. All turtles were pelagic stage juveniles, alive and very
oiled, their behavior was abnormal, but they were still responsive. All were initially
cleaned on the support vessel and received initial veterinary care. They were transported
to Audubon Aquarium and are undergoing further care.
st
A Louisiana DWF enforcement vessel went offshore Grand Isle to look for turtles and
collected 4 live and 1 dead Kemps ridley, all oiled. This operation was not coordinated
through Unified Command and we are working to resolve communication and
coordination issues as well as de-oiling facility logistics and staffing. It is unclear
whether LDWF intends to continue, enhance, or decrease this effort in the coming days.
Skimmer vessels, especially a few newly added vessel specifically deployed to suck up
oiled Sargassum mats, are of significant concern as far as clean up operations go. An
SEC staff member observed a prototype barge skimmer off the AL/MS coast on June 1
st
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.7
and is providing a report. We continue to work to deploy observers and navigate the BP
contracting path for these observers. The Houma and Mobile ICCs are working together
to identify the best use of observers.
Another report was received of dolphins strand feeding near Grand Isle (a normal
behavior that is commonly confused with animals being in distress). We have developed
an information sheet for distribution to the public and media, and are working with the
JIC to get that released.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.7
SCIENCE IN SUPPORT OF DEEPWATER HORIZON OIL SPILL

RESPONSE
NOAA
http://response.restoration.noaa.gov
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dhos/index.php
Introduction
Authorities for NOAAs role:
Scientific support to U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) under the Oil Pollution Act of
1990 (OPA-90): NOAA provides scientific support to USCG in their role as
Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) for Oil Spill Response Actions
Seafood Safety Management under Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSRA).
Living Marine Resource protection under MSRA, Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), and Endangered Species Act (ESA) as well as other statutes such as the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. Marine Health and Stranding Response Act
Natural Resource Damage Assessment under OPA-90: NOAA, as a Trustee for
natural resources, works with other federal and state trustees to assess the injuries
to natural resources from the oil spill and the oil spill response actions.
Oceans and human health effects, including effects on ecosystem health, marine
organism health, and human health under Oceans and Human Health Act,
Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Act.
Immediate Actions (event to 2 months)
NOAA is providing scientific support to the Response Incident Command, through the
USCG FOSC. This includes daily trajectories for fate and transport of surface oil, higher
resolution of the interaction between surface oil and the Loop Current, daily predictions
of shoreline oil impacts, on-scene assessment of shoreline oiling through overflights and
Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Technology Technique (SCAT) models describing
likely fate and transport of oil dispersed at the well head, daily observations and
evaluations of marine mammal and turtles, estimates of oil flow rates, organization of
scientific data, and ongoing science briefs to local, state, and national groups. NOAA
currently staffs command posts in Robert LA, Houma LA, Venice LA, Mobile AL, St.
Petersburg FL, Miami FL, and Key West FL. NOAA also has a scientific support group
in Seattle WA and provides staff for the National Incident Command in Washington, DC.
As of the end of May, NOAA has four aircraft, two NOAA ships, and is supporting/has
supported five contract ships involved in this incident. Additionally, through
partnerships, NOAA is supporting several additional cruises and is working closely with
non-federal as well as federal partners in coordinating information derived from a fleet of
AUVs and gliders operating throughout the northeastern Gulf of Mexico.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.8
NOAA is closing federal waters to fishing based on oil trajectories, initiating training for
seafood safety assessment for oil and dispersant contamination - via both organoleptic
and chemical analyses - and collecting untainted seafood for these tests and trainings. As
a Trustee for natural resources, NOAA is working with USFWS, NPS, DoD, LA, MS,
AL, FL, and TX to collect samples of both baseline and impacted resources. To date,
over 2000 were collected.
A summary of past and on-going NOAA immediate response actions include:
Scientific support to the Incident Command through the USCG FOSC;

Collecting a broad suite of Mussel Watch and other samples for determination of
baseline environmental conditions immediately prior to coastal/shoreline
contamination by the DWH oil;
Assessing the safety of seafood and inform appropriate closures of federal waters;
Evaluating dispersant and oil related to seafood safety conduct baseline
contaminant studies and include post-Katrina data;
Calculating oil flow from the DWH site to estimate total release of oil;
Tracking surface oil and dispersant fate and transport;
Measuring distribution and magnitude of subsurface dispersed oil and dispersant
through acoustics, fluorescence studies, water sampling, and other technologies
with NOAA Research Vessels and partners, Participate in interagency Joint
Analysis Group (JAG);
Measuring impact of subsea dispersed oil on hypoxia events;

Conducting aerial surveys of protected species distribution and abundance;
Updating state of the Loop Current hydrodynamics aircraft deployed ocean
profilers and oceanographic cruises;
Conducting baseline studies of natural resources (water, sediment, biota, human
use);
Developing and conducting studies to measure injuries of trust resources (water,
sediment, biota, human use) by oil and or response actions; and,
Initializing studies on effects of dispersants on marine organisms
Near-Term Actions
Assuming oil continues to flow from the well head through August, many of the near-
term actions will look similar to the immediate actions. Some longer-term NOAA studies
may be developed and undertaken, such as those designed to demonstrate and quantify
oceanographic observations and modeling to predict trajectories, injury to natural
resources, continued testing of seafood for fishery closure and seafood safety
considerations, and studies to gain higher resolution on extent and fate of subsea
dispersed oil. Restoration planning will likely commence.
Continued scientific support to the IC through USCG FOSC (including trajectory

predictions, Loop Current evaluation, predicted shore line impacts, etc.).
Mass balance calculations to understand surface and sub-surface fractions of total
release
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.8
Continued assessment of shoreline oil impacts and support for scientifically

appropriate clean-up actions.
Continued surveys to assess the magnitude, characteristics, fate, transport and
near-term effects of subsurface dispersed oil
Surveys of potential oil and dispersants in seafood species in closed and open
areas
Identification and initiation of studies to quantify natural resource injuries.
Additional human dimensions studies to understand the impact of the event on
coastal community, including outreach efforts by Sea Grant
Exploring novel mechanisms for engaging the broader scientific community
Long-Term Actions (2 months-decadal)
Long-term impacts of the spill are likely ecosystem-wide, with particular relevance to
various habitat types from salt marshes to deep coral/biogenic communities to human
communities. Studies are needed to establish baselines, which are essential to determine
the extent of natural resource damages. These studies and baselines include:
Natural Resource Damage Assessment injury studies;

Long-term studies of impacted areas, salt marsh productivity, species
composition, and geochemistry;
Ecosystem level restoration needs and opportunities along the northern GOM;
Long-term assessment of surface ocean productivity (e.g., following the long-term
impact(s) to neuston) including ecosystem-wide impacts;
Long-term impacts to deep communities (e.g., deep water corals);
Long-term connections between dispersed oil and GOMEX hypoxia events;
Planning for and initiation of long-term ecosystem and socio-economic impact
studies;
Effects of oil, dispersants, and dispersant-oil mixtures at the surface, sub-surface
and atmosphere on LMR and ecosystem processes, productivity, and services;
and,
Effects on key habitats and natural biodiversity, with special emphasis on coastal
wetlands and estuarine nursery areas.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.8
Seafood Safety Baselines collected for Snappers, groupers, shrimp and

Oysters in LA, MS, AL, extending baselines to FL & TX
Baseline samples all well below the action levels (1/10 or below)
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.10
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.10
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.10
dolphins
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.10
Greater Awareness of sampling assets
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.10
Over 800,000 gallons of dispersants used surface & subsurface

Are there tipping points in the ecosystem?
Document ID: 0.7.19.2104.10
Received(Date): Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:04:52 +0100

Subject: BP Gulf of Mexico Update June 2
Todays report contains two item s:

1) 2)
Press release regarding funding for Louisiana Barrier Islands proposal.
Daily update
Additional resources:
www.bp.com/gulfofmexicoresponse
www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com

Press Release - June 2, 2010
BP AGREES TO FUND CONSTRUCTION OF SIX SECTIONS

OF LOUISIANA BARRIER ISLANDS
BP today announced that it supports the U.S. governments decision to proceed with the construction of
six sections of the Louisiana barrier islands proposal. The company will fund the estimated $360 million it
will cost to construct the six sections.

BP will not manage or contract directly for the construction of the island sections, nor will the company
assume any liability for unintended consequences of the project. The company plans to make payments
in stages based on the projects m ilestones.

BP is committed to implementing the most effective measures to protect the coastline of Louisiana and
reduce the impact of the oil and gas spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The federal government and the state of
Louisiana have agreed that the barrier islands construction is an effective response to the spill, and we
look forward to working with them on this project, said Tony Hayward, BPs chief executive officer.

BP already has provided $170 million to Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida to help with their
response costs and help promote their tourism industries. The company also has paid approximately $42
million in compensation to people and companies affected by the spill.

- ENDS -


06/02/2010 10:00pm EDT
1. 2. 3.
Highlights
x x x x
Lower Marine Riser Package Cap procedure continues.

BP to
provide $360 million to fund six sections of Louisiana Barrier Islands Proposal.
$40 million in claims paid see state-by-state breakdown.

Subsea
x Over
18,000 total personnel working on response, plus an additional 15,555 volunteers signed up
to date.
Offshore Sea Floor

ContainmentRecovery Systems
Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap containment option now being actively deployed involves
removing the damaged riser from the top of the BOP, leaving a cleanly-cut pipe at the top of the BOPs
LMRP over which the cap will be placed. The cap is an engineered containment device which will be
connected to a riser from the Discoverer Enterprise drillship (see www.bp.com for graphics) with the
intention of capturing most of the oil and gas flowing from the well and transporting it to the drillship on the
surface.
Operationssummary: the riser shear cut was completed at 7:30 pm CDT on June 1; the diamond saw
blade became stuck around 12:05 am CDT on June 2. At the time, work had succeeded in cutting about
45% of the riser. Work progressed to dislodge the blade until approximately 12:30 pm CDT on June 2;
The diamond saw and shears are being retrieved to surface and preparations are underway to resume
cutting the riser.

Two further containment strategies are planned:
x Q 4000
Direct Connect: this option will use the hoses and manifold that were deployed for the
top kill operation to take additional oil flow directly from the failed Deepwater Horizon blow-out preventer
(BOP) through a separate riser to the Q4000 vessel on the surface. This system, currently expected to be
available for deployment in mid-June, is intended to increase the overall efficiency of the containment
operation by possibly increasing the amount of oil and gas flow that can be captured from the well.

new free-standing riser ending approximately 300 feet below sea level. A flexible hose will attach it to a
containment vessel at surface. This long-term option is designed to more effectively disconnect and
reconnect the riser to provide the greatest flexibility for operation during a hurricane. Implementation is
expected in late June or early July.
Dispersant injection on the sea floor dispersant use at the subsea leak source continues. EPA is
allowing subsea application of the currently-used dispersant to continue.

12,000 feet below sea level and drilling. This well was spudded on May 2.
The second relief well (work being performed by Development Driller II) is at approximately 8,600

x feet below sea level and drilling. Drilling began on May 16.
x Both
wells intercept the existing wellbore at approximately 18,000 feet below seal level. It is estimated the total

boats). 120 skimmers are in use.
Skimming Operations 9,006 barrels of oily-water mix collected yesterday. Total to date = 338,848
barrels.
Surface Dispersant No surface dispersant was applied yesterday. remain available.
Over 360,000 gallons of dispersant
In-Situ Burning The Unified Command conducted 4 in-situ burns on Tuesday. In-situ burning occurs
on the surface using special fire-boom that collects surface hydrocarbons which are then burned.

Louisiana Barrier Island Project Funding - BP today announced that the company will fund the
estimated $360 million in costs to construct six sections of the Louisiana Barrier Islands proposal.

Shoreline Impacts in addition to ongoing impacts in Louisiana; tar balls were observed on Dauphin
Island, Alabama.
Shoreline Protection Coast Guard and BP are redoubling efforts with additional senior operations

Boom Report over 2,002,946 feet of containment boom has been deployed (with an additional 627,105
feet staged). Over 2,192,430 feet of sorbent boom has been deployed (with an additional 1,777,280 feet
staged)

Claims
Over
million in claims paid. Note: see chart below for claims paid by state
$40
x 500 claims adjustors are working across the Gulf Coast, 125 operators are answering phone

calls.
x
BP has 24 claims offices (across LA., MS., AL., FL.) open to help claimants through
the process. Most claims are for loss of income or wages in commercial fishing, shrimping and oyster
harvest, and associated facilities. Note: No person asserting a claim or receiving payment for interim
benefits will be asked or required to sign a release or waive any rights to assert additional claims, to file
an individual legal action, or to participate in other legal actions associated with the Deepwater Horizon
incident. The contact number for claims is (800) 440-0858. In person claims can be filed at office
locations listed below. Claims can also be filed online at:

Claims by State
State LA
AL
MS
FL
TX
GA
Other
Number of Checks 7,527 2,710 1,769 1,099 174 20 52 Amount Paid $24,016,372 $7,151,808 $4,775,148 $3,519,815 $549,900 $57,500 $175,500 $40,246,043 Average Paid
$3,191
$2,639
$2,699
$3,203
$3,160
$2,875
$3,375
$3,014
13,351 Grand Total

Total costs: the cost of the response to date amounts to approximately $1 billion, including the cost of
the spill response, containment, relief well drilling, grants to the Gulf states, claims paid and federal costs.



and its associated response, on the marine and shoreline environment of the Gulf of Mexico. In
coordination with other baseline efforts underway, BP will enter into programs with Louisiana State
University, and other gulf coast research institutions, to establish a baseline of the coastal and marine
ecosystem to serve as a control against which future impacts will be assessed.
Plans.

Volunteers and Training Over 18,000 total personnel working on response, plus an additional 15,555
volunteers signed up to date. BP has opened 22 Community Outreach Centers across the Gulf where
people can go for more information, to find out about the spill, and to connect with volunteer
opportunities. Volunteers are being trained in five different modules that range from safety for beach
clean-up, to wildlife monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and vessel operation for laying boom.
Information about training can be found on the incident website at www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com
under volunteers.
Wildlife Activities 25 new wildlife impacts reported yesterday. Wildlife rehabilitation sites are located
in Venice, LA and Mobile, AL.

Louisiana
Sites:

Amelia Staging Area

Unit 2
Cut Off, LA 70345
3811 LA 1
303 Timber Creek
Hammond, LA 70404
Houma Claims Office
Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363
4375 Michoud Blvd
Slidell, LA 70461
1345 Bayou Rd
41093 Hwy LA 23

Mississippi
Sites:

Bay St. Louis
Claims Office
1171 Highway 90
Bay St. Louis, MS
39520
Biloxi, MS 39532
5912 Old Mobile Hwy
Suite 4
Alabama Sites:

Bayou
LaBatre
Claims
Office
13290 N.
Wintzell
Avenue
Bayou
LaBatre,
AL 36509
Foley Claims Office

Suite 1
Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535
Florida Sites:
St. Petersburg Incident Command Post


th
194 14
Street
Suite 105
Suite A&B
Ft. Walton
Claims
Office
348 SW
Miracle
Strip Pkwy
Suite 13
Fort
Walton
Beach, FL
32548
Unit B-9

3960 Navy Boulevard
Suite 16-17
Pensacola, FL 32507
106 Trade Circle
Suite A
5008 US Hwy 98W
Unit 6&7

Contact Information
(866) 448-5816
Team
suggestions
(866) 557-1401
(866) 448-5816
(281) 366-5511
with response
and to sign up\
(281) 366-5511

(866) 905-4492 or (866) 647-
2338
(281) 366-3123
(800) 440-0858
(985) 902-5231 or (985) 902-
5240
(251) 445-8965
(832) 587-8554
(888) 318-6765
(281) 366-5578

Joint Information Center Mobile, AL Media and information center Transocean Hotline MI Swaco Hotline BP Family and third-party contractor hotline
Twitter: Oil_Spill_2010
Karen St John
BP America
B6 Privacy
(cell)
B6 Privacy
[email protected]
Received(Date): Thu, 03 Jun 2010 12:18:43 +0000

Subject: Export TP
To: "Sarri, Kristen" <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Cc: "Rapp, John" <[email protected]>, "Turner, James" <[email protected]>
The U.S. Government is finalizing protocols to prevent tainted products

from entering the marketplace. The protocols include closing affected
areas of the Gulf of Mexico to commercial fishing, sampling of the
waters of the Gulf of Mexico, sampling of fisheries species of the Gulf
of Mexico, and sampling of products in the marketplace. Analytical and
sensory methods are based on internationally accepted criteria.
All consumers should expect commercially available Gulf
seafood to be of the same quality that people have come to expect from
the Gulf.
NOAA continues to monitor the health of the commercial fish stocks
within the United States Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). While we do not
have complete data yet, we have not yet seen any effect on fish stocks
outside of our closed areas although we continue to monitor.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
From: Allison Reed <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 16:41:32
To: Sarri, Kristen<[email protected]>
Cc: Rapp, John<[email protected]>; Spring, Margaret<[email protected]>; Smullen,
Scott<[email protected]>; Oil spill staff ([email protected])<[email protected]>; Griffis,
Kevin<[email protected]>; Schwaab, Eric<[email protected]>; Medina,
Monica<[email protected]>; Lugo, Lauren<[email protected]>; Wilson,
Steven<[email protected]>; Turner, James<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: URGENT -- Seafood Safety Talking Points
With respect to the international component, I would suggest the
following (which is derived partially from language in a cable State
sent to posts on 13 May, as well as language from the draft seafood
export cable. However, I understand that the language might need to be
changed to reflect the fact that the protocols are already "finalized"
and I also understand that the export cable is now undergoing NOAA
clearance again and there might be issue taken with the use of the term
"marketplace.")
The U.S. Government is finalizing protocols to prevent tainted products
from entering the marketplace. The protocols include closing affected
areas of the Gulf of Mexico to commercial fishing, sampling of the
waters of the Gulf of Mexico, sampling of fisheries species of the Gulf
of Mexico, and sampling of products in the marketplace. Analytical and
sensory methods are based on internationally accepted criteria. The
program is also finalizing strict protocols for the reopening of areas
closed to commercial fishing. Fishing grounds will be reopened ONLY when
levels of contaminants are within safety parameters as identified by
regulatory agencies. Consumers should expect commercially available Gulf
seafood to be of the same quality that people have come to expect from
the Gulf.
NOAA continues to monitor the health of the commercial fish stocks

within the United States Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). While we do not
have complete data yet, we have not yet seen any effect on fish stocks
outside of our closed areas although we continue to monitor.
Hope this helps

Allison
Sarri, Kristen wrote:
>
> We have a process for clearing seafood talking points and Q&As.
>
> Scott and John if you can work together with the appropriate NOAA
> staff (John, Lauren, and Steve) that would be great.
>
> We need to merge our TPs and Q&As with FDAs on seafood safety. Once we
> work with FDA on this and the document is agreed to by us and FDA then
> we will send to WH for clearance.
>
> To the document that we already have (Scott is QB), we need to add a
> TP and Q&A that address that US seafood is safe and international
> concerns that are being raised.
>
> Also, if we want to release the baseline data to the states then we
> also need to add TP and Q&As on baseline data per Nance Becks request
> yesterday (John Rapp has this information).
>
> Can we get this done with FDA in the next 90 minutes?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* John Rapp [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 02, 2010 3:48 PM
> *To:* Spring, Margaret
> *Cc:* Oil spill staff ([email protected]); Sarri, Kristen
> *Subject:* Re: tps on seafood safety?
>
> Here are two docs that have seafood safety talkers. There are more in
> the hopper, but they're probably at least 24 hours away from being
> cleared.
>
> John
>
> Margaret Spring wrote:
>
> What do we have in the can that I could send up above?
>
> Margaret Spring
>
> Chief of Staff
>
> National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
>
> U.S. Department of Commerce
>
> 14th & Constitution Avenue NW, Room 5128
>
> Washington, DC 20230
>
B6 Privacy >
>
--
Allison Reed
International Affairs Specialist
B6 Privacy
Received(Date): Thu, 03 Jun 2010 09:11:42 -0400

From: ICC Deputy <[email protected]>
Subject: June 2 ICC SITREP
June 2 slb SITREP.pdf

CDR Mike Weaver
--
ICC Deputy on Watch
ICC Main Number: (301) 713-0136

Situation Report For activities through 02 June 2010

(NMFS) It is becoming increasingly apparent to the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Health and
Stranding Response Program, based on onwater observations and enhanced understanding of
cleanup operations (i.e., skimmer vessels and surface burns), that sea turtles are being
significantly impacted including substantial takes. For example, the material that is being
targeted by at least some of the in situ burn operations is the same surface material (rafts of
Sargassum, oil, weathered oil, and mousse) that is being recovered on live, oiled turtles.
(NMFS) The National Seafood Inspection Laboratory processed 416 field samples and shipped
them to the Northwest Fishery Science Center (NWFSC) for PAH analysis; 118 field samples were
provided to the Seafood Inspection Program (SIP) for sensory analysis; 640 field samples were
received from 18 vessel trips; and 224 field samples are still to be processed. In addition, SIP
sensory experts began the first of the state sensory training sessions today, June 2, 2010, in
Pascagoula, MS. This first class has 20 participants from MS, AL, and TX. Two other sessions are
planned for next week again in Pascagoula.

(NOS) Gulf Coast Services Center staff facilitated the townhall meeting on June 1, 2010, in
Slidell, LA. Approximately 200 participants sought information at more than 20 issue stations
from SubjectMatter Experts.

(NOS) Three NCCOS researchers are aboard two BPcontracted vessels, TDIBrooks R/V Brooks
McCall and Stabbert Maritimes R/V Ocean Veritas to characterize the water column in the
vicinity of the continuing spill to locate and characterize the subsea plume and dispersant
concentrations in areas around the former Deepwater Horizon rig site.

(NOS) The Brooks McCall team member successfully sampled 5 stations within 10 km of the
Deepwater Horizon wellhead. Subsurface oil spill plume detected at 2 of the 5 stations.
Southwestern edge of plume extent successfully delineated. Conditions on site remain noxious.
Fisheries Closure

A change in the Fisheries closure area took place last night at 6 pm EDT. The new closure area
covers about 37% of the GOM EEZ which is up from the last closure area of 31% of June 1.
Gordon Gunter has completed 642nm of Acoustic survey on its subsurface oil sampling cruise in
addition to its full suite of sampling operations.

The ship remains on target for scheduled endurance until June 04.

Operating around the 5NM Exclusion Zone and an area to the SSW. Conducting the full suite of
sampling operations. Acoustic signatures with potential as subsurface plumes being sampled
extensively.

Operational details as follows: CS reporting data/results summary through ICC.
o
642nm of Acoustic Survey Completed
o
24 XBT Casts
o
23 CTD Casts
o
3 MOCNESS Tows
o
7 Sub Surface Neuston Tows
o
AUV Gulper Survey Hours: 26
o
SIPPER Survey Hours: 15 NOAA Incident Coordination Center
([email protected]) 3017130136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1665.1


Participating in daily calls with UC Environmental Unit (Pickett)

1800 Gallons used in the sixth 24 hrs. Total used 8,500. Remaining 5,500. On target for
scheduled endurance until 04JUNE

Equipment has only been "lighlty" oiled. HAZMAT controls working well.

Requested VOC monitoring device via UC due to strong odors while operating in certain areas.

PCO coordinating likely Dr. Lubchenco visit to GU on Friday afternoon, once the ship is alongside
Singing River Island.


Departed at 0600 EDT on June 3 for DWH Western Sentry project.

R/V Gandy

Conducting Reef Fish Survey out of Panama City, FL
R/Vs Caretta

Alongside Pascagoula prepping for TED Certification cruise. Scheduled to assist with spill
response after 21 June.
R/V HST

Alongside Pascagoula. Available. Suitable for coastal day trips.
R/V Harold B

Coming out of shipyard this week. Scheduled to conduct trap/video surveys out of Panama City
the remainder of the month. Vessel suitable for nearshore, day trips.
R/V Beau Rivage

Concluding trawling in nonoiled areas to collect baseline samples for the National Seafood
Inspection Laboratory. ETA Pascagoula 04 June.


Alongside in Port Fouchon

R/V Pelican

Starting a 5day cruise for FUGRO today

Gliders

2 IOOS community gliders (Rutgers and Mote) & 2 NAVO gliders on active missions and
transmitting data

Total flight time flown for 02 Jun 2010: 5.6 Hours
Total flight time scheduled for 03 June : 23.0 Hours

OAR/OMAO are planning another P3 flight for Thursday 03 Jun
([email protected])
3017130136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1665.1


Financials

As of COB 31 MAY, Obligations to Deepwater Horizon Funding Codes:

ORF Total $1.8M

Reimbursable Total $3.2M

Grand Total $5.0M

Personnel

Employee billed hours as of PP09

Command, Information Centers and Staging
Total NOAA Staff:
Areas

Area Command Post Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Source
Control
Staging Areas Venice, LA Pascagoula, MS Venice, LA Pascagoula, MS TOTAL DEPLOYED NOAA STAFF: ROBERT, LA HOUMA, LA MOBILE, AL ST. PETERSBURG, FL KEY WEST, FL HOUSTON, TX 10
31
11
3
0
0
12, 712.25 hrs
3
10
68

35
103
([email protected])
3017130136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1665.1


([email protected])
3017130136
Document ID: 0.7.19.1665.1

From: "Lauren.B.Lugo" <[email protected]>
Subject: cable
Ensuring that U.S. produced seafood from the Gulf of Mexico continues to be safe for both
domestic and international markets is of the utmost importance to the Government of the United
States. Federal and state agencies responsible for seafood safety and certification are working
together to achieve this goal.
The U.S. Department of Commerces National Marine Fisheries Service operates a Seafood
Inspection Program and is the recognized Competent Authority for seafood export certification
when required.
Analytical and sensory methods that will be used to re-open fisheries are based on internationally
accepted criteria.
Lauren B. Lugo
Seafood Inspection Program
B6 Privacy
fax:
B6 Privacy

From: Margaret Spring <[email protected]>
Subject: Fw: Fwd: Fwd: FW: link
frank parker.vcf
Live link to science conf at LSU
From: frank parker <[email protected]>

To: HDQ PCO Contacts <[email protected]>; HDQ Policy Contacts
<[email protected]>
Sent: Thu Jun 03 10:32:07 2010
Subject: Fwd: Fwd: FW: link
http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream4
Subject: FW : link
Date:Thu, 03 Jun 2010 10:07:41 -0400
From:Staci Lewis <[email protected]>
To:Parker, Frank <[email protected]>
FYI

From: Staci Lewis

Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 9:07 AM
To: '[email protected]'
Subject: link
http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream4

---
Staci Lewis
Policy Analyst
Consortium for Ocean Leadership
1201 New York Ave NW

4th Floor
B6 Privacy Office. Email. [email protected]
Frank Parker
Program Coordination Office
US Department of Commerce
Rm 5811
1401 Constitution Ave NW
202.482.1075 202.482.4116 301.602.5577
( Work )
( Fax )
( Cell )
( Internet )
[email protected]
Formatted Name
Frank Parker
Name
Family: Parker
First: Frank
Middle:
Prefix:
Suffix:
Organization
US Department of Commerce
Address
( Domestic )
P.O. Address: Rm 5811
Extended Address:
Street: 1401 Constitution Ave NW
Locality: Washington
Region: DC
Postal Code: 20230
Country:
Electronic Mail Address ( Internet )

[email protected]
Title
Program Coordination Office
Telephone Number 202.482.1075

Telephone Number
( Work )
( Fax )
Document ID: 0.7.19.1643.1
202.482.4116
Telephone Number 301.602.5577

x-mozilla-html
TRUE
Version
2.1
( Cell )
Document ID: 0.7.19.1643.1

From: Linda Belton <[email protected]>
Subject: Fw: Thursday 10:00 a.m. IGA Coordination Call
Alabama Gov Report 3JUN (final).pdf
Florida Gov Report 3JUN (final).pdf
Louisiana Gov Report 3JUN (final).pdf
Mississippi Gov Report 3JUN (final).pdf
These are the fact sheets that are being sent to Governors daily.
From: McGrath, Shaun L. <Shaun L. [email protected]>

To: McGrath, Shaun L. <Shaun L. [email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>;
[email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Lori [email protected] <Lori [email protected]>; [email protected]
[email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>;
<[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Agnew, David P.
<David P. [email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>;
<[email protected]>; Guernica, Georgina M. <Georgina M. [email protected]>; Salzman,
Amelia S. <Amelia S. [email protected]>; Ryan, Evan M. <Evan M. [email protected]>
Sent: Thu Jun 03 10:17:47 2010
Subject: RE: Thursday 10:00 a.m. IGA Coordination Call
From: McGrath, Shaun L.

To: McGrath, Shaun L.; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]';
'[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; 'Lori [email protected]';
'[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]';
'[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]';
'[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; Agnew, David P.; '[email protected]';
'[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]';
'[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; Guernica, Georgina M.; Salzman, Amelia S.; Ryan,
Evan M.
Subject: RE: Thursday 10:00 a.m. IGA Coordination Call
Action items from Govs call:

Valerie we are changing format of calls: 1) send out fact sheet prior to call; 2) Adm Allen as
chief briefer

Allen top cap failed. Now working on top hat. We will know this afternoon if we are
successful on containment

Adm. Poullen some of the boom from Europe need to verify if compatible

Vessels of opportunity We need to get numbers from BP on how many workers they have
hired locally and from outside. Need to get a breakdown of the technical skills for the different
st
nd
jobs, and direct locals to the appropriate jobs for them. VJ: 1
priority is safety; 2
is hiring
locals!. Riley said local vessels were creating a blockade against the Maine boats!! (Is this
true) Riley said there was an article in local paper (Mobile?) about the hiring of locals. Jindal
agreed strongly with VJ. They are having same problems in LA. We need to lean on BP. Jindal
also mentioned 11,000 prisoner to release.

Jindal thanks for decision on berms. Please lean on BP to start funding them one way or the
other. Allen took it on as an action item

Jindal claims process BP still saying no denials, but there are many that are open after a
month! Need info on the small businesses. Allen we will follow up. Riley also has examples.
Will give info to Adm Watson today during their meeting.

Juliette described flood insurance issues. She will be sending out written information. Jindal
said it was very helpful info and will look forward to written materials to get to his insurance
commissioner.

Boom report dont call it UCCP -- ACP

From: McGrath, Shaun L.

Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 7:22 PM
Subject: Thursday 10:00 a.m. IGA Coordination Call
Thursday, June 3
IGA Coordination Call BP Deepwater Horizon Response
B6 Privacy
/ Pin: B6 Privacy #
10:00 a.m. EDT

Here is the draft agenda for the IGA coordination call tomorrow
o Report from IGA in the Gulf

Discuss follow up to the June 3 Governors Call
Preparation for June 4 Governors call
Run through agenda and speakers
o o o o o o o o o o
Discuss follow up to the June 2 call with Local Officials

Preparation for June 3 call with Local Officials
Agendas and speakers
Reports
DHS
EPA
DoI
Commerce/NOAA
USDA
Labor
SBA
CEQ
Other
Document ID: 0.7.19.1751.4

Subject: Fwd: NOAA & dispersants (from Mobile Press Register)
To: Lauren Lugo <[email protected]>, John Rapp <[email protected]>,Walt Dickhoff
<[email protected]>
Cc: Brian Pawlak <[email protected]>,John Incardona
<[email protected]>,Beth Lumsden <[email protected]>, John Oliver
<[email protected]>
Attachment
In today's newspaper piece on last night's Sea Grant community forum in

Mobile an FDA rep is quoted as saying "NOAA is ensuring that
dispersants aren't in the seafood making it (sic) to market." Is that
accurate?
The weekly Gulf Outreach Call with about 400 environmental NGOs is
tomorrow afternoon and I anticipate we may get asked about what we are
doing regarding seafood safety in regards to both oil and dispersants.
Do we have any cleared materials I can pass along to the NIC rep on
that call, or uncleared drafts I can read up on in case I'm asked to
respond to any questions? Thanks.

From: "Burkhardt III, William" <[email protected]>
Subject: Mobile Press Register
Link to Mobile Press Register Article

http://blog.al.com/live/2010/06/residents oil spill concerns q.html
Document ID: 0.7.19.1747.1
In today's newspaper piece on last night's Sea Grant community forum in

Mobile an FDA rep is quoted as saying "NOAA is ensuring that
dispersants aren't in the seafood making it (sic) to market." Is that
accurate?
The weekly Gulf Outreach Call with about 400 environmental NGOs is
tomorrow afternoon and I anticipate we may get asked about what we are
doing regarding seafood safety in regards to both oil and dispersants.
Do we have any cleared materials I can pass along to the NIC rep on
that call, or uncleared drafts I can read up on in case I'm asked to
respond to any questions? Thanks.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1747.2

Morning-
June 3, 2010
11:00 AM
The next NRT meeting is June 4 at 11 AM.
Situation Status:
- The attempt to cut the riser pipe with the diamond blade saw failed (it was pinched due to
drilling pipe still in the riser).
-However the riser pipe was successfully cut with cutting shears. This left a rough cut and
therefore a more loose fitting Top Hat containment structure will be put in place. They are
trying to get this structure in place today.
- Skimming operations recovered approximately 15,000 bbls of an oil/water mix yesterday.
Skimming operations continue today.
- Approximately 3,000 surface and 7,000 of sub-surface gallons of dispersants were applied
yesterday.
- The President approved 6 emergency berms for Louisiana. The next step is get BP to fund this
construction. Admiral Allen is meeting with BP today to discuss this.
- Growing more and more busy as more State involvement is occurring.

- Trying to get better management of the data getting distributed out the States.
- Questions regarding boom resources continue.
- Meeting with Appropriation staff went well yesterday. It does not look like the supplemental
will pass by next week.
Legal Affairs
- Responding to lots of questions of regarding the types of liability BP is on the hook for.
- Continue to focus on fiscal issues.
- Yesterday the Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit against the USCG under the
Endangered Species Act regarding the use of dispersants.
Communications
- Admiral Allen gave a technical briefing this morning regarding the successful cut of the riser
pipe.
- Media questions are very focused on the technical processes.
- The central message continues to be the important role science plays in this spill response.
Joe Inslee
Silver Spring, MD 20910 Office Cell Fax
ext. 202
Received(Date): Fri, 04 Jun 2010 09:46:22 -0400

Subject: June 3 ICC SITREP
June 3 slb SITREP.pdf

CDR Weaver
--
ICC Deputy on Watch
B6 Privacy ICC Main Number:


(NMFS) The contract vessel Beau Rivage is finished with all the trawl stations and is steaming
back to Pascagoula. It is scheduled to arrive on Friday morning, June 4. Samples will be off
loaded and transferred to NSIL for analysis and the vessel will be prepared to go out again on
Monday, June 7.

(NMFS) The GORDON GUNTER will be returning to port Friday morning, June 4th. Dr. Lubchenco
is currently scheduled to visit the GUNTER Friday afternoon, June 4th at approximately 1 p.m.

(NOS) Gulf Coast Services Center staff, in collaboration with Sea Grant and other partners,
facilitated town hall meetings in Biloxi and Mobile. Approximately 250 citizens attended each
meeting. Local media coverage was extensive.

(NOS) Direct Impact of Oil The Gulf Coast Reserves are not seeing a direct ecological impact of
the oil spill at this time, although the area from just west of Pascagoula, MS to the AL state line
is now closed to recreational and commercial fishing, including the Grand Bay Mississippi NERR.

Sampling
o
At the request of USFWS NRDA, Grand Bay NERR has expanded shoreline sampling to
include presence of oiled birds.
o
Rookery Bay Florida NERR developed a West Coast NRDA sampling plan that has been
reviewed and approved by the Florida trustee lead Lee Edmiston, and it has been forwarded
to BP for review.

Wildlife related
o
Grand Bay NERR will be used to assess bird damages by NRDA, and staff are planning on
conducting additional point count surveys for marsh birds over the next week or two.
GU received approval at 2100 on 02 June to conduct operations within 3NM of DWH site.
Operating around the 3NM perimeter and an area to the SSW conducting acoustic profiles and
CTD's.
The AUV "GULPER" was deployed at 0600 Thursday morning and for an 11 hour sampling
mission.
Suspended sampling operations North of the DWH site at 1115 today due to strong odors that
began to penetrate ship. These were the strongest fumes to date. Probably due to a
combination of increased Southerly wind (1518KTS) and greater releases from the well after
cutting the pipe. No personnel have reported exposure symptoms however we required use of
VOC respirators for any personnel on deck until we cleared the impacted area.
Operational details as follows: CS reporting data/results summary through ICC.
o
757nm of Acoustic Survey Completed
o
24 XBT Casts
o
29 CTD Casts
o
3 MOCNESS Tows
o
10 Sub Surface Neuston Tows
o
AUV Gulper Survey Hours: 38
o
SIPPER Survey Hours: 15
Participating in daily calls with UC Environmental Unit (CAPT Pickett)
1900 Gallons used in the sixth 24 hrs. Total used 10,400. Remaining 3,700. On target for
scheduled endurance until 04 June
Equipment has only been "lighlty" oiled. HAZMAT controls working well. NOAA Incident Coordination Center
([email protected])
B6 Privacy
Document ID: 0.7.19.1781.1


Requested VOC monitoring device via UC due to strong odors while operating in certain areas.
Recommend future deployments of NOAA Ship's have these monitors.


Departed at 0600 EDT on June 3 for DWH Western Sentry project.

R/V Gandy
Conducting Reef Fish Survey out of Panama City, FL
R/Vs Caretta

Alongside Pascagoula prepping for TED Certification cruise. Scheduled to assist with spill
response after 21 June.
R/V HST

Alongside Pascagoula. Available. Suitable for coastal day trips.
R/V Harold B

Coming out of shipyard this week. Scheduled to conduct trap/video surveys out of Panama City
the remainder of the month. Vessel suitable for nearshore, day trips.
F/V Beau Rivage

Concluding trawling in nonoiled areas to collect baseline samples for the National Seafood
Inspection Laboratory. ETA Pascagoula 04 June.


Alongside in Port Fouchon

R/V Pelican

Starting a 5day cruise for FUGRO today

Gliders

Info on Navy gliders:

NAVOCEANO seagliders SG135 and SG137 continue to survey the northern Gulf of Mexico in
a suspected oilfree environment. The plan is to send the gliders in the direction of
suspected oil locations today. We expect that the gliders will come into contact with oil
within 6 to 10 hours of receiving their new waypoints.

The location and data plots (CDOM, Chlorophyll, Backscatter, salinity & temperature) from
both gliders are ALL available on NAVOCEANO's public facing web:
(https://oceanography.navy.mil/legacy/web/cgibin/search.pl/0/objects/0/7).


Total flight time flown for 03 Jun 2010: 8.8 Hours

Total flight time scheduled for 04 June : 9.0 Hours


P3 loop current monitoring flight is planned for June 4, 2010.

([email protected])
B6 Privacy
Document ID: 0.7.19.1781.1


Deepwater Response NOAA Financial Obligations as of June 3, 2010:
ORF: $2.3M

Reimbursable: $3.2M

TOTAL: $5.5M
Personnel

Employee billed hours as of PP09 12, 712.25 hrs
Command, Information Centers and Staging

Total NOAA Staff:
Areas

Area Command Post Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Unified Incident Cmd Source
Control
Staging Areas Venice, LA Pascagoula, MS Venice, LA Pascagoula, MS TOTAL DEPLOYED NOAA STAFF: ROBERT, LA HOUMA, LA MOBILE, AL ST. PETERSBURG, FL KEY WEST, FL HOUSTON, TX 11
28
10
3
0
0
2
11
65

26
91
ICC Metrics for 03 JUNE 2010 as of 1800 EDT

New Action Items: 6

Closed: 162

Open: 18

Recurring: 26

([email protected])
B6 Privacy
Document ID: 0.7.19.1781.1

([email protected])
B6 Privacy
Document ID: 0.7.19.1781.1

Subject: [Fwd: Today's closure change]
John Oliver.vcf
CLOSE HOLD
Subject: Today's closure change

Date:Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:17:44 -0400
From:John Oliver <[email protected]>
To:Jane Lubchenco <[email protected]>,
Monica Medina <[email protected]>,
Justin kenney <[email protected]>,
Amrit Mehra <[email protected]>, Frank
Parker <[email protected]>, David
Kennedy <[email protected]>,
Margaret Spring <[email protected]>
The net effect of today's action will decrease the closure area by 5%
(from 37% to 32%), see below for details. This email has a small
The
jo
distribution, I will wait to send to the broader group with map. information will be posted at noon on the web.
We are extending the northernmost closure boundary eastward along the

federal state water line to waters off Choctawhatchee Bay, Florida, to
encompass the projected movement of oil in that area over the next 72
hours. Also, we are retracting the southeastern closure boundary to
open area inside the current boundary which was closed on June 2 as a
precautionary measure based on trajectory data but was not impacted by oil.
The new closure measures 78,182 sq mi (202,491 sq km), or about 32% of
the GOM EEZ, compared to the June 2 closure comprising 88,522 sq mi
(229,270 sq km), or about 37% of the GOM EEZ. The new closure is
reduced in size relative to the June 2 closure because the additional
area we are closing to the north is smaller than the area we are
reopening to the southeast.
The new closure map is attached. ONLINE. before noon today. PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE UNTIL WE POST
We intend to post the map (and supporting materials) at or

The new closure will become effective at 6 PM
Eastern Time tonight.
<CENTER><IMG SRC=
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/images/usa2c.gif
></CENTER> 
<CENTER><BOLD>John
Oliver</BOLD></CENTER><CENTER><a
href=\"[email protected]\">[email protected]
ov</a></CENTER>
<CENTER>Deputy Assistant
Administrator</CENTER><CENTER>National Marine Fisheries
Service</CENTER><CENTER>(301)713-2239</CENTER>
Formatted Name
<CENTER><IMG SRC= http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/images/usa2c.gif ></CENTER> 
Name
Family: Oliver
First: John
Middle:
Prefix:
Suffix:
Organization
<CENTER>Deputy Assistant Administrator</CENTER><CENTER>National Marine Fisheries
Title
href=\"[email protected]\">[email protected]</a></CENTER>
Version
2.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2109.2

From: Shelby Walker <[email protected]>
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Pelican/Weatherbird]
Pelican-Weatherbird Research.docx
FYI-this was developed in response to an inquiry from NYT about the Pelican and W eatherbird
data
Subject: Re: Pelican/W eatherbird

Date:Fri, 04 Jun 2010 16:47:11 -0400
From:Chris Vaccaro
<[email protected]>
To:Shelby W alker <Shelby.W [email protected]>
References:<[email protected]>
Attached.
Shelby Walker wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> Can you resend the final version that was forwarded? > briefing this afternoon.
> I'm also happy to meet with you regarding the timelines.
> Shelby I've lost track
> of it in my e mail and I need to forward that to DWH for Dr. L's
WEATHERBIRD CRUISE #2 - May 22-27 - Associated with Response activities, specially

focused on assessing subsea dispersed petroleum from the top of the Loop Current to
approximately 50-55 nm south of Mobile Bay.
-What sampling was taken? Focused on water sampling and on CTD (Conductivity/
Transport/Depth) and Fluorometry.
-What was found? WEATHERBIRD Scientists indicated observance of elevated fluorescence at
400m depth approx. 50-55 nm south of Mobile Bay. Additionally, scientists reported slicks at
surface in various areas.
-Why are the results taking so long? Splits of water samples provided to NOAA on May 28th.
Twenty-five samples were prioritized by WEATHERBIRD II scientists and are being analyzed
by NOAA. In discussions with WEATHERBIRD II scientists, they are currently analyzing their
splits. We anticipate a NOAA/USF joint data release next week (June 7-11).
WEATHERBIRD CRUISE #1 - May 5-17 - A NRDA Cruise
-What sampling was taken? Focused on Fisheries [baseline (tows - well away from well head)]
and Plankton [baseline (well away from well head) and impact (near well head) using tows and
shadow image particle profiling evaluation recorder (SIPPER)], with some surface water samples
[baseline and impact] and sediment grabs [baseline])
-What was found? Historically, NRDA does not inform the response, and NRDA analysis occurs
well after the response is ended (e.g., no real need to know baseline amounts prior to conducting
the NRDA injury quantification which will compare baseline vs. post impacted conditions).
Thus, NRDA samples are usually archived (or for water samples, they are extracted and
archived).
As of about a week ago, NOAA agreed to make the NRDA data available to public. Many of
these samples are now moving through the laboratory and will come out of the laboratory over
the next few weeks. Our next step will be to submit these samples for 3rd party validation - a
step which will take another two weeks. This is necessary as these data will form the basis of our
legal case for damages against BP for injuries to the public's natural resources.
PELICAN CRUISE #2 - May 16-24, Unaffiliated with NRDA or Response (not NOAA
supported; was supported by NSF)
-What sampling was taken? Pelican Scientists indicate water samples, fluorometry, CDT, etc.
were taken during the cruise.
-What was found? Analysis ongoing.
PELICAN CRUISE #1 - May 2-16, Cruise unaffiliated with NRDA or Response (supported by
NOAA through the National Institute for Undersea Science and Technology).
Document ID: 0.7.19.2019.1
-What sampling was taken? Pelican Scientists indicate water samples, fluorometry, CDT, etc.
were taken during the cruise.
-What was found? Based on Fluorometry, Pelican Scientists suggest identification of submerged
petroleum plumes. NOAA requested splits of the water samples for petroleum chemistry.
NOAA has not seen results from Pelican's analysis of their water samples. Fifteen (15) water
samples provided to NOAA/LSU were received beyond the holding time, stored in plastic
bottles, and at room temperature. For these reasons, under EPA guidance, the analytical results
are considered invalid. Results from split samples run at LSU indicated no detectable
hydrocarbons (in the parts per billion range). The caveat is that the manner in which the split
samples were provided to NOAA/LSU invalidate these results based on EPA guidance.
-Why are the results taking so long? As stated above, NOAA results indicated no detectable
hydrocarbons in the parts per billion range, but were considered invalid; Academic results
pending.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2019.1

From: "Jen.Pizza" <[email protected]>
Subject: DAILY DWH UPDATE 6.4.2010
DWH - NOAA ACTIVITIES 6.4.2010 END OF THE

DAY REPORT OUT
* W hat you need to know:
Press release coming out today > just been notified that AP is going to do a press release from a
covo they had with scientist from the weathterbird that will suggest there is a confirmed oil
plume. This release and the discussion leading up to it was not approved by Bill Hogarth. W e
have talked with Bill, he is standing by his joint PR from Monday but this AP release has already
gone out.
W e are currrently trying to contact Steve Murawski to corrdinate with Hogarth to move up their
PR so that you may have that info available for your mtg with the POTUS on Monday.
TJ UPDATE:
R/V Thomas Jefferson status

Deployed on June 6, expected return on June 11 (Galveston).
Current location-5nm south of well-head
Current operations-acoustic testing and deepwater sampling
Findings-Good returns on possible 1000m layer as well as potential vertical seeps.
-Operational details:
Thursday, 0600: Underway from port of New Orleans. Transit south
west pass of the Mississippi River
1400: Pilots depart and underway fire and abandon ship drills
1415: Safety operations brief on the deployment/retrieval of fish
and rosette sensors
1430: Calibration of Cyclops 7 sensors in the fish and the rosette
1500: Shallow water deployment of rosette followed by testing of
moving vessel profiler cast and brake capabilities. Tests Sat.
1900: Successful cast to 600m
2000: Underway to conduct echosounder and cast work SW of the
spill site, to continue excellent work by GU. Bravo Zulu GU!
Response Operations
Oil still billows past Top hat #4 in video feeds, but ROVs closed 1 of 4 vents in the cap today
and will close the other 3 over many hours to reduce hydrate formation and pressure changes
NIC Activities
ER M A team : NIC ERMA team continues to handle high volume of requests from USCG.
Program presented to the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, who showed significant
interest. The CG has requested a follow-up meeting with ERMA program staff in order to
discuss a potential expansion of program. Now planning to support two ERMA staff in the NIC.
Sub Surface Oil Team : Two one-pagers begun - one describing the role/charter of the NIC
Subsurface Dispersed Oil Group, and one designed as a Best Practice document for the same
group.
NM FS Communications: NMFS is looking into how to more effectively communicate
upcoming changes to the Fishery Closure area to the FOSC. This issue was raised on this
afternoons NRT call.
FISHERIES CLOSURES:
The closed area was modified at noon and becomes effective at 6pm EST
The new closure measures 78,182 sq mi (202,491 sq km), or about 32% of the GOM
EEZ, compared to the June 2 closure comprising 88,522 sq mi (229,270 sq km), or
about 37% of the GOM EEZ.
The new closure is reduced in size relative to the June 2 closure because the
additional area closed to the north is smaller than the area reopened to the southeast.
The map of the new closed area and a map with the new area and the June 2nd
closure are attached.
The 2010 Mississippi shrimp season opened at 6 am Thursday June 03, 2010, in territorial
waters west of the East Biloxi ship channel.
SEAFOOD INSPECTION
Beginning this weekend, all of the sensory assessors will return home from Pascagoula,
MS except for a reduced crew of 4 who will assist with sample preparation and continue
training State screeners next week. The full expert team is not needed at this time because
no areas are under consideration for re-opening at this time. Therefore, we are giving the
assessors a break to return home before they are needed in Pascagoula again.
Next week is the second training session for State screeners.
The complete daily Seafood Inspection report is attached.
MARINE MAMMAL AND TURTLE HEALTH AND STRANDING:
280 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 2 from
June 2)
255 stranded (increase of 2 from June 2)
234 of the stranded were found dead (increase of 1 from June 2)
21 of the stranded were found alive (increase of 1 from June 2)
3 turtle released alive (increase of 2 from June 2)
15 live turtles in rehabilitation (decrease of 1 from June 2)
Increase of 1 previously stranded dolphin fully necropsied (no visible external or internal
oil observed)
The current designated spill area encompasses the coastline from the Texas/Louisiana
border to Apalachicola (Franklin County), Florida. All stranded animals within this
geographic range are being examined following the oil spill response protocols.
The directed turtle survey operating under Unified Command was on the water initially on
June 3rd but conditions were not favorable and the operation was canceled. Operations are
scheduled to resume today.
The complete health and stranding report, turtle stranding map, and dolphin stranding map
are attached.
COMMS UPDATE:
Planning media rollout of ERMA/GeoPlatform.gov

Finalizing talking points on seafood safety, with eye toward press rollout next week
Held dockside press conference today for R/V Gordon Gunter return to Pascagoula, Miss.
In various stages of responding to sensitive inquiries from NYTimes, WashPost, Denver
Post & AP
Correcting inaccuracies of 6/2 Huffington Post story
Editing and clearing fact sheets on NRDA sampling summary, Long-term Movement of
Oil
Cleared two fact sheets on NRDA
Scoping possible CNN Cooper embed with sea turtle stranding expert on de-oiling trip
NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Studies:
Trustees have established 15 Resource Injury and Functional Groups (e.g. birds, shoreline,
mammals and turtles, human use, submerged aquatic vegetation, etc.) to coordinate injury
assessment activities at this time.
Approximately 2,000 NRDA samples have been taken, breakdown regarding the amount (
percentage of samples taken) is as follows;
o Water = 75%
- water samples (includes nearshore and offshore cruises, e.g., surface and sub-surface samples)
o Sediment = 15%
- sediment samples (nearshore and offshore)
o Tissue = 5%
- tissue samples (includes, but not limited to, bottlenose dolphin and oyster biopsies)
o Oil = 5%
- oil samples (source, surface, and shoreline, e.g., tarballs)

Between 15-20 field teams are currently active in the field on a daily basis conducting surveys
and collecting samples
OFFSHORE CRUISES
There are five research vessels currently conducting offshore NRDA studies in the Gulf of
Mexico.

Gordon Gunter NOAA vessel

Thomas Jefferson NOAA vessel
Bunny Bordelon
Jack Fitz
Brooks McCall
Notes Attached - DISPERSED OIL WORKSHOP OVERVIEW MAY 26 AND MAY 27,
BATON ROUGE LOUISIANA
SCIENCE UPDATE:
Bob and Steve had a productive meeting with EPA (Bob Perscapie) on overall Science
Coordination.
ACTION:
1.Continuing to promote join assessment group
2. Government turtle experts are concerned about the impacts of the skimming efforts on sea
turtle. USCG needs to be aware of ESA's.

Deepwater Horizon Dispersant Use Meeting Report
May 26-27, 2010

Report Issued by: Coastal Response Research Center
University of New Hampshire
June 4, 2010

CoastalResponseResearchCenter

Deepwater Horizon Dispersant Use Meeting Report
May 26-27, 2010

Repor Issu by: Coastal Response Research Center
t ed University of New Hampshire
Ju 4, 2010
ne

Coastal Response Research Center
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
FOREWORD

The Coastal Response Research Center, a par tnership between the N ational Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administr ation (N OAA) Office of Response and Restor ation (ORR) and
the Univer of New Hampshire (UNH), develops new appr sity oaches to spill response and
restoration thr gh r ou esearch and synthesis of information. The Centers mission requires it
to serve as a hu for research, development, and technology transfer to the oil spill
b commu nity. The CRRC has a long history of over seeing r esearch and development on the
efficacy and effects of dispersed oil and convening dispersant related workshops with
stakeholders fr the oil spill commu om nity. At the request of N OAA, the center held a
meeting on May 26 and 27 at the Lod Cook Alumni Center on the Lou isiana State
Univer (LSU) campu in Baton Rou focu sity s ge sing on the u of dispersants in the
se Deepwater Horizon (DWH) incident in the Gu of Mexico.
lf
The meeting, titled Deepwater Horizon Disper sant Use Meeting, was attended by
over 50 scientists, engineers and spill r esponse pr actitioner from numer s or s ou ganizations,
including: U.S. Coast Gu (USCG), Miner Management Ser ard al vice (MMS), N ational
Oceanic and Atmosphere Administr ation (NOAA), indu y, state government, and
str academia. The u ltimate goals of this meeting were to: (1) Provide inpu to the affected
t Regional Response Teams (RRTs) on the u of disper se sants going for ward in the DWH
incident; and (2) Identify possible new monitor pr ing otocols in the event of continuing
aerial and su bsurface dispersant application.

This report contains considerations on fu re use of dispersants and possible
tu monitor protocols for the RRTs along with the notes from the breakou groups, a
ing t participant list, the meeting agenda and Power point presentations. I hope you find the input
helpfu and the discu l ssion illuminating. If you have any comments, please contact me. The
Center hopes that this report will be of u to the RRTs as they move forward with the
se Deepwater Horizon r esponse and to the gr eater oil spill commu nity and the nation.

Sincer ely,

N ancy E. Kinner, Ph.D. UN Co-Dir H ector
Pr ofessor of Civil/Environmental Engineer ing
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Acknowledgements
The Coastal Response Research Center gr atefu acknowledges the CRRC author of this
lly s report: Nancy E. Kinner, Joseph J. Cu nningham III, Zachary E. Magdol, Heather R.
Ballestero, and Tyler M. Crowe. The Center acknowledges the time and effort provided by
the par ticipants in the workshop, whose contributions have been synthesized into this
report. In addition, the Center acknowledges the thou ghtfu input and comments r l eceived
fr the reviewers of the draft report: Craig Carroll (USEPA, RRT6); Richard Coffin (US-
om N RL); William Conner (N OAA, ORR); Char Henry (NOAA, ORR); Bru Hollebone
lie ce (Environment Canada); Robert Pond (USCG); Jeep Rice (NOAA, NMFS); Terry Wade
(Texas A&M University). The Center also gr atefully acknowledges the help of Professor
Donald W. Davis (LSU Emeritu David N s), ieland (LSU, Sea Gr ant) and the staff of the
Lod Cook Hotel and Alu mni Center at LSU for their help in making this meeting happen in
less than 96 hou rs.

The following individu helped plan this meeting: Car Childs (NOAA OR&R); Tom
als l Coolbau (Exxon Mobil); Dave Fr (BP); Ku Hansen (USCG, R&D Center); Charlie
gh itz rt Henr (N y OAA ORR); Bru Hollebone (Environment Canada); Ken Lee (Fisheries and
ce Oceans, Canada); and Al Venosa (USEPA). The Center staff for this meeting consisted of:
Heather Ballestero; Joseph Corsello; Tyler Crowe; Joseph Cunningham; Michael Cu rry;
Er Doe; N ic ancy Kinner; Zachar Magdol; and Kathy Mandsager. The Center also
y gratefu acknowledges Bru Hollebone and Nichole Rutherford (N lly ce OAA OR&R) for
ser ving as grou leaders.
p
Citation:
Coastal Response Resear Center 2010. Deepwater Horizon Dispersant Use Meeting
ch . Report. Univer of New Hampshire, Du sity rham, N 21 pp and appendices. H,
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Table of Contents
Forwar d...1

Acknowledgements.........2

mmary...4
I.
Executive Su II. Introduction...5
III. Meeting Or ganization and Str ctu u re..6
IV. Meeting Results..7
A. Group A: Dispersant Efficacy and Effectiveness....7
B. Group B: Physical Tr ansport/Chemical Behavior of Disper Oil10
sed C. Group C: Biological Effects of Disper sants on Deep Ocean Species..........13
D. Group D: Biological Effects of Dispersants on Su face Water Species.......16
r V. Refer ences Cited........18

Appendices:

A. Meeting Agenda
B. Participant List
C. Breakou Qu t estions
D. Breakout Grou ps
p t ts
E.
Breakout Grou Notes and Repor Ou F.
Oil Char acter istics (Used for basis of discussion)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Meeting participants developed the following input to the RRTs:
Input Regarding Overall DWH Response Methods
1. Chemical dispersants, mechanical r ecovery and in situ bu rning are components of

an effective r esponse to su rface oil pollution.

2. Mechanical recover is the preferr method of on water oil spill r y ed esponse becau se
it r emoves the oil from the envir onment, bu is not always effective due to
t environmental conditions (e.g., weather, waves).

o 3.
N combination of response actions can fully contain oil or mitigate impacts from a
spill the size and complexity of the DWH incident.

4.
Toxicity mu be consider when a decision is made to apply chemical dispersants.
st ed
sing 2.5 MG of dispersants du ring the Ixtoc spill in 1979 (Jernelov
5. The effects of u and Linden, 1981) should be consider as par of the evalu ed t ation of the DWH
incident.

Input Regarding Dispersant Use for the DWH Incident
6.
It is the consensu of this gr s oup that u to this point, u of disper p se sants and the
effects of dispersing oil into the water column has generally been less
environmentally harmfu than allowing the oil to migrate on the su l rface into the
sensitive wetlands and near shor coastal habitats.
e
ld al ation of
7.
For the DWH spill, the RRTs shou provide for a continu re-evalu tradeoff options going for d. Becau of the magnitu of the DWH spill and
war se de with the expectation of pr olonged dispersant application, the RRTs shou consider
ld commissioning a Consensu Ecological Risk Assessment, or equ s ivalent, inclu ding
u of existing temporal and spatial data on the resou se rces at risk and using the most
cu rrent environmental data.

8.
Dispersed oil shou be tracked over time and space in combination with 3-D
ld modeling in order to infor fu e decisions on the u of dispersants for the DWH
m tur se incident

9. There ar short term laboratory and modeling stu e dies which can be done to aid
oper ational decision making (e.g., effect of high oil temp, high ambient pressu re,
and the presence of methane on disper sion effectiveness).

Input Regarding Monitoring Protocols for Dispersant Use
10. Monitoring pr otocols have been u for the DWH incident, modified as needed,
sed and shou be fur ld ther adapted as noted in the specific sections of this repor in the
t event of continu aerial and su rface disper ing bsu sant application.

4

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
II.
INTRODUCTION
At approximately 2200 hour on Tu s esday, April 20, 2010, the U.S. Coast
Gu d (USCG) received a r ar eport that the mobile offshore dr illing u (MODU)
nit Deepwater Horizon (DWH) located in the Mississippi Canyon lease site 252
(approximately 42 miles southeast of Venice, LA), had experienced an explosion
and was on fir The MODU su on Apr 24, scattering debris from the r pipe
e. nk il iser across the ocean floor in ~5,000 feet of water. It became clear with a few days that
the blowou preventer was not functional and oil was leaking into the water from
t more than one location on the broken riser .

Within hour of the incident, the USCG responded and began Search and
s Rescue (SAR) and environmental response oper ations. The r elease is r elatively
close to sensitive near shore coastal habitats and wetlands, and pr evailing winds
drive the sur face oil towards land. To prevent landfall of the oil, mechanical
recovery techniqu were used, inclu es ding skimming and booming, as well as
situ
in bur ning. However when poor weather conditions limited the effectiveness and
, su itability of mechanical r ecover and bu y rning, dispersants were applied to disperse
su rface oil and prevent landfall. In early May, responder began injecting
s dispersants at the sou of the release in or to pr rce der event oil from reaching the
su rface. These techniqu have largely been successfu and have r ced the
es l, edu amou of oil r nt eaching the nearshore. Consequ ently, disper sant u primarily aerial
se, (su rface) application and in the oil plu as it exits the riser (deep ocean
me application), has become a major response tool as the release has continu ed
u nabated. The response was declared a Spill of National Significance (SON on
S) Apr 29, 2010, and recent repor fr the National Incident Command estimate
il ts om that between 12,000 and 19,000 barr of oil are r els eleased into the water every day,
making the DWH incident the largest oil spill in U.S. history. More than 990,000
gallons of dispersant have been u thus far in the r sed esponse, and with completion
of relief wells schedu for Au st, 2010, ther is potential for significant fur led gu e ther
release of oil and application of disper sants.

In the event continued disper sant u is necessar throughou the su se y t mmer,
the Regional Response Teams (RRTs) expressed inter in late May in convening a
est meeting of scientists and practitioners to discuss disper sant u and provide inpu to
se t the affected RRTs. This meeting, titled Deepwater Horizon Disper sant Use
Meeting br ght together approximately 50 participants to: (1) Provide inpu to the
ou t affected RRTs on the u of dispersants going forward in the DWH Incident; and
se (2) Identify possible new monitoring protocols in the event of continuing aerial and
su r bsu face dispersant application. Fou breakou groups were established that
r t discu ssed: (1) Efficacy and effectiveness of surface and deep ocean use of
disper sants; (2) Physical transpor and chemical behavior of dispersants and
t dispersed oil; (3) Exposu pathways and biological effects r lting from deep
re esu ocean application of disper sants; and (4) Exposu pathways and biological effects
re resulting from su rface application of disper sants.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
III. MEETING ORGANIZATION AND STRUCTURE
The meeting, held at Lou isiana State University on May 26 and 27, 2010,
consisted of plenary sessions where invited speakers gave an over view of disper sant
u in past oil spills, as well as an over se view of the DWH incident and the response
to date. Four breakou grou discu t ps ssed key aspects of dispersant u in the DWH
se response: (1) Efficacy and effectiveness of surface and deep ocean dispersants u se;
(2) Physical tr ansport and chemical behavior of dispersants and disper oil; (3)
sed Exposu pathways and biological effects resu re lting fr deep ocean application of
om dispersants; and (4) Exposu pathways and biological effects resu re lting from
su rface application of dispersants. Meeting participants were selected by a planning
committee comprised of gover nment and inter national par tners with expertise in
dispersants and oil spill response and research; meeting participants (Appendix B)
repr esented a wide range of issu e-related exper and backgr nd, and inclu tise ou ded
representatives from feder state and foreign government agencies, as well as
al, industry and academia.

Breakou qu t estions (Appendix C) were developed by the Center staff and
the planning committee. The breakou gr ps (Appendix D) developed input on
t ou continu use of disper ed sants for the DWH response, the risks/benefits of su u ch se,
and possible monitor protocols going forward. In addition, they determined what
ing infor mation was needed to give the input, whether it was available for the DWH
incident, or could be gleaned using information fr past exper om ience or the
literatu re.

As a star ting point, the following guidance was given to the breakou t
grou (1) Su ps: rface disper sant oper ations have only been conducted in pr e-approved
zones (> 3miles offshor >10 m water depth). Most dispersants have been applied
e, 20-50 miles offshore where the water is mu greater than 100 ft deep; (3) The
ch footprint of su rface disper sant application is relatively small; (4) The body of water
in which the dispersants are applied is constantly changing; and (5) This meeting
focu on oil effects and dispersants in general (no discu sed ssions of specific
dispersants, ju general composition types).
st
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
IV. MEETING RESULTS
A. Dispersant Efficacy and Effectiveness for Surface and Deep Ocean Application
Group A initially consider the efficacy and efficiency of su face and su rface
ed r bsu disper sant u sage, however, on the second day of the wor kshop, the gr oup was divided
into two su bgroups: Gr p A1 examined the efficacy and efficiency of deep ocean
ou disper sant application, while Gr p A2 considered the efficacy and efficiency of
ou su rface disper sant application.

Group members inclu ded:

Group Lead: Joseph Cu nningham, Coastal Response Research Center

Recorders: Joe Corsello* & Eric Doe, University of New Hampshir e
Tom Coolbaugh*, Exxon Mobil

Craig Carroll#, U.S. EPA
Per Daling, SINTEF
J.T Ewing*, Texas General Land Office
Ben Fieldhou Environment Canada
se, Chantal Gu enette*, Canadian Coast Gu ard
Ann Hayward Walker*, SEA Consulting
Lek Kadeli#, U.S. EPA
Pau Kepkay, Bedford Institu of Oceanogr l te aphy - Fisheries & Oceans Canada
Ed Levine*, N OAA
Zhengkai Li, Bedford Institu of Oceanography - Fisheries & Oceans Canada
te Joe Mu llin*, Minerals Management Service
Duane Newell*, U.S. EPA Contractor
Bob Pond, USCG
Kelly Reynolds*, ITOPF
Al Venosa, U.S. EPA
*Grou Member assigned to Gr p A2 on Day 2

p s ou # Gr oup Members who were present for Day 1, but absent du ring Day 2
Information Requ ed to Make Assessment:

ir
Spatial location of high, low, and non- effectiveness of dispersant

Results of continu s water colu monitoring, rather than discr sampling
ou mn ete events

Extent of weathering from su rface and subsu rface oil
ack e
GPS tr routes to see if sampling boats ar operating within the vicinity of
aerial dispersant application tr acks

Pr operties of oil on the su rface, inclu ding thickness and extent of weather ing
operties of disper sant applied and u ntreated oil

Pr
3D visu alization of plume

Location, volume, and tr ends of plu me

Complete weathering pr ofile of oil

Accu rate volu metric oil flow rate and disper sant application range

Effect of temperatu and pr re essu on dr re oplet for mation and dispersion 7

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Estimates of contact time and mixing energy

Dispersability of emulsion after mu ltiple applications of dispersant

Cur rent State of Knowledge:

Oil emulsion (> 15 20% water) is non-dispersible

Plu is between 1100 1300 m deep moving SW direction
me
DWH oil high in alkanes, and has a PAH composition similar to South
Louisiana refer ence crude

Lighter PAHs (< C15) ar likely volatilizing
e
Viscosity of emulsified oil is between 5500-8500 centistoke
Emulsion may be destabilizing (50-60%)

Primary detection method, C3 (flu orometer only gives r ), elative trends does
not accu ately measu concentr r re ation of total oil or degree of dispersion

Knowledge Gaps:

Ability of emulsions to be dispersed with mu ltiple applications of dispersant

Appr iate endpoint for disper opr sant application (i.e., how clean is clean?)
Effectiveness and appropriateness of other dispersant applications (i.e., boat,
su bsur face, airplane, helicopter)
Actu r al ange of oil flowrates and composition (i.e., percentage oil, methane)

Size of plume (volu metr ic)

Diffu sion of oil components from disper droplets into the water column
sed (e.g., aliphatics, PAHs)

Chemical composition of the plu (i.e., pr me esence of oil, disper sant)

Extent of su face and r r r esu facing of dispersed oil

Su ggestions to Address Knowledge Gaps:

Short and long term collection of chemical data (oil and dispersant
concentration) at the sur face and su rface
bsu
Measurement of methane concentrations and flowrate throu ghout the water
column

Analysis of natu vs chemically enhanced dispersion in the subsu ral rface and
su rface

On day two, Gr oup A was divided into two su bgrou Grou A1 examined the
ps; p efficacy and effects of su rface water application, while A2 examined the efficacy and
effects of deep ocean application.

Input for RRTs: Group A1 Su rface Application:
rface application of dispersants has been demonstrated to be effective for the
1.
Su DWH incident and shou continu to be u ld e sed.
2.
The use of chemical disper sants is needed to au gment other response options
because of a combination of factors for the DWH incident (i.e., continu s,
ou lar volu r ge me elease).
3.
Winds and cu ents may move any oil on the su rr rface toward sensitive wetlands
in 4.
Limitations of mechanical containment and r ecover as well as
situ bur y, ning. 8

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

sible. Fu rther lab and field stu dies are
5.
Weathered DWH oil may be disper needed to assess the efficacy and efficiency and optimal dispersant application
(e.g., mu ltiple dispersant applications).
6.
Spotter airplanes are essential for good slick targeting for lar scale aer ge ial
applications (e.g., C-130), so their u should be continu se ed.
7.
In order to most effectively use the assets available, the appr opriate vessels or
aircr should be selected based on the size and location of the slick and
aft condition of oil. Vessels and smaller air aft shou be u to treat smaller
cr ld sed slicks and the weathered DWH oil becau they can target more accu se rately and
repeatedly. Lar air ger craft should be u for lar fresh oil slicks offshor sed ger e
except in the exclu sion zone around the source. A matr of oil location, oil
ix patch slicks size and condition, dispersant technique/dosage, visu gu al idance,
requirements for su ccess/confirmation has been developed by the dispersant
assessment group in Hou incident command. This matrix should be r ma eviewed
by the RRTs.

Risks of Inpu for RRTs:
t Dispersants will not be 100% effective. The matrix referenced above contains
information to maximize the efficacy of dispersant application on different states of the
DWH oil. Disper sants r edistr te the oil from the surface to the water column which is
ibu a tradeoff decision to be made by the RRT.

Benefits of Inpu for the RRTs:
t Dispersing the oil r ces su edu rface slicks and shoreline oiling. The u of chemical
se dispersants enhances the natural dispersion process (e.g., the smaller droplet size
enhances potential biodegradation). Disper sing the oil also r educes the amount of waste
gener ated from mechanical containment and r ecovery, as well as shoreline cleanu p.

Possible Monitoring Pr otocols for Su rface Water Application:
1.
There is a good correlation between Tier 1 SMART observations and Tier 2
field fluorometr data. There has been su y fficient Tier 1 and 2 data collected for
the DWH incident to indicate monitoring is not r ired for every sor equ tie.
2.
Going forwar it is important to now focu on assessing the extent of the 3D
d s area after multiple applications of dispersant at the su rface. A sampling and
monitor plan to do this has been developed by the dispersant assessment
ing group based in the Hou command center and initial implementation has
ma begu The RRT 6 shou review this plan.
n. ld
Input to RRTs: Grou A2 Su rface Application:
p bsu 1.
The su rface dispersant dosage shou be optimized to achieve a Dispersant
bsu ld to Oil Ratio (DOR) of 1:50. Becau conditions ar ideal (i.e., fresh, u se e n-
weathered oil) a lower ratio can be u sed, reducing the amou of dispersant
nt requ ired. The volu injected shou be based on the minimum oil flowrate,
me ld however an accu rate volumetr oil flowrate is required to ensure that the DOR
ic is optimized.
2.
If we assume a 15,000 bbls/day oil r and a 1:50 DOR, then actual disper ate sant
flowr is roughly similar to the current application r of 9 GPM. ate ate 9

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

ther optimize dispersant efficacy, the contact time between dispersant and
3.
To fur oil should be maximized. Longer contact time ensu better mixing of oil and
res disper sant pr to being r ior eleased into the water and shou resu in better , ld lt
droplet for mation.
4.
Contact time can be incr eased by shifting the position of the application wand
deeper into the riser, optimizing nozzle design on the application wand to
incr ease flu sheer, and incr id easing the temperatu of the disper re sant to lower
viscosity.
5.
Effectiveness should be validated by allowing for a short period of no dispersant
application followed by a short time of disper sant u sage to look for visu al
improvements in subsu face plume.
r
t Disper sants are never 100% effective. The flow rate of oil ou of the damaged
t riser is not constant, and significant amounts of methane gas are being released.
Because the effective DOR is a function of oil flow rate, changes in the oil flow rate
may significantly impact the actual DOR. If the DOR is too low, dispersion may not
be maximized, while if it is too high, dispersant will be u nnecessarily added to the
environment. Assumptions are based on knowledge at standard temperatur and
es pressu (STP), while conditions at the r are significantly differ res iser ent. Gr oup
member suggested that the oil escaping the damaged r may be in excess of
s iser 100C, and it is unclear what effect this has on the dispersant, or the efficacy or
effectiveness of droplet formation. These conditions may drastically alter fluid
behavior. Finally, there is an oppor nity cost of changes to application wand
tu position and development and deployment of a new nozzle.

t When optimized, su rface dispersant application may reduce or eliminate the
bsu need for su rface disper sant application, and will reduce sur facing and resu rfacing of oil.
Optimized su rface disper bsu sant application will likely pr omote formation of smaller,
more stable dr oplets of oil, theor etically allowing qu icker biodegradation.

Possible Monitoring Protocols for Su bsur face Application:
1. Measurement shou be made on the su ld rface and su bsur face to detect disper sant
and disper oil to gauge the effectiveness of su rface dispersant application.
sed bsu Cu rrently, no known techniqu exists for accu e rately measu ring par per billion
t concentrations of dispersant in seawater and novel applications of GC-MS/GC-
, FID or UVFS + LISST may be requ ed.
ir 2.
Tier 1 (SMART) visual monitoring at the su rface with qu antification of oil with
aerial r emote sensing
3.
Visu monitor may be able to qu al ing alitatively demonstr differ ate ences between
dispersant application and no application (e.g., plume shape, color).

B. Physical Transport/ Chemical Behavior of Dispersed Oil
Group B was focused on the physical transpor and chemical behavior of disper t sed
oil. While the initial goal was to look at these char acter istics for chemically dispersed
oil, the scope of the deepwater horizon incident required looking at both chemically
and natur ally disper oil. sed 10

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Gr p member inclu ou s ded:

Group Lead: Br uce Hollebone, Environment Canada

Recorder: Tyler Crowe, Coastal Response Research Center
Les Bender, Texas A&M

Mary Boatman, Minerals Management Service
Michel Boufadel, Temple Univer sity
Robert Carney, Louisiana State Univer sity
Jim Churnside, U.S. EPA
Greg Fr U.S. EPA
ost, Jerry Galt, Genwest
Bu Martin, Texas General Land Office
zz Allan Mearns, NOAA
Scott Miles, Lou isiana State University
Erin ORiley, Minerals Management Ser vice
Jim Staves, U.S. EPA
Infor mation Requ ired to Make an Assessment and Knowledge Gaps:

Contact efficiency between dispersant and oil at the sea floor

Release rate of oil and gas
sion efficiency at injection point on sea floor

Disper Mixing energy at injection point on sea floor

Effects of incr eased pressu and temper re on disper re atu sion efficiency

Temperatu of released oil
re
Degr or r of weathering of oil in rising plu (e.g., dissolu ee ate me tion, vapor
stripping)
mation and disper sion in the rise zone, u nder pressur e

Emulsion for Destabilization of emu lsions as pressu decreases
re
Biodegradation r on dr ate oplets at pressur and at bottom temper re
e atu
Sedimentation of dispersed oil fr depth
om
Biological u ptake, par lar in demersal and benthic organisms
ticu ly
Su rface Langmu circu ir lation potential for mixing

Su rface advection rates versu oil dischar to deter s ge mine buildu potential
p
BTEX levels above oil slick
Su ession of airborne VOCs when u ppr sing dispersants

Air ne concentrations of 2-bu bor toxy ethanol fr spring
om
Atmospheric breakdown and toxicity of 2-bu toxy ethanol and other produ cts
EBA for dispersant use

Improved N

Su rface models ar effective and continu e ously improving
e
SMART protocols ar improving

Increase of sampling at depth

Well researched region (oceanogr aphic and ecological studies)

Well established baseline data
bor
Air ne application protocols are established
11

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1


Review Norwegian experiments (Deep Spill, 2000)
Review liter e on IXTOC I
atur
Increase in remote sensing of the disper ar (check for oil resu sed ea rfacing)

Use of smaller grid sizes or nested grids on models

Increased offshore sur face sampling independent of SMART at fixed
stations in the operational zone

Establishment of criteria for discontinu ance of dispersant operations
Fu rther r esear on the contact efficiency between disper ch sant and oil at the
su bsur face injection point
Better u nderstanding of release rate and temperatur of oil and gas
e
Qu antification of mixing energy at injection point

Better cou pling between offshore (ocean/pelagic) and onshor (estu ine or
e ar riverine) hydr odynamic models (LaGrangian vs. Eulerian)

Laborator investigation of effects of elevated pressu and temperatur on
y re e disper sion efficiency at depth (e.g., study in pressur cells)
e
Input for RRTs:
1.
Create an on-scene envir onmental review committee to advise SSCs that will be
responsible for providing immediate oper ational and scientific advice, and aid in
dispersant decisions. This committee shou be compr ld ised of government agencies
and academia that meet regularly.
ea/water volu of concer This will improve
me n. 2. Clearly define geographic ar st
estimates for scale of impact (1
der approximation). This is important for N or EBA
analysis, and is based on cur rent application r ates, and maximum concentr ations in
the water volu me.
e ehensive sampling and monitoring program to
3.
Establishment of a mor compr u nderstand tr ansport of oil on the su rface and potential for long-term increases to
TPH, TPAH, oxygen demand, or lower of DO with continu disper ing ed sant
application. This cou be done by implementing off-shor water (first 10 m)
ld e monitor stations (e.g., fixed stationar positions such as other drill rigs).
ing y
t Continu dispersant use tr ed ades shor eline impacts for water colu impacts. This
mn increases the u ncer tainty of the fate of the oil, and potentially incr eases the oil
sedimentation rate on the bottom.

Benefits of Input for the RRTs:
Continu dispersant use reduces the threat distance, protects shor ed elines, likely
incr eases the biodegr adation rate of the oil, inhibits for mation of emu lsions, reduces
waste management, and potentially redu buildu of VOCs in the air ces p .

Possible Monitoring Protocols for Su bsur face Application:
1. Measu size and shape of the plu with and withou su re me t bsur face injection of
dispersant in or to have a better u der nderstanding of the efficacy. Sonar 12

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

monitoring of plume size and mor phology (tilt) can be u sed; increases in plu me
size or longer tail of droplets su ggest greater disper sion
Additional monitoring in the rising plu at a var me iety of depths to improve
tr anspor modeling and development of boundaries and constr t aints on estimates.
Additional su r bsu face monitor of water temperatu par ing re, ticle size distr tion,
ibu fluorescence monitoring of dispersant concentration, and total petroleu m
hydrocarbons (TPH) to define su rface plu concentrations and bou bsu me ndaries.
Incr ease su rface layer water qu ality monitor (pr ing ofile of upper 10 m) to
address concer of cu lative loading of water with oil and disper ns mu sant. Size of
the monitoring zone will var with advection and dispersant application. Shou y ld
monitor for TPH, PAHs, dissolved oxygen, salinity, temperatur biological
e, oxygen demand (BOD), VOA, and if feasible, su factant monitor and toxicity
r ing testing.
Fur ther air monitor of sur ing face water qu ality zone to gain a better
u nderstanding of volatilization and r to responder Monitoring shou inclu isk s. ld de
BTEX and VOC concentrations, and while COREXIT 9527 is being used, 2-
bu toxy ethanol.
2. 3.
4.
5.
C. Biological Effects of Dispersants on Deep Ocean Species
Group C discu ssed exposur pathways of dispersants applied to the su r e bsu face and
su bsequ biological effects. Grou member inclu ent p s ded:

Group Lead: Zachar Magdol, Coastal Response Research Center

y Recorder: Mike Cur Coastal Response Research Center
ry,
Adriana Bejarano, Research Planning Inc.

Richard Coffin, Naval Resear Laboratory
ch William Conner, NOAA Office of Response and Restoration
Charlie Henry, N OAA, Scientific Suppor Coor t dinator for USCG District 8
Ken Lee, Environment Canada
Jeffrey Short, Oceana
Ron Tjeer dema, University of California
Information Required to make assessment:

Receptor species/species at r isk

Identify species at r inclu isk ding their migration, feeding habits, life histories,
repr ctive strategies/recr odu uitment

Disper sant effect on oxygen and other electron acceptor availability on key
biogeochemical cycles in the deep water ecosystem

Assess the maximu rates of disper m sant application to balance treatment of the
spill and a low environmental impact

Determine the impact on nu trient recycling, general efficiency of food chain
tion as a fu nction of depth, and if these changes

What is the particle size distribu affect key elemental absorption and feeding str ategies

Oil biodegradation rates, microbial commu nity stru re and ecosystem fu ctu nction
in the pr esence and absence of the dispersant

Evalu the seasonal and spatial variation in the deep ocean oxygen demand in
ate the pr esence and absence of the disper sant 13

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Scavenging particle interactions, oil-mineral aggr egate formation at sou and
rce thr ghou water colu ou t mn

Vertical and horizontal transpor dynamics of deep water ocean cu t rrents for an
over view of the oil and dispersant tr ansport and dilu tion

Unknown indirect effects (e.g., persistence) on the food chain and key elemental
cycles

Biogeochemical and habitat data about ecosystems near natur deep water al
petroleu seeps to evalu the cycling rates and commu m ate nity str ctur u e

Percent effectiveness of the seafloor dispersant application relative to the
su rface application
Determine the changes in the petroleu layer throu the water colu with
m gh mn application of the dispersant
Changes in microbial degr adation due to selective metabolism fr addition of
om dispersants (e.g., is ther a preferr dispersant degr e ed adation that will pathway
that will limit petr oleu degradation?)
m al
Effectiveness of natur dispersion

Knowing the downstream flu of oil residu from the spill to the seafloor to
x e contribu to a net balance of the oil fate
te

Minerals Management Services, Gu of Mexico deep water stu lf dies/r eports:
http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/regulate/envir on/deepenv.html

N ral hydrocarbon seepage in the Gu of Mexico approximately 40 million
atu lf gallons per year

Some knowledge and past stu dies on deep water species in the Gu of Mexico
lf
Pr eliminary modeling
eliminar monitor data (Flu y ing orometr data, Par y ticle size analysis,

Pr Temperatu Salinity, D.O., Hydr re, ocarbon, Acu toxicity , Acou data,
te stic sonar Genomics)
,
N of the information listed above is considered complete
one
Knowledge Gaps:

Pr eliminary models not validated

Life history of benthic biota

Migratory patter and residence time of deep water species
ns
Micr obial degr adation r ates on deep ocean hydrocarbon seeps

Disper sant and dispersed oil bypr cts
odu
Chr onic toxicity of benthic biota
o
Compar ison of bioaccu lation/bioavailability between differ mu ent
droplet sizes
ral vs
o
Comparison of toxicity and environmental impact of natu chemically enhanced dispersed oil

Species avoidance of oil


Formulation of biogeochemical rates with respect to fu tr el ansport and
sedimentation 14

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Early life stage studies, laboratory or cage studies

Robu toxicity stu st dies for deep water species
iation in the ecosystem oxygen and alter nate electr on

Spatial and temporal var acceptor availability

Input for RRTs:
ld me 1. Dispersant risk assessment shou consider volu of DWH incident relative to
natur seepage
al 2. There is a net benefit to continu su ed bsurface dispersant u and application
se shou continu ld e

t Dispersant u increases the extent of biological impacts to deep water pelagic
se and/or benthic organisms, inclu ding oxygen depletion, release of VOCs into the water
colu mn, and toxicity. This may lead to changes in the diversity, str uctu and fu re nction
of the microbial commu nity, leading to changes in tr ophic level dynamics and changes
to key biogeochemical cycles.

t
Su rface water column and beach impacts vs. vertical water colu impacts
mn
Obser redu ved ction in volatile or ganics at su face
r
Enhances the inter action between oil and su spended particu material
late
Accelerated microbial degradation thr gh increased bioavailability
ou ecover of downward su y lfate diffu sion and u pwar methane diffu d sion
Rapid r related to shallow sediment geochemistry
Based on cu ent knowledge, subsu rr rface dispersant u confines the aer se ial
extent of impact
rent impact zone is less than 50 km radiu s
o
Cur
Redu ction in emulsified oil at the su rface
ction of phototoxic impacts

Redu
Possible Monitoring Pr otocols for Su rface Water Application:
1.
Robu deep ocean toxicity stu st dies
o
Application of research done with acu toxicity on foraminifera,
te possibility of chronic studies (LC50, EC50)
o
Identify control areas, in ter ms of system ecology, physical ocean
proper ties, and biogeochemical par ameters
o
Cage studies in the plume
o
Identify sur rogate/indicator species for impacts over a range of tr ophic
levels
atory species)
o
Identify key species of concern (migr o
Microbial genomics to su vey changes in the commu r nity str uctu that
re changes key elemental cycles
o
Long term biological effects for resident species with baseline
information
2.
Biogeochemical monitoring
m ates (C14 labels) o
Petroleu degradation r 15

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

pr ction and function (3H thymidine/leu odu cine and
Genomics)
nity diver (16S RN sity A)
o
Commu 13
o
Backgr nd parameter (DOC, POC, DIC, concentration and
ou s C)
nction of particle size
o
Bioavailability of the oil as a fu 3.
Physical/chemical parameters
o
UV flu ometry (Inclu or ding FIR)
ticle size distr tion of the oil as fu ibu nction of space and
o
Monitor the par time (LISST particle cou nters)
o
Cu ent velocity (ADCP)
rr oper CTD (oxygen, salinity, pH, SPM)
ties o
Chemical pr rce properties of the oil as a function of space and time
o
Chemical and sou (GC-MS and IRMS)
stic monitoring (3.5 and 12 khz)
o
Potential of acou
D. Biological Effects of Dispersants on Surface Water Species
Gr p D focu on the effects of su face dispersant application on species in the top
ou sed r ten meters of the water colu mn. Group member inclu s ded:
therford, NOAA
Group Lead: Nicholle Ru o, Recorder: Heather Ballester University of New Hampshire
Carys Mitchelmore, University of Mar yland
Ralph Portier Lou , isiana State University
Cynthia Steyer, USDA
Mace Barron, U.S. EPA
Les Bu rridge, St. Andrews Biological Stn, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Simon Cou rtenay, Gu Fisheries Centre, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
lf Bill Hawkins, Gu Coast Research Laboratory, University of Sou Mississippi
lf th Brian LeBlanc, Lou isiana State University
Jeep Rice, NOAA
Dou Upton, MS DEQ
g Terry Wade, Texas A&M University
o
Micr obial
Infor mation Requ ed to make assessment:

ir Spatial location of oil, dispersants, and species

The levels of concern need to be noted (e.g., sensitive species life stages, exposu re
pathways, LC50s oil and disper sant constitu ents)

Cu ent State of Knowledge:
rr
The oil is being disper in the top ten meters of the water colu from su sed mn rface
dispersant application (flu orescence methods)

Knowledge Gaps:
sant

Effectiveness of disper
Long ter effects of dispersant exposu (carcinogenicity)
m re
Dispersed oil effects in an estu arine/riverine/pelagic environment

Bioavailability, bioaccu lation
mu
Suggestions to Addr Knowledge Gaps:
ess
Develop a clearinghou to facilitate access to baseline data being collected se 16

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Know dose of exposur effects, species present and tradeoffs with habitat
e, pr otection

Under stand differences between disper vs. non-disper oil
sed sed
Inpu for RRTs: Effects of Dispersant in the top 10 M.
t
1. Sur face application of dispersants is acceptable. Tr ansferr the risk fr the
ing om su rface to the top 10 m is the lesser of the many evils.
2. Additional monitoring is r ir to better model wher disper oil is going.
equ ed e sed Long ter (monthly) monitor is r ired at a minimum, and shou be
m ing equ ld condu cted in a gr for id mation inshore to open ocean. Passive sampler (i.e.,
s SPME) shou be u in selected ar ld sed eas, while a active water sampling pr ogram
should be implemented to measu dispersant and disper oil, dissolved oxygen,
re sed and standar CTD + chlor d ophyll concentr ations, as well as selected bioassays.

Possible Monitor Protocols:
ing 1. Monitor below 10 m
2. Monitor su rface to bottom acr a transect from the shore to sour oss ce
3. Deploy semi-permeable membrane device (SPMD), passive sampling, or oysters
4. Monitor concentr ation and exposu time to get a better understanding of effective
re dose
5. Use state-of-the-ar toxicity tests t
17

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
E. Bibliography:
1.
Adams, E.E. and S. A. Socolofsky. 2005. Review of Deep Oil Spill Modeling
Activity Su pported by the Deep Spill JIP and Offshore Operator Committee. Final
s Report. http://www.mms.gov/tar ojects/377/Adams%20Review%204.pdf
pr
2.
Atlas, R.M.,"Fate of oil from two major oil spills: Role of microbial degradation in
removing oil from the Amoco Cadiz and IXTOC I spills", (1981) Environment
International, 5 (1), pp. 33-38.

3.
Bedinger Jr., C.A., N ulton, C.P., "Analysis of envir onmental and tar samples from the
near shore South Texas area after oiling from the Ixtoc-1 blowou (1982) Bu t", lletin of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 28 (2), pp. 166-171.

4.
Boehm, P.D., Flest, D.L., Mackay, D., Paterson, S.,"Physical-chemical weathering of
petroleu hydrocarbons from the ixtoc I blowout: Chemical measur m ements and a
weathering model", (1982) Environmental Science and Technology, 16 (8), pp. 498-
505.

5.
Boehm, P.D., Fiest, D.L., Kaplan, I., Mankiewicz, P., Lewbel, G.S., "A natu al
r resour damage assessment stu The Ixtoc I blowout", 2005) 2005 Inter ces dy: national
Oil Spill Conference, IOSC 2005, p. 5035.

6.
Boehm, P.D., Fiest, D.L., Kaplan, I., Mankiewicz, P., Lewbel, G.S., "A natu al
r resour damage assessment stu The Ixtoc I blowout", (2005) 2005 International
ces dy: Oil Spill Conference, IOSC 2005, p. 5035.

rface distributions of petroleum from an offshore
7.
Boehm, P.D., Fiest, D.L., "Subsu well blowou The Ixtoc I blowou Bay of Campeche", (1982) Environmental
t. t, Science and Technology, 16 (2), pp. 67-74.

8.
Coastal Response Research Center (2006) Resear & Development N ch eeds For
Making Decisions Regarding Dispersing Oil.
http://www.cr nh.edu rc.u /dwg/dispersant workshop report-final.pdf

9.
Cor des, C., Atkinson, L., Lee, R., Blanton, J.,"Pelagic tar off Geor and Florida in
gia relation to physical pr ocesses", (1980) Marine Pollu tion Bu lletin, 11 (11), pp. 315-
317.

TIC RIDLEY TURTLE
10. Delikat, Donald S., "IXTOC I OIL SPILL & ATLAN SURVIVAL.", (1980) Proceedings of SOUTHEASTCON Region 3 Conference, 1,
pp. 312-319.

11. DeepSpill 2000: Johansen, ., Rye, H., Cooper C. DeepSpill-Field study of a
, simu lated oil and gas blowou in deep water, (2003) Spill Science and Technology
t Bulletin, 8 (5-6), pp. 433-443.
18

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

12. Haegh, T., Rossemyr, L.I., "A comparison of weathering processes of oil from the
Bravo and Ixtoc blowou ts.", (1980) Pr twelfth annu offshor technology
oc. al e conference, Hou ston, Texas, May 1980, pp. 237-244.

13. Haegh, Thor, Rossemyr, Leif I., "COMPARISON OF WEATHERING PROCESSES
OF OIL FROM THE BRAVO AND THE IXTOC BLOWOUTS.", (1981)
Pr oceedings of the Annual Offshore Technology Confer ence, 1, pp. 237-244

14. Hall, R.J., Belisle, A.A., Sileo, L., "Residu of petroleum hydrocarbons in tissues of
es sea tur exposed to the Ixtoc I oil spill.", (1983) Jou tles rnal of wildlife diseases, 19 (2),
pp. 106-109.

15. Jer nelov, A., Linden, O., "Ixtoc I: A case study of the world's largest oil spill", (1981)
Ambio, 10 (6), pp. 299-306.

16. Johansen, O., et al. 2001. Deep Spill JIP Experimental Dischar of Gas and Oil at
ges Helland Hansen June 2000. Final Technical Report
http://www.mms.gov/tar ojects/377/DeepSpill%20Final%20Report.pdf
pr
17. Johansen, O., et al. 2001. Deep Spill JIP Experimental Dischar of Gas and Oil at
ges Helland Hansen Ju 2000. Final Cru Repor ne ise t.
http://www.mms.gov/tar ojects/377/DeepSpill%20Cru pr ise%20Report.pdf

18. Johansen, O., et al. 2001. ROV Sonar and Pictures from Project Deep Spill - June
2000. Final Data Report.
http://www.mms.gov/tar projects/377/DeepSpill%20ROV%20Repor t.pdf

19. Kalke, R.D., Du T.A., Flint, R.W., "Weathered IXTOC I oil effects on estu ke, arine
benthos", (1982) Estu arine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 15 (1), pp. 75-84.

20. Linton, T.L., Koons, C.B., "Oil disper sant field evaluation. Ixtoc 1 blowou Bay of
t, Campeche, Mexico", (1983) Oil and Petrochemical Pollu tion, 1 (3), pp. 183-188.

21. Lizarraga-Partida, M.L., Rodrigu ez-Santiago, H., Romero-Jar ero, J.M., "Effects of
the Ixtoc I blowou on heter t otrophic bacteria", (1982) Mar Pollution Bu ine lletin, 13
(2), pp. 67-70.

22. Macko, S.A., Winters, J.K., Par , P.L.,"Gulf of Mexico dissolved hydrocarbons
ker associated with the IXTOC I mousse", (1982) Mar Pollution Bulletin, 13 (5), pp.
ine 174-177

23. Masu tani, S.M., Adams, E., 2001 Study of Mu lti-Phase Plu mes with Application to
Deep Ocean Oil Spills, Hawaii N ral Energy Institu University of Hawaii,
atu te, http://www.mms.gov/tar ojects/377/UH MIT Final 2001.pdf
pr
24. Patton, J.S., Rigler, M.W., Boehm, P.D., Fiest, D.L.,"Ixtoc 1 oil spill: Flaking of
su rface mou in the Gu of Mexico", (1981) N sse lf ature, 290 (5803), pp. 235-238.
19

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

de sant on spot
25. Slade, G.J., "Effect of Ixtoc I cru oil and Corexit 9527 disper (Leiostomu xanthu s) egg mortality", (1982) Bu s ru lletin of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology, 29 (5), pp. 525-530.

26. Waldichu M.,"Retrospect of the Ixtoc I blowou (1980) Marine Pollu k, t", tion Bu lletin,
11 (7), pp. 184-186.
20

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

APPENDIX A
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

APPENDIX B
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
NAME Mace Adriana Les Marie Mary Michel Les Robert Craig Jim Richard William Tom Simon Per Ronald Christopher J.T. Ben Greg Jerry Judy Christopher Chantal James Bill Ann George Charlie Bruce Lek Paul Nancy Brian K Ken Ed Zhengkai Buzz Alan Scott Carys Joe Tim Duane John Andrews Erin Christopher Bob Ralph Kelly Jeep Nicolle Jeffrey Gus Jim Cynthia Ron Kenneth Doug Albert Terry Dave Barron Bejarano Bender Benkinney Boatman Boufadel Burridge Carney y Carroll Churnside Coffin Conner Coolbaugh Courtenay Daling DeLaune D Elia D'Elia Ewing Fieldhouse Frost Galt Gray Green Guenette Hanzalik Hawkins Hayward Walker Henderson Henry Hollebone Kadeli Kepkay Kinner LeBlanc Lee L Levine Li Martin Mearns Miles Mitchelmore Mullin Nedwed Newell Nyman O'Reilly Piehler Pond Portier Reynolds Rice Rutherford Short Stacy Staves Steyer Tjeerdema Trudel Upton Venosa Wade Westerholm
AFFILIATION U.S. EPA Research Planning, Inc Texas A&M Exponent U.S. Minerals Management Service Temple University St. Andrews Biological Stn, Fisheries and Oceans Canada Louisiana State University y EPA, RRT 6 NOAA
Naval Research Laboratory
NOAA, ORR, ERD
ExxonMobil
Gulf Fisheries Centre, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
SINTEF
Louisiana State University
Dean, School of Coast and Environment, LSU
Texas General Land Office
Environment Canada
NOAA
NOAA, Genwest
NOAA
Canadian Coast Guard
USCG, RRT6
Gulf Coast Research Laboratory USM
Laboratory, SEA Consulting
FL Fish & Wildlife
NOAA, ORR, SSC
Environment Canada
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ORD)
Bedford Institute of Oceanography Fisheries & Oceans Canada
Coastal Response Research Center
Bedford Institute of Oceanography
B df d I i fO h
NOAA, ORR, SSC
Bedford Institute of Oceanography Fisheries & Oceans Canada
Texas General Land Office
NOAA, ERD
University of Maryland, CES
US Minerals Management Service
ExxonMobil
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Minerals Management Service, New Orleans
LA DEQ
U.S. Coast Guard
ITOPF
NOAA, Auk Bay NMFS lab
NOAA, ERD
Oceana
LA Oil Spill Coordinators Office (LOSCO)
USDA NRCS
University of California
SL Ross
Mississippi DEQ
Texas A&M University
NOAA, ORR
COASTAL RESPONSE RESEARCH CENTER STAFF:

Joseph Joe Heather Kathy Tyler Zachary Eric Mike Beth Cunningham
Corsello
Ballestero
Mandsager
Crowe
Magdol
Doe
Curry
y
Potier
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

APPENDIX C
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

APPENDIX D
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

APPENDIX E
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDER NOTES GROUP A1 MAY 26, 2010

Breakout Session I: Wednesday afternoon
1.
What do we need to know in order to give input regarding dispersant operations and to
identify possible monitoring protocols?

Way for oil to be dispersed

Effectiveness of dispersants surface and subsea
Fluorometer use indecisive
Where effectiveness high and low
Continued use good for right oil remove tier 1 to get particle size overall picture everyday
Oil is dispersible
Continuous monitoring of water column rather than discrete events
Surface vs subsurface dispersant amount of weathering
Tier 2 not specific data
GPS routes see if boats are located where near planes are
Tier 1 = Eyeball aerial observation
Tier 2 = Fluorometry at 1 m below
Tier 3 = multiple depths
C3 = Fluorometer
Small aircraft, Big aircraft, sampling vessels
Better placement of tier 2 sampling vessels
Tier 1 and 3 are best big boat tier 3
Property of oils on surface weathering of source out to get properties and thickness of layer
Visual profile of oil
Treated and non-treated oil properties
Increasing amount of energy for dispersants turbulence 1, 2 hrs after
Different levels of monitoring for different levels oil weathering
Fresh oil tier 1
Tier 2 proof of performance
Weathering profile transitional phase - to see when dispersant is no longer needed
Emulsified oil as indicator of dispersant use
Deep water plume know where is it
Amount of dispersant:flowrate of oil
Ratio of dispersant to oil deep water
Droplet size deep water
Temperature effect on dispersion
Amount of mixing energy and time deep water
Emulsion may be dispersible with multiple applications of dispersant needs to be researched
What is causing the small droplets at the surface?

2.
What is the current state of knowledge regarding the DWH spill?
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Location of plume: 1100 1300 ft moving SW direction
DWH oil high in alkanes, PAH similar to reference oil, up to C30
14-21% emulsified oil may have come from skimmer
10-15% natural water and oil surface oil (redish brown)
Less than C15 volatilizing
Max = 200,000 centistoke
Emulsified 5500-8500 centistoke
Need to know how oil is weathering on surface
Oil emulsion is non dispersible (15-20%) and when redish brown
Mousse is dispersing- not as good as before
Take sample, add dispersant, shake, see if dispersed
Resurfacing samples needed for what is resurfacing
C3 calibration needed
C3 (fluorometer) gives relative trends no level of total oil or degree of dispersion
(Need quick field tests)

3.
What are the gaps in our knowledge or information?
Similar to #1
Can emulsions be dispersed with multiple applications?
When is the endpoint of effective dispersance? Look at data
Should other dispersant application methods be considered besides air (boat, subsurface)
Oil flowrate max, min
Size of plume (volumetric)
Leaching rate from small droplets
Leaching rate - soluble components in oil
Rate of dispersant in subsurface application (how well will it disperse)
Is the plume of oil and dispersant rising together?

a.
Can these gaps be addressed using information from past experience and/or the
literature?
Lack of research on top surface

Data to collect:
Short Term methane at surface, dispersant (if any), chemical dispersance vs.
natural dispersance

b.
If not, what information should be collected in the short and long term?
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Measure concentrations of oil and dispersants through water column
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDERS NOTES GROUP A1 MAY 27, 2010

Breakout Session II: Thursday morning
1.
Develop input for the RRTs on subsurface dispersant use if the DWH release continues.
MIXING
Dosage required better understanding of required ratio (more systematic)
Maximize contact time period between oil and dispersant from riser (shift wand
position)
Optimized mixing in riser wand position (deeper is better double or more),
smaller nozzle on wand to increase fluid sheer (mixing on the small scale)
Increase temperature of dispersant to lower viscosity use oil to naturally heat
dispersant? (collect data of droplet size as oil exits riser)
oil is at 100 degrees C
oil vs dispersant temperature experiments for best conditions?
Short time of no dispersant (record data) followed by short time of dispersant
usage (record data) and look for improvement to validate effectiveness
DOSAGE
If mixing is optimal dispersant dose may be high
Use minimum flowrate to derive DOR
Optimal in lab = 1:25
Measure oil flow (estimated 15,000 barrels/day ~450gpm)
Lower DOR is better (1:50 ~ 9gpm)
If use the assumed 15,000 barrels/day AND 1:50 DOR, then actual dispersant
flowrate stays roughly the same

a. What are the tradeoffs (risks/benefits) associated with this input?
Dosage
o
Risks
If too low DOR, will not be getting maximized dispersion

If high DOR, adding more dispersant to environment
Are we doing enough dispersion?

Benefits
Cut down need to add surface dispersants

Protect shoreline
Create smaller droplets that may degrade faster
Avoid surfacing
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Mixing
o
Risks
Lab results are based on STP and actual conditions differ (5,000ft and 100 C)
Opportunity cost of having to make a new nozzle and deployment

o
Benefits
More stable
Kept below surface
Lower droplet size
More efficient delivery of dispersant

2.
Identify possible monitoring protocols in the event of continuing dispersant use.
Monitor for:
Dispersant present on surface from subsurface injection
Dispersant in water column
Surface and depth for chemically dispersed vs. physically dispersed oil
Potentially measured using GCMS/GCFID
UVFS and LISST
Tier 1 visual monitoring at surface with quantification of oil with aerial remote sensing
Collect images

Technique for surface and depth detection of dispersant
No reference control monitoring of dispersion at depth
Visual monitoring may demonstrate differences between dispersant application and no
application plume shape, color
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDER NOTES GROUP A2 MAY 27, 2010

Overall input:

1. Surface application of dispersants has been demonstrated to be
effective for the DWH incident and should continue to be used.
2. The use of chemical dispersants is needed to augment other response
options because of a combination of factors for the DWH incident: 1)
continuous, large volume release, 2) Relative proximity to sensitive
wetlands, 3) winds and currents which may move the oil toward
sensitive wetlands, and 4) Limitations of mechanical containment and
recovery and insitu burning.
3. Weathered DWH oil may be dispersible. Further lab and field studies
are needed to assess the efficacy and effectiveness and optimal
dispersant application (e.g., multiple dispersant applications).
4. Spotter airplanes are essential for good slick targeting for large scale
aerial application (e.g., C130), so their use should be continued.
5. In order to most effectively use the assets available, the appropriate
vessels or aircraft should be selected based on the size and location of
the slick and condition of the oil. Vessels and smaller aircraft should
be used to treat smaller slicks and the weathered DWH oil because
they can target more accurately and repeatedly. Larger aircraft should
be used for larger fresh oil slicks offshore except in the exclusion zone
around the source. A matrix of oil location, oil patch slicks size and
condition, dispersant technique/dosage, visual guidance, requirements
for success/confirmation has been developed by the dispersant
assessment group in Houma incident command. This matrix should be
reviewed by the RRT.

What are the tradeoffs (risks/benefits) associated with this input?

Risks: Dispersants will not be 100% effective. The matrix citied in #5 of overall
input section above contains information to maximize the efficacy of dispersant
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
application on different states of the DWH oil. Dispersants redistribute the oil
from the surface to the water column which is a tradeoff decision to be made by
the RRT.

Benefits: Dispersing the oil reduces surface slicks and shoreline oiling. The use
of chemical dispersants enhances the natural dispersion process (e.g., smaller
droplet size enhances biodegradation). Dispersing the oil also reduces the
amount of waste generated from mechanical containment and recovery and
shoreline cleanup.

Relevant literature and field study information:
1. Field data (tier 1 and tier 2) at the DWH site demonstrate that under
calm seas aerial application of the dispersant is effective.
2. OHMSETT testing in calm seas and nonbreaking waves on fresh oil
demonstrated that dispersant will stay with oil and if energy
subsequently increases, the oil will disperse. If it remains calm over a
period of days, a fraction of the dispersant may leave the oil and
dissolve in the water column (this is a function of underlying currents).

Caveats:
1. There are logistical difficulties in getting tier 2/3 (fluorometry) data for
aerial application because of the 2 mile safety restriction on any vessel
after the plane has sprayed. It may be 2030 mins before the boat
starts moving towards the perceived area of application. This may
mean that the sampling vessels do not collect data where the
dispersant was applied. This operational issue should be addressed.
2. The RRTs should develop criteria for discontinuing or altering
dispersant operations.

Question 2: Identify possible monitoring protocols in the event of continuing
dispersant use.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Protocols:

1. There is good correlation between tier 1 observations and tier 2 field
fluorometry data. There has been sufficient tier 1 and 2 data collected
for the DWH incident to indicate monitoring is not required for every
sortie.
2. Going forward it is important to now focus on assessing the extent of
the cumulative extent of the 3D area after multiple applications of
dispersant on the surface. A sampling and monitoring plan to do this
has been developed by the dispersant assessment group based in the
Houma command center and initial implementation has begun. The
RRT6 should review this plan.

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
REPORT OUT GROUP A1- MAY 26, 2010

1.

Where effectiveness is high and low or none

Continued use good for right oil remove tier 1 to get particle size overall picture everyday
Continuous monitoring of water column rather than discrete events
Surface vs subsurface dispersant amount of weathering
GPS routes see if boats are located where planes are near
Better placement of tier 2 sampling vessels
Property of oils on surface weathering of source out to get properties and thickness of layer
Visual profile of oil
Treated and non-treated oil properties
Increasing amount of energy for dispersants turbulence 1, 2 hrs after
Weathering profile transitional phase - to see when dispersant is no longer needed
Deep water plume know where is it
Amount of dispersant:flowrate of oil - DOR
Droplet size deep water
Temperature effect on dispersion
Amount of mixing energy and time deep water
Emulsion may be dispersible with multiple applications of dispersant needs to be researched
What is causing the small droplets at the surface?
Oil emulsion is non dispersible (15-20%) and when reddish brown

Tier 1 = Eyeball aerial observation
Fluorometer confirms aerial observations
Tier 2 = Fluorometry at 1 m below
Tier 3 = multiple depths
C3 = Fluorometer
Fresh oil tier 1
Tier 2 proof of performance

2.
Location of plume: 1100 1300 m deep moving SW direction

DWH oil high in alkanes, PAH similar to reference oil, up to C30
14-21% emulsified oil may have come from skimmer
10-15% natural water and oil surface oil (redish brown)
Less than C15 volatilizing
Emulsified 5500-8500 centistoke
Mousse is dispersing- not as good as before
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
C3 calibration needed
C3 (fluorometer) gives relative trends no level of total oil or degree of dispersion
(Need quick field tests)

3.
Similar to #1
Can emulsions be dispersed with multiple applications?
When is the endpoint of effective dispersance? Look at data
Should other dispersant application methods be considered besides air (boat, subsurface)
Oil flowrate max, min
Size of plume (volumetric)
Leaching rate from small droplets
Leaching rate - soluble components in oil
Rate of dispersant in subsurface application (how well will it disperse)
Is the plume of oil and dispersant rising together?
Resurfacing samples needed for what is resurfacing

a.
literature?
Lack of research on top surface

Data to collect:
Short Term methane at surface, dispersant (if any), chemical dispersance vs.
natural dispersance

b. If not, what information should be collected in the short and long term?
Measure concentrations of oil and dispersants through water column
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
Develop input for the RRTs on subsurface dispersant

use if the DWH release continues
Deep Water Efficacy and

Effectiveness
Group A
Day 2
MIXING
required better understanding of required ratio (more
systematic)

Maximize contact time period between oil and dispersant from riser
(shift wand position)

Optimized mixing in riser wand position (deeper is better
double or more), smaller nozzle on wand to increase fluid sheer
(mixing on the small scale)
Increase temperature of dispersant to lower viscosity use oil to
naturally heat dispersant? (collect data of droplet size as oil exits
riser)
Dosage
Oil
Oil
Short
is at 100 degrees C
vs dispersant temperature experiments for best conditions?
time of no dispersant (record data) followed by short time of

dispersant usage (record data) and look for improvement to
validate effectiveness
Question 1 (contd.)
DOSAGE
What are the tradeoffs (risks/benefits)

associated with this input?
Dosage Risks:
If mixing is optimal dispersant dose may be high

Use minimum flowrate to derive DOR
Optimal in lab =
1:25
Measure oil flow (estimated 15,000 barrels/day

~450gpm)
Lower DOR is better (1:50 ~ 9gpm)
If use the assumed 15,000 barrels/day AND 1:50
DOR, then actual dispersant flowrate stays roughly
the same
If too low DOR, will not be getting maximized

dispersion
If high DOR, adding more dispersant to
DOR environment
Are we optimizing dispersion?
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
Question 2 (contd.)
Dosage Benefits:
Cut down need to add surface dispersants
Create smaller droplets that may degrade faster
Minimize surfacing
Mixing Risks:
Lab results are based on STP and actual conditions

differ
5,000ft
and 100 C (?)
Opportunity cost of having to make a new

nozzle and deployment
Mixing Benefits:
More stable droplets
Kept below surface
Lower droplet size
More efficient delivery of dispersant
Potential for faster biodegradation (?)
Identify possible monitoring protocols in the

event of continuing dispersant use
In the absence of reference control, monitor for:
Visual monitoring may demonstrate differences

between dispersant application and no application
Plume
shape, color
vs.
Surface and depth for chemically dispersed v
physically dispersed oil and dispersant itself
Potentially
UVFS
measured using GCMS/GCFID

and LISST
Tier 1 visual monitoring at surface with quantification

of oil with aerial remote sensing
Collect
images
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDERS NOTES GROUP B MAY 26, 2010

1.

Unknowns at depth

Contact efficiency between dispersant and oil

Dispersion efficiency
Mixing energy at injection point

Dispersion at depth (pressure effects)

Temperature of released oil

Weathering of oil in rising plume (dissolution, vapor stripping)

Emulsion formation and dispersion under pressure

Destabilization of emulsions as pressure decreases

Emulsion formation in the rise zone before it hits the surface

Biodegradation rate on droplets at pressure and at bottom temperature

Movement at depth

Sedimentation of dispersed oil from depth

Biological uptake

Unknowns at the surface

Langmuir circulation potential for mixing

Is advection fast enough to eliminate buildup

Unknowns for airborne fate


Suppression of VOCs when using dispersants

Levels of 2butoxy ethanol from spring

Atmospheric breakdown and toxicity of 2butoxy ethanol and other products

2.

Surface models are effective and continuously improving

SMART protocols are improving

Increase of at depth sampling

Well researched region (oceanographic and ecological studies)


Airborne application protocols are established

Improved NEBA for dispersant use
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

3.
a. Can these gaps be addressed using information from past experience and/or the
literature?

Norwegian experiment

Ixtoc 1

b.

Short Term

Remote sensing of the dispersed area

Nested models

Smaller grid sizes on models

Further offshore surface sampling, either as increased SMART sampling
or separate sampling regime

Fixed stations or boat station monitoring sensing in the operational
zone(continuous monitoring, water quality monitoring)

Establishing criteria for cease of dispersant operations

Guidelines for surface turbulence and dispersant effectiveness




Long Term

Better coupling between offshore and onshore hydrodynamic models
(LaGrangian vs. Eulerian) L



Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDERS NOTES GROUP B MAY 27, 2010

1.
Develop input for the RRTs on aerial and subsurface dispersant use if the DWH release
continues.

a.
Benefits
Reduces threat distance and protects shorelines
Probable increase of biodegradation rate (result of smaller particles)
Inhibits emulsion formation=reduces bulk volume of pollutants
Reduces waste management
Potential reduction of VOC in air
Risks
Trades shoreline impact for water column impact
Increases uncertainty of fate
Increased sedimentation rate

2.
Measure Size and shape of plume
o o o o o
With and without subsurface injection of dispersant

Sonar monitoring of plume size and morphology (tilt)
Plume size increasing= greater dispersion=better effectiveness
More plume monitoring in the rising plume at a variety of depths

Important for transport modeling
Development of boundaries and constraints on estimates

Water Temperature
Particle size distribution
Fluorescence monitoring of dispersant
TPH
Measures needed
Define geographic area/water volume of concern
Estimates for scale of impact (first order approximation)
Based on current application rates

Based on maximum concentration in that volume (worst case
scenarios)
Scenarios for surface water, onshore, deepwater plumes
Important for NEBA analysis
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Create an environmental review committee to advise SSCs
o o o o o
Clearinghouse for environmental data

Multi-agency and academia
Meeting regularly
Focused on immediate operational and scientific advice
eg. Rapid evaluation of dispersant options
Product selection based on:
Effectivenesss
Toxicity
Modeling
NEBA
Environmental conditions
Surface layer water quality monitoring (profile of upper 10 m)
o o o
Concerns of cumulative loading of water (oil, dispersant)

Size of monitoring zone
Based on anticipated advection and dispersant application

TPH
TPAH
DO
Salinity/ Temperature
VOA
BOD
Surfactant monitoring (possible?)
Tox testing (?)
Tests of concern
Air monitoring of same surface water quality zone
BTEX/VOC levels
2-butoxy ethanol (in case of corexit 9527)
Aerial spectral monitoring
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
REPORT OUT GROUP B MAY 26, 2010 (USED RECORDERS NOTES)

1.

Unknowns at depth







Weathering of oil in rising plume (dissolution, vapor stripping)

Emulsion formation and dispersion under pressure

Destabilization of emulsions as pressure decreases
Emulsion formation in the rise zone before it hits the surface

Biodegradation rate on droplets at pressure and at bottom temperature
Movement at depth

Sedimentation of dispersed oil from depth

Biological uptake

Unknowns at the surface

Langmuir circulation potential for mixing

Is advection fast enough to eliminate buildup

Unknowns for airborne fate

Suppression of VOCs when using dispersants
Levels of 2butoxy ethanol from spring

Atmospheric breakdown and toxicity of 2butoxy ethanol and other products

2. What is the current state of knowledge regarding the DWH spill?

Surface models are effective and continuously improving

SMART protocols are improving

Increase of at depth sampling

Well researched region (oceanographic and ecological studies)


Airborne application protocols are established

Improved NEBA for dispersant use

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
3.
a.
literature?

Norwegian experiment

Ixtoc 1

b.

Short Term

Remote sensing of the dispersed area
Nested models

Smaller grid sizes on models

Further offshore surface sampling, either as increased SMART sampling
or separate sampling regime
Fixed stations or boat station monitoring sensing in the operational
zone(continuous monitoring, water quality monitoring)

Establishing criteria for cease of dispersant operations

Guidelines for surface turbulence and dispersant effectiveness



Long Term

Better coupling between offshore and onshore hydrodynamic models
(LaGrangian vs. Eulerian) L



Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
Fate And Transport: Benefits
Reduces threat distance and protects

shorelines
Group B: Fate and Behavior
Probable increase of biodegradation rate

I hibit emulsion formation
Inhibits l i f ti
Reduces pollutant bulk and waste
management
Potential reduction of VOC in air
Fate and Transport: Risks
Trades shoreline impact for water column

impact
Increases uncertainty of fate
I Increased sedimentation rate
d di t ti t
1. Create an environmental review

committee to advise SSCs
Clearinghouse for environmental data

Multi agency and academia
Meeting regularly for entire course of spill
Focused on immediate operational and scientific
advice
eg. Rapid evaluation of dispersant options
Product selection based on:
Effectivenesss
Toxicity
Modeling
NEBA
Environmental conditions
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
2. Measure Size and shape of

Rising Plume
With and without subsurface injection of dispersant

Sonar monitoring of plume size and morphology (tilt)
Plume size increasing---greater dispersion---better effectiveness
3. Define geographic area/water

volume of concern
Estimates for scale of impact

first order approximation
Based on current application rates

B d i t ti Based on maximum concentration i th t
in that
volume (worst case scenarios)
Scenarios for surface water, onshore,
deepwater plumes
More plume monitoring in the rising plume at a variety of

depths
p
Important for transport modeling
Development of boundaries and constraints on estimates
Measures needed
Water Temperature
Particle size distribution
Fluorescence monitoring of dispersant
TPH
Important for NEBA analysis
NOAA/EPA deep water sub surface dispersed

plume monitoring
4. Surface layer water quality

monitoring
Profile of upper 10 m
Concerns of cumulative loading of water (oil, dispersant)

Size of monitoring zone
Based on anticipated advection and dispersant application
5. Air monitoring of same surface water

quality zone
BTEX/VOC levels
2-butoxy ethanol (in case of corexit 9527)
Aerial spectral monitoring
Tests of concern
TPH
TPAH
DO
Salinity/ Temperature
VOA
BOD
Surfactant monitoring (possible?)
Tox testing (?)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDERS NOTES GROUP C MAY 26 2010

1. What do we need to know in order to give input regarding dispersant operations and to
Much less known about deep ocean systems compared to surface water

Biochemical, trophicdynamics effects of the dispersant rate
What specifically is at risk?

What are the receptor species?

Life histories of local species, migration, feeding habits

Identify species at risk (migration, feeding habits, life histories, reproductive/
recruitment strategies)

What are the reproductive strategies/recruitment of the species affected?
What parts of the ecosystem are affected?

Dispersant effect of oxygen levels and cycling, modeling, maximum rates of
application
How much will it affect the nutrient recycling, general efficiency of food chain

What is the particle size distribution as a function of depth, dispersant application
rate

Emphasis needs to be put on water scale when considering effects

Understand the biodegradation rates, microbial structure and function

Evaluate the need for another team for data analysis
Look at seasonal dynamics etc of oxygen demand

Naval research lab organics, hydrocarbons
Microbial structure and function

Scavenging particle interactions, oilmineral aggregate formation at source and
throughout water column

Transport dynamics of deep water ocean currents
Rate of water absorption

Unknown latent effects, persistence?

How much is the dispersant/spill affecting the oxygen demand compared to other
natural seeps and sources?

Follow the fate

Evaluate the tradeoffs between dispersant application costs vs surface reduction in
oil

Percent effectiveness of the seafloor dispersant application

Further research on where dispersion occurs in the water column

Transport to surface?

Does the addition of dispersant change the microbial degradation due to selective
metabolism

Effectiveness of natural dispersion
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Knowing the downstream flux of oil residue from the spill to the seafloor
2.
MMS report on gulf of mexico deep water resources (2000049 Review of list for
GOM including area, deep water fish, fauna and seepage)

MMS vulnerability of DW species to oil spills

Natural hydrocarbon seepage in the GOM, 40 MG/year

Receptor paper by Alan Mearns
Existing reports e.g. MMS, NOAA

Deep water species in the GOM, Kathys reference
Preliminary modeling

Preliminary monitoring data (Fluorometry data, Particle size analysis, Temperature,
Salinity, D.O., Hydrocarbon, Acute toxicity , Acoustic data, sonar, Genomics)

Looking at microbial structure, Berkley

*None of the info listed above is considered complete

3.
i.
Models not validated from #2
ii.
Life history of benthic biota
iii.
Migratory patterns, residence time
iv.
Incomplete data
v. Microbial degradation rates in deep ocean on hydrocarbon seeps
vi.
Byproducts
vii.
Chronic toxicity of benthic biota
1. Leads to community and ecosystem effects
2.
Comparison of bioaccumulation/bioavailability between different
droplet sizes
3.
Comparison of toxicity and environmental impact of natural vs
chemically enhanced dispersed oil
viii.
Weighing the costs/benefits, and tradeoffs
ix.
Species avoidance of oil?
x.
Evaluate the tradeoffs between dispersant application costs vs
quantitative surface expression in oil

xi.
b.
literature?
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Chronic and acute toxicology cannot apply to these deep water
settings, some data but we have large gaps

In many cases we cant trust previous techniques
o
Advances in microbiology technology

Existing studies concerning deep water toxicity of pesticides on
forams
c.

Formulation of biogeochemical rates wrt fuel transport and
sedimentation

Early life stage studies, laboratory or caging
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDERS NOTES GROUP C MAY 27 2010

1. Develop input for the RRTs on subsurface dispersant use if the DWH release continues.
a.
BENEFITS
Offshore/nearshore biological tradeoffs

Surface impacts vs. water column impacts

Initial evidence of greater efficiency with subsurface/point source application vs.
aerial application

Observed reduction in volatile organics at surface w.r.t. personnel safety
Enhances the interaction between oil and suspended particulate material

accelerated microbial degradation through increased bioavailability

more rapid recovery of downward sulfate diffusion and upward methane
diffusion related to shallow sediment geochemistry
Based on current knowledge confines the aerial extent of impact
o
Current impact zone is far less than 50 km

Reduction emulsified oil at the surface

Reduction of phototoxic impacts

RISKS

Increases the extent of impact at depth
o
Biological impacts to deep water pelagic/benthic organisms
o Concern with oxygen depletion (Note: 0.7 g C/L/day tPAH *Coffin)
o
Release of VOCs in the water column
Change in microbial community diversity, structure, and function
o
Change in trophic level dynamics
o
Leading to changes in key biogeochemical cycles

Risk assessment should consider volume of Horizon spill relative to natural
seepage
Future application rates unknown with future operations (small contained high
concentration zone compared to larger lower concentration zone with the
possibility of future growth)

Recoalescing and movement to surface remotely surface slick

Exhaust dispersant supply
Based on the net benefit, but recognizing incomplete information, the group agrees with
subsurface dispersant injection as an immediate option.

2.

Robust deep ocean toxicity studies
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
of research done with acute toxicity on forams, possibility of

chronic studies (LC50, EC50)
o Identify control areas
o
Caged studies in the plume
o
Identify surrogate/indicator species for impacts over a range of trophic
levels
o
Identify key species of concern (migrating fauna?)
o
Microbial genomics
o
Long term biological effects for resident species with baseline
information
Biogeochemical monitoring
o Petroleum degradation rates (C14 labels)
o
Microbial production and function (3H thymodine/Genomics)
o
Community diversity (16S RNA)
o
Background parameters (DOC, POC, DIC, concentration and dC13)
o
Bioavailability of the oil as a function of particle size

o
UV Fluorometry (Including FIR)
o
Monitor the particle size distribution of the oil as function of space and
time (LISST particle counters)
o
Current velocity (ADCP)
o
Chemical properties CTD (oxygen, salinity, pH, SPM)
o
Chemical properties of the oil as a function of space and time (GCMS)
o
Potential of acoustic monitoring (3.5 and 12 khz)

Use of data from all of the above for the development of predictive models.

Validation!
o
Application
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
Deep Ocean: Needed Knowledge to

Give Input to RRTs
Group C: Biological Effects on Deep
Water Ecosystem; Subsurface
Application
Report Out I: Wednesday, May 26,

2010
Much less known about deep ocean systems compared to surface water
Biochemical, trophic dynamics effects of the dispersant rate

Identify species at risk (migration, feeding habits, life histories,
reproductive/ recruitment strategies)

Dispersant effect of oxygen levels and cycling, modeling, maximum rates
of application

What is the particle size distribution as a f h h l b function of depth, dispersant
h
application rate

Understand the biodegradation rates, microbial structure and function

Scavenging particle interactions, oilmineral aggregate formation at
source and throughout water column
Transport dynamics of deep water ocean currents

Evaluate the tradeoffs between dispersant application costs vs surface
reduction in oil

Further research on where dispersion occurs in the water column
Deep Ocean: Current Knowledge
Natural
Deep Ocean: Gaps In Knowledge
Model validation
hydrocarbon seepage in the GOM, 40

MG/year

Existing reports e.g. MMS, NOAA
Preliminary modeling
li i d li

Preliminary monitoring data (Fluorometry
data, Particle size analysis, Temperature,
Salinity, D.O., Hydrocarbon, Acute toxicity ,
Acoustic data, sonar, Genomics)
of subsurface dispersion and

biogeochemical cycles

Byproducts

Migratory patterns, residence time

Comparison of toxicity and environmental impact of
natural vs chemically enhanced dispersed oil

Evaluate the tradeoffs between dispersant
application costs vs quantitative surface expression
in oil
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
Tradeoffs of Subsurface Dispersant Application
RISKS
Increases
the extent of impact at depth
deep water pelagic/benthic organisms

with oxygen depletion (Note: 0.7 g C/L/day tPAH )
of VOCs in the water column
Group C: Biological Effects on Deep

Water Ecosystem; Subsurface
Application
Report Out II: Thursday, May 27,

2010
Biological impacts to
Concern
Release
Change
in microbial community diversity, structure, and function
in trophic level dynamics

to changes in key biogeochemical cycles
Change
Leading
Risk assessment should consider volume of Horizon spill relative

to natural seepage

Future application rates unknown with future operations (small
contained high concentration zone compared to larger lower
concentration zone with the possibility of future growth)
Recoalescing and movement to surface remotely surface slick
Exhaust dispersant supply
Tradeoffs of Subsurface Dispersant Application
BENEFITS
Offshore/near shore
Surface
Input!
biological tradeoffs
impacts vs. water column impacts

Initial evidence of greater efficiency with subsurface/point source
application vs. aerial application

Observed reduction in volatile organics at surface w.r.t. personnel
safety

Enhances the interaction between oil and suspended particulate
material

Accelerated microbial degradation through increased bioavailability

More rapid recovery of downward sulfate diffusion and upward
methane diffusion related to shallow sediment geochemistry

Based on current knowledge confines the aerial extent of impact
Current impact zone is far less than 50 km

Reduction emulsified oil at the surface

Reduction of phototoxic impacts
Based on the net benefit, but recognizing

incomplete information, the group agrees
with subsurface dispersant injection as an
immediate option
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
Deep Ocean Monitoring Protocols
Robust
deep ocean toxicity studies
Application of research done with acute toxicity on

forams, possibility of chronic studies (LC50, EC50)
Identify control areas
Caged studies in the plume
Identify surrogate/indicator species for impacts over a
range of trophic levels
Identify key species of concern (migrating fauna?)
Microbial genomics
Long term biological effects for resident species with
baseline information
Biogeochemical
monitoring
Petroleum degradation rates (C14 labels)

Microbial production and function (3H
thymodine/Genomics)
Community diversity (16S RNA)
Background parameters (DOC, POC, DIC,
concentration and dC13)
Bioavailability of the oil as a function of particle
size
Modeling
Use of monitoring
UV Fluorometry (Including FIR)

Monitor the particle size distribution of the oil as
function of space and time (LISST particle counters)
Current velocity (ADCP)
Chemical properties CTD (oxygen, salinity, pH, SPM)
Chemical properties of the oil as a function of space
and time (GC MS)
Potential of acoustic monitoring (3.5 and 12 khz)
data for the development

and validation of predictive models
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDERS NOTES GROUP D MAY 26 2010

Shallow water
1.
What do we need to know in order to give
input regarding dispersant operations and to


Chemical composition of oil and dispersants
o
Real toxicity is from oil not corexit
o
Test corexit toxicityshort term

Impact to health of fisheries resources
Potential impact to human health from consumption of seafood
o
Assessment tool for critical habitats

Spatial and temporal distribution of concentrations of oil constituents
o Knowing dissolved phase and particulate hydrocarbon
o
Toxicity on speciesbioassays
o
Comparing water composition of mixtures (oil:water)
o 3D exposure environment (depth and from shore then moving towards spill)

Criteria tool for long term habitat monitoring

Submerged aquatic vegetation

Physical and chemical, exposure pathways, what is being exposed (surface vs
depth;LC50, LD50)

Federal tests for platforms also apply to products used
Some constituents disperse naturally

Surface oil moves with wind, dispersed oil in water column moves with currents

Effects of riverine system on how dispersants work (salinity concentrations)

Toxicity in water column and where is it
o
Physical and chemical dispersion, proximity to dispersant application location

Acute vs chronic toxicitywhat information is needed to decide whether dispersant
use is or is not needed

Define benchmarks

Many exposure pathways, bioassays could benefit

Limit on concentrations and exposure/effects. Chemistry threshold
Toxicity equilibrium partitioning, chronic effects concerns, safety factor of 10 to
apply to standard benchmarks
T oxicity tests using rototox (?), but only at deepw ater dispersion
W hat is known and how a rototox test works
Federally mandated bioassays in GulfofMex ico

Effects to biological components PAH residuals as benchmarks
o
New monitoring device aside from what is used
DO level
Photo-enhanced toxicity
Normal lab studies do not capture this
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
What larvae are out there that will absorb oil and be subjected to those phototoxicity
effects.
What depth are these species at
What is the exact depth of surface dispersed oil plume

Deeper than ten meters, physical and chemical aspect of oil droplets unknown
Monitoring at 5,000ft depth, is there a plume?
o o
using fluorescence for subsurface dispersed patterns

Fluorescent transects will document what happened to decision thats been
made
Baseline data prior to the oil reaching that area
o o o
Trace PAHs in water column

Gaps- having enough transect profile data moving away from shoreline
(baselines)
Some data has been collected
Agreement among involved parties on toxicity benchmarks

NOAA fisheries proposed studies and monitoring for seafood safety and levels of
concern (conservative levels)
Rate of degradation of oil vs. dispersed oil
o o o o
Biproducts of degradation, and relative toxicity

True residence time of volatile fractions (dispersed vs. non)-present LSU
studies
Seasonal factors
Other degradation factors (e.g., dead zone)
Will this in turn influence dead zone, DO, etc
Species type- exposure duration, pathways, variations amongst species; if there are
numbers, what are they based on (which tox tests)?
Rototox assay is very general thing
Dose- disperse compounds, how long do plumes persist, are they mixed in the water
column. What level is negligible?
Undetectable limits but still have effects on species
Spatial and temporal fluorescence for basic infrastructure. Assist in evaluating use of
dispersants.
Is it toxic, what are the adverse effects

Area, number of species and concentrations in regions
Species out there, area, concentration, threshold levels, protecting which species
Continual spill, risks may equal out of effected species in water column to shoreline
Seasonality distribution of species, larvae
Influence top of water column that feed rest of food chain will eventually affect
shoreline species anyway. Tradeoffs
How long does it last, where does it go?
Life periods of species and how they will be effected (e.g., killifish vs. blue fin tuna)
What biota is in the vicinity of the dispersants
Degradation components of dispersants not well known in terms of accumulation
Persistent components of dispersants
Are dispersants bioaccumulated
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Information be made available for decision makers

How toxic is dispersant, how much in relation to oil, is oil more toxic when dispersed.
Is this loss acceptable knowing that it may save the shoreline.tradeoffs
Are dispersants giving us enough relief (looking at ERMA map)? How much of a
reduction will we get in oil hitting the shoreline. Relative to total volume
Does it make a difference in the end with total amounts of oil that will and would
have reached the shore had it not have been dispersed.
What is the oil that is coming ashore now? Not sure if oil moving on shore is exactly
dispersed oil or non.
2.
Water samples with no oil concentrations came from inshore samples prior to oil
making landfall
Fluorescence methods to monitor subsurface dispersed oil

Hypoxia-EPA-mapping hypoxic zone, just mapping it, not looking at influence on
biodegradation potential
Good to disperse if it doesnt get into coastal zone
Persistence of dispersant is around 7days
Potential bioaccumulation on some aspects of dispersants (MSDS)
EPA PAH datas. Priority pollutants (not full range). Push for GCMS
Petroleum distillates in corexit: known animal carcinogen in the MSDS for petroleum
distillates
If use dispersants, oil in top 10m of water column will cause injury to species in that
area.
More oil is dispersed when using dispersants at wellhead.
Aerial application- effectiveness drops off
Oil that comes ashore hasnt been dispersed. Not likely to have recoalesced
RRT discussion on lifting restrictions on dispersant application areas
3.
1.
literature?

Pulling data together and synthesizing
Water samples throughout depth up to 5,000ft (LSU)

Pharmaceutical productsendocrine disrupting properties
IXTOC 140M barrels of oil, 2M gallons of oil applied.

Exxon Valdez, oil that came ashore, still have a fraction of it after 20 years

Leave marsh alone, it cleans itself, what are the orders of magnitude
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
How much oil gets onto marsh plants dictates lethality

Want to keep it off the nursery ground
State dependent upon species from these habitat areas
Pelagic fish and organisms. Bluefin tuna exp. Will we lose that species (deep
water species)
2.

EPA, BP data compilation

What is the distribution of sensitive species offshore

Distribution of dispersed oil
1.
larva data and commercial species
oyster and mussel examples for monitoring

SPMD monitoring (30dayshas some biofouling)
o
Benefit future dispersant decisions

Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
RECORDERS NOTES GROUP D MAY 27 2010
1. Develop input for the RRTs on aerial and subsurface dispersant

use if the DWH release continues.
a. What are the tradeoffs (risks/benefits) associated with this
input?
Report 50% loss of fisheries (menhaden-spawn in marshes, life in
open ocean)
Commercially important species top ten meters (location marshes

to open ocean)
San Bernard shoals type of oil (dispersed or non) doesnt matter,
area is already compromised
Major fisheries in open oceans
MSDS states no toxicity tests required
Consider offshore fisheries (one species against the other-

inshore fisheries and shrimping grounds vs. offshore)
First hit for summer fishing season will be menhaden

Southeast fisheries science center has information on species
location
No environmental impact statement required for this location
Scrutinize MMS document (bluefin tuna and menhaden)
MSDS for corexit has LC50 (consider dose)

Does the dispersant make oil more toxic because its more
available? More animals see more of the oil. If dilution is fast
enough, the species will see less of it (dose)
Theory: increase oil in water column then go away

Oil slick-worry about birds, etc, if you disperse it goes to top ten
meters of water column and threatens those species. Then habitat
concerns
Transfer risk from surface to subsurface, then worry about

habitat contamination if it comes ashore
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Lessons from Persian gulf, no concentrations in water, but dig into

sediments to find oil there
Long term effects as opposed to short term acute effects.
Half life and concentration. Creating a different effect than the

MSDS sheet has information for
Subsurface water and surface water move in different directions
which lowers the dose (of oil?)
Dispersants speed up natural process which lowers the dose. Could
wipe out phyto and zooplankton in dispersant areas. Fluorescence
shows oil location and how effective oil dispersion is.
Corexit breaks down relatively quickly (in a lab)

Propylene glycol dissolves in water, dilutes rapidly, can adhere to
particulates (?), its solubility is affected by propylene distillates.
Microbes degrade soluble and non-soluble components
Toxicity as lethality and not so much long term chronic effects.

Risk and uncertainty in terms of how much over what area,
what species are there.
Sub lethal effects with long ranging impacts. If you contaminate

habitat you extend the range of those impacts
How much of a difference are we really making by using
dispersants (looking at ERMA map)-small area of application
What is the effectiveness of the dispersed treatment?
Is it worth it if were still going to have impacts to the exact habitat
were trying to protect?
o Once youve added a volume it takes a certain time for the
marsh to clear it, so the more oil there the more time.
o 430,000gallon application with 10:1 ratio. You save
approximately 1-10M gal of oil off the shore
o Application may not be as efficacious as expected;
dispersants may be over applied
o 2 weeks ago, reevaluated dispersant application

o EPA is pro deep dispersant application
o Smart data shows that there is dispersion into the water
column-only monitors down to 10m
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
o Public perception is that the oil slick is dropped slightly into
the water column, below surface, not that it is broken into

small droplets.
What is the application rate? Then you can calculate dilution rate
Dispersant is less toxic than oil and applied in smaller
concentration than oil. Thus, more worried about oil toxicity
Dispersant may facilitate PAH uptake in organisms and increase
dissolved phase of PAHs enhancing bioavailability
Mechanisms of uptake and physical characteristics of dispersed oil
(sticking to species). Bacterial degradation (much conflicting data
on uptake and exposure routes)
Mechanisms of PAH availability and toxicity resulting from

dispersant use and making PAHs more bioavailable
More dispersant-increase toxicity, not the dispersant itself, just

what it does. Endocrine disruption, carcinogenicity
Solely disperse deep water, need to fully know the efficacy and
effects. Think they can get same dispersion with deep water
injection. Believe dispersed oil will remain below pycnocline
Halted surface water dispersion
Use of dispersants should continue to lessen extent of shoreline

oiling. Tradeoffs with species in open ocean water column
Small reduction in oil (even 1%) is it beneficial? What is the

objective of dispersant application
How much of the slick are you actually getting to (about 1M
gallon?)
Dose, duration, and spatial context
All an experiment, controlled or not

A lot of marsh that hasnt been hit yet, small fraction of LA
marshes have been oiled
If you apply dispersants and its just washing around, if its effects
are less than the oil, then whats the risk?
If we spray it on open water, or it isnt effective, then whats
downside to applying it? There is no real downside (aside from
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
potential unknowns of dispersants, their residence time, and

toxicity)
Can only apply dispersant when conditions are adequate (to create
mixing)
Currents, where things are going, wheres the plume? Consistent
plume? Kill the tight plume and not worry about everything else?
Species sensitivity (e.g., corals would be killed by dispersed oil)
What is your footprint damage
More data on open oceans, how much harm is being done?
Big uncertainty
Data gaps: what is being exposed, exposure time.

If dispersant application mitigates a small percentage of oil in
marshes, it may have a beneficial tradeoff. Are the beneficial
tradeoffs acceptable?
Spatial mapping not adequate density

Too many unknowns-never going to get to a comfortable stage,
even with a five year plan
2. Identify possible monitoring protocols in the event of continuing

dispersant use.
Monitor deeper than 10meters (below 20meters or until
no fluorescence doesnt work)
Monitor surface to bottom across a transect from the

shore to source
o Gradation out from shore
o If not in this spill, beneficial to future spills
Need grid

Deploy semi permeable membrane device (SPMD),
passive sampling, or oysters
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
o Oysters take about 30 days to reach equilibrium
Objectives? Detailed species questions

Damage assessment, tracking and exposure
What limits microbes
Bioaccumulation monitors at selective points along

transect
Concentration monitoring (dose) and exposure time
How big is the footprint of dispersed oil? Is there
naturally dispersed oil in other areas; compare and measure
how much dispersant is in water.
Measure current (subsurface) prior to application
Measure DO
o pH, temp, pressure, salinity, particle size,
fluorometry, turbidity
Monitor/measure physical parameters, put into model to
figure concentration to measure toxicity
Biological species indicators (indicator species,
chlorophyll,)
o eggs or larval abnormalities-long term monitoring
coordination with NRDA

oil vs dispersant effects
shrimp moving out of marshes and into ocean now
Baseline species and behavior verse effects from oil and
dispersed oil
Hypoxic zone
o Match up where chemical vs DO signal are
o Correlation between river volume (flood) and hypoxic
zone
o Baseline data
Need to prove where the oil and dispersed oil is
Track oil!
o Where chemicals are going, exposure regimes
o Dealing with uncertainty
Would this data help managers?
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
What is the effect of the dispersant; is it an adverse effect? If

so, how much?
o Small and localized
o Tradeoff for keeping oil out of the marsh
Ecosystems will recover after oil shock to system, open

ocean ecosystems may rebound faster than marsh
areas; worthwhile to apply dispersants
Opportunity to learn
Tracking unknown oil in deep sea-
surface, start monitoring plan NOW. Start prior to

potential future surface dispersant application
o Data set will be beneficial in damage assessment as
well
o Beneficial for dispersant or not
Toxicity tests-state of the art (standard 48hour tests)
o Bioassays; bioassay based decision tree
Important for public perception
o 24 hour acute tox screen
o Show public toxicity levels, ease concern
Tox tests on underwater dispersion (rototox indicates not

much toxicity)
Dont know what tests to suggest (microtox)
Manidya, mica, alga
Public does care sublethal effects, chronic effects
Selected bioassays at selected sampling points

o Water
o Sediment? If it comes ashore, definitely
Seafood safety-marketing
Transfer risk to 10m is lesser of evils. Dispersant use on surface

okay
Water measurements dispersants and oil
DO measurements
Toxicity tests: selected bioassays
More confidence in where oil is going
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Mussel watch time aspect, before and after oil spill

o Long term monitoring (monthly)
Sediment doesnt necessarily reflect dispersant useneed baseline and
background for oil in sediment
Sediment baselines for future

Powerpoint presentation recommendations:
Surface application of dispersants is ok
Transfer risk to 10m is lesser of evils
Monitoring to provide more confidence in where oil is going
Long term monitoring (monthly); grid from inshore to open
ocean (past oil slick edge)
Passive samplers in selected areas
DO measurements
Standard CTD tests plus chlorophyll measurements
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
Q1: What do we need to know in order to

give input regarding dispersant
operations and to identify possible
monitoring protocols?
Location, location, location
Oil, dispersants, critters
Q2: What is the current state of

knowledge regarding the DWH
spill?
Dispersed oil in shallow water (10m)
Levels of concern?
E.g., sensitive life stages

Oil and dispersant constituents
What are the gaps in our

knowledge or information?
Effectiveness of dispersant
Long term effects of dispersant exposure
(carcinogenicity)
Di Dispersed oil effects i
an
d il ff t in estuarine/riverine/pelagic environment
Bioavailability, bioaccumulation (SPMD)
Recommendations
Clearinghouse for baseline data being

collected
Know dose of exposure, effects, species
present and tradeoffs with habitat
protection
Dispersed verse non dispersed oil
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
6/1/2010
Recommendations
Surface application of dispersants is ok
Transfer risk to 10m is lesser of evils
Monitoring to provide more confidence in where

oil is going
Long term monitoring (monthly); grid from inshore to

open ocean (past oil slick edge)
Passive samplers in selected areas
DO measurements
Standard CTD tests plus chlorophyll measurements
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

APPENDIX F

Courtesy Bruce Hollebone, Environment Canada
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
2010133-02 - Source Oil Pre-spill
Page 1
LSU ID#: 2010133-02

Source Oil, Pre-spill Sample Weight: 310 mg
Final Extracted Volume: 30 mL
Alkane Analyte: Concentration (ng/mg)
LSU ID#: Lab Ref Oil

South Louisiana Crude
Sample Weight: 500 mg
Alkane Analyte: Concentration (ng/mg)
nC-10 Decane nC-11 Undecane nC-12 Dodecane nC-13 Tridecane nC-14 Tetradecane nC-15 Pentadecane nC-16 Hexadecane nC-17 Heptadecane Pristane nC-18 Octadecane Phytane nC-19 Nonadecane nC-20 Eicosane nC-21 Heneicosane nC-22 Docosane nC-23 Tricosane nC-24 Tetracosane nC-25 Pentacosane nC-26 Hexacosane nC-27 Heptacosane nC-28 Octacosane nC-29 Nonacosane nC-30 Triacontane nC-31 Hentriacontane nC-32 Dotriacontane nC-33 Tritriacontane nC-34 Tetratriacontane nC-35 Pentatriacontane
2600 2600 2600 2500 2400 2000 1800 1700 960 1500 770 1300 1300 1100 1000 940 890 600 510 350 300 250 230 150 120 100 90 92
nC-10 Decane nC-11 Undecane nC-12 Dodecane nC-13 Tridecane nC-14 Tetradecane nC-15 Pentadecane nC-16 Hexadecane nC-17 Heptadecane Pristane nC-18 Octadecane Phytane nC-19 Nonadecane nC-20 Eicosane nC-21 Heneicosane nC-22 Docosane nC-23 Tricosane nC-24 Tetracosane nC-25 Pentacosane nC-26 Hexacosane nC-27 Heptacosane nC-28 Octacosane nC-29 Nonacosane nC-30 Triacontane nC-31 Hentriacontane nC-32 Dotriacontane nC-33 Tritriacontane nC-34 Tetratriacontane nC-35 Pentatriacontane
2600
2700
2600
2600
2300
2200
2000
1900
970
1700
910
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
620
510
360
310
260
230
190
150
110
110
110
Total Alkanes
Source Oil
30752
Total Alkanes
32940
LSU ID#: 2010133-02

Aromatic Analyte: Concentration (ng/mg)
LSU ID#: Lab Ref Oil

South Louisiana Crude
Aromatic Analyte: Concentration (ng/mg)
Naphthalene C1-Naphthalenes C2-Naphthalenes C3-Naphthalenes C4-Naphthalenes Fluorene C1-Fluorenes C2-Fluorenes C3- Fluorenes Dibenzothiophene C1-Dibenzothiophenes C2-Dibenzothiophenes C3- Dibenzothiophenes Phenanthrene C1-Phenanthrenes C2-Phenanthrenes C3-Phenanthrenes C4-Phenanthrenes Anthracene Fluoranthene Pyrene C1- Pyrenes C2- Pyrenes C3- Pyrenes C4- Pyrenes Naphthobenzothiophene C-1 Naphthobenzothiophenes C-2 Naphthobenzothiophenes C-3 Naphthobenzothiophenes Benzo (a) Anthracene Chrysene C1- Chrysenes C2- Chrysenes C3- Chrysenes C4- Chrysenes Benzo (b) Fluoranthene Benzo (k) Fluoranthene Benzo (e) Pyrene Benzo (a) Pyrene Perylene Indeno (1,2,3 - cd) Pyrene Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
750 1600 2000 1400 690 130 340 390 300 53 170 220 160 290 680 660 400 200 6.1 4.2 8.9 68 84 96 54 11 48 37 22 5.5 36 100 100 54 19 2.3 1.8 6.6 1.0 0.92 0.20 1.3 1.2
Naphthalene C1-Naphthalenes C2-Naphthalenes C3-Naphthalenes C4-Naphthalenes Fluorene C1-Fluorenes C2-Fluorenes C3- Fluorenes Dibenzothiophene C1-Dibenzothiophenes C2-Dibenzothiophenes C3- Dibenzothiophenes Phenanthrene C1-Phenanthrenes C2-Phenanthrenes C3-Phenanthrenes C4-Phenanthrenes Anthracene Fluoranthene Pyrene C1- Pyrenes C2- Pyrenes C3- Pyrenes C4- Pyrenes Naphthobenzothiophene C-1 Naphthobenzothiophenes C-2 Naphthobenzothiophenes C-3 Naphthobenzothiophenes Benzo (a) Anthracene Chrysene C1- Chrysenes C2- Chrysenes C3- Chrysenes C4- Chrysenes Benzo (b) Fluoranthene Benzo (k) Fluoranthene Benzo (e) Pyrene Benzo (a) Pyrene Perylene Indeno (1,2,3 - cd) Pyrene Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
710
1300
1500
1100
590
100
270
270
240
56
210
280
240
200
360
340
200
84
6.2
4.5
7.1
43
31
31
20
7.8
30
30
25
5.4
14
28
27
18
5.6
1.7
1.5
2.9
1.0
0.89
0.22
0.92
1.1
Total Aromatics
11203
Total Aromatics
8394
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) TIC
Abundance
TIC: MU10133D.D\data.ms
3800000
3600000
3400000
3200000
3000000
2800000
2600000
2400000
2200000
2000000
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
5.00 Time->
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
50.00
55.00
60.00

201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) Alkanes
Abundance
Ion 3400000
57 00 (56 70 to 57 70)
MU10133D D\data m s
3200000
3000000
2800000
2600000
2400000
2200000
2000000
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
5 00 Tim e >
10 00
15 00
20 00
25 00
30 00
35 00
40 00
45 00
50 00
55 00
60 00
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) C17/Pristane, C18/Phytane
Abundance
Ion 57.00 (56.70 to 57.70): MU10133D.D\data.ms

2000000
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
25.50 Time-->
26.00
26.50
27.00
27.50
28.00
28.50

201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) Naphthalene
A bundance
Ion 128.00 (127.70 to 128.70): MU10133D.D\data.ms 2200000

2000000
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
12.00 12.20 12.40 12.60 12.80 13.00 13.20 13.40 13.60 13.80 14.00 14.20 14.40 14.60 14.80
Time >
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) C1Naphthalenes
A bundance
2800000
2600000
2400000
2200000
2000000
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
15.20 15.40 15.60 15.80 16.00 16.20 16.40 16.60 16.80 17.00 17.20 17.40 17.60 17.80
Time->

Abundance
Ion 156 00 (155 70 to 156 70) 1600000
MU10133D D\data m s
1500000
1400000
1300000
1200000
1100000
1000000
900000
800000
700000
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
18 00 Tim e >
18 50
19 00
19 50
20 00
20 50
21 00
21 50
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Abundance
800000
750000
700000
650000
600000
550000
500000
450000
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
21.00 Time->
21.50 22.00 22.50 23.00 23.50 24.00 24.50 25.00 25.50

Abundance

200000
180000
160000
140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
22.50 Time >
23.00 23.50 24.00 24.50 25.00 25.50 26.00 26.50
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) DBT
Abundance
130000
120000
110000
100000
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
27.00 Time->
27.10
27.20
27.30
27.40
27.50
27.60
27.70
27.80
27.90

201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) C1DBTs
A bundance
210000
Ion 198 00 (197 70 to 198 70)
MU10133D D\data m s
200000
190000
180000
170000
160000
150000
140000
130000
120000
110000
100000
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
29 00 Tim e >
29 20
29 40
29 60
29 80
30 00
30 20
30 40
30 60
30 80
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
A bundance
110000
100000
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
30.50 Time >
31.00 31.50 32.00 32.50 33.00 33.50 34.00

A bundance

60000
55000
50000
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
32.00 Time >
32.50
33.00
33.50
34.00
34.50
35.00
35.50
36.00
36.50
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) Phenanthrene
A bundance
800000
750000
700000
650000
600000
550000
500000
450000
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
27.00 27.10 27.20 27.30 27.40 27.50 27.60 27.70 27.80 27.90 28.00 28.10 28.20 28.30 28.40
Time->

201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) C1Phenanthrenes
Abundance
450000
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
29.60 Time >
29.80
30.00
30.20
30.40
30.60
30.80
31.00
31.20
31.40
31.60
31.80
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Abundance
450000
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
32.00 Time->
32.50 33.00 33.50 34.00 34.50 35.00

Abundance

140000
130000
120000
110000
100000
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
33.50 Time->
34.00 34.50 35.00 35.50 36.00 36.50 37.00
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
Abundance
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
33.50 Time-->
34.00
34.50
35.00
35.50
36.00
36.50
37.00
37.50
38.00
38.50
39.00

201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) Hopanes
Abundance

8500
8000
7500
7000
6500
6000
5500
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
40.00 Time >
42.00
44.00
46.00
48.00
50.00
52.00
54.00
56.00
58.00
60.00
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1
201013302 (Source Oil, Prespill) Steranes
Abundance
13000
12500
12000
11500
11000
10500
10000
9500
9000
8500
8000
7500
7000
6500
6000
5500
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
43 00 Time-->
44 00 45 00 46 00 47 00 48 00 49 00 50 00 51 00
Ion 217 00 (216 70 to 217 70): MU10133D D\data ms
Document ID: 0.7.19.1935.1

Subject: Cleared NRDA factsheets
To: Tom Brosnan <[email protected]>
Cc: _HQ Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>,Robert Haddad
<[email protected]>, Brendan Bray <[email protected]>,Courtney Groeneveld
<[email protected]>,Mary Evans <[email protected]>, Glenda Powell
<[email protected]>,Vicki Loe <[email protected]>
Re: [Fwd: FW: DEEPWATER/Natural Resource Damage Assessment f
All-
These have been cleared (NOAA Comms ran the processing) and have been sent to Dave at the JIC and
Vicki/Glenda for NOAA site.
Big thanks to all helped pull these together
-Joe
--
Joe Inslee
Silver Spring, MD 20910 Office 301-713-4248 ext. 202
Cell 240-460-6472
Fax 301-713-4387
--
Joe Inslee
Cell 240-460-6472
Fax 301-713-4387

From: Courtney Groeneveld <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: FW: DEEPWATER/Natural Resource Damage Assessment fact sheets]
To: Rachel Wilhelm <[email protected]>
Sorry for the delay - I got a new laptop this afternoon and it took a while to transfer all my files.
Here they are with edits.
Have a good weekend!
Courtney
Rachel W ilhelm wrote:
Subject:
FW : DEEPW ATER/Natural Resource Damage Assessment fact sheets
From:
"Griffis, Kevin" <[email protected]>
Date:
Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:21:41 -0400
To:
"W ilhelm, Rachel" <Rachel.W [email protected]>, "Smullen, Scott"
<[email protected]>, "Vaccaro, Christopher" <[email protected]>
To:
"W ilhelm, Rachel" <Rachel.W [email protected]>, "Smullen, Scott"
<[email protected]>, "Vaccaro, Christopher" <[email protected]>
From: Zaidi, Ali A. [mailto:Ali A. [email protected]]

Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 11:20 AM
To: Griffis, Kevin
Cc: [email protected]; Baer, Kenneth S.; Bedingfield, Katherine; Brian, Andrea M.;
French, Michael J.; Greenawalt, Andrei M.; Kimball, Astri B.; LaBolt, Ben; Shapiro,
Nicholas S.; Yates, Jonathan P.
Subject: FW: DEEPWATER/Natural Resource Damage Assessment fact sheets
Cleared with edits.

Thanks.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2013.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2013.1

From: Rachel Wilhelm <[email protected]>
Subject: Deepwater NRDA Fact Sheet
To: Oil_DWH <[email protected]>
Being posted on NOAA site and JIC.

Rachel
--
________________________________
Rachel A. Wilhelm
NOAA Public Affairs Specialist
Office: 202.482.3978
Mobile: 202.657.9816
http://www.noaa.gov
http://www.climate.gov
Received(Date): Sat, 05 Jun 2010 06:16:56 -0400

Subject: DEEPWATER HORIZON - morning reports
LoopCurrentStatus-6-04.pdf
loopcurrent 6 4.pdf
forecast 20100607 1200CDT 20100604 2100CDT rs.pdf
landfall6 04.pdf

--
ICC Deputy on Watch
ICC Main Number: (301) 713-0136
TIME: 8:00pm CDT, June 4, 2010

TO: NOAA SSCs
FROM: NOAA Office of Response and Restoration / Emergency Response Division
Seattle, WA 98115

SUBJECT: Deepwater Horizon MC252 incident and the Loop Current

Summary The pattern continues to show minimal risk of the Loop Current serving as a
significant mechanism to transport oil toward any shorelines. There continue to be no
significant amounts of oil being moved toward the Loop Current. However, there
continues to be persistent sheens in the northern parts of the warm core ring that is
detached (or nearly so) from the Loop Current. The anomaly that has been observed by
satellite analysis on the outside of the eddy on the eastern side was no longer visible in
satellite analysis for the last two days. There has been no evidence of high concentrations
of oil in or near the Loop Current.

The northern eddy is showing signs of re-attaching to the main Loop Current. It is
expected to re-form over the next few days to a week. Depending on which model you
use, there either is or isnt a connection to the main Loop Current on the southwestern
side of the warm core eddy. Buoys dropped in the Loop Current earlier this week and
last week are consistent with the models showing the northern eddy as separated. In
addition, some of the models indicate a pathway from the far eastern edge of the main
eddy to the Florida Current, and passing through the Florida Straits. Two additional
buoys were dropped a few days ago. We continue to monitor the situation closely.

The sheens observed in the overflight two days ago are not likely to reach the Florida
Straits in the next 3-4 days. Any oil ultimately making it to the Florida Straits will likely
consist of widely scattered tarballs. At this time, we estimate that the fraction that may
reach shorelines may be slightly above background levels of tarballs already on the
Florida shorelines.

How we are monitoring We continue to monitor the Loop Current characteristics from
a number of satellite and model sources, a vessel contracted by BP to monitor at the
northern front, and buoys dropped in or near the Loop Current over the last two weeks.

The sheen that has been pulled toward the Loop Current continues to be stretched out and
thinned. A NOAA overflight two days ago (Wesley) observed some 2 to 4 foot pancakes
at 1-2% coverage about 40 miles from the edge of the Loop current. Beyond that there
was some transparent sheen that was breaking up as it got nearer to the Loop Current.

Light sheen on the leading edges of slicks may be accompanied by tarballs that are
generally not visible from fixed wing aircraft or satellite observations. Shipboard
monitoring coordinated with aerial positioning is the best method to determine if there
are tarballs associated with this surface sheen. We have no confirmation that a ship has
been secured for this mission.
FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
June 4, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1820.1
What can be expected in the future It is likely that at some point in the future, another
fraction of the oil will move south from the spill site. If this oil gets entrained into the
northern eddy while it is still separated, the oil will tend to remain in the eddy, circulating
around the middle of the Gulf, far from shore, as it continues to weather and dissipate.
However, when this large eddy reconnects with the main Loop, any oil moved to the
northern extent of the Current will once again have a pathway to the Florida Straits and
beyond. We will continue daily monitoring of the Loop Current in order to monitor this
re-connection.

June 4, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1820.1

Report # 48: June 4, 2010 at 2000 PDT

Overview: BPs attempt to place the Top Hat on the cut riser pipe last night appears to have
been successful. BP has reported pumping oil and gas through the new riser pipe to a ship
waiting on the surface. It is hoped that a significant portion of the oil leaking from the well-head
will be captured by the Top-Hat apparatus. It is unknown how much oil and gas is currently
being recovered. BP estimates another 12hrs before an accurate recovery rate is known.
It is important to note that in order for the drill ship at the surface to continually receive oil from
the well, it has to hold- or maintain-station above the well-head. There are concerns that severe
winds and waves might affect the vessels ability to hold-station and severe weather plans are
being prepared. Also, the drilling of the two relief wells is still continuing, as they are thought to
be the more permanent solution to the leaking oil well. The relief wells are estimated to be
finished in mid-August.
Trajectories: ORRs modeling team continues to generate daily trajectories for the nearshore
and offshore surface oil. Overflights are also conducted on a daily basis (weather permitting) to
provide field verification of model trajectories. Onshore winds (S-SW at 15-20kts) have resulted
in the northward movement of the slick towards the Mississippi/Alabama barrier islands. The
westerly component of the winds and currents has also resulted in alongshore movement of the
slick towards the Florida panhandle. Trajectories show a continued northeastward movement of
the slick over the next few days, which will continue to threaten shorelines in Alabama and the
panhandle of Florida. The threat of oiling continues to decrease for shorelines in Breton Sound,
Chandeleur Sound, and the NE side of the Mississippi delta. To the W est of the delta,
trajectories indicate that any remaining oil in this region could come ashore between Timbalier
Bay and SW pass. Analysis of an early morning satellite image detected no oil west of Timbalier
Bay.

Offshore: Satellite imagery analysis indicates a narrow band of oil to the SE of the main slick.
Scattered sheens and tarballs observed in this region are being entrained into the northern edge of
the large clockwise eddy that has pinched off the main Loop Current. Trajectories indicate some
of these sheens will continue southward along the eastern edge of the eddy, whereas some are
being entrained into a counter-clockwise eddy to the NE of the main Loop Current eddy. Further
to the east, the second narrow band of semi-contiguous transparent sheens previously observed is
no longer distinguishable in todays imagery. Stronger winds and waves have likely broken up
and dispersed these light sheens. Any tarballs present in this region will continue to move within
the main Loop Current eddy.

Hot Topics:
Oiled M arshes: W ith the recent oiling of marshes in Louisiana, there is increasing pressure to
start cleaning the marshes. This is a sensitive issue due to the oil still coming ashore and the
thought that some of the clean-up methods may be too intrusive.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1820.6

Sub-surface plume: Oil chemistry data is starting to come in from the various research cruises
and we are starting to get a better characterization of the sub-sea plume located near the well-
head.

Briefings and meetings:
June 4, 2010:
POTUS visit: Obama visited the Area Command and other sites in the Gulf today. ORR
provided visual aid materials for Obamas visit per USCGs request.

June 5, 2010
Lubchenco SCAT trip: Dr. Lubchenco and Secretary Jackson plan to join a SCAT team out of
Houma, LA. ORR scientists will accompany the team to answer any questions.

PRFA status update:
Seafood Safety Gordon Gunter and Weatherbird II
Cruises
HF Radar Recreational Fishing Remote Sensing Activities by NGS Approved
Approved verbally, working on obtaining written
documentation from FOSC
Being reevaluated by modelers for resubmission for
funding, likely directly to BP.
ORR and NMFS are pursuing the rec. fishing
assessment as a NRDA study
In review by SSC.
Thomas Jefferson / WHOI cruises for
Authorization requested, response positive but
mapping sub surface areas west of the
funding authorization pending due to spend cap.
Mississippi Delta for potential
hydrocarbons and dispersants

Oiled sea turtle recovery operations. Photo: FWC Fish and Wildlife Research Institute.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1820.6
NOAA Roles: Many personnel are on scene and many more are engaged remotely.
Additional NOAA assets are being made available for the spill.

Office of Response and Restoration (OR&R)

Scientific support to the U.S. Coast Guard and Unified Command

Emergency Response Division (ERD)

Predict oil fates and effects

Overflight observations and mapping

Identify resources at risk

Recommend appropriate clean-up methods

Manage data and information

Assessment and Restoration Division (ARD)

Plan for assessment of injuries to natural resources

Coordinate with state and federal trustees

National Weather Service
Incident weather forecasts including marine and aviation
National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS)

Experimental imagery for spill trajectory forecasts

Data Visualization

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)

Issues related to marine mammals, sea turtles, and fishery resources

Public Affairs support to the Joint Information Center

Office of Marine and Aviation Operations (OMAO)

USCG Liaison to the DCO Incident Support Team USCG Headquarters

Aircraft and vessel support

Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

Oceanographic and atmospheric modeling and data support.

Gulf of Mexico Sea Grant programs providing technical advice on impacts to living
resources and coastal communities.

National Ocean Service

Support from ONMS for staffing and technical information

Oceanographic modeling support

Public Affairs support to Joint Information Center
Document ID: 0.7.19.1820.6

Morning-
June 5, 2010
11:00 AM
Regarding the next NRT call- they will poll the agencies regarding the value of continuing to
hold daily meetings. Then they will decide and apprise.
Bill Conner will inform DW H Staff of any changes.
Situation Status:
- The Top Hat has been in place for the last 30 hrs and has recovered 6,000 bbls in a 24 hr
period. The flow rate to the surface is still being worked on.
- No hydrates seem to be forming in the Top Hat.

- The surface support vessels will have a maximum recovery rate of 25,000 bbls a day from the
"Top Hat".
- Yesterday approximately 13,000 gallons of dispersant where applied to the surface. Sea sea
dispersant use was also approximately 13,000 gallons.
- Both relief wells have halted drilling. One well is testing its BOP the other is having electronic
issues with its BOP.
- Yesterday a modification was made to the fisheries closure. Now approximately 32% of the
Gulf of Mexico Federal waters are closed to fishing.
- The meeting between the President and the Governors went well yesterday.
- They are looking into where response workers are from due to some expressing concerns that
non-local people are being hired.
- The berm permitting process continues to be an issue of financing. Discussion revolves around
how money will be given to Louisiana.
- There are growing requests to Federal agencies to participate as witnesses in State Legislature
hearings regarding the spill.
- On the Congressional call yesterday a central issue was how the navigation of websites can be
improved for the public.
- There are a growing number of calls to the Hill expressing concerns that although there is allot
people wanting to volunteer there is not much utilization of these volunteers.
Legal Affairs
- Continue to work on fiscal law matters regarding BP recovery.
Communication
- Admiral Allen participated in a media event this morning. Another is planned today regarding
bird cleaning operations.
- Media continues to look for ways to cover this spill for the long haul.
Joe Inslee
Silver Spring, MD 20910 Office 301 713 4248 ext. 202
Cell 240 460 6472
Fax 301 713 4387
Received(Date): Sun, 06 Jun 2010 16:05:56 -0400

From: Nickie Lambert <[email protected]>
Subject: DWH-MC252 Afternoon Update 6Jun10
Cc: Bill Conner <[email protected]>, [email protected]
DWH-MC252 Afternoon Update - 6Jun10.docx.doc
Good afternoon DWH Staff,

Attached please find the afternoon update for the Response Operations =
Group. if you have any questions or require further information, please =
contact me.
Vr,
Nickie
For Internal Use
DeepWater Horizon
MC252
June 6, 2010
Response Operations Afternoon Report.
Response Operations
From BPs website on source operations-
10,500 barrels of oil collected and 22 million standard cubic feet of natural gas flared
yesterday.
Efforts to improve portion of oil collectied ongoing for the next 24-72 hours.
Oil visibly bypassing Top Hat #4 on video feeds.
NRT
NRT call cancelled today; will resume Monday.
NIC Activities
NIC IASG lead, Juliette Kayyem, requests agencies be mindful of the burdens VIP visits
place on command posts; she suggests VIPs work through their own agency reps in the
field to support visits, and not rely on UAC and ICPs. There is a draft set of protocols
that is being reviewed by the White House today.
Dispersant composition - EPA senior management is asking for all Departments and
Agencies who have an interest to please inform NIC EPA Rep of status of obtaining the
necessary product information either from EPA or the manufacturer of the dispersants
for this spill. Suspense - 1200 EDT Monday.
NOAA NIC representative is consolidating information on the 4 Alternate Technology
Programs currently being field tested and on the Federal Register notification of IATAP.
For Internal Use
Document ID: 0.7.19.2030.1

Subject: DWH Actions and Updates - June 6, 2010
MMST Health and Stranding Update DWHMC252 06-05-10 FINAL.doc
NRDA Activities 6 06 10.doc
OMAO Assets Gantt Chart 060610-1.xlsx
DWH ACTIONS and UPDATES 6.06.2010.xlsx
All,
Below are the daily updates for June 6, 2010 and supporting materials are attached.
John
Issue Teams:
Response Operations
From BPs website on source operations-

10,500 barrels of oil collected and 22 million standard cubic feet of natural gas flared
yesterday.
Efforts to improve portion of oil collected ongoing for the next 24-72 hours.
Oil visibly bypassing Top Hat #4 on video feeds.
NRT

NRT call canceled today; will resume Monday.
N IC A ctivities

NIC IASG lead, Juliette Kayyem, requests agencies be mindful of the burdens VIP visits
place on command posts; she suggests VIPs work through their own agency reps in the
field to support visits, and not rely on UAC and ICPs. There is a draft set of protocols that
is being reviewed by the W hite House today.
Dispersant composition - EPA senior management is asking for all Departments and
Agencies who have an interest to please inform NIC EPA Rep of status of obtaining the
necessary product information either from EPA or the manufacturer of the dispersants for
this spill. Suspense - 1200 EDT Monday.
NOAA NIC representative is consolidating information on the 4 Alternate Technology
Programs currently being field tested and on the Federal Register notification of IATAP.
Science
P-3 update
Operational discussions with EPA are on-going. Had a coordination call today with EPA,
followed by an operational call between EPA/ASPECT and NOAA/ESRL/CSD and AOC
to work through logistics.
ASPECT is is currently conducting flights at 2800', sampling for 24 compounds in real-
time, with an additional ~500 post-flight.
As part of this effort, NOAA and EPA will be conducting calibration flights to ensure
comparability of the data. The NOAA/EPA team will also be discussing data
storage/archive.
The P-3 mission will complement the current EPA missions by conducting surveys in the
marine boundary layer at 200', 500', and 1000' using a proton transfer reaction mass
spectrometer, providing real-time/near-real-time data on a suite of compounds including
C8-C11 aromatics, formaldehyde, methanol, acetonitrile, acetone, acetic acid, isoprene,
benzene, toluence, methylethylketone, and naphthalene. A "whole air canister" will be used
to collect samples on 72 compounds for post-mission analysis (analysis within 24 hours).
The P-3 is being moved from California and will be ready to fly in the Gulf on likely early-
to-mid-week. Exact dates are being worked out.
W alton Smith
Four scientists from AOML/CIMAS are departing at 6PM today for a transit cruise
(Gulfport to Miami) on the R/V Walton Smith.
CRUISE TRACK- Using information from satellite altimetry and other support, proceed
toward front of the Gulf Stream Loop Current at bearing of approximately 135. Once LC
Front identified, proceed along front except as a deviation is desired to sample the Tiger
Tail or to cross the front and define properties.
Conducting chemical, physical, and biological sampling, as well as make observations on
the conditions of pelagic birds and mammals (to be performed by Dr. David Lee who has
done sensitive observations of this sort for MMS, the USN, NOAA and others is on board
as a volunteer to do this work). Sampling highlights include:
Collecting samples with a Neuston net at locations in the Tiger Tail, other sites
where observers think there may be oil or tar balls at the surface, and in the region of
the Dry Tortugas.
Collecting samples for petroleum products and tar balls as feasible using OR&R
approved procedures, especially when such material is clearly present.
Living Marine Resources:
Fisheries Closures
There was no change to the closed area in federal waters for June 06, 2010. The map with
the area currently closed is attached.
Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) announced the following action
in a portion of the Barataria Basin south of Empire, LA in Plaquemines Parish effective at
sunset, June 6, due to confirmed reports of oil in the area.
The portion of state inside waters north of the inside/outside shrimp line and south of
the Mississippi River from the southern shoreline of Red Pass at 89 degrees 28
minutes 13.4 seconds north latitude westward to the western shoreline of the Empire
Canal, closes to recreational and commercial fishing.
Seafood Inspection
Work continued on various seafood documents.
M arine M am m al and T urtle Health and S tranding R eport

Increase of 7 turtle strandings (1 live, heavily oiled in AL, 1 dead in AL, 3 dead in MS, 2
dead in LA)
Two of the Kemps ridleys recovered June 1 from the offshore search/rescue
operation died today at Audubon Aquarium
289 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 7
from June 4)
264 stranded* (increase of 7 from June 4)
25 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (no change from June
4)
22 live turtles in rehabilitation (decrease of 2 from June 4)
1 turtle collected dead (no change from June 4)
2 turtles died in rehabilitation (increase of 2 from June 4)
128 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increase of 8 from
June 4)
Increase of 2 dolphin strandings (1 live in FL that was euthanized, 1 dead in LA)
The live stranded dolphin in Florida was an offshore S tenella longirostris, the same
species that stranded earlier in the week.
33 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of
2 from June 4).
31 were dead stranded* dolphins (increase of 1 from June 4)
2 were live stranded dolphins, one of which that died shortly after stranding, one that
was euthanized upon stranding (increase of 1 from June 4)
7 verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of decomposition or
unable to recover (increase of 1 from June 4)
2 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increase of 1 from
June 4)
Discussions are underway to relocate the turtles currently in rehabilitation at Audubon and
IMMS to secondary facilities for longer-term rehab to ensure open space and sufficient
staff at the primary de-oiling facilities to handle expected additional turtles in the coming
week.
The complete health and stranding report, turtle stranding map, and dolphin stranding map
are attached.
Received(Date): Mon, 07 Jun 2010 05:52:20 -0400

landfall6 06.pdf
loopcurrent 6 6.pdf


Overview: The Top Hat device continues to collect a portion of the oil and gas leaking out of
the Mississippi Canyon 252 well-head. BP reports that they recovered over 10,000 bbls of oil
through the collection device within the past 24hrs. Efforts are currently underway to increase
the collection and processing capacity of the Top-Hat assembly. BP continues to drill the two
relief wells that are scheduled to be completed by mid-August.
Trajectories: ORRs modeling team continues to generate daily trajectories for the nearshore
and offshore surface oil. Overflights are also conducted on a daily basis (weather permitting) to
provide field verification of model trajectories. Onshore winds (S/SW at 10-15kts) are forecast
to continue through today. Tonight through Monday winds are expected to reduce to 5-10 kts
and stay there through Tuesday. Moderately strong southerly winds have resulted in northward
movement of the slick towards the Mississippi/Alabama barrier islands. The westerly component
of winds and currents has also resulted in alongshore movement along the Florida Panhandle.
Trajectories indicate coastal regions between Dauphin Island, AL and Freeport, FL will continue
to experience limited shoreline oiling throughout this forecast period. The threat to shorelines in
Breton Sound, Chandeleur Sound, and the NE side of the Mississippi delta is reduced. To the
west of the Delta, any remaining floating oil in this region could come ashore between Timbalier
Bay and SW Pass.

Offshore: Satellite imagery analysis and overflight observations continue to indicate bands of
sheen to the SE of the main slick. Scattered sheens and tar balls observed in these regions are
being entrained into the northern edge of the large clockwise eddy that has pinched off the main
Loop Current (LC). Trajectories indicate that some of these sheens will continue southward
along the eastern edge of this main LC eddy, whereas some are being entrained into the counter-
clockwise eddy to the NE of the main LC eddy. Further to the east, a second narrow band of
semi-contiguous transparent sheens was not observed today.

Hot Topics:
Endangered S pecies A ct (ES A ): ESA concerns are becoming more prevalent regarding sea
turtles and shorebirds. Concerns have been brought up regarding in-situ burn operations,
skimming operations, shoreline prevention, and shoreline clean-up strategies and their effect on
sea turtles, birds and their habitats. There is a lot of focus on ensuring that operations are
following proper ESA consultation, when necessary. The concern is that in some cases this has
not happened.

PRFA status update:
Seafood Safety Gordon Gunter and W eatherbird II

Cruises
Approved
Document ID: 0.7.19.1853.1
HF Radar Recreational Fishing Remote Sensing Activities by NGS

In review by SSC.


NOAA Roles: Many personnel are on scene and many more are engaged remotely.
Additional NOAA assets are being made available for the spill.









Assessment and Restoration Division (ARD)







Data Visualization









Document ID: 0.7.19.1853.1



Document ID: 0.7.19.1853.1

TO: NOAA SSCs
Seattle, WA 98115


Summary The pattern continues to show minimal risk of the Loop Current serving as a
significant mechanism to transport oil toward any shorelines. There continues to be no
significant amounts of oil being moved toward the Loop Current. However, there
continues to be persistent sheens in the northern parts of the warm core ring that is
detached (or nearly so) from the Loop Current. The anomaly that has been observed by
satellite analysis on the outside of the eddy on the eastern side was not visible in satellite
analysis today. A overflight (Wesley) today did not report significant amounts of oil to
the south and southeast of the source.. There has been no evidence of high
concentrations of oil in or near the Loop Current.

The northern eddy is still showing signs of re-attaching to the main Loop Current, and
may re-join it over the next few days to a week. Depending on which model you use,
there either is or isnt a connection to the main Loop Current on the southwestern side of
the warm core eddy. Buoys dropped in the Loop Current earlier this week and last week
are consistent with the models showing the northern eddy as separated. In addition, some
of the models indicate a pathway from the far eastern edge of the main eddy to the
Florida Current, and passing through the Florida Straits. Two additional buoys were
dropped a few days ago. We continue to monitor the situation closely.

The sheens observed in the overflight a few days ago are not likely to reach the Florida
Straits in the next 3-4 days. Any oil ultimately making it to the Florida Straits will likely
consist of widely scattered tarballs. At this time, we estimate that the fraction that may
reach shorelines may be slightly above background levels of tarballs already on the
Florida shorelines.

thinned. A NOAA today observed a patch of transparent sheen and wind rows to the
northeast of the main northern eddy.

Light sheen on the leading edges of slicks may be accompanied by tarballs that are
generally not visible from fixed wing aircraft or satellite observations. Shipboard
monitoring coordinated with aerial positioning is the best method to determine if there
are tarballs associated with this surface sheen. Much work has been done to secure a ship
for this mission, which will hopefully be confirmed in the next couple days.
June 6, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1853.5
fraction of the oil will move south from the spill site. If this oil gets entrained into the
northern eddy while it is still separated, the oil will tend to remain in the eddy, circulating
around the middle of the Gulf, far from shore, as it continues to weather and dissipate.
However, when this large eddy reconnects with the main Loop, any oil moved to the
northern extent of the Current will once again have a pathway to the Florida Straits and
beyond. We will continue daily monitoring of the Loop Current in order to monitor this
re-connection.

June 6, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1853.5
Document ID: 0.7.19.1853.7

From: Andrew Winer <[email protected]>
Subject: Air quality Monitoring systems
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
This is indicative of the type of question I am receiving from fishermen involved in cleanup operations.
Do we have an answer for what air quality testing is occurring that would be applicable to fishermen
working in the Gulf?

Thanks,

Andy W iner
Director of External Affairs
NOAA Communications & External Affairs
(202) 482-4640
[email protected]

From: Kim Chauvin [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:48 AM
To: 'Andrew W iner'
Subject: RE: Air quality Monitoring systems
Andy,
W ould there be any difference in the air quality down on the water to the 2800 feet that these
tests are being done? My worry is that the guys on the water are right on top of this stuff as far as
the oil. As for the dispersant spraying, this stuff moves through the air wherever theyre
spraying, at what height is this being sprayed down? Are they spraying at 2800 feet or
lower/higher?

I still feel the fitted respirators and air quality monitors on the vessels should be on the vessels to
protect our men and women out on the water. Can you recommend which ones to purchase and
install. Im looking at putting them on my vessels and gathering the data?
Ive read up on the Exxon Valdez and this is exactly how the Alaska crew lost their battle when
all of those men/women had gotten sick by not being prepared. Of course, my prayers are that no
one gets sick, but since weve already had people sick we need as a community to prepare
ourselves.

Thanks for your time.

Kimberly Chauvin
Mariah Jade Shrimp Company
5248 Bayouside Drive

Chauvin, LA 70344
985-594-6304 Business
www.mariahjadeshrimp.com
kimchauvin@mariahjadeshrimpcom

From: Jason Rolfe <[email protected]>
Subject: NIC Report Out - 7 June
To: "Mark.W.Miller" <[email protected]>,Bill Conner <[email protected]>,_HQ
Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>,Timothy Gallagher
<[email protected]>,Richard R Wingrove <[email protected]>,Nathalie Valette-
Silver <[email protected]>,Ralph Lopez <[email protected]>,Michelle A Johnston
<[email protected]>,John Wagner <[email protected]>
ADM Allen has approved the Joint Analysis Group (JAG) as a new scientific group under the
NIC IASG. Their task is to provide comprehensive characterization of the surface and sub-
surface oceanography, oil and dispersant data derived from the coordinated sampling efforts of
vessels contracted or owned by BP, NOAA and academic scientists. This group needs to
coordinate with the NIC-IASG Subsurface Dispersed Oil Group (SDOG) that was tasked about
two weeks ago with a similar mission. The NIC-IASG/SDOG has requested the formal
integration of the 2 groups to insure efficient communication/collaboration.
ERMA map products continue to gain high visibility ERMA team here continues to provide
ERMA displays for the NIC situation unit briefings as well as provide demonstrations for
visiting VIPs. They are also producing map products for DHS, USCG leaders and the W hite
House. All products and services from the ERMA team here met with great praise and interest
for continued support at NIC Situation Unit.
NRT call to shift to a Mon, W ed, Friday at 1100 EDT schedule, effective 9 June. No NRT call
on 8 June. NIC IASG to participate more in the NRT calls. There is an attempt to revert the
NRT call back to more of a working call. The IASG will provide relevant topics for the NRT
agenda (due to CAPT Lloyd 1400 prior day). The NIC IASG will provide 5 minutes of IASG
issues summary and 5 minutes providing a feature issue update.

From: "Dave.Westerholm" <[email protected]>
Subject: Corexit 9500 and 9527
Cc: David Kennedy <[email protected]>, Jen Pizza <[email protected]>
In the press and at least one Hearing the topic of Corexit being banned in Europe (and
specifically the UK) has been brought up.
Alan Mearns requested and received a more definitive answer which boils down to all oil spill
treatment products must pass both the "Sea" (using the Brown Shrimp) and "Rocky Shore"
(using the Common Limpet) toxicity tests - Corexit failed the Rocky Shore test. However,
existing stocks were still allowed to be considered for use under certain conditions because the
UK had extensive stockpiles and Corexit is efficacious against heavier oils.
Because of the number of times dispersants have come up, I have asked the DW H staff to
forward this to leadership. You will note reference to a letter to EPA and there were also other
attachments to the original e-mail. If anyone is interested in this level of detail, let me know and
I can forward that information.
v/r
Dave
Subject:
RE: Dispersant Statement to EPA
From:
"Dispersants (MMO)" <[email protected] >
Date:
Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:08:32 +0100
To:
"alan.mearns" <[email protected]>
CC:
"W aldock, Mike J (CEFAS)" <[email protected]>, "Camplin, Bill W C (CEFAS)"
<[email protected]>, Dawn Lawrence <[email protected]>, Gary Shigenaka
<[email protected]>, W illiam Conner <W [email protected]>,
[email protected]
Alan,
Thanks for getting in touch, apologies I couldn't get back to you before
the weekend. I have answered your question in the text below, and have
also attached a recent summary of our communications with the US EPA.
In 1996 a review of the UK Testing, Approval and Use of Oil Dispersants
(also attached) recommended that all oil spill treatment products must
pass both the "Sea" (using the Brown Shrimp) and "Rocky Shore" (using
the Common Limpet) toxicity tests previously products could be
approved after passing only one of the tests.
The rationale behind this is outlined in the sections 31 & 32 of the
1996 review and was due to concerns that offshore application of
products could be washed or blown ashore.
When Corexit 9500 and 9527 came to renew their approval in 1998, they
failed the "Rocky Shore" test (along with another dispersant however, still allowed to be considered for use under certain
Chemkleen
ODA JAS), and approved was therefore withdrawn. Existing stocks were,
conditions, the rationale being that Corexit 9500 and 9527, of which the
UK had extensive stockpiles, is efficacious against heavier oils and it
would be useful for the UK to maintain its capacity to deal with these
kind of oils.
Corexit 9500 and 9527 are therefore not "banned" in the UK, something we
have reiterated to the press. Corexit 9500 and 9527 have not been shown
to display excessive toxicity in the offshore marine environment.
Furthermore we are currently developing a new testing protocol to allow
the use, in the offshore environment only, of products which are highly
efficacious against heavier oils. These products would not be required
to pass the "Rocky Shore" test, but would be required to prove their
efficacy against heavier oils, and pass the "Sea" test.
I hope this helps and do not hesitate to contact me if more details are
required.
Best regards,
Nick Greenwood
Marine Pollution Response Manager
Marine Management Organisation
Lancaster House
PO Box 1275
Newcastle Upon Tyne
NE99 5BN
Tel: 0191 376 2666
Web: www.marinemanagement.org.uk

From: Justin Kenney <[email protected]>
Subject: DRAFT Weatherbird press release
To: "Deepwater Staff ([email protected])" <[email protected]>,"DEEPWATER Leadership
([email protected])" <[email protected]>,"Gilson, Shannon" <[email protected]>,
"Sarri, Kristen" <[email protected]>
image001.png
Hello folks, below is a DRAFT press release for tomorrows announcement of the W eatherbird
data. Drs. Lubchenco and Murawski weighed in already, and I would like to give everyone a
chance to see the direction we are headed. Comments please, and soon.

Many thanks,

Justin Kenney
NOAA Director of Communications & External Affairs
Office: 202-482-6090
Cell: 202-821-6310
http://www.noaa.gov/socialmedia/
NOAA Completes Initial Analysis of W eatherbird II Water Samples
R esearch part of larger ef f ort to solv e 3-dim ensional puz z le of w here the B P oil is sub-surf ace

NOAAs independent analysis of some water samples provided from the May 22-28 research
mission of the University of South Floridas R/V W eatherbird II confirmed the presence of very
low concentrations of sub-surface oil and PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which
include carcinogens such as benzoapyrene) at sampling depths ranging from 50 meters to 1000
meters. The W eatherbird samples came from three stations: 40 and 45 nautical miles to the
northeast of the well head and 142 nautical miles southeast of the well head (see chart). NOAAs
analysis of the presence of subsurface oil determined that the concentration of oil is in the range
of less than 0.5 parts per million, and PAH levels in range of parts per trillion. NOAA announced
its analysis in conjunction with the University of South Florida from its campus in St.
Petersburg, Florida.

We have always known there is oil under the surface; the questions we are exploring are where
is it, in what concentrations, where is it going, and what are the consequences for the health of
the marine environment? said NOAA Administrator Dr. Jane Lubchenco. This research from
the University of South Florida contributes to the larger, three-dimensional puzzle we are trying
to solve, in partnership with academic and NOAA scientists.

Other NOAA research missions that are fitting complimentary pieces of the 3-D puzzle include
the NOAA Ship Thom as Jefferson, a 208-foot survey vessel, which is currently underway on a
mission in the vicinity of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Researchers are taking water
samples and testing advanced methods for detecting submerged oil while gathering
oceanographic data in the areas coastal waters. The NOAA Ship Gordon Gunter, a 224-foot
research vessel, returned June 3 from an eight-day oil detection mission in the vicinity of the BP
Deepwater Horizon well head. During the effort, researchers collected water samples, conducted
plankton tows, and employed echo sounders, autonomous underwater vehicles and other
technologies to collect subsurface data. In addition, NOAAs P-3 Hurricane Hunter is
deploying instruments to better track the movement of the Loop Current, and therefore improve
our understanding of where the oil is moving at the surface and below the surface.

Along with its analysis for the presence of oil and PAHs, NOAAs analysis to fingerprint the
W eatherbird oil samples to the BP/Mississippi Canyon 252 (MC-252) source concluded that:
Oil found in surface samples taken at the Slick 1 source were consistent with the
MC252 source,
Oil found in samples taken from Station 01, 142 nautical miles southeast of the well head,
at 100 meters and 300 meters were not consistent with the MC252 source.
Trace oil found in samples from Station 07 at the surface, at 50 meters and at 400 meters
are in concentrations too low to confirm the source, and

In general, NOAAs analysis of the W eatherbird samples shows that concentrations of
hydrocarbons decrease with depth, with a notable exception of samples at 300 meters from
Station 07, which warrants additional research attention. [Bob and Steve, I need a so what [Still awaiting results for the final bullet]
sentence here about this finding. Also, PAH levels are very low in all samples, with only five of
25 having reportable concentrations of the priority pollutant PAHs.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1722.1
NOAA Science
Situational Awareness Briefing
June 8, 2010
EXPERIMENTAL PRODUCT
** For Internal Use ONLY **
92 0 W
91 0 W
90 0 W
89 0 W
88 0 W
87 0 W
86 0 W
85 0 W
84 0 W
83 0 W
82 0 W
81 0 W
80 0 W
Mississippi
31 0 N
Alabama
Fishery Closure Area 78264 mi

(202703 km
)

Approx 32% of the Gulf of Mexico Federal Waters
31 0 N
Louisiana
Mobile
Gulfport
Mobi e Bay
o ac ns Pe
la
30 0 N
Morgan City
Atchafalaya
Bay
New Orleans
Chandeleur
Sound
8620'W
3000'N
@ State/Fed
Water Line
8630'W
ala Ap
ch ic
ola
30 0 N
-20 0 m
29 0 N
29 0 N
2847'N
9120'20"W
28 0 N
9120'20"W
@State/Fed
Water Line
2830'N
8630'W
2810'N
8430'W
Tampa
28 0 N
2735'N
8954'W
2735'N
9033'W
2707'N
8708'W
2648'N
8620'W
8616'W
@Outer Federal
Water Boundary
2626'N
8347'W
-20
Florida
27 0 N
27 0 N
0m
GULF of MEXICO
26 0 N
Naples
26 0 N
25 0 N
Fishery Closure Boundary

as of 6pm Eastern Time
07 June 2010
DWH/BP Incident Location
8450'W
@Outer Federal
Water Boundary
25 0 N
y Ke
s We
0m -20
Dry
Tortugas
24 0 N
Closure Points
Closure Area
Federal Water Boundary
0 30
60 120 M les
180 240
24 0 N
92 0 W
91 0 W
90 0 W
89 0 W
88 0 W
87 0 W
86 0 W
85 0 W
84 0 W
83 0 W
82 0 W
81 0 W
80 0 W
Response Operations
Top Hat #4 in place, 3 of 4 valves open; offloading oil from ENTERPRISE to the MASSACHUSETTS
scheduled for this evening. See also NRT, below.
NRT
11,190 bbls of oil collected on Enterprise; subsea dispersant - 10 gal/min. Vessel Q4000 prepping
for potential choke/kill line operations.
Plans emerging for Community Relations Teams for better outreach.
NIC Activities
Joint Analysis Group (JAG): ADM Allen has approved the Joint Analysis Group (JAG) as a new
scientific group under the NIC IASG. Their task is to provide comprehensive characterization of the
surface and sub-surface oceanography, oil and dispersant data derived from the coordinated sampling
efforts of vessels contracted or owned by BP, NOAA and academic scientists. The group will need to
coordinate with the NIC-IASG Subsurface Dispersed Oil Group (SDOG) which was tasked about two
weeks ago with a similar mission. The NIC-IASG/SDOG has requested formal integration of the 2
groups to insure efficient communication/collaboration.
ERMA: ERMA team is providing ERMA displays for the NIC situation unit briefings, demonstrations
for VIPs, and map products for DHS, USCG and the White House. ERMA team products and services
have earned high praise, and the NIC Situation Unit has interest in continued support.
R/V Seward Johnson: Petrobras has offered to delay delivery of the R/V Seward Johnson to Brazil so
that the ship is available to work on the DWH spill. A letter has been sent to Petrobras confirming a
delay of approx. 120 days. Shirley Pomponi and Pete Tatro at Harbor Branch are the points of contact.
Th d t i i d i h id l $20 K
Science Box Talking Points
(1) "Science Box" is considering four follow-up large ship missions which are dependent on the
availability of the fleet:
o Loop current dynamics (ship & plane)
o Seafood safety - broad scale surveys of baselines, edges of closed areas and under currently
oiled areas using 2 ships, one for bottom fish one using pelagic longlines in deep water
o Shallow (5 to 50 fathoms) and deep=water oil trajectories (1 vessel devoted to this following
our multi-ship missions)
o Deep coral damage assessment (probably want to conduct this mission once the well is capped
(2) Will request authority to extend the two twin otter missions past their June 15 mission end dates
(3) NOAA findings on Weatherbird II will be formally rolled out on Tuesday in St. petersburg at a joint
press event
(4) Science Box is starting to transition its activities towards near term and longer priorities as we get a
handle on immediate issues
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Fisheries Closures
* There was a slight modification to the closed area in the Gulf EEZ for June 07, 2010, this
modification goes into effect at 6pm EST
o We are retracted the northeast closure boundary to 8620W to open a portion of the area
closed on June 5 based on trajectory data.
o The total federal fishery closure now measures 78,264 sq mi (202,703 sq km), or about 32% of
the GOM EEZ, a decrease of 135 sq. mi.
o The map of the new area is attached.
Seafood Inspection
* SIP personnel will hold their next State sensory training tomorrow in Pascagoula, MS. After that a
small crew of four will be available for surveillance activities.
* Three NWFSC staff left for Pascagoula, MS on June 6 to work with NSIL staff to process fish and
shrimp for chemical analyses.
* NWFSC is continuing chemical analysis of oyster, shrimp, snapper and croaker tissues.
* NWFSC outlined the plan for development of a relational database to report data from chemical
and sensory analysis of fish and shellfish. Data will need to be collected from SEFSC, SIP, NSIL and
NWFSC to populate the database.
* Preparing to host approx. 20 State personnel in DWH taint sensory training starting tomorrow.
* Working out logistical problems with SEFSC on obtaining GIS mappings of sampling locations vs.
cruise tracks in order to facilitate combining seafood species samples from nearby sites into amounts
needed to perform sensory analysis on.
* Working on scheduling of SEFSC Fisheries Scientist availability to taxonomically id previously
collected but unidentified DWH seafood specimens.
* Friday afternoon (6/4/10) provided demonstration of DWH seafood sample receipt and processing
for Dr. Lubchenco and staff.
* Friday afternoon (6/4/10) provided demonstration of DWH taint sensory analysis protocols and
procedures for Dr. Lubchenco and staff.
* The complete seafood safety report is attached.
Marine Mammal and Turtle Health and Stranding
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Daily Conference Call held for all Interested Congressional Members and Staff
* USCG gave an overview the response assets in place now and oil collection measures underway
* MMS provided a status update on the well head containment efforts and of the two relief wells
* NOAA provided the current weather conditions and trajectory outlook for the next 3 days and of
today's Gulf of Mexico fishery closure modification
* Rep. Bill Cassidy participated, as well as staff from a number of Congressional offices including
Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-9th, FL), Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS)
Congressional Staff Call This Thursday on the State of Science
* Working to set up a conference call for this Thursday afternoon for all interested Congressional
Members and Staff that would provide an update on the state of the science regarding the oil spill (e.g.
ecosystem-related issues, etc.)
Upcoming Congressional Hearings - Week of June 7 - 11
* Wednesday, June 9th: House Science and Technology Committee, Energy and Environment
Subcommittee Hearing on "Deluge of Oil Highlights Research and Technology Needs for Effective
Cleanup of Oil Spills" (NOAA Witness: Doug Helton, NOS/OR&R)
* Thursday, June 10th: House Natural Resources Committee, Insular Affairs, Oceans, and Wildlife
Subcommittee Hearing on "Ocean Science and Data Limits in a Time of Crisis: Do NOAA and the Fish
and Wildlife Service Have Resources to Respond?" (NOAA Witness: Dave Westerholm, NOS/OR&R)
Issued news release - NOAA Opens 339 Sq. Mile Fishing Area in Gulf
Drafting release announcing P3 air chemistry flights - target Tues.
Drafting release announcing USF Weatherbird II mission results subsurface oil - target Tues.
Refining ERMA / GeoPlatform.gov site and rollout plan - target Thurs.
Refining seafood safety rollout plan - target TBD
Planning: External Affairs submitted an outline to David Kennedy for the strategic external
affairs plan. External Affairs continues to work with Sea Grant to build our capacity for reaching out
to Gulf communities and to the academic sector.
Field Meetings in the Gulf: Met with Charlene Lee and Wendy Allen from SmartCoast in
Fairhope, AL. Discussed need to create opportunities for communities to participate in protection of
communities. Also discussed importance of long-term rebranding of not only seafood but Gulf tourism
as well. Discussed importance of interagency coordination on issues related to coastal community
resilience.
Interaction on volunteer program: External Affairs was contacted again by BP over the
weekend. They have an update on a new agreement BP has reached with Gulf states on training and
use of volunteers. Winer and Madsen will discuss ideas from Winers trip week of 5/31 and will
discuss next steps with BPs volunteer coordinator.
Complaint emails: External Affairs received 12 new emails with complaints re the oil spill.
Topics of concern: Two emails were critical of trajectory maps because they show cities that are not
on the coast where few people live instead of more recognizable cities on the coast (like Panama City,
Destin). One e-mail asked if rescued birds are being tagged. Others were from constituents venting
anger about NOAA and EPA.
Mass Notifications: Sent notification of a modification to the fish closure area in the Gulf -
retracting a portion of the last modification made on Sat. June 6.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Attended conference call with OMB (deputy Fed CIO) and Federal geospatial leadership all very
positive about geoplatform.gov, but OMB noted potential challenge with large number of concurrent
web site users resulting in blocked access to the site.
Discussed options with DOC New Media Office for improving public usability of data on
geoplatform.gov., and refining web page messaging.
1. ICC Tasker #179: Dr. Porfirio Alvarez (Mexico) responded positively to OIAs interim response sent
last week regarding a possible meeting with Dr. Lubchenco while he is in Washington (June 15-17).
Dr. Alvarez understands the state of flux in her schedule. He also did provide a cell phone number for
quick contact in the event of a sudden opening in her schedule. Will monitor schedules at the end of
this week to see what, if any, opportunities can be considered.
2. Received call from NOAA/Leg. Affairs regarding a Congressional question about international
outreach by NOAA regarding seafood safety. OIA attempting to get more details.
3. Chefs who will be participating in the Great American Seafood Cook-off in August in New Orleans
will be in Washington this week for the NOAA Fish Fry. NMFS is facilitating a meeting with OIA,
which in turn is reaching out to ITA, EDA, and USDA/Foreign Agricultural Service to discuss seafood
safety and Gulf seafood exports.
Key Bullets
Working with LA to get more details on a Congressional question about NOAAs international
outreach
Have cell phone contact information for Dr. Porfirio Alvarez in the event Dr. Lubchenco has an
opening to meet with him next week.
Continuing efforts to prevent safe Gulf seafood exports do not lose competitive position with world
class chefs, ITA, EDA, and USDA/FAS.
NO UPDATE
NO UPDATE
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
TASK litigation hold on all documenets talking points/on-pager Impacts to marine mammals and turtles
Fisheries report and economic statistics Role, Schedule document Email Distribution List fishery closure disaster FAQs (can fishermen receive compensation near real-time?)
Request for economic impacts to fisheries fisheries issues white paper as relates to spill Develop a long-term staffing plan White House White paper - OCS and OSLTF Develop plan for ICC to be 24 hrs Use of Satellite Imagery oil spill impacts, hurricances, and other weather systems
provide trajectory information to DOT List of NMAO vessels in area Impacts to NOAA equipment (tide guages, etc) Unified Command locations Map of NOAA facilities in area contact info to send new ideas/technologies Worst Case Scenario briefing for Deputies assessment of historical weather in Gulf Prioritized list of Congressional of overflights policy decision -economic implications for WH Winer to serve as POC for NGO engagement Resources at Risk and accompanying FAQs about roles responsibiliites, and what we are actually doing
follow-up with UNH science contacts, particularly in relation to dispersants
one-pager biological impact from sheen and dispersants
NOAA role in oil spills Turtle talking points legal record of use of dispersant at source work force mgt explore how to engage support of other agencies, states, etc
Contingency Plan for Gordon Gunther Official Tasking for vessel allocation Loop Current Tps Verify NIST engaged in specimen collection understanding of safety of environment Safety of staff working on the ground catch & release in closed area tps recreational & commercial fishing data NASA to provide high spectral imaging Legal questions for response to Governors LO engagement training fishermen loop current factsheet High level worst case tps
DEADLINE
on-going
4/27/2010
4/28/2010
4/29/2010
4/29/2010
4/29/2010
4/29/2010
4/29/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/2/2010
5/3/2010
5/3/2010
5/3/2010
5/3/2010
5/3/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/5/2010
5/5/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
worst case web-ex meeting partner with google on product NMFS updated info available for Govs. Calls
5/5/2010
on-going
5/6/2010
best case scenario Request from DOI for assistance in chain of custody, storage procedures, laboratories that can do
anaylysis, etc.
Review EPA Dispersant Q&A
5/6/2010
5/6/2010
5/7/2010
info on how volunteers can get involved
5/7/2010
mechanism for small grants to academics Briefing for Francis Beinecke, CEO NRDC industry validator list for efforts in Gulf for Adm Allen phone call on 4/9
5/7/2010
5/7/2010
5/8/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Q&A on Sea Food Safety - NOAA/FDA authorities, roles, on-ground coordination, NMFS
Assess NOAA to serve as lead for SCATs Compacted oil bricks collected at Dauphin Island, what NOAA scientist received, what info is known
NOAA all hands message on gulf Rep. Cassidy requested info on testing/monitoring of the impacted fisheries areas and how it is
determined what areas should be closed (or re-opened) and how that information is relayed with the
public.
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
analysis of "red-tide" samples NOAA Research Council oil and science coordination across NOAA; outcome actions for team and
Larry Robinson
Gov. LA request to dredge and fill for keeping oil off-shore
follow-up on cooperative MOU and BP science sharing, and ability for contract academic scientist to
share data
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/10/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Identify NOAA Scientist to serve as lead for our scientific activities and liaison for the academic
community
5/10/2010
Follow up with MS and AL regarding fisheries closure. NMFS has call today with State Directors
subject matter expert briefings
Ensure we are adequately ramping up our capacity to analyze seafood safety issues
Review DOS Embassy cable
5/10/2010
5/10/2010
5/10/2010
5/10/2010
OMB request that NOAA serve as Federal lead for Deepwater Horizon consolidated website
Provide guidance to staff regarding tracking hours, expenses, etc in relation to this event
5/11/2010
5/11/2010
NOAA SSC /RRT efforts to host workshop on dispersants, region-wide assessment, impacts, long-term
fate, etc.
Seafood Sampling plan details for DOC
Fisheries Disaster Declaration Apparently the Governor sent a letter to Sec. Locke on April 30
seeking a disaster declaration for MS fisheries due to the leak. They have not heard anything about
their request and asked for a status update.
Process for forwarding funding requests to Unified Command or other leads
Move proposals for IOOS HFR and second flight of P-3 through approval process
Prepare request to Mary Landry regarding NOAAs research/scientific requests, ceiling of requests,
and streamlined process for making requests
Guidance for staff on congressional town halls, local/regional meetings with congress ensure
consistent messaging
Request rough estimate for number of NOAA staff in the region, distinct from those on TDY
Follow-up today for science coordination across NOAA and engagement/coordination with Navy
Request for time on aircraft for NMFS enforcement
Follow-up regarding interview scheduled for today in Houma
5/11/2010
5/11/2010
5/11/2010
5/12/2010
5/12/2010
5/12/2010
5/12/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
Media protocol work through Office of Communications and External Affairs on all media requests.
5/13/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
External constituent engagement protocol work through appropriate offices: Office of

Communication and External Affairs and o Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
When you meet with external groups, please send a brief report out of the meeting and interests of the
public (all)
Barrier Island fill-in follow-up today, ensure Habitat Office is engaged; host call today with NOAA HQ
and staff ASAP today (5/13)
Request for data on normal numbers of turtle and dolphin strandings/deaths for the longest historical
data
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
Follow-up on flow-rate estimates

NOAA needs to step out in a stronger way regarding our science and examining the whole ecosystem;
air quality and water quality.
Utilize Sea Grant more effectively to serve as our liaison for engaging with the community
Engage external scientific community to validate videos from BP
5/14/2010
5/14/2010
5/14/2010
5/14/2010
ADML Landry request 30-day ship time, use of the Gordon Gunther
Overview of sampling that is not being done, broad issues related to understanding where the oil is
and what its impact is (all assets, not exclusive to NOAA assets) Requested to send this to the NIC
Clear Daily report on status of marine mammals and turtles
Create daily chart showing mortality in relation to: #of total dead turtles, # sent for necropsies, #
necropsies completed, and # dead due to oil.
Assess capacity to conduct work needed request to review this and if more people are needed
develop timeline of seafood safety testing in advance of Monday Meeting/call at WH
Ensure routine updates on 0800 calls on key issues NOAA is working on
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
Ensure clear lines of communication and updates between NOAA and NIC
Reconstruct process of how NOAA has been engaged with developing/communicating release rate
Contact sheet for where to refer constituents to for key information
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Strategies to communicate our issues, particularly NMFS closures to public

Assign lead technical expert for LA barrier island issue
Check in on monitoring plan regarding use of sub-sea dispersants
Develop product for what our NERR and NM Sanctuary sites are seeing
Follow-up on release of chemical contents of dispersants for seafood safety testing needs
Identify mechanism to follow-up with attendees at community meetings
Follow-up on NOAA representation at NIC and if Mark Miller and Ralph Lopez need additional
support
Communication plan for loop current, ensure have same story for all constituents. Talking points for
leadership
Move loop current one-pager through clearance ASAP
Change loop current map: oil portion stippled to indicate that the oil is not uniform across the spill,
show loop current as a somewhat more varied flow
Tuesday, 2-3 meeting hosted by OMB for bi-cameral Congressional meeting to review legislation that
has been introduced who should participate on behalf of NOAA
Formal request needed through NIC for chemical components of dispersants, assistance from GC if
needed
Dispersant Monitoring plan should include efficacy of dispersant on oil, and biological/ecological
impacts
Hurricane outlook interactions with oil spill talking points and Tuesday 8am briefing
Develop talking points for issue of Pelican cruise and scientific statements asserted in press
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/17/2010
Line Office assess participation in 3 technical working groups that are stood up by the Interagency
Solutions group
Develop proposal for engaging academic community (for review today)
Reconsider fisheries closure in light of data provided from Pelican cruise. Also conducting random
dock-side sampling to ensure seafood safety.
Expedited review of Loop 101 and Talking Points internal by 0930
Expedited review of Long-Term Transport of Oil and Talking Points internal by 1100
Follow-up on research platforms that could be deployed and sampling plan from all assets
Expert briefing for Loop Current Histogram by day for turtle strandings Request for talking points for turtle strandings Precautionary closure of fisheries due to potential of oil in the loop current
Assign technical point for OMB, DOC, FDA group regarding seafood safety; .
Need to have talking points and alert Cuba and Mexico regarding fishery closure and potential of oil
in loop current
Alert WH of fishery closure change Talking points on loop current, fishery closure, international, states what we are doing to address
the potential that oil is in the loop current
PLEASE clearly note on all emails and documents if they are FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
Check-in with Michele Finn regarding assets available on the ground, consider requesting Navy
support
Talking points on activities underway in Sanctuaries and NERRs
NOAA daily update, NOAA by the numbers, what NOAA has done for the day
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/19/2010
5/19/2010
5/19/2010
5/19/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Do not provide economic data; contact Patricia Buckley ([email protected]) and Mark Doms
([email protected]) for questions and cleared economic data
5/19/2010
Consider if the new Loop Current product can be made public and updated as appropriate
Follow-up call with NMFS and Kennedy regarding particular aspects of seafood safety testing and oil
aspects
Time-line for science plan Recirculate oil and hurricane materials Step back and assess how we are operating in response to this spill, how can we do a better job in
getting information out to the public (data, what we are doing, etc), what resources do we need to
additional staff needs for ORR Seattle War room, etc Joint press release for Gunther and USF sampling cruise
Notification to foreign nations of potential impacts to their states; need to do this in a timely manner as
there are legal considerations
Follow up on science plans, cruises note of 7 vessels, request for clear list of vessels and activities
Hurricanes and Oil Spill fact sheet and talking points, share with Jason Rolfe at the NIC
Share stories for how the government is adding value to the spill response and associated activities
Determine how many non-Federal partners NOAA has engaged with this process
Engage oil spill community and hurricane community to familiarize on data, processes,
communication strategies so that if hurricanes occur in the gulf, we can have a coordinated message
and approach; include EPA in conversations and follow-up actions
Consider deploying ORR staff to sit in the NHC to support FEMA on the ground
Do a briefing for meteorologists on the ground in the coastal states that are prepared with information
and talking points regarding oil spill and hurricanes
Identify what our hurricane response plan is in light of a hurricane, both Unified Command and
NOAA assets
Follow-up for 3pm Oil Spill 101 WH Press Briefing Dispersant workshop provide information on plans, who is invited, etc. for outreach to public and
federal agencies, etc.
Follow-up on EPA water quality monitoring plan, potentially item to be raised at a Principal call.
Follow-up meeting among science players to ensure tight coordination across NOAA
5/20/2010
5/20/2010
5/20/2010
5/20/2010
5/20/2010
5/21/2010
5/21/2010
5/21/2010
5/22/2010
5/22/2010
5/22/2010
5/23/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
Succinct email for where we are on making data public and where that data will be housed
Roll out seafood safety results this week, ensure is well coordinated
Berm proposal - usace proposal for berm : NOAA review before noon
Dispersant workshop at LSU - Planners need to connect Nancy Kinner
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/25/2010
5/25/2010
Clear compilation of NOAA and contract cruise activities Review materials that are distributed daily and streamline
5/26/2010
5/26/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Resources for ensuring ERMA/data information can be operational ASAP; request from other
bureaus and departments for servers and hardware needs while we wait for equipment to
arrive
5/26/2010
Follow-up on discussion regarding data compilation and peer review considerations for data clearance for posting on erma clearance process for factsheets, tps, etc ERMA: Data descriptions NOAA delivering to the public through geoplatform.gov. Talking pts/materials for dr. lubchenco for 6.7.2010 potus briefing on dwh intro speech for dr. lubchenco's chow presentation 5/26/2010
6.5.2010
6.4.2010
6.4.2010
6.3.2010
6.3.2010
Need POC for Smithsonian offering to work with NOAA: 370,000 marine collections from
the Gulf. They are deep ocean specimens from areas right around the oil spill. Result in a
sense of relative abundance, and might provide a helpful basline.
Jonathan Coddington ([email protected]) lead for SI
6.5.2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
LEAD ALL NMFS James

Dieveney Love NMFS NMFS through ICC Moore
Lukens, Bavishi, Holst Moore Holst NWS ICC Taggert Moore
Holst Taggart ORR Conner, Helton NWS Gray, Bagley Doremus
Winer NMFS kennedy request Holst Holst NMFS ORR Taggart
OMAO Conner ORR Seattle ORR Broglie Nyr B NMFS James, Plummer
Glackin Schiffer, GC PCO ORR Seattle Holst
Status
On-going
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
On-going
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
On-going
Completed
Completed
Completed
need follow-up
On-going
On-going
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Conner Klimavicz, Akamine NMFS, Rapp
OBE
On-going
On-going
Conner NIST/Pedro Espina

Holst, ORR
Completed
Completed
Madsen
Completed
On-going
Winer
Winer Completed
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
NMFS
Conner Conner Kenney Completed
Completed
completed
OLA/NMFS
Completed
ORR
Murawski Bavishi
Schiffer, GC Completed
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Kennedy/Glackin/ORR
completed
NMFS
Comms with JIC Murawski/Thompson
DWH, ORR
Completed/but
continued
engagement needed
On-going
Completed
Sarri to follow-up with OMB,

Klimavicz
Gallagher/all staff Completed
conner NMFS
in progress
draft developed
NMFS
ORR/Gallagher
ORR/OAR/Gallagher
ORR/Gallagher
Gray, Bagley
Taggart Murawksi as lead, Zdenka,others
Oliver/Kenul
Kenney/Westerholm/Conner Completed
Completed
Completed
All staff
On-going
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
All staff All staff Yozell NMFS
On-going
On-going
On-going
outstanding
Murawski and team
McLean, Winer, Kennedy,

Murawski
Beaverson
Kenul/westerholm
Completed
Murawksi and team

ORR/ICC
NMFS
NMFS/ORR
NMFS
Dieveney/Kennedy On-going
Dieveney/Westerholm/Miller ORR-Seattle
Dieveney/Winer team
On-going
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Sutter/Winer
Yozell
Westerholm/Henry NOS Kennedy/Westerholm McLean/Winer/Bamford/Gray
Miller with leadership
Kenney Murawski/Dieveney/leadership
clearance
Haddad Gray
Tim Gallagher
Tim Gallagher NWS Kenney/McLean completed
completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
completed
On-going
outstanding
LO Leadership
Murawski/Sandifer/Haddad,
others
NMFS HQ clearance HQ clearance Murawski/McLean
Kenney
NMFS
NMFS
NMFS
NMFS
draft submitted 5/17
Completed
Completed
outstanding
Sarri
DWH Team with experts ALL DWH Team
DWH Team
Kenney underway completed
On-going
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
ALL
On-going
Conner/Kenney Oliver, Kennedy Matlock, Murawski

DWH Team
review on-going
Completed
Completed
All, also particular to NOAA HQ Taggart

Kenney
Turner/Reed with DWH Team Gallagher
NWS and ORR Comms/DWH staff team ICC RFI
on-going
On-going
in progress
On-going
NWS/ORR
ORR NWS/ORR
ICC
Kenney Gray/Kenney (Dreyfus)
(Rolfe at NIC/Westerholm)
Kennedy
Complete
completed
Klimavicz Comms/ NMFS

policy/NIC Comms
Completed
completed
completed
Science/Assets
ICC/DWH staff
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Data & Information

Science
margaret spring
comms
Amy Merten
DWH Staff
DWH Staff
NRDA / Penn
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Outcome
NOTES
questions from WH
Submitted through JIC process, not a NOAA product
briefing to take place on 5/18

http://www.charts.noaa.gov/ENCs/?M D
map is now created periodically showing all NOAA assets in the
region
region
region
Have one-pager with info for use
one-pager developed and sent for clearance on 5/17
being coordinated through Unified Command
External Affairs team in place to support
cleared and posted on-line
request to engage UNH through the science summit proposal and
engaging academic scientists
complete and posted on-line
requested by GC
working on IPA
BP not requesting
BP not requesting
5/7 version completed and available for use internally
what is NIST concern?
Birnea to travel 5/10 to review situation and develop a plan
vendor AIRINC could also serve this role

info sent to John Rapp for use
completed, needs to be posted on-line
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Dr. L to call google colleagues to follow up

www.google.com/crisisresponse/oilspill
will be built into every days tps
Experience tells me that the response would go on for 45-60 more
days, but the oil will all be beached or dispersed within about 30
Pedro to close loop with NOAA and DOI
Need to have final Q&A
On the guidance for volunteer issue, Caren and I are working with
BP's volunteer coordination program coordinators to establish a
protocol for providing information to BP about organizations that
have volunteer resources and organizations in the Gulf that are
capable of accepting volunteers. Based on my discussions, BP should
be ready to discuss these protocols by Wednesday/Thursday, and we
are planning a call with BP's volunteer coordinators and the external
affairs working group organized by CEQ. In addition, the Fish and
Wildlife Service and NOAA are working together to take the various
lists of entities offering volunteers and organizations in the Gulf
seeking volunteers and create a working document. After we
determine the best way to interface with BP, we will likely send the
document to JIC and get approval to share it with BP.
there is a mechanism in place (LA Sea Grant), for which funds if
available could always be added, other regional Sea Grants following
suit. Sea Grant should be included in the suite of granting
mechanisms engaged, but not be sole route
To follow-up with Michele Finn to identify SSC or other to brief
list sent to Justin on Sat. No known outcomes from Adm Allen phone
call
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Mussel
Watch
(John
Christense
n in
NCCOS) is
sampling
for
chemicals
in shellfish
along the
coast to
establish
new base
lines before
oil hits and
will be
testing
during and
after spill
hits
shorelines.
It is
nation's
longest
continual
water
quality/she
llfish
monitoring
program.
Determine that we could coordinate Federal participation on SCAT
(as of 5/10/10: 4 out of Houma; 5 out of Mobile)
analysis shows this is from Mississippi 252; likely sourced from
initial blast
sent with notice of confirmation of AS Dr. Larry Robinson
Talking points cleared and delivered

NCCOS
scientists
(Rick
Stumpf) on
what red
tides/ algae
they have
IDed in
Gulf.
Analysis being done 5/10 by LUMCON, should have information

today
activities on-going to engage scientific community across NOAA and
external partners
call taking place on 5/12 (EPA, NOAA, DOI)
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Gary Matlock - intra-agency; Murawski - interagency; Sandifer -

academic liaison
NMFS has call today with State Directors

Disperants, Hurricanes, Seafood Safety, etc. NMFS text has been provided regarding fish closures and seafood
safety
no specific
criteria
they are
using
NOAAs 3
day traj's
like us
Dispersants (5/12)
Deepwater
Integrated
Services
Team led
by Tracy
Wareing,
DHS, and
Daniel
contact made to DOC CFO to take action to follow-up with OMB to
Werfel,
OMB. Leon
make a formal request of Randy Lyon,
Cammen,
Randolph M. [email protected], and ask about a possible DOC
NOAA Sea
leadership role perhaps through multi-agency coordination with SBA
to explore further what is required for physical one-stop locations.
Grant,
guidance distributed on 5/12
Charlie Henry is trying to push forward with this using BP funding.
He requested that Dave Kennedy support the concept to BP while he
is in Louisiana. We should also start to support the idea in NRT calls
and discussions with EPA.
Meeting with OMB, DOC, and FDA Monday, 5/17
FTEs in 5 regional states: 1400; within 20 miles of coastline: ~750

activities on-going
interview was canceled
Contact: Justin Kenney ([email protected]), Scott Smullen
([email protected]) and Jennifer Austin
([email protected]).
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Office of Communication and External Affairs (Andy Winer:

[email protected]); Office of Legislative and
Intergovernmental Affairs ([email protected])
send to [email protected] and [email protected]
meeting happening in region today: rachel sweeney, pat williams to
participate on behalf of NMFS
data received by NMFS on 5/17, in process
(updated 5/14) WHOI scientists are capable of deploying

instruments on one of the working ROVs. We discussed making
multiple acoustic measurements to assess the degree of variability.
This looks to be doable
NIST: Flow
Metrology
Group and
the POC
there is
Pedro
Espina
(pedro.espi
[email protected]
v, 301-975-
5444)
Regional meeting with all Sea Grant Directors scheduled for Monday,
5/17
request for longer piece of video is still outstanding (5/17)
USCG is
using
contract
vessel. No
need for
NOAA to
reallocate
the
Identify what other NOAA/academic assets has that are comparable;
Gunther
o Connect with Unified Area Command to determine needs and how
(reported
needs could be met by other NOAA /academic assets
on 5/17)
Request from WH Principals meeting on 5/14 - note that if more
resources are needed we should ensure we have them
Report for daily situation report
Request from WH Principals meeting on 5/14; DoI requested to do
same for birds
NOAA contacts at NIC: Mark Miller ([email protected]);

Ralph Lopez ([email protected])
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Has polled team for technical expert engagement (Miles Croom,

Chris Doley, others)
Contact made to NERR and ONMS on 5/14 for follow-up
NOAA NIC contacts tracking this down today 5/14
assessing additional full-time science staff
Spring/NMFS(Reisner)/NOS (Westerholm and Kennedy)
will be given to team on 5/18
Proposal from Mark Miller: Discharge Rate technical team potential

participants: Dr. Bill Lehr, OAR (Dr. Ned Cokelet, PMEL); Loop
current team potential participants: Dr. Jerry Galt, Dr. Rich Patchen
(Environmental Assessment Group has also taken this issue on);
Subsea Dispersant Characteristics potential participants: Dr. CJ
Beegle-Krausen, Dr. Alan Mearns
verified that the area in which the Pelican was working is within the
closed area
JIC cleared (5/17) OMB/WH pending
Closing larger area of fishery will be announed 1300 today, in effect

1600 today
Steve Wilson and Tim Hansen can serve this role
press briefing on loop current conducted 5/18 at 1100.
request out to Los to submit data every day
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
contact Patricia Buckley ([email protected]) and Mark Doms

determined product as is is not appropriate for public dissemination,
conversations between D.Miller and Helton underway
sent with notes from call
updated document outlining leadership response structure
Tick-Tock of NOAA assets on the ground developed (5/23)
Jerry Galt identified to serve this role
Have slide deck used for this press briefing
Comments on plan postponed to noon 5/24
NOAA's principal web engineers worked through this past weekend

and are continuing to install additional hardware to allow this effort
to become a reality. We are limiting access to this development/test
portal to speed development. I thought we would be able to allow
access to a few users to preview the site today, but given where we
are with development, we will try to give some access tomorrow to
NOAA leadership. Concerning the consolidated approach to
Deepwater data, this development (public ERMA or GeoPlatform.gov)
addresses the ability to integrate all of NOAA's data, as well as other
Government agencies (DOI, EPA, DHS)
comments submitted 5/25
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.1
NOAA Science
June 8, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Topic Areas
Loop Current Dynamics

Protected Species Status
Seafood Safety Sampling
NOAA Assets
Planes, Vessels and Charters
IOOS
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Loop Current Discussion

for June 7, 2010
*There is still indication that the gap

between the northern eddy and the
main part of the Loop Current is
narrowing, however it is too soon to
draw conclusions from this.
*Continued potential for reattachment
in the next few days to weeks.
*Buoy tracks (shown as colored lines
in above picture), continue to remain
moving clockwise within the northern
eddy
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
NOAA P3 will transit to Tampa today, Monday June 7, 2010 and fly a mission, if every
thing goes well, on Tuesday. This aircraft will operate both within and outside the
Marine Boundary Layer. It will examine emissions close to DWH rig and other parts of
the oil spill. ASPECT will do its regularly scheduled flights on Tuesday.
Intercomparison will be carried out later. Such intercomparison could be done by flying
in the proximity at appropriate times and it is not essential to have the two aircraft flight
simultaneously in the same air mass.
EPA data is already available on the web and has public access. NOAA needs to work out
its data sharing policy since it involves partner from universities. However, data will be
shared freely using password protected ftp site between NOAA and EPA scientists.
NOAA and EPA scientists will talk as soon as the first set of data from NOAA flights are
available.
Agreed that we should have two people as pointperson: NOAA for the measurements
from P3 and EPA for ASPECT and toxicology.
Further details will be forthcoming in the next day or two.
Air Quality
EPA and NOAA discussion re: NOAA P3
aircraft
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Turtles
Turtle Status
Total Verified Stranded Turtles
300
Total stranded turtles found dead
250
Total live stranded turtles currently in rehabilitation
41
Total live stranded turtles that died in rehabilitation
6
Total live stranded turtles released
3
Turtle Necropsy Status (of dead animals)
Number assessed and unable to perform necropsies
(e.g., advanced decomposition)
7
Number of partial necropsies performed
(e.g., due to scavenging or autolysis)
17
Number of full necropsies performed
53
Verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of
decomposition or unable to recover
46
Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants
133
Live, oiled Kemps ridley recovered from convergence/oil areas

1 June 2010.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Flyovers will resume June 7
Dolphins
Dolphin Status
Total Verified Dolphins
Total dead stranded dolphins
Total live dolphins currently in rehabilitation
Total live dolphins stranded that died in care
Total live released dolphins
Dolphin Necropsy Status (of dead animals)
35
33
0
2
0
12
7
6
8
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
June 7, 2010
3 Center staff are at NSIL in Pascagoula, MS to process fish and shellfish samples for transfer to the
NWFSC for chemical analyses.
GC/MS results of 13 fish samples (muscle composites) collected from areas closed to fishing passed
QA/QC and are posted on the NWFSC website [results summarized on next slide]--concentrations
were well below levels of concern.
Additional sets of fish, oyster, and shrimp samples (composites) from existing inventory are currently
being prepped for GC/MS analysis.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Concentrations (ng/g, wet weight) of selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons measured in edible tissues of fish collected in
the Gulf of Mexico region as part of the Deepwater Horizon MC Canyon 252- Seafood Safety Response 2010
Species Lane Snapper Lane Snapper Red Snapper Red Snapper Lane Snapper Lane Snapper Red Snapper Lane Snapper Red Snapper Lane Snapper Red Snapper Red Snapper Red Snapper Sample T ype muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle muscle Site BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 BR 1001 052010 052010 052010 052110 052110 052110 052110 052210 052110 052110 052110 052110 052110 012/512 013 013 014 014 015 016 020 018 018 019 018 018 Collection Date 20-May-10 20-May-10 20-May-10 21-May-10 21-May-10 21-May-10 21-May-10 22-May-10 21-May-10 21-May-10 21-May-10 21-May-10 21-May-10 FLA <0.13 <0.14 <0.13 <0.14 <0.13 <0.13 <0.12 <0.11 <0.14 <0.16 <0.14 <0.11 <0.13 CHR <0.21 <0.23 <0.22 <0.24 <0.22 <0.22 <0.20 <0.18 <0.23 <0.27 <0.23 <0.18 <0.21 BaP <0.19 <0.21 <0.20 <0.21 <0.19 <0.19 <0.18 <0.16 <0.20 <0.24 <0.21 <0.16 <0.19 BAA <0.19 <0.20 <0.19 <0.20 <0.19 <0.19 <0.17 <0.15 <0.20 <0.23 <0.20 <0.16 <0.18 PY R <0.13 <0.14 <0.13 <0.14 <0.13 <0.13 <0.12 <0.11 <0.14 <0.16 <0.14 <0.11 <0.13 HMWAHs < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ < LOQ LMWAHs
3
1.8
2.8
3.3
2.9
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.3
1.1
2.1
2.1
2.5
FLA = fluoranthene, CHR = chrysene, BaP = benzo[a]pyrene, BAA = benz[a]anthracene, PYR = pyrene
LMWAH = < 3 benzene rings

HMWAH = > 3 benzene rings
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
NOAA Aircraft Positions

As of 07 JUN 2010
N56
N45 N43
N48
N46
N68
N57
N44
N47
N49
N51
N52
N42
ID N42 N43 N44 N45 N46 N47 N48 N49 N51 N52 N56 N57 N68 Type P3 P3 P3 Turbo Cmdr Twin Otter Shrike Twin Otter G IV Shrike Citation Twin Otter Twin Otter King Air Status Today
No Flight, MacDill AFB
CALNEX, Ontario CA repositioning to MacDill AFB
Maintenance, MacDill AFB
Maintenance, Indianapolis, IN
DWH Multi Spectral scanning / oil density and thickness, Mobile, AL
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Repositioning to Ardmore, OK for TDR work
In Disposal Process, MacDill AFB
Repositioned to Sitka, AK
DWH Marine survey in Mobile, AL
DWH Coastal photography / mapping, New Orleans, LA
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
NOAA Ship Positions

As of 07 JUN 2010
FA
DY
MF
SH
M2
RA
DJ
HB
DE
KA
HA
SE
GU
R2
PC
TJ
RB
NF
= underway
EX Guam
ID FA SH MF DY HI M2 SE KA RA DJ EX Status Today
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/18 Port Angeles, WA
Alongside Newport, OR. Departure 6/8, transit to Seattle, WA
Alongside Astoria, OR. Departure 6/9 for scheduled project
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/24 Dutch Harbor, AK
Alongside Pearl Harbor, HI. Departure 6/9 for scheduled project
Alongside Seattle, WA. Departure 6/9 for scheduled project
Alongside San Diego, CA. Departure 7/8 for scheduled project
Alongside Cascade, OR for shipyard repair period
Alongside Seattle, WA. Decommissioning on week of 7/26
Alongside Guam. Departure 6/8 for scheduled project
ID DE TJ HB NF RB GU PC R2
= alongside
Status Today
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/10 Woods Hole, MA
Underway on DWH Western Sentry. Arrival 6/11 Galveston, TX
Alongside Newport, RI. Departure 6/22 for sea trials
Alongside Charleston, SC. Departure 6/18 for scheduled project
Alongside Norfolk, VA. Shipyard repair contract ends 8/13
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure 6/15 for scheduled project
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Chartered Vessels and NOAA Small Boats

As of 07 JUN 2010
RC BB CA BR
JF GY OV
BM
WS WB
= underway
= alongside
ID BR JF GY CA WB PE BB OV RC WS BM
Type F/V Beau Rivage R/V Jack Fitz R/V Gandy R/V Caretta R/V Weatherbird II R/V Pelican M/V Bunny Bordelon R/V Ocean Veritas R/V Ryan Chouest R/V Walton Smith R/V Brooks McCall
Status Today
Inport Pascagoula, MS
Inport Golden Meadow
NOAA Small Boat conducting reef fish surveys out of Panama City, FL. ETA Pascagoula 6/7
NOAA Small Boat alongside Pascagoula. DWH begin 21 June
Underway today from Key West non oil spill ops
Inport Chauvin, LA
Inport Port Fouchon
Inport Port Fouchon, departing evening6/7 for deep water sampling
Testing Sampling Equipment In Vicinity of Mobile, AL
En route to Tiger Tail for CTD, Drifter, and XBT work.
BP/NOAA Charter. DWH sampling
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/confluence/display/OOP/Sub+Surface+Monitoring+Ship+Locations
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
No Update Today
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/confluence/display/OOP/Maritime+Vessel+Assets
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Vessel Assignments for June 79, 2010
Vessel Type
109 F/V
Compliment
6
Latitude
30 18.0N
Longitude
88 34.0W
Operations for June 7
Findings
Beau Rivage
In Pascagoula
Brooks McCall
162 ROV
Ops
32 28 38.8N 88 22.0W
Departing for inshore

waters off Florida
Arriving
in Port Fourchon
Coastal sampling
Lots of noise, trouble
tracking plume.
Allowed to approach
500m of wellhead
Waiting for direction for

VOC sampling
16 29 08.6N 90 12.8W
In Port Fourchon
Bunny Bordelon
150 OSV
In Port Fourchon
In Port Fourchon
In Port Fourchon
Gordon Gunter
Jack Fitz
Navocean Sea
Gliders
224 R/V 165' OSV 2 AUV's
33 26 N/A
30 18.0N 29 20.9N
88 34.0W
90 14.8W
In Pascagoula In Golden Meadow Tracking submersed

plume by fluorometry
In Pascagoula In Golden Meadow Tracking submersed

Deep water sampling
In Pascagoula
In Golden Meadow
Tracking submersed
Deep water sampling
Ocean Veritas
194 M/V
41
29 08.6N
90 12.8W
Departing in evening for

Deep water sampling
In Chauvin, LA
Pelican
116' R/V
16
29 14.3N
90 40.2W
In Chauvin, LA
In Chauvin, LA
Rutgers and USF

3 AUV's gliders
N/A
Monitoring for oil in Florida

coastal waters from
Tampa to FL Keys
coastal waters from
Tampa to FL Keys
coastal waters from
Tampa to FL Keys
Ryan Chouest
215 OSV
30 10.7N
88 37.4W
Getting underway for

surface sampling; top
5m
Shallow water sampling

for hydrocarbons
Shallow water sampling

for hydrocarbons
Hotspots are less
active; seeing high
phosphorescense and
low disolved O2
Thomas Jefferson
208 R/V
33
28 43.1N
88 28.0W
Working west
Transit east to do coastal
toward Port Fourchon
work off FL.
and will need VOOP
resupply
En route to Tiger Tail.
CTD, Drifter and XTB's
Tiger tail/Dry Tortuga
Tarball survey
Coastal sampling
Walton Smith
96 R/V
19
29 58.4N
88 45.6W
Tiger tail/Dry Tortuga

Tarball survey
Weatherbird II
115' R/V
20
24 43.6N
83 17.3W
Underway Non Oilspill
p //
g /
p y/
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
US IOOS Assets deployed 4 June
Gliders (5) : IOOS Partners: MACOORA (Rutgers, U Del); SECOORA (USF); GCOOS (USM)
High Frequency Radars (6) Surface currents : IOOS Partners GCOOS (USM); SECOORA (USF)
Drifters (10) : Horizon Marine
Data: http://rucool.marine.rutgers.edu/deepwater/
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
All Observing Assets in GOM (Fed/NonFed)
Includes: Private,
Academic, State,
NOAA/NDBC,
NOAA/CO-OPS,
NOAA/IOOS*
* Includes IOOS
Regional Associations
17
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.4
Update through June 6 2010 (as of 1800)

x
Increase of 6 turtle strandings, all dead (1 in FL, 1 in AL, 1 in MS, 3 in LA)
x
Capture of 5 heavily oiled turtles from the directed offshore search effort (4 live and 1
dead)
x
A third Kemps ridley recovered June 1 from the offshore search/rescue operation died
today at Audubon Aquarium
x
Increase of 2 dolphin strandings (2 dead in LA, 1 of which was externally oiled)
x
Sea Turtles:
300 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 11 from June
5)
x
o
o
22 of the stranded were found alive (no change from June 5)
x
3 recovered alive but died in rehab (no change from June 5)
x
3 turtle released alive (no change from June 5)
x
16 live turtles in rehabilitation (no change from June 5)
x
30 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (increase of 5 from June 5)
o
25 live turtles in rehabilitation (4 new, 1 died, net increase of 3 from June 5)
o
2 turtles collected dead (increase of 1 from June 5)
o
3 turtles died in rehabilitation (increase of 1 from June 5)
in rehab):
x
from June 5)
x
17 partial necropsies (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (no change from June 5)
x
53 full necropsies performed (increase of 3 from June 5)
x
and/or buried (no change from June 5)
x
133 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increase of 5 from June
5)
Information on Signs of Sea Turtle Oiling :
x
turtle and 4 live stranded turtles (2 of which were caught in skimming operations).
x
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.5
2 dead sea turtle captured during directed turtle surveys.
Historical Sea Turtle Strandings:
x
Louisiana/Texas border through the Florida panhandle from April 30 through June 6 is
270.
x
recent years in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama during this approximate time frame
(combined range of 4-30 for LA, MS, and AL)
o
o
o
o
From 2005 2009 1 to 15 in Alabama
o
In the Florida panhandle, from 2005 - 2009, the number of strandings in May has
ranged from 14 to 29
x
Marine Mammals:
x
35 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 2
from June 5).
o
o
2 were live stranded dolphins, one of which that died shortly after stranding, one
that was euthanized upon stranding (no change from June 5)

x
x
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.5
Dolphin Necropsy Status (of the 33 dead stranded and 2 live stranded that died or were
euthanized):
x
from June 5)
x
7 partial necropsies performed (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (no change from June
5)
x
x
8 verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of decomposition or unable to
recover (increase of 1 from June 5)
x
2 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (no net change: increase of
1, decrease of 1 from June 5)
Information on Signs of Dolphin Oiling:
x
Two of the verified dolphins have evidence of external oil on the tongue and/or body and
therefore were classified as oiled. However, we are unable at this time to determine
whether the animal was externally oiled pre- or post-mortem.
Historical Dolphin Strandings
x
Since April 30, the observed dolphin stranding rate is higher than the historical averages
that have been documented in recent years (2003-2007) in Louisiana, Mississippi, and
Alabama. In part, this may be a reflection of increased detection and reporting and the
lingering effects of an earlier observed spike in strandings for the winter of 2010.
x
For the entire Northern Gulf of Mexico, the combined observed range is 0-6 for the years
2003 to 2007 in LA, MS, AL, and FL (panhandle only). The breakdown by state for the
range of animals historically stranding in the month of June (2003-2007) is as follows:
o
o
o

x
The directed turtle survey operating under Unified Command was on the water today and
captured 4 live and 1 dead oiled turtles. Operations are planned again for June 7.
x
Press interest remains high on sea turtle activities. UC Davis and Audubon, with
consultation with NOAA, allowed CBS National News to film at the rehabilitation
facility as well as when the directed turtle captures arrived at the dock this evening.
NMFS Public Affairs is also working closely with UC Davis and Audubon, and in
coordination with the JIC, to organize a press event (to be announced by the Unified
Command) this coming week around the turtles in rehabilitation at Audubon. Film taken
by CBS at dockside will be available to these media outlets as pooled footage.
x
Discussions are underway to relocate the turtles currently in rehabilitation at Audubon
and IMMS to secondary facilities for longer-term rehab to ensure open space and
sufficient staff at the primary de-oiling facilities to handle expected additional turtles in
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.5
the coming week.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.5
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.6
920'W
910'W
900'W
890'W
880'W
870'W
860'W
850'W
840'W
830'W
820 W
810 W
800 W
Mississippi
310'N
A labama
2
2
(202703 km
)
Fishery Closure Area=78264 mi
Approx. 32% of the Gulf of Mexico Federal Waters
310'N
Louisiana
Mobile
Gulfport
Mobile Bay
ns Pe
aco
la
300 N
Morgan City
Atchafalaya
Bay
290 N
New Orleans
Chandeleur
Sound
8620'W
@ State/Fed
3000'N
Water Line
8630'W
icola lach Apa
300'N
-200 m
290'N
2847'N
9120'20"W
280 N
9120'20"W
@State/Fed
Water Line
2830'N
8630'W
2735'N
8954'W
2810'N
8430'W
Tampa
280'N
Florida
2707'N
8708'W
2648'N
8620'W
8616'W
@Outer Federal
Water Boundary
2626'N
8347'W
Naples
260'N
270'N
2735'N
9033'W
270 N
0m -20
GULF of MEX ICO
260 N
250 N

07 June 2010

Closure Points
Closure A rea
0 30
60 120 Miles
8450'W
@Outer Federal
Water Boundary
250'N
Ke
es t yW
Dry
Tortugas
- 20 0
240 N
240'N
180
240
920'W
910'W
900'W
890'W
880'W
870'W
860'W
850'W
840'W
830'W
820 W
810 W
800 W
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.7
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.8

Monday, June 7, 2010
Seafood Inspection Program:
Steven Wilson finalized the seafood surveillance plan and sent it out to the seafood safety team
for review. Comments are expected by COB today.
SIP personnel will hold their next State sensory training tomorrow in Pascagoula, MS. After that
a small crew of four will be available for surveillance activities.
Three NWFSC staff left for Pascagoula, MS on June 6 to work with NSIL staff to process fish and
shrimp for chemical analyses.
NWFSC is continuing chemical analysis of oyster, shrimp, snapper and croaker tissues.
NWFSC outlined the plan for development of a relational database to report data from chemical
and sensory analysis of fish and shellfish. Data will need to be collected from SEFSC, SIP, NSIL
and NWFSC to populate the database.
Processing baseline samples from SEFSC contracted vessel Simple Man from a couple of weeks
ago.
Hosting SIP Sensory Analysts and FDA representatives.

Preparing to host approx. 20 State personnel in DWH taint sensory training starting tomorrow.
Working out logistical problems with SEFSC on obtaining GIS mappings of sampling locations vs.
cruise tracks in order to facilitate combining seafood species samples from nearby sites into
amounts needed to perform sensory analysis on.
Working on scheduling of SEFSC Fisheries Scientist availability to taxonomically id previously

collected but unidentified DWH seafood specimens.
Friday afternoon (6/4/10) provided demonstration of DWH seafood sample receipt and
processing for Dr. Lubchenco and staff.
Friday afternoon (6/4/10) provided demonstration of DWH taint sensory analysis protocols and
procedures for Dr. Lubchenco and staff.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.9

Image not available for this document, ID: 0.7.19.2151.10
Document ID: 0.7.19.2151.10
Received(Date): Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:29:14 +0100

Subject: BP Gulf of Mexico Updte: June 8 2010

06/08/2010 8:00pm EDT
1. 2. 3.
Highlights
x x x x x x x
14,842
barrels of oil captured by the Lower Marine Riser Package Cap in the past 24 hours.
17 staging areas established for shoreline protection.

30 claims office now open.

BP tofund wildlife trust fund with proceeds from captured oil.

12 controlled burns conducted since noon Monday.

27,665
safety and hazardous material handling training modules completed.
Skimming continues--15.8 million gallons of oily water collected and treated.

Offshore Sea Floor

ContainmentRecovery Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap
Operations Summary: 14,842 barrels of oil were captured through the LMRP cap during the past 24-hour
period. Oil and natural gas are being carried to the surface through a riser pipe and oil is being stored on
the Discoverer Enterprise. Efforts to optimize flow continue and one valve has been closed.

Two additional strategies are planned in conjunction with the LMRP cap and progress on each continues.
x Q4000
Direct Connect: the hoses and manifold that were deployed for the top kill operation will
take oil directly from the blowout preventer through a separate riser to the Q4000 vessel on the surface.
This system, expected to be available for deployment in mid-June, is intended to increase the overall
efficiency of the containment operation by increasing the amount of oil and gas flow that can be captured
from the well.

new free-standing riser that will end approximately 300 feet below sea level. A flexible hose will attach it
to a containment vessel at surface. This option is designed to more effectively disconnect and reconnect
the riser to provide the greatest flexibility for operation during a hurricane. Implementation is expected in
late June or early July.
Dispersant injection on the sea floor dispersant use at the subsea leak source continues, with
approximately 21,000 gallons applied since Sunday. EPA is allowing subsea application of the currently-
used dispersant to continue.
Drilling Relief Wells
They are situated approximately one-half mile from the Macondo well and will attempt to intercept the
existing wellbore at approximately 18,000 feet below sea level. Once intercepted, the Macondo well can
be killed via a bottom kill by pumping heavy mud and cement down the hole. It is estimated the total
drilling process for each well will take at least 90 days from the start date.


14,000 feet below sea level. Drilling began on May 2.

feet below sea level and the blowout preventer is being tested. Drilling began on May 16.
Cleanup Vessels 3,100 vessels are now deployed, including tugs, barges and recovery boats.
Skimming Vessels 111 of the cleanup boats are skimmers, designed to separate oil from water.
Approximately 15.8 million gallons of oil-water mix have been recovered and treated.

Surface Dispersant An additional 4,000 gallons of dispersant was applied on the surface yesterday.
246,000 gallons of dispersant remain available for surface application.
In-Situ Burning The Unified Command has conducted an additional 12 in-situ burns since noon on
Monday. It is estimated that 85,400 barrels of oil have been burned.
Spill Response Technology Ideas / Offers of Services or Products
BP
x BP has received more than 20,000 ideas on how to stop the flow of oil or contain the

oil spill since the Gulf of Mexico incident began. To submit alternative response technology, services or
products, call (281) 366-5511. Each caller to the Houston suggestion line will have their details entered
into the Horizon Call Center database. The database will then send the caller a simple form, termed either
the Alternative Response Technologies form, or the Products and Services Form, for them to set out the
details of their idea. The forms are available online at: www.horizonedocs.com. After the caller
completes and submits the form, it is sent for review by a team of 30 technical and operational personnel
who will review its technical feasibility and application. Given the quantity of the proposals and the detail
in which the team investigates each idea, the technical review can take some time.
US Government
x On June 4, the
newly formed Interagency Alternative Technology Assessment
Program workgroup was announced by the National Incident Commander for the BP Deepwater Horizon
oil spill, in an effort to collect and review oil spill response solutions from scientists and vendors. The
Coast Guard's Research and Development Center, in collaboration with interagency partners, issued a
Broad Agency Announcement found at
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=6b61794cf96642c8b03fcf9e0c3083eb&tab=cor
e& cview=1 calling for the submission of white papers that cover: oil sensing improvements to response
and detection; oil wellhead control and submerged oil response; traditional oil spill response technologies;
alternative oil spill response technologies; and oil spill damage assessment and restoration.
The IATAP and the RDC will screen and triage submissions based on technical feasibility efficacy and
deployability. This will be a federal process to ensure a fair, systematic, responsive and accountable
review of alternative response technologies by interagency experts. The IATAP and RDC initial screening
will result in one of three determinations: the white paper has a potential for immediate benefit to the oil
spill response effort; the white paper submission needs more detailed investigation or evaluation by the
appropriate government agency; or the white paper submission does not support this incident.
Wildlife Fund Established BP announced today it will establish a new wildlife fund to create, restore,
improve and protect wildlife habitat along the coastline of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.
The creation of this fund is over and above BPs obligations under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.
will
BP direct all net revenue from the saleable oil recovered from the MC252 into the fund. Net revenue is BPs
share of the proceeds after federal royalties, taxes, and other interest owners have been paid.
Wildlife Impacts: on Monday there were 107.

Louisiana Barrier Island Project Funding BP has deposited $360 million into escrow to fund
construction of six sections of the Louisiana Barrier Islands Proposal. Funding for the first section has
been released.
Boom Report Across Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida 2.19 million feet of containment
boom have been deployed (with an additional 702,000 feet being staged). 2.46 million feet of sorbent
boom have been deployed (with an additional 2.52 million feet available or being staged.)
Claims
Approximately 18,400 checks have been written for over $48 million and over 38,000 claims have been
submitted. 500 claims adjusters are operating across the Gulf Coast and 125 operators are taking calls.

x BP announced on Sunday that it will pay a second round of advance payments to existing

claimants during the month of June. This is to compensate businesses and individuals for loss of income
and loss of wages caused by the spill.
x BP has
claims offices open to help claimants through the processsee locations below.
30 Vietnamese and Spanish translators are in some offices. Note: No person asserting a claim or receiving
payment for interim benefits will be asked or required to sign a release or waive any rights to assert
additional claims, to file an individual legal action, or to participate in other legal actions associated with
the Deepwater Horizon incident.
x The contact
number for claims is (800) 440-0858. In person claims can be filed at
office locations listed below. Claims can also be filed online at:
Independent Claims Mediator Established BP is appointing an Independent Mediator to ensure a fair

claims process for people affected by the spill. BP will pay legitimate, substantiated claims for loss and
damage caused by the spill, and is committed to paying claims promptly. In those cases where a
claimant disagrees with the outcome of the process, the mediator will provide a way for them to get an
independent review.
Total Cost The cost of the response to date has exceeded $1.25 billion, including the cost of the spill
response, containment, relief well drilling, grants to states, claims paid, and federal costs submitted so
far.
and its associated response, on the marine and shoreline environment of the Gulf of Mexico.

Volunteers and Training 19,822 volunteers were signed up, trained, and working on Monday.
Volunteers are being trained in five different modules that range from safety for beach clean-up, to wildlife
monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and vessel operation for laying boom. As of today, more
than 29,000 training courses have been completed by those working on the incident. Information about
training can be found on the incident website at www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com under volunteers.
State Specific Websites These websites are designed to provide state-specific oil spill information to
residents of communities affected by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill
x x x x



Mississippi:
www.mississippigulfresponse.com
Onshore Regional Operations and Outreach
Staging Areas 17 staging areas are being utilized for rapid deployment to protect sensitive shorelines.
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Dauphin Island, AL

Orange
Beach, AL
Theodore, AL

Panama City, FL

Pensacola, FL

Port St.
Joe, FL
St. Marks, FL

Amelia,
LA
Cocodrie, LA

Grand Isle, LA

Shell
Beach, LA
Slidell, LA

St. Mary, LA

Venice,
LA
Biloxi, MS

Pascagoula, MS

Pass
Christian, MS
Claims Offices 30 Claims offices have been established by BP across the Gulf Coast to provide
locations where people can go to file or discuss claims. There are more than 500 claims adjusters
staffing the offices.
Louisiana (12 locations)
Belle
Chasse/Gretna

Chauvin (Terrebonne Parish)

5703 Hwy 56
Chauvin, LA 70344

Cut Off
(Lafourche Parish)

Unit 2
Cut Off, LA 70345

Grand Isle (Jefferson Parish)

3811 LA 1 (Community Center)


Houma
(Terrebonne Parish)

Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363

Lafitte (Jefferson Parish)

2654 Jean Lafitte Blvd

Town Hall
Lafitte, LA 70067
Morgan
City (St. Mary Parish)
931 US Hwy 90 East

Bayou Vista, LA 70380

New Orleans East (Orleans Parish)

4375 Michoud Blvd


New Iberia (Iberia Parish)

956 S. Lewis Street

New Iberia, LA 70560

Slidell (St. Tammany Parish)


Slidell, LA 70461

St. Bernard (St. Bernard Parish)

1345 Bayou Rd

Venice/Boothville (Plaquemines Parish)

41093 Hwy LA 23

Mississippi (3 locations)
Bay St.
Louis (Hancock County)
1171 Highway 90
Bay St. Louis, MS 39520

Biloxi


Biloxi, MS 39532

Pascagoula

5912 Old Mobile Hwy

Suite 3

Alabama (5 locations)
Bayou LaBatre

13290 N. Wintzell Avenue

Bayou LaBatre, AL 36509

Dauphin Island (Mobile County)

1008 Alabama Avenue

Dauphin Island, AL 36528

Foley
1506 North McKenzie Street (HWY 59)
Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535

Gulf Shores / Orange Beach (Baldwin County)


Suite 1

Mobile (Mobile County)

325 East I-65 Service Rd S

Suite 1
Mobile, AL 36606

Florida (10 locations)
Apalachicola (Franklin County)

194 14th Street

Suite 105

Crawfordville (Wakulla County)


Suite A&B

Ft. Walton Beach (Okaloosa County)
348 SW Miracle Strip Pkwy

Suite 13
Fort Walton Beach, FL 32548

Gulf Breeze (Santa Rosa County)


Unit B-9

Marathon (Monroe County)

7885 Overseas Hwy

Marathon, FL 33050

Panama City (Bay County)



Pensacola (Escambia County)

3960 Navy Boulevard

Suite 16-17
Pensacola, FL 32507

Port St.
Joe (Gulf County)
106 Trade Circle

Suite A
Key West (Monroe County)

3706 N. Roosevelt Blvd

Suite H
Key West, FL 33040

Santa Rosa Beach (Walton County)

5008 US Hwy 98W

Unit 6&7

Contact Information
(866) 448-5816
Team
suggestions
(866) 557-1401
(866) 448-5816
(281) 366-5511
with response
(281) 366-5511

(866) 905-4492 or (866) 647-
and to sign up\

2338
(281) 366-3123
(800) 440-0858
(985) 902-5231 or (985) 902-
5240
(251) 445-8965
(832) 587-8554
(888) 318-6765
(281) 366-5578

Press Release June 8, 2010
BP TO DONATE NET REVENUE FROM MC252 WELL

LEAK TO PROTECT AND REHABILITATE
WILDLIFE IN GULF STATES
As part of its commitment to restore the environment and habitats in the Gulf Coast region, BP
today announced that it will donate the net revenue from oil recovered from the MC252 spill to
create a new wildlife fund to create, restore, improve and protect wildlife habitat along the
coastline of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. The creation of this fund is over and
above BPs obligations under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.

BPs net revenue from the sale of oil recovered from skimming operations and the well
containment systems will be deposited into this newly-created fund. At this point, BP cannot
predict the total of amount of net revenue that will be deposited into the wildlife fund. The
amount of funding will be contingent upon the amount of oil collected during operations and the
price at which the oil is sold. BP will provide regular updates on the amount of proceeds being
deposited into the fund.

Weve already launched the largest environmental response in history, and BP is committed to
protecting the ecosystems and wildlife on the Gulf Coast. Proceeds from the sale of oil recovered
from the MC252 well will be used to further this commitment, said Tony Hayward, BPs chief
executive officer. We believe these funds will have a significant positive impact on the
environment in this region.

The creation of wildlife fund is the latest example of BPs commitment to help the Gulf Coast
states and their residents. On May 24, 2010, BP announced a commitment of up to $500 million
for an open research program studying the impact of the Deepwater Horizon incident, and its
associated response, on the marine and shoreline environment of the Gulf of Mexico.

BP Press Office London: +44 20 7496 4076
BP Press office, US: +1 281 366 0265

Unified Command Joint Information Center: +1 985-902-5231
www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com
www.bp.com/gulfofmexicoresponse
Karen St John
BP America
(202) 457-6594
(202) 351-1399 (cell)
[email protected]

landfall6 08.pdf
LoopCurrentMap-6-08.pdf
ICC Deputy



Overview: BP has been collecting oil via the Top Hat for five days. The amount of oil
collected increased from approximately 11,000 barrels yesterday to 14,842 in the past 24 hours.
Engineers continue to work to optimize the amount of oil collected from the riser. BP should
have a better handle on the final containment potential of the top hat operation within the next
day or two.

Efforts to collect, burn, disperse, and contain the oil continue in full force. To date, skimmers
have recovered nearly 15.86 million gallons of oily water and nearly 3.58 million gallons of oil
has been burned in 131 in-situ burns. In addition, responders have deployed more than 4.80
million feet of sorbent and containment boom.

Trajectories: Onshore (SE) winds are forecast to continue through Friday at 15 knots or less.
Persistent southwesterly winds last week resulted in northward movement of the slick towards
the Mississippi/Alabama barrier islands and westward movement along the Florida Panhandle.
Models show alongshore currents becoming more westward over the next few days, inhibiting
further eastward movement of any oil. However, coastal regions between Horn Island, AL and
Pensacola, FL may continue to experience limited shoreline oiling throughout this forecast
period. To the west of the Mississippi delta, any remaining floating oil in this region could come
ashore between Timbalier Bay and SW Pass.

Offshore Forecast: Satellite imagery analysis continues to indicate patches of sheen to the SE of
the main slick. Scattered sheens and tar balls observed in this region may be getting entrained
into the northern edge of the large clockwise eddy that has pinched off the main Loop Current
(LC). Trajectories indicate that some of these sheens may continue southward along the eastern
edge of this main LC eddy, whereas some maybe getting entrained into the counter-clockwise
eddy to the NE of the main LC eddy. A CG overflight off the west coast of Florida saw no oil
today. Satellite imagery of the Florida Strait and Gulf Stream saw no anomalies. However, a
research vessel confirmed tarballs mixed in with seaweed along the NE edge of the main LC
eddy.

Hot Topics:
T arballs: Today, as part of a tarball monitoring effort, the R/V W alton Smith conducted a
sampling cruise to the edge of the eddy that broke off of the main Loop Current. Satellite
anomalies and transparent sheens seen in this area over the past few days made it a good
candidate for further investigation. The R/V W alton Smith reported finding sporadic tarballs
mixed with seaweed. The location of this observation was approximately 180nm W SW of
Tampa Bay, FL and was along the NE edge of the main LC eddy.

D ispersants: BP continues to use dispersants on surface and sub-surface oil. To date, over
331,000 gallons of dispersants have been released near the well-head. For sub-sea dispersant use
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.1
today, the rate of release was approximately 10 gallons/minute into the oil plume. NOAA
scientists are working to determine if it is possible to accurately measure water column
distribution of dispersants and how to routinely incorporate dispersant testing into sample
analysis. EPA has completed some nearshore sampling and did not detect dispersants. Also, BP
has requested that samples from some past R/V Brooks McCall cruises be analyzed for
dispersant markers.

L ouisiana B erm Projects: BP announced that it will make an immediate payment of $60 million
to the State of Louisiana to permit the State to begin immediate construction of berms along the
barrier islands. The berms are being built to protect sensitive coastal areas from oil. NOAA
provided feedback on the berm proposal raising concerns over the ability to implement the
project in a meaningful time-frame and the ability to construct a stable berm over a short time
frames, among other issues.

M obile B ay B erm Project: The governor of Alabama has recently requested to build berms at the
north end of Mobile Bay, AL in order to close off small inlets connecting critical habitat in the
northend of Mobile Bay. NOAA has definite hydrologic, essential habitat, and endangered
species concerns with this proposal. NOAA is preparing to provide potential protection
alternatives in response this new proposal.

Subm erged Plum e M onitoring: Several vessels continue to collect information on the
distribution and concentration of submerged oil. Similar to other cruise results, a few R/V
Brooks McCall water samples at 1000-1400 feet and 2-4 nautical miles from the source tested
positive for hydrocarbons, however concentrations were in parts per billion. The BP requested
dispersant analysis has slowed the processing of the remaining R/V Brooks McCall samples.
Media and meetings:

R/V W eatherbird II Press Briefing: A joint USF and NOAA press briefing today on the water
chemistry results from the R/V Weatherbird II appears to have been well received.

V IP V isit: Secretary Locke and Congressional representatives plan to visit Robert, Louisiana on
Friday, June 11, 2010. Secretary Locke plans to fly onboard a NOAA Twin Otter airplane along
the coast from Gulfport, MS to New Orleans, LA. This flight will be collecting multispectral
imagery to help map oil locations and will help with directing clean-up efforts.

PRFA status update:

Cruises
HF Radar Recreational Fishing Remote Sensing Activities by NGS Approved
In review by SSC.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.1


NOAA Roles: Many personnel are on scene and many more are engaged remotely. Additional
NOAA assets are being made available for the spill.









A ssessment and Restoration Division (A RD)







Data Visualization












Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.1
Nearshore
Nearshore
NOAA/NOS/OR&R Surface Oil Forecast
Est imat for: 1200 CDT, Friday 6/ 10
e , 11/ Deepwater Horizon MC252
e Prepared: 2100 CDT, Tuesday, 6/08/10
Dat
This forecast is based on the N WS spot forecast from Tuesday June 8 PM. Currents were obt , ained from several models
(NOAAGulf of Mexico, West Florida Shelf/USF, N VO/N A RL) and HFR measurement The model was initialized from
s. Monday -Tuesday sat ellite imagery analy (N sis OAA/ NESDIS) and overflight observations. The leading edge may contain
t arballs that are not readily observable from the imagery (hence not included in the model init ializat ion). Oil near bay inlets
could be brought into that bay by local t idal currents.
920'0"W
910'0"W
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
310'0"N 310'0"N
M obile
P oula
Gulfort
ascag p B SL ay t ouis
300'0"N
M ilton
P ensacola
F ort
reep S Andrew
t.
300'0"N
Chandeleur
S ound
A tchaf a
alay B ay
B reton
S ound
V enice
B arataria
B ay
Caillou
T errebonne
B ay
B ay
A alachicola
p
290'0"N
290'0"N
Mississippi Canyon 252

Incident Location
280'0"N
280'0"N
Forecast location for oil

on 11-June-10 at 1200 CDT
See Offshore Forecast for

t ectories of oil to the south.
raj
270'0"N
270'0"N
260'0"N
260'0"N
20
40 Miles
80
250'0"N
Onshore (SE) winds are forecast to cont inue t hrough Friday at 15 knots or less. Persistent
southwesterly winds last week resulted in northward movement of the slick towards t he
Mississippi/ Alabama barrier islands and westward movement along the Florida Panhandle. Models
show alongshore currents becoming more westward over the next few days, inhibiting further
eastward movement. However, coast regions between Horn Island and Pensacola may continue to
al experience shoreline contacts throughout this forecast period. To the west of the Delta, any
remaining floating oil in this region could come ashore bet ween Timbalier Bay and SW Pass.
920'0"W
910'0"W
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
Trajectory
Uncertaint y
Light
Medium
Heavy
Potential
X
beached oil
860'0"W
250'0"N
240'0"N
240'0"N
Next Forecast:
June 9t PM
h
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.2
Offshore
Offshore
Estimate for: 1200 CDT, Friday, 6/11/10
Date Prepared: 1900 CDT, Tuesday, 6/08/10
Currents were obtained from five models: N OAA Gulf of Mexico, N avO/N COM, N RL/IASN West Florida
FS, Shelf/USF, and N St C ./SABGOM. Each includes Loop Current dynamics. Gulf wide winds were obt ained from t he
gridded NCEP product. The model was initialized from June 6/7/8 satellite imagery analysis (N OAA/N ESDIS) and
overflight observations from t oday. The leading edge may contain tarballs that are not readily observable from the
imagery (hence not included in the model init ializat ion).
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
840'0"W
830'0"W
820'0"W
810'0"W
300'0"N

Incident Location
300'0"N
290'0"N
290'0"N
280'0"N
Sheens and possible t arballs
280'0"N
Please refer t Surface Oil

o Forecast for trajectory
informat nearshore
ion
270'0"N
270'0"N
260'0"N

260'0"N
Uncertainty Boundary
250'0"N 250'0"N
240'0"N
240'0"N
230'0"N
25
50 Miles
100
230'0"N
220'0"N
210'0"N
Satellite imagery analysis continues to indicate patches of sheen to the SE of t main slick. Scattered sheens and tar
he balls observed in these regions may be gett entrained into the northern edge of t large clockwise eddy (Eddy
ing he Franklin) that has pinched off the main Loop Current (LC). Traject ories indicate that some of these sheens may
cont inue sout hward along the eastern edge of Eddy Franklin, whereas some may be gett entrained into the counter-
ing Legend
clockwise eddy to the N of the main LC eddy. ACG overflight off the west coast of Florida saw no oil. Satellite
E imagery of the Florida St and Gulf Stream saw no anomalies. However, a vessel confirmed tarballs mixed in wit rait h
seaweed along the N edge of Eddy Franklin.
E
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
840'0"W
830'0"W
820'0"W
810'0"W
220'0"N
210'0"N
Next Forecast:
June 9th PM
t scale bar shows t meaning of the dist his he ribution t erms at the current t ime
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.3
M obile
Florida
E lin A B
g F P ensacola
B ay
Choctawhatchee
B ay
S Andrew B t ay
Mississippi
Alabama
P ascag oula
obile
M Gulfort
p B S Louis
is ay t. ay
M sissip i S p ound
B
V ermilion
B ay
M an City
org
Louisiana
B arataria
B ay
T imbalier
T errebonne
ay
B ay
B
Chandeleur
S ound
B reton S ound
Wednesday - Thursday
A tchaf a
alay B ay
Thursday - Sunday
Wednesday - Sunday
Shoreline Impact Outlook
Prepared Tuesday, June 8, 2010
This map delineates threatened shorelines for the period of June 9-13 Because of
the continuous leak at the source, there is potential to impact areas multiple times.
Scattered tarballs w hich are not observable from overflight may impact shorelines
ahead of the indicated dates. Forecasting beyond three days has greater
uncertainty as to potential impacts. FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
Friday - Saturday
Tuesday - Saturday
0 25
50 Miles
100
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.4
920'0"W
900'0"W
880'0"W
860'0"W
840'0"W
820'0"W
800'0"W
Alabama
Mississippi
Louisiana
300'0"N 300'0" N
280'0"N
Florida
280'0" N
Well bore location
260'0"N
260'0" N
Loop Current
240'0"N
Cay Sal
Bahamas
240'0" N
Loop Current Location Relative to Oil Slick
June 8, 2010
Slick location derived by NOAA NESDIS from analysis of RADARSAT-2 data

aquired June 8, 2010 at 0656 CDT. The area to the west of the well not covered
by today's imagery was derived from imagery aquired on June 7, 2010.
Loop Current and eddy analysis updated on June 8, 2010 by NOAA/AOML from
220'0"N
satellite altimetry-derived sea surface height fields obtained from NASA and ESA.
220'0" N
Map prepared June 8, 2010 by

NOAA Emergency Response Division
0 50
100 Miles
200
920'0"W
900'0"W
880'0"W
860'0"W
840'0"W
820'0"W
800'0"W
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.5

TO: NOAA SSCs
Seattle, WA 98115


Summary The Loop Current pattern has changed to slightly increase the risk of the Loop
Current serving as a mechanism to transport oil toward The Florida Straits. There
continues to be no significant amounts of oil being moved toward the Loop Current.
However, there has been a confirmation of a scattered tarball field at the northeast corner
of the Loop Current. In addition, the northern eddy has begun to re-attach to the main
Loop Current, and may completely re-join it over the next few days to a week. This
provides a pathway for tarballs to move to the Florida Straits.

Observations There continues to be no evidence of high concentrations of oil in or near
the Loop Current. The visible sheens near the northern edge of the Loop Current show
signs of dissipating, and satellite analysis today did not observe any sheens in the loop
current, Florida shelf, or Florida Current. A NOAA overflight (Jeansonne) today did not
report any visible oil on the west Florida shelf or eastern edge of the Loop Current as
well.

As discussed in previous reports, scattered tarball fields are generally not visible from
fixed wing aircraft or satellite observations. To confirm the presence of tarballs, the
vessel R/V Walton Smith traveled to the northeast corner of the Loop current, where
frequent sheens had been observed in the Satellite imagery. They found little orange
particles and some bits of more aggregated red oil at location 2646.07N--8603.77W.
That location is near the boundary of the counter clockwise eddy to the northeast of the
Loop Current. We expect some of the oil in that location to remain in that eddy, but some
may be drawn into the Loop Current. Once in the Loop Current, some of it may remain in
the large clockwise eddy, while some of it may enter the Florida Straits.

The northern eddy appears to have begun re-attaching to the main Loop Current. There is
evidence of a connection to the main Loop Current on the southwestern side of the warm
core eddy. In addition, some of the models and the sea surface height analysis indicate a
pathway from the far eastern edge of the main eddy to the Florida Current, and passing
through the Florida Straits. Two USF deployed drifter buoys have moved from the
eastern edge of the northern eddy to the east, toward the Florida Straits. We continue to
monitor the situation closely.

The observed tarballs are not likely to reach the Florida Straits in the next 3-4 days. The
observed tarball were in an area of convergence; any oil ultimately making it to the
Florida Straits will likely be far more widely scattered. In order for tarballs to reach
shorelines, there must be a persistent shoreward wind to bring them to shore. At this time,
we estimate that the fraction that may reach shorelines may be slightly above background
levels of tarballs already on the Florida shorelines.
June 8, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.6


thinned. We do not expect larger concentration of oil to move toward the Loop Current
in the near future.

A sentry plan has been developed by the Florida Peninsula Incident command. It consists
of vessels transecting the Florida Current, west of the Dry Tortugas, in order to measure
the tarball concentrations entering the Florida Straits. This activity should serve to
provide a warning if significant tarball fields approach the Florida Straits.

fraction of the oil will move south from the spill site. If the northern eddy has re-joined
the main Loop Current, any oil moved to the northern extent of the Current will once
again have a pathway to the Florida Straits and beyond. We will continue daily
monitoring of the Loop Current in order to monitor this re-connection.

June 8, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.6
ICC Deputy
Document ID: 0.7.19.2161.7

From: Beth Lumsden <[email protected]>
Subject: NOAA Science Briefing June 10
To: _HQ Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>,_DWH Science Box
<[email protected]>
Cc: Jen Pizza <[email protected]>
Please see attached

--
****************************************
Beth Lumsden
Chief of Staff for Science
1315 East West Hwy (F)
Silver Spring, MD 20910
(301) 713-2239 x 180
[email protected]
NOAA Science
June 10, 2010
NOAA Science
June 10, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
Topic Areas
P3-Air Quality Mission


Tarballs

NOAA Assets

IOOS update
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
Air Chemistry in Gulf oil spill area
Successful flight on June 8, 2010 (Tuesday)- ~ 6 hours over the spill

Key Zeroth-order findings:
The spill site and surrounding have air pollution loadings of ozone and
particulate matter mass, aerosol are smaller than that in LA in 1980s
Air was relatively clean away from the spill locations.
Aromatics were much higher than that encountered in any polluted urban
areas. Total was <20 ppbv.
OSHA and EPA need to speak to the impacts of these.
VERY rough estimate of the HCs evaporating from the oil slick. Consistent with
expectations. It may be possible to get a better estimate if the winds are larger
tomorrow. May have implications to other findings.
No definitive results regarding dispersants in air at this point
Potential unknowns for closer examination
detailed identification of the organic chemicals,
composition of aerosols and their potential health impacts.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1

for June 9, 2010
* Sea height suggests that the outer edge of
the large loop eddy is reattaching to the Loop
Current, and that water east of the eddy is

flowing south to join the Loop Current.
*Walton Smith confirmed tarballs near
eastern side of LC, samples taken.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
Tarballs
Observed location of tarballs.
R/V Walton Smith

conducted a sampling
cruise to the edge of the
eddy that broke off of the
main Loop Current.
Satellite anomalies and
transparent sheens seen in
this area over the past few
days made it a good
candidate for further
investigation.
Sporadic tarballs mixed
with seaweed were
reported.
The location of this
observation was
approximately 180nm WSW
of Tampa Bay, FL and was
along the NE edge of the
main LC eddy.
6
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
Turtles
Turtle Status
322
272
41
6
3
7
17
55
46
153
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
Dolphins
Dolphin Status
38
36
0
2
0
13
9
6
9
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
June 9, 2010
Another set of 12 fish and shellfish composite samples will be analyzed by GC/MS today.

Preparation of additional sets of fish and shellfish samples for chemical analysis are
ongoing.
9
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1

As of 09 JUN 2010
N56
N45 N48
N46
N68
N57
N44
N47
N49
N51
N52
N42
N43
ID N42 N43 N44 N45 N46 N47 N48 N49 N51 N52 N56 N57 N68
Type P-3 P-3 P-3 Turbo Cmdr Twin Otter Shrike Twin Otter G-IV Shrike Citation Twin Otter Twin Otter King Air
Status Today
No flight, MacDill AFB
Hard Down Day, No flight, MacDill AFB
DWH multi-spectral scanning / oil density and thickness, Mobile, AL
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Tail Doppler Radar install/testing, Ardmore, OK
In disposal process, MacDill AFB
MMS marine mammal survey, Sitka, AK.
DWH marine survey in Mobile, AL
DWH coastal photography / mapping, New Orleans, LA
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
NOAA Ship Positions

As of 09 JUN 2010
SH
FA
DY
MF
M2
RA
DJ
HB
DE
KA
SE
HA
GU
R2
PC
TJ
RB
NF
= underway
EX Guam
ID FA SH MF DY HI M2 SE KA RA DJ EX Status Today
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/9, transit to Seattle, WA
Alongside Astoria, OR. Departure 6/9 for scheduled project.
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival TBD, pending Indonesian clearance
ID DE TJ HB NF RB GU PC R2
= alongside
Status Today
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/10 Woods Hole, MA
Underway on DWH Western Sentry. Arrival 6/11 Galveston, TX
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1

As of 09 JUN 2010
BB CA BM
JF GY RB PE
OV
BR
WS
EN RC
WB
= underway
= alongside
ID BR BM BB CA EN GY JF OV PE RB RC WS WB
Type F/V Beau Rivage R/V Brooks McCall M/V Bunny Bordelon R/V Caretta R/V Endeavor R/V Gandy R/V Jack Fitz R/V Ocean Veritas R/V Pelican M/V Rachel Bordelon R/V Ryan Chouest R/V Walton Smith R/V Weatherbird II
Status Today
Coastal mapping off of FL
Inport Port Fouchon
Inport Houma
Transit to FL
Inport Pascagoula for mechanical problems. Return to operations estimated 14 June
Inport Golden Meadow
2.5km SSE of wellhead, deep water sampling
Inport Chauvin, LA
Inport Houma, LA. Departing at 2300 for ACDP Buoy Deployment 2.5km north of wellhead
Shallow water (5m) sampling for hydrocarbons, moving westerly
Survey/sampling leading edge of forecast surface plume in "tiger tail"
Underway non oil spill ops
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/confluence/display/OOP/Sub+Surface+Monitoring+Ship+Locations
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
Vessel Assignments for June 9-11, 2010
Vessel Beau Rivage Brooks McCall

Bunny Bordelon Endeavor Gordon Gunter Jack Fitz Navocean Sea
Gliders
Type 109 ft F/V 162 ft ROV
Ops
150 ft OSV 185 ft 224 ft R/V 165 ft OSV 33 26 30 18.0N 29 20.9N 88 34.0W 90 14.8W Compliment 6 32 16 29 08.6N 29 35.9N 90 12.8W 90 12.8W Latitude Longitude Operations for June 8 Coastal sampling off FL In Port Fourchon
In Houma
Transit to FL In Pascagoula
In Golden Meadow
Monitoring and sampling
oceanographic conditions
Operations for June 9 Coastal sampling off FL Depart Port Fourchon In Houma Operations for June 10 Coastal sampling off FL
Deep water sampling
In Houma
Transit to FL
In Pascagoula
Findings
Transit to FL
In Pascagoula Departing for deep water
sampling
Deep water sampling

Deep water sampling
2 AUV's
Ocean Veritas
194 ft M/V
41
28 42.9N
88 21.7W
Deep water samplin, 2.5 km

Deep water sampling SSE of wellhead, heading
2.5 km SW
In Chauvin, LA
In Chauvin, LA
ADCP Bouy Deployment,
2.5 km North of wellhead
No subsurface oil
detected
Pelican
116 ft R/V
16
29 14.3N
90 40.2W
In Chauvin, LA
In Houma
Rachel Bordelon
150 ft
20
29 35.9N
90 12.8W
In Houma, departing 2300
Rutgers and USF

gliders
3 AUV's
Monitoring FL coastal
waters from Tampa to the
Keys
Shallow (5m) water

sampling for hydrocarbons,
moving westerly
Keys
Keys
Orange/brown oil cakes,
little subsurface
anomalies
Anomalies on flourometer
at 25-40m depth off
Alabama, Delta and Port
Fourchon
Long, patchy oil sheens
along 86W longitude, tar
"blobs"
Ryan Chouest
215 ft OSV
29 35.8N
88 12.4W
Departing Theordore, AL for

Subsurface (150m)
subsurface (150m) sampling
sampling for hydrocarbons
for hydrocarbons
Thomas Jefferson
208 ft R/V
33
28 21.9N
91 47.8W
MVP transects for coastal

sampling, westbound
Arrive Galveston, TX
In Galveston, TX
Walton Smith
96 ft R/V
19
26 22.9N
84 17.4W
Survey/sampling leading
edge of forecast surface
plume in "tiger tail".
Arriving Key West for

repairs
Transit to Miami
Weatherbird II
115 ft R/V
Underway-Non-Oilspill
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/confluence/display/OOP/Daily+Vessel+Call+Notes
20 Underway-Non-Oilspill
Underway-Non-Oilspill
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1
US IOOS Assets deployed 9June
Gliders (9) : IOOS Partners: MACOORA (Rutgers, U Del); SECOORA (USF); GCOOS (USM) ; SCCOOS (new);
US Navy (2). Note USF recovered Sam and deployed Waldo
High Frequency Radars (6) Surface currents : IOOS Partners GCOOS (USM); SECOORA (USF)
Drifters (10) : Horizon Marine not shown on the map
Data: http://rucool.marine.rutgers.edu/deepwater/
Document ID: 0.7.19.1831.1

Subject: Mikulski trip to Gulf + new letter
To: "Oil spill staff ([email protected])" <[email protected]>,"[email protected]"
<[email protected]>,"Dave Westerholm ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>,Sally Yozell <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>,Amanda Hallberg Greenwell <[email protected]>,"Jen Pizza
([email protected])" <[email protected]>,"William Conner ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,John Oliver
<[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,"Kimball, Kevin A."
<[email protected]>, "Sarri, Kristen" <[email protected]>
20100610102517403.pdf
Note below assume NOAA in field is prepared for the Mikulski codel on these topics? Just
heads up.

Also just got a letter in from a number of Senators - including Mikulski requesting NOAA to
do long term projections for east coast.

See attached.

From: Ordal, Paul (EPW ) [mailto:[email protected]]

To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; 'Kreischer,
Jon'; 'W ittkamp, Carol MVN'; 'Salt, Terrence C SES CIV USA ASA CW '; 'Lee, Let Mon Mr CIV USA ASA CW ';
'Kristi_W [email protected]'
Cc: Albritton, Jason (EPW ); Rafle, Peter (EPW ); Poirier, Bettina (EPW )
Subject: CODEL policy issues
I wanted everyone to know that these are the issues that have been raised by the senators and
staff who will be on the CODEL tomorrow. Can you please relay them to your agencys
representatives who will be briefing/touring with the delegation? Thanks.

EPA: water quality impacted by oil and dispersants, air quality/environmental testing, dispersant
toxicity
NOAA: spill assessment and modeling, wildlife and natural resources impacts of the oil spill

Corps of Engineers: barrier island issues, navigation/flood protection impacts of spill, coastal
restoration plan

Fish and Wildlife Service: wildlife and natural resource impacts of the spill, habitat restoration

Coast Guard: Spill mitigation, incident management

Thanks for your assistance.

Paul M. Ordal
U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
Senator Barbara Boxer, Chairman
202-224-8832
202-224-1273 FAX
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
Document ID: 0.7.19.2153.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2153.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2153.1
Received(Date): Fri, 11 Jun 2010 03:32:08 +0100


06/10/2010 6:00pm EDT
BP is working as part of the Unified Command to accomplish three main objectives in

the Gulf of Mexico:
1. 2. 3.
Regional Highlights
15,816 barrels of oil captured by the Lower Marine Riser Package Cap on June 9.

x BP
make $75 million in additional grants to states for advance funding of
will shoreline protection.
x 17 controlled burns conducted since Tuesday bringing total estimate to 91,712

barrels consumed to date.
x x x
29,640 safety and hazardous material handling training modules completed.

4,067
vessels active, an increase of 482 since Tuesday.
18.1 million gallons of oil-water mix has been collected and treated.

Offshore Sea Floor
BPs priority is to reduce and stop the flow of oil subsea and minimize environmental
impacts through multiple strategies:

Containment Recovery Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap
Operations Summary: 15,816 barrels of oil were captured through the LMRP cap during
the past 24-hour period. Oil and natural gas are being carried to the surface through a
riser pipe and oil is being stored on the Discoverer Enterprise.

x Q4000 Direct Connect: the hoses and manifold that were deployed for the top

kill operation will take oil directly from the blowout preventer through a separate riser to
the Q4000 vessel on the surface. This system, expected to be available for deployment
in mid-June, is intended to increase the overall efficiency of the containment operation
by increasing the amount of oil and gas flow that can be captured from the well.
x Long-term Containment Option: this operation will take oil from the LMRP via a

manifold to a new free-standing riser that will end approximately 300 feet below sea
level. A flexible hose will attach it to a containment vessel at surface. This option is
designed to more effectively disconnect and reconnect the riser to provide the greatest
flexibility for operation during a hurricane. Implementation is expected in late June or
early July.
Dispersant injection on the sea floor dispersant use at the subsea leak source
continues, with approximately 12,000 gallons applied on June 9. EPA is allowing
subsea application of the currently-used dispersant to continue. 529,000 gallons is in
inventory for subsea use.
Drilling continues on both wells. They are situated approximately one-half mile from the
Macondo well and will attempt to intercept the existing wellbore at approximately 18,000
feet below sea level. Once intercepted, the Macondo well can be killed via a bottom
kill by pumping heavy mud and cement down the hole. It is estimated the total drilling
process for each well will take at least 90 days from the start date.

x The first relief well (work being performed by the Development Driller III) has

passed 12,000 feet below sea level and is still drilling. This well was spudded on May
2.
The second relief well (work being performed by Development Driller II) is at

x approximately 8,600 feet below sea level. Drilling began on May 16.

Cleanup Vessels 4,067 vessels are deployed, including tugs, barges and recovery
boats, an increase of 482 over the prior 24 hours.
Skimming Vessels 138 of the cleanup boats are skimmers, designed to separate oil
from water. Approximately 18.1 million gallons of oil-water mix have been recovered
and treated.
Surface Dispersant An additional 2,100 gallons of dispersant was applied on the

surface yesterday. 230,000 gallons is in inventory for surface use.
In-Situ Burning The Unified Command conducted an additional 17 in-situ burns on

Wednesday. It is estimated that 91,700 barrels of oil have been burned.
Spill Response Technology and Offers of Services or Products
x BP has received more than 20,000 ideas on how to stop the flow of oil or

contain the oil spill since the Gulf of Mexico incident began. To submit alternative
response technology, services or products, call (281) 366-5511. Each caller to the
Houston suggestion line will have their details entered into the Horizon Call Center
database. The database will then send the caller a simple form, termed either the
Alternative Response Technologies form, or the Products and Services Form, for them
to set out the details of their idea. The forms are available online at:
www.horizonedocs.com. After the caller completes and submits the form, it is sent for
review by a team of 30 technical and operational personnel who will review its technical
feasibility and application. Given the quantity of the proposals and the detail in which the
team investigates each idea, the technical review can take some time.
x The U.S.
Government has also issued a general call for submission of
white papers that cover: oil sensing improvements to response and detection; oil
wellhead control and submerged oil response; traditional oil spill response technologies;
alternative oil spill response technologies; and oil spill damage assessment and
restoration. That announcement can be found online at:
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=6b61794cf96642c8b03fcf9e0
c3083eb&tab=core&_cview=1

BP Provides $75 million in Additional Grants to States Today BP announced it is

providing the states of Alabama, Mississippi and Florida with an additional $25 million
each to continue implementation of the states Area Contingency Plans. These are in
addition to the previous grants that BP announced on May 5 to accelerate the
implementation of Area Contingency Plans, and in addition to the tourism grants
announced on May 17.
Louisiana Barrier Island Project Funding BP has deposited $360 million into
escrow to fund construction of six sections of the Louisiana Barrier Islands Proposal.

Wildlife Fund Established BP has established a new wildlife fund to create, restore,
improve and protect wildlife habitat along the coastline of Louisiana, Mississippi,
Alabama, and Florida. The creation of this fund is over and above BPs obligations
under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. BP will direct all net revenue from the saleable oil
recovered from the MC252 into the fund. Net revenue is BPs share of the proceeds
after federal royalties, taxes, and other interest owners have been paid.
Boom Report 2.36 million feet of containment boom have been deployed (with an
additional 633,000 feet being staged). 2.76 million feet of sorbent boom have been
deployed (with an additional 2.29 million feet available or being staged.)
Claims
More than $55.5 million has been paid to claimants. 500 claims adjusters are operating
across the Gulf Coast and 125 operators are taking calls.
x BP
announced on Sunday it will pay a second round of advance payments to
existing claimants during the month of June. This is to compensate businesses and
individuals for loss of income and loss of wages caused by the spill.
x BP
31 claims offices open to help claimants through the process. Vietnamese
has and Spanish translators are in some offices. Note: No person asserting a claim or
receiving payment for interim benefits will be asked or required to sign a release or
waive any rights to assert additional claims, to file an individual legal action, or to
participate in other legal actions associated with the Deepwater Horizon incident.
x The contact number for claims is (800) 440-0858. In person claims can

be filed at office locations listed below. Claims can also be filed online at:
Independent Claims Mediator Established BP is appointing an Independent

Mediator to ensure a fair claims process for people affected by the spill. BP will pay
legitimate, substantiated claims for loss and damage caused by the spill, and is
committed to paying claims promptly. In those cases where a claimant disagrees with
the outcome of the process, the mediator will provide a way for them to get an
independent review.
Total Cost The cost of the response to date has exceeded $1.25 billion, including the
cost of the spill response, containment, relief well drilling, grants to states, claims paid,
and federal costs submitted so far.
$500 Million for 10-year Gulf Research Initiative to Study Spill Impacts BP is
contributing $500 million over 10 years to fund an open research program studying the
impact of the Deepwater Horizon incident, and its associated response, on the marine
and shoreline environment of the Gulf of Mexico.

BP Provides $70 million in Tourism Grants to States On May 17, BP made $70
million available to Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida to promote tourism.
Volunteers and Training 21,907 volunteers were signed up, trained, and working on
Wednesday. Volunteers are being trained in five different modules that range from
safety for beach clean-up, to wildlife monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and
vessel operation for laying boom. As of today, more than 29,000 training courses have
been completed by those working on the incident. Information about training can be
found on the incident website at www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com under
v o lu n te e rs .

State Specific Websites These websites are designed to provide state-specific oil
spill information to residents of communities affected by the Deepwater Horizon oil
spill. Residents are encouraged to visit these sites frequently and sign up for the
mailing list to receive the most current information about the spill response. These sites
are dedicated to providing information about activities and events most important to
residents of each state.
x x x x


Louisiana:
www.louisianagulfresponse.com

Staging Areas 17 staging areas are being utilized for rapid deployment to protect
sensitive shorelines.
x x x x x x
Dauphin Island, AL

Orange Beach, AL

Theodore, AL

Panama City, FL

Pensacola, FL

Port St. Joe, FL
x x x x x x x x x x x
St.
Marks, FL
Amelia, LA

Cocodrie, LA

Grand Isle, LA

Shell
Beach, LA
Slidell, LA

St.
Mary, LA
Venice, LA

Biloxi, MS

Pascagoula, MS

Pass
Christian, MS
Claims Offices 31 Claims offices have been established by BP across the Gulf Coast
to provide locations where people can go to file or discuss claims. There are more than
500 claims adjusters staffing the offices.
Belle
Chasse/Gretna



5703 Hwy 56
Chauvin, LA 70344
Cut
(Lafourche Parish)
Off

Unit 2
Cut Off, LA 70345




Houma (Terrebonne Parish)


Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363



Town Hall
Lafitte, LA 70067

Morgan City (St. Mary Parish)

931 US Hwy 90 East


4375 Michoud Blvd



956 S. Lewis Street




Slidell, LA 70461

St.
Bernard (St. Bernard Parish)
1345 Bayou Rd


41093 Hwy LA 23

Westwego (Jefferson Parish)

1280 Westbank Expressway
Westwego, LA 77094

Bay St. Louis (Hancock County)

1171 Highway 90

Biloxi


Biloxi, MS 39532

Pascagoula

5912 Old Mobile Hwy

Suite 3

Bayou LaBatre



1008 Alabama Avenue


Foley

Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535



Suite 1



Suite 1
Mobile, AL 36606


194 14th Street

Suite 105


Suite A&B



Suite 13



Unit B-9


7885 Overseas Hwy

Marathon, FL 33050




3960 Navy Boulevard

Suite 16-17
Pensacola, FL 32507

Port St. Joe (Gulf County)

106 Trade Circle

Suite A



Suite H
Key West, FL 33040

Santa
Rosa Beach (Walton County)
5008 US Hwy 98W

Unit 6&7

Contact Information
Environment / Community Hotline to report oil on the beach

(866) 448-5816
or shoreline or other environment or community impacts and
access the Rapid Response Team
Wildlife to report and access care for impacted, i.e. oil wildlife (866) 557-1401
Volunteers to request volunteer information
(866) 448-5816
(281) 366-5511
Services to register as consultant, contractor, vendor, or
submit information on alternative response technology, services,
products or suggestions
Vessels of Opportunity to report and register boats available

(281) 366-5511
to assist with response
Training for questions about training requirements, times and
(866) 905-4492 or (866)
locations, and to sign up\
647-2338
Investor Relations Claims by phone
(281) 366-3123
(800) 440-0858
Joint Information Center Robert, LA Media and information
(985) 902-5231 or (985)
center
902-5240
Joint Information Center Mobile, AL Media and information
(251) 445-8965
center
Transocean Hotline MI Swaco Hotline BP Family and third-party contractor hotline Twitter: Oil_Spill_2010
(832) 587-8554
(888) 318-6765
(281) 366-5578
Karen St John
BP America
B6

Deepwater_Horizon_Report_54.pdf
forecast_20100613_1200CDT_20100610_2100CDTr.pdf
os_forecast_20100613_1200CDT_20100610_2100CDTr.pdf
landfall6_10_2010.pdf

CDR Mike Weaver
ICC Deputy


Overview:
The top hat containment cap, installed on June 3, continues to collect oil and gas flowing from
the MC252 well and transport it to a drillship on the surface. The efficiency of the containment
The transfer of crude
operation is improving. Oil collection reached 17,000 barrels/day today.
oil from the drillship to the barge Massachusetts began the morning of June 9. W hen the process
is complete, the barge will transport the oil to an onshore terminal. Efforts to enhance oil
collection continue. Further connections via one or more pipes to the ports on the side of the
blow out preventer are being made to increase collection capability and are thought to be
completed by next week.
Meanwhile, work on the first relief well continues and has currently reached a depth of 13,978
feet. The second relief well is at 8,576 feet. The wells are planned to reach their target depth
and be completed in mid-August. The relief wells are believed to be the permanent solution for
stopping the oil and gas flowing from the well into the Gulf of Mexico.
Almost 3,600 vessels are involved in the response effort, including skimmers, tugs, barges and
recovery vessels. Operations to skim oil from the surface of the water have recovered, in total,
approximately 383,000 barrels (16.1 million gallons) of oily liquid.
Trajectories:
Onshore (SE/S/ESE) winds are forecast to continue through the weekend at 5-10 knots.
Persistent onshore winds have resulted in northward movement of the slick towards the
Mississippi/Alabama barrier islands and the Florida Panhandle. Coastal regions in Mississippi
Sound and west of Pensacola may continue to experience limited shoreline oiling. Persistent
southeasterly winds are also resulting in movement of oil towards the Chandeleur Islands, Breton
Sound, and the Mississippi River delta and these areas are threatened by shoreline oiling.

Satellite imagery analysis continues to indicate possible patches of sheen to the S-SE of the main
slick. Scattered sheens and tar balls observed in these regions may be getting entrained into the
northern edge of the large clockwise eddy that has pinched off the main Loop Current (LC).
Trajectories indicate that some of these sheens may continue southward along the eastern edge of
the main LC eddy, whereas some may be getting entrained into the counter-clockwise eddy to
the NE of the main LC eddy. A CG overflight off the west coast of Florida yesterday saw no oil.
A NOAA overflight today reported seeing only noncontiguous sheens 45 nm to the SSE of the
source.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.1
Hot Topics:
L oop Current: The Loop Current (LC) pattern is continuing to slightly increase the risk of the
Loop Current serving as a mechanism to transport oil toward The Florida Straits. There are no
significant amounts of oil being moved toward the Loop Current at this time; however there has
been a confirmation of a scattered tarball field at the northeast corner of the northern clockwise
eddy that pinched off from the LC. This eddy may have begun to re-attach to the main Loop
Current, and could completely re-join it over the next few days to a week. This reforming of the
Loop Current could provide a pathway for tarballs to move to the Florida Straits.
T arballs: Tarballs collected during the R/V Walton Smith sampling cruise to the edge of the
northern eddy that broke off of the main Loop Current were received by NOAA staff today and
will be sent to LSU for source analysis. The analysis should be complete by early next week.
The tarballs are from an area targeted by observations from a C-130 overflight (26 46.067N / 86
03.768W). The R/V Walton Smith reported finding sheens and trace amounts of oil described as
floating soft pads, dark browny-orange or reddish-orange. Size ranged from ~6 oval to dinner
plate size and some smaller. Not super common, not rare 5-6 pass the ship within 150 every
few minutes, sometimes two or three together.

Florida oil surv eillance: With the potential reconnection of the loop current to the northern
eddy, there is a potential path for oil to move to the Florida Straits. As a result, Florida is
increasing its vessel and aerial surveillance of its coastal zone. Experienced ORR observers are
flying over the eastern edge of the Loop Current and vessels are now surveying for tarballs near
the Florida Straits daily. Florida responders plan to use this information to identify and prepare
for potential oiling threats and the information will also help ground truth NOAA trajectories. In
addition, tomorrow ORR staff is training 11 USCG and FL state staff in proper aerial observation
techniques.
Dispersant use: ORR is working with EPA to generate a more efficient process for selecting
locations for dispersant application, as well as key decisions for continued dispersant application.
Clean up operation challenges: As cleanup operations move into new locations, including
National Park property and historic areas, coordination between clean-up operations and the
Environmental Unit is becoming increasingly important. ORR responders are working to
address concerns regarding the entanglement of turtles in snare boom, coordination with DOI for
operations on NPS land, and coordination with State Historic Preservation Office staff, when
necessary.
Media and Meetings:
Congressional Science B riefing: Today, ORR participated in a science call with congressional
staff to share NOAAs analysis of the R/V Brooks McCall water samples. The call is reported to
have gone very well. Still, there is continued confusion regarding oil concentrations and what
these concentrations mean in terms of potential impacts. There is also confusion on how best to
portray this information so that it is not misinterpreted.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.1
V IP V isit: Secretary Locke and six congressional representatives plan to visit Robert, Louisiana
on Friday, June 11, 2010. Both Secretary Locke and the congressional delegation will be briefed
by NOAA Scientific Support Coordinators. Secretary Locke plans to fly onboard a NOAA Twin
Otter airplane along the coast from Gulfport, MS to New Orleans, LA. This flight will be
collecting multispectral imagery to help map oil locations and will direct clean-up efforts.

PRFA status update:
Seafood Safety surface areas west of the Mississippi Delta for
potential hydrocarbons and dispersants
Gordon Gunter and Weatherbird II Cruises HF Radar Approved verbally, working on obtaining
written documentation from FOSC
Being reevaluated by modelers for
resubmission for funding, likely directly
to BP.
Recreational Fishing Remote Sensing Activities by NGS OR&R base increase to $7.7 million
Approved
Thomas Jefferson / WHOI cruises for mapping sub

Approved
ORR and NMFS are pursuing the rec.

fishing assessment as a NRDA study
In review by SSC.
Under USCG consideration
















Data Visualization

Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.1










Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.1
Nearshore
Nearshore
NOAA/ NOS/ OR&R Surface Oil Forecast
Estimate for: 1200 CDT, Sunday, 6/13/10
Date Prepared: 2100 CDT, Thursday 6/10/10
This forecast is based on the N WS spot forecast from Thursday June 10 PM. Currents were obtained from several models
, (N OAA Gulf of Mexico, West Florida Shelf/USF, N VO/N A RL) and HFR measurements. The model was initialized from
Thursday satellite imagery analy (N sis OAA/ ESDIS) and overflight observations. The leading edge may contain tarballs
N that are not readily observable from the imagery (hence not included in the model initialization). Oil near bay inlets could be
brought into that bay by local tidal currents.
920'0"W
910'0"W
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
310'0"N 310'0"N
M obile
P oula
Gulfort
ascag p B S Louis
ay t
300'0"N
M ilton
P ensacola
F ort
reep S A t. ndrew
300'0"N
Chandeleur
S ound
A tchaf a
alay B ay
B reton
S ound
V enice
B arataria
B ay
Caillou
T errebonne
B ay
B ay
A alachicola
p
290'0"N
290'0"N

Incident Location
280'0"N
280'0"N


trajectories of oil to the south.
270'0"N
270'0"N
260'0"N
260'0"N
20
40 Miles
80
250'0"N
Onshore (SE/S/ ESE) winds are forecast to continue through the weekend at 6-10 knots. Persistent
onshore winds have resulted in northward movement of the slick towards the Mississippi/ Alabama
barrier islands and the Florida Panhandle. Coastal regions in Mississippi Sound west of Pensacola
may continue to experience shoreline contacts throughout this forecast period. Persistent
Sound, and the Mississippi Delta. These region are also threatened by shoreline contacts within this
forecast period.
920'0"W
910'0"W
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
Trajectory
Uncertainty
Light
Medium
Heavy
Potential
X
beached oil
860'0"W
250'0"N
240'0"N
240'0"N
Next Forecast:
June 11th PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.2
Offshore
Offshore
NOAA/ NOS/ OR&R Surface Oil Forecast
Estimate for: 1200 CDT, Sunday, 6/13/10
Date Prepared: 1900 CDT, Thursday, 6/10/10
Currents were obt ained from four models: N OAAGulf of Mexico, N avO/N COM , N RL, and N St./SABGOM. Each
C includes Loop Current dynamics. Gulf wide winds were obtained from t gridded N he CEP product. The model was
initialized from June 9/10 satellit imagery analysis. The leading edge may contain tarballs that are not readily observable
e from the imagery (hence not included in t model initialization).
he
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
840'0"W
830'0"W
820'0"W
810'0"W
300'0"N

Incident Locat ion
300'0"N
290'0"N
290'0"N
280'0"N
Sheens and possible tarballs
Please refer to Surface Oil

Forecast for t raject ory
information nearshore
280'0"N
270'0"N
270'0"N
260'0"N

260'0"N
250'0"N 250'0"N
240'0"N
240'0"N
230'0"N
25
50 Miles
100
230'0"N
220'0"N
210'0"N
Satellit imagery analysis continues to indicate possible pat e ches of sheen to the S-SE of the main slick. Scatt ered
sheens and tar balls observed in t hese regions may be getting entrained into t northern edge of the large clockwise
he eddy (Eddy Franklin) t has pinched off the main Loop Current (LC). Traj hat ectories indicate that some of these sheens
may cont inue southward along the east edge of Eddy Franklin, whereas some may be gett entrained into the
ern ing Legend
counter-clockwise eddy to t N of t main LC eddy. ACG overflight off the west coast of Florida yesterday saw no
he E he oil. AN OAAoverflight today reported seeing only noncontiguous sheens 45 nm t the SSE of the source.
o
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
840'0"W
830'0"W
820'0"W
810'0"W
220'0"N
210'0"N
Next Forecast :
June 11t PM
h
t scale bar shows the meaning of t distribut terms at the currenttime
his he ion
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.3
M obile
Florida
E lin A g FB
P ensacola
B ay
Choctawhatchee
B ay
Mississippi
P ascag oula
Gulfort
p B S Louis
M siss p S ay t. is ip i ound
Alabama
M obile
B ay
SA t ndrew
Louisiana
Chandeleur
S ound
Friday - Tuesday
B reton S ound
B arataria
B ay
imbalier
T errebonne
T B ay
B ay
Saturday - Tuesday
Friday - Tuesday
Prepared Thursday, June 10, 2010
This map delineates threatened shorelines for the period of June 9-1 5. Because of
the continuous leak at the source, there is potential to impact areas multiple times.
Scattered tarballs w hich are not observable from overflight may impact shorelines
ahead of the indicated dates. Forecasting beyond three days has greater
uncertainty as to potential impacts.
FOR INTERNA USE ONLY
L
20
40 Miles
80
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.4
920'0"W
900'0"W
880'0"W
860'0"W
840'0"W
820'0"W
800'0"W
Mississippi
Alabama
Louisiana
300'0"N 300'0" N
280'0"N
Florida
280'0" N
Well bore location
260'0"N
260'0" N
Loop Current
240'0"N
Cay Sal
Bahamas
240'0" N
June 10, 2010
Slick location derived by NOAA NESDIS from MODIS AQUA data aquired
June 10, 2010 at 1402 CDT, from ENVISAT ASAR data aquired June 10, 2010
at 1044 CDT and RADARSAT-1 data aquired June 10, 2010 at 0637 CDT.
Cuba
220'0" N
220'0"N

0 50
100 Miles
200
Mexico
920'0"W
900'0"W
880'0"W
860'0"W
840'0"W
820'0"W
800'0"W
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.5

TO: NOAA SSCs
Seattle, WA 98115


Summary The Loop Current pattern is continuing to slightly increase the risk of the
Loop Current serving as a mechanism to transport oil toward The Florida Straits. There
of the northern clockwise eddy (Eddy Franklin). This eddy may have begun to re-attach
to the main Loop Current, and may or may not completely re-join it over the next few
days to a week. This would provide a pathway for tarballs to move to the Florida Straits.

signs of dissipating, and a US Coast Guard overflight today around the southern Gulf and
Florida Keys did not observe any visible sheens. Satellite analysis today indicated a few
small sheens in the region of Eddy Franklin. These may be the result of oil from the spill
that has been circulating in that eddy.

As discussed in previous reports, scattered tarball fields are generally not visible from
fixed wing aircraft or satellite observations. To confirm the presence of tarballs, the
vessel R/V Walton Smith traveled to the northeast corner of the Loop current, where
frequent sheens had been observed in the Satellite imagery. They found little orange
The ship has taken some samples that have now been shipped to LSU. We expect
analysis of those samples this Saturday.

That location is near the boundary of the counter clockwise eddy to the northeast of Eddy
Franklin where there have been frequent sheens observed by satellite analysis. We expect
some of the oil in that location to remain in that eddy, but some may be drawn into Eddy
Franklin. Once in Eddy Franklin, some of it may remain there, circulating around the
central Gulf, while some of it may follow a pathway that leads to the Florida Straits.

There is some uncertainty as to whether Eddy Franklin has begun to re-attach to the main
Loop Current. The connection to the main Loop Current on the southwestern side of the
eddy has weakened. However, some of the models and the sea surface height analysis
indicate a pathway from the far eastern edge of the Eddy Franklin to the Florida Current,
indicating a possible re-connection. Two USF deployed drifter buoys have moved from
the eastern edge of Eddy Franklin to the east, toward the Florida Straits, confirming this
connection. We continue to monitor the situation closely.

thinned. An NOAA overflight (Wesley) to the southeast of the spill site today observed
June 10, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.6
isolated patches of sheen extending toward Eddy Franklin. We do not expect larger
concentrations of oil to move toward the Loop Current in the near future.

observations were in an area of convergence; any oil ultimately making it to the Florida
Straits will likely be far more widely scattered. In order for tarballs to reach shorelines,
there must be a persistent shoreward wind to bring them to shore. At this time, we
estimate that the fraction that may reach shorelines may be slightly above background

northern front, and drifter buoys dropped in or near the Loop Current over the last few
weeks.

The US Coast Guard will be conducting overflights daily to look for signs of significant
oil over the Florida Shelf and Loop Current; a NOAA observer will be on board every 2-
3 days. In addition, a sentry plan has been put in place by the Florida Peninsula Incident
command. It consists of vessels transecting the Florida Current, west of the Dry Tortugas,
in order to measure the tarball concentrations entering the Florida Straits. This activity
should serve to provide a warning if significant tarball fields approach the Florida Straits.

fraction of the oil will move south from the spill site. If Eddy Franklin remains separated
from the Loop Current, most of the oil will circulate around the central gulf, weathering
and dissipating long before nearing any shorelines. If Eddy Franklin has re-joined the
main Loop Current, any oil moved to the northern extent of the eddy will once again have
a pathway to the Florida Straits and beyond. We will continue daily monitoring of the
Loop Current in order to monitor this re-connection.

June 10, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.6

CDR Mike Weaver
ICC Deputy
Document ID: 0.7.19.2040.7

[email protected], [email protected],[email protected], Nickie Lambert
<[email protected]>
Afternoon-
June 11, 2010
11:00 AM
th
The next NRT call will be on Monday June 14
at 11:00.
Situation Status:
- Yesterday 15,000 bbls of oil were recovered with the Top Hat. This is reaching the maximum
recovery rate of the current recovery ship. Other vessels are being brought in to increase the
maximum recovery rate.
- A new flow rate was released yesterday ( 20-40,000 bbls). This new flow rate is a revised
estimate of the flow rate before the riser pipe was cut. W ork continues on creating a flow rate
after the rise cut was made.
- The first relief well remains at approximately 8,700ft below the seafloor. Casing continues to
be installed.
- The second relief well is at 3,400 ft below the seafloor. They have completed the BOP
diagnostics.
- There was 1 burn yesterday.
- 9,600 bbls of an oil/water mix was recovered yesterday via skimming operations.
- 2,700 gallons of surface and 10,000 gallons of subsea dispersants were applied yesterday.
Interagency Solutions Group:
- There are 18 agencies as part of ISG.

- One main topic has been the barrier berm proposals.
o -Emergency permits have been approved for LA. There are going to be 6 berms to the
W est totaling 60 miles. There will be 3 berms to the East, totaling 18 miles.
- A proposal has been approved to fill in the Katina Cut on Dauphin Island.
- Continue to discuss the Presidents visit to the Gulf next week.
Congressional Affairs:
- Today a Senate CODEL is in the Gulf.

- The House Government Oversight Committee will be in the Gulf on Monday to ask MMS
employees questions as part of their investigation.
Legal Affairs:
- Continue to focus on cost recovery and claims issue.

- House passed a bill allowing for more access to the Trust Fund.
--
Joe Inslee
B6
Fax 301-713-4387
Received(Date): Sat, 12 Jun 2010 04:29:11 +0100


06/11/2010 5:00pm EDT
1. 2. 3.
Regional Highlights
x 15,400
barrels of oil captured by the Lower Marine Riser Package Cap on
June 10.
x x x
203 skimmers are now active across the impacted states, an increase of 65 since Wednesday.

22,720
volunteers trained and working on clean up.
Over
million in claims paid see State Claims Summary data by county below.
$58
Offshore Sea Floor

ContainmentRecovery Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap
Operations Summary: 15,400 barrels of oil were captured through the LMRP cap during the past 24-hour
period. Oil and natural gas are being carried to the surface through a riser pipe and oil is being stored on
the Discoverer Enterprise.
approximately 10,279 gallons applied on June 10. EPA is allowing subsea application of the currently-
used dispersant to continue. There is a reduction in the need for subsea dispersant with increased
capture of oil through the LMRP Cap.
Drilling continues on both wells. They are situated approximately one-half mile from the Macondo well
and will attempt to intercept the existing wellbore at approximately 18,000 feet below sea level. Once
intercepted, the Macondo well can be killed via a bottom kill by pumping heavy mud and cement down
the hole. It is estimated the total drilling process for each well will take at least 90 days from the start
date.

x The first relief well (work being performed by the Development Driller III) has passed 13,800 feet

below sea level. This well was spudded on May 2.

feet below sea level. Drilling began on May 16.
Cleanup Vessels 3,772 vessels are deployed, including tugs, barges and recovery boats.
Skimming Vessels 203 of the cleanup boats are skimmers, designed to separate oil from water.
Approximately 18.5 million gallons of oil-water mix have been recovered and treated.
Surface Dispersant An additional 1,366 gallons of dispersant was applied on the surface yesterday.
Increased oil recovery through the LMRP Cap and subsea application of dispersant reduces the need for
surface application.
In-Situ Burning No burns were conducted on Thursday.

The U.S. Government has also issued a general call for submission of white papers

x that cover: oil sensing improvements to response and detection; oil wellhead control and submerged oil
response; traditional oil spill response technologies; alternative oil spill response technologies; and oil spill
damage assessment and restoration. That announcement can be found online at:
e&_cview=1

Onshore Response
Boom Report 2.4 million feet of containment boom have been deployed (with an additional 622,000
feet staged). 2.9 million feet of sorbent boom have been deployed (with an additional 2.27 million feet
available or being staged.)
$500 Million for 10-year Gulf Research Initiative to Study Spill Impacts BP is contributing $500
million over 10 years to fund an open research program studying the impact of the Deepwater Horizon
incident, and its associated response, on the marine and shoreline environment of the Gulf of Mexico.

BP Provides $75 million in block grants BP announced it is provided the states of Mississippi,
Alabama and Florida $25 million each to continue implementation of state Area Contingency Plans.
Volunteers and Training 22,720 volunteers are signed up, trained, and working as of June 10.
monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and vessel operation for laying boom. As of today, more
than 29,000 training courses have been completed by those working on the incident. Information about
training can be found on the incident website at www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com under volunteers.
State Specific Websites These websites are designed to provide state-specific oil spill information to
residents of communities affected by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
x x

x x

Mississippi:
Claims Summary June 10

Alabama Counties
Mobile Baldwin Monroe Montgomery Covington Clarke Wilcox Escambia Plaquemines Tuscaloosa Dale Chilton Madison Washington Other Counties Claims Paid
$7,408,634
$2,075,647
$56,000
$31,100
$25,000
$24,500
$23,500
$19,000
$15,000
$12,500
$12,500
$12,500
$11,389
$10,226
$394,002
$10,131,496
Alabama Total
Florida Counties
Franklin Escambia Okaloosa Bay Santa Rosa Wakulla Gulf Walton Pasco Liberty Pinellas Washington Jackson
Claims Paid
$1,908,257
$1,510,601
$1,331,822
$1,186,565
$494,120
$358,450
$268,000
$153,930
$53,500
$42,300
$27,500
$25,000
$25,000
Leon Duval Calhoun Citrus Lake Hillsborough Other Counties
$22,500
$20,000
$16,075
$15,000
$12,500
$12,500
$217,119
$7,700,737
Florida Total
Louisiana Parishes
Plaquemines Jefferson Terrebonne Lafourche Saint Bernard Orleans Saint Tammany Vermilion Iberia Saint Charles Calcasieu Saint Mary Cameron Lafayette Tangipahoa Livingston East Baton Rouge St John the Baptist Assumption Saint Martin Washington Saint Landry Jefferson Davis Ascension Beauregard Saint James Pointe Coupee Avoyelles Other Parishes
Louisiana Total
Claims Paid
$6,492,735
$5,999,574
$5,511,305
$3,425,646
$2,907,577
$1,474,523
$1,256,230
$956,133
$587,624
$569,100
$460,300
$441,800
$389,150
$253,694
$205,600
$132,500
$131,304
$88,750
$61,500
$60,500
$56,700
$43,000
$42,500
$36,400
$36,000
$29,000
$24,900
$23,900
$977,099
$32,675,044
Mississippi Counties
Harrison Jackson Hancock
Claims Paid
$2,982,955
$1,507,610
$1,013,898
Stone Pearl River George Lamar Pike Forrest Marion Madison Lawrence Neshoba Other Counties
Mississippi Total
Other States
$103,625
$99,000
$55,500
$55,000
$19,300
$15,000
$12,500
$11,800
$10,000
$10,000
$214,550
$6,110,738
Total Claims Paid
$1,555,774
$58,173,790
Claims
31 Claims offices have been established by BP across the Gulf Coast to provide locations where

x people can go to file or discuss claims. There are more than 500 claims adjusters staffing the offices.
Vietnamese and Spanish translators are in some offices. Note: No person asserting a claim or receiving
payment for interim benefits will be asked or required to sign a release or waive any rights to assert
additional claims, to file an individual legal action, or to participate in other legal actions associated with
the Deepwater Horizon incident.
x The contact
office locations listed below. Claims can also be filed online at: www.bp.com/claims
Claims Offices
Belle
Chasse/Gretna


5703 Hwy 56
Chauvin, LA 70344

Cut Off
(Lafourche Parish)

Unit 2
Cut Off, LA 70345




Houma
(Terrebonne Parish)

Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363



Town Hall
Lafitte, LA 70067

Morgan
City (St. Mary Parish)
931 US Hwy 90 East


4375 Michoud Blvd



956 S. Lewis Street




Slidell, LA 70461

St. Bernard (St. Bernard Parish)

1345 Bayou Rd


41093 Hwy LA 23



Westwego, LA 77094
Bay St.
Louis (Hancock County)
1171 Highway 90

Biloxi


Biloxi, MS 39532

Pascagoula

5912 Old Mobile Hwy

Suite 3

Bayou LaBatre




1008 Alabama Avenue


Foley

Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535



Suite 1



Suite 1
Mobile, AL 36606


194 14th Street

Suite 105



Suite A&B


Suite 13



Unit B-9


7885 Overseas Hwy

Marathon, FL 33050





3960 Navy Boulevard

Suite 16-17
Pensacola, FL 32507

Port St.
Joe (Gulf County)
106 Trade Circle

Suite A



Suite H
Key West, FL 33040

Santa Rosa Beach (Walton County)

5008 US Hwy 98W

Unit 6&7

Contact Information

(866) 448-5816
Team
suggestions
(866) 557-1401
(866) 448-5816
(281) 366-5511
with response
and to sign up\
(281) 366-5511

(866) 905-4492 or (866) 647-
2338
(281) 366-3123
(800) 440-0858
Ideas or Services to Offer File online at www.horizonedocs.com

Investor Relations Claims by phone Claims File online at www.bp.com/claims
(985) 902-5231 or (985) 902-

5240
(251) 445-8965
(832) 587-8554
(888) 318-6765
(281) 366-5578
Joint Information Center Robert, LA Media and information center

Karen St John
BP America
B6

Subject: DWH_ACTIONS_and_UPDATES_6.11.2010
DWH_ACTIONS_and_UPDATES_6.11.2010.xls
OMAO DWH Aircraft Tasking - NMFS NOS OAR Program Impacts.doc
OMAO DWH Ship Tasking - NMFS NOS OAR Program Impacts.docx
MMST Health and Stranding Update 06-10-10.doc
2010_0611_Seafood Safety Daily Report.docx
Good morning
Here is the report from yesterday evening.
NOS was having IT issues and I didn't see that this report went through so I am resending.
Best,
Jen
PRIORITY
ISSUES
RESPONSE OPERATIONS -
Response Operations
NIC/ICC/NRT
Source Control: Total oil collected since the LMRP Cap containment system (t approximately 88,700 barrels. Dispersant use was reduced from 10 to 7 gal pe NRT
No calls scheduled this weekend.
NRT Marsh Cleanup Report MC252 is being reviewed by the NRT.
Louisiana barrier project: $360 million in escrow from BP, $60 million transf Alabama:
o Dauphin Island/Katrina Cut project: $10-12 million, 74 days est. completion o Perdido Pass project: 36 pipe booms attached to multiple 40 pipes across t for emergency vessels; est. completion June 2011
NIC Activities
Public Health Response: NIC/IASG staff participated on an interagency call a DW H. Public health response will be coordinated by the W H Domestic Policy Communications Plan addresses:
o worker safety
o public health risks from exposure to oil and dispersants
o seafood inspection
o reopening of closed fisheries
Each agency has been asked to identify designated spokespeople for communi Medicine is planning a public workshop on DW H health effects in New Orlean asked to provide representation for seafood safety and fishery closures.
Spatial Data: Daily Loop Current graphic submitted to the NIC for JIC cleara outgoing team of John W agner (NMS) and Michelle Johnston (NMS) have don expanding ERMAs use at the NIC. Created requirements document to identify would be useful to senior decision makers at NIC and make ERMA more robu Situation Unit to better display ERMA on touch screen and multiple large scre SCIENCE LMR
REPORT ATTACHED
Fisheries Closure
* There were no modifications to the closed area in the Gulf EEZ for June 1 78,264 sq mi (202,703 sq km), or about 32% of the GOM EEZ.
The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources announc
Response Operations
Source Control: Total oil collected since the LMRP Cap containment system (top hat #4) was
implemented is approximately 88,700 barrels. Dispersant use was reduced from 10 to 7 gal per
minute.
NRT
No calls scheduled this weekend.
NRT Marsh Cleanup Report MC252 is being reviewed by the NRT.
Louisiana barrier project: $360 million in escrow from BP, $60 million transferred to state to start
project.
Alabama:
o Dauphin Island/Katrina Cut project: $10-12 million, 74 days est. completion time
o Perdido Pass project: 36 pipe booms attached to multiple 40 pipes across the pass with removable
center section for emergency vessels; est. completion June 2011
NIC Activities
Public Health Response: NIC/IASG staff participated on an interagency call about the public health
response to DWH. Public health response will be coordinated by the WH Domestic Policy Council. The
Public Health Communications Plan addresses:
o worker safety
o public health risks from exposure to oil and dispersants
o seafood inspection
o reopening of closed fisheries
Each agency has been asked to identify designated spokespeople for communications and policy. HHS
Institute of Medicine is planning a public workshop on DWH health effects in New Orleans 22-23
June. NOAA will likely be asked to provide representation for seafood safety and fishery closures.
Spatial Data: Daily Loop Current graphic submitted to the NIC for JIC clearance. Welcomed new
REPORT ATTACHED
Fisheries Closure
* There were no modifications to the closed area in the Gulf EEZ for June 11, 2010. The closed area
remains 78,264 sq mi (202,703 sq km), or about 32% of the GOM EEZ.
The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources announces additional state
waters were closed to all forms of recreational and commercial fishing effective at 6 p.m. June 10,
2010. The new precautionary closures affect all inside waters west of the Dauphin Island Bridge
including Mississippi Sound, Heron Bay, Portersville Bay and Grand Bay. These closures are in
addition to previous closures of all waters in the Gulf of Mexico including Pelican Bay and the waters
of Mobile Bay east of the Mobile Ship Channel and south of a line from Mobile Ship Channel Marker
Number 22 to Little Point Clear on the north side of Fort Morgan Peninsula.
Seafood Inspection
* Preparing to host a third training for State sensory assessors to begin next week in Pascagoula, MS.
* Three NWFSC staff are returning from Pascagoula after assisting NSIL staff in processing fish and
shrimp for chemical analyses. Three other staff will depart for Pascagoula on Sunday 6/13.
* As of COB June 10, 2010:
o Total Number of Stations Sampled-- 154
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
TASK litigation hold on all documenets talking points/on-pager Impacts to marine mammals and turtles
Fisheries report and economic statistics Role, Schedule document Email Distribution List fishery closure disaster FAQs (can fishermen receive compensation near real-time?)
Request for economic impacts to fisheries fisheries issues white paper as relates to spill Develop a long-term staffing plan White House White paper - OCS and OSLTF Develop plan for ICC to be 24 hrs Use of Satellite Imagery oil spill impacts, hurricances, and other weather systems
provide trajectory information to DOT List of NMAO vessels in area Impacts to NOAA equipment (tide guages, etc) Unified Command locations Map of NOAA facilities in area contact info to send new ideas/technologies Worst Case Scenario briefing for Deputies assessment of historical weather in Gulf Prioritized list of Congressional of overflights policy decision -economic implications for WH Winer to serve as POC for NGO engagement Resources at Risk and accompanying FAQs about roles responsibiliites, and what we are actually doing
follow-up with UNH science contacts, particularly in relation to dispersants
one-pager biological impact from sheen and dispersants
NOAA role in oil spills Turtle talking points legal record of use of dispersant at source work force mgt explore how to engage support of other agencies, states, etc
Contingency Plan for Gordon Gunther Official Tasking for vessel allocation Loop Current Tps Verify NIST engaged in specimen collection understanding of safety of environment Safety of staff working on the ground catch & release in closed area tps recreational & commercial fishing data NASA to provide high spectral imaging Legal questions for response to Governors LO engagement training fishermen loop current factsheet High level worst case tps
DEADLINE
on-going
4/27/2010
4/28/2010
4/29/2010
4/29/2010
4/29/2010
4/29/2010
4/29/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
4/30/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/1/2010
5/2/2010
5/3/2010
5/3/2010
5/3/2010
5/3/2010
5/3/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/4/2010
5/5/2010
5/5/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
worst case web-ex meeting partner with google on product NMFS updated info available for Govs. Calls
5/5/2010
on-going
5/6/2010
best case scenario Request from DOI for assistance in chain of custody, storage procedures, laboratories that can do
anaylysis, etc.
Review EPA Dispersant Q&A
5/6/2010
5/6/2010
5/7/2010
info on how volunteers can get involved
5/7/2010
mechanism for small grants to academics Briefing for Francis Beinecke, CEO NRDC industry validator list for efforts in Gulf for Adm Allen phone call on 4/9
5/7/2010
5/7/2010
5/8/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Q&A on Sea Food Safety - NOAA/FDA authorities, roles, on-ground coordination, NMFS
Assess NOAA to serve as lead for SCATs Compacted oil bricks collected at Dauphin Island, what NOAA scientist received, what info is known
NOAA all hands message on gulf Rep. Cassidy requested info on testing/monitoring of the impacted fisheries areas and how it is
determined what areas should be closed (or re-opened) and how that information is relayed with the
public.
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
analysis of "red-tide" samples NOAA Research Council oil and science coordination across NOAA; outcome actions for team and
Larry Robinson
Gov. LA request to dredge and fill for keeping oil off-shore
follow-up on cooperative MOU and BP science sharing, and ability for contract academic scientist to
share data
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/9/2010
5/10/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Identify NOAA Scientist to serve as lead for our scientific activities and liaison for the academic
community
5/10/2010
Follow up with MS and AL regarding fisheries closure. NMFS has call today with State Directors
subject matter expert briefings
Ensure we are adequately ramping up our capacity to analyze seafood safety issues
Review DOS Embassy cable
5/10/2010
5/10/2010
5/10/2010
5/10/2010
OMB request that NOAA serve as Federal lead for Deepwater Horizon consolidated website
Provide guidance to staff regarding tracking hours, expenses, etc in relation to this event
5/11/2010
5/11/2010
NOAA SSC /RRT efforts to host workshop on dispersants, region-wide assessment, impacts, long-term
fate, etc.
Seafood Sampling plan details for DOC
Fisheries Disaster Declaration Apparently the Governor sent a letter to Sec. Locke on April 30
seeking a disaster declaration for MS fisheries due to the leak. They have not heard anything about
their request and asked for a status update.
Process for forwarding funding requests to Unified Command or other leads
Move proposals for IOOS HFR and second flight of P-3 through approval process
Prepare request to Mary Landry regarding NOAAs research/scientific requests, ceiling of requests,
and streamlined process for making requests
Guidance for staff on congressional town halls, local/regional meetings with congress ensure
consistent messaging
Request rough estimate for number of NOAA staff in the region, distinct from those on TDY
Follow-up today for science coordination across NOAA and engagement/coordination with Navy
Request for time on aircraft for NMFS enforcement
Follow-up regarding interview scheduled for today in Houma
5/11/2010
5/11/2010
5/11/2010
5/12/2010
5/12/2010
5/12/2010
5/12/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
Media protocol work through Office of Communications and External Affairs on all media requests.
5/13/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
External constituent engagement protocol work through appropriate offices: Office of

Communication and External Affairs and o Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
When you meet with external groups, please send a brief report out of the meeting and interests of the
public (all)
Barrier Island fill-in follow-up today, ensure Habitat Office is engaged; host call today with NOAA HQ
and staff ASAP today (5/13)
Request for data on normal numbers of turtle and dolphin strandings/deaths for the longest historical
data
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
5/13/2010
Follow-up on flow-rate estimates

NOAA needs to step out in a stronger way regarding our science and examining the whole ecosystem;
air quality and water quality.
Utilize Sea Grant more effectively to serve as our liaison for engaging with the community
Engage external scientific community to validate videos from BP
5/14/2010
5/14/2010
5/14/2010
5/14/2010
ADML Landry request 30-day ship time, use of the Gordon Gunther
Overview of sampling that is not being done, broad issues related to understanding where the oil is
and what its impact is (all assets, not exclusive to NOAA assets) Requested to send this to the NIC
Clear Daily report on status of marine mammals and turtles
Create daily chart showing mortality in relation to: #of total dead turtles, # sent for necropsies, #
necropsies completed, and # dead due to oil.
Assess capacity to conduct work needed request to review this and if more people are needed
develop timeline of seafood safety testing in advance of Monday Meeting/call at WH
Ensure routine updates on 0800 calls on key issues NOAA is working on
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
Ensure clear lines of communication and updates between NOAA and NIC
Reconstruct process of how NOAA has been engaged with developing/communicating release rate
Contact sheet for where to refer constituents to for key information
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Strategies to communicate our issues, particularly NMFS closures to public

Assign lead technical expert for LA barrier island issue
Check in on monitoring plan regarding use of sub-sea dispersants
Develop product for what our NERR and NM Sanctuary sites are seeing
Follow-up on release of chemical contents of dispersants for seafood safety testing needs
Identify mechanism to follow-up with attendees at community meetings
Follow-up on NOAA representation at NIC and if Mark Miller and Ralph Lopez need additional
support
Communication plan for loop current, ensure have same story for all constituents. Talking points for
leadership
Move loop current one-pager through clearance ASAP
Change loop current map: oil portion stippled to indicate that the oil is not uniform across the spill,
show loop current as a somewhat more varied flow
Tuesday, 2-3 meeting hosted by OMB for bi-cameral Congressional meeting to review legislation that
has been introduced who should participate on behalf of NOAA
Formal request needed through NIC for chemical components of dispersants, assistance from GC if
needed
Dispersant Monitoring plan should include efficacy of dispersant on oil, and biological/ecological
impacts
Hurricane outlook interactions with oil spill talking points and Tuesday 8am briefing
Develop talking points for issue of Pelican cruise and scientific statements asserted in press
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/15/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/16/2010
5/17/2010
Line Office assess participation in 3 technical working groups that are stood up by the Interagency
Solutions group
Develop proposal for engaging academic community (for review today)
Reconsider fisheries closure in light of data provided from Pelican cruise. Also conducting random
dock-side sampling to ensure seafood safety.
Expedited review of Loop 101 and Talking Points internal by 0930
Expedited review of Long-Term Transport of Oil and Talking Points internal by 1100
Follow-up on research platforms that could be deployed and sampling plan from all assets
Expert briefing for Loop Current Histogram by day for turtle strandings Request for talking points for turtle strandings Precautionary closure of fisheries due to potential of oil in the loop current
Assign technical point for OMB, DOC, FDA group regarding seafood safety; .
Need to have talking points and alert Cuba and Mexico regarding fishery closure and potential of oil
in loop current
Alert WH of fishery closure change Talking points on loop current, fishery closure, international, states what we are doing to address
the potential that oil is in the loop current
PLEASE clearly note on all emails and documents if they are FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
Check-in with Michele Finn regarding assets available on the ground, consider requesting Navy
support
Talking points on activities underway in Sanctuaries and NERRs
NOAA daily update, NOAA by the numbers, what NOAA has done for the day
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
5/17/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/18/2010
5/19/2010
5/19/2010
5/19/2010
5/19/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Do not provide economic data; contact Patricia Buckley ([email protected]) and Mark Doms
5/19/2010
Consider if the new Loop Current product can be made public and updated as appropriate
Follow-up call with NMFS and Kennedy regarding particular aspects of seafood safety testing and oil
aspects
Time-line for science plan Recirculate oil and hurricane materials Step back and assess how we are operating in response to this spill, how can we do a better job in
getting information out to the public (data, what we are doing, etc), what resources do we need to
additional staff needs for ORR Seattle War room, etc Joint press release for Gunther and USF sampling cruise
Notification to foreign nations of potential impacts to their states; need to do this in a timely manner as
there are legal considerations
Follow up on science plans, cruises note of 7 vessels, request for clear list of vessels and activities
Hurricanes and Oil Spill fact sheet and talking points, share with Jason Rolfe at the NIC
Share stories for how the government is adding value to the spill response and associated activities
Determine how many non-Federal partners NOAA has engaged with this process
Engage oil spill community and hurricane community to familiarize on data, processes,
communication strategies so that if hurricanes occur in the gulf, we can have a coordinated message
and approach; include EPA in conversations and follow-up actions
Consider deploying ORR staff to sit in the NHC to support FEMA on the ground
Do a briefing for meteorologists on the ground in the coastal states that are prepared with information
and talking points regarding oil spill and hurricanes
Identify what our hurricane response plan is in light of a hurricane, both Unified Command and
NOAA assets
Follow-up for 3pm Oil Spill 101 WH Press Briefing Dispersant workshop provide information on plans, who is invited, etc. for outreach to public and
federal agencies, etc.
Follow-up on EPA water quality monitoring plan, potentially item to be raised at a Principal call.
Follow-up meeting among science players to ensure tight coordination across NOAA
5/20/2010
5/20/2010
5/20/2010
5/20/2010
5/20/2010
5/21/2010
5/21/2010
5/21/2010
5/22/2010
5/22/2010
5/22/2010
5/23/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
Succinct email for where we are on making data public and where that data will be housed
Roll out seafood safety results this week, ensure is well coordinated
Berm proposal - usace proposal for berm : NOAA review before noon
Dispersant workshop at LSU - Planners need to connect Nancy Kinner
5/24/2010
5/24/2010
5/25/2010
5/25/2010
Clear compilation of NOAA and contract cruise activities Review materials that are distributed daily and streamline
5/26/2010
5/26/2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Resources for ensuring ERMA/data information can be operational ASAP; request from other
bureaus and departments for servers and hardware needs while we wait for equipment to
arrive
5/26/2010
Follow-up on discussion regarding data compilation and peer review considerations for data clearance for posting on erma clearance process for factsheets, tps, etc ERMA: Data descriptions NOAA delivering to the public through geoplatform.gov. Talking pts/materials for dr. lubchenco for 6.7.2010 potus briefing on dwh intro speech for dr. lubchenco's chow presentation 5/26/2010
6.5.2010
6.4.2010
6.4.2010
6.3.2010
6.3.2010
Need POC for Smithsonian offering to work with NOAA: 370,000 marine collections from
the Gulf. They are deep ocean specimens from areas right around the oil spill. Result in a
sense of relative abundance, and might provide a helpful basline.
Jonathan Coddington ([email protected]) lead for SI
6.5.2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
LEAD ALL NMFS James

Dieveney Love NMFS NMFS through ICC Moore
Lukens, Bavishi, Holst Moore Holst NWS ICC Taggert Moore
Holst Taggart ORR Conner, Helton NWS Gray, Bagley Doremus
Winer NMFS kennedy request Holst Holst NMFS ORR Taggart
OMAO Conner ORR Seattle ORR Broglie Nyr B NMFS James, Plummer
Glackin Schiffer, GC PCO ORR Seattle Holst
Status
On-going
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
On-going
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
On-going
Completed
Completed
Completed
need follow-up
On-going
On-going
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Conner Klimavicz, Akamine NMFS, Rapp
OBE
On-going
On-going
Conner NIST/Pedro Espina

Holst, ORR
Completed
Completed
Madsen
Completed
On-going
Winer
Winer Completed
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
NMFS
Conner Conner Kenney Completed
Completed
completed
OLA/NMFS
Completed
ORR
Murawski Bavishi
Schiffer, GC Completed
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Kennedy/Glackin/ORR
completed
NMFS
Comms with JIC Murawski/Thompson
DWH, ORR
Completed/but
continued
engagement needed
On-going
Completed
Sarri to follow-up with OMB,

Klimavicz
Gallagher/all staff Completed
conner NMFS
in progress
draft developed
NMFS
ORR/Gallagher
ORR/OAR/Gallagher
ORR/Gallagher
Gray, Bagley
Taggart Murawksi as lead, Zdenka,others
Oliver/Kenul
Kenney/Westerholm/Conner Completed
Completed
Completed
All staff
On-going
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
All staff All staff Yozell NMFS
On-going
On-going
On-going
outstanding
Murawski and team
McLean, Winer, Kennedy,

Murawski
Beaverson
Kenul/westerholm
Completed
Murawksi and team

ORR/ICC
NMFS
NMFS/ORR
NMFS
Dieveney/Kennedy On-going
Dieveney/Westerholm/Miller ORR-Seattle
Dieveney/Winer team
On-going
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Sutter/Winer
Yozell
Westerholm/Henry NOS Kennedy/Westerholm McLean/Winer/Bamford/Gray
Miller with leadership
Kenney Murawski/Dieveney/leadership
clearance
Haddad Gray
Tim Gallagher
Tim Gallagher NWS Kenney/McLean completed
completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
completed
On-going
outstanding
LO Leadership
Murawski/Sandifer/Haddad,
others
NMFS HQ clearance HQ clearance Murawski/McLean
Kenney
NMFS
NMFS
NMFS
NMFS
draft submitted 5/17
Completed
Completed
outstanding
Sarri
DWH Team with experts ALL DWH Team
DWH Team
Kenney underway completed
On-going
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
ALL
On-going
Conner/Kenney Oliver, Kennedy Matlock, Murawski

DWH Team
review on-going
Completed
Completed
All, also particular to NOAA HQ Taggart

Kenney
Turner/Reed with DWH Team Gallagher
NWS and ORR Comms/DWH staff team ICC RFI
on-going
On-going
in progress
On-going
NWS/ORR
ORR NWS/ORR
ICC
Kenney Gray/Kenney (Dreyfus)
(Rolfe at NIC/Westerholm)
Kennedy
Complete
completed
Klimavicz Comms/ NMFS

policy/NIC Comms
Completed
completed
completed
Science/Assets
ICC/DWH staff
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Data & Information

Science
margaret spring
comms
Amy Merten
DWH Staff
DWH Staff
NRDA / Penn
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Outcome
NOTES
questions from WH
Submitted through JIC process, not a NOAA product
briefing to take place on 5/18

http://www.charts.noaa.gov/ENCs/?M=D
region
region
region
Have one-pager with info for use
one-pager developed and sent for clearance on 5/17
being coordinated through Unified Command
External Affairs team in place to support
cleared and posted on-line
request to engage UNH through the science summit proposal and
engaging academic scientists
complete and posted on-line
requested by GC
working on IPA
BP not requesting
BP not requesting
5/7 version completed and available for use internally
what is NIST concern?
Birnea to travel 5/10 to review situation and develop a plan
vendor AIRINC could also serve this role

info sent to John Rapp for use
completed, needs to be posted on-line
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Dr. L to call google colleagues to follow up

www.google.com/crisisresponse/oilspill
will be built into every days tps
Experience tells me that the response would go on for 45-60 more
days, but the oil will all be beached or dispersed within about 30
Pedro to close loop with NOAA and DOI
Need to have final Q&A
On the guidance for volunteer issue, Caren and I are working with
BP's volunteer coordination program coordinators to establish a
protocol for providing information to BP about organizations that
have volunteer resources and organizations in the Gulf that are
capable of accepting volunteers. Based on my discussions, BP should
be ready to discuss these protocols by Wednesday/Thursday, and we
are planning a call with BP's volunteer coordinators and the external
affairs working group organized by CEQ. In addition, the Fish and
Wildlife Service and NOAA are working together to take the various
lists of entities offering volunteers and organizations in the Gulf
seeking volunteers and create a working document. After we
determine the best way to interface with BP, we will likely send the
document to JIC and get approval to share it with BP.
there is a mechanism in place (LA Sea Grant), for which funds if
available could always be added, other regional Sea Grants following
suit. Sea Grant should be included in the suite of granting
mechanisms engaged, but not be sole route
To follow-up with Michele Finn to identify SSC or other to brief
list sent to Justin on Sat. No known outcomes from Adm Allen phone
call
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Mussel
Watch
(John
Christense
n in
NCCOS) is
sampling
for
chemicals
in shellfish
along the
coast to
establish
new base
lines before
oil hits and
will be
testing
during and
after spill
hits
shorelines.
It is
nation's
longest
continual
water
quality/she
llfish
monitoring
program.
Determine that we could coordinate Federal participation on SCAT
(as of 5/10/10: 4 out of Houma; 5 out of Mobile)
analysis shows this is from Mississippi 252; likely sourced from
initial blast
sent with notice of confirmation of AS Dr. Larry Robinson
Talking points cleared and delivered

NCCOS
scientists
(Rick
Stumpf) on
what red
tides/ algae
they have
IDed in
Gulf.
Analysis being done 5/10 by LUMCON, should have information

today
activities on-going to engage scientific community across NOAA and
external partners
call taking place on 5/12 (EPA, NOAA, DOI)
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Gary Matlock - intra-agency; Murawski - interagency; Sandifer -

academic liaison
NMFS has call today with State Directors

Disperants, Hurricanes, Seafood Safety, etc. NMFS text has been provided regarding fish closures and seafood
safety
no specific
criteria
they are
using
NOAAs 3
day traj's
like us
Dispersants (5/12)
Deepwater
Integrated
Services
Team led
by Tracy
Wareing,
DHS, and
Daniel
contact made to DOC CFO to take action to follow-up with OMB to
Werfel,
make a formal request of Randy Lyon,
OMB. Leon
[email protected], and ask about a possible DOC
Cammen,
leadership role perhaps through multi-agency coordination with SBA
NOAA Sea
to explore further what is required for physical one-stop locations.
Grant,
guidance distributed on 5/12
Charlie Henry is trying to push forward with this using BP funding.
He requested that Dave Kennedy support the concept to BP while he
is in Louisiana. We should also start to support the idea in NRT calls
and discussions with EPA.
Meeting with OMB, DOC, and FDA Monday, 5/17
FTEs in 5 regional states: 1400; within 20 miles of coastline: ~750

activities on-going
interview was canceled
Contact: Justin Kenney ([email protected]), Scott Smullen
([email protected]) and Jennifer Austin
([email protected]).
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Office of Communication and External Affairs (Andy Winer:

[email protected]); Office of Legislative and
Intergovernmental Affairs ([email protected])
send to [email protected] and [email protected]
meeting happening in region today: rachel sweeney, pat williams to
participate on behalf of NMFS
data received by NMFS on 5/17, in process
(updated 5/14) WHOI scientists are capable of deploying

instruments on one of the working ROVs. We discussed making
multiple acoustic measurements to assess the degree of variability.
This looks to be doable
NIST: Flow
Metrology
Group and
the POC
there is
Pedro
Espina
(pedro.espi
[email protected]
v, 301-975-
5444)
Regional meeting with all Sea Grant Directors scheduled for Monday,
5/17
request for longer piece of video is still outstanding (5/17)
USCG is
using
contract
vessel. No
need for
NOAA to
reallocate
the
Identify what other NOAA/academic assets has that are comparable;
Gunther
o Connect with Unified Area Command to determine needs and how
(reported
needs could be met by other NOAA /academic assets
on 5/17)
Report for daily situation report
Request from WH Principals meeting on 5/14; DoI requested to do
same for birds
NOAA contacts at NIC: Mark Miller ([email protected]);

Ralph Lopez ([email protected])
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Has polled team for technical expert engagement (Miles Croom,

Chris Doley, others)
Contact made to NERR and ONMS on 5/14 for follow-up
NOAA NIC contacts tracking this down today 5/14
assessing additional full-time science staff
Spring/NMFS(Reisner)/NOS (Westerholm and Kennedy)
will be given to team on 5/18
Proposal from Mark Miller: Discharge Rate technical team potential

participants: Dr. Bill Lehr, OAR (Dr. Ned Cokelet, PMEL); Loop
current team potential participants: Dr. Jerry Galt, Dr. Rich Patchen
(Environmental Assessment Group has also taken this issue on);
Subsea Dispersant Characteristics potential participants: Dr. CJ
Beegle-Krausen, Dr. Alan Mearns
verified that the area in which the Pelican was working is within the
closed area
JIC cleared (5/17) OMB/WH pending
Closing larger area of fishery will be announed 1300 today, in effect

1600 today
Steve Wilson and Tim Hansen can serve this role
press briefing on loop current conducted 5/18 at 1100.
request out to Los to submit data every day
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
contact Patricia Buckley ([email protected]) and Mark Doms

determined product as is is not appropriate for public dissemination,
conversations between D.Miller and Helton underway
sent with notes from call
updated document outlining leadership response structure
Tick-Tock of NOAA assets on the ground developed (5/23)
Jerry Galt identified to serve this role
Have slide deck used for this press briefing
Comments on plan postponed to noon 5/24
NOAA's principal web engineers worked through this past weekend

and are continuing to install additional hardware to allow this effort
to become a reality. We are limiting access to this development/test
portal to speed development. I thought we would be able to allow
access to a few users to preview the site today, but given where we
are with development, we will try to give some access tomorrow to
NOAA leadership. Concerning the consolidated approach to
Deepwater data, this development (public ERMA or GeoPlatform.gov)
addresses the ability to integrate all of NOAA's data, as well as other
Government agencies (DOI, EPA, DHS)
comments submitted 5/25
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.1
NOAA Science
June 11, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
Topic Areas
P-3
preliminary results



NOAA Assets
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
P-3 prelim results
Measured concentrations were highly variable due to location ofthe aircraf relative to the
t oil spill, rate at which crude oil was being transported to the surf f the well, residence
ace rom time ofoil on surf ace, aging ofspecies in the atmosphere, and meteorological conditions.
The reported data are considered PRELIMINARY because there has been very little time to
evaluate the data. Not all the species whose concentrations were measured are given in this
report. The emphasis ofthis report is on chemicals believed to contribute to health impacts;
however the aircraf was not equipped to measure a comprehensive suite ofair tox t ics
MAJ FINDING: The ozone air pollution and the aromatic hydrocarbons from the Deep
OR Water Horizon spill were mostly confined to the area around the site and fresh oil slick
from the spill. In contrast, the aerosols (likely produced from hydrocarbons evaporating
3 from the oil slick) were also present downwind.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
Throughout the sampled region the concentrations of criteria pollutants- ozone, carbon monoxide, and
nitrogen dioxide- were lower than the concentrations applicable under the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
Directly over the oil slick, concentrations of all aromatic hydrocarbons and oxygenated volatile orgainc
compounds (VOCs) were enhanced (Fig 2a)
Downwind from the oil slick, the concentrations of aromatic hydrocarbons were reduced due to the
combined effects of dilution and chemical removal, i.e. these species are chemically removed from the
atmosphere with lifetimes of hours to days.
South of Louisiana, the background Gulf air was relatively clean with all species close to their seasonal
background concentrations.
4
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4

for June 11, 2010
* The large loop eddy remains semi-detached

from the Loop Current, with its outer edge
interacting with the Loop Current while its core
is in closed circulation. The small cyclonic
(counterclockwise) vortex just south of 25 N,
85 W has become weaker over the last

several days.
*Continued potential for reattachment in the
next few days to weeks.
*With continued S-SE winds over the next
several days, no significant quantities of oil are
expected to enter the northern eddy or Loop

Current.
1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
No flyover updates
mandatory pilot break
Turtles
Turtle Status
351
296
45
6
4
7
17
57
46
175
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
No flyover updates
mandatory pilot break
Dolphins
Dolphin Status
39
37
0
2
0
14
8
6
9
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
June 11, 2010
152 samples of fish and shellfish collected in the Gulf arrived at the NWFSC yesterday.
These samples are being processed and will undergo analysis early next week.
and are undergoing QA/QC review.
GC/MS analysis of 24 fish and shellfish composite samples were completed this week

Chemical analysis is underway for 13 shrimp samples (composites).
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4

As of 11 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48
N49
N46
N68
N57
N42
N43
N44
N47
N51
N52
Status Today
Loop Current Flight, MacDill AFB
Repo to Ontario, CA for CALNEX, MacDill AFB
DWH multi-spectral scanning/oil density & thickness, down day crew rest, Mobile, AL
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Marine mammal survey, Homer, AK.
DWH marine survey , Mobile, AL
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
NOAA Ship Positions

As of 11 JUN 2010
FA
DY
MF
SH
M2
RA
DJ
HB
DE
KA
SE
HA
TJ
GU
R2
PC
RB
NF
= underway
EX Guam
ID FA SH MF DY HA M2 SE KA RA DJ EX Status Today
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/15 Newport, OR
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/11 Pearl Harbor, HI
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival TBD, pending Indonesian clearance
= alongside
ID Status Today
Alongside Woods Hole, MA. Staging for transit to GoM for DWH ops
DE
(seafood study)
Alongside Galveston, TX. Departure 6/15 for continued DWH ops
TJ
(acoustics and water sampling)
HB Alongside Newport, RI. Departure 7/6 for scheduled project
NF Alongside Charleston, SC. Departure delayed to ~6/23 following repairs
RB Alongside Norfolk, VA. Shipyard repair contract ends 8/13
GU
(mammal survey shifted to GoM due to DWH)
PC Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure 6/14 for DWH ops (seafood study)
R2 Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure 6/16 for sea trials
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4

As of 11 JUN 2010
BB CA BM OV
JF GY PE
CH
BR
RB
WS
EN RC
= underway
= alongside
ID BR BM BB CH CA EN GY JF OV PE RB RC WS Type F/V Beau Rivage R/V Brooks McCall M/V Bunny Bordelon R/V Cape Hatteras R/V Caretta R/V Endeavor R/V Gandy R/V Jack Fitz R/V Ocean Veritas R/V Pelican M/V Rachel Bordelon R/V Ryan Chouest R/V Walton Smith Status Today
Fisheries baseline sampling off of FL
Deep water sampling W of wellhead, moving N
Inport Houma
Arriving Gulfport, MS
Transit to FL
Inport Pascagoula for mechanical problems. Return to operations estimated 14 June
Departing 1800 for deep water sampling
Inport Fourchon
Inport Chauvin, LA
ADCP mooring deployment 2.5km north of wellhead
Continuing coastal sampling (150m depth) westward then redirecting eastward
Transit to Miami, FL
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/confluence/display/OOP/Subsurface+Monitoring+Ship+Locations
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/confluence/display/OOP/Maritime+Vessel+Assets
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
Vessel Assignments for June 11-13, 2010
Vessel Beau Rivage Type 109 ft F/V Compliment 6

Latitude Longitude
Operations for June 11 Fisheries baseline sampling
off FL coast
28 43.5N 88 24.8W
Deep water sampling W of
wellhead, moving N
Operations for June 12 Fisheries baseline sampling
off FL coast
Deep water sampling Operations for June 13
Fisheries baseline sampling
off FL coast
Deep water sampling
No indication of
subsurface oil, small
dissolved oxygen dip at
900m west of well head
Findings
Brooks McCall
162 ft ROV
Ops
32
Bunny Bordelon Cape Hatteras

Endeavor Gordon Gunter
150 ft OSV
16
29 35.9N 30 22.0N
90 12.8W
89 05.5W
In Houma Arriving Gulfport, MS Transit to FL In Pascagoula, MS Departing 1800 for deep

water sampling
In Houma In Gulfport, MS Transit to FL In Pascagoula, MS On station at first light for

deep water sampling
In Houma
Departing for Methane
sampling
Transit to FL
In Pascagoula, MS
Awaiting equipment
delivery
185 ft
224 ft R/V 33 30 18.0N 88 34.0W
Jack Fitz
NAVOcean Sea
Gliders
165 ft OSV
2 AUV's
26
29 20.9N
90 14.8W
Deep water sampling

Ocean Veritas
194 ft M/V
41
29 08.6N
90 12.8W
In Port Fourchon
In Port Fourchon, LA
Indication of subsurface
plume detected yesterday
3km SW of wellhead,
weaker indication out to
5.5 km W of wellhead
Pelican Rachel Bordelon Rutgers and USF

gliders
116 ft R/V 150 ft
16 20
29 14.3N 28 48.0N
90 40.2W 88 52.5W
In Chauvin, LA
ADCP mooring deployment
2.5km north of wellhead
Keys
In Chauvin, LA In Houma, LA Monitoring FL coastal

Keys
In Chauvin, LA
In Houma, LA
Keys
3 AUV's
Ryan Chouest
215 ft OSV
27
29 12.0N
88 00.0W
Continuing coastal sampling

Subsurface (150m)
(150m depth) westward
then redirecting eastward
Arriving in Galveston, TX Arriving in Miami, FL In Galveston, TX In Miami, FL
Subsurface (150m)
In Galveston, TX
In Miami, FL
Large surface patch of oil

sighted last night, no
subsurface hits reported
Thomas Jefferson Walton Smith
208 ft R/V 96 ft R/V
33
19
29 20.4N 25 47.2N
94 45.6W 80 13.0W
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.4
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
30N !
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
(
!
!
(
Deepwater Horizon MC252:

Documented Dolphins in Northern
Gulf of Mexico from 4/30/10 - 6/ 1 0 10/
28N Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
Unconfirmed Location
(
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
!
(
Deepwater Horizon Platform
28N
26N
0 25
50
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.5
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
30N !
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
((
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
((
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
!
(!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(!
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(!
(!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
30N
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(

Documented Sea Turtles in Northern
Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Skimmer-caught:
#
* New
#
* Confirmed Location
#
* Unconfirmed Location
Captures from Directed Surveys:
"
New
)
"
Confirmed Location
)
"
)
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
26N FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
"
)
!
)
(
"
!
(
(
!
#
*
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
)
)
"
"
"
)
)
"
"
)
)
"
)
)
"
"
)"
)
"
"
)
)
!
(
"
)
"
)
"
)
#
*
28N
28N
0 25
50 90W
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.6


Increase of 16 turtle strandings, all dead (15 dead in MS, 1 dead in LA)
Increase of 4 oiled turtles captured during directed on-water search efforts (3 live, 1 dead)
Increase of 1 dolphin stranding (1 dead in LA, reported on June 9 and verified on June
10)
Sea Turtles:
351 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 20 from June 9
report)

o 293 of the stranded were found dead (increase of 16 from June 9)

4 turtles released alive (no change from June 9)
o 28 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 3 from June 9)
o o
3 turtles collected dead (increase of 1 from June 9)

3 turtles died in rehabilitation (no change from June 9)
* For this event, a true turtle stranding is defined as a turtle that washes ashore dead or
debilitated or is found floating dead or debilitated in the course of non-directed turtle surveys.
Turtles observed and/or captured during directed sampling efforts are not categorized as
strandings.
in rehab):

from June 9)
9)
Of the initial 73 full or partial necropsies completed, the two primary considerations for
the cause of death of the non-oiled recovered turtles are forced submergence or acute
toxicosis. Further results are pending.
Information on Signs of Sea Turtle Oiling:
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.7

Louisiana/Texas border through the Florida panhandle from June 1-10 is 65.
recent years in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and the Florida Panhandle during this
approximate time frame. The breakdown by state for the range of animals historically
stranding in the month of June (2005-2009) is as follows:
o o o o
Louisiana: 0-3 stranded sea turtles

Mississippi: 0-1 stranded sea turtles
Alabama: 0-4 stranded sea turtles
Florida panhandle (Escambia Wakulla Co.): 5-17 stranded sea turtles
Marine Mammals:
39 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 1
from June 9).
o o

2 were live stranded dolphins, one of which that died shortly after stranding, one
that was euthanized upon stranding (no change from June 9)
euthanized):

14 assessed and unable to perform necropsies (e.g. advanced decomposition) (increase of
1 from June 9)
9)
6 full necropsies performed (no change from June 9)
recover (no change from June 9)
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.7
2 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (no change from June 9)

Necropsy results are pending for all animals necropsied to date.
whether the animal was externally oiled pre- or post-mortem.

The total number of dolphin strandings that we have documented from the
This is higher than the number of marine mammal strandings that have been documented
in recent years in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and the Florida Panhandle during this
approximate time frame. In part, this may be a reflection of increased detection and
reporting and the lingering effects of an earlier observed spike in strandings for the winter
of 2010.
The breakdown by state for the range of animals historically stranding in the month of
June (2003-2007) is as follows:
o o o
o

The directed turtle survey managed by the Marine Mammal/Sea Turtle Unit was on the
water today, and 3 live and 1 dead oiled turtles were collected. Directed surveys will not
be undertaken on June 11 due to weather and vessel logistics.
Due to the documented presence of manatees in Mobile Bay and shoreline oil in the area,
an aerial survey under the Wildlife Branch to assess the risk to these animals was flown
today. Two airplanes flew simultaneous surveys, one in Alabama and one in
Mississippi/part of Louisiana. Only one potential manatee was observed; due to water
clarity it could not be confirmed. However, 80 dolphins were seen, including one group
of about 20 animals, and 2 sea turtles (both loggerheads) were also documented.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.7

Friday, June 11, 2010
Preparing to host a third training for State sensory assessors to begin next week in Pascagoula,
MS.
Three NWFSC staff are returning from Pascagoula after assisting NSIL staff in processing fish and
shrimp for chemical analyses. Three other staff will depart for Pascagoula on Sunday 6/13.
NWFSC is continuing chemical analysis of oyster, shrimp, snapper and croaker tissues.
Manually generated & QA-ed following seafood sample status summary from sample status
spreadsheets and related documentation.
Setting up database management and programming necessary to generate daily summaries of

seafood samples status.
Hosting SIP Sensory Analysts and NWFSC staff.

Working out logistics with SEFSC on determining which seafood samples are baseline and which
are from closed areas. This is necessary for reporting purposes.
Working out logistics with SEFSC on obtaining GIS mappings of sampling locations vs. cruise
tracks in order to improve sample management and processing.
Metrics:
As of COB June 10, 2010:
Total Number of Stations Sampled-- 154
o o
Number of Baseline Stations -- 124

Number of Sensory Stations -- 30
Document ID: 0.7.19.2162.8

forecast_20100614_1200CDT_20100611_2100CDT_rs.pdf
landfall6_11_complete.pdf
LoopCurrentStatus-6-11-1.pdf
os_forecast_20100614_1200CDT_20100611_1900CDT_rs.pdf
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

ICC Deputy on Watch


Overview: The amount of oil being collected via the top hat operation was approximately
15,400 gallons in the latest 24hr operation period. The transfer of crude oil from the drillship to
the barge Massachusetts, a process known as lightering, began the morning of June 9. The
operation should be completed by tomorrow morning and the barge will transport the oil for
discharge at an onshore terminal. Late this month, BP intends to increase surface processing
capacity by re-plumbing the top hat system so it can be routed to tankers. BP is moving forward
with connecting risers to ports on the side of the blow-out preventer. The risers will be
connected to the rig used in the top kill procedure. The operation is expected to collect 5,000-
10,000 additional barrels of oil per day.
BP is also continuing efforts to connect a new free-standing riser to the top hat. The new riser
will connect to the containment cap on the well, and will be held in the water by a canister
suspended about 300 feet beneath the water's surface. This system should be ready by next
month and will allow the surface collection ship to disconnect if a hurricane threatens it and
reconnect once the storm passes.
There is a total of 24,000 staff currently working to support response efforts in the field. The
staff is supporting a wide range of functions including oil clean-up operations, natural resource
damage assessment, source control, and seafood safety.

Trajectories:

Onshore (SE/S/SW ) winds are forecast to continue into next week at speeds <10 knots. Persistent
onshore winds have resulted in northward movement of the slick towards the
Mississippi/Alabama barrier islands and the Florida panhandle. Coastal regions in Mississippi
Sound west of Freeport, FL may continue to experience shoreline contacts. Persistent
Sound, and the Mississippi delta and shoreline oiling is possible.

Satellite imagery analysis continues to indicate possible patches of sheen to the S-SE of the main
slick. Scattered sheens and tar balls observed in these regions may be getting entrained into the
northern edge of the large clockwise eddy that has pinched off the main Loop Current (LC).
Trajectories indicate that some of these sheens may continue southward along the eastern edge of
main eddy, whereas some may be getting entrained into the counter-clockwise eddy to the NE of
the main LC eddy. A USCG/NOAA overflight off the west coast of Florida today saw
noncontiguous sheens along the northeastern section of the main LC eddy.

Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.1
Hot Topics:
A labam a Heavy Oiling: Alabama today experienced its heaviest oiling since the start of the spill.
A heavy band (2-3 ft wide) of red-brown oil was observed at the high tide line on along 8-10
miles of shoreline in the Bon Secour National Wildlife Refuge, AL. The refuge sits at the mouth
of Mobile Bay and contains 7,000 acres of wildlife habitat for migratory birds, nesting sea turtles
and the endangered Alabama beach mouse. As more oil reaches shore, various shoreline
protection strategies are being attempted.

Flow R ate Estim ates: The new flow rate estimates released by the NIC yesterday have
heightened concerns about environmental and economic impacts. The new estimates are the
consensus of the NIC Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG) and put the release rate at 25,000-
30,000 barrels/day (pre-riser cut). This release rate equates to more than 1 million gallons/day,
and this is day 53 of the spill. The FRTG plume team is working on post-riser cut flow estimates
(flow rate before the top hat was engaged) and like BPs engineers, expect estimates will be
higher than the pre-cut estimates.

ORR Staffing: ORR is working diligently to meet long term staffing needs for SCAT, NRDA,
GIS, data management, and other key roles. We have received a number of responses to calls for
assistance from NOAA, DOI, universities, States, and contracting companies and are working to
identify funding vehicles as needed. Many of the staff require SCAT or other training in order to
fill the necessary requirements and we are sharing materials and setting up training sessions as
quickly as possible. This week, we completed a SCAT training session and several new aerial
observers were trained in oil observation.

Subm erged Oil: While NOAA continues to investigate the extent and concentration of the
submerged oil, ORR is also performing a Resources at Risk assessment for depths between
1000-1400m. This RAR will contribute to NRDA and improve our understanding of potential
impacts of oil at these depths. In addition, NOAA, EPA, and BP recently released plume
monitoring protocols and procedures guidance for research cruises.

L oop Current and L ong T erm T rajectories: NOAA continues to work with OMB to get approval
to release to the general public long-term oil projections and a Loop Current image created daily
by ORR oceanographers. This information, in combination with ORR trajectory forecast maps,
would give the public a much better understanding of circulation patterns and how and where the
oil is and may be moving in the future. A number of East Coast senators recently sent a letter to
NOAA requesting long-term oil trajectories so that they could plan accordingly for their state.
Hopefully this request will expedite the review and release of this information.

PRFA status update:
Seafood Safety surface areas west of the Mississippi Delta for

potential hydrocarbons and dispersants
Gordon Gunter and Weatherbird II Cruises HF Radar Approved verbally, working on obtaining
written documentation from FOSC
Being reevaluated by modelers for Approved
Thomas Jefferson / WHOI cruises for mapping sub
Approved
Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.1
resubmission for funding, likely directly

to BP.
Recreational Fishing Remote Sensing Activities by NGS OR&R base increase to $7.7 million ORR and NMFS are pursuing the rec.
fishing assessment as a NRDA study
In review by SSC.
Under USCG consideration
















Data Visualization













Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.1
Nearshore
Nearshore
Est imat for: 1200 CDT, Monday 6/14/10
e , Deepwater Horizon MC252
e Prepared: 2100 CDT, Friday, 6/11/10
Dat
This forecast is based on the N WS spot forecast from Friday June 11 PM. Currents were obtained from several models
, (NOAAGulf of Mexico, West Florida Shelf/USF, N VO/N A RL) and HFR measurement The model was initialized from
s. Friday sat ellite imagery analysis (N OAA/ NESDIS) and overflight observations. The leading edge may contain tarballs t hat
are not readily observable from t imagery (hence not included in the model initialization). Oil near bay inlets could be
he brought into that bay by local tidal currents.
920'0"W
910'0"W
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
310'0"N 310'0"N
M obile
P oula
Gulfort
ascag p B SL ay t ouis
300'0"N
M ilton
P ensacola
F ort
reep S Andrew
t.
300'0"N
Chandeleur
S ound
A tchaf a
alay B ay
B reton
S ound
V enice
B arataria
B ay
Caillou
T errebonne
B ay
B ay
A alachicola
p
290'0"N
290'0"N

Incident Location
280'0"N
280'0"N

raj
270'0"N
270'0"N
260'0"N
260'0"N
20
40 Miles
80
250'0"N
Onshore (SE/S/SW) winds are forecast to continue into next week at speeds <10 knots. Persist ent
onshore winds have resulted in northward movement of the slick t owards the Mississippi/ Alabama
barrier islands and the Florida Panhandle. Coastal regions in Mississippi Sound west of Freeport
may continue to experience shoreline cont acts throughout this forecast period. Persistent
southeasterly winds are also resulting in movement of oil towards t Chandeleur Islands, Bret he on
Sound, and t Mississippi Delta. These regions are also threatened by shoreline contact wit he s hin
t forecast period.
his
920'0"W
910'0"W
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
Trajectory
Uncertaint y
Light
Medium
Heavy
Potential
X
beached oil
860'0"W
250'0"N
240'0"N
240'0"N
Next Forecast:
June 12t PM
h
Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.2
M obile
Florida
E lin A B
g F P ensacola
B ay
Choctawhatchee
B ay
S Andrew B t ay
Mississippi
Alabama
P ascag oula
obile
M Gulfort
p B S Louis
is ay t. ay
M sissip i S p ound
B
V ermilion
B ay
M an City
org
Louisiana
B arataria
B ay
T imbalier
T errebonne
ay
B ay
B
Chandeleur
S ound
B reton S ound
Saturday - Wednesday
A tchaf a
alay B ay
Saturday - Wednesday
Prepared Wednesday, June 11, 2010
This map delineates threatened shorelines for the period of June 12-16 Because
of the continuous leak at the source, there is potential to impact areas multiple
times. Scattered tarballs which are not observable from overflight may impact
shorelines ahead of the indicated dates. Forecasting beyond three days has
greater uncertainty as to potential impacts. FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
25
50 Miles
100
Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.3
920'0"W
900'0"W
880'0"W
860'0"W
840'0"W
820'0"W
800'0"W
Mississippi
Alabama
Louisiana
300'0"N 300'0" N
280'0"N
Florida
280'0" N
Well bore location
260'0"N
260'0" N
Loop Current
240'0"N
Cay Sal
Bahamas
240'0" N
June 11, 2010
Slick location derived by NOAA NESDIS from NASA MODIS

TERRA data aquired June 11, 2010 at 1131 CDT.
220'0"N
Cuba
220'0" N

0 50
100 Miles
200
Mexico
920'0"W
900'0"W
880'0"W
860'0"W
840'0"W
820'0"W
800'0"W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.4

TO: NOAA SSCs
Seattle, WA 98115


Summary The Loop Current pattern is continuing to slightly increase the risk of the
Loop Current serving as a mechanism to transport oil toward The Florida Straits. There
of the northern clockwise eddy (Eddy Franklin). This eddy may have begun to re-attach
to the main Loop Current, and may or may not completely re-join it over the next few
days to a week. This would provide a pathway for tarballs to move to the Florida Straits.

signs of dissipating. Satellite analysis today did not pick up any sheens in the region of
Eddy Franklin. A USCG and NOAA (Jeansonne) overflight indicated some linear
features in the northeastern edge Eddy Franklin consistent with fields of scattered
tarballs.

As discussed in previous reports, scattered tarball fields are often not visible from fixed
wing aircraft or satellite observations. To confirm the presence of tarballs, the vessel R/V
Walton Smith traveled to the northeast corner of the Loop current, where frequent sheens
had been observed in the Satellite imagery. They found little orange particles and some
bits of more aggregated red oil at location 2646.07N--8603.77W. The ship has taken
some samples that have now been shipped to LSU. We expect analysis of those samples
this Saturday.

That location is near the boundary of the counter clockwise eddy to the northeast of Eddy
Franklin where there have been frequent sheens observed by satellite analysis and todays
overflight. We expect some of the oil in that location to remain in that eddy, but some
may be drawn into Eddy Franklin. Once in Eddy Franklin, we expect most of it will
remain there, circulating around the central Gulf, but some of it may follow a pathway
from the outer edge of Eddy Franklin that leads to the Florida Straits.

There is some uncertainty as to whether Eddy Franklin has begun to re-attach to the main
Loop Current. The connection to the main Loop Current on the southwestern side of the
eddy has weakened. However, some of the models and the sea surface height analysis
indicate a pathway from the far eastern edge of the Eddy Franklin to the Florida Current,
indicating a possible re-connection. Two USF deployed drifter buoys have moved from
the eastern edge of Eddy Franklin to the east, toward the Florida Straits, confirming this
connection. We continue to monitor the situation closely.

June 11, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.5
thinned. An NOAA overflight (Wesley) to the southeast of the spill site yesterday
observed isolated patches of sheen extending toward Eddy Franklin. We do not expect
larger concentrations of oil to move toward the Loop Current in the near future.

observations were in an area of convergence; any oil ultimately making it to the Florida
Straits will likely be far more widely scattered. In order for tarballs to reach shorelines,
there must be a persistent shoreward wind to bring them to shore. At this time, we
estimate that the fraction that may reach shorelines may be slightly above background
weeks.

The US Coast Guard will be conducting overflights daily to look for signs of significant
oil over the Florida Shelf and Loop Current; a NOAA observer will be on board every 2-
3 days. In addition, a sentry plan has been put in place by the Florida Peninsula Incident

and dissipating long before nearing any shorelines. If Eddy Franklin has re-joined the
main Loop Current, any oil moved to the northern extent of the eddy will once again have
a pathway to the Florida Straits and beyond. We will continue daily monitoring of the
Loop Current in order to monitor this re-connection.

June 11, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.5
Offshore
Offshore
Estimate for: 1200 CDT, Monday, 6/14/10
Date Prepared: 1900 CDT, Friday, 6/11/10
Currents were obtained from four models: N OAAGulf of Mexico, N avO/N COM , N RL, and N St./SABGOM. Each
C includes Loop Current dynamics. Gulf wide winds were obtained from the gridded N CEP product. The model was
init ialized from June 10/11 satellite imagery analysis, and a CG/ NOAAoverflight. The leading edge may contain
t arballs that are not readily observable from the imagery (hence not included in the model init ializat ion).
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
840'0"W
830'0"W
820'0"W
810'0"W
300'0"N

Incident Location
300'0"N
290'0"N
290'0"N
280'0"N
280'0"N

informat nearshore
ion
270'0"N
270'0"N
260'0"N
260'0"N
250'0"N 250'0"N
240'0"N
240'0"N

230'0"N 230'0"N
25
50 Miles
100
220'0"N
210'0"N
Satellite imagery analysis continues to indicate possible patches of sheen to the S-SE of the main slick. Scat tered sheens
and tar balls observed in these regions may be getting entrained into the northern edge of the large clockwise eddy
(Eddy Franklin) t has pinched off t main Loop Current (LC). Trajectories indicate t some of these sheens may
hat he hat Legend
cont inue sout hward along the eastern edge of Eddy Franklin, whereas some may be gett entrained into the counter-
ing clockwise eddy to the N of the main LC eddy. ACG/N E OAAoverflight off the west coast of Florida today saw
noncontiguous sheens along the nort heast section of Eddy Franklin.
ern
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
840'0"W
830'0"W
820'0"W
810'0"W
220'0"N
210'0"N
Next Forecast:
June 12th PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

ICC Deputy on Watch
Document ID: 0.7.19.1794.7

From: "Mark.W.Miller" <[email protected]>
Subject: Draft Marsh Options ppt
MarshCleanupMethods.pptx
Oil Spill Response in Coastal Marshes
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Coastal marshes critical supports for life
Marshes support the aquatic food web:
Exporting nutrients to coastal waters

Providing nesting habitat for
migrating birds
Serving as nursery grounds for fish
and shellfish
Toxins in oil can affect marsh plants and fauna
Thick oil can suffocate marsh plants
Oil can foul animals using the marsh habitat
Marshes are vulnerable to oil:
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Cleanup in coastal marshes
Objectives: minimize
impact and enhance
recovery
Select cleanup methods
that enhance recovery
Avoid cleanup methods
that could further damage
an oiled marsh.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Is cleanup the right choice?
Use SCAT surveys to assess the damage
SCAT: Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Technique
Estimate the time to recover (in the absence of cleanup)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Recovery
Not a return to the precise conditions preceding the spill,

because natural systems constantly respond to environmental
change
A marsh that comes to resemble similar, unoiled marshes in
important ecological parameters is considered to be recovered
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Understanding Oiling: Heavily Oiled Marshes
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Understanding Oiling: Moderately Oiled

Marshes
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Understanding Oiling: Lightly or Very Lightly

Oiled Marshes
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Response cleanup options
Natural recovery (no response)

Vacuuming/skimming oil
Low-pressure flushing
Manual oil removal
Organic sorbents (synthetic & natural)
In-situ burning (controlled burning)
Vegetation cutting
Surface washing agents
Bioremediation
Natural organic sorbents (cellulosic and consolidated)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Natural recovery (no response)
Allow the oil to degrade or be removed by

tides and waves
Minimal impact; avoids physical impact from
workers; rapid recovery
BUT potential for oiling of birds or wildlife; oil
may impact adjacent areas; heavy oils may
degrade slowly or form persistent residues
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Vacuuming/skimming
Usually from boats, along with flushing

Can remove large quantities of oil,
speeding natural recovery
BUT difficult to bring equipment into
marsh; physical impacts may be
considerable considerable
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Low pressure flushing (with near-source water)
Ambient water sprayed with hoses, used to flush oil out of

marsh into boom on waters edge
Can herd oil to collection points (can be used with
vacuuming/skimming); lifts oil off sediment surface (when
marsh is not flooded)
BUT pressure must be carefully controlled; must be carefully
monitored; can make tidal areas susceptible to further oiling
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Manual removal
Removal of stranded surface oil with hand tools and manual

labor
Avoids use of mechanized equipment; minimize soil
disturbance (boardwalks)
BUT can damage marsh & compact soil, slow, logistics
challenging challenging
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Synthetic Organic Sorbents (contained)
Synthetic sorbents such as

sausage boom, snare, and
sweep are placed on outer
marsh fringe
Recovers oil as marsh releases
it; no vegetation disturbance if
properly deployed
BUT improper use creates
large amount of waste; requires
constant maintenance
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Natural Organic Sorbents (loose)
Natural sorbents such as

bagasse, peat moss, and wood
fiber in lightly oiled marshes
Reduces risk of residual oiling
to wildlife and vegetation;
speeds degradation of residual
oil
Loose sorbent recovery
unlikely so not appropriate for
free-floating bulk oil; can slow
oil degradation
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Natural Organic Sorbents (consolidated)
Includes sorbents made

from kenaf fiber, cotton
lint, and other approved
organic sorbents, in boom,
socks, mats, etc.
Easier to dispose of than
other materials
May absorb less oil than
synthetic sorbents
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
In-situ burning (controlled burning)
Remove oil by burning itonly used post-source control

Can remove oil quickly; can minimize impacts from other
physical removal methods
BUT high temperatures may damage plant roots and
rhizomes, slowing recovery; creates localized air pollution; can
be difficult to control control
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Vegetation cutting
Manual cutting and removal of oiled vegetation

Increases recovery rate for pooled oil in otherwise inaccessible
marshes
BUT cut vegetation may die; foot traffic can press oil into soil;
may increase rate of marsh loss
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Surface washing agents
Liquid products, soften and lift

oil from oiled surfaces
Use only products non-toxic to
plants
May reduce oil contact hazard
to wildlife, may increase plant
survival
BUT narrow window of
opportunity; complex logistics,
foot traffic can compact marsh
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Bioremediation (nutrient enhancement)
Adding nutrients (e.g., N, P, K, or

oxygen) to speed rates of natural
microbial degradation of the oil
Oil is highly biodegradable
BUT unclear what factors limit
natural degradation rates, oxygen is
more limiting than nutrients in
marshes (but no proven method to
inject oxygen into marsh soils)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Natural Organic Sorbents pre-treatment

Cellulosic Materials)
(Natural
Applied from boat with blower

Proposed to pretreat unoiled marsh
fringes in imminent danger of oiling
Causes little physical disturbance,
can increase rate of natural
degradation
BUT winds and tides may displace
loose material from marshes; when
oiled, may sink or be transported
elsewhere. If removed after oiling,
increases waste volume to treat.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1
Minimizing damage
Regardless of the method(s) chosen, minimizing damage is

important
Approach from the water whenever possible

Use boards or platforms to distribute weight of people and
equipment when work on the marsh surface is required
Work efficiently to minimize foot and vehicle traffic in
marshes
Err on the side of using less-intrusive methods
Document ID: 0.7.19.1713.1

Subject: [Fwd: Re: URGENT: Call TODAY at 5pm EST]
To: "rapp >> John Rapp" <[email protected]>
2010_0614_Seafood by the numbers.docx
NOAA-FDA Surveillance Plan 6.14 CLEARED.docx
John_Oliver.vcf
Subject: Re: URGENT: Call TODAY at 5pm EST

Date:Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:11:03 -0400
From:John Oliver <[email protected]>
To:Lauren B Lugo <[email protected]>,
Nancy Thompson
<[email protected]>, Lisa Desfosse
<[email protected]>, Spencer Garrett
<[email protected]>, John E Stein
<[email protected]>, Usha Varanasi
<[email protected]>, W alton W
Dickhoff <W alton.W [email protected]>,
Steven W ilson <Steven.W [email protected]>,
Brian T Pawlak <[email protected]>
CC:Steve Murawski <[email protected]>
References:<[email protected]>
Attached is a starting point for our discussion.
Also where are we with
sampling in the northwestern edge of the current closed area that is oil
free? Have the samples reported by Bill Steers with oil in their bellies
been tracked down?
John Oliver wrote:
> We need to have a call today. Below are questions that have been
Call in
> posed to us and we are required to answer by COB tomorrow. > will be at 5pm EST with the following dial in:
>
B6 Privacy
> Pass code:
B6 Privacy
> How many samples taken?

> How many boats taking samples and from where?
> How many samples can we process at Pascagoula and NWFSC?
> What types of seafood?
> How much dockside monitoring is going on now?
> How long does it take to get test results?
> How many state inspectors trained to do the sniff test, hotline
> numbers, etc.
NOAAs Seafood Surveillance Program by the Numbers

June 14, 2010
How many samples taken?
As of June 10, 2010, seafood has been collected seafood at a total of 154 sampling stations. Of
the 154 stations, 124 were for baseline sampling and 30 for re-opening. NOAA is focusing on
collecting baseline samples off the Florida and Texas coasts. The area that was sampled for
possible re-opening is no longer under consideration for re-opening.
Should have some numbers for chemical samples analyzed today from NWFSC. No sensory
samples are being analyzed at this time because we are not considering areas for re-opening.
How many boats taking samples and from where?
As of June 14, 2010
Two small NOAA vessels (Caretta and Gandy) are sampling now. These are deployed
from Pascagoula, Mississippi.
One contract vessel (Beau Rivage) is collecting seafood samples. Additional vessels may
be contracted soon.
Three large fisheries survey vessels are collecting seafood samples (Oregon II, Pisces, Gorden
Gunter).
One additional large survey vessel from NOAAs fleet is being deployed to the Gulf to collecte
seafood samples in the coming weeks (and months). The Delaware II may arrive as early as next
week.
How many samples can we process at Pascagoula and NWFSC?
???
What types of seafood?
NOAA is sampling and testing fish and shrimp in Federal waters for surveillance. Fish and
shellfish will also be tested for re-opening. There is no commercial harvest of shellfish in Federal
waters. The States will test fish, shrimp, crabs and shellfish for re-opening State waters.
NOAA has identified 32 target species of fish for sampling and which are considered
representative of the sampling location. Of those, 10 sentinel or indicator species have been
selected for analysis that are of the highest fishery value or are representative of what is landed
in a particular area.
The exception is Highly Migratory Species which will be represented by what is caught by chance
in the area. HMS species will be targeted specifically in surveillance sampling cruises.
NOAAs baseline sampling has included fish, shrimp, crabs, and bivalves such as oysters and
clams.
How much dockside monitoring is going on now?
Document ID: 0.7.19.2010.1
None at this time.

The purpose of dockside samples by NOAA will be to verify whether fish arriving at docks caught
from outside the closed area are not contaminated, particularly Highly Migratory Species (HMS).
For samples taken at dockside, NOAA must be able to verify the location of the catch from either
vessel monitoring systems that track the location of the vessel while fishing or by an observer on
board. NOAA is planning to collect HMS species using the Delaware II and other vessels in its
own fleet. Therefore, dockside sampling will be done as a complement to that activity.
How long does it take to get test results?
Sensory testing (for reopening, primarily) takes approximately 2 days.

Chemical analysis takes approximately 7-8 days.
How many state inspectors trained to do the sensory test?
As of June 14, 40 State sensory assessors have been trained by the NOAA Seafood Inspection
Program with contract to the University of Florida. On June 17, NOAA and its partner
organization will have trained 60 State sensory assessors.
As of June 14, NOAA and FDA have a total of 15 Federal expert sensory assessors harmonized
and available to conduct sensory testing. NOAA will host another harmonization session for its
expert assessors from June 21-25. After that date, we will have a total of 30 Federal expert
assessors harmonized and available.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2010.1
DEEPWATER HORIZON (DWH) OIL SPILL
June 14, 2010
Protecting the Public from Oil-Contaminated Seafood: Fishery Area Closure and Surveillance Plan
As part of the federal governments comprehensive efforts to ensure seafood safety, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in coordination with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
has taken an aggressive and precautionary approach to prevent exposure of consumers to potential seafood
contamination in the Gulf of Mexico. Closing oiled areas to fishing is the primary tool for preventing the
entry of tainted fish and fishery products into the market place. Ongoing sampling of seafood will help ensure
that closures are protecting the Nations seafood supply.
The elements of the Federal strategy for seafood safety include:
Fishery Area Closure: Under its first emergency rule, promulgated on May 2, 2010, and subsequently revised
on May 11, 2010, NOAA Fisheries has closed, and will continue to close, areas in the Gulf of Mexico in which
there is visible oil on the surface. NOAA is also closing areas where NOAA has evidence of clearly detectable
levels of subsurface oil from the BP Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill, as well as areas that do not currently
have surface oil but where the agency projects there will be surface oil based on NOAAs 48 to 72 hour
surface oil trajectory forecasts and subsurface oil locations. In addition, NOAA has closed, and will continue
to close, a 5 mile buffer area around the known or projected oil locations as a precaution. This buffer area
accounts for uncertainties in the actual boundaries of the oil and movement of fish. To date, NOAA has not
observed any subsurface oil outside the boundaries of the closed area. The Coast Guard and NOAA are
monitoring the closed federal areas to ensure that fishermen are not fishing within those areas and will take
enforcement action against fishermen violating the closure boundary.
Under their individual authorities, states have closed, and will continue to close, areas in the Gulf of Mexico
in waters under their jurisdiction. The FDA is working with both NOAA and the states to monitor the situation
and ensure that appropriate closures are in place. Fishermen and consumers should report any seafood
contaminated by oil to 1-888-INFO FDA (1-888-463-6332) and include available details on the location of the
seafood or catch, kind of seafood, and suspected contamination.
Surveillance Plan: NOAA will continue to sample fish in the vicinity of the closed area to account for the
possibility that contaminated fish may move out of the closed area. NOAA has been taking baseline fish
tissue samples in areas where there is currently no visible oil. NOAA also has historic baseline samples, which
were taken after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. NOAA will compare the surveillance samples with the baseline
samples to evaluate whether contaminated fish are present outside the closed area. If fish samples have
elevated levels of oil compounds, it is an indication that the boundaries and buffer zones of the closed area
will need to be expanded to include areas where contaminated fish have been found. If NOAA finds evidence
of tainted fish outside the closure area, NOAA will reevaluate the closure criteria and whether the evidence is
sufficient to warrant changes to the criteria.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2010.2
Dockside Sampling: NOAA is implementing a targeted dockside sampling program and will conduct tests of
fish products arriving at docks as an additional level of screening to ensure that fish caught from outside the
closed area are not contaminated. NOAA will verify that the catch was caught outside of a closed area either
by vessel monitoring systems that track the location of a vessel or by an on-board observer. If tainted fish
are found in dockside sampling, NOAA will notify the appropriate FDA and State seafood officials who have
the authority to prevent oiled fish from entering commerce in fish markets or elsewhere, and evaluate
whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant changes to the closure boundary.
Additional Baseline Sampling: In order for the surveillance sampling to be effective, NOAA needs an
adequate comparison baseline as to the conditions of oil contaminants in the water and fishery prior to the
Gulf spill. NOAA has an understanding of the pre-spill baseline conditions from a significant post-hurricane
Katrina and Rita sampling effort as well as recently collected samples taken in Federal waters off Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Alabama. The oil continues to spread and move. For this reason, more baseline sampling
conducted by NOAA and EPA will enable the agencies to develop an even more robust understanding of the
pre-exposure levels, particularly in areas off Florida and Texas. Therefore, NOAA and EPA will continue to
gather baseline samples in oil-free Gulf waters in advance of any impact from the DWH spill.
States also need an adequate comparison baseline as to the presence of oil contaminants in the water and
fishery prior to the Gulf spill. FDA has agreed to analyze baseline samples previously collected by the states.
FDA has developed and distributed a baseline sample procedure to each state.
FDA Seafood Safety Program: The FDA operates a mandatory safety program for all fish and fishery products
under the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the Public Health Service Act, and related
regulations. The FDAs seafood Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) regulation requires
processors to identify and control hazards which are reasonably likely to occur. FDA is issuing a letter
reminding fish and fishery product processors of FDA's regulations and policy concerning the food safety
hazard of environmental chemical contaminants, including the importance of verifying that fish they are
processing have not come from closed waters. In addition, FDA is increasing inspections of Gulf Coast
seafood processors to ensure compliance with this regulation.
FDA Market Surveillance: FDA is implementing a risk-based surveillance sampling program targeting seafood
products at Gulf Coast seafood processors. The agency will be targeting oysters, crabs, and shrimp, which
could retain contaminants longer than finfish. This sampling will provide verification that seafood on the
market is safe to eat. FDAs sampling activities are designed to complement the dockside monitoring of
finfish already planned by NOAA and described above.
Minimizing Economic Harm from the Oil Spill The NOAA/FDA Reopening Protocol: NOAA and FDA
recognize that the effects of the oil spill continue to grow as the oil continues to flow. However, as
remediation efforts continue, it may be possible to alleviate some of the economic harm caused by the oil
spill by reopening previously closed areas. NOAA will reopen these areas only if it is assured, based on
testing of seafood from the area and consultation with FDA, that fish products within the closed area meet
FDA standards for public health and wholesomeness. To that end, NOAA and FDA are continuing to refine a
reopening protocol based on both chemical and sensory analysis of seafood within the closed area.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2010.2
<CENTER><IMG SRC=
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/images/usa2c.gif
></CENTER> 
href=\"[email protected]\">[email protected]
ov</a></CENTER>
<CENTER>Deputy Assistant
Administrator</CENTER><CENTER>National Marine Fisheries
Formatted Name
<CENTER><IMG SRC= http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/images/usa2c.gif ></CENTER> 
Name
Family: Oliver
First: John
Middle:
Prefix:
Suffix:
Organization
<CENTER>Deputy Assistant Administrator</CENTER><CENTER>National Marine Fisheries
Title
href=\"[email protected]\">[email protected]</a></CENTER>
Version
2.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.2010.3

From: Caren Madsen <[email protected]>
Subject: Daily DWH External Engagement report
Cc: 'Andrew Winer' <[email protected]>, [email protected],'James Chang'
<[email protected]>,'Laurel Bryant' <[email protected]>, 'Les Adams'
<[email protected]>,"'Janet.E.Ward'" <[email protected]>,'Justin kenney'
<[email protected]>, [email protected],'Christopher Vaccaro'
<[email protected]>
DWH EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT DAILY REPORT
From the Ex ternal A ffairs T eam , N OA A Office of Com m unications and Ex ternal A ffairs
6-14-10
Over the weekend and today:

Interactions:
Prepared agenda and conducted organizational call for regional outreach including representation
from NOAA headquarters, the Southeast Regional Collaboration team, and Sea Grant.

External Affairs drafted a fact sheet for JIC approval on volunteer programs and is interacting
with BP staff and representatives from four Gulf NGOs who have signed an MOU with BP
to head up volunteer training and programs in their respective states.

Communicated with W H/interagency group over the weekend about the psychological impacts
of the spill on the people of the Gulf coast after an American Psychological Association report
addressed this. Members of the group provided feedback on any possible assistance that we can
lend in terms of networking with mental health associations during the crisis.

Met with a Gulf outreach team assembled by EA to discuss reaching out to various sectors and
forming workgroups around those sectors. W e also discussed the ongoing series of meetings and
outreach in the Gulf to date, re whats working well/what can we can improve and help.

Complaint e-mails:
External Affairs received 9 emails over the weekend. We have responded to 5 of them. Topics
included: general complaints (NOAA should never have used/approved dispersants, NOAA is
misrepresenting amounts of oil in "plumes", etc), 2 suggestions on how to fix the leak, and
questions about the oil spill's flow rate.

Emailed the press release on the new "one stop" website to follow the federal oil spill
response to our NGO stakeholder list.

Mass Notifications:
Caren Madsen
NOAA External Affairs
NOAA Office of Communications & External Affairs
B6 Privacy
[email protected]

External Affairs Website for stakeholders: NOAA Home Site: www.noaa.gov
www.ExternalAffairs.noaa.gov
Document ID: 0.7.19.1850.1

Subject: DWH ACTIONS and UPDATES 6.14.2010
NRDA Activities Report_6_14_10.doc
OMAO_Assets_Gantt_Chart_061410.xlsx
NOAA Platforms 061410.pptx
OMAO DWH Ship Tasking - Program Impacts 061410.docx
OMAO DWH Aircraft Tasking - Program Impacts 061410.docx
DWHMC252_Turtles20100614.pdf
DWHMC252_Dolphins20100614.pdf
ERMA_scat14JUN.pdf
PRIORITY RESPONSE OPERATIONS -

NIC/ICC/NRT
Response Operations
Source Control: Top Hat is listing approximately 10 degrees. Technicians co degree of list, but are not planning any action since the system has been consis approximately 15,000 barrels of oil per day. The long term recovery system w disconnect" for the processing and storage vessels is scheduled to be in place i weeks. Until then, if the Enterprise needs to leave station due to weather it wil decouple from the riser, and several more days to reconnect upon return.
ERMA: Public ERMA geoplatform.gov is on the JIC landing page. JIC American people have questions about the response to this crisis. Today, NOA website meant to answer those questions with clarity and transparency a onereal-time information about the response to the Deepwater Horizon BP oil spil incorporates data from the various agencies that are working together to tackl Shoreline: SCAT teams report 124 miles of shoreline in LA, MS, AL, FL are attached).
NRT - See below (Fisheries Closures)
NIC Activities
Birds: Discussion with USDA on using farms in the Midwest to reduce the ri the birds by altering migratory flyways. The Audubon Society plans to evaluat implementation. If funding via PRFA / NPFC not available, they plan to proce level) using existing and private funds.
Seafood Safety: Senior-level DHS/FDA/NOAA conference call regarding a u seafood safety - plans made for another call later this week with Gulf-state fish commissioners. The Institute of Medicine plans a workshop in New Orleans o related health effects, possibly next week. Call from members of Congress for intergovernmental task force on seafood safety to address the need for improve the DW H incident.
NIC/ICC/NRT (2)
Fisheries Closures: At the request of USCG, NOAA staff briefed DHS Depu RADM W atson and the National Response Team on the fisheries closure proc during today's NRT call. Topics included:
o Scheduling of daily precautionary fishery closure determinations and
o Timing of announcements;
o Strategy and criteria for reopening closed areas both with and without oil p
o Coordination with FDA and states on seafood safety monitoring protocols

SCIENCE LMR
attached
Fisheries Closure
* There were no modifications to the closed area in the Gulf EEZ for June 1 remains 78,264 sq mi (202,703 sq km), or about 32% of the GOM EEZ.
Seafood Inspection
* SIP personnel traveled to Pascagoula, MS today to deliver the final schedu training. The training is scheduled for Wednesday and Thursday, and will be a State personnel. Once completed, SIP will have trained 60 State sensory scree * SIP is finalizing plans for the next expert sensory harmonization to be held June 21 25. Another 14 personnel from FDA and NOAA will be there to au assessors. Once completed this will bring our available Federal expert assesso * Steven Wilson and Michael McLaughlin of FDA finalized plans to validat nose using samples from the next scheduled harmonization. The electronic no that, if successful, will act as a sensory screening process as part of FDAs mo successful, this will minimize the use of our valuable expert sensory assessor r * The complete seafood inspection report is attached.
Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Health and Stranding
* 411 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (inc report o 363 stranded(increase of 13 from June 12)
+ 330 of the stranded were found dead (increase of 9 from June 12)
+ 33 of the stranded were found alive (increase of 4 from June 12)
+ 25 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 4 from June 12)
* 48 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (increase of 1 o 42 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 11 from June 12)
* 211 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increa * To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 4 dead live stranded turtles (2 of which were caught in skimming operations).
* To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 45 live turtle captured during directed turtle surveys.
* 41 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (n
* Issues regarding nighttime operations on sea turtle nesting beaches in Alab again today. Communication problems and lack of adherence to protocols and practices resulted in interference with the nest survey and nest marking effort t completely obliterating a fresh emergence and resulting in significant difficult to accurately evaluate the crawl, find, and mark the nest.
* The complete health and stranding report, turtle stranding map, and dolph attached.
LMR (2)

* 411 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (inc report o 363 stranded(increase of 13 from June 12)
+ 330 of the stranded were found dead (increase of 9 from June 12)
+ 33 of the stranded were found alive (increase of 4 from June 12)
+ 25 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 4 from June 12)
* 48 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (increase of 1 o 42 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 11 from June 12)
* 211 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increa * To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 4 dead live stranded turtles (2 of which were caught in skimming operations).
* 41 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (n
* Issues regarding nighttime operations on sea turtle nesting beaches in Alab again today. Communication problems and lack of adherence to protocols and practices resulted in interference with the nest survey and nest marking effort t completely obliterating a fresh emergence and resulting in significant difficult to accurately evaluate the crawl, find, and mark the nest.
NRDA
1. Technical Working Group Updates

Shoreline: Four teams went out in the field to complete pre-assessment shoreli Island, Laneaux Island, Bastion Bay, Bay Baptiste, Whiskey Island and Point C Forensic oil sampling occurred in West-South Terrebonne Bay and West-Nort Team 1 Surveyed areas of scattered tarballs and some tar patties along beach a cover. Responded to input from Army Corps staff that oil had entered the bay west; consistent oiling along both sides of western bayou. Observed areas of s tar patties along beach (<1% to 5% cover, depending on location); 100s of skim nesting with scrapes and nests with eggs.
Team 2 Evaluated previously mapped shoreline along the northern shoreline o mapped the northern shore of Bay Batiste and noted heavy oiling along this en Team 3 assessed marsh areas north of Whiskey Island. Waypoint and tracklog data sheets were collected from 19 waypoints during the days field effort. Al starting at the easternmost limits of SCAT oil mapping data in the area, progre direction. Data obtained during the days field effort was found to coincide wi mapping data.
Team 4 no summary report
Sample Intake Teams Samples processed at shoreline as of 6/13/10:
Chain of Custodys processed: 242
Number of Water Bottles Received: 2589
NRDA (2)
Chemistry: As of June 14th, approximately 4500 samples have been collected baseline and pre-assessment data collection. This total consists of approximat 20% sediment samples, and 5% or less of tissue, oil (tarballs), oil on water pro
Water Column: NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard 2 vessels. 3 ves NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard two vessels:
Brooks McCall: Conducting deep water sampling 2.5 km northwest of wellhe Jack Fitz: Testing equipment for deepwater sampling 2km west of the wellhe Ocean Veritas - In Port Fourchon (scheduled to depart 6/13). Will have NRD water sampling.
Gordon Gunter in Port (Pascagoula, MS). Expected to get underway 6/21.
Bunny Bordelon in Port (Port Fourchon, LA)
A draft plan is in the works that proposes up to five boats for doing Gulf-wid Human Use: Boat ramp and shore fishing counts in LA, MS, AL, and, FL. Ov North Gulf coast between LA/MS border and Appalachicola
SAV: Processing data from weekend surveys and identifying long-term samp injury assessment phase.
Marine Mammals: The focus of the 6/13 flight was to provide the stranding gr sargassum locations for potential turtle rescues. No sea turtles were observed. were observed. Next NRDA flight scheduled for Monday, 06-14-10.
ASSETS AND PLATFORMS REGIONAL LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOV'T
AFFAIRS
COMMS / PUBLIC AFFAIRS attached
Regional staff involved with education, outreach and engagement (EOE) held with Andy Winer to coordinate constituent outreach.
no update
Held GeoPlatform.gov webinar for media. Planning second session for JIC m *Final cleared seafood safety news release. To be issued tonight.
EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT
DATA INFORMATION
Interactions:
Prepared agenda and conducted organizational call for regional outreach inclu NOAA headquarters, the Southeast Regional Collaboration team, and Sea Gra External Affairs drafted a fact sheet for JIC approval on volunteer programs an staff and representatives from four Gulf NGOs who have signed an MOU volunteer training and programs in their respective states.
Communicated with WH/interagency group over the weekend about the psych spill on the people of the Gulf coast after an American Psychological Associat Members of the group provided feedback on any possible assistance that we ca networking with mental health associations during the crisis.
Met with a Gulf outreach team assembled by EA to discuss reaching out to var workgroups around those sectors. We also discussed the ongoing series of me Gulf to date, re whats working well/what can we can improve and help.
Complaint e-mails
External Affairs received 9 emails over the weekend. We have responded to 5 included: general complaints (NOAA should never have used/approved dispe misrepresenting amounts of oil in "plumes", etc), 2 suggestions on how to fix t about the oil spill's flow rate.
Mass Notifications:
Emailed the press release on the new "one stop" website to follow the fede NGO stakeholder list.
Data and Information Management Daily Update June 14, 2010
-Public use of www.geoplatform.gov/gulfresponse continues to increase.
-Improvements to public ERMA application performance continued throughou
IA/ INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
-Working with DWH Science Team on DWH data flows and storage.
-No update from EPA today on air/water quality availability for public ERMA 1. Provided geoplatform.gov press release to State so that Posts as well as inte aware and informed of the oil situation. Also shared with Bermuda scientist (f Environment and Sport) whom Dr. Robinson met at Science Summit.
2. NIC cleared on response to questions from Bahamas and forwarded to JIC. Spring, Kris Sarri, Mark Miller, and State to understand and comply with curre 3. Seeking to arrange meeting for Dr. Porfirio Alvarez (Mexico) with Dr. Lubc Washington June 15-17. Contacted Dr. Robinson regarding his availability fo 4. The Cuba Desk at State asked questions about the loop current and possible fishing outside U.S. EEZ (currently the closure area includes regions up to the Working on responses.
5. The seafood safety cable drafted by NMFS and cleared by FDA and USDA The cable is generic in nature and is meant to reassure host countries that the U seriously and is actively working to maintain the safety of U.S. seafood export assigned to Brussels will convey message to EC.
Key Bullets
State informed about geoplatform.gov; can pass to Posts and international sci Response to questions from Bahamas cleared by NIC and sent to JIC.
Staffing visit request by Dr. Porfirio Alvarez (Mexico) for meeting with Dr. L from the Cuba Desk about loop current and possible fisheries concerns.
Seafood safety cable dispatched.
no update
no update

LEGAL / GC POLICY / BUDGET
NOAA NRDA Activities Report - June 14, 2010

(Reporting Activities from June 13, 2010)

Shoreline: Four teams went out in the field to complete pre-assessment shoreline surveys at
Pelican Island, Laneaux Island, Bastion Bay, Bay Baptiste, Whiskey Island and Point
Chenier/Bay Island. Forensic oil sampling occurred in West-South Terrebonne Bay and West-
Northwest Terrebonne.
Team 1 Surveyed areas of scattered tarballs and some tar patties along beach at Pelican
Island. (<1% cover. Responded to input from Army Corps staff that oil had entered the
bayou yesterday and headed west; consistent oiling along both sides of western bayou.
Observed areas of scattered tarballs and some tar patties along beach (<1% to 5% cover,
depending on location); 100s of skimmers and terns, some nesting with scrapes and nests
with eggs.
Team 2 Evaluated previously mapped shoreline along the northern shoreline of Bay
Batiste on 6/13/10, mapped the northern shore of Bay Batiste and noted heavy oiling
along this entire shoreline.
Team 3 assessed marsh areas north of Whiskey Island.

effort.
Waypoint and tracklog data,
photographs and data sheets were collected from 19 waypoints during the days field
All waypoints were collected starting at the easternmost limits of SCAT oil
mapping data in the area, progressing in a westward direction. Data obtained during the
days field effort was found to coincide with existing SCAT mapping data.
Team 4 no summary report


Chemistry:

Number of Water Bottles Received: 2589
As of June 14
approximately 4500 samples have been collected to support NRDA
,
th
baseline and pre-assessment data collection. This total consists of approximately 70% water
samples, 20% sediment samples, and 5% or less of tissue, oil (tarballs), oil on water product, and
dispersant.
Water Column: NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard 2 vessels. 3 vessels are in port.
NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard two vessels:
Brooks McCall: Conducting deep water sampling 2.5 km northwest of wellhead, moving
southwest.
Jack Fitz: Testing equipment for deepwater sampling 2km west of the wellhead.
Ocean Veritas - In Port Fourchon (scheduled to depart 6/13). Will have NRDA staff
conducting deep water sampling.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2014.1
Gordon Gunter in Port (Pascagoula, MS). Expected to get underway 6/21.

Bunny Bordelon in Port (Port Fourchon, LA)
A draft plan is in the works that proposes up to five boats for doing Gulf-wide
monitoring.
Human Use: Boat ramp and shore fishing counts in LA, MS, AL, and, FL. Overflights
continuing along North Gulf coast between LA/MS border and Appalachicola
SAV: Processing data from weekend surveys and identifying long-term sampling dates and
sites for injury assessment phase.
Marine Mammals: The focus of the 6/13 flight was to provide the stranding ground team with
sargassum locations for potential turtle rescues. No sea turtles were observed. No marine
mammals were observed. Next NRDA flight scheduled for Monday, 06-14-10.
Document ID: 0.7.19.2014.1
Received(Date): Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:02:52 +0100


06/14/2010 8:00pm EDT
1. 2. 3.
Offshore - to stop the flow of oil on the sea floor;
Offshore to minimize impacts of the spill on the surface; and
Onshore to protect and cleanup the shoreline, inform the public, and compensate impacted people.
Highlights
x 15,208
barrels of oil captured by the Lower Marine Riser Package Cap on June 13. 156,730
barrels collected to date.
x x x x
Environmental Monitoring sampling data on BP website

Unified
Command launches Interactive Gulf Response mapping tool.
421 skimmers are now active.

Over
million paid in claims see State Summaries.
$63
Offshore Sea Floor
BPs priority is to contain the oil spill and complete relief wells to kill the flow.

ContainmentRecovery
x Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap - 15,208 barrels of oil were captured through the

LMRP cap during the past 24-hour period. Total recovery from the LMRP Cap is 156,730 barrels to date.
Oil and natural gas are being carried to the surface through a riser pipe and oil is being stored on the
Discoverer Enterprise.
Additional Containment Capacity efforts are underway to add containment capacity through

x new systems to complement the LMRP Cap.
BP plans to utilize the Q4000 drilling platform by reversing the flow on the choke line, which is
connected to the blowout preventer and was previously used to carry mud during the top kill effort. This
system is expected to be deployed in mid-June.
Permanent Riser Systems BP will also bring in two additional ships which will be connected to two
permanent riser systems. These systems will be capable of quick disconnect/reconnect in the event of a
hurricane.

approximately 9,500 gallons applied on June 13. EPA is allowing subsea application of the currently-
used dispersant to continue.
Drilling continues on both wells. They are situated approximately one-half mile from the Macondo well
and will attempt to intercept the existing wellbore at approximately 18,000 feet below sea level. Once
intercepted, the Macondo well can be killed via a bottom kill by pumping heavy mud and cement into the
wellbore. It is estimated the total drilling process for each well will take at least 90 days from the start
date.
x The first relief well (work being performed by the Development Driller III) is at 13,978 feet below

sea level. This well was spudded on May 2.
The second relief well (work being performed by Development Driller II) is at approximately 9,120

x feet below sea level. Drilling began on May 16.

Offshore Surface Response
Skimming Vessels 421 skimmers designed to separate oil from water are deployed across the Gulf.
Approximately 486,500 barrels of oil-water mix have been recovered and treated, including 12,383 barrels
in the prior 24 hours.
Surface Dispersant 36,000 gallons of dispersant was applied on the surface yesterday.
In-Situ Burning 14 burns were conducted in the last 24-hour period. 102,800 barrels are estimated to
have been consumed through burns.
BP Environmental Monitoring Programs As part of the response effort, several ongoing sampling
and monitoring programs have been implemented based on the type of impact or location and trajectory
of the spill. Monitoring and sampling programs are being conducted for:
x x x x x
Sampling data can be found at:

http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9033821&contentId=7062498#

air quality

water
quality
water
column sampling
submerged oil, and

worker health

New Interactive Mapping Website Today, NOAA launched a new federal website meant to provide a
one-stop shop for detailed near-real-time information about the response to the Deepwater Horizon BP oil
spill. The website incorporates data from the various agencies that are working together to tackle the
spill. The website www.GeoPlatform.gov/gulfresponse integrates the latest data on the oil spills
trajectory, fishery closed areas, wildlife and place-based Gulf Coast resources such as pinpointed
locations of oiled shoreline and daily position of research ships into one customizable interactive map.

x The U.S. Government has also issued a general call for submission of white papers

that cover: oil sensing improvements to response and detection; oil wellhead control and submerged oil
response; traditional oil spill response technologies; alternative oil spill response technologies; and oil spill
damage assessment and restoration. That announcement can be found online at:
e&_cview=1

Onshore Shoreline Protection and Funding
Boom Update 2.5 million feet of containment boom deployed across the Gulf with over 600,000 feet in
staging areas. 3.2 million feet of sorbent boom is deployed with 1.8 million feet in staging areas.
Alabama
x
Boom 523,000 feet of containment boom deployed and 135,000 feet staged.

x Activated Vessels 245 official response vessels, 854 Vessels of Opportunity, 33 skimmers, 68

barges.
x Shoreline Impacts More than 1,000 people working to clean up Dauphin Island, and more than

1,000 people working to clean up locations from Ft. Morgan to Perdido Pass.
Florida
x
Boom 299,900 feet of containment boom deployed and 58,750 feet staged.

x Activated Vessels 147 official response vessels, 365 Vessels of Opportunity, 109 skimmers, 17

barges.
Shoreline Impacts More than 620 people working to clean up oiling between Pensacola Beach

x and Navarre Beach. No other current shoreline impacts noted.
Louisiana
x Boom 1,346,264 feet of containment boom deployed or assigned. 282,654 feet of boom

staged.
x Activated Vessels 1,655 official response vessels, 275 Vessels of Opportunity, 150 skimmers,

369 barges.
x Shoreline Impacts 1,810 people are working to clean up oil at locations in St. Bernard,

Plaquemines, Jefferson, Lafourche and Terrebonne parishes. Oiling at other locations has been cleaned
and the areas are being monitored for re-oiling.
Mississippi
x
Boom 367,000 feet of containment boom deployed.
Activated Vessels 322 official response vessels, 567 Vessels of Opportunity, 107 skimmers, 55

x barges.
Shoreline Impacts Petit Bois Island, 322 people working on cleanup.

Volunteers and Training 24,185 volunteers are signed up, trained, and working as of June 13.
monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and vessel operation for laying boom. Information about
training can be found at www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com under volunteers.
State Websites
x x x x



Mississippi:
Onshore Claims and Outreach
Claims
x 31 Claims offices have been established by BP across the Gulf Coast to provide locations where

people can go to file or discuss claims. There are more than 145 operators answering phones, and 600
claims adjusters staffing the offices. Vietnamese and Spanish translators are in some offices.
x Note: No person asserting a claim or receiving payment for interim benefits will be asked or

required to sign a release or waive any rights to assert additional claims, to file an individual legal action,
or to participate in other legal actions associated with the Deepwater Horizon incident.
x The contact
office locations listed below. Claims can also be filed online at: www.bp.com/claims
Claims Summary as of June 14
Alabama Counties Mobile Baldwin Monroe Jefferson Claims Paid

$8,134,739
$2,437,303
$66,000
$42,098
Clarke Montgomery Covington Escambia Wilcox Tuscaloosa Dale Chilton Madison Washington Other Counties Alabama Total
Florida Counties Franklin Escambia Okaloosa Bay Santa Rosa Wakulla Gulf Walton Pasco Liberty Pinellas Leon Duval Washington Jackson Calhoun Citrus Hillsborough Lake Other Counties Florida Total
Louisiana Parishes Plaquemines Jefferson Terrebonne Lafourche Saint Bernard Orleans Saint Tammany Vermilion
$37,000
$31,100
$30,000
$24,000
$23,500
$20,900
$16,500
$12,500
$12,009
$10,226
$360,279
$11,258,153
Claims Paid
$2,201,557
$1,590,693
$1,414,762
$1,314,600
$521,127
$415,715
$312,500
$178,930
$66,000
$42,300
$37,500
$30,000
$27,500
$25,000
$25,000
$21,075
$15,000
$12,500
$12,500
$225,470
$8,489,727
Claims Paid
$6,872,985
$6,643,009
$5,803,805
$3,684,600
$3,127,636
$1,607,423
$1,363,630
$1,022,383
Iberia Saint Charles Calcasieu Saint Mary Cameron Lafayette Tangipahoa Livingston East Baton Rouge St John the Baptist Washington Saint Martin Assumption Jefferson Davis Ascension Saint Landry Beauregard Saint James Pointe Coupee Avoyelles Other Parishes Louisiana Total
Mississippi Counties Harrison Jackson Hancock Stone Pearl River Lamar George Pike Lawrence Forrest Lincoln Chesterfield Marion Madison Neshoba Other Counties Mississippi Total

$597,624
$589,100
$551,300
$456,800
$446,650
$273,694
$232,500
$145,000
$136,054
$91,750
$66,700
$65,500
$61,500
$52,500
$43,900
$43,434
$41,000
$39,000
$24,900
$23,900
$948,099
$35,123,875
Claims Paid
$3,246,455
$1,639,503
$1,097,698
$105,125
$104,800
$61,000
$60,500
$19,300
$15,000
$15,000
$12,500
$12,500
$12,500
$11,800
$10,000
$204,550
$6,628,232
Karen St John
BP America
B6 Privacy

From: Beth Lumsden <[email protected]>
Subject: NOAA Science Briefing June 16
Cc: _DWH Science Box <[email protected]>,John Oliver <[email protected]>
Science box staffing contacts.xlsx
DWH Staff
Please see attached
June 16th Science Briefing.
Dispersant 101 as cleared through the science box
Updated Staffing (Oceanography and Ecosystem Impacts leads were left off)
Thank you
Beth
Dispersants 101

Application of Dispersant. Photo credit: NOAA.

For NOAA staff working on the Deepwater Horizon Spill, prepared for the Science Box
(note US EPA has regulatory authority f or approv ing the use of dispersants, and
additional technical inf orm ation on dispersants, including inf orm ation o n their use in the
DW H spill, can be found here: http://w w w .epa.gov /bpspill/dispersants.htm l#list)

What are dispersants? Dispersants are mixtures of chemicals that include active
ingredients together with solvents and other additives that facilitate the ir use and
effectiveness. The most abundant dispersants used so far in the Gulf of Mexico are
Corexit 9500 and Corexit 9527. The main differences between these are in the
component solvents and other additives; Corexit 9527 is a more water -miscible
preparation, whereas Corexit 9500 uses petroleum distillates as solvents. The active
chemicals in dispersants are actually detergents that are amphiphilic, that is, they have
both water -attractive (hydrophilic) and oil- or lipid -attractive (lipophilic) properties. The
amphiphilic properties of these detergents makes them useful for breaking down oil
sheens on the water surface, or large aggregates of oil under the water, into much smaller
microdroplets. Common dish detergents work by the same principle.

Why are dispersants used ? The primary objective in oil spill response is to physically
remove the oil, but this option may not be possible given the scale or operational
conditions for some spills. Dispersants are used to reduce the risk of oiling to surfac e
dwelling animals (birds, marine mammals) and coastal habitats (shoreline, wetlands).
Dispersion transfers this risk from the surface to the subsurface, usually to the top ~ 10
meters of the water column. Many important species occupy this zone (plankto n, fish),
so the decision to use dispersants is usually a question of tradeoffs to minimize the
overall ecological impacts of a spill.

What is the toxicity of the active ingredients in dispersants? The detergent
components of dispersants are generally no more toxic than household detergents.

Moreover, one of the detergents in Corexit products (Tween 80; sorbitan mono -(9Z)-9 -
octadecenoate) has been approved by the U .S. Food and Drug Administration as a food
NOAA Science
June 16, 2010
Dispersants 101

Application of Dispersant. Photo credit: NOAA.

For NOAA staff working on the Deepwater Horizon Spill, prepared for the Science Box
(note
EPA has regulatory authority for approv ing the use of dispersants, and
US additional technical inform ation on dispersants, including inform ation on their use in the
DW H spill, can be found here: http://w w w .epa.gov /bpspill/dispersants.htm l#list)

What are dispersants?
Dispersants are mixtures of chemicals that include active
ingredients together with solvents and other additives that facilitate their use and
effectiveness. The most abundant dispersants used so far in the Gulf of Mexico are
Corexit 9500 and Corexit 9527. The main differences between these are in the
component solvents and other additives; Corexit 9527 is a more water-miscible
preparation, whereas Corexit 9500 uses petroleum distillates as solvents. The active
chemicals in dispersants are act ually detergents t are amphiphilic, that is, they have
hat
both water-attractive (hydrophilic) and oil- or lipid-attractive (lipophilic) properties. The
amphiphilic properties of these detergents makes them useful for breaking down oil
sheens on the water surface, or large aggregates of oil under the water, into much smaller
microdroplets. Common dish detergents work by the same principle.

Why are dispersants used? The primary objective in oil spill response is to physically
remove the oil, but this option may not be possible given the scale or operational
conditions for some spills. Dispersants are used to reduce the risk of oiling to surfac e
dwelling animals (birds, marine mammals) and coastal habitats (shoreline, wetlands).
Dispersion transfers this risk from the surface to the subsurface, usually to the top ~ 10
meters of the water column. Many important species occupy this zone (plankton, fish),
so the decision to use dispersants is usually a question of tradeoffs to minimize the
overall ecological impacts of a spill.

What is the toxicity of the active ingredients in dispersants?
The detergent
components of dispersants are generally no more toxic than household detergents.

Moreover, one of the detergents in Corexit products (Tween 80; sorbitan mono-(9Z)-9-
octadecenoate) has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a food
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.1
and pharmaceutical additive. Detergents will likely irritate the eyes and mucous
membranes lining the airways of turtles, dolphins, birds, humans, and other large
animals. However, they would have to be ingested in very large amounts to be
systemically toxic. Smaller animals with shells (crabs, shrimp) or scales (fish) should be
relatively well protected from the external effects of detergents. Marine life without a
hard shell or scales (e.g., soft corals, jellyfish, marine bacteria, etc.) could be more
susceptible to damage by detergents in dispersants due to their lipophilic properties.
Lipophilic chemicals such as detergents and petroleum hydrocarbons in crude oil can
break down or dissolve unprotected cell membranes. In t same way, t detergents

he he
may be toxic to specialized cells in larger animals that are directly exposed to the
surrounding marine environment.

What is the toxicity of other components of dispersants? The solvents and
other additives in dispersants have potentially toxic properties that are independent of the
detergent components and also less well characterized. The identity of these compounds
is in many cases proprietary (i.e., confidential business information) and therefore
unknown to the general scientific community. One of the proprietary organic solvents
used in Corexit products can be neurotoxic to humans if inhaled. However, for birds and
marine life, the toxicity of the solvents and additives in dispersants is largely untested and
therefore poorly understood.

What do we know about the effects of dispersant/oil mixtures? The application of

dispersants to crude oil can increase the hydrocarbon exposure risk for fish, shrimp,
oysters, corals, and other species. Dispersants break oil masses down into smaller
droplets. This causes more hydrocarbons from surface slicks and subsurface plumes to
enter the water column where they can be more readily taken up by marine organisms.
This increased uptake of dispersed hydrocarbons has been shown for several different
marine species. However, the different processes governing the uptake and effects of
dispersed oil have not been studied in detail. For example, it is not known how very
small, sub-microscopic detergent-oil complexes interact with gills, sensory neurons, and
other types of surface membranes. It is important to note that while exposure risk to
water column species may be greatly increased over the short term, over the longer term
factors that can reduce overall exposure risk can also come into play, such as dilution and
increased microbial activity in association with smaller oil particles.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.1
NOAA Science
June 16, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
Topics include:
Loop Current
Protected Resources Updates
Seafood Safety
NOAA Assets
Vessels, Planes, Charters

IOOS
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
for June 15, 2010
* The large loop eddy (Eddy Franklin)
remains effectively isolated from the
Loop Current.
Continued potential for reattachment in

the next few days to weeks.
Inflow from Yucatan is bypassing eddy
Franklin and flowing more directly into
the Florida Straits.

3
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
15 day surface drifter trajectories (starting points indicated by squares)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
For June 11 flyover updates
see next slide. No flights since

June 12.
Turtles
Turtle Status
430
341
78
7
4
7
17
59
46

219
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
For June 12 flyover updates
see previous slide. No flights

since June 12.
Dolphins
Dolphin Status
43
41
0
2
0
15
8
6
11
3
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
June 15, 2010
GC/MS results of 26 fish and shellfish samples (composites) collected from the Gulf are posted on the
NWFSC website [results summarized on next slide]--concentrations were well below levels of concern.
Chemical analysis of 13 shrimp composite samples on GC/MS will be initiated today.

Additional fish and shellfish samples are being processed for chemical analysis.
Additional fish and shellfish will be sent from Pascagoula to the NWFSC for chemical analyses
today.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
Concentrations (ng/g, wet weight) of selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons measured in edible tissues of fish collected in
the Gulf of Mexico region as part of the Deepwater Horizon MC Canyon 252- Seafood Safety Response 2010
Closure Area
Collection Date
Status Gulf of
22-May-10 Surveillance Gulf of
22-May-10 Surveillance Baseline Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Surveillance Surveillance
Species
Region Northern Red Snapper

Mexico Northern Red Snapper
Mexico Northern Mexico Lane Snapper
Northern Lane Snapper
Mexico
NPH 0.6 0.68 0.81 0.78 0.74 0.69 0.87 0.79 1.3 0.9 0.91 1.1 0.61 0.58 0.72 0.71 0.82 0.89 0.76 0.59 0.81 0.94 0.89 0.67 0.75 0.95
FLU <0.24 <0.23 <0.24 <0.22 <0.21 <0.21 <0.23 <0.24 <0.20 <0.27 <0.20 <0.21 0.41 <0.23 <0.20 <0.21 <0.25 <0.23 <0.22 <0.26 <0.18 1 0.95 <0.27 <0.26 <0.20
ANT/PHN 0.3 0.33 0.35 0.34 0.3 0.31 0.33 <0.24 0.42 <0.27 0.31 0.34 0.62 0.42 0.24 0.29 0.26 0.28 0.31 0.31 0.32 1.9 1.7 <0.27 <0.26 0.28
FLA <0.14 <0.13 <0.14 <0.13 <0.12 <0.12 <0.14 <0.14 <0.11 <0.15 <0.13 <0.13 <0.12 <0.14 <0.11 <0.12 <0.15 <0.14 <0.13 <0.16 <0.10 0.28 <0.16 <0.16 <0.15 <0.11
PY R <0.14 <0.13 <0.14 <0.13 <0.12 <0.12 <0.14 <0.14 <0.11 <0.15 <0.12 <0.13 <0.12 <0.13 <0.11 <0.12 <0.15 <0.14 <0.13 <0.15 <0.10 <0.12 <0.15 <0.16 <0.15 <0.11
BAA <0.21 <0.19 <0.21 <0.19 <0.18 <0.18 <0.21 <0.21 <0.17 <0.23 <0.19 <0.19 <0.18 <0.20 <0.17 <0.19 <0.23 <0.21 <0.19 <0.23 <0.16 <0.18 <0.23 <0.24 <0.23 <0.16
CHR/Trphn <0.24 <0.22 <0.25 <0.22 <0.21 <0.21 <0.24 <0.24 <0.20 <0.26 <0.22 <0.22 <0.21 <0.24 <0.20 <0.22 <0.26 <0.25 <0.22 <0.27 <0.18 <0.21 <0.27 <0.28 <0.27 <0.19
BaP
<0.21
<0.20
<0.22
<0.20
<0.19
<0.19
<0.21
<0.21
<0.18
<0.24
<0.20
<0.20
<0.19
<0.21
<0.18
<0.19
<0.23
<0.22
<0.20
<0.24
<0.16
<0.19
<0.24
<0.25
<0.24
<0.17
Red Snapper Florida 18-May-10 Northern Gulf of

Red Snapper
Mexico 22-May-10 Northern Gulf of
Lane Snapper
Mexico 22-May-10 Brown
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
Red Snapper
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
Mexico 22-May-10 Atlantic
Pascagoula, MS
Croaker
Sound 6-May-10 Atlantic
Pascagoula, MS
Croaker
Sound 6-May-10 Brown
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
White Shrimp
White Shrimp
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
Northern Gulf of
Shrimp
Pascagoula, MS
Croaker
Sound 13-May-10 Atlantic
Pascagoula, MS
13-May-10 Croaker
Sound Northern Gulf of
White Shrimp
Northern Gulf of
Croaker
Northern Gulf of
Croaker
Mexico 18-May-10
NPH = napthalene, FLU = Flourene, ANT/PHN = anthracene/phenanthrene, FLA = fluoranthene, CHR = chrysene, BaP = benzo[a]pyrene ,
BAA = benz[a]anthracene, PYR = pyrene
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2

As of 15 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48
N43
N49
N46
N68
N57 N42
N44
N47
N51
N52
Status Today
DWH Loop Current, No Flight Today, MacDill AFB
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
DWH multi-spectral scanning/oil density & thickness, Mobile, AL
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Marine mammal survey, Kodiak, AK.
Carrollton, GA for corrosion inspection and maintenance
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
NOAA Ship Positions

As of 15 JUN 2010
FA
M2
DY
RA
MF
DJ
SH
HB
DE
RB
KA
HA
SE
R2
PC
NF
TJ
GU
= underway
EX Guam
ID Status Today
FA Scheduled operations suspended by weather. Arrival 6/18 Port Angeles, WA
SH
MF
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 06/21 Seattle, WA.
DY Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/24 Dutch Harbor, AK
HI
M2 Underway on scheduled project. Arrival San Francisco 07/04
SE Alongside Pearl Harbor, HI. Departure 7/6 for scheduled project
KA Alongside San Diego, CA. Departure 7/8 for scheduled project
RA Alongside Cascade, OR for shipyard repair period
DJ Alongside Seattle, WA. Decommissioning on week of 08/02
EX Underway on scheduled project. Arrival TBD
ID DE TJ HB NF RB GU
= alongside
Status Today
ETD for DWH Seafood Safety surveys 06/16
ETD Galveston, TX for DWH acoustics and water sampling 06/15
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure 6/15 for mammal surveys near
DWH
PC Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure for DWH surveys TBD
R2 Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure 6/16 for sea trials and scheduled
project
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2

As of 15 JUN 2010
BM BB CA
JF GY RB
RC
EN OV
CH
WS
= underway
= alongside
ID BM BB CH CA EN GY JF OV RB RC WS
Type R/V Brooks McCall M/V Bunny Bordelon R/V Cape Hatteras R/V Caretta R/V Endeavor R/V Gandy R/V Jack Fitz R/V Ocean Veritas M/V Rachel Bordelon R/V Ryan Chouest R/V Walton Smith
Status Today
In Houma, LA
Deepwater sampling 1km W of wellhead, surface surveying for natural gas, tow-yo CTD sampling 5km SW of wellhead
In St. Petersburg,FL
In Pascagoula for mechanical problems. Return to operations estimated 14 June
In Leeville, LA
Deepwater sampling 5 km W of wellhead
In port Houma, LA
Subsurface (150m) sampling for hydrocarbons towards E to find plume extent
Inport Miami, FL
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/confluence/display/OOP/Subsurface+Monitoring+Assets
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.2
Name
Steve Murawski Bob Haddad Beth Lumsden Lora Clarke Shelby Walker
Role
SCIENCE BOX LEAD Deputy Lead for Science Box Science Coordination lead Science Coordination backup Science Interface w/ NOAA Leadership Back up science interface OAR Lead OAR Backup OAR AA OMAO lead OMAO Backup NWS Lead NWS backup NWS backup NWS backup NWS backup NOS Lead NOS Backup NMFS Lead NMFS Backup NESDIS Lead NESDIS backup Communications Lead Communications backup Habitat Restoration Lead Habitat Restoration backup Air Quality Lead Air Quality Backup Sub-surface oil lead Sub-surface oil back up Social Science Lead Social Science backup LMR lead LMR Backup Regional Collaboration Lead Regional Collaboration backup Oceanography Lead Oceanography Back up
Ecosystem Impacts Lead Ecosystem Impacts Back up
Email
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Dian Seidel, Gabby Dreyfus

Mike Uhart Alan Leonardi Craig McLean Phil Kenul Todd Stiles Steve Lord Bill Lapenta Chad Cary Avichal Mehra Hendrik Tolman Juli Trtanj Tracy Collier Ned Cyr David Detlor Bill Pichel
Kent Hughes
[email protected],[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected], [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]>
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Jana Goldman Jennifer Austin Chris Doley John Iliff James Meagher Dave Parrish Bob Pavia Sam Walker Jamie Kruse Joe Terry Ned Cyr David Detlor Jim Murray Paul Sandifer Bob Haddad Gary Matlock
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.3
office
phone
301-713-2239
cell
phone
301-713-3038 x 110
301-713-2239
301-734-1049 301-734-1177
oaa.gov,[email protected]
noaa.gov, [email protected]
301-713-7700
301-763-8000 x 7202
301-713-0524 x 197
206-780-1931
301-713-2367 x 159 301-713-2367 x 113 301-763-8231 x 166 301-763-8102 x 171
206-526-6272
301-713-2367 x 159
301-734-1070 301-713-3038 x 110

301-713-1622 x 200
Document ID: 0.7.19.1945.3

Subject: DWH ACTIONS and UPDATES 6.15.2010
DWH ACTIONS and UPDATES 6.15.2010.xls
MMST Health and Stranding Update 06-14-10 DRAFT.doc
Science box staffing contacts.xlsx
NOAA Science Briefing Jun 16.pdf
dispersants101_w graphic.pdf

NIC/ICC/NRT
STATUS UPDATE
Fire on ENTERPRISE: A small fire visible at the top of the derrick on the D temporarily shut down the LMRP containment operation today. Preliminary r which was quickly extinguished, was caused by a lightning strike. Operations afternoon, after final safety and operational assurance inspection.
Source Control: Top Hat is listing approximately 12 degrees. Technicians co degree of list, but are not planning any action since the system has been consis approximately 15,000 barrels of oil per day. Todays shut down will reduce th hour period by about 1,500 barrels.
Marine Mammals: NOAA Ship PISCES reported a dead, 25ft long sperm wh south of Pascagoula, Mississippi. There is no oil in the vicinity of the whale, b are feeding on the carcass.
NRT No call today
NIC Activities
JAG/SDOT: Draft charter for the SDOT Team sent to the JAG Chair. Meeti and SDOT to discuss organization of the JAG and clearance of various produc
SCIENCE
use of www.geoplatform.gov/gulfresponse continues to increase (3.4 million v Provided overview of geoplatform.gov to DHS-OMB DW H Integrated Service scheduled to Team for next Tuesday.
DHS standing up new Unified Command .gov site by this weekend, and worki migration plans.
All NOAA Line Offices, NOAA GC and NOAA OCIO met with DOJ legal sta to the preservation of records, identification of systems, and collection of data Litigation Hold. NOAA will provide DOJ with a draft template of the descrip identify NOAA systems on which DW H data is being held and preserved. On to between DOJ and NOAA, a data call will be issued from the NOAA CIO O No update from EPA on air/water quality availability for public ERMA applic inquiring.
June 16th Science Briefing.- attached.
LMR
Fisheries Closure
* There were no modifications to the closed area in the Gulf EEZ for June 1
LMR (2)
remains 78,264 sq mi (202,703 sq km), or about 32% of the GOM EEZ.

Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries announced the following open commercial fishing in portions of inside waters east and west of the Mississipp Parish effective June 14, 2010. The area was originally closed as a precaution recent information from shoreline cleanup assessment teams indicates no oil in o Inside Waters West of Mississippi River: The portion of state inside w inside/outside shrimp line west of the Mississippi River from the southern sho degrees 28 minutes 13.4 seconds west longitude westward to 89 degrees 30 mi longitude near Sandy Point.
o Inside Waters East of Mississippi River :The portion of state inside wa inside/outside shrimp line located south and east of the eastern shore of Baptis eastward to the eastern shore of Main Pass.
o Territorial Sea East of Mississippi River: The portion of state outside w Mississippi River seaward of the inside/outside shrimp line west of 89 degrees west longitude and south of 29 degrees 21 minutes 32.7 seconds north latitude Seafood Inspection
* Participated in an interagency conference call regarding consumption rate have been reached and the protocol tables are being modified.
* Steven Wilson is drafting a dockside monitoring plan for review by the NM * FDA has requested SIP to draft HACCP plan templates to be provided to i plans for detection of oil. This is a portion of FDA's marketplace surveillance a * Processing seafood safety samples collected off Western Louisiana by SE Beau Rivage.

* Manually generated & QA-ed seafood sample status summary from seafoo spreadsheets and related documentation.
* Provided updated seafood safety sample metrics to Nancy Thompson per * Worked on NSIL's DWH response cost estimates and expenditures with d describe the activities.
* Evaluating data received to date in regards to seafood safety sample receip for purpose of determining data base structure and format in order to design an and tracking system.
* Complete seafood inspection report attached.
PISCES reported a dead, 25ft long sperm whale today. The whale's locatio of Pascagoula,
Mississippi. turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 19 from J * 371 stranded (increase of 8 from June 13)
o 33 of the stranded were found alive (no change from June 13)
o 4 recovered alive but died in rehab (no change from June 13)
o 4 turtles released alive (no change from June 13)
o 25 live turtles in rehabilitation (no change from June 13)
* 59 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (increase of 11 o 53 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of11 from June 13)
o 3 turtles collected dead (no change from June 13)
o 3 turtles died in rehabilitation (no change from June 13)
LMR (2)
NRDA
* 219 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increase of * Of the initial 75 full or partial necropsies completed, the two primary cons death of the non-oiled recovered turtles are forced submergence or acute toxic pending.
* To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 4 dead live stranded turtles(2 of which were caught in skimming operations).
* 43 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (i 13).
o 41 were dead stranded dolphins (increase of 2 from June 13)
o 11 verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of decom recover (increase of 2 from June 13)
Shoreline: Four teams went out in the field to complete pre-assessment shoreli Island, Laneaux Island, Bastion Bay, Bay Baptiste, Whiskey Island and Point C Forensic oil sampling occurred in West-South Terrebonne Bay and West-Nort CRMS Team observed light sheen observed on North shore of Lake Washingt obtained at CRMS 0174 due to the presence of oil. Sheen on vegetation was a marsh with approximately 100cm penetration.
Team 1- No report available
Team 2 evaluated the southern portion of Wilkerson Canal, eastern portion of northeastern shore of Wilkerson Bay near Wilkerson Canal. Heavy oil observ of Wilkerson Canal heading south, beginning just south of stationary barge un Wilkerson Bay. Light oil and sheen observed along northern island surroundin Heavy oil observed along southern shoreline of island surrounding St. Marys along most shorelines.
Team 3 assessed shoreline and marsh areas west of Marsh Island. All waypoin near the westernmost limits of SCAT oil mapping data in the area, progressing Data obtained during the days field effort was found to coincide with existing with the exception of the area mapped as moderate coverage immediately w Lock. No oil was observed in this area.
Team 4 no report available
Number of Bottles: 2700
Jack Fitz cruise experienced mechanical problems which cancelled the sampl (6/14) and we have rescheduled for 6/15 rendezvous with vessel in Port.
NRDA (2)
Chemistry: As of June 14th, approximately 4500 samples have been collected baseline and pre-assessment data collection. This total consists of approximat 20% sediment samples, and 5% or less of tissue, oil (tarballs), oil on water pro Water Column: NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard 2 vessels..
Brooks McCall: Conducting deep water sampling 2.5 km northwest of wellhe Jack Fitz: Returning to port due to mechanical problems
Ocean Veritas: Deep water sampling 5km W of wellhead. Altering plans to 2
signals. Indicated weak plume 5km N of wellhead at 4 of 5 stations at 1100m. Human Use: Conducted boat ramp counts at 3 ramps in Central FL, 2 in South 3 in LA, 1 in MS, and 1 in AL. Shore counts and intercepts in MS. Overflight canceled.
SAV: Currently identifying long-term sampling dates and sites for injury asse Marine Mammals:
The team flew a NRDA survey today to collect aerial sightings of marine ma primary oil spill zone. Six bottlenose dolphins were seen in light sheen and tw were seen in light sheen.
Marine Mammal survey team aboard Gordon Gunter is underway on a sperm survey.
ASSETS AND PLATFORMS
The following digital files are attached. Information is current as of Date Tim 1. NOAA Platform Powerpoint showing current mapped locations of assets.
2. OMAO Assets Excel Gantt Chart showing projects assigned to each asset.
3. Proposed OMAO Asset DWH Response Schedule Word document
identifying impacts to NOAA projects should OMAO assets be tasked.
No updates
No updates
REGIONAL LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOV'T

AFFAIRS
COMMS / PUBLIC AFFAIRS
*Planning seafood safety media day at Pascagoula Lab, date TBD.

*Answered several follow up press calls on ERMA / GeoPlatform.gov.
*Holding second ERMA /GeoPlatform.gov webinar for select media, Wed. 1p *Preparing roll out (date TBD) of NOAA's long-term modeling of oil moveme clearance), press release and supporting Q&A (in development) and media ava and David Holst as lead contact points)
* Working on data release policy with Science Team and DWH Staff
* JIC put out update release on this week's TJ, Gunter, and Pisces
missions.
EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT
External Affairs received final comments on the draft fact sheet on volunteer p JIC approval for the document. Will be posted on the External Affairs website interagency group for their sites. Reached out to LaDon Swann, Bill Walker an concerns of the academic community in the Gulf region. Will use this and oth strategy for continued outreach to that sector. Met with Constituent Affairs Ne outreach efforts to Gulf and to coordinate line office participation. Reached ou organizer for the June 17th Gulf Oil Spill Disaster Response Summit being hel Contacted the Houma JIC to get more information on the BP Community Expo Louisiana over the past week and will continue this week. The Expos are being Houma JIC by contractors hired by BP. Federal and state agency participants a through staff stationed at the Houma JIC. Spoke with Paul Sadowski, BP cont Spoke with Rebecca Hoff, NOS OR&R In the case for NOAA - this is being d NOS OR&R Science Support Coordinator (SSC - Jordan Stout last week), Ass week) and the Biologic Support Representative (Rebecca Hoff last week). Th position that coordinates to support the USCG - long before the BP oil spill. In and Biologic Support are tied to the Incident Command.
Additional contact made with Margaret 'Jody' Cottrill at the Unified Area Com
along additional contact information regarding the Expos and the plans for the to put together a Speakers Bureau. Requests for speakers at following events n n LSU Food and Water Safety Executive Summit Meeting Baton Rouge, LA n Jackson County Republican Women's Group - Pascagoula, MS - July 12 at t and Ballroom Kiwanis Club - Loc: TBD - July 14, 2010 Reached out to FEMA Affairs, Gwen Camp requesting to speak with her about FEMA's plans or ongo Gulf Coast with regards to hurricane season preparedness. Complaint e-mails E 10 new emails over the weekend and Monday. We have responded to 7 of them fix suggestions, trajectory map mistakes and general complaints.
DATA INFORMATION IA/ INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
1. Responded to State Department/Cuba Desk questions about the loop current Desk is expecting a large delegation later this week to discuss migration issues for oil spill questions. They have further questions about sub-surface plumes a Responses being worked with DWH staff.
2. A representative from the U.K. Center for Environmental Fisheries and Aqu an MOU with NOAA on marine science, ocean and human health. To respon offering to host a scientific meeting to promote science exchange, goodwill, an collaboration. The information was passed to Dr. Robinson and Dr. Murawsk 3. Awaiting decision by Dr. Lubchenco regarding possible meeting with Dr. P delegation to Dr. Robinson or someone else. Dr. Alvarez contact information email address) passed to PCO for quick contact after decision.
4. Received response from Brendan Bray on arrangements for possible hosting Bahamian scientist to interact with modelers in Seattle. A likely time frame o was suggested in order to assure time to process the required foreign visitor fo currently have the resources to pay for travel.
5. The weather advisory regarding a low pressure system which may develop i passed to State along with the National Hurricane Center URL. The system is Windward Islands.
Key Bullets
Assisting Cuba Desk at State Department prepare for a visit from a large dele is expected to be raised.
Continuing a review of arrangements and accommodations needed to suppor scientist to Seattle to interact with modelers. OR&R not able to pay travel.
U.K. offer of collaboration passed to Dr. Robinson & Dr. Murawski.
Awaiting decision regarding meeting with Dr. Alvarez (Mexico)
No updates
No updates

LEGAL / GC POLICY / BUDGET
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
(
(!
!
(
!
(
30N !
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
30N
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(

Gulf of Mexico from 4/30/10 - 6/14/10
28N
!
( Deepwater Horizon Platform

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
26N
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
30N !
!
(
(
((!
!
((
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
( !
(!
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(!
(
(!
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(!
((
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(!
!
((
!
!
!
!
((
(!
!(!
!

(!
!
(!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
(!
(
!
(
(
(!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
(!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
(

!
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
( (
!
(!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(!
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(!
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
(
(!
!
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
FL
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
28N
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
)
"
!
)
(
!
(
)"
"
(
!
)
!
(
*
#
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
)
)
)
)"
)"
)"
"
"
"
"
)
)
)
"
"
)
)
" "
)

" ) )
)"
"
)
)
"
"
)"
"
!
")

)
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
)
"
)
#
*
Skimmer-caught:
* #
New
#
Confirmed Location
* * #
"
New
)
"
)
Confirmed Location
"
)
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
90W
88W
86W

As of 15 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48
N43
N49
N46
N68
N57
N42
N44
N47
N51
N52
Status Today
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
CALNEX, Ontario, CA


Shoreline: Four teams went out in the field to complete pre-assessment shoreline surveys at
Chenier/Bay Island. Forensic oil sampling occurred in West-South Terrebonne Bay and West-
Northwest Terrebonne.
CRMS Team observed light sheen observed on North shore of Lake Washington. No
baseline data was obtained at CRMS 0174 due to the presence of oil. Sheen on
vegetation was approximately 150 yards of marsh with approximately 100cm penetration.

Team 2 evaluated the southern portion of Wilkerson Canal, eastern portion of St. Marys
Point, and the northeastern shore of Wilkerson Bay near Wilkerson Canal. Heavy oil
observed along western shoreline of Wilkerson Canal heading south, beginning just south
of stationary barge until the beginning of Wilkerson Bay. Light oil and sheen observed
along northern island surrounding St. Marys Point. Heavy oil observed along southern
shoreline of island surrounding St. Marys Point. Boom was present along most
shorelines.
Team 3 assessed shoreline and marsh areas west of Marsh Island. All waypoints were
collected starting near the westernmost limits of SCAT oil mapping data in the area,
progressing in an eastward direction. Data obtained during the days field effort was
found to coincide with existing SCAT mapping data, with the exception of the area
mapped as moderate coverage immediately west of the Freshwater Lock. No oil was
observed in this area.


Jack Fitz cruise experienced mechanical problems which cancelled the sample
intake team last night (6/14) and we have rescheduled for 6/15 rendezvous with
vessel in Port.
Chemistry:
, As of June 14
th
dispersant.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.1
Water Column: NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard 2 vessels..

southwest.
Jack Fitz: Returning to port due to mechanical problems
Ocean Veritas: Deep water sampling 5km W of wellhead. Altering plans to 2km SW of
wellhead if no signals. Indicated weak plume 5km N of wellhead at 4 of 5 stations at
1100m.
Human Use: Conducted boat ramp counts at 3 ramps in Central FL, 2 in Southern FL, 3 in
Western FL, 3 in LA, 1 in MS, and 1 in AL. Shore counts and intercepts in MS. Overflight along
north Gulf coast was canceled.
SAV: Currently identifying long-term sampling dates and sites for injury assessment phase.
Marine Mammals:
The team flew a NRDA survey today to collect aerial sightings of marine mammals and
turtles in the primary oil spill zone. Six bottlenose dolphins were seen in light sheen and
two unidentified dolphins were seen in light sheen.
Marine Mammal survey team aboard Gordon Gunter is underway on a sperm whale
preassessment survey.
Environmental Response Management Application _Sampling Overview_06-15-2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.1
PRIORITY
NIC/ICC/NRT
SCIENCE
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
LMR
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
LMR (2)
LMR (2)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
NRDA
NRDA (2)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
REGIONAL
LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOV'T
AFFAIRS
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT
DATA INFORMATION
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
LEGAL / GC
POLICY / BUDGET
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
STATUS UPDATE
Fire on ENTERPRISE: A small fire visible at the top of the derrick on the Discoverer ENTERPRISE
temporarily shut down the LMRP containment operation today. Preliminary review indicates the fire, which
was quickly extinguished, was caused by a lightning strike. Operations should resume this afternoon, after final
safety and operational assurance inspection.
Source Control: Top Hat is listing approximately 12 degrees. Technicians continue to monitor the degree of
list, but are not planning any action since the system has been consistently recovering approximately 15,000
barrels of oil per day. Todays shut down will reduce the recovery of oil in this 24-hour period by about 1,500
barrels.
Marine Mammals: NOAA Ship PISCES reported a dead, 25ft long sperm whale today 150 miles due south of
Pascagoula, Mississippi. There is no oil in the vicinity of the whale, but numerous tiger sharks are feeding on
the carcass.
NRT No call today

NIC Activities
JAG/SDOT: Draft charter for the SDOT Team sent to the JAG Chair. Meeting today between JAG and
SDOT to discuss organization of the JAG and clearance of various products..
June 16th Science Briefing.- attached.

Public use of
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
Fisheries Closure
* There were no modifications to the closed area in the Gulf EEZ for June 15, 2010. The closed area remains
78,264 sq mi (202,703 sq km), or about 32% of the GOM EEZ.
Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries announced the following opening to recreational and
commercial fishing in portions of inside waters east and west of the Mississippi River in Plaquemines Parish
effective June 14, 2010. The area was originally closed as a precautionary measure. The most recent
information from shoreline cleanup assessment teams indicates no oil in these areas.
o Inside Waters West of Mississippi River: The portion of state inside waters north of the inside/outside
shrimp line west of the Mississippi River from the southern shore of Red Pass at 89 degrees 28 minutes 13.4
seconds west longitude westward to 89 degrees 30 minutes 12 seconds west longitude near Sandy Point.
o Inside Waters East of Mississippi River :The portion of state inside waters inshore of the inside/outside
shrimp line located south and east of the eastern shore of Baptiste Collette Bayou eastward to the eastern shore
of Main Pass.
o Territorial Sea East of Mississippi River: The portion of state outside waters east of the Mississippi
River seaward of the inside/outside shrimp line west of 89 degrees 11 minutes 21 seconds west longitude and
south of 29 degrees 21 minutes 32.7 seconds north latitude.
Seafood Inspection
* Participated in an interagency conference call regarding consumption rates. Agreement appears to have
been reached and the protocol tables are being modified.
* Steven Wilson is drafting a dockside monitoring plan for review by the NMFS management.
* FDA has requested SIP to draft HACCP plan templates to be provided to industry to update their plans for
detection of oil. This is a portion of FDA's marketplace surveillance activity.
* Processing seafood safety samples collected off Western Louisiana by SEFSC contracted vessel Beau Rivage.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
* Manually generated & QA-ed seafood sample status summary from seafood safety sample spreadsheets and
related documentation.
* Provided updated seafood safety sample metrics to Nancy Thompson per instructions.
* Worked on NSIL's DWH response cost estimates and expenditures with detailed narratives to describe the
activities.
* Evaluating data received to date in regards to seafood safety sample receipt, log-in, and processing for
purpose of determining data base structure and format in order to design an efficient sample log-in and tracking
system.
* Complete seafood inspection report attached.
PISCES reported a dead, 25ft long sperm whale today. The whale's location is 150 miles due south of
Pascagoula, Mississippi. sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 19 from June 13 report)
* 371 stranded (increase of 8 from June 13)
o 33 of the stranded were found alive (no change from June 13)
* 59 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (increase of 11 from June 13)
o 53 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of11 from June 13)
o 3 turtles collected dead (no change from June 13)
o 3 turtles died in rehabilitation (no change from June 13)
430 total
* 219 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increase of 8 from June 13)
* Of the initial 75 full or partial necropsies completed, the two primary considerations for the cause of death of
the non-oiled recovered turtles are forced submergence or acute toxicosis. Further results are pending.
* To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 4 dead stranded sea turtle and 5 live
stranded turtles(2 of which were caught in skimming operations).
* To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 56 live sea turtles and 3 dead sea turtle
captured during directed turtle surveys.
* 43 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 2 from June 13).
o 11 verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of decomposition or unable to recover
(increase of 2 from June 13)
* The complete health and stranding report, turtle stranding map, and dolphin stranding map are attached.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2

Shoreline: Four teams went out in the field to complete pre-assessment shoreline surveys at Pelican Island,
Laneaux Island, Bastion Bay, Bay Baptiste, Whiskey Island and Point Chenier/Bay Island. Forensic oil
sampling occurred in West-South Terrebonne Bay and West-Northwest Terrebonne.
CRMS Team observed light sheen observed on North shore of Lake Washington. No baseline data was obtained
at CRMS 0174 due to the presence of oil. Sheen on vegetation was approximately 150 yards of marsh with
approximately 100cm penetration.

Team 2 evaluated the southern portion of Wilkerson Canal, eastern portion of St. Marys Point, and the
northeastern shore of Wilkerson Bay near Wilkerson Canal. Heavy oil observed along western shoreline of
Wilkerson Canal heading south, beginning just south of stationary barge until the beginning of Wilkerson Bay.
Light oil and sheen observed along northern island surrounding St. Marys Point. Heavy oil observed along
southern shoreline of island surrounding St. Marys Point. Boom was present along most shorelines.
Team 3 assessed shoreline and marsh areas west of Marsh Island. All waypoints were collected starting near the
westernmost limits of SCAT oil mapping data in the area, progressing in an eastward direction. Data obtained
during the days field effort was found to coincide with existing SCAT mapping data, with the exception of the
area mapped as moderate coverage immediately west of the Freshwater Lock. No oil was observed in this area.


Jack Fitz cruise experienced mechanical problems which cancelled the sample intake team last night (6/14) and
we have rescheduled for 6/15 rendezvous with vessel in Port.
Chemistry:
As of June 14th, approximately 4500 samples have been collected to support NRDA baseline and
pre-assessment data collection. This total consists of approximately 70% water samples, 20% sediment samples,
and 5% or less of tissue, oil (tarballs), oil on water product, and dispersant.
Water Column: NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard 2 vessels..
Brooks McCall: Conducting deep water sampling 2.5 km northwest of wellhead, moving southwest.
Jack Fitz: Returning to port due to mechanical problems
Ocean Veritas: Deep water sampling 5km W of wellhead. Altering plans to 2km SW of wellhead if no signals.
Indicated weak plume 5km N of wellhead at 4 of 5 stations at 1100m.
Human Use: Conducted boat ramp counts at 3 ramps in Central FL, 2 in Southern FL, 3 in Western FL, 3 in
LA, 1 in MS, and 1 in AL. Shore counts and intercepts in MS. Overflight along north Gulf coast was canceled.
SAV:
Currently identifying long-term sampling dates and sites for injury assessment phase.
Marine Mammals:
The team flew a NRDA survey today to collect aerial sightings of marine mammals and turtles in the primary
oil spill zone. Six bottlenose dolphins were seen in light sheen and two unidentified dolphins were seen in light
sheen.
Marine Mammal survey team aboard Gordon Gunter is underway on a sperm whale preassessment survey.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
The following digital files are attached. Information is current as of Date Time Group in subject line.
1. NOAA Platform Powerpoint showing current mapped locations of assets.
No updates
No updates
*Planning seafood safety media day at Pascagoula Lab, date TBD.

*Answered several follow up press calls on ERMA / GeoPlatform.gov.
*Holding second ERMA /GeoPlatform.gov webinar for select media, Wed. 1pm EDT.
*Preparing roll out (date TBD) of NOAA's long-term modeling of oil movement - via fact sheet (in clearance),
press release and supporting Q&A (in development) and media availability. (Chris Vaccaro and David Holst as
lead contact points)
* Working on data release policy with Science Team and DWH Staff
missions. * JIC put out update release on this week's TJ, Gunter, and Pisces
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
External Affairs received final comments on the draft fact sheet on volunteer programs and will pursue JIC
approval for the document. Will be posted on the External Affairs website and offered to the interagency group
for their sites. Reached out to LaDon Swann, Bill Walker and Bill Hogarth about concerns of the academic
community in the Gulf region. Will use this and other findings to draft a brief strategy for continued outreach
to that sector. Met with Constituent Affairs Network to summarize outreach efforts to Gulf and to coordinate
line office participation. Reached out to Bill Loiry who is the organizer for the June 17th Gulf Oil Spill Disaster
Response Summit being held in Mobile, AL. Contacted the Houma JIC to get more information on the BP
Community Expos that have been held in Louisiana over the past week and will continue this week. The Expos
are being planned out of the Houma JIC by contractors hired by BP. Federal and state agency participants are
also being coordinated through staff stationed at the Houma JIC. Spoke with Paul Sadowski, BP contractor at
Houma JIC. Spoke with Rebecca Hoff, NOS OR&R In the case for NOAA - this is being done through the
NOAA NOS OR&R Science Support Coordinator (SSC - Jordan Stout last week), Assistant SSC (Ed Levine last
week) and the Biologic Support Representative (Rebecca Hoff last week). The SSC is an established position that
coordinates to support the USCG - long before the BP oil spill. In this case though the SSC and Biologic
Support are tied to the Incident Command.
Additional contact made with Margaret 'Jody' Cottrill at the Unified Area Command and she passed along
additional contact information regarding the Expos and the plans for the Unified Area Command to put together
a Speakers Bureau. Requests for speakers at following events need to be confirme
n LSU Food and Water Safety Executive Summit Meeting Baton Rouge, LA - June 25
n Jackson County Republican Women's Group - Pascagoula, MS - July 12 at the Grand Magnolia Suites and
Ballroom Kiwanis Club - Loc: TBD - July 14, 2010 Reached out to FEMA Intergovernmental Affairs, Gwen
Camp requesting to speak with her about FEMA's plans or ongoing outreach along the Gulf Coast with regards
to hurricane season preparedness. Complaint e-mails External Affairs received 10 new emails over the weekend
and Monday. We have responded to 7 of them. Topics included oil leak fix suggestions, trajectory map mistakes
and general complaints.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
1. Responded to State Department/Cuba Desk questions about the loop current and fishery closures. The Desk
is expecting a large delegation later this week to discuss migration issues and want to be prepared for oil spill
questions. They have further questions about sub-surface plumes and monitoring them. Responses being
worked with DWH staff.
2. A representative from the U.K. Center for Environmental Fisheries and Aquaculture Science proposed an
MOU with NOAA on marine science, ocean and human health. information was passed to Dr. Robinson and Dr. Murawski.
3. Awaiting decision by Dr. Lubchenco regarding possible meeting with Dr. Porfirio Alvarez or possible
delegation to Dr. Robinson or someone else. Dr. Alvarez contact information (cell phone number and email
address) passed to PCO for quick contact after decision.
4. Received response from Brendan Bray on arrangements for possible hosting of a visit from a Bahamian
scientist to interact with modelers in Seattle. to pay for travel.
5. The weather advisory regarding a low pressure system which may develop into a tropical cyclone was passed
to State along with the National Hurricane Center URL. The system is 1250 miles east of the Windward
Islands.
Key Bullets
To respond to the oil spill they are offering to

The
host a scientific meeting to promote science exchange, goodwill, and promotion of collaboration.
A likely time frame of mid-late July or later was suggested in
order to assure time to process the required foreign visitor forms. OR&R does not currently have the resources
Assisting Cuba Desk at State Department prepare for a visit from a large delegation where the oil spill is
expected to be raised.
Continuing a review of arrangements and accommodations needed to support a visit by a Bahamian scientist to
Seattle to interact with modelers. OR&R not able to pay travel.
U.K. offer of collaboration passed to Dr. Robinson & Dr. Murawski.
Awaiting decision regarding meeting with Dr. Alvarez (Mexico)
No updates
No updates
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
LEAD
Bill Conner
Steve Murawski
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
John Oliver
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
Tony Penn
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
Phil Kenul
Buck Sutter
John Gray
Justin Kenney
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
Andy Winer
Joe Klimavicz
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
Jim Turner
Lois Schiffer
Sally Yozell
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.2
Update through June 14, 2010 (as of 1800)


Increase of 8 turtle strandings (1 dead in FL, 1 dead in MS, and 1 dead in LA; 1 dead in
FL, 1 dead in MS, and 3 dead in LA reported from June 13 after 1800)
Increase of 11 live oiled turtles captured during directed on-water search efforts
Increase of 2 dolphin strandings (2 dead in MS photodocumented on May 25 and 26,
verified on June 14)
Sea Turtles:
13 report)

o o
3 turtles collected dead (no change from June 13)

strandings.
in rehab):

from June 13)
13)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.3

o o o o

Marine Mammals:
43 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 2 from June
13).

2 were live stranded dolphins, one of which that died shortly after stranding, one that was
euthanized upon stranding (no change from June 13)
euthanized):

from June 13)
13)
11 verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of decomposition or unable
to recover (increase of 2 from June 13)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.3
whether the animal was externally oiled pre- or post-mortem. All other necropsy
findings are pending.

Louisiana/Texas border through the Florida panhandle from June 1 - June 14 is 12.
of 2010.
o o o o

water today (see results above) and will be on the water again Tuesday June 15.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.3

Tuesday, May 15, 2010
Participated in an interagency conference call regarding consumption rates. Agreement appears

to have been reached and the protocol tables are being modified.
Steven Wilson is drafting a dockside monitoring plan for review by the NMFS management.
FDA has requested SIP to draft HACCP plan templates to be provided to industry to update their
plans for detection of oil. This is a portion of FDA's marketplace surveillance activity.
Three NWFSC staff are in Pascagoula assisting NSIL staff in processing fish and shellfish to be
shipped for chemical analyses.
NWFSC is continuing chemical analysis of finfish and shellfish tissues.
Processing seafood safety samples collected off Western Louisiana by SEFSC contracted vessel
Beau Rivage.
Manually generated & QA-ed seafood sample status summary from seafood safety sample
Provided updated seafood safety sample metrics to Nancy Thompson per instructions.
Provided tour of NSIL facilities and DWH operations to NMFS AA Eric Schwaab.
Worked on NSIL's DWH response cost estimates and expenditures with detailed narratives to
describe the activities.
Evaluating data received to date in regards to seafood safety sample receipt, log-in, and
processing for purpose of determining data base structure and format in order to design an
efficient sample log-in and tracking system.
Programming database front end for seafood safety sample data management. The database
will replace the current data management strategy which uses multiple spreadsheets which is
cumbersome and not as efficient as a database.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.4
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
30N !
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(

28N Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
!
(
28N
26N
0 25
50
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.5
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
30N !
( !
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
(!
( !
!
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
( (
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
((
(
(
((
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
((
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(!
(
(
(!
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
( (
(
!
!
(
!
((
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Skimmer-caught:
#
* New
#
#
"
New
)
"
Confirmed Location
)
"
)
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
"
!
!
(
"
!
)
(
)
!
(
#
(
!
*
"
)
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
)
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
)"
"
)
"
"
(
)
"
"
)
!
)
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
*
#
28N
28N
0 25
50 90W
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.6
Proposed NOAA Asset DWH Response Schedule
SHIPS
Asset Gunter Start Date June 5 End Date June 26 Impacted Projects 6/5-6/14
GU-10-02 Leg 1 - Marine Mammals
06/15 06/26
Foster Thomas
Jefferson
Oregon II June 21 July 5 Rd-10-01 Summer groundfish Leg 2
loses 9 DAS (much of the area
is likely going to be off limits due to
the oil.)
Delaware
II
Foster Gunter July 5 July 18 July 18 August 4 tbd tbd DE-10-05 Benthic Habitat June 5 June 15 June 19 tbd None: NF-10-05, Grays Reef
Comparison Cancelled.
TJ-10-03 FGBNMS Inport Charleston, SC for z-drive repairs and
potential DWH response. ETD 6/25.
Departed Galveston, TX, for DWH Western
Sentry II 6/15
Could shift to start one day earlier to
maintain continuity of DWH mission support
early. Ship would have to resupply with
water once.
DE plans to depart Woods Hole 16 June for 8
day transit to GOM pending final project
instructions for seafood sampling mission
NF-10-07 Tortugas Eco Reserve loses
Allows 2 weeks for z-drive repairs alongside
all 7 DAS
GU-10-02 Marine Mammals, Leg 3
lose 14 DAS. Currently this project is
scheduled for Atlantic Ocean, but
there are discussions of moving this
effort to the Gulf instead. If project
remains in Atlantic, GU isnt an option
Pisces Oregon II August 5 September 3 PC-10-04 CoOp Reef Fish Survey loses
This 30 day mission would have to be broken
23 DAS
September
September
Rd-10-02, Shark/Snapper Longline
3
28
loses all of Leg 4 and most of Leg 3.
Estimate losss of ~20 DAS. However,
into 2 or 3 legs w/ T&Gs for water
This 26 day mission would have to break into
2 or 3 legs for water and reprovisioning in Pascagoula
GU would have to resupply fresh water one
time during this mission period
Comments
Mammal project 6/15
Repairs/ABS inspection scheduled for
Departed Pascagoula, MS, for DWH Marine
typically surveyed during this project

by ending Leg 1 of groundfish a day or two
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.10
much of the projects survey area is

impacted by oil
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.10
Aircraft
Asset N42RF
WP-3D
Start Date End Date June 15 Impacted Projects Hurricane Season Comments
Funding ends on June 15. Gulf Loop Current
flights could be rescheduled around any
tasking for Hurricanes. Hurricane taskings
would delay Gulf Loop Current flights by
several days
N43RF
WP-3D
TBD TBD CALNEX (OAR California air quality
study)- Potential loss of 1 to 3 days
Reassignment to DWH for air quality study
per OAR request. Arrived MacDill 6/7.
Mission Flights conducted 6/8 and 6/10.
Returned to CALNEX 6/11.
N46RF
Twin
Otter
April September
Alaska Marine Mammal Surveys 30
Extending Multi Spectral Oil Analysis flights
beyond June 15 will impact Alaska Marine
Mammal surveys. Additionally, engine
overhaul date will be accelerated due to
increased utilization and installation of
extended range fuel tank will be delayed.
N57RF
Twin
Otter
June 7 September
Northeast Right Whale / BOWFEST 30
DWH Marine Mammal flights tasking
resumed June 7. Anticipated schedule is
approximately 5 flights every 14 days.
Tasking could be flown on Twin Otter N46RF
but belly port will be unavailable for use.
Additional crew would be required for N46F
due to crew duty day limitations.
N68RF
King Air
April September
National Coastal Mapping Priorities 30
Risk of not meeting GPRA goals for shoreline
mapping.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.10
OMAO Assets (as of 6/15/10)
Jun
Jul Aug Sep
Oct
Nov
N42 WP-3D
N43 WP-3D N46 Twin Otter
DWH Gulf Loop
Hurricane Season
CALNEX
Hurricane Season
N43 - Arrived MacDill AFB 6/7. Mission Flights conducted 6/8 and 6/10. Return to CALNEX on 6/11
DWH Multi Spectral
Marine Mammal Surveys

Continuation of DWH Multi Spectral Oil, Mobile, AL
N48 Twin Otter

N56 Twin Otter
N57 Twin Otter
CALNEX
Harbor Seals
Steller Sea Lions
Harbor Seals
BWASP
NERW
in Carrollton, GA for corrosion inspection and maintenance
BOWFEST
N68 King Air
Bigelow
Delaware II
MX
National Coastal Mapping Priorities
Cetacean Abundance
Mapping
Bottom Trawl
ECOMON
Benthic
ECOMON
Atl. Herring
Delaware II - re-tasked for DWH in support of seafood inspection, preparations for departure underway, departure estimated no earlier than 6/16 with arrival no earlier than 6/24
Brown
Foster
GRNMS
Repairs
Shipyard / Trials / Fleet Inspection
Tsunami/Trop. Atl
Pully Ridge/Tortugas/FGBNMS/Reg Assmt/Seafloor/Lionfish/Norfolk Canyon
Foster - potential re-task for DWH response. ETD from Charleston delayed to due to contining maintenance 6/25.
Gunter
DWH
Repairs
Marine Mammals
Gunter - scheduled marine mammal cruise shifted to GOM 6/15
F.I.
Fall Plankton
Jefferson
DWH
FGBNMS
Jefferson - DWH Western Sentry II to begin 6/15
Key West
Chesapeake Bay
Oregon II
Pisces
MRP/Trials
Groundfish
Longline Shark / Red Snapper
Warranty
SEAMAP Reef Fish
South Atlantic Reef Fish - TBD
NOAA Line Office Assets
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

Nov
R/V HST
R/V Gandy
NOAA Small Boat suitable for coastal day trips. Currently alongside Pascagoula and available.
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.11
R/V Gandy
R/V Caretta
R/V Harold B
NOAA Small Boat conducting reef fish surveys out of Panama City, F L. Inport Pascagoula with mechanical problems until 6/14
NOAA Small Boat alongside Pascagoula. DHW begin 6/21.
Scheduled to conduct trap/video surveys out of Panama City the reamainder of the month.
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.11
Other Assets
Jun Jul Aug Sep

Oct Nov
Beau Rivage
Brooks McCall
Bunny Bordelon
Capt Hatteras
Endeavor
Jack Fitz
Ocean Veritas
Pelican
Rachel Bordelon
Ryan Chouest
Walton Smith
IOOS Gliders
NAVO Gliders
no update
In Houma. LA.
Deepwater CTD sampling 7km from wellhead SW quadrant

In port St. Petersburg,FL
ROV survey, deep and shallow water CTD sampling 1 km N of wellhead.
Deepwater sampling 5 km NE of wellhead
no update
In port Houma, LA
Inport Miami, FL
DWH*
Monitoring for oil in Florida coastal waters from Tampa to FL Keys. *No end date specified for gliders.
Monitoring and sampling oceanographic conditions
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.11
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.11
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.11
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.11

As of 15 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48
N43
N49
N46
N68
N57
N42
N44
N47
N51
N52
Status Today
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.12
NOAA Ship Positions

As of 15 JUN 2010
FA
M2
DY
MF
RA
DJ
SH
HB
DE
RB
KA
SE
HA
R2
PC
TJ
GU
= underway
NF
EX
ID FA Status Today
Guam
= alongside
ID DE TJ HB NF RB GU PC R2 Status Today
ETD for DWH Seafood Safety surveys 06/16
ETD Galveston, TX for DWH acoustics and water sampling 06/15
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure 6/15 for mammal surveys near
DWH
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure for DWH surveys TBD
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. Departure 6/16 for sea trials and scheduled
project
Scheduled operations suspended by weather. Arrival 6/18 Port Angeles, WA
SH
MF
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 06/21 Seattle, WA.
DY M2 SE KA RA DJ EX Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/24 Dutch Harbor, AK
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival San Francisco 07/04
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival TBD
HI
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.12

As of 15 JUN 2010
BM BB CA
JF GY RB
RC
OV
CH CH
= underway
= alongside
EN
WS
Type R/V Brooks McCall M/V Bunny Bordelon R/V Cape Hatteras R/V Caretta R/V Endeavor R/V Gandy R/V Jack Fitz R/V Ocean Veritas M/V Rachel Bordelon R/V Ryan Chouest R/V Walton Smith
Status Today
In Houma, LA
Deepwater sampling 1km W of wellhead, surface surveying for natural gas, tow-yo CTD sampling 5km SW of wellhead
In St. Petersburg,FL
In Pascagoula for mechanical problems. Return to operations estimated 14 June
In Leeville, LA
Deepwater sampling 5 km W of wellhead
In port Houma, LA
Inport Miami, FL
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.12
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.12
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.12
Document ID: 0.7.19.1879.12

Subject: Morning Reports
forecast_20100618_1200CDT_20100615_2100CDT_rs.pdf
landfall6_15_complete.pdf
os_forecast_20100618_1200CDT_20100615_1900CDT_rs.pdf

N OAA Emergency Response Division (ERD)
Report # 59: June 15, 2010 2000 PDT
MC 252 DEEPWATER HORIZON Incident, Gulf of Mexico, Major Spill Incident

After further calculations the Flow Rate Technical group released new estimates of flow rate
from the MC 252 riser after it was cut to place on the Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) or
top hat. The plume team estimates that post riser cut, but before the top hat was in place, the
amount of oil exiting the riser was between 35,000 and 60,000 barrels/ day.

Collection of oil from containment cap of the leaking MC 252 well was interrupted this morning
when lightning struck the recovery ship Discovery Enterprise. The lightening strike started a fire
in a vent pipe leading from a storage tank. An automatic fire suppression system contained the
fire in about 10 minutes with no injuries or significant damage to the vessel or containment
system and collection resumed within 5 hours of the strike. The system had been recovering
about 15,000 bbls per day. N recovery volume was reported today.
o
N OAA continues to prepare daily trajectories for the nearshore and offshore oil. In the
nearshore, winds are forecast to be relatively weak (5-8 kts) and predominantly SW/W through
Thursday, then become N at 6-9 kts on Friday. Trajectories indicate continued movement of
W the slick to the NE over the next few days. Eastward alongshore currents will continue to move
the oil east along the Florida coast. Coastal regions between Dauphin Island, AL and Panama
City, FL are threatened by shoreline contacts within this forecast period. A morning overflight
reported scattered sheens and tarballs south of the Chandeleur Islands; this region is also
threatened by shoreline contacts within this forecast period.

In the offshore region, recent satellite imagery analysis no longer shows the persistent patches of
sheen to the S-SE of the main slick. However, scattered sheens and tar balls previously observed
in these regions may be getting entrained into the large clockwise eddy (Eddy Franklin) that has
pinched off the main Loop Current (LC). Trajectories indicate that most of these sheens will
continue to move clockwise in Eddy Franklin. Some oil may be getting entrained into a
counterclockwise eddy to the N of Eddy Franklin. The connection between the spill source and
E Eddy Franklin has been cut off due to a change in the currents.

N changes to fishery closures were announced today, but injuries to wildlife and critical habitat
o are growing as oil collects in the Gulf and impacts shorelines. ORR continues to work with
USFWS and other trust agencies to reduce impacts of oil and operations on trust resources.
Today a dead sperm whale was reported in the Gulf. OR&R prepared a hind cast analysis to
determine the whales drift.

The potential for the low pressure system in the Atlantic to become a tropical cyclone was
downgraded today. The N ational Hurricane Center had indicated that this system has a 40%
Overview:
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.1
chance of this system becoming a tropical cyclone. The system, now 900 miles east of the
Lesser Antilles, is now thought to have a 10% chance of developing in the next 48 hours.

Yesterday, the day the public spill and response information portal geoplatform.gov was
released, the site received 3.4 million hits. The portal features over 400 data layers including
trajectory forecasts, fishery closed areas, wildlife and resources at risk, and shoreline oiling.
ORR will brief congressional, media, and N staff on navigating the system and available
GO information tomorrow.

PRFA status update:
Cruises
HF Radar
Approved
Approved

Recreational Fishing ORR and N MFS are pursuing the rec. fishing
Remote Sensing Activities by NGS In review by SSC.
Approved
ORR base increase by $7.7M Approved
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.1

Many personnel are on scene and many more are engaged remotely. Additional
N OAA assets are being made available for the spill.

cientific support to the U.S. Coast Guard and Unified Command
S
redict oil fates and effects
P verflight observations and mapping
O dentify resources at risk
I ecommend appropriate clean-up methods
R M anage data and information

lan for assessment of injuries to natural resources
P oordinate with state and federal trustees
C
I ncident weather forecasts including marine and aviation

xperimental imagery for spill trajectory forecasts
E ata Visualization
D
ssues related to marine mammals, sea turtles, and fishery resources
I P ublic Affairs support to the Joint Information Center

SCG Liaison to the DCO Incident Support Team USCG Headquarters
U ircraft and vessel support
A
ceanographic and atmospheric modeling and data support.
O ulf of Mexico Sea Grant programs providing technical advice on impacts to living
G resources and coastal communities.

upport from ON for staffing and technical information
S MS ceanographic modeling support
O ublic Affairs support to Joint Information Center
P
NOAA Roles:
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.1
Nearshore
Nearshore
Est imat for: 1200 CDT, Friday 6/ 10
e , 18/ Deepwater Horizon MC252
e Prepared: 2100 CDT, Tuesday, 6/15/10
Dat
This forecast is based on the N WS spot forecast from Tuesday June 15 PM. Currents were obtained from several models
, (NOAAGulf of Mexico, West Florida Shelf/USF, TGLO/TAMU, N VO/N A RL) and HFR measurements. The model was
init ialized from Tuesday satellit imagery analysis (N e OAA/N ESDIS) and overflight observations. The leading edge may
cont tarballs that are not readily observable from t imagery (hence not included in the model initialization). Oil near
ain he bay inlets could be brought into t bay by local tidal currents.
hat
910'0"W
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
310'0"N 310'0"N
M obile
P oula
Gulfort
ascag p B St L ay ouis
300'0"N
M ilton
P ensacola
F ort
reep St. Andrew
300'0"N
Chandeleur
Sound
A tchaf a
alay B ay
B reton
Sound
V enice
B arataria
B ay
Caillou
T errebonne
B ay
B ay
A alachicola
p
290'0"N
290'0"N

Incident Location
280'0"N
280'0"N

270'0"N

raj
270'0"N
260'0"N
260'0"N
20
40 Miles
80
250'0"N
Winds are forecast to be relatively weak (5-8 kts) and predominant SW/ through Thursday ly W ,
t become N at 6-9 kts on Friday Trajectories indicate continued movement of the slick to the
hen W . N over the next few day Eastward alongshore currents will continue to move the oil east along
E s. t Florida coast. Coastal regions between Dauphin Island, AL and Panama City FL are threatened
he , by shoreline contacts within this forecast period. Amorning overflight reported scatt ered sheens
and tarballs sout of t Chandeleur Islands; this region is also threatened by shoreline contacts
h he within this forecast period.
910'0"W
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
Trajectory
Uncertaint y
Light
Medium
Heavy
Potential
X
beached oil
850'0"W
250'0"N
240'0"N
240'0"N
860'0"W
Next Forecast:
June 16t PM
h
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.2
M obile
obile
P ascag M oula
Gulfort
p B S Louis
sissip i S ay t. B M is p ound
ay
Chandeleur
S ound
B reton S ound
B arataria
B ay
T imbalier
T errebonne
B ay
B ay
Mississippi
Alabama
E lin A B
g F P ensacola
Choctawhatchee
B ay
B ay
Florida
S Andrew B t ay
V ermilion
B ay
M an City
org
Louisiana
Wednesday - Sunday
Thursday - Sunday
Wednesday - Friday
A tchaf a
alay B ay
Wednesday - Friday
Prepared Tuesday, June 15, 2010
This map delineates threatened shorelines for the period of June 16-20 Because
of the continuous leak at the source, there is potential to impact areas multiple
times. Scattered tarballs which are not observable from overflight may impact
shorelines ahead of the indicated dates. Forecasting beyond three days has
greater uncertainty as to potential impacts. FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
30
60 Miles
120
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.3
920'0"W
900'0"W
880'0"W
860'0"W
840'0"W
820'0"W
800'0"W
Mississippi
Alabama
Louisiana
300'0"N 300'0"N
Florida
280'0"N 280'0"N
Well bore location
Loop Current
260'0"N
260'0"N
240'0"N
Cay Sal
Bahama
240'0"N
June 15, 2010
Slick location derived by NOAA NESDIS from RADARSAT-1 data aquired

June 15, 2010 at 0651 CDT. There was no imagery available for the Bird's Foot
Delta and the western portion of the main slick.
220'0"N 220'0"N
Cuba

Mexico
50
100 Miles
200
920'0"W
900'0"W
880'0"W
860'0"W
840'0"W
820'0"W
800'0"W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.4

TO: NOAA SSCs
Seattle, WA 98115


Summary The Loop Current pattern is not currently serving as a major mechanism to
transport oil toward the Florida Straits. The northern section of the Loop Current has
separated once again from the main Loop Current into a large clockwise eddy (Eddy
Franklin). There continues to be no significant amounts of oil being moved toward the
Loop Current or Eddy Franklin. However, there has been a confirmation of a scattered
tarball field a week ago at the northeast corner of Eddy Franklin. Eddy Franklin may re-
join the main Loop Current over the next few weeks. If this re-joining occurs, it would
again provide a clear pathway for tarballs to move to the Florida Straits.

the Loop Current or Eddy Franklin. The visible sheens near the northern edge of Eddy
Franklin appear to have dissipated. Satellite imagery analysis has identified no anomalies
in the region for about a week. There have been no overflights to the region for a few
days.

As discussed in previous reports, scattered tarball fields are often not visible from fixed
wing aircraft or satellite observations. To confirm the presence of tarballs, the vessel R/V
Walton Smith traveled to the northeast corner of the Loop current last week, where
frequent sheens had been observed in the satellite imagery. They found little orange
The ship took samples that were shipped to LSU. Initial results indicate that there is a
high probability that the red oil did come from the spill.

That tarball field was found near the boundary of a counter clockwise eddy located to the
northeast of Eddy Franklin where there had been frequent sheens observed by satellite
analysis and last Fridays overflight. We expect some of the oil in that location to remain
in the counter clockwise eddy, but some may be drawn into Eddy Franklin. Once in Eddy
Franklin, we expect most of it will remain there, circulating around the central Gulf.

It appears that Eddy Franklin has once again separated from the main Loop Current. All
of the models we are examining and the sea surface height analysis show the surface
expression of the eddy to be separated. Two AOML drifters deployed by the R/V Walton
Smith have followed Eddy Franklin clockwise around to the west. We continue to
monitor the situation closely.

The sheen that has been pulled from the source region toward Eddy Franklin continues to
be stretched out and thinned and is no longer showing up in satellite imagery. A NOAA
overflight (Wesley) to the southeast of the spill site Saturday (6/12) observed nothing
heavy at the tail extending toward Eddy Franklin. We do not expect larger
June 15, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.5
concentrations of oil to move toward the Loop Current within the forecast period.

We do expect that there are now same scattered tarball fields circulating in Eddy
Franklin. Most of these tarballs will continue to circulate in the eddy, while they continue
to weather and spread and become widely scattered. If and when Eddy Franklin re-
connects with the main Loop current, a fraction of these tarballs may move to the Florida
Straits. We expect that any tarballs that persist long enough to ultimately enter the
Florida Straits will be highly weathered and widely scattered. In order for tarballs to
reach shorelines, there must be a persistent shoreward wind to bring them to the coast. At
this time, we estimate that the fraction that may reach shorelines may be slightly above
background levels of tarballs already on the Florida shorelines.
weeks.

The US Coast Guard will be conducting regular overflights to look for signs of
significant oil over the Florida Shelf and Loop Current; a NOAA observer will be on
board every 2-3 days.

The vessel Richard L. Becker conducted visual observations and sampling operations in
Eddy Franklin today. Transparent sheens and Trichodesmium plankton were observed.
Plankton net tows found tiny bits of well weathered tarballs in one of the tows. The type
and concentration of the tarballs were consistent with typical background concentrations
in the region. No fresh oil was observed.

In addition, a sentry plan has been put in place by the Florida Peninsula Incident
To date they have not reported any tarballs.

and dissipating long before nearing any shorelines. If Eddy Franklin re-joins the main
Loop Current, any oil moved to the northern extent of the eddy will once again have a
pathway to the Florida Straits and beyond. We will continue daily monitoring of the Loop
Current in order to monitor this re-connection.

June 15, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.5
Offshore
Offshore
Estimate for: 1200 CDT, Friday, 6/18/10
Date Prepared: 1900 CDT, Tuesday, 6/15/10
Currents were obtained from four models: N OAAGulf of Mexico, N avO/N COM , N RL/IASN and N FS, C
St./SABGOM. Each includes Loop Current dynamics. Gulf wide winds were obtained from the gridded N CEP product .
The model was initialized from June 11 t June 14 satellite imagery analysis, and a June 11 CG/ OAAoverflight. The
o N leading edge may contain t arballs that are not readily observable from the imagery (hence not included in t model
he init ializat ion).
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
840'0"W
830'0"W
820'0"W
810'0"W
300'0"N

Incident Location
300'0"N
290'0"N
290'0"N
280'0"N
280'0"N

informat nearshore
ion
270'0"N
270'0"N
260'0"N
260'0"N
250'0"N 250'0"N
240'0"N
240'0"N

230'0"N 230'0"N
25
50 Miles
100
220'0"N
210'0"N
Recent satellit imagery analysis no longer shows the persistent pat e ches of sheen to the S-SE of the main slick.
However, scattered sheens and tar balls previously observed in these regions may be getting entrained int the the large
o clockwise eddy (Eddy Franklin) that has pinched off the main Loop Current (LC). Trajectories indicate that most of
Legend
t hese sheens will continue to move clockwise in Eddy Franklin. Some oil may be get ting entrained into a counter-
clockwise eddy to the N of Eddy Franklin. The connect between the spill source and Eddy Franklin has been cut
E ion off due to a change in the currents.
900'0"W
890'0"W
880'0"W
870'0"W
860'0"W
850'0"W
840'0"W
830'0"W
820'0"W
810'0"W
220'0"N
210'0"N
Next Forecast:
June 16th PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.6
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.7
Document ID: 0.7.19.1837.8

From: "Mark.W.Miller" <[email protected]>
Subject: Clearance for Bahama Response
To: _HQ Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>,Jim Turner <[email protected]>,
Allison Reed <[email protected]>
Response to Embassy Nassau_DWH questions_06_14_10.doc
In light of the discussions held yesterday doesn't this require to go

through NOAA clearance?
Mark
NOAA Response to Embassy Nassau 13 June 2010
1)
What is taking place with respect to the oil spill under the surface of the Sea?
Specifically, to what extent has the oil seeped into the water column?
The Deepwater Horizon MC252 oil spill response raises concerns that spilled oil may form a
large plume of oil at toxic concentrations below the water surface. This information is meant to
summarize our current understanding of how subsurface oil (below the surface mixed layer)
behaves, based on our experience at other oil spills, research, monitoring, and computer
simulations. At this time as a result of sampling and analysis, we believe that there are no
cohesive subsurface plumes of oil in the areas sampled beyond the immediate area of the well.
Observations and modeling indicate that:
Average subsurface oil concentrations will be in the parts-per-million (ppm) range within
a few kilometers of the wellhead, and will continue to decrease away from the source.
There can be parcels of water, even at long distances from the source, that contain oil
concentrations much higher than average because oil droplets do not mix uniformly into
the water column.
Subsurface oil droplets will not coalesce and create higher oil concentrations in a
coherent plume.
Physical, chemical, and biological processes will continue to reduce water column oil
concentrations over time.
The Deepwater Horizon is now releasing methane gas and oil in a turbulent mixture from 5,000
feet below the surface. . Initial estimates are that the plume of oil and gas rises from the release
point with most oil reaching the surface in about three hours. During the trip to the surface some
of the oil dissolves in the water column and some forms droplets. Deepwater Horizon MC252 oil
has a density about 85 - 90% of that of water, making it buoyant. When it reaches the surface the
oil floats. The pressure propelling the oil out of the wellhead is strong enough that it can cause at
least some of the oil to form water-in-oil emulsion, or mousse. While mousse is denser than the
oil, it is less dense than the water, and so it too naturally rises to the surface.
Dispersing oil at depth, either naturally or chemically, has the effect of breaking up the oil into
small droplets within the water column. Dispersed droplets vary in size, and droplets of different
sizes take different lengths of time to rise to the water surface. Very small droplets, less than
about 100 microns in diameter, rise to the surface so slowly that ocean turbulence is strong
enough to keep them mixed within the water column for months. These very small droplets
behave as if they were neutrally buoyant, and remain at depth. These dynamic processes can
result in oil remaining in subsurface waters in the area around the well or being transported
beyond 10 km.
Chemical dispersants have been injected into the oil as it is released from the riser to increase
subsurface dispersion. Injecting chemical dispersants into the oil jet at the sea floor is likely to
increase the percentage of oil forming droplets small enough to be neutrally buoyant. The
Document ID: 0.7.19.1926.1
neutrally buoyant oil droplets dispersed at the well are being released into ocean waters below
.
the pycnocline
2)
1
What effect is the oil spill having on the sea floor and what are the medium and long
term effects of this disaster on that environment?
The environmental repercussions of dispersed droplets of oil at depth and on the sea floor are not
well known at this time while oil is still flowing into the water. NOAA is working with
environmental agencies across the US government as well as academic institutions to better
understand the short, medium and long-term impacts to the deep ocean ecosystem and to
evaluate appropriate remediation measures. NOAA is leading several interagency natural
resource damage assessment working groups focused on deep ocean habitat including, but not
limited to, deep-sea corals, sediment, water and tissue.
3)
What measures can be taken to protect this ecologically sensitive and remote area
(Cay Sal Bank)?
Should any surface oil exit the Gulf of Mexico it will have been in the water at least 20-30 days.
During that transit time, the natural processes of evaporation and dispersion would reduce the oil
volume significantly. The remaining oil could be composed of streaks of emulsified oil and tar
balls.
The pycnocline is a region in the ocean where water density increases relatively rapidly with depth. It has the effect of
retarding movement of fluids from below to above, or vice versa.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1926.1
Document ID: 0.7.19.1926.1
4) What are the safety implications of the oil spill on recreational water and beach
activities?
On beaches and land, fresh or emulsified oil can smother plants, birds, and animals and can
create a skin contact hazard for people. Volatile organic compounds, such as PAH can pose an
inhalation hazard to people working near fresh oil, sheen, or emulsified mousse. PAHs can cause
a persistent environmental hazard if the oil penetrates substrates or is not removed from beaches.
It is unlikely that slicks of fresh or emulsified oil will reach Bahamian waters, cays and islands;
however, there is a possibility that tarballs could impact the shoreline, especially near Cay Sal
Bank. Tarballs typically range in size from tiny pellets that are the size of pencil erasers (10-20
mm) up to several cm across. Occasionally, tarballs stick together to form larger tarmats. Upon
reaching the shoreline, tarballs may soften in hot sun, posing hazard to birds and marine animals.
Prolonged skin contact may cause allergic reaction or rash. This is a potential concern for
recreational shorelines.
5) What is the effect of the chemical dispersant that is being used on the water and
environment? What dangers are there from these chemicals on seafood?
When an oil spill occurs, there are no good outcomes. Dispersant use is one of several tools that
may be employed, individually or in combination, to reduce consequences of an oil spill.
Surface application of dispersants results in a "plume" or "cloud" of oil droplets just below the
water surface. This dispersed oil mixes vertically and horizontally into the water column and is
rapidly diluted. Because the surface area of small droplets is large relative to the volume of oil,
bacteria and other microscopic organisms are then able to act more quickly and effectively to
degrade the oil. Dispersants are generally less toxic than oil.
When this crisis occurred, U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) granted BP authorization to use an approved dispersant on the surface of the water in an
effort mitigate the impact of the spill. Preliminary testing results indicate that subsurface use of
the dispersant is effective at reducing the amount of oil from reaching the surfaceand can do
so with the use of less dispersant than is needed when the oil does reach the surface. While BP
pursues the use of subsurface dispersants, the U.S. Government conducts regular analysis of its
effectiveness and impact on the environment, water and air quality, and human health through a
rigorous scientific monitoring program.
To date, two dispersants have been used on the response, Corexit 9500A and 9527A. Details on
these chemicals are available on the U.S. National Contingency Plan Product Schedule
(http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/ncp/product_schedule.htm).
When considering the use of a dispersant in the deep ocean, the EPA and Coast Guard weigh
the effectiveness of the dispersant at such depths; the benefits of preventing the oil from rising
to the surface and eventually hitting the shore where it is likely to do significant damage to
Document ID: 0.7.19.1926.1
birds, wetlands and aquatic life; and the long term impacts of the dispersant mixed with oil in
deeper waters.
Surface use of dispersants decreases the environmental risks to shorelines and organisms at the
surface and, when used this way, dispersants break down over several days. While the long-
term effects on aquatic life are unknown, the current strategy to cautiously use dispersants given
the characteristics of MC252 oil and the current environmental conditions provides the greatest
opportunity for mitigation. Recently, BP was directed to scale back on the use of dispersants.
How will we address what is likely to be slumping demand for seafood based on
6) lower consumer confidence in the safety and quality of seafood from the Bahamas - in
particular the lucrative lobster industry? How do we detect levels of oil or chemical
dispersant in food and the water it is not something regularly tested for, nor is it easy to
detect?
Crude oil has the potential to taint seafood with flavors and odors imparted by exposure to
hydrocarbon chemicals. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) operates a Seafood
Inspection Program and is the recognized Competent Authority for seafood export certification
when required. The agency also operates a system of science centers including laboratories
with experts in the field of toxicology and the impacts of oil spill contamination.
The U.S. Government is finalizing protocols to prevent tainted products from entering the
marketplace. The protocols include sampling of the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, sampling of
fisheries species potentially affected, sampling of products in the marketplace, and closing
affected areas to commercial fishing contaminant levels in seafood products are deemed to be
unsafe. Analytical and sensory methods are based on internationally accepted criteria. The
program is also finalizing strict protocols for the reopening of areas closed to commercial
fishing. Fishing grounds will be reopened ONLY when the products are deemed safe for
consumption by regulatory agencies. Consumers should expect commercially available Gulf
seafood to be of the same quality that people have come to expect from the Gulf.
NOAA continues to monitor the health of the commercial fish stocks within the United States
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). While we do not have complete data yet, we have not yet
seen any effect on fish stocks outside of our closed areas although we continue to monitor. Up
to date information on current fisheries closures can be found on the following web site:
http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm
Embassy Nassau may want to consider scientists and/or officials responsible for Bahamian food
safety to visit ongoing seafood safety operations in the Gulf of Mexico. For more information
on the NOAA Seafood Safety Inspection Program, please visit www.seafood.nmfs.noaa.gov
7)
There was widespread appreciation of the offer for training and technological
assistance in using and applying NOAA modeling systems.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1926.1
NOAA looks forward to working with Bahamian government to build capacity to prepare for,
respond to and recover from oil pollution threats from the Deepwater Horizon. We understand
training for modelers is the most urgent need.
8)
How long will the threat of tar balls exist?
Tarballs represent the final stage in the weathering of oil that enters the sea from accidental
spills, vessel operations, illicit discharges, or natural seeps. A series of weathering processes
begins to alter crude oil as soon as it is released to the water from a spill or natural seep. Fresh
crude oil is a complex mixture of thousands of chemical compounds. Within hours of reaching
the water surface, the lightest-weight chemical components have evaporated. Meanwhile, soluble
chemical components dissolve into the water. Breaking waves dislodge tiny pieces from patches
of oil and disperse those pieces downward into the water column. Microbes begin to degrade the
oil by breaking apart the long chain molecules within it. The result of these weathering
processes is the tarballs that you might encounter on a beach or observe floating in the water.
Tarballs typically range in size from tiny pellets that are the size of pencil erasers up to a few
inches across. Occasionally, tarballs stick together to form larger tarmats.
Tarballs are carried by currents to beaches, where you might spot them in natural collection
areas. Typically, these are areas high on the shore where wrack (marine vegetation), debris, and
trash naturally collect. Tarballs may be mixed with sand or pebbles, or you might just see small
tar stains on plastic bottles and trash. We are not certain where and how far tarballs originating
from the Deepwater Horizon wellhead may travel or for how long they will persist once they
reach shore. But results from research studieswhich have included shoreline surveys and
vessel surveys using special nets to sample tarballs from the waterprovide some information
about where tarballs common in the Gulf might travel. For example, research has shown that
more tarballs have been found on windward than leeward shorelines generally.. More tarballs
have been observed floating in the Loop Current and Florida Straits than in other open waters in
the region.
Taken together, these studies tell us that tarballs are common in the Gulf of Mexico region, and
originate from many sources, not just major oil spills. Tarballs have been monitored on
shorelines and in the waters off the U.S. Atlantic, Gulf, and Caribbean coasts for at least 6
decades. A given tarball on a Gulf of Mexico beach might have originated from a major incident
such as the Ixtoc I oil spill, vessel operations, accidents such as the many smaller oil spills
caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, natural oil seeps, or other causes.
9) Please provide a written explanation of the effect of the oil spill on the water
column.
The spilled oil is subjected to a variety of dispersal processes highly dependent on weather
conditions. Once on the surface, a portion (20-30%) of the oil evaporates into the air and a
small amount (10%) of the oil naturally disperses into the water column.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1926.1
In general, during the first forty-eight hours after the oil is released into the environment, 10-
20% of the oil could be chemically dispersed or burned and10-15% of oil could be
mechanically recovered. Therefore, the remaining roughly 25-50%, with 50% being worst case,
could ultimately impact shorelines and the water column.
The greatest concern for water column impacts are to the tiny planktonic organisms present in
the mid- to upper water column (upper 200m), such as copepods, and larvae of crustaceans and
fish. In the aftermath of other oil spills, with or without dispersant use, copepods have been
observed feeding on tiny oil droplets. There are two outcomes from this. First, the copepods
were excreting oil-contaminated fecal pellets which are much denser than the original oil
droplets and which can fall down through the water column, possibly to the sea floor. Second,
filter-feeding forage fish are more likely to ingest oil not from the tiny droplets but from feeding
on living copepods and other planktonic crustacean that themselves are consuming the tiny oil
droplets. Therefore, impacts to organisms living in mid and upper water column habitat are at
greatest risk close to the source of the oil. As the oil moves away from the source, disperses
and begins the weathering process, acute risks to water column organisms becomes more
difficult to determine as oil droplets do not mix uniformly into the water column.
10) Please provide additional information on the current state of the sub-sea water
under the oil slick.
Please see answer to question #1.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1926.1

Subject: 6.16.2010 DWH ACTIONs and UPDATES
NOAA PA Daily Media Tracking Report - NOS 06-16-10.xls

NIC/ICC/NRT
Source Control:
o Top Hat still listing at approximately 12 degrees ; 1 vent valve closed, but pl valves today.
o Q-4000 (choke line) flaring operations in progress at 2,387 bbls/day increasi afternoon; goal of 10,000 bbls by tomorrow night.
EPA Air monitoring: Air monitoring teams active near Long Beach, MS; Or Pensacola, FL to address odor complaints
NRT No report
NIC Activities
Mass Balance: Additional discussions about Mass Balance/Oil Budget (MB/ USCG. There are questions about whether the pressure gauges are functioning measuring what they are assumed to. This may impact the high end of the flow resolution for the pressure measurements before more detailed MB/OB can be Eastern Senators: NIC asked to coordinate a response to the letter from the E NOAA. NIC contacts sent to David Holst who is putting together the NOAA r IATAP: IATAP activities are picking up. Phase 2 - a more detailed technica probably require additional NOAA staff including a Contracting Officer to coo the Broad Agency Advertisement (BAA) from USCG.
SCIENCE
LMR
Please see attached

* NOAA Science briefing for tomorrow June 17th
* Full report on P-3 air quality data (briefed in slides)
* OMAO asset reports
Fisheries Closure
* There was a modification to the closed area in the Gulf of Mexico EEZ fo o Today's modification extends the northeastern closure boundary eastw Florida, to encompass the projected path of oil illustrated in the 72-hour trajec o The closure measures 80,806 sq mi (209,286 sq km) and covers about compared to the June 7 closure comprising 78,264 sq mi (202,703 sq km), or a EEZ.
o The map of today's closed area and an overlay map with the previous c modification are attached.
* Louisiana Department of W ildlife and Fisheries announced the following and commercial fishing in portions of inside waters and the territorial seas east in St. Bernard Parish effective June 15, 2010. This area was originally closed d measures. The most recent information from shoreline cleanup assessment team areas.
o The portion of Breton and Chandeleur Sounds as described by the dou
495.1 and state outside waters seaward of the inside/outside shrimp line north 54 seconds north latitude will open to recreational and commercial fishing wit following areas which shall remain closed to recreational and commercial fish o Those inside and outside state waters bounded on the north by 30 degr north latitude and on the south by 29 degrees 43 minutes 58 seconds north latit territorial sea boundary westward to 88 degrees 55 minutes 14.6 seconds west o The portion of inside waters extending north of Martin Island at 29 de seconds north latitude and south of Isle au Pitre at 30 degrees 09 minutes 20.5 from 89 degrees 7 minutes 00 seconds west longitude westward to 89 degrees west longitude.
LMR (2)
NRDA
Seafood Inspection
* Fisheries has had initial discussions with FDA on the hot line for the publi closings and to report oiled fish.
Marine Mammals and Sea Turtle Health and Stranding
* 449 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (inc report)
o 383 stranded (increase of 12 from June 14)
+ 350 of the stranded were found dead (net increase of 12 from June + 33 of the stranded were found alive (no change from June 14)
+ 4 recovered alive but died in rehab (no change from June 14)
+ 4 turtles released alive (no change from June 14)
+ 25 live turtles in rehabilitation (no change from June 14)
o 66 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (increase of + 60 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 7 from June 14)
+ 3 turtles collected dead (no change from June 14)
+ 3 turtles died in rehabilitation (no change from June 14)
+ 231 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (in 14)
* To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 4 de 5 live stranded turtles (2 of which were caught in skimming operations).
* To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 63 l sea turtle captured during directed turtle surveys.
* 45 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (i 14).
o 10 partial necropsies performed (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) ( 14)
* Whale Necropsy Status (of the 1 dead stranded)
o 1 verified stranding but animal not collected due to stage of decompos (increase of 1 from June 14)
+ The verified whale had no evidence of external oil.
* The complete health and stranding report, turtle stranding map, dolphin st stranding map are attached
Shoreline: Forensic oil sampling occurred in West-South Terrebonne Bay and Terrebonne. Four teams went out in the field to complete pre-assessment shor Island, Laneaux Island, Bastion Bay, Bay Baptiste, Whiskey Island and Point C summaries below:
Team 1 Shoreline pre-assessment from Myrtle Grove to Wilkinson Bay near S Vegetation oiled within areas without previous SCAT data and with previous S varied between no visible vegetation oiling to a solid band of oil several feet in within the water was predominately silver sheen with some sheening from oile Team 2 No report
Team 3 Assessed shoreline of Whiskey Island. Waypoint and tracklog data, p were collected from 7 (070-076) waypoints during the days field effort. Way starting near the center and collecting points toward the easternmost limits of S the area. We finished by progressing in a westward direction back toward the SCAT data listed the entire shoreline as lightly oiled; however, surveys found lightly with scattered tar balls. Team 3 reported in to NOAA Command Cente the ramp, at mid-day and again upon returning to the boat ramp at 1415. Ther problems during the field effort.
Team 4 assessed the northern and south eastern portions of the Bassa Bassa ( with direct exposure to the Gulf of Mexico (southeast side) tended to have mo shorelines (northern) tended to have less oiling. The northern side of the islan maps to be No Oil (blue) but we found light oil consistently along this marsh side) with the direct exposure, the SCAT maps showed the shore to be very lig this to be moderate at the northern end, and light to moderate along the middle Sample Intake Teams Samples processed at shoreline as of 6/15/10:
NRDA (2)
Chain of Custody data packages processed: 265

Number of Bottles Received: 3158
Chemistry: As of June 15th, approximately 4600 samples have been collected baseline and pre-assessment data collection. This total consists of approximat 20% sediment samples, and 5% or less of tissue, oil (tarballs), oil on water pro Water Column: NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard 2 vessels.
Brooks McCall: Conducting deep water sampling 2.5 km northwest of wellhe Jack Fitz: Returned to port due to mechanical problems on 6/14. Scheduled to Ocean Veritas: Deep water sampling 5km W of wellhead. Altering plans to 2 signals.
Thomas Jefferson: Scheduled to depart today. May rendezvous with Jack Fitz survey operations. Awaiting final decision on rendezvous plan.
Human Use: Conducted boat ramp counts at 4 ramps in Central FL, 1 in FL K LA. Shore counts and intercepts in AL.
SAV: Currently identifying long-term sampling dates and sites for injury asse Marine Mammals/Turtles: Marine Mammal survey team aboard Gordon Gunt whale preassessment survey.
REGIONAL LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOV'T

AFFAIRS
The following digital files are attached. Information is current as of Date Tim 1. NOAA Platform Powerpoint showing current mapped locations of assets.
no update
Conference Call for Interested Congressional Members and Staff and Intergov GeoPlatform.gov Site
* Offered an overview of the GeoPlatform.gov website to Congressional, St
* Highlighted the site's capabilities and provided an opportunity for the part * Staff with NOAA's Office of Response and Restoration presented
* Staff with the House Natural Resources Committee, Senate Commerce Co Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-9th, FL) participated
EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT
DATA INFORMATION
*Planning counter points ahead of CBS story about slow fed response to help K *Planning media rollouts on long-term movement of oil and seafood safety for on Mon. / Tues.
*Interactions:*
Telecon with White House Public Engagement/CEQ/federal agencies for upd o Informed them that Buck Sutter will participate in the Friday White House/in o Briefed them on intent to work with FEMA on additional hurricane prepared outreach along Gulf coast
Requests for speakers with the following groups need to be confirmed:
o GNODRP Meeting New Orleans, LA June 23, 2010 at 0:00 AM at 1717 o Jackson County Republican Women's Group - Pascagoula, MS - July 12 at th and Ballroom
o Kiwanis Club - Loc: TBD - July 14, 2010
Working with OR&R to schedule a Geoplatform.gov WebEX with NGOs
NOAA 101 Presentation in development through NOAA COMs, External Af assist with speaker requests that are coming in from local rotary clubs, chambe *Complaint Emails:*
External Affairs has received 3 e-mails in the past 24 hours. We've responded included concerns about dispersant use and a cleanup vessel incident.**
*Mass Notifications:*
E-mailed updated fishery closure information to national constituent lists**
nothing new to report.
report from 6.15.2010
Public use of www.geoplatform.gov/gulfresponse continues to increase (3.4 m -Provided overview of geoplatform.gov to DHS-OMB DWH Integrated Servic scheduled to Team for next Tuesday.
-DHS standing up new Unified Command .gov site by this weekend, and work migration plans.
-All NOAA Line Offices, NOAA GC and NOAA OCIO met with DOJ legal s related to the preservation of records, identification of systems, and collection DWH Litigation Hold. NOAA will provide DOJ with a draft template of the d needed to identify NOAA systems on which DWH data is being held and pres is agreed to between DOJ and NOAA, a data call will be issued from the NOA -No update from EPA on air/water quality availability for public ERMA applic inquiring

1. The Cuba Desk at State Department is hosting a large delegation on Friday. oil spill will be raised. OIA provided comments on their talking points and res 2. Awaiting JIC clearance on Bahamas responses. State is pushing also since i responses could be provided last week.
3. Provided update to State on National Hurricane Centers latest projection of pressure system in the Atlantic could develop into a tropical cyclone in the nex decreased from 40% to 10%)
4. Provided comments to Embassy Nassau on draft cable for the video confere
5. Forwarded to State information on arrangements and accommodations need Bahamian scientist to Seattle to interact with NOAA modelers. Due to timing request for foreign visit form, mid-July is the earliest time frame to consider.
6. ICC Tasker #179: Dr. Lubchenco delegated a meeting with Dr. Alvarez (M Dr. Robinson has Dr. Alvarez contact information to make arrangements. Re Tasker.
LEGAL / GC POLICY / BUDGET no update
no update

920'W
910'W
900'W
890'W
880'W
870'W
860'W
850'W
840'W
830'W
820'W
810'W
800'W
Mississippi
310'N
Alabama
)
(209286 km
Georgia
310'N
Louisiana
Mobile
Gulfport
Mobile Bay
o la ac ns Pe
Panama City
300'N
Morgan City
Atchafalaya
Bay
New Orleans
Chandeleur
Sound
300'N
8548'W
@ State/Fed
Water Line
-20 0 m
290'N
290'N
2847'N
9120'20"W
280'N
9120'20"W
@State/Fed
Water Line
2830'N
8630'W
2810'N
8430'W
Tampa
280'N
2735'N
8954'W
2735'N
9033'W
2707'N
8708'W
2648'N
8620'W
8616'W
@Outer Federal
Water Boundary
2626'N
8347'W
-20
Florida
270'N
270'N
0m
GULF of MEXICO
260'N
Naples
260'N
250'N

16 June 2010
8450'W
@Outer Federal
Water Boundary
250'N
y Ke
s We
0m -20
Dry
Tortugas
240'N
Closure Points
Closure Area
0 30
60 120 Miles
180 240
240'N
920'W
910'W
900'W
890'W
880'W
870'W
860'W
850'W
840'W
830'W
820'W
810'W
800'W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
(
(!
!
(
!
(
30N !
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
30N
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(

28N

!

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
26N
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
FL
30N
30N

Documented Large Whales in Northern
28N
(
! Deepwater Horizon Platform
Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
!
(
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
26N
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
30N !
!
(
(
((!
!
((
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
( !
(!
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
((
(
(
(
(!
(!
(!
!
(!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
((
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
((
!
!(!
(

!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(!((
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(!

(
!
(!
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(!
!
!
!
(
(
!
(
( (!
!
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
FL
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
28N
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
)
"
!
)
(
!
!
)"
"
(
(
)
!
(
*
#
#
*
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
)
)
)
)"
)"
)"
"
"
"
"
)
)
)
"
"
)
)
" "
)

" ) )
)"
"
)
)
"
"
"
"
!
)"
)
")

)
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
)
"
)
"
"
"
"
) "
)
)
)
"
)
"
)
Skimmer-caught:
* #
New
#
Confirmed Location
* * #

"
)
New
"
)
Confirmed Location
"
)
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
90W
88W
86W
920'W
910'W
900'W
890'W
880'W
870'W
860'W
850'W
840'W
830'W
820'W
810'W
800'W
Mississippi
310'N
A labama
2
2
(209286 km
)
Georgia
310'N
Louisiana
Mobile
Gulfport
Mobile Bay
ns Pe
aco
la
Panama City
300'N
Morgan City
Atchafalaya
Bay
290'N
New Orleans
Chandeleur
Sound
300'N
8548'W
@ State/Fed
Water Line
-200 m
290'N
2847'N
9120'20"W
280'N
9120'20"W
@State/Fed
Water Line
2830'N
8630'W
2735'N
8954'W
2810'N
8430'W
Tampa
280'N
Florida
2707'N
8708'W
2648'N
8620'W
8616'W
@Outer Federal
Water Boundary
2626'N
8347'W
Naples
260'N
270'N
2735'N
9033'W
270'N
0m -20
GULF of MEX ICO
260'N
250'N

16 June 2010

Closure Points
Closure Area
0 30
60 120 Miles
8450'W
@Outer Federal
Water Boundary
250'N
Ke
es t yW
Dry
Tortugas
- 20 0
240'N
240'N
180
240
920'W
910'W
900'W
890'W
880'W
870'W
860'W
850'W
840'W
830'W
820'W
810'W
800'W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.1
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
30N !
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(

28N Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
(
!
28N
26N
0 25
50
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.2
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
FL
30N
30N

28N Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
(
!
28N
!
(
26N
0 25
50
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.3
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
30N !
( !
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
(!
( !
!
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
(!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
( (
( !
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
((
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(!
(
(
(
(!
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
( (
(
!
!
(
!
((
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
!
(

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Skimmer-caught:
* New
#
#
#
"
New
)
"
Confirmed Location
)
"
)
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
"
!
!
"
(
!
)
(
)
!
(
(
!
#
*
#
*
"
)
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
)
"
)
)
)
"
)
)
"
)"
"
"
"
)
)
"
)
(
)
"
!
"
)
)
"
"
) "
"
)
)
"
)
)
"
"
"
)
)
"
)
"
)
28N
28N
0 25
50 90W
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.4
Noteworthy Developments During this Reporting Period
The NOAA Ship Pisces reported a dead 25 ft sperm whale located 150 miles due south of
Pascagoula, MS. The whale was decomposed and heavily scavenged by sharks. There
was no oil in the vicinity. The whale was photodocumented, sampled (skin/blubber,
external swab), and marked with blue paint to reduce resighting/resampling.
Increase of 12 turtle strandings (1 dead in FL, 1 dead in MS, and 2 dead in LA from June
15; 8 dead reported from previous days)
Increase of 7 live oiled turtles captured during directed on-water search efforts
Increase of 2 dolphin strandings (1 dead in MS, 1 dead in AL)
Sea Turtles
Total Turtle Numbers
14 report)

o 350 of the stranded were found dead (net increase of 12 from June 14)
o o

strandings.
Turtle Necropsy Status (of the 350 dead stranded, 3 dead directed capture and 7 that died
in rehab):

from June 14)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.5

14)


o o o o

Marine Mammals
Total Mammal Numbers
14).

euthanized upon stranding (no change from June 14)
1 dead stranded sperm whale has been verified to date within the designated spill area
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.5
Dolphin Necropsy Status (of the 43 dead stranded and 2 live stranded dolphins that died or
were euthanized):

from June 14)
10 partial necropsies performed (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (increase of 2 from
June 14)
to recover (no change from June 14)
Whale Necropsy Status (of the 1 dead stranded):

from June 14)
14)
1 verified stranding but animal not collected due to stage of decomposition or unable to
recover (increase of 1 from June 14)
Information on Signs of Mammal Oiling:
Dolphins: Two of the verified dolphins have evidence of external oil on the tongue and/or
body and therefore were classified as oiled. However, we are unable at this time to
determine whether the animal was externally oiled pre- or post-mortem. All other
necropsy findings are pending.
Whales: The verified whale had no evidence of external oil.

of 2010.
o o o

Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.5
Historical Whale Strandings

The total number of whale strandings that we have documented from the Louisiana/Texas
border through the Florida panhandle from June 1 - June 15 is 1.
There are no records of stranded whales in the Gulf of Mexico for the month of June
(2003-2007).
water today (see results above) and will be on the water again Wednesday June 16.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.5
NOAA PA
Daily Media Tracking
ACTION TAKEN/ANSWER TO
NAME OF REPORTER AND
MEDIA OUTLET
TELEPHONE NUMBER/
CONTACT VIA EMAIL
QUESTIONS/REQUEST
QUESTION (Note who
responded)
ROUTINE OR URGENT, IF
URGENT EXPLAIN WHY
Ewald stated that NOAA produces

three-day out trajectory models
and that anything beyond 72 hours
has a high degree of uncertainty.
Referred her to the National
Hannah Devlin, The Times
(London)
Wanted to know more about long-
Center for Atmospheric Research
term trajectory modeling
Wanted to know more about a
plan to divert the flow of the
Sam Chu, Minnesota Public
Radio
Mississippi River to help flush out
Vernon Smith referred reporter to
Gulf ecosystems.
the Army Corps of Engineers.
Routine
that has looked months ahead.
Routine
Doug Helton responded, informed

Wanted to know if oil may reach
Ron Barnett, Greenville News South Carolina
Wanted to interview CDR Shep
Smith of the NOAA Ship Thomas
Jefferson for "today's most
Michelle Cumbo, CNN Kerry Sanders, NBC
interesting person" news item
tomorrow
Seeking live 7a.m. on camera
interview tomorrow morning with
Katie Adams, Fox 5 (Wash.
DC)
Susan Baxter, WWL Radio,
New Orleans
someone from NOAA about oil
spill.
Seeking someone to interview
Sherman referred her to NOAA
concerning how long it will take for
fisheries in Gulf to ebound.
Wondering if NOAA's Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management woukld be providing
the staffing and office space for
President's newly announced
commision on Gulf Coast
Alan Kovski, BNA Newsletters Restoration
Sherman indicated it was too early
to state at present.
Routine Fisheries
Routine
Sherman suggested she talk with
Scott Smullen.
Routine
Ewald forwarded to David Hall at
OMAO
Ewald forwared downtown. Routine
Routine
reporter NOAA forecasts don't
look beyond 72 hours
Routine
Wanted to join an NGO NRDA trip
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.6
NOAA PA
MEDIA OUTLET
TELEPHONE NUMBER/
CONTACT VIA EMAIL
QUESTIONS/REQUEST
QUESTION (Note who
responded)
URGENT EXPLAIN WHY
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.6
NOAA PA
MEDIA OUTLET
TELEPHONE NUMBER/
CONTACT VIA EMAIL
QUESTIONS/REQUEST
QUESTION (Note who
responded)
URGENT EXPLAIN WHY
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.6
Jun
Jul Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
N42 WP-3D
DWH Gulf Loop
Hurricane Season
CALNEX
Hurricane Season
DWH Multi Spectral

N48 Twin Otter

N56 Twin Otter
N57 Twin Otter
CALNEX
Harbor Seals
Steller Sea Lions
Harbor Seals
BWASP
NERW
BOWFEST
N68 King Air
Bigelow
Delaware II
MX
Cetacean Abundance
Mapping
Bottom Trawl
ECOMON
Benthic
ECOMON
Atl. Herring
Delaware II - re-tasked for DWH in support of seafood inspection, preparations for departure underway, departure estimated no earlier than 6/16 with arrival no earlier than 6/24
Brown
Foster
GRNMS
Repairs
Tsunami/Trop. Atl
Gunter
DWH
Repairs
Marine Mammals
Gunter - scheduled marine mammal cruise shifted to GOM
F.I.
Fall Plankton
Jefferson
DWH
FGBNMS
Jefferson - DWH Western Sentry II
Key West
Chesapeake Bay
Oregon II
Pisces
MRP/Trials
Groundfish
Warranty
SEAMAP Reef Fish
Jun Jul
Aug Sep Oct
Nov
R/V HST
R/V Gandy
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.7
R/V Gandy
R/V Caretta
R/V Harold B
NOAA Small Boat conducting reef fish surveys out of Panama City, F L. Inport Pascagoula with mechanical problems until 6/14
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.7
Other Assets
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

Nov
Beau Rivage
Brooks McCall
Bunny Bordelon
Capt Hatteras
Endeavor
Jack Fitz
Ocean Veritas
Pelican
Rachel Bordelon
Ryan Chouest
Walton Smith
IOOS Gliders
NAVO Gliders
no update
In Port Fourchon, LA, departing 1800 for deep water sampling

In Houma, LA
Deepwater sampling 5+km SE of wellhead on an arc from SE to N
In port St. Petersburg,FL
Deepwater ROV sampling 2km NW of wellhead. Sampling on an arc toward N with deep and shallow CTD casts.
Deepwater sampling 7.5km ENE of wellhead on arc toward N
no update
In port Houma, LA
Arriving Theodore, LA
Inport Miami, FL
DWH*
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.7
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.7
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.7
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.7
SHIPS
06/15 06/26
Foster Thomas
Jefferson
the oil.)
Delaware
II
Foster Gunter July 5 July 18 July 18 August 4 tbd tbd DE-10-05 Benthic Habitat June 5 June 15 June 19 tbd None: NF-10-05, Grays Reef
TJ-10-03 FGBNMS Inport Charleston, SC for z-drive repairs and
potential DWH response. ETD 6/25.
Departed Galveston, TX, for DWH Western
Sentry II in FGBNMS 6/15
Could shift to start one day earlier to
maintain continuity of DWH mission support
early. Ship would have to resupply with
water once.
DE plans to depart Woods Hole 18 June for
transit to GOM pending final project
instructions for seafood sampling mission
all 7 DAS
23 DAS
September
September
3
28
2 or 3 legs for water and reprovisioning in Pascagoula
time during this mission period
Comments
Mammal project 6/15
Departed Pascagoula, MS, for DWH Marine

by ending Leg 1 of groundfish a day or two
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.8

impacted by oil
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.8
Aircraft
Asset N42RF
WP-3D
several days
N43RF
WP-3D
N46RF
Twin
Otter
April September
N57RF
Twin
Otter
June 7 September
N68RF
King Air
April September
mapping.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.8


Shoreline: Forensic oil sampling occurred in West-South Terrebonne Bay and West-Northwest
Terrebonne. Four teams went out in the field to complete pre-assessment shoreline surveys at
Chenier/Bay Island. Team summaries below:
Team 1 Shoreline pre-assessment from Myrtle Grove to Wilkinson Bay near Saint
Marys Point. Vegetation oiled within areas without previous SCAT data and with
previous SCAT data; condition varied between no visible vegetation oiling to a solid
band of oil several feet into the marsh. Oiling within the water was predominately silver
sheen with some sheening from oiled vegetation.
Team 2 No report
Team 3 Assessed shoreline of Whiskey Island. Waypoint and tracklog data, photographs
and data sheets were collected from 7 (070-076) waypoints during the days field effort.
Waypoints were collected starting near the center and collecting points toward the
easternmost limits of SCAT oil mapping data in the area. We finished by progressing in
a westward direction back toward the center of Whiskey Island. SCAT data listed the
entire shoreline as lightly oiled; however, surveys found the oiling to be very lightly with
scattered tar balls. Team 3 reported in to NOAA Command Center before departing from
the ramp, at mid-day and again upon returning to the boat ramp at 1415. There were no
interactions or problems during the field effort.
Team 4 assessed the northern and south eastern portions of the Bassa Bassa (Saturday
Island). Areas with direct exposure to the Gulf of Mexico (southeast side) tended to
Protected shorelines (northern) tended to have less oiling. The
have more oiling.
northern side of the island was shown on the SCAT maps to be No Oil (blue) but we
found light oil consistently along this marsh. On the Gulf side (SE side) with the direct
exposure, the SCAT maps showed the shore to be very lightly oiled. The team found this
to be moderate at the northern end, and light to moderate along the middle to southern
end.
Chain of Custody data packages processed: 265

Number of Bottles Received: 3158
Chemistry:
As of June 15
,
th
dispersant.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.9
Water Column: NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard 2 vessels.

southwest.
Jack Fitz: Returned to port due to mechanical problems on 6/14. Scheduled to depart
again on 6/17
Ocean Veritas: Deep water sampling 5km W of wellhead. Altering plans to 2km SW of
wellhead if no signals.
Thomas Jefferson: Scheduled to depart today. May rendezvous with Jack Fitz on 6/19
for combined survey operations. Awaiting final decision on rendezvous plan.
Human Use: Conducted boat ramp counts at 4 ramps in Central FL, 1 in FL Keys, 3 in Western
FL, 4 in LA. Shore counts and intercepts in AL.
SAV: Currently identifying long-term sampling dates and sites for injury assessment phase.
Marine Mammals/Turtles: Marine Mammal survey team aboard Gordon Gunter is underway on
a sperm whale preassessment survey.
Environmental Response Management Application _Sampling Overview_06-16-2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1902.9

Subject: [Fwd: Re: sea food safety]
Re: sea food safety.eml

From: Eric Schwaab <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: sea food safety
Cc: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>
Sure. Thanks.
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
To: Eric Schwaab <[email protected]>
Cc: John Oliver <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu Jun 17 12:27:00 2010
wanted to see if you wanted to invite matt thorburn - war room rep - in on =
this call?
From: Eric Schwaab <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 6:45 pm
To: David Kennedy <[email protected]>
Cc: John Oliver <[email protected]>, Steve Murawski <Steve.Murawski@noaa=
gov>, Jen Pizza <[email protected]>
> Dave - thanks. I understand. I will ask Gloria to coordinate

> schedules
> for a call tomorrow.
>
> Let me suggest that we think about we we are and where we are heading
>
> by component parts. My concern is that we never complete a
> conversation about strategy without jumping to implementation,
> communications or any of a range of elements of the response. So I
> suggest we structure conversation around:
>
> 1) Strategy - is a closure based first line of defense the right role
>
> for NOAA? Do we have the right baseline, perimeter and dockside
> sampling to ensure that the closure is effective? Where do
> dispersants
> fit into the seafood safety approach, etc.?
>
> 2) Implementation Plan - Do we have the right sampling plan, at the
> right scale / volume, targeted to the right places? And are we
> processing samples the right way, etc.?
>
> 3) Management of the process - Are we implementing the plan - do we
> have the right people with the right skill set in place, boats, money
> to
> support them, facilities, and a rotational approach to sustain the
> process over time?
>
> 4) Communications - internally and externally - are we communicating
>
> effectively what we are doing? How can we do it better?
Document ID: 0.7.19.1901.1
>
> 5) Evaluation / Adaptive Management - the sampling effort has shifted
>
> already due to changing conditions. It will shift again. We should
> not
> be afraid to communicate that and react accordingly.
>
>
> Hope this helps. Thanks.
>
>
> David Kennedy wrote:
> > We have to have a meeting to discuss the way ahead. Eric, you heard
>
> > the discussion today. Not only is commerce upset by not having the
>
> > full story and plans but Jane expressed her concern about lack of
> long
> > term plans, capacity and dispersant testing before we even got to
> > living marine resources, turtles and outside experts being brought
> in
> > to analyze sampling protocols and length of time to get them done.
> > After the meeting I talked with Margaret about this and other issues
>
> > related to structure and my role. She made it clear that I was
> > supposed to be in charge of the issue team boxes and that it was up
> to
> > me to make things happen there. Have not felt like I was given that
>
> > authority but she made it clear that is what she expects. So..., as
> I
> > have said before, I am in this with you guys on both living marine
> > resources, science and the other boxes and we have to find a way
> ahead
> > quickly or at least make sure that if we have the right answers they
>
> > are being communicated better. Am available through from around 10
> to
> > 3 tomorrow so tell me who and how we talk about way ahead. dmk
Document ID: 0.7.19.1901.1

Subject: High Level Talkers
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Cc: Brian Pawlak <[email protected]>, Mike Weaver <[email protected]>,Matthew
Thorburn <[email protected]>,Heather Blough <[email protected]>, John Oliver
<[email protected]>,Andrew Winer <[email protected]>, Russell Dunn
<[email protected]>,Gloria Thompson <[email protected]>,Roy Crabtree
<[email protected]>, [email protected]
Scott~
Can you please forward the most up to date high level talkers that comms has for use by Roy
Crabtree, who is with Senator Shelby in the Gulf.
Thanks
Dave.W [email protected] wrote:
Brian
I'm at Mobile IC right now and don't have access
Mike is no longer the icc contact ..it is Chris moore now
I've copied dwh staff who can get you the info.
Dave
From: Brian Pawlak <[email protected]>

Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:32:45 -0400
To: Dave.W esterholm <Dave.W [email protected]>; Mike
W eaver<Mike.W [email protected]>; Matthew
Thorburn<[email protected]>; Heather
Blough<[email protected]>
Cc: John Oliver<[email protected]>; Andrew
W iner<Andrew.W [email protected]>; Russell Dunn<[email protected]>;
Gloria Thompson<[email protected]>; Roy
Crabtree<[email protected]>
Subject: Facts for Shelby Constituent Meetings for Roy Crabtree
Mike/Dave
Can you all send high level talkers as you did last week to Roy/Heather ASAP
Roy Crabtree, Southeast Regional Administrator for NMFS. He is
accompanying Senator Shelby through the Gulf.
Brian Pawlak wrote:
Thanks all...Russ has what he needs.
Dave.W esterholm wrote:
John,
No problem but I will be doing an oil spill

presentation at CHOW then doing hearing prep so
I'm forwarding this to the dwh staff and Mike
Weaver (ICC). Most of the initial information is
available from our reports (ICC, NIC, your LMR
report, etc.) but a few of the questions may be hard
to answer.
v/r
Dave
John Oliver wrote:
Dave & Andy -- as you know Russ
Dunn will be with the Secretary
tomorrow & Friday and will need
lots if support & information. See his
initial thoughts below. I will have
Brian Pawlak reach out to you Dave
to figure out what info and how to
feed it to Russ today as background
and then real time updates while he
is with the Secretary. jo
Russell Dunn wrote:
Brian:
Per my telephone
message, as you are
spill guru, I would
seem that the tasking
of this falls to you. I
have been asked to
accompany Sec.
Locke and represent
NOAA in a series of
constituent meetings
with tomorrow in
Mobile, Biloxi, and
New Orleans. As
such, I have a number
of relevant NMFS and
NOAA related
questions for which I
need our best
available answers
before COB today:
What is the
official estimate
of total spill
volume to date?
What is the
official estimate
of current oil
flow rate?
What were the
pertinent
outcomes/salient
points for the
public with
regard to the
dispersant
science meeting
held in late
May? or the first
week of June?
Did any
practices change
as a result of
that meeting?
How many
NOAA ships
and water
vessels are
actively
engaged (or en
route) to the
spill?
How many
NOAA aircraft
have been
involved in the
spill and what
are the
aggregate flight
hours (from all
types of
aircraft)?
How many
NOAA staff are
deployed in the
GOM and
working on the
spill?

Approximatel
y how many
NOAA staff are
engaged on the
spill
nationwide?
How many
seafood samples
have been fully
processed and
what have the
results been (the
first samples
arrived at the
labs on May 20-
21)? If the
answer is we
have no results
yet, when will
we have results?
What monies,
aside from
additional
funding for
increased
sampling in the
For-hire Survey
has NOAA
provided to
states, affected
industries, or
individuals?
What is the
status of
Congressional
appropriations
related the
fishery disaster
declaration?
What are the
official
estimates of
marine mammal
strandings and
of what species?
What are the
official
estimates of sea
turtles
strandings and
of what species?
How many
acres of marsh
habitat are
estimated to
have been
impacted by oil
to date?
What declines
in commercial
fishing
effort/landings
have been seen
relative to the
same period last
year? (one or
two concrete
examples)
What declines
in recreational
effort/landings
have been seen
relative to the
same period last
year? (one or
two concrete
examples)
Is there a
master list of
State agencies
and academic
institutions with
whom NOAA is
collaborating on
the BP oil spill
response?
Thanks.
RBD
--
Russell Dunn
National Policy
Advisor for
Recreational
Fisheries
Office of the
Assistant
Administrator
NOAA Fisheries
Tel.
B6 Privacy
--
Brian Pawlak
Deputy Director
(167)
(Fax)
--
Brian Pawlak
Deputy Director
(167)
(Fax)
--
Beth Dieveney
phone: fax:
B6 Privacy
B6 Privacy b7c personal information B6 Privacy
Received(Date): Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:02:53 +0100

Subject: BP Gulf of Mexico Update from June 17

06/17/2010

the Gulf of Mexico:
1. 2. Offshore - to stop the flow of oil on the sea floor;
3. Onshore to protect and cleanup the shoreline, inform the public, and compensate
impacted people.

Highlights
x 14,752 barrels of oil captured by the LMRP Cap on June 16. Approximately

179,000 barrels have been collected to date.
x Q4000 drilling platform connected to valves on blowout preventer captured and

flared 3,475 barrels of oil on June 16.
x x
240,000 feet of containment and sorbent boom deployed yesterday.

BP
creates a $20 billion fund dedicated to claims and response costs.
x $90million paid in claims as of close of business on June 16 see State

Summaries.
x BP Interactive Mapping Tool at:

http://www.gulfofmexicoresponsemap.com.
Offshore Sea Floor


Containment Recovery
x Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap 14,752 barrels of oil were captured

through the LMRP cap during the past 24-hour period. Total recovery from the LMRP
Cap is 197,351 barrels to date. Oil and natural gas are being carried to the surface
through a riser pipe and oil is being stored on the Discoverer Enterprise. The gas is
being flared. 33.2 million cubic feet were burned on June 16.
x Q4000 Direct Connect to Blowout Preventer Yesterday, a second recovery

system was placed in service which is connected directly to the BOP and carries oil and
gas through a manifold and hoses to the Q4000 vessel. Because the Q4000 does not
have storage capacity, it uses a specialized clean-burning system to flare captured oil
and gas. The Q4000 flared 3,475 barrels of oil and 6.8 million cubic feet of gas on June
16. That flow rate will be increased over the next few days.
x Permanent
Riser Systems BP is bringing in two additional ships that will
be connected to permanent riser systems. These systems will be capable of quick
disconnect/reconnect in the event of a hurricane. The first riser has been fabricated and
is being installed. The second riser is in the design stage. More information can be
found under Technical Update on BPs website at:
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9033572&contentId=7061710
continues, with approximately 9,152 gallons applied on June 16. EPA is allowing
subsea application of the currently-used dispersant to continue.
kill by pumping heavy mud and cement into the wellbore. It is estimated the total
x The first relief well (work being performed by the Development Driller III) is at

15,936 feet below sea level. This well was spudded on May 2.
x
The second relief well (work being performed by Development Driller II) is at
approximately 9,970 feet below sea level. Drilling began on May 16.

Skimming Vessels 447 skimmers designed to separate oil from water are deployed
across the Gulf. Approximately 521,585 barrels of oil-water mix have been recovered
and treated, including 16,995 barrels in the last 24 hours.
Surface Dispersant 13,593 gallons of dispersant were applied on the surface

yesterday.
In-Situ Burning 10 burns were conducted in the last 24-hour period. 124,012 total
barrels are estimated to have been consumed through burns.
BP Environmental Monitoring Program As part of the response effort, several

ongoing sampling and monitoring programs have been implemented based on the type
of impact or location and trajectory of the spill. Monitoring and sampling programs are
being conducted for:
x x x x x
air quality

water
quality
water
column sampling
submerged oil, and

worker health.



Interactive Mapping Websites BP has developed an Interactive Mapping Tool meant

to provide a one-stop shop for detailed near-real-time information about the response to
the Deepwater Horizon BP oil spill. The tool integrates the latest data on the oil spills
trajectory, fishery closed areas, wildlife and place-based Gulf Coast resources, locations
of oiled shoreline and other data points. The BP mapping tool is located at:
http://www.gulfofmexicoresponsemap.com. The U.S. Government has also created a
mapping tool that is located at: www.GeoPlatform.gov/gulfresponse.

x BP is receiving approximately 5,000 suggestions per day on innovative

ways to stop the flow of oil or contain the oil spill. Our team of engineers is reviewing
these as quickly as possible. To submit alternative response technology, or offer
services or products, call (281) 366-5511, or go online at: www.horizonedocs.com.
After forms are received they are reviewed by a team of technical and operational
personnel who assess need, technical feasibility and application.
The U.S.
x white papers that cover: oil sensing improvements to response and detection; oil

Boom Update More than 2.5 million feet of containment boom is deployed or
assigned across the Gulf with 639,000 feet in staging areas. 3.6 million feet of sorbent
boom is deployed with more than 1.9 million feet in staging areas. More than 240,000
feet of containment and sorbent boom was deployed on June 16.
Alabama
x
Boom
527,600 feet of containment boom deployed and 128,825 feet staged.

x Activated Vessels 485 official response vessels, 850 Vessels of Opportunity, 74

skimmers, 84 barges.
x
Shoreline Impacts More than 1,200 people working on clean up at Dauphin
Island, and nearly 950 people working to clean up locations from Ft. Morgan to Perdido
Pass. Vacuum trucks are being used at Perdido Bay and sand cleaning machines are
being used at Ft. Morgan.
Florida
x
Boom
308,600 feet of containment boom deployed and 56,050 feet staged.

x Activated Vessels 218 official response vessels, 568 Vessels of Opportunity,

110 skimmers, 22 barges.
x Shoreline Impacts More than 1,360 people working to clean up oiling in

Escambia, Okaloosa, Walton, Bay and Gulf counties.
Louisiana
x Boom
1,399,208 feet of containment boom deployed or assigned. 277,561 feet
of boom staged.
x Activated Vessels 1,372 official response vessels, 679 Vessels of Opportunity,

150 skimmers, 380 barges.
x Shoreline Impacts 1,830 people are working to clean up oil at locations in St.

Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, Lafourche and Terrebonne parishes.
Mississippi
x Boom
369,200 feet of containment boom deployed. 26,835 feet of boom is
staged.
x Activated Vessels 431 official response vessels, 833 Vessels of Opportunity, 96

skimmers, 69 barges.
x Shoreline Impacts More than 540 people working on cleanup at Horn Island and

Petit Bois Island.
Volunteers and Training 25,519 volunteers are signed up, trained, and working as of
June 14. Volunteers are being trained in five different modules that range from safety
for beach clean-up, to wildlife monitoring, handling of hazardous materials and vessel
operation for laying boom. Information about training can be found at


State Specific Websites
x x x x


Louisiana:

Onshore Claims
BP to Create a $20 billion Claims Fund on Wednesday, BP met with the President
of the United States and reached agreement on creation of a $20 billion fund to cover
legitimate business and loss of income claims, natural resource damages, and state and
local response costs for the spill. Claimants will have access to an Independent Claims
Facility administered by a neutral third-party to ensure fairness. More detail about the
establishment and operation of the claims fund is available on BPs website at:
http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7062966

Filing Claims The contact number for claims is (800) 440-0858. In person claims can
www.bp.com/claims. Note: No person asserting a claim or receiving payment for
interim benefits will be asked or required to sign a release or waive any rights to assert
additional claims, to file an individual legal action, or to participate in other legal actions
associated with the Deepwater Horizon incident.

State-by-State Claims Summary as of June 17
Alabama Counties Mobile Baldwin Monroe Covington Claims Paid $10,716,909 $4,053,668 $83,000 $55,000
Montgomery Clarke Jefferson Tuscaloosa Escambia Wilcox Dale Chilton Marengo Madison Walker Greene Saint Clair Washington Other Counties Alabama Total
$51,100 $50,500 $36,032 $30,438 $27,715 $23,500 $22,462 $20,000 $18,000 $17,009 $15,000 $14,350 $11,245 $11,035 $372,279 $15,564,726
Florida Counties Franklin Escambia Okaloosa Bay Santa Rosa Wakulla Gulf Walton Orange Duval Pasco Liberty Pinellas Leon Hillsborough Washington Calhoun Citrus Jackson Lake Other Counties Florida Total Claims Paid $2,861,781 $2,484,486 $2,230,080 $1,877,937 $1,058,595 $550,346 $427,772 $265,256 $112,300 $95,541 $91,000 $52,300 $44,847 $43,700 $40,720 $32,500 $21,075 $17,500 $17,500 $15,000 $309,035 $12,649,271
Louisiana Parishes Terrebonne Claims Paid $9,231,788
Jefferson Plaquemines Lafourche Saint Bernard Orleans Saint Tammany Vermilion Saint Charles Iberia Calcasieu Saint Mary Cameron Lafayette Tangipahoa East Baton Rouge Livingston St John the Baptist Assumption Saint Martin Washington Jefferson Davis Saint Landry Ascension Saint James Beauregard Pointe Coupee Acadia Ouachita Avoyelles West Baton Rouge Other Parishes Louisiana Total
$9,022,051 $8,559,413 $5,905,338 $3,979,888 $2,293,999 $2,107,560 $1,515,627 $1,006,072 $838,622 $687,200 $684,500 $570,150 $405,388 $360,018 $240,754 $192,925 $134,950 $89,000 $85,300 $80,200 $80,000 $71,934 $65,900 $50,000 $49,500 $47,400 $25,350 $25,000 $23,900 $23,000 $877,731 $49,330,456
Mississippi Counties Harrison Jackson Hancock Pearl River Stone George Lamar Pike Forrest Marion Lawrence Claims Paid
$4,791,148
$2,347,722
$1,531,067
$158,800
$153,264
$98,992
$92,000
$29,300
$25,000
$20,000
$15,000
Jones Madison Lincoln Hinds Neshoba Webster Other Counties Mississippi Total
$15,000
$14,300
$12,500
$11,000
$11,000
$10,000
$214,850
$9,550,942
Other States Total Claims Paid $2,742,011

$89,837,407
Claims Offices 32 Claims offices are open across the Gulf Coast to provide locations
where people can go to file or discuss claims. There are more than 170 operators
answering phones, and 667 claims adjusters are staffing the offices.
Belle
Chasse/Gretna



5703 Hwy 56
Chauvin, LA 70344

Cut
(Lafourche Parish)
Off

Unit 2

Cut Off, LA 70345






Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363



Town Hall
Lafitte, LA 70067


931 US Hwy 90 East



4375 Michoud Blvd

New Orleans East (Orleans Parish) BP Office

4655 Michoud Blvd., Suite D6 (first floor)



956 S. Lewis Street




Slidell, LA 70461

St.
1345 Bayou Rd


41093 Hwy LA 23


Westwego, LA 77094


1171 Highway 90

Biloxi


Biloxi, MS 39532

Pascagoula

5912 Old Mobile Hwy

Suite 3

Bayou LaBatre



1008 Alabama Avenue


Foley

Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535



Suite 1



Suite 1
Mobile, AL 36606


194 14th Street

Suite 105


Suite A&B



Suite 13



Unit B-9


7885 Overseas Hwy

Marathon, FL 33050




3960 Navy Boulevard

Suite 16-17
Pensacola, FL 32507


106 Trade Circle

Suite A



Suite H
Key West, FL 33040

Santa
5008 US Hwy 98W

Unit 6&7

Contact Information

(866) 448-5816
Volunteers to request volunteer information Services to register as consultant, contractor, vendor, or
(866) 448-5816
(281) 366-5511


(281) 366-5511
(866) 905-4492 or (866)
647-2338
(281) 366-3123
(800) 440-0858

(985) 902-5231 or (985)
center
902-5240
(251) 445-8965
center
Transocean Hotline MI Swaco Hotline BP Family and third-party contractor hotline Twitter: Oil_Spill_2010
(832) 587-8554
(888) 318-6765
(281) 366-5578
Karen St John
BP America
B6 Privacy

From: "Griffis, Kevin" <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: pah standards background
To: "Rapp, John" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Kenney, Justin" <[email protected]>,"Sarri, Kristen" <[email protected]>, "Gilson,
Shannon" <[email protected]>,"Spring, Margaret" <[email protected]>
PastedGraphic-2.tiff
ATT00001.htm
963_seafood2-oil.pdf
ATT00002.htm
These questions are more timely and for a story that Andrew Schneider from AOL News is writing over
the weekend. He spoke with Walt Dickhoff at the Seattle lab, and while overall the interview was fine,
there was one very concerning thing that Walt said. According to Walt, the Seattle lab hasnt received a
fish sample from the Gulf for testing since the first batch arrived in April/May.

Please see the reporters question below.

I assume the answer to question 1 is they are FDA standards that are included in the 2002 NOAA
docum ent 963 M anaging Seafood Safety After an O il Spill.

For question 2, we do the testing, but it is FDA that makes the determination as to safety, right? How do
we get them the info? What is the process?

Question 3: Have we sent samples to the Seattle lab subsequent to what was sent/collected in April/May?
If not, why not? Did we send it to another lab? Does Pascagoula do chemical testing too?

You can see where this is going. If we dont have any test results from fish taken after May, even though
the closures may be the first and best line of defense, that points to what reporters would think would be a
pretty significant hole in our seafood safety regimen.

From: Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 1:35 AM

To: Griffis, Kevin
Subject: Re: pah standards background
B6 Privacy

So everyone (FDA, EPA, etc) is using (2002) NOAA-established standards for seafood?
Correct sir?

Walt told me today that the results his people obtained on the samples were sent back to
headquarters where their safety would be determined "further up the food chain." Who does
that please? And, when please?

The only other (and final) point you were trying to pin down for me is NOAA collected more
samples for chemical analysis? If so, how often?
Nothing has arrived at the Seattle lab since the first batch collected in April and May.

Have a great weekend,

a

Andrew Schneider
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.1
Senior Public Health Correspondent
B6 Privacy PB6 Privacy F

B6 Privacy EW - www.aolnews.com
On Jun 17, 2010, at 2:31 PM, Griffis, Kevin wrote:
Andrew, here are the answers to the questions you asked yesterday.
Background: Levels for hydrocarbon contamination in seafood were set after multi-agency
discussions in which a post-Exxon Valdez FDA advisory opinion was used as a guide.
Ive attached the NOAA study Managing Seafood Safety after an Oil Spill, which
references the FDA study mentioned above. Let me know what else you need.
Kevin Griffis
Director of Public Affairs
1401 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20230
(o)
B6 Privacy b7c personal information (c) personal Privacy B6 b7c information
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.2
Managing Seafood Safety

after an Oil Spill
Courtesy of PhotoDisc
Ruth Yender
Ofce of Response and Restoration
Seattle, Washington
Jacqueline Michel and Christine Lord
Research Planning, Inc.
Columbia, South Carolina

Nat ional Oceanic and A mospheric A t dminist ion NOA s Nat rat A ional Ocean Serv Ofce of Response and Rest ion
ice orat

Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3

Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Managing Seafood Safety

after an Oil Spill
Ruth Yender
Ofce of Response and Restoration
Seattle, Washington
Jacqueline Michel and Christine Lord
Research Planning, Inc.
Columbia, South Carolina

Nat ional Oceanic and A mospheric A t dminist ion NOA s Nat rat A ional Ocean Serv Ofce of Response and Rest ion
ice orat
Nov ember 2002

Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3

FOR INFORMATION OR COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT, PLEASE CONTACT:

[email protected]
PLEASE CITE AS:
Yender, R., J. Michel, and C. Lord. 2002. Managing Seafood Safety after an Oil Spill. Seattle: Hazardous Materials Response Division, Ofce of
Response and Restoration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 72 pp.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Table of Contents
I.
Introduction and Background 1

Decision Process for Managing Seafood Safety 2
Seafood Safety Management Authority 4
Assessing the Likelihood of Seafood Exposure and Contamination
Oil Types and Properties 6
Oil Fate and Pathways of Exposure 11
Early weathering processes that change oil properties 11
Long-term weathering processes that change oil properties 15
Weathering processes that change the location of the oil 15
Seafood Contamination Terminology 17
Biological and Ecological Factors Affecting PAH Contamination of Seafood Summary of Literature on Uptake and Elimination 23
Correlation between Taint and Body Burden 26
Conceptual Models of Exposure, Uptake, and Elimination 26
II.
18
III.
Monitoring Seafood for Contamination
29
Developing Seafood Sampling Plans 29

Selecting sampling locations 29
Selecting target species to be sampled 30
Sampling frequency and duration 30
Sample collection and handling 30
Testing Seafood for Contamination and Tainting 31
Sensory evaluation of seafood for presence of petroleum taint Chemical testing techniques for petroleum contaminants in seafood Water Monitoring 36
Sediment Monitoring 37
IV .
31
33
Seafood Risk Assessment
38
Overview of Cancer Risk Calculations for PAHs in Seafood 38

Seafood Advisory and Action Levels from Previous U.S. Oil Spills 40
The Equivalency Approach for Risk Assessment 41
BaP equivalency approach for PAH contamination 41
Equivalency calculations 42
Human Consumption Rate Assumptions 43
Consumption estimates for consumers of commercially harvested seafood 43
Consumption estimates for consumers of seafood harvested recreationally or for subsistence use Consumption estimates for other potentially at-risk groups 46
V .
44
Risk Communication 47
General Considerations 47
General recommendations for risk communication during oil spills Lessons Learned from Previous Oil Spills 48
Communicating Relative Risks 51
47
VI. VII.
Literature Cited Glossary of Terms Appendix 64
53
60
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Figures
I-1. II-1. II-2. V-1 V-2. Decision process for managing seafood safety after an oil spill 3
Pattern of PAH distribution for different oil types. 9

Plots of predicted evaporation and dispersion representative of four oil types Commercial shellsh harvest closure notice issued during the New Carissa oil spill Shellshing closure notice issued during the New Carissa oil spill 51
12
50
Tables
I-1. II-1. II-2. II-3. II-4. II-5. II-6. II-7. II-8. III-1. Recent oil spills where seafood monitoring was conducted 5
Components in oil and selected characteristics 6

Characteristics of oil types affecting the potential for seafood contamination 7
PAHs normally reported in chemical analyses 10
Example of solubilities of different oil types 13
Habitat utilization, feeding strategies, and risk of exposure to oil of different seafood groups Half-lives of PAHs in bivalves based on laboratory tests of both water and sediment exposures Presence and duration of taint and tissue contamination with petroleum
compounds reported at various oil spills 25
Conceptual framework for seafood exposure to, uptake, and elimination of oil 27
19
24
National recommended water quality criteria for priority toxic pollutants for protection against
human health effects 37
Relative PAH potency estimates derived from various sources. Sport shers consumption data 45
Subsistence shers consumption data 45
PAHs in foods 52 42
IV-1. IV-2. IV-3. V-1.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
I.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Seafood safety is a concern raised at nearly every oil spill incident of any signicance. Both
actual and potential contamination of seafood can substantially affect commercial and recreational
shing and subsistence seafood use. Loss of condence in seafood safety and quality can impact
seafood markets long after any actual risk to seafood from a spill has subsided, resulting in serious eco-
nomic consequences. Protecting consumers from unpalatable and unsafe seafood is a primary objec-
tive of federal and state public health agencies after a spill occurs. Seafood managers may be faced
with making many urgent decisions after an oil spill, often based on limited data:
Should seafood harvest in the spill area be closed or restricted?
If closed, what criteria should be applied to re-open a shery?
How should seafood safety and palatability be evaluated?
How can health risks best be communicated to the public?
Public health ofcials and other seafood managers do not routinely deal with oil spills as part
of their day-to-day responsibilities. Consequently, they typically have little experience with risks to
seafood from oil spills when they suddenly are faced with determining appropriate seafood manage-
ment actions in response to a spill.
The objective of this guide is to provide seafood managers and other spill responders with
information to help them evaluate the likelihood that an oil spill will contaminate seafood, determine
whether seafood actually has been contaminated, and assess and communicate human health risk
from eating contaminated seafood. The guide is divided into the following sections:
I. Introduction and Background
II. Assessing the Likelihood of Seafood Exposure and Contamination
Describes the factors that inuence ex posure,uptake,and elimination in aquatic organisms.
III. Monitoring Seafood for Contamination
Provides guidance on chemical and sensorytesting methods,sampling strategies,and monitoring.
IV. Seafood Risk Assessment
Describes carcinogenic risk assessment methods,assumptions,and interpretation of chemical results.
V: Risk Communication
Provides guidance on communicating risks associated with contaminated seafood and gives ex amples
of advisories.
A glossary of terms used in this guide is included in the appendix.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
D ecision P rocess f M or anag Seaf Saf

ing ood ety
The guide generally follows the ow chart shown in Figure I-1, which suggests a decision
process for managing seafood safety after oil spills. Throughout this process, the default is no closure
or other restrictions on seafood harvest. In some cases there may be an initial, temporary de facto
closure if the U.S. Coast Guard establishes a safety zone restricting access in areas of active oil recovery.
Fishermen also may voluntarily avoid working in oiled areas to prevent oiling their gear and catch. This
initial period after a spill can provide an opportunity to evaluate spill conditions and conduct limited
testing to determine whether a precautionary closure or other immediate restrictions on seafood
harvest are warranted.
As indicated on the owchart, the rst step for seafood managers after an oil spill has occurred
is to collect and evaluate information on the nature of the spill. The spill response organization should
be able to provide the following information almost immediately after the spill occurs:
overight maps and trajectory analyses showing the present and predicted spread of surface
slicks;
forecasts of weather and sea conditions that may affect the potential for oil to mix into the
water column;
results of oil weathering models;
details about the oil type and expected behavior;
predictions of oil fate and persistence; and
in some cases, chemical results for water and sediment samples collected in the spill area.
Fishery management agencies and associations should be able to provide information on:
species being harvested now or in the near future;
geographical extent of the harvest areas;
harvest gear types in use; and
data on background levels of PAH contamination in the spill area (from NOAA Mussel Watch
and other monitoring programs).
Based on this type of information, seafood managers can assess whether the oil spill is likely to
expose and contaminate seafood. If seafood is not at signicant risk, then no harvest closures or other
seafood restrictions are needed, and this determination is communicated to the public. Because spills
are dynamic, conditions are monitored and risks to seafood re-evaluated until the threat abates.
If managers determine that seafood may be affected, the next step is to assess whether sea-
food is tainted or contaminated to levels that pose a risk to human health through consumption.
Information that can help determine the impacts includes:
overights and ground surveys identifying visible oil in seafood harvesting areas;
chemical analysis of water and/or sediment samples from the harvest area;
sensory testing of seafood samples from representative species and areas (both spill and refer-
ence areas);
chemical analysis of tissue samples from representative species and areas (both spill and refer-
ence areas); and
data on background levels of oil-related contaminants.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
F ure1.1 D cis p s f ma g s aood s f a te a oil s ill ig e ion roce s or na ing e f a e fr n ty p
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Determining whether seafood has been contaminated can take substantial time. Developing
and implementing sampling plans, conducting sensory and/or chemical testing, and evaluating results
may require weeks or longer. Monitoring continues and the risk assessment process is repeated as
necessary.
If seafood is tainted or is contaminated to a level posing a potential health risk, the next step
is to select the most appropriate seafood management action(s). Examples of management actions
include seafood advisories, increased inspections of harvested seafood or shing gear, harvest clo-
sures, and shing gear restrcitions. If a shery is closed or otherwise restricted, seafood managers must
establish criteria for determining that the seafood is palatable and safe for human consumption and
that restrictions can, therefore, be lifted. No accepted international or federal criteria have been estab-
lished for oil-related contaminants in seafood. State seafood managers generally have developed their
own criteria for each spill, resulting in some inconsistencies among spills. V arying levels of background
contamination also have contributed to inconsistencies in criteria applied.
Several papers summarize some of the difcult seafood management issues encountered after
recent oil spills (Mearns and Yender 1997; Mauseth and Challenger 2001; Moller et al. 1989; Moller et al.
1999; Mauseth et al. 1997; Challenger and Mauseth 1998). Table I-1 also summarizes information on a
few recent spills at which seafood safety was an issue of concern.
Seaf Saf M ood ety anag ement A uthority
Typically, authority to manage seafood to protect human health resides with state health
agencies. Many states routinely chemically analyze nsh and shellsh tissues for contamination as
part of their water-quality monitoring programs. If a state concludes that eating contaminated nsh
or shellsh collected from state waters poses an unacceptable human health risk, it may issue local
sh consumption advisories or harvest closures for specic water bodies or parts of water bodies and
specic species.
The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act authorizes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USFDA)
to protect and promote public health. The USFDAs responsibilities include keeping adulterated food
off the market. The USFDA has jurisdiction over seafood that crosses state lines in interstate com-
merce.
The Magnuson Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., authorizes NOAAs National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) to regulate shing in federal waters (generally from 3-200 miles from shore). The act is tar-
geted toward shery conservation rather than protection of public health or economic concerns. Fish-
ery management plans, developed under the authority of the Magnuson Act, specify any limitations
imposed on shing for federally regulated species. Limits on shing are enforced by means of regula-
tions published in the Federal Register, in compliance with the Administrative Procedures Act. In the
event of an oil or chemical spill, publication of an emergency rule in the Federal Register is required to
put an enforceable, ofcial shery closure in place and to make any modications to the closure once
it is put into effect. The Magnuson Act was recently amended to allow emergency action sheries clo-
sures to remain in effect indenitely. Previously, such closures were limited to two 90-day periods.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Ta I R ce oil s illswh res aood monitoringwa conducte ble -1. e nt p e ef s d
Spill Name/
Location
M/ New Carissa
V Near Coos Bay, OR
4 Feb 1999
Oil Type/ Volume
Spill Conditions
Species Monitored
Closures*
References
Two bunker oils and

Oil released in the
Oyster, shrimp, crab two marine diesels/
surf zone (>5m
70,000 gallons
waves) over several
weeks
Bivalves: 21 days,
Gilroy (2000),
longer adjacent to
Michel (2000)
the vessel
Mauseth and Chal-
lenger (2001)
M/ Kure
V Humboldt Bay, CA
5 Nov 1997
T/ J N
V ulie Portland, ME
27 Sept 1996
Intermediate fuel oil

4 days of sheens in
Mariculture oyster, rock
Mariculture oyster,
Challenger and
(IFO 180)/
bay; light shoreline
crab
crabs: 49 days
Mauseth (1998)
4,537 gallons
oiling
IFO 380 and No. 2
Heavy shoreline
Lobster, scallop, clam,
Shellfish: 15 days fuel oil/180,000 gal-
oiling in Fore River
mussel
lons total
& Casco Bay
None Mauseth et al.
(1997)
M/ Provence
T Heavy fuel oil No. 6
Released in Pisca-
Lobster Piscataqua River, NH
(API 6.2)/
taqua River, most of
2 July 1996
~880 gallons
the oil sank
T/ Sea Empress
V Forties light crude/
Severe weather;
Milford Haven, Wales
Heavy fuel oil #6/
extensive use of
15 Feb 1996
21,274,000 gallons
dispersants
total
Cockle, mussel, crab,
lobster, whelk,
wild salmon, and other
finfish
Mauseth et al.
(1997)
Marine finfish:
Law et al. (1997);
82 days; whelk &
Coates (1998)
crustaceans: 183
days; cockles: 125
days; mussel: 8-19
months
Finfish and
bivalves: 73 days;
lobsters: 75-155
days
Wild finfish: 2
months; farmed
salmon: 12 mo;
burrowing lobster:
>6 yrs
Mauseth et al.
(1997)
Home heating oil

T/ North Cape
B Block Island Sound, RI
No. 2
19 Jan 1996
828,000 gallons
Gale-force winds,
Lobster, finfish,
release in surf zone,
bivalves (coastal
6-7 m waves, natu-
ponds)
rally dispersed
Haddock, dab, farmed
salmon, cod, sole, ling,
lobster, scallop, edible
crab
T/ Braer
V Shetland Islands
5 Jan 1993
Gullfaks light crude/

Hurricane-force
25,000,000 gallons
winds; release in
surf zone, naturally
dispersed
Kingston (1999)
Topping et al.
(1997)
Whittle et al. (1997)
T/ Ex on Valdez
V x Prudhoe Bay crude/
Over 700 km of
Prince William Sound,
11,000,000 gallons
shoreline oiled
AK
24 Mar 1989
Finfish, bivalves from

subsistence harvest
areas
Fall and Field (1996)

Herring and
salmon: entire
Field et al. (1999)
season;
Advisories on
bivalves in 4 subsis-
tence harvest areas
*Closure does not necessarily indicate that either tissue contamination or taint was detected or persisted for as long a period as the closure remained in
place.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
II. ASSESSING THE LIKELIHOOD OF SEAFOOD EXPOSURE AND

CONTAMINATION
Each oil spill is a unique combination of conditions and events. Seafood is only at risk of con-
tamination from a spill if it is exposed to the oil. Once exposed to oil, an organism becomes contami-
nated only to the extent it takes up and retains petroleum compounds. Factors that inuence the
potential for spilled oil to expose and contaminate seafood are discussed in this section.
Oil T p and P erties

y es rop
Oil type and properties strongly inuence whether seafood is exposed and contaminated.
Crude oils and the rened products derived from them are complex and variable mixtures of hydro-
carbons of different molecular weights and structures. They can contain hundreds of different
compounds. All crude oils contain lighter fractions similar to gasoline, as well as heavier tar or wax
fractions. Because of these differences in composition, different oils vary considerably in their physical
and chemical properties. For example, consistencies of different crude oils vary, ranging from a light
volatile uid to a viscous semi-solid. Such differences in properties inuence behavior of spilled oil and
subsequent cleanup operations.
The petroleum hydrocarbons that comprise oil are composed primarily of hydrogen and
carbon, but also can contain varying amounts of sulfur, nitrogen, oxygen, and trace metals. The three
main fractions of hydrocarbon compounds in oils are saturates, aromatics, and polar compounds. The
properties and relative abundance of each fraction in different types of oil products are summarized in
Table II-1. Note that toxicity differs among different hydrocarbons and, therefore, different oils.
Ta I-1. Comp ntsin oil a s le d ch ra ris ( ble I one nd e cte a cte tics modid f N C 2 ) e rom R 002 .
Group
Saturates
Sub-groups (alternate name)

1. Alkanes (aliphatics): n-alkanes
(paraffins) are straight- chained; isoal-
kanes are branching
2. Cyclo-alkanes (cyclo-paraffins or
naphthenes): saturated ring struc-
tures
3. Waxes: larger saturate compounds
1. Monoaromatics (BTEX): single ben-
zene ring
2. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH): 2-6 benzene rings
Selected Characteristics
High rate of microbial degradation
up to C22;
Low water solubility;
Low aquatic toxicity
Typical Content in Oil (%)
Gasoline: 50-60
Diesel: 65-95
Light crude: 55-90
Heavy crude: 25-80
Heavy fuel oil: 20-30
Aromatics
Slower rate of microbial degrada-

tion than saturates;
Higher water solubility;
High aquatic toxicity
Gasoline: 25-40
Diesel: 5-25
Light crude: 10-35
Heavy crude: 15-40
Gasoline: 0
Diesel: 0-2
Light crude: 1-15
Heavy crude: 5-40
Polar Compounds
1. Resins: smaller compounds that

V slow microbial/physical deg-
ery bond with S, N, or O
radation;
2. Asphaltenes: very large compounds
V low water solubility/aquatic
ery toxicity
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Oils have been grouped into types with similar properties to help predict their behavior at
spills (NOAA and API 1994). This same approach can be used to characterize the relative risk of con-
tamination of seafood by oil type. Table II-2 summarizes the properties and risk of seafood contamina-
tion for the ve oil groups commonly encountered by spill responders. These generalizations can be
used when initially screening an incident to evaluate the potential for seafood contamination.
Ta I-2 Ch ra ris of ty e a f ble I . a cte tics oil p s fctingth p ntia f s aood conta e e ote l or e f mina ( tion modid f N Aa A I19 4) e rom OA nd P 9 .
Medium-grade Crude
Diesel-like Products
Heavy Crude Oils and
Oils and Intermediate
Non-Floating Oils
and Light Crude Oils
Residual Products
Products
Examples No. 2 fuel oil,

Examples North Slope
jet fuels, kerosene, West
crude, South Louisiana
Texas crude, Alberta
crude, IFO 180, lube oils
crude
Specific gravity of <0.85;
Specific gravity of 0.85-
API gravity of 35-45*
0.95; API gravity of 17.5-
35*
Usually floats on surface,
Usually floats on sur-
face; although can
although can mix with
contaminate suspended
sand by stranding on
sediments that are then
beaches or in the surf
deposited on the bottom
zone, and be deposited in
the nearshore
Examples San Joaquin
V alley crude, V enezuelan
crude, No. 6 fuel oil
Examples V heavy
ery No. 6 fuel oil, residual oils,
vacuum bottoms, heavy
slurry oils
Gasoline Products
Examples Gasoline
Specific gravity of
<0.80;
Floats on surface
Specific gravity of 0.95-

Specific gravity greater
1.00; API gravity of 10-
than 1.00; API gravity
17.5*
< 10*
Usually floats on surface
Will sink in fresh water;
but can sink in fresh water
may sink in seawater if
or in seawater if they
they emulsify or mix with
emulsify or mix with sand
sand (in the surf zone
(in the surf zone or after
or after stranding on
stranding on beaches) and
beaches) and deposit in
deposit in the nearshore
the nearshore
V little evaporation
ery when submerged; also
very slow weathering
overall when submerged
High evaporation rates;

Refined products can
narrow cut fraction with
evaporate to no residue;
no residues
crude oils do leave resi-
dues
Low viscosity; spread
rapidly to a thin sheen;
readily dispersed; will
not emulsify
Low to moderate vis-
cosity; spread rapidly
into thin slicks; readily
dispersed by natural
processes; may form
unstable emulsions
Up to one-third will
V little product loss
ery evaporate in the first 24
by evaporation; will form
hours; will form persistent
persistent residues
residues
Moderate to high viscos-
ity; dispersed by natural
processes only very early
in the spill; readily emulsi-
fies
V viscous to semisolid;
V viscous to semi-
ery ery will not readily disperse or
solid; will not readily
mix into the water column;
disperse or mix into the
can form stable emulsions
water column; can form
stable emulsions
Low risk of seafood con-

Moderate to high risk of
Moderate to high risk of
Low risk of finfish con-
Low risk of finfish con-
tamination because of
seafood contamination
seafood contamination
tamination because of low
tamination because of
rapid and complete loss
because relatively high
because of high percent-
water-soluble fraction and
high viscosity; where
via evaporation; poten-
content of low molecular
age of low-molecular
little natural mixing in the
thick oil accumulates
tial contamination
weight, water-soluble
weight aromatic hydrocar-
water; moderate to high
on the bottom, could
for spills in confined
aromatic hydrocarbons,
bons; coating of gear and
risk of shellfish contamina-
become a chronic source;
areas with high mixing,
which are semi-volatile
intertidal species can be
tion where shoreline oiling
moderate to high risk of
such as small rivers; no
and so evaporate slowly;
significant
is heavy; can coat gear and
contamination of ben-
reported cases of taint-
dispersed droplets are
intertidal species
thic species because of
ing for marine spills
also bio-available
coating and persistence
of submerged oil
*API Gravity is used by the petroleum industry rather than density. It is determined by the following equation: API at 60F = 141.5/oil density -131.5.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Seafood contamination can result from exposure to the dissolved fraction of oil, dispersed oil
droplets, or an oil coating. With regard to the dissolved fraction, the aromatic fraction of the oil poses
the greatest exposure risk because aromatics are relatively more soluble than the other components in
oil. Saturates are a major component of oil, but they have lower solubility and higher volatility com-
pared to aromatics of the same molecular weight. Furthermore, Heras et al. (1992) has concluded that
saturates are virtually odorless and tasteless, and do not contribute to tainting.
Of the aromatic hydrocarbons, the mono-aromatic hydrocarbons, such as benzene, toluene,
ethyl benzene, xylene (known collectively as BTEX), other substituted benzenes, and the 2- to 3-ringed
PAHs (naphthalene, uorene, dibenzothiophene, anthracene and their substituted homologues,
referred to as low-molecular weight PAHs) comprise over 99 percent of the water-soluble fraction
(McAuliffe 1987). The distribution of these compounds in the spilled oil is one measure of the poten-
tial for contamination of seafood from water exposure. Figure II-1 shows the PAH composition for typi-
cal crude oils and rened products. Table II-3 lists the abbreviations used for PAHs, groups the PAHs
into low- and high-molecular weight categories, and shows the number of benzene rings. Most crude
oils are composed of a wide range of compounds, including the PAHs of concern.
Note that compounds in petroleum-derived oils have a general pattern of increasing abun-
dance with higher level of substitution of a benzene ring (e.g., unsubstituted parent naphthalene
is less abundant than C1-naphthalene, which is less abundant than C2-naphthalene). This pattern
indicates that the PAHs are petrogenic, that is, they are from petroleum oils. The PAH pattern is very
different for hydrocarbons produced from the combustion of fossil fuels (pyrogenic hydrocarbons),
in that the parent PAHs are by far the dominant compounds in hydrocarbons of pyrogenic origin. Also,
it is important to note that crude oils contain very low concentrations of the high-molecular weight
PAHs (e.g., 4- and 5-ringed compounds such as pyrene, chrysene, and benzo[a]pyrene) that are associ-
ated with combustion by-products. These differences in relative PAH abundance are key components
of ngerprinting analysis.
Rened products have characteristic ranges of PAHs representative of the distillation frac-
tion in the product. In Figure II-1, note that the PAHs in the No. 2 fuel oil are dominated by the 2- and
3-ringed compounds. Heavy fuel oils are sometimes cut or blended with lighter fractions to meet
customer specications, as is the case with the intermediate fuel oil (IFO-180) in Figure II-1D, and so
can contain some low-molecular weight PAHs.
For exposure via ingestion of whole oil droplets or contaminated sediments, the high-molecu-
lar weight PAHs pose greater risk of contamination. These compounds have low water solubility and
are more lipophilic. In organisms with relatively limited capability to metabolize PAHs, such as bivalve
mollusks, the high-molecular weight compounds are more likely to accumulate in tissues and persist
for longer periods, compared to the low-molecular weight PAHs, which are more rapidly eliminated
(Meador et al. 1995). Finsh and some crustaceans, however, readily metabolize and eliminate all of
these compounds rapidly.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
F ureI-1. P tte ofA dis ig I a rn P H tribution f difre oil ty e : A N 2f l oil;B S L ia crude ame or f nt e p s ) o. ue ) outh ouis na , dium crude
oil;C)N 6 f l oil, ah a oil;a D a inte dia f l oil th t isamix . N th t h h o. ue e vy nd ) n rme te ue a ture ote a ig -mole r we h P H
cula ig t A s s a be o[a p re ( A )h veve low conce tionsin p trole oils uch s nz ] y ne B P a ry ntra e um .

!
$
!$#
"$

! $

Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Ta I-3 P H norma re orte in ch mica a lye f p trole comp ble I . A s lly p d e l na s s or e um ounds( fr S ue a B h 19 5 .
ate a r nd oe m 9 )
PAH Naphthalene C1Naphthalene C2Naphthalene C3Naphthalene C4Naphthalene Biphenyl Fluorene C1Fluorene C2Fluorene C3Fluorene Acenaphthylene Acenaphthene Dibenzothiophene C3Dibenzothiophene Anthracene Phenanthrene C1Phenanthrene/Anthracene C2Phenanthrene/Anthracene C3Phenanthrene/Anthracene Napththobenzothiophene C1Napththobenzothiophene C3Napththobenzothiophene Fluoranthene Pyrene
Abbreviation N N1 N2 N3 N4 BI F F1 F2 F3 AC CE D D3 A P P/A1 P/A2 P/A3 NBT NBT1 NBT3 FL PY
No. of Benzene Rings 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4
Molecular Weight
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
High
High
10
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
PAH
C1Pyrene C2Pyrene Benzo[a]Anthracene Chrysene C1Chrysene C2Chrysene C3Chrysene C4Chrysene Benzo[b]Fluoranthene Benzo[k]Fluoranthene Benzo[e]Pyrene Benzo[a]Pyrene Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene Indeno[1,2,3-cd]Pyrene Benzo[g,h,i]perylene
Abbreviation
PY1 PY2 BA C C1 C2 C3 C4 BB BK BEP BAP DA IP DP
No. of Benzene Rings

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6
Molecular Weight
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Oil Fate and P athway of x osure

s Ep
Oil behavior after release determines whether seafood is at risk of exposure. Oil behavior is a
function of the processes described below.
Early weathering processes that change oil properties
Evaporation
Evaporation is the transfer of the volatile fractions in oil from the liquid phase to the vapor
phase. The rate of evaporation depends on the composition of the oil, surface area of the slick, wind
velocity, sea state, water temperature, and solar radiation. Most evaporation occurs in the rst 24 hours
after release, though it continues at a much lower rate for up to two weeks (NOAA and API 2001).
During the rst 24-48 hours after a spill, evaporation is the most important weathering process. The
amount of oil that evaporates depends primarily on the oils composition. For light crude oils and
rened products, evaporation can account for up to 75 percent loss within a few days. Figure II-2-A
shows plots of the loss by evaporation over time for representative oils of the rst four oil groups listed
in Table II-2. The plots are output from the NOAA oil fate model ADIOS 2 for the same spill scenario for
all oil types (Lehr et al. 2000). The lighter the oil, the higher will be the loss by evaporation.
11
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
F ureI-2 P ofre d e p tion a dis e ion f oilsre re e tiveofour oil ty e : g s , die e me ig I . lots p dicte va ora nd prs or p s nta f ps a oline s l, dium-
g decrudeoil ( orthS eCrude , a h a f l oil gne te us N A oil we th ringmode A I 2( e r e a ra N lop ) nd e vy ue e ra d ing OA s a e l DOS L h t l.
2 . Th s mes ill conditionswe us d f e choil: s ill volume10,000 g llonsins nta ous re a e wind s e d 10
000) e a p re e or a p a ta ne ly le s d; pe mp ;wa r te e ture60 F h te mp ra .
A

%!#
"
!#

!#

"
%& $

"!"
"
!#

%& $

"
!#

C

%& $
!#

!#

"

"
$!"

12
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Evaporation is also important in that the more volatile fractions are also more water-soluble
and thus contribute signicantly to the oils uptake and toxicity. Evaporation dominates over dissolu-
tion in most spill conditions, so it is a key process that reduces the risk of aquatic exposure to the more
soluble, toxic compounds, such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) and low-molecu-
lar weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).
Dissolution
Dissolution is the transfer of water-soluble components in oil to the water. It begins immedi-
ately after oil is released and is likely to continue throughout the weathering process. The loss of oil
due to dissolution, however, is minor when compared to the other weathering processes. It is not an
important process affecting the fate or mass of the spilled oil, since only a small amount dissolves. Less
than 0.1 % (very heavy oil) to 2% (gasoline) of the spilled oil volume actually dissolves into the water
column. As shown in Table II-4, light rened products, such as gasoline, are more soluble than heavier
oils, such as crude oil.
The most water-soluble components in oil are the low-molecular weight aromatic hydro-
carbons: the mono-aromatics such as benzene through xylene, and the 2- and 3-ring PAHs, such as
naphthalene and phenanthrene (McAuliffe 1987). These components are also the most volatile, and
they rapidly evaporate from solution. The rate of dissolution depends on the oils chemical composi-
tion and the surface area of the oil and water.
Though only a small percentage of the spilled oil volume dissolves into the water column,
the components that do dissolve are often the most toxic and may also taint seafood at low concen-
trations. Concentrations of 450 micrograms per liter (g/L, equal to parts per billion, or ppb) of the
water-soluble fraction of a light crude oil have been reported to cause taint in salmon after six hours in
laboratory tests (Heras et al. 1992). Davis et al. (1992) reported the tainting threshold for trout exposed
to diesel fuel to be 0.08 nanograms per liter (ng/L, equal to parts per trillion). Actual dissolved oil con-
centrations at spills vary widely, depending on the oil type and environmental conditions. For exam-
ple, during the North Cape spill of approximately 800,000 gallons of home heating oil under conditions
of very high natural dispersion, concentrations of dissolved PAHs in water samples were measured to
be 3-167 ppb within a few km of the release site (French 1998). These dissolved PAH concentrations
are considered to be unusually high for oil spills. During the New Carissa release of 70,000 gallons
of both marine diesel and bunker oils into the surf zone off Oregon, total dissolved PAHs in water
sampled 2-5 km from the release site were reported to be in the range of 0.5-5 ppb (Payne and Driskell
1999).
Ta I-4. E a leofolubilitie of f nt oil ty e (okutye a 19 9 .
ble I x mp s s difre e ps J t l. 9 )
Oil Type
Unleaded gasoline Diesel Prudhoe Bay crude Lagomedio
Aqueous Solubility (mg/L or ppm)
260.9
60.4
20.5
10.0
13
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Dispersion
Wind and waves can break oil slicks into small droplets that mix or disperse into the water
column. Under calm conditions, the oil droplets can re-coalesce and resurface as slicks because they
are lighter than water. These droplets are composed of the whole oil. Thin slicks of lighter, low-viscos-
ity oils (such as diesel) readily disperse naturally. Heavier, more viscous oils or oils that have become
more viscous due to weathering are more resistant to natural dispersion. Applying chemical disper-
sants, which reduce the oils surface tension, can enhance natural dispersion. Dispersion is an impor-
tant mechanism that enhances oil degradation by increasing the exposed surface area. Dispersed
oil droplets can be ingested directly (such as by plankton or lter-feeding bivalves) or secondarily by
eating oil-contaminated prey. Most past spills that contaminated seafood involved conditions of high
natural dispersion (e.g., Braer, North Cape, and Amoco Cadiz ).
Emulsification
Emulsication is the process by which one liquid disperses into another in the form of small
droplets. This process is most important at oil spills where water droplets mix into the oil and form
a stable emulsion (called a mousse) that does not easily break up. Emulsication causes several
response problems: 1) a mousse often contains 50-80 percent water, thus the volume of oily mate-
rial to be recovered is increased several-fold; 2) emulsied oil is very viscous and difcult to remove or
pump (Fingas et al. 1994); and 3) emulsied oil degrades more slowly (NRC 1985).
Comparison of evaporation and dispersion for different oil ty pes
Figure II-2 shows the predicted fate of the rst four oil types listed in Table II-2 using the NOAA
oil-weathering model ADIOS2 under the same spill conditions. Note the differences among oil types
in the amounts lost due to each of the dominant weathering processes. Light, rened products such
as gasoline and diesel evaporate and disperse rapidly, generally within six hours of release. Evapora-
tion can be a dominant weathering process for crude oils, depending on the type of crude. North
Slope crude is relatively persistent, particularly if it emulsies, as in this scenario. Natural dispersion is
an important process for low-viscosity oils that are readily broken into droplets by wave action. More
viscous oils do not normally disperse naturally. Heavy oils are resistant to weathering and highly per-
sistent.
Gasoline: A light, rened product like gasoline can quickly dissipate when spilled in open-
ocean environments. In this particular scenario, strong winds in the model evaporated and dis-
persed the entire product in the rst three hours after the release. The Oil Remaining graph
shows none of the gasoline remaining three hours after the spill.
Diesel: The diesel selected for this scenario is a light, rened product and, under light wind
conditions, the oil will likely remain on the surface with much of the product evaporating.
However, strong winds in the scenario (15 knots) will generate breaking waves that tear the
surface slick into small droplets. The oil droplets are driven into the water column and, if the
droplets are small enough, natural turbulence will prevent the oil from resurfacing. The Per-
cent Oil Dispersed graph shows that over 85% of the diesel has dispersed about 12 hours after
the spill. Because very little of the oil was available at the surface, a much smaller amount, less
than 15%, has evaporated. The Percent Oil Remaining graph shows that no product remains
after 12 hours.
It is important to note that the terminology for rened products is not standardized, and
heavier intermediate fuel oils are sometimes referred to as marine diesel. These heavier
products are much less volatile than normal diesel or Fuel Oil No. 2 and form a more persistent
slick than shown in Figure II-2.
14
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
North Slope Crude: North Slope crude oil is known to entrain water droplets and form an
emulsion if there is sufcient energy in the environment and if a sufcient amount has evapo-
rated. This scenario uses a 15-knot wind so that about 40% of the oil has evaporated in the rst
12 hours. After this time, the oil begins to entrain water droplets, eventually forming a stable
emulsion containing 70 to 90% water. This process increases the viscosity of the product,
making it more difcult for turbulent energy to tear the oil into small droplets and disperse it.
Note that the Percent Oil Dispersed graph shows that none of the product has dispersed.
Because the North Slope crude has emulsied and persisted, the Percent Oil Remaining graph
shows about 40% remaining 120 hours after the initial release.
Heavy Fuel Oil: Heavy rened products, such as heavy fuel oil, have been rened to remove
the lighter components and, as a result, are somewhat pre-weathered. Under strong winds,
the Oil Evaporated graph shows less than 10% of the product evaporating over the rst 120
hours after the release. Heavy products are known to be viscous and, therefore, less likely to be
torn into small droplets and dispersed. The Percent Oil Dispersed graph shows that less than
20% of the heavy fuel oil disperses over the rst 120 hours. Finally, the Percent Oil Remaining
graph indicates that about 70 to 80% of the oil remains after 120 hours, suggesting that heavy
fuel oil is persistent.
During a spill, oceanographers and modelers will generate spill-specic data on the spilled oils
weathering, behavior, trajectory, and fate. They can estimate the present and future spread of
surface slicks, extent and persistence of dispersed and dissolved oil plumes, and the risk of oil
sedimentation. This information can help seafood managers assess the risk of spilled oil expos-
ing seafood.
Long-term weathering processes that change oil properties
Biodegradation
Biodegradation is the process by which hydrocarbon-degrading organisms such as bacteria,
fungi, and yeasts break down petroleum hydrocarbons ultimately into carbon dioxide and water. Oil
degradation rates depend on the oil type and may be further limited by oxygen, nutrients, and/or the
surface area available to microorganisms. Small droplets of dispersed oil biodegrade more rapidly
than tarballs or surface slicks. Light crude oils and light rened products readily biodegrade within
weeks to months. Heavier oils can require years to decades to biodegrade. Biodegradation is a very
important removal mechanism for persistent oil residues remaining after shoreline cleanup efforts
have concluded.
Photo-ox idation
In the presence of oxygen, natural sunlight can cause petroleum hydrocarbons to undergo
chemical reactions, a process known as photolysis (NRC 1985). Although the toxicity of photo-oxida-
tion products is a concern because they are more water-soluble and reactive, the rates of photo-oxida-
tion of liquid or solid fractions of the oil are too slow to signicantly affect the mass balance of a spill
within the rst few months (Jordan and Payne 1980).
Sedimentation
Sedimentation is the process by which particles of oating oil sink to the bottom of the water
column and become part of the bottom sediments. Sedimentation of oil can occur when oil droplets
sorb onto particulate matter, such as sand and clay. Sorption onto suspended sediments in the water
column is likely only under very high wave and wind conditions. For example, during the Braer spill,
25,000,000 gallons of a light Gullfaks crude oil were released from the grounded vessel during hur-
15
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
ricane-force winds, and an estimated 35 percent of the oil was deposited on the seabed in an area of
4,000 km2 (Kingston 1999). The sedimented oil provided a long-term pathway for exposure to benthic
organisms. However, this degree of ne-grained, subtidal sediment contamination is highly unusual.
More frequently, sedimentation occurs when stranded oil on sandy beaches adheres to the sediment,
then is eroded and deposited in small quantities in the nearshore environment (NRC 1999). Sedimen-
tation can also occur through deposition as fecal pellets after ingestion by marine organisms. During
the Arrow spill in Chedabucto Bay, Canada, zooplankton ingested naturally dispersed Bunker C oil and
later excreted it in their fecal pellets (Conover 1971).
Weathering processes that change the location of oil
Spreading
Oil quickly spreads into a very thin layer on the water surface. The rate of spreading is deter-
mined by the surface tension of the oil, water currents, and wind. Spreading enhances the rate and
effect of other weathering processes by increasing the oils exposure to sunlight and air.
Advection
Oil moves on the waters surface due to forces generated by winds and currents in a process
known as advection. The speed and direction of wind can vary rapidly over time, so weather forecasts
must be closely monitored to correctly predict oil spill trajectories.
Submersion
Most oils oat on the water surface because they are less dense than water. If oil is denser than
water, or becomes denser as the lighter components evaporate, the oil may submerge. If it attaches to
suspended sediments, the oil may sink to the bottom (NRC 1999). Once oil is deposited on the bottom,
weathering processes are very slow. Submerged oil can be a chronic source of contamination both
from slowly dissolving water-soluble fractions and from physical coating of seafood and shing gear.
Shoreline Stranding
For most oil spills, the oil oats on the water surface, transported by wind and currents until it
strands on the shoreline. Stranded oil can directly coat intertidal organisms, habitats, and shing and
aquaculture equipment. Oil stranded on shorelines adjacent to a shery can be a source of chronic
contamination, particularly where shoreline cleanup is not effective or not attempted due to concerns
of causing greater harm to the oiled habitat. Even the most effective shoreline cleanups rarely remove
all of the stranded oil. Remaining oil is removed or degraded by natural processes. Natural removal
processes usually include physical breakup and dispersal of persistent oil residues over a period of
months to years (Shigenaka 1997; Hayes and Michel 1999). This remobilized oil, either as whole oil
droplets or attached to suspended sediments, can become available to lter feeders, particularly inter-
tidal and shallow subtidal beds of mussels, oysters, and clams (Shigenaka and Henry 1995).
Shoreline type and degree of exposure inuence how long oil persists as a secondary source
of seafood contamination. Large volumes of oil can penetrate permeable substrates, such as sand
beaches, gravel beaches, and rocky rubble shores. Once oil has penetrated into the substrate, weath-
ering rates are slowed and there can be episodic releases of relatively fresh oil. If the oiled shorelines
also are sheltered from direct wave energy, the potential for long-term persistence of oil greatly
increases. Sheltering can be large-scale, such as in bays and estuaries; it can also be localized, such as
in the lee of a large boulder on an otherwise exposed shoreline. For example, during the extensive
monitoring of subsistence seafood following the Ex on Valdezoil spill, an oil spill health task force
x determined that nsh from all areas were safe to consume, but that intertidal shellsh from specic
areas should not be eaten (Fall and Field 1996; Field et al. 1999). These specic areas were a small
16
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
number of sheltered, sedimentary beaches with high levels of oil contamination in the intertidal sedi-
ments. Another example is the 1996 Sea Empress oil spill in Milford Haven, Wales. Six months after the
Sea Empress spill, the only seafood harvest activities still restricted outside of Milford Haven were the
exploitation of bivalves where heavy shoreline oiling had occurred in sheltered areas (Law et al. 1997).
Seaf Contamination T ood erminolog y
Adulteration: According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), a food is considered
adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance that may render it injurious
to health, if it contains any lthy, putrid, or decomposed substances, or if it is otherwise unt for food
(Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, Section 402).
Taint: Taint is commonly dened as an odor or avor that is foreign to a food product, includ-
ing seafood (ISO 1992). According to this denition, the presence of a taint simply indicates that avor
or odor is altered; it does not characterize the nature of the off-avor or off-odor, quantify the degree
of taint, or imply health hazard.
Body Burden: The concentration of a contaminant in an organism, reported for the whole
animal, or for individual tissues such as gonads, muscle, and liver, is referred to as the body burden. It
can be reported on the basis of either wet or dry weight of the organism or tissue.
Uptake: Uptake is the process of contaminant accumulation in an organism. Uptake of oil can
occur via the following mechanisms:
adsorption (adhesion) of oil on the skin
absorption of dissolved components from the water through the skin (including interstitial
water exposures for infauna)
absorption of dissolved components through the gills
adsorption of dispersed oil droplets to the lipid surfaces in the gills
ingestion of whole oil droplets directly or of food contaminated with oil, followed by sorption
in the gut
Many factors inuence uptake, including the exposure concentration and duration, pathway
of exposure, lipid content, and feeding and metabolic rates. Uptake from water generally occurs more
quickly than dietary uptake or uptake from sediments.
Bioaccumulation: The net accumulation of a substance by an organism as a result of uptake
from all environmental sources and possible routes of exposure (contact, respiration, ingestion, etc.) is
termed bioaccumulation (ASTM 1994).
Bioconcentration: The net accumulation of a substance as a result of uptake directly from
aqueous solution (ASTM 1994).
Biomagnication: The increase in body burden of a contaminant with trophic level is called
biomagnication. PAHs generally do not biomagnify in nsh and shellsh because of their low
dietary uptake efciencies, on the order of 1 to 30%, reecting slow kinetics and short residence time
in the gut (Meador et al. 1995).
Elimination: All of the processes that can decrease tissue concentrations of a contaminant,
including metabolism, excretion, and diffusive loss are collectively termed elimination (Meador et al.
1995). Metabolism is an active physiological process whereby a contaminant is biotransformed into
metabolites. For PAHs, the metabolites are more water-soluble, which facilitates ex cretion, another
17
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
active physiological process that eliminates contaminants (both parent compounds and metabo-
lites) through bile, urine, or feces. Diffusive loss refers to a decrease in tissue burden caused by simple
diffusion out of the organism, which is controlled by partitioning between tissue and water. Meador
et al. (1995) recommend that depuration be used for the mechanism of diffusive loss, and elimination
be used for the combined process of metabolism, excretion, and diffusive loss. These denitions are
slightly different than those used by ASTM (1994), which denes depuration as the loss of a substance
from an organism as a result of any active or passive process and provides no denition for elimina-
tion. However, the denitions by Meador et al. (1995) are more precise and will be followed in this
document. Elimination can also include release of PAHs in lipid-rich eggs or gametes during spawning.
Elimination processes begin as soon as uptake occurs. In constant exposure experiments,
body burdens tend to reach a steady state in which uxes of the contaminant moving bidirection-
ally across a membrane or boundary between compartments or phases have reached a balance, not
necessarily equilibrium (Meador et al. 1995). When the exposure decreases, elimination rates depend,
in part, on the hydrophobic properties of the compound (Spacie and Hamelink 1982). The half-lives of
individual compounds vary (see discussion below).
Growth Dilution: Growth dilution occurs when the rate of tissue growth exceeds the rate of
accumulation, such that it appears as though elimination is occurring because the tissue concentration
is decreasing (Salazar and Salazar 2001). This process may be important when monitoring bivalves
during the growing season.
B iolog and E ical colog Factors A f ical f ectingP HContamination of ood

A Seaf
Petroleum contamination of nsh and shellsh depends upon a variety of biological and
ecological factors. Understanding how different feeding strategies, habitat utilization, and physiology
inuence the likelihood of petroleum contamination of particular species is critical when managing
seafood after spills. Table II-5 summarizes several of these factors for different types of seafood organ-
isms.
Metabolic Capacity
Both vertebrates and invertebrates have mixed-function oxygenase (MFO) enzyme systems
that enable them to metabolize petroleum substances (Meador et al. 1995). Enzymatic activity is low
in invertebrates compared to vertebrates, and therefore induction of metabolism occurs at a higher
contamination level in invertebrates (Marsh et al. 1992). Finsh are able to rapidly and efciently
biotransform or metabolize PAHs and excrete the resulting metabolites into bile (V aranasi et al. 1989).
These metabolites do not pose a health risk to human consumers of the nsh. Marine invertebrates,
including most shellsh, metabolize petroleum compounds slowly and inefciently; consequently,
they tend to accumulate high concentrations and wide ranges of PAHs (Law and Hellou 1999).
Metabolic capacity of organisms is important from a seafood safety standpoint because some
PAHs have carcinogenic potential for human consumers, due to the highly chemically reactive oxida-
tion products that form during the rst stage of metabolism in vertebrates (ATSDR 1995; Hellou 1996).
Human consumers often eat invertebrates in their entirety, and, therefore, may ingest all of the hydro-
carbons that have accumulated in the organism and may be present in the organisms gut. Because
nsh, like other vertebrates, rapidly and efciently metabolize petroleum hydrocarbons, they gener-
ally pose little or no health risk to human consumers. Exceptions to this may occur for consumers for
whom the edible portion of nsh includes tissues such as liver and gall bladder, which tend to accu-
mulate higher levels of PAHs than muscle tissue.
18
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Ta I-5 H bita utiliz tion, f dings te ie , a ris ofx os to oil of f nt s aood g s( da te f R I ble I . a t a e e tra g s nd k e p ure difre e f roup a p d rom P
e 19 7, 19 9 .
8 8)
Feeding
Strategies
Seafood Groups Finfish
anadromous fish
Examples
Metabolic Capacity
Habitat Utilization
Risk of Exposure
sturgeon, herring,
high capacity salmon
high capacity
nearshore and shallow

water during spawning
predatory
moderate to high in
nearshore/shallow
low
marine pelagic and

mackerel, jacks,
bottomfish
cod, flounder
reef fish
highly mobile, most spe-

predatory cies prefer depths of >
10 m
relatively deep waters (10
predatory - 200 m)
spawning in intertidal or
predatory subtidal habitats; offshore
winter migrations
sea basses, snap-

high capacity pers, porgies
bluefish, mullet,
anchovies
high capacity
low to moderate;
higher risk in shallow
water
moderate to high in
nearshore/shallow
estuarine fish
Crustaceans
lobster, crabs,
shrimp
American lobster,
reduced capacity pink shrimp, blue
crab
may migrate seasonally;
predatory,
range of depths between
omnivorous,
estuarine and deep
scavengers
waters
benthic burrowing,
estuarine/shallow
water species at higher
risk than deep water
species
Mollusks
oysters, mussels American oyster,

very limited capacity Pacific oyster, blue
mussel
hard clam, soft-
very limited capacity shell clam, bay
scallop, sea scallop
abalone, conch,
snails, whelk,
limpet, top shell
very limited capacity shallow subtidal and
intertidal regions, estu-
aries; attached to sub-
strates
filter-feeders high
clams, scallops
intertidal and shallow

filter/deposit
high
subtidal areas; benthic or
feeders
buried in the sediment;
some mobility
intertidal and shallow
grazers and
to deep subtidal areas;
predatory
epibenthic; some mobility
moderate to high
gastropods
19
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Feeding Strategies and PAH Exposure
The feeding strategies of different marine organisms affect their likelihood of exposure to
PAHs:
Finsh and crustaceans are predatory or omnivorous. They are exposed to oil by ingesting con-
taminated food items or sediments, and by absorbing water-soluble petroleum compounds
through the gills.
Filter feeding bivalves may ingest dispersed oil droplets and absorb water- and lipid-soluble
petroleum compounds as they lter plankton and detritus suspended in the water column.
Deposit-feeding bivalves may be exposed to oil through contaminated sediments as they feed
on benthic detritus, and as they absorb water-soluble compounds from the interstitial water in
sediments.
Uptake from the water tends to be more rapid than uptake through the diet for both verte-
brates and invertebrates. Studies of dietary uptake of PAHs in nsh indicate low uptake efciencies,
on the order of 1 to 30%, reecting slow kinetics and short residence time in the gut (Meador et al.
1995). Recent studies have shown that the rate of uptake by sediment contact and ingestion varies,
yet it tends to be lower than from the water (Meador et al. 1995). How PAHs partition among water,
sediment, and prey items in different aquatic environments may impact the bioavailability of the con-
taminant. In general, both lter-feeding and deposit-feeding bivalves are considered to be at a higher
risk of exposure than predatory or omnivorous nsh and crustaceans due to the persistence of oil in
contaminated sediments.
Habitat Utilization and Behavior
A species habitat utilization and behavior affect the likelihood it will be exposed to oil during a
spill (Table II-5).
Finsh
Most pelagic and benthic nsh that occur in relatively deep waters have a low exposure risk
to spilled oil because they are highly mobile and often are able to avoid oiled areas (Moller et
al. 1989; Law et al. 1997; Law and Hellou 1999). Also, oil concentrations in the water column
are usually low and decline very rapidly, minimizing exposure. Exceptions may occur if a large
amount of fresh, light oil is mixed into the water column (as occurred at the North Cape and
Braer oil spills) or if bottom sediments become contaminated.
Finsh that spawn or occur in nearshore, shallow water areas in intertidal and subtidal zones
(e.g., salt, brackish, or freshwater marshes, creeks, or rivers) and in shallow reef zones have a
greater risk of exposure than offshore nsh, due to shoreline oiling.
Penned nsh have a greater risk of exposure than wild nsh because they cannot avoid oil in
the water column. Most cases of nsh contamination at oil spills have involved penned nsh
at spills where a signicant quantity of oil was mixed into the water column.
Crustaceans
Crustaceans (lobsters, crabs, shrimp) have a moderate risk of exposure because they have some
mobility, but utilize benthic habitats in shallow nearshore and estuarine areas.
Some species of lobsters and shrimp migrate seasonally between estuaries and offshore areas,
and are at a higher risk of exposure when they are in nearshore, shallow waters.
20
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
When subtidal sediments are signicantly contaminated, species that burrow into soft sedi-
ments are at higher risk of exposure. For example, during the Braer spill, the burrowing Norway
lobster remained contaminated for over ve years, whereas epibenthic lobsters eliminated
petroleum contaminants to background levels of PAHs in one month (Kingston 1999).
Mollusks
Most mollusks, especially bivalves, are at high risk of contamination because they are sessile
and unable to avoid exposure. They generally occur in substrates in shallow subtidal and inter-
tidal areas where exposures are likely to be most persistent if sediment is contaminated. Filter
feeding mollusks can ingest dispersed oil and oil attached to suspended sediments. Deposit
feeders can ingest oil-contaminated sediments. The longest seafood closure periods associ-
ated with oil spills have been for bivalves in areas where adjacent sediments remained heavily
contaminated (Law et al. 1997).
Some bivalve species use defense mechanisms during oil spills, including closing their shells or
shutting down their pumping systems, thereby eliminating the uptake route for the contami-
nants (RPI 1989). Some species can remain closed for several weeks without adverse effects,
whereas others start to degrade a few days after closure.
Temperature
It is generally accepted that uptake and elimination rates both tend to increase with increas-
ing temperature, though there is some contradiction among reported study results for PAHs (Fucik and
Neff 1977; Landrum 1982; Jovanovich and Marion 1987; Meador et al. 1995).
The rate of reaction in chemical and biological processes generally increases 2- to 4-fold for
a 10C increase in temperature (Kennedy et al. 1989; French 2000). Uptake, metabolic, and elimina-
tion rates typically increase with temperature, but at different rates, making it difcult to predict
body burdens under the constantly changing oil concentrations that occur at spills. However, at high
temperatures and increased respiration and ltration rates, it is expected that uptake will occur quickly,
to relatively high concentration, followed by rapid declines (Meador et al. 1995). At low temperatures,
body burdens are likely to be lower, but elimination rates will also be slower. At very low temperatures,
some species stop feeding and thus are at lower risk of exposure. For example, elevated levels of PAHs
from the North Cape oil spill were detected in soft shell clams, oysters, and mussels, but not in quahogs
because they stop feeding at 6C and the water temperature during the spill was 4C (NOAA et al.
1999).
Physiology
Lipid, carbohydrate, and protein levels are known to vary seasonally in certain aquatic inver-
tebrate species, often associated with reproductive changes (Jovanovich and Marion 1987). Some of
these changes in biochemical composition may affect uptake and elimination rates seasonally. Sea-
sonal variation may also result from differences in feeding rates, microbial activity, and various environ-
mental factors (Meador et al. 1995).
Organisms with higher overall lipid content generally exhibit higher levels of uptake or reten-
tion of petroleum compounds (NRC 1983). For example, Heras et al. (1992) found that salmon (muscle
lipid content of 4.0% wet weight) accumulated higher hydrocarbon concentrations than cod (muscle
lipid content of 0.75% wet weight). Jovanovich and Marion (1987) have reported that uptake rates of
PAHs in clams peaked when gametogenesis was near completion and decreased during spawning,
while elimination rates peaked during spawning. Bender et al. (1986) found that oysters and clams
21
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
sampled at the high point of lipid and glycogen reserves during their spawning cycles (the fall) had
PAH tissue levels that were 2 to 3 times higher than they were when sampled during the spring. High
elimination rates during the loss of lipid-rich eggs are consistent with ndings that nsh and shellsh
tend to accumulate PAHs in tissues with high lipid content because PAHs are strongly hydrophobic
(Meador et al. 1995).
Potential variations in PAH uptake and elimination rates in seafood species due to seasonal
and physiological variation should be taken into account during spill response. These differences
should be considered when designing seafood sampling plans and when comparing analytical results
from samples from different species, collected at different times of year, or collected during different
stages in the life cycle of the organisms.
Chronic Exposure Stress
Bioaccumulation levels and elimination rates of hydrocarbons for nsh and shellsh may
depend on the type and duration of exposure to petroleum products, and the extent to which the
organisms have been chronically exposed to other contaminants. Chronic exposure appears to reduce
elimination capacity. In fact, there may be two phases of elimination: an initial rapid phase followed
by a second slower phase for PAHs that are sequestered in stable compartments of the organism, such
as storage lipids (Meador et al. 1995). Some chronic hydrocarbon pollution studies have indicated
no signicant reductions in PAH levels in tissues over 2-4 months for clams and mussels, even when
the animals were moved to cleaner habitats (DiSalvo et al. 1975; Boehm and Quinn 1977). The ratio
of liver/ muscle concentrations in nsh sometimes can be used as an indicator of the level of chronic
PAH contamination at a site. Liver levels represent shorter-term exposure to oil, while muscle levels
represent longer-term bioaccumulation. Therefore, lower liver/muscle ratios may indicate decreased
efciency in an organisms ability to biotransform absorbed or ingested oil into compounds that are
easily excreted (Hellou 1996).
Other subsistence and recreational seafood organisms
Some organisms that are collected and consumed for subsistence and recreation were not
discussed in this section. Examples are octopus, squid, seals, whales, seaweed, and algae. There isnt
enough information on these organisms to thoroughly discuss the level of risk they may pose to con-
sumers following an oil spill. It should be noted, however, that if these organisms occur in a spill area
and are exposed, restrictions on harvest or consumption advisories might be warranted, depending on
contamination and consumption levels.
Summary
Wild nsh are unlikely to become contaminated or tainted because they typically are either
not exposed or are exposed only briey to the spilled oil and because they rapidly eliminate
petroleum compounds taken up. Exceptions may occur if a large amount of fresh, light oil is
mixed into the water column or if bottom sediments become contaminated. If nearshore sedi-
ments are contaminated, species that spawn in nearshore and shallow waters are more likely to
be exposed to spilled oil than pelagic and benthic species.
Penned nsh are more susceptible to tainting and contamination because they are not
able to escape exposure. They are especially at risk if large amounts of oil mix into the water
column.
22
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Shellsh are more likely than nsh to become contaminated from spilled oil because they are
more vulnerable to exposure and less efcient at metabolizing petroleum compounds once
exposed. Shellsh are generally less mobile and have more contact with sediments, which can
become contaminated and serve as a long-term source of exposure.
Among crustaceans, species that burrow are at the highest risk of exposure at spills where
bottom sediments are contaminated, followed by species that utilize nearshore and estuarine
benthic habitats.
Bivalves are at high risk of contamination because they are sessile, lter- and deposit- feed,
and occur in substrates in shallow subtidal and intertidal areas that are more likely to become
contaminated.
It is generally accepted that uptake and elimination rates both increase with temperature,
though study results are somewhat contradictory.
PAHs tend to accumulate to higher concentrations in lipid-rich tissues and organisms. Sea-
sonal differences in tissue lipid content associated with spawning may inuence uptake and
elimination rates of PAHs in some marine species.
Chronic exposure to hydrocarbons in water and sediments may reduce elimination capacity.
Summaryof iterature on U take and E L p limination
Most of the literature on oil and PAH uptake and elimination by marine organisms is based on
laboratory studies using the water-soluble fraction or dispersed oil in aqueous exposures, or contami-
nated sediments. The organisms are typically exposed to a constant concentration for a period of
time (often 24 hours for aqueous exposures; 28 days for sediment exposures) and then placed in clean
water and monitored for tissue concentrations over time. The rate of elimination is often reported in
terms of half-life, that is, the time it takes for the concentration of a compound to decrease by half.
Laboratory aqueous exposure concentrations are often an order of magnitude or two higher
than expected at oil spills. At actual oil spills, organisms are more likely to experience spiked exposures
in the water: concentrations that are initially high (for a few hours or less) and then rapidly decline as
the oil disperses in three dimensions and degrades. Although laboratory exposure conditions often
differ from those at actual spills, laboratory tests can be useful indicators of the relative rates of uptake
and elimination among different oil compounds and concentrations, species, routes of exposure, and
environmental conditions.
Laboratory study results indicate that PAH uptake from water is rapid, especially for nsh and
crustaceans, which may be related, in part, to high ventilatory rates (Meador et al. 1995). For example,
laboratory experiments have reported tainting after eight hours of exposure of salmon to 0.4 ppm
of the water-soluble fraction of a crude oil (Ackman and Heras 1992) and after 4 hours of exposure
of Arctic char to 50 ppm of a crude oil (Lockhart and Danell 1992). Dietary uptake from sediments is
slower. Studies indicate that PAH uptake rates decrease with increasing molecular weight (Meador et
al. 1995).
Elimination rates vary widely, by organism type, species, size, uptake pathway, oil type, tem-
perature, and season. However, some generalizations can be derived from the literature. First, the
half-lives of PAHs in organisms increase with molecular weight (Meador et al. 1995). Table II-6 shows
this trend for PAHs in bivalves, which have limited ability to metabolize PAHs (the PAHs are listed in
order of increasing molecular weight). It is important to note that the more persistent PAHs (with
more than three benzene rings) are present in petroleum at very low levels. Elimination rates for
23
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
nsh, which metabolize PAHs more readily, would be faster than the rates shown in Table II-6. Second,
passive release and metabolism of PAHs are slower in chronically exposed animals, as discussed earlier
(Meador et al. 1995).
Ta I-6. H lf sofA sin biva sba e on la toryte tsof wa r a s dime e p ure ( ble I a -live P H lve s d bora s both te nd e nt x os s modid a te e fr
Ma e a 19 5 .
e dor t l. 9 )
Compound
No. of Tests
Half-life, in days
mean (range)
1.6 (0.9-2)
Naphthalene Phenanthrene Fluoranthene Benzo(a)pyrene
3
6 6 6
3.3 (1.7-6.1)
9.9 (2.0-29.8)
12.3 (4.8-16)
Field data on the duration of taint and body burdens is limited to a few, well-studied spills.
Table II-7 summarizes the available data by spill and organism type. These case studies show that wild
nsh are seldom tainted, and the duration of taint is short (less than one month). Caged salmon,
however, are more vulnerable to exposure, and taint may persist longer. At the Braer spill, in which a
very large amount of a light crude oil was released over 12 days and elevated oil concentrations in
water persisted in the vicinity of salmon farms for up to 50 days, the salmon closest to the spill report-
edly remained tainted for nearly 200 days after the spill (Whittle et al. 1997).
Tainting of crustaceans has been reported for spills at which a light oil was naturally dispersed
into the water column immediately after release. Some of the dispersed oil can mix with suspended
sediments and accumulate on the seaoor surface, where lobsters, for example, can come into contact
with the oil. It appears that epibenthic crustaceans readily uptake oil from sediments and are tainted
at low PAH levels. Petroleum hydrocarbons tend to persist longer in crustaceans than nsh, perhaps
partly because they are exposed by both water and sediment pathways. The sediment-associated
oil has more of the higher-molecular weight PAHs that are more persistent and are eliminated more
slowly (Meador et al. 1995).
Bivalves, particularly lter feeders, are more likely to have elevated levels of PAHs when the oil
strands on intertidal beds or mixes into the water column over subtidal beds. Heavily oiled sediments
can provide a source of chronic exposure, as at the Sea Empress spill where intertidal mussels remained
contaminated in one heavily oiled bay for 19 months after the spill (Law et al. 1999). Once exposure
ceases, elimination can be completed as rapidly as less than one month. Because bivalves accumulate
oil compounds and eliminate them very slowly, they sometimes can be used as to indicate the extent
and degree of oil exposure after an oil spill.
24
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Ta I-7. P s ncea dura of int a tis ueconta ble I re e nd tion ta nd s mina withp trole comp tion e um oundsre orte a va p d t riousoil
s ills R f to Ta I f th de ilson s ill loca p . ee r ble -1 or e ta p tion, da , oil ty ea volume e te p nd , nvironme l conditions a re e nce .
nta , nd f re s
Tissue PAH Concentration (g/kg or ppb
wet weight) and Persistence
Spill Name
Finfish
T/ Sea Empress V T/ Braer V
Taint Persistence
Wild salmon: 12-186 Declined rapidly Cod: 1.3-74

Haddock: 8-262
Plaice: 15-184
Whiting: 9-2,650
Lemon sole: 6-1,240
Dab: 25-2,160
All but dab reached background in 1 month; dab in 2
months
Caged salmon: up to 14,000; rapid loss to 1,000 in 25
days, reached background in 5 months
Wild salmon: No taint

Cod: No taint
Haddock: 1 month
Plaice: Suspect taint 2 months
Whiting: No data
Lemon sole: No taint
Dab: 1 month
Caged salmon: 7 months
T/ North Cape B
Finfish: 5-1,100; 0 months because no increase over

background was observed
All finfish: No taint in 416 samples
Crustaceans
M/ Kure V M/ New Carissa V T/ Braer V Rock crab: 5-350; 0.5 months Dungeness crab: < 15 Lobster: 112-1,060; 1 month
V elvet crab: 94-308; 2 months
Edible crab white meat: 19-281;
brown meat: 104-1,390;
12 months for crabs
Lobster: 0-33,150; 2.5-5 months Crab: No taint
No sensory testing conducted
Lobster: 1 month
Edible crab: No taint
T/ North Cape B
Lobster: 2.5-5 months
Bivalves
M/ Kure V M/ New Carissa V T/ Sea Empress V Oyster: 264-4,467; 0.5 months Oyster: 70-1,200; 3 weeks Whelk: 50-3,800; 4 months
Mussel: up to 19,500; 2.5-5 months
Cockle: similar to mussels
Whelk: 45-1,130; 12 months
Scallop: 223-3,580; 17 months
Steamer clam: 8,500-18,400; 3 months
Oyster: 1,400-13,500; 3 months
Mussel: 4,200-24,300; 3 months
Oysters: 30,000; <1 month Bivalves from four small areas were above 100; 1 year
All other areas < 100
Oyster: No taint
Oyster: No taint
Whelk: No taint
Mussel: No data
Whelk: No data
Scallop: Suspect taint 2 months
Steamer clam: No taint
Oyster: No taint
Mussel: No taint
Oysters: No data
Bivalves: No data
T/ Braer V T/ North Cape B
Refinery Spill, El Salvador T/ Ex on Valdez V x
25
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Correlation between T aint and B B ody urden
The specic compounds responsible for petroleum taint in seafood have not been unequivo-
cally determined. Consequently, results of chemical analysis cannot yet be used to predict presence
or absence of taint. Nevertheless, results from recent spills where both chemical and sensory testing
have been conducted indicate a high degree correlation between presence of taint and presence of
measured petroleum contaminants, or conversely, absence of both. The relationship, as well as tainting
threshold, may vary somewhat depending on species, oil type, exposure pathway, and other unknown
factors. Within a series of experiments using the same oil type and species, sensory panels can cor-
rectly rank the degree of taint with both tissue concentrations and exposure water concentrations.
Some reported minimum concentrations of measured oil compounds in tissues that were determined
by sensory testing to be tainted include 0.6 ppm for cod (Ernst et al. 1989b), 5 ppm for salmon (Heras
et al. 1993), 9 ppm for plaice (Howgate et al. 1977), and 100 ppm in scallops (Motohiro and Iseya 1976).
Sometimes it is possible to develop correlations for specic spills once a large enough data set is
generated. For example, during the Braer spill, taint in caged salmon was readily perceived if the PAH
concentration in the esh was 1,000 ppb or greater (Whittle et al. 1997).
Laboratory studies have reported tainting thresholds in salmon, rainbow trout, scallops, and
mussels (Ernst et al. 1989a; Ackman and Heras 1992; Davis et al. 1995; Heras et al. 1992, 1993; Jacques
Whitford Environment 1992). The data are difcult to interpret because tissue levels are seldom mea-
sured, or they are reported as ppm oil rather than specic compounds, such as PAHs. More often, the
studies correlate taint with the amount of oil in the exposure water, again usually reported as ppm oil.
These studies might provide some basis for predicting the potential for tainting for the combination of
species and oil tested. However, it is not yet possible to make general predictions.
Concep tual M odels of x osure, U take, and E Ep p limination
Because conditions change rapidly at oil spills, it is helpful to have conceptual models of the
exposure pathways for a range of spill conditions. These conceptual models may help seafood man-
agers in evaluating the risk of signicant contamination of seafood and making decisions based on
limited on-scene data. Table II-8 summarizes ve conceptual models for exposure, uptake, and elimi-
nation at oil spills, applied to seafood. These models are based on actual spill data and supported by
laboratory research, as cited in the previous sections. Please refer to these sections to nd the citations
supporting each of the conceptual models. It is important to note that during some spills more than
one of the models will apply. Each of these models is briey discussed.
26
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Ta I-8 Conce tua f me ble I . p l ra work f s a ood e p ureto, up ke a e or e f x os ta , nd limina of a s ills tion oil t p .
Exposure Pathway
Exposure Conditions
Seafood at Risk
Tissue Contaminants
Elimination Rates
-Most rapid because the

compounds are more
water-soluble and are
quickly lost by diffusion
and/or metabolism
Dissolved oil fraction only

-Relatively calm, so slick
via the water column
does not disperse
-Separation of dissolved
plume from surface slick
-Viscous oils that do not
readily disperse
-Exposure time is short
-Finfish in the area

-The more water-soluble
affected by the dissolved
compounds will domi-
plume
nate, i.e., the 2- and 3-
-Epibiota and filter feed-
ringed PAHs
ing infauna where the
dissolved plume contacts
the bottom
-Same as the whole oil
because particulate oil
will dominate over dis-
solved
-Over time heavier frac-
tions will predominate
as the more soluble frac-
tions are depleted from
the slick
Dissolved and particulate

-Turbulence that mixes
-All biota in the water
oil fractions via the
the oil as droplets into
column
water column and water
the water column
-Epibiota and filter feed-
surface
-Light oils that are readily
ing infauna where the
dispersed
dissolved/dispersed
-Exposure time is short
plume contacts the
bottom
-Intertidal biota (e.g.
oyster/mussel beds)
Resuspension of contam-
-Resuspension of heavily
-Nearshore filter feeders
inated sediments into the
oiled sediments from the
(epibiota and infauna)
water column
shoreline or nearshore
sediments
-Exposure time is likely to
be episodic and related
to storms
Contaminated intertidal
-Oiled intertidal or sub-
and subtidal sediments
tidal sediments
-Chronic exposure
- The range of PAHs in the

whole oil is present in
tissues;
-Elimination slower for
4-5 ringed PAHs than for
2-3 ringed PAHs
-Will follow weathering

-Relatively slower rates
pattern in the stranded
because of the wide
oil
range of PAHs in the oiled
-Over time, the less solu-
sediments; chronic expo-
ble, less degradable com-
sures may result in longer
pounds will dominate
persistence even after
exposure ends
-Same as above
- Infauna and some

-Same as above epibiota that are closely
associated with bottom
sediments, especially
deposit feeders
Ingestion of contami-
nated food
-Predators, scavengers,
-Highly variable and
-Usually occurs where
sediments are contami-
and omnivorous feeders
poorly understood
nated
-Exposure often chronic
-Highly variable and

poorly understood
1.
Exposure to the dissolved oil fraction only
This exposure model assumes little or no dispersion of the whole oil into the water column, or
that the dispersed oil re-coalesced into surface slicks, leaving behind a dissolved oil plume. Alternately,
winds may transport the surface slick in one direction, whereas tidal currents can carry the dissolved
plume in another direction. Under most conditions, exposure time to the water-soluble fraction of oil
is short (in the range of hours to days) due to rapid dilution, evaporation, etc. Exposure concentrations
are usually low (ppb range). Uptake by nsh and shellsh will be rapid and dominated by the most
water-soluble compounds. However, elimination will also be rapid. Confounding factors can include
longer exposure due to multiple or chronic releases, very slow dilution or ushing rates, and very cold
temperatures that reduce metabolic activity of animals. Though many laboratory studies have shown
rapid uptake of the water-soluble fraction, there are few examples of seafood harvest closures attrib-
uted to this pathway during oil spills, probably because the exposure concentrations are too low or
rapidly diluted and do not result in persistent contamination.
27
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
2.
Exposure to dissolved and particulate oil
This exposure model includes dispersed oil droplets that mix into the water column. This
behavior could occur with light (low-viscosity) oils, turbulent conditions, or chemically dispersed
oil. The total (both dissolved and dispersed) oil concentrations in the water column can be relatively
higher (total oil concentrations up to low ppm) than with model 1. Exposure time to such high con-
centrations, however, is usually very short (in the range of hours to days), as oil concentrations rapidly
decline with mixing in three dimensions. Tissue residues may include the full suite of PAHs in the
whole oil, not just the water-soluble fraction. Thus, elimination rates are expected to be relatively
slower, with the higher molecular weight PAHs having relatively longer half-lives. An example of this
type of exposure is the North Cape oil spill.
3.
Exposure to contaminated sediments re-suspended into the water column
Often, complete cleanup of oiled intertidal or subtidal sediments is not feasible and oil is left
to weather and degrade naturally. The oiled sediments (or in some cases, free oil droplets) can be
re-suspended during storm events, exposing nearby biota. Filter-feeders are at the greatest risk of
exposure. Decline in tissue concentrations of contaminants from this pathway of exposure is likely to
be delayed because of repeated exposures, presence of persistent, high-molecular-weight PAHs, and
possibly slower overall elimination rates for organisms that are repeatedly exposed. This pathway of
exposure has been documented for crude and heavy rened oils stranded on more sheltered shore-
lines (e.g., Ex on Valdezoil spill, Sea Empress oil spill).
x
4.
Exposure to contaminated sediments.
Oiled intertidal and subtidal sediments can provide pathways of oil exposure via sediment
ingestion to invertebrate deposit feeders, such as bivalves, and sediment grazers, such as shrimp and
gastropods. Also, infauna can be exposed to dissolved oil in the sediment porewater, potentially con-
taminating tissues with the more soluble, lighter-molecular weight compounds. Decline in tissue con-
centrations will be delayed for organisms that are chronically exposed, and may be slow for the same
reasons described in model 3 above. Intertidal sediments are more likely than subtidal sediments to
be contaminated. Subtidal sediments are seldom contaminated, and if they are contaminated they are
generally at lower concentrations than intertidal sediments. Sorbed oil might be more likely to dis-
solve, compared to pyrogenic PAHs derived from combustion of fossil fuels that are tightly bound to
the sediments. This pathway of exposure has been documented at very few spills (most notably, the
Braer oil spill). It is primarily associated with chronic pollution.
5.
Ingestion of contaminated food.
This exposure model assumes that organisms uptake oil by eating contaminated food, not
sediments ingested while feeding. Examples are oil droplet ingestion by copepods that are then eaten
by nsh, or crabs feeding on oiled bivalves. Dietary uptake of PAHs is not very efcient, and decreases
with increasing molecular weight.
28
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
III.
MONITORING SEAFOOD FOR CONTAMINATION
Section II described information that can help determine the likelihood that spilled oil will
expose and contaminate seafood. If it is decided that seafood is at signicant risk, the next step is
monitoring to determine whether seafood actually is contaminated, and to characterize the extent and
degree of contamination. This section provides general guidelines for developing seafood sampling
plans and conducting sensory and chemical testing of seafood samples for petroleum contamination.
D evelop Seaf Samp ing ood lingP lans
The rst step in developing a sampling plan is dening the questions to be answered. Sam-
pling should not begin before study objectives have been clearly established. Because every oil spill
is a unique combination of conditions and the objectives of seafood sampling may vary from spill to
spill, there is no standard sampling plan that can be applied to all seafood contamination monitoring
studies. Generally, though, any sampling plan to monitor for potential seafood contamination from an
oil spill should specify the study area, sampling locations, target species, number of samples to be col-
lected, timing of initial and repeat sampling, sample collection methods and handling procedures, and
analyses to be conducted. The statistical design must ensure sufcient statistical power to provide the
information needed at the desired level of condence to support seafood management decisions.
We suggest some general guidelines for designing a seafood-sampling plan below. For more
detailed guidelines, see Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories
Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analy by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000a). For more
sis detailed sampling guidelines for sensory testing, see Guidance on SensoryT esting and Monitoring of
Seafood for Presence of Petroleum T aint Following an Oil Spill (Reilly and York 2001). For general sam-
pling guidance related to oil spills, see Mearns (1995).
Selecting sampling locations
In selecting sampling locations, all likely pathways of oil exposure should be identied (e.g.,
surface slicks, dispersed or dissolved oil in the water column, submerged oil associated with bottom
sediments), as discussed in Section II, so that risks to specic sheries can be evaluated. Inclusion of
commercial, recreational, and subsistence harvest areas should be considered.
Collection of pre-exposure samples from the spill area or samples from appropriate unexposed
reference areas is extremely important because they can provide information on background levels of
contamination in the spill area. Petroleum hydrocarbons are ubiquitous in environmental samples, so
we cannot assume that all petroleum hydrocarbons measured in a sample or all increases over time
are a result of an oil spill. Furthermore, monitoring often continues until the level of contamination
returns to background. Reference samples are key to determining the range of background concen-
trations and the baseline against which changes over time will be evaluated.
The best reference samples are pre-spill samples taken in areas not yet oiled but in the poten-
tial path of the oil (before can be compared with after exposure). If pre-spill sampling is not pos-
sible, unexposed reference sites comparable to exposed sites can be selected for sampling. However,
site histories and differences in the characteristics of the sites should be carefully evaluated to deter-
mine whether there are signicant differences between the exposed and reference areas. Often, areas
that escape oiling do so because they differ fundamentally from exposed areas (for example, bays that
face different directions), and so would not be expected to exhibit the same background conditions.
29
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Any differences between reference and exposed sites must be considered when analyzing and inter-
preting results.
National monitoring programs such as NOAAs National Mussel Watch Program can provide
valuable pre-spill data for determining historical ranges of background concentrations of PAHs in
shellsh at several locations around the country (Mearns et al. 1998, 1999). When available for an area,
PAH data from the NOAA Status and Trends Program (including the National Mussel Watch Program)
or other monitoring programs may help determine normal background levels and seasonal patterns in
contaminant levels.
Selecting target species to be sampled
Evaluating risk to human health from seafood consumption usually is a primary purpose of
seafood sampling, so including species harvested commercially, recreationally, and for subsistence use
may be important. Species that are present throughout the area of concern may be most appropriate
for sampling if results are to be compared spatially or if the results are to be used to make statistical
inferences to the entire area.
Hydrocarbon uptake and elimination rates vary widely among species, as described in Sec-
tion II. Finsh, for example, quickly metabolize and eliminate PAHs. Bivalves generally tend to bioac-
cumulate most contaminants and often serve as good indicators of the potential extent, degree, and
persistence of contamination. On the other hand, some shellsh species stop feeding or passing water
over their gills at extreme temperatures and, consequently, may exhibit low uptake rates under certain
conditions. Consider such differences when selecting species for monitoring and comparing results
among species.
Sampling frequency and duration
Monitoring generally should continue until contaminant levels reach background levels or
pre-determined acceptable levels. Periodic sampling before those levels are reached can reveal trends
in contaminant levels. Appropriate monitoring frequency and duration will depend on spill condi-
tions, such as oil type and volume spilled, ushing rates of affected water bodies, and the degree of
exposure to wave action of contaminated shorelines. Appropriate monitoring frequency and duration
will also depend on the species exposed and exposure duration. Finsh generally eliminate hydrocar-
bons within days or weeks, whereas bivalves may require several weeks or months. Elevated levels of
petroleum compounds in bivalves have been detected for years at some sites where high levels of oil
persist in adjacent sediments. Time of year should also be considered in some climates because elimi-
nation rates may be slower in cold temperatures. Other factors to consider with regard to monitoring
frequency are the turnaround time for sample analysis and time required for the evaluation team to
meet, interpret the results, and decide on the need for further sampling. Sampling plans may need to
be adjusted over time as conditions change and as monitoring results provide new information on the
fate of the oil and on which pathways of exposure are signicant.
Sample collection and handling
The seafood-sampling plan should specify all details about sample collection. This includes
the areas to be sampled, number of samples to be collected from an area (to meet statistical objec-
tives), number of organisms or quantity of tissue to be composited (to meet analytical requirements),
size of organisms to be collected, tidal elevations for collection (in the case of intertidal invertebrates),
method of marking or recording exact sampling locations, and eld notes to be recorded.
30
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
The sampling plan should also specify how seafood samples should be handled. This includes
any eld preparation, packaging and temperature requirements (for example, wrapping in foil, keep-
ing in a cooler at 4C or below, and freezing within a specied period of time), labeling, and any chain-
of-custody requirements during transport to the analytical laboratory. (An example chain-of-custody
form is included in the appendix). Only live animals should be collected for seafood analysis. The
edible portion, which may vary culturally, is usually the portion of interest. Seafood samples collected
for sensory testing generally should be handled as they would be during commercial, recreational, or
subsistence harvest and transport.
Procedures should be followed to prevent cross-contamination in the eld (such as preventing
exposure of samples or sampling equipment to exhaust fumes and engine cooling systems on vessels)
and to maintain the integrity of the samples. Likewise, good laboratory practices should be employed
to prevent contamination of samples during preparation and analysis.
T estingSeaf f C ood or ontamination and T ainting
Generally, two different types of evaluations can be conducted after oil spills to determine
whether seafood is contaminated. Sensory testing determines whether seafood is tainted, i.e., if it
has an off-odor or off-avor. Chemical analysis determines whether tissues are contaminated with
targeted compounds. Detailed methods of chemical analysis can indicate the presence as well as
the quantity of specic contaminants in tissues. These results can be used to evaluate risk to human
health through consumption of contaminated seafood (as described in Section 5). Summaries of these
types of seafood testing are described below.
Sensory evaluation of seafood for presence of petroleum taint
When an oil spill occurs, local seafood resources may be exposed to petroleum compounds
that affect their sensory qualities; that is, smell, taste, and appearance. Even when seafood from a spill
area is considered acceptable with regard to food-safety, avor and odor may still be affected, nega-
tively impacting the seafoods palatability, marketability, and economic value. Furthermore, tainted
seafood is considered by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to be adulterated and, therefore, is
restricted from trade in interstate commerce.
Overview of sensorytesting of seafood
Tainted seafood is dened as containing abnormal odor or avor not typical of the seafood
itself (ISO 1992). Under this denition, the odor or avor is introduced into the seafood from external
sources and excludes any natural by-products from deterioration due to aging during storage, decom-
position of fats, proteins, or other components, or due to microbial contamination normally found
in seafood. Taint is detected through sensory evaluation, which has been dened as the scientic
discipline used to evoke, measure, analyze and interpret those reactions to characteristics of foods
and materials as perceived through the senses of sight, smell, taste, touch and hearing (Food Technol-
ogy Sensory Evaluation Division 1981). Humans have relied for centuries on the complex sensations
that result from the interaction of our senses to evaluate quality of food, water, and other materials. In
more recent times, sensory testing has developed into a formalized, structured, and codied method-
ology for characterizing and evaluating food, beverages, cosmetics, perfumes, and other commercial
products. Sensory evaluation techniques are routinely used commercially in quality control, product
development, and research. Sensory testing can be either subjective or objective. Subjective test-
ing measures feelings and biases toward a product rather than the products attributes. For objective
31
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
testing, highly trained assessors use the senses to measure product attributes. Testing of seafood for
petroleum taint should be completely objective and should be conducted by highly trained analysts.
Objective sensory testing serves as a practical, reliable, and sensitive method for assessing
seafood quality. Only human testers can measure most sensory characteristics of food practically, com-
pletely, and meaningfully. Though advances continue to be made in developing instrument-based
analysis, human senses remain unmatched in their sensitivity for detecting and evaluating organo-
leptic characteristics of food. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and NOAAs National Marine
Fisheries Service routinely employ sensory evaluation in inspecting seafood quality. Seafood inspec-
tors are essentially sensory analysts, or assessors, who work as expert evaluators in the application of
product standards. A major objective of seafood sensory inspection is to evaluate quality with regard
to decomposition of sheries products. Sensory analysis can also provide information on presence of
taint from external sources, such as spilled oil and chemicals.
Sensorypanels
Objective sensory evaluation of seafood is usually conducted using a panel of trained and
experienced analysts. Sensory analysts must be screened for sensitivity and then trained in applying
established sensory science methodology. Participation in calibration or harmonization workshops
ensures uniform application of sensory evaluation criteria for particular types of contaminants, includ-
ing standard terminology and consensus on levels of intensity of sensory characteristics. Descriptive
analyses and references are used to yield results that are consistently accurate and precise.
There are different types of sensory analysts, which function differently and have specic selec-
tion, training, and validation requirements. Trained assessors are sensory analysts selected and trained
to perform a specic task. Ex pert assessors are the most highly trained and experienced category of
sensory analyst. Expert assessors generally evaluate product full-time, function independently, and
often are used in quality control and product development. Examples of products evaluated by expert
sensory assessors include wine, tea, coffee, and seafood. Through extensive standardized training
and experience with sensory methodology, these expert assessors have become extremely objective
and evaluate quality with a high degree of accuracy and precision. Seafood inspectors fall into the
category of expert assessors, and can make consistent and repeatable sensory assessments of quality
characteristics of seafood as they relate to grade level or decisions to accept or reject product.
The number of panelists needed depends on the level of expertise and experience of the
analysts used. For panels of expert assessors, such as NMFS and FDA seafood inspectors, usually only
three to ve analysts are needed. If less experienced analysts are used, a larger number of panelists is
recommended. Whenever possible, use of expert seafood assessors, such as seafood inspectors, is rec-
ommended for evaluation of seafood for presence of petroleum taint. Extensive product knowledge
and experience enable seafood inspectors to very accurately distinguish variations related to product
processing, storage, deterioration, etc. from taint due to external sources. Some seafood inspectors for
NMFS and FDA have had specialized training for detecting petroleum taint in seafood and experience
evaluating seafood samples at oil spills. If called upon, these specialized inspectors are available to
conduct sensory evaluation of seafood during spill events.
Sensoryevaluation procedures
Applied as a science, sensory evaluation should be conducted under specic, highly controlled
conditions in order to prevent extraneous inuences in the testing environment from affecting panel-
ists sensory responses. Accordingly, sensory testing is best conducted in facilities specically designed
for sensory testing. The NMFS Seafood Inspection Branch maintains several such laboratories around
the country. Seafood samples collected during a spill event can be shipped to these laboratories for
sensory evaluation. In most cases, NMFS and FDA recommend that samples be shipped and evaluated
in the same manner as they normally are shipped and sold (i.e., fresh, live, frozen). When this is not pos-
32
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
sible, as may be the case for oil spills in very remote areas, sensory analysts can conduct evaluations at
the scene of an incident.
All sensory testing should be conducted under the supervision of a sensory professional,
who designs and implements the sensory testing procedure. A trained facilitator should coordinate
sensory analysis . The facilitator conducts the testing, including receiving, preparing, and presenting
samples to the expert sensory panel, and collecting the resulting data in a scientic and unbiased
manner. All of these steps should be conducted according to standardized procedures under highly
controlled conditions. Suspect samples are presented to assessors in blind tests, along with control
or reference samples. Samples are rst smelled raw, then smelled cooked, and nally tasted by each
panelist independently to determine whether petroleum taint is present. A sensory professional statis-
tically analyzes panelists responses to determine whether samples pass or fail with regard to presence
of petroleum taint. These results, in turn, help seafood managers determine whether restrictions are
needed on seafood harvest or marketing from the spill area due to tainting.
In that we are not certain which compounds in petroleum are responsible for taint perceived
by humans, chemical analysis cannot yet substitute for sensory testing in determining whether a taint
is present. It has been suggested that the principal components of crude and rened oils responsible
for tainting include the phenols, dibenzothiophenes, naphthenic acids, mercaptans, tetradecanes, and
methylated naphthalenes (GESAMP 1977). The human olfactory system generally is very sensitive to
phenolic and sulfur compounds, even though they are minor components of oil.
In 2001, NOAA published a technical guidance document on appropriate sensory methodol-
ogy to objectively assess seafood for the presence of petroleum taint. Written by sensory scientists
with NOAAs National Marine Fisheries Service Seafood Inspection Program and Canadas Food Inspec-
tion Agency, in cooperation with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Guidance on Testing and
Monitoring of Seafood for Presence of Petroleum T aint Following an Oil Spill comprehensively describes
recommended standard procedures, including collection, preservation, and transport of seafood
samples, for sensory evaluation. The guidance is intended to assist in conducting scientically sound
and legally defensible sensory tests on seafood during oil spill response, with adequate and appropri-
ate quality control.
Chemical testing techniques for petroleum contaminants in seafood
Chemical testing of seafood often is conducted after an oil spill to determine whether seafood
tissues are contaminated with petroleum compounds. Both detailed and screening methods of analy-
sis can be employed. Below, we summarize methods typically used after past oil spills, including some
of their advantages and disadvantages.
Detailed methodsof chemical analy gaschromatography massspectrometry
sis: / Detailed chemical analysis of seafood after oil spills typically is conducted using gas chro-
matography and mass spectrometry (GC/MS), which measures individual PAHs at very low detection
levels and provides a PAH pattern (or ngerprint) to compare to that of the source oil. Prior to analysis,
hydrocarbons are extracted from seafood tissue samples and the extract is split into three fractions:
1) the saturated hydrocarbons fraction (f
containing the n-alkanes, isoprenoids, steranes and triter-
1 ), panes; 2) the aromatic hydrocarbon fraction (f
containing the PAHs and sulfur heterocyclics; and 3)
2), the polar hydrocarbon fraction (f
containing the nitrogen heterocyclic compounds. Recovery stan-
), 3 dards appropriate to each fraction are added (Lauenstein and Cantillo 1993).
The PAHs in the f
2 fraction generally are of greatest concern with regard to risk to human
health. The gas chromatograph separates targeted PAH compounds yielding a retention time that,
in combination with the mass spectra from the mass spectrometer, enable detailed identication of
individual compounds by their ion masses. The method often used is usually referred to as Modi-
33
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
ed EPA Method 8270, which is EPA Method 8270 for semi-volatile compounds modied to include
quantication of the alkyl-substituted PAH homologues, in addition to the standard PAH priority
pollutants. Table II-3 lists the PAHs and their alkyl homologues usually included in this analysis. In oil,
alkylated homologues of PAHs are more predominant than parent PAH compounds, often by an order
of magnitude. This is in contrast to pyrogenic (combustion) and other potential PAH sources. The
detailed chemical ngerprint provided by GC/ analysis enables differentiation among sources of
MS PAHs found in the sample. Contamination from a specic spill can be distinguished from background
sources of contamination, such as PAHs derived from combustion sources. GC/MS can also measure
analytes other than PAHs to help with ngerprint analysis of oil or to track oil weathering. The GC/MS
can be run in the selected ion monitoring (SIM) mode, rather than the full-scan mode, to increase the
minimum detection levels (MDL) of the individual parent and selected homologue PAHs by a factor of
10 to 40. Minimum detection levels for individual PAHs are very low, in the range of parts per billion
(ng/g) in tissue. The quantitative results for specic, targeted PAHs can be used to assess whether
levels detected pose a risk to human health through seafood consumption.
Normal turnaround time for analysis of tissue samples for PAHs is approximately two weeks.
Fast turnaround time is approximately three days for a batch of samples. Costs for GC/MS-SIM analysis
of tissues are relatively high, starting from about $750 per sample, plus premiums of 50-100% for fast
turnaround. The sample-processing rate depends on the throughput capabilities of the laboratory and
the degree of quality control (QC) of the data before the results are released, ranging from approxi-
mately 20 to a maximum of 100 samples per week.
Data Reporting and Interpretation
The importance of data reporting and interpretation should not be underestimated in plan-
ning seafood safety monitoring programs after oil spills. Some simple steps can be taken to help avoid
confusion and prevent incorrect conclusions. For example, the analytical laboratory should include at
least the following information for all analytical data reported:
Sample HeaderInformation
Sample Name or Field ID: the sample name or number assigned bythe sampler
Sample Ty e.g.,sample,eld blank,tripblank,procedural blank,QC
pe: Batch No.: analy tical batch number (so samples run as a batch can be identied,particularlyif
problems are found with a batch run)
Matrix e.g.,water,sediment,tissue,oil
: Percent Moisture: for tissue and sediment samples
Sample Siz weight or volume of sample used for analy e: sis
Collection Date: date the sample was collected
Ex traction Date: date the sample was ex tracted
Analy Date: date the sample was analy ed
sis z Analy Method: EPAMethod or other description
sis Surrogate Corrected?: Are the reported concentrations corrected for surrogate recovery ?
Method Detection Limit: the minimum detection level
Units: units in which the concentration is reported,including whether concentrations are wet
weight or dryweight (for tissue)
34
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Analy Data
te
Individual and T otal PAH concentrations
Surrogate Recovery(%): for everysample
Keyto Data Qualiers: The lab should include a keyto anyqualiers used to ag reported values
that have some kind of data accuracyissue. For ex ample,two standard qualiers used under the
USEPAContract LaboratoryProgram guidelines (USEPA1994)are:
U = the analy was analy ed for,but was not detected above the reported sample quantita-
te z tion limit
J= the analy was positivelyidentied;the associated numerical value is the approx te imate concentration of the analy in the sample
te
Analysis of the source oil, if available, is needed to enable ngerprint comparisons. Only expert
petroleum hydrocarbon chemists should interpret ngerprints because the complex processes of oil
weathering and uptake result in variable PAH patterns in organisms (Sauer and Boehm 1995). Also,
patterns can be difcult to interpret in samples collected from areas with high background levels of
contamination.
Caution is advised when comparing analytical results for samples of different types, or samples
collected from different areas or at different times. Before drawing conclusions, consider any differ-
ences in the analyses conducted or the way the data are reported. Examples of differences to watch
for include:
the units in which results are reported, and whether reported concentrations are dry or wet
weight;
whether the lists of analytes and minimum detection limits for individual PAHs are the same;
whether reported concentrations have been corrected for surrogate recovery; and
whether reported concentrations have been lipid-normalized. As described in Section II, PAH
uptake and retention tend to increase with the increasing lipid content of tissues. Conse-
quently, differences in lipid content may need to be considered when comparing and inter-
preting analytical results over time or among different organisms.
Rapid screening methodsof analy sis

Rapid, low-cost analytical methods, generally known as screening methods, can be employed
to identify contaminated samples and prioritize them for detailed analysis. Detailed methods of analy-
sis for PAHs in tissue are time-consuming and expensive. The large number of samples often collected
after an oil spill can quickly overwhelm laboratory capacity and strain resources. Screening methods
of analysis can rapidly process large numbers of samples to yield semi-quantitative estimates of con-
taminant concentrations and allow ranking of samples by degree of contamination. Used in a tiered
approach, screening methods can identify the most contaminated samples, prioritizing or reducing
the number of samples that need to be processed by detailed analytical techniques, such as GC/MS.
For example, in response to the need to analyze large numbers of subsistence seafood samples
collected after the Ex on Valdezoil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska, NOAAs Northwest Fisheries
x Science Center used reverse-phase, high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with uores-
cence detection to screen for metabolites of aromatic compounds in nsh bile (Krahn et al. 1982,
1984, 1986, 1992, 1993a, 1993b, 1993d). Finsh rapidly metabolize aromatic compounds and concen-
trate the resulting metabolites in bile for excretion, often at concentrations that are orders of magni-
tude greater than those in edible tissue. Using this rapid, low-cost method, hundreds of nsh tissue
samples were screened for indication of exposure to petroleum contaminants, enabling GC/MS analy-
35
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
ses to be focused on selected samples to conrm presence and quantities of individual contaminants.
Hufnagle et al. (1999) has developed an HPLC/UVuorescence screening method for rapidly measur-
ing aromatic compounds in invertebrate tissues. This screening method was used successfully on lob-
ster samples collected after the North Cape oil spill off the coast of Rhode Island in 1996. For details on
a rapid screening method for parent aromatic compounds in sediments see Krahn et al. (1991, 1993c).
Screening analyses, such as the HPLC/ uorescence method described above, generally can be
completed in rapid turnaround time (within 24 hours) and can be conducted on a research vessel or
onshore lab. Rapid availability of results enables sampling modications based on indications of expo-
sure. This can be very helpful during the critical early phases of an oil spill response, when decisions
regarding closing or otherwise restricting seafood harvest may be made.
The utility of HPLC/uorescence and other screening methods, however, is more limited than
detailed methods of analysis. For example, though it may be possible to recognize chromatographic
patterns associated with characteristic classes of petroleum products, HPLC/ uorescence screening
does not produce a detailed ngerprint similar to the results acquired from GC/MS. Consequently,
HPLC/uorescence usually will not enable differentiation between background contamination sources
and the spilled oil, especially in very polluted areas. Since HPLC/uorescence screening does not
quantify individual aromatic compounds, the results cannot be used to assess risk to human health
from consumption of contaminated seafood. Furthermore, measurement of uorescent aromatic com-
pounds in bile is not a standard analysis, limiting temporal and spatial comparisons using historical
data sets. Lastly, HPLC/uorescence screening for uorescent aromatic compounds in bile is a special-
ized technique, and laboratory availability and expertise needed to conduct the analyses reliably may
be limited.
Water Monitoring
Water samples often are collected and analyzed as part of the initial spill response and assess-
ment. Seafood safety managers can use these results to help estimate the extent and duration of sea-
food exposure to oil in the water column. Monitoring of water concentrations may also be important
if water-quality criteria are applied as a condition for re-opening a closed shery or removing other
harvest restrictions.
Oil concentrations in the water column generally peak early after an oil spill and, in most cases,
rapidly decline to background levels within days to a week, as was the case for example at the New
Carissa oil spill (Payne and Driskell 1999). Accordingly, if water sampling is to be conducted, initial
sampling should commence very soon after an oil spill occurs. Oil may persist longer than usual in
the water column if there are multiple or ongoing oil releases, if the released volume is extraordinarily
large, or if large volumes of oil are physically dispersed. After the Braer oil spill, for example, elevated oil
concentrations were detected in the water column as long as 50 days after release (Davies et al. 1997).
Dissolved and dispersed oil plumes in the water column are driven by currents and so may have a very
different spatial distribution than surface slicks, which are driven primarily by wind.
Under the authority of the Clean Water Act (63 FR 68354-68364), EPA has issued national rec-
ommended water-quality criteria for priority toxic pollutants to be used by states and tribes in adopt-
ing water quality standards. EPA has issued water-quality criteria for protection against human health
effects for three mono-aromatic hydrocarbons and eight PAHs (listed in Table III-1). These particular
compounds, however, are present in crude oils and rened products at very low levels and constitute
a tiny percentage of the PAHs normally detected in water samples after an oil spill. None of the water
quality criteria to protect aquatic communities (both freshwater and saltwater) issued by EPA are for
PAHs. EPA has issued recommended water quality criteria for organoleptic effects for 23 chemicals,
though not for any of the compounds present in petroleum products. Some states have established
state water quality standards for PAHs in their coastal waters.
36
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Ta II N tiona re ble I-1. a l comme d wa r q litycrite f p nde te ua ria or rioritytox p ic olluta f p ction a a t h n h a
nts or rote g ins uma e lth e f ( F 68 5 .
fcts 63 R 3 4) e
PAH Priority Pollutant
Benzo(a)anthracene Benzo(a)pyrene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Benzo(k)fluoranthene Dibenzo(a)anthracene Fluoranthene Fluorene
Human health criteria for consump-

Human health criteria for consump-
tion of Water + Organism (g/L)
tion of Organism Only (g/L)
0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 300 1,300 0.049

0.049
0.049
0.049
0.049
370
14,000
Sediment Monitoring
Sediment monitoring can be included as part of a post-spill monitoring program to determine

whether sediments may be a potential chronic source of oil exposure to adjacent seafood collection
sites, particularly at intertidal sites where bivalves are harvested. Sediment sampling also may facilitate
ngerprint analysis of PAHs in tissues by providing the PAH pattern in contaminated sediments, which
may be different than the PAH pattern in the fresh source oil. It is important to recognize, however,
that sediments often contain high levels of background PAH contamination, particularly in urban areas
and harbors. PAHs and other contaminants detected may not be related to a particular oil spill. Also,
characterization of sediment contamination can be difcult because of the inherent heterogeneity of
intertidal sediments over space, depth, and time.
There are no national sediment quality criteria for PAHs in marine or freshwater sediments.
Some states have established sediment quality standards and cleanup screening levels to prevent
adverse biological effects. How these standards would relate to seafood adulteration or safety issues is
unclear.
37
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
IV.
SEAFOOD RISK ASSESSMENT
Several different endpoints can be considered when assessing risks posed to human health
from consuming contaminated seafood. These include both carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic
effects to the general population, as well as to particularly susceptible segments of the population
such as children, pregnant women, and subsistence seafood consumers. Human epidemiological
studies, when available, and laboratory studies involving animals are used to assess the likely effects of
contaminants at various exposure levels.
As discussed in Section II, petroleum oils are composed of complex and variable mixtures of
hundreds of different hydrocarbon compounds. Of these, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
are typically of greatest concern with regard to health effects because of their relative persistence and
carcinogenicity. Evidence from occupational studies of workers exposed to mixtures of PAHs indicates
that many of these compounds may be carcinogenic to humans. Individual PAHs that are considered
to be probable human carcinogens include benz[a]anthracene, benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[b]uoranthene,
benzo[k]uoranthene, chrysene, dibenz[a,h]anthracene, and indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene (IRIS 1994). Most
of the data gathered from laboratory studies provides information on carcinogenic effects of lifetime
exposure to PAHs. Information on non-carcinogenic effects is limited. Consequently, cancer generally
is the primary endpoint considered when assessing potential risks to human health from consumption
of seafood from an oil spill area.
Overview of Cancer Risk C alculations f P H in Seaf or A s ood
Most seafood risk assessments conducted after oil spills in the U.S. have followed an approach
used by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) in 1990 after the Ex on Valdezoil spill in Prince
x William Sound, Alaska. At the request of the Alaska Oil Spill Health Task Force, a group established after
the spill to conduct a survey and assess the impact of the spill on subsistence food supplies, USFDA
conducted a risk assessment and provided an advisory opinion on the safety of aromatic hydrocar-
bon residues in subsistence seafood in the spill area (Bolger et al. 1996; Bolger and Carrington 1999).
This approach uses a set of calculations to determine nsh or shellsh PAH tissue concentrations,
expressed in benzo[a]pyrene (BaP) equivalents (g/kg), above which an acceptable risk level for cancer
is exceeded. The values for several variables in these calculations can be adjusted on a case-by-case
basis, depending on local seafood consumption levels of the exposed population, average body
weight of the exposed population, estimates of exposure time for a particular spill, and the cancer
risk level deemed acceptable. This approach to calculating seafood advisory or action levels has since
been used after several other oil spills, including the North Cape spill in Rhode Island, the J N spill in
ulie Maine, the Kure spill in California, and the New Carissa spill in Oregon.
The basic equation and input parameters are described below:

!" ! # !

Acceptable Risk Level (RL): The acceptable risk level is the maximum level of individual life-
time carcinogenic risk that is considered acceptable by risk managers. The typical RL used in cancer
-6
risk calculations is 1 x 10
In the case of PAHs, this implies that exposure to PAHs in seafood below a
. specied tissue concentration level at a dened consumption rate over the dened exposure period
would yield a lifetime cancer risk of no greater than 1 in 1,000,000. Some states consider higher risk
-5
levels, such as 1 x 10
lifetime cancer risk of no greater than 1 in 100,000) to be acceptable. (a
38
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
-6
was used in the risk calculations done by USFDA for the Exxon V aldez oil
A risk level of 1 x 10
spill, as well as those done by the State of Rhode Island for the North Cape oil spill, the State of Califor-
-5
was
nia for the Kure oil spill, and the State of Oregon for the New Carissa oil spill. A risk level of 1 x 10
used in the risk assessment conducted by the State of Maine for the Julie N oil spill and the State of
Alaska for the Kuroshima oil spill.
Body Weight (BW): The value for body weight used in risk calculations is intended to repre-
sent the body weight of an individual consumer (kg). An average body weight of 60-70 kg (132-154
lb) is often used for adults in the general U.S. population. If a particular group of at-risk consumers is
considered in a risk calculation, alternative body weights may be used. For instance, children or subsis-
tence harvesters may have lower average body weights than 60-70 kg. Because allowable consump-
tion limits at a certain seafood tissue concentration are linearly related to body weight, risk assessors
should consider the actual body weights of the targeted population.
Averaging Time (AT): A typical averaging time value used in cancer risk calculations is 70
years. This value represents the average length of a human lifetime, which is the time period of interest
for examining cancer as an endpoint.
1
BaP Cancer Slope Factor (SF): The cancer slope factor, or cancer potency (q
is derived from
*), dose-response data obtained from human epidemiological and animal toxicity studies (USEPA 2000b).
High doses of the contaminant of interest are often used in dose-response studies, and extrapolation
of the data to lower doses that may be encountered by the general population is often necessary.
Cancer potency is estimated as the 95-percent upper condence limit of the slope of the dose-
response curve in the low-dose region. This method provides a conservative estimate of the potential
cancer risk of a contaminant. The actual risk may be signicantly lower. The USEPA (2000b) has used
a cancer potency factor of 7.3 per mg/ kg/day to calculate monthly consumption limits for the general
population over a range of PAH tissue concentrations in nsh. This same potency value was used in
cancer risk calculations for the New Carissa and J N oil spills. A cancer potency factor of 9.5 mg/kg/
ulie day, established by the State of California EPA, was used to calculate carcinogenic risk associated with
consuming contaminated shellsh following the Kure spill in California.
Exposure Duration (ED): The exposure duration is the time period over which an individual
is exposed to a contaminant. When calculating risks associated with seafood consumption following
an oil spill, the exposure duration is equivalent to the time interval over which an individual consumes
contaminated seafood harvested from the spill zone. Exposure duration varies depending on spill
conditions. The default assumption for risk assessments generally is 70 years, the average time for a
lifetime exposure. Unlike some other contaminants, however, PAH concentrations in contaminated
nsh and shellsh decrease over time and exposure levels will decline, eventually dropping to back-
ground concentrations. Consequently, exposure periods much shorter than a 70-year lifetime expo-
sure assumption are more realistic and appropriate for PAHs, particularly for oil spills because they are
typically very short-term, pulsed contamination events.
An exposure duration of two years was assumed for the risk calculations for the New Carissa
and Kure oil spills. An exposure duration of ve years was used for the North Cape oil spill calculations
(Mauseth et al. 1997). More conservative exposure assumptions have been made at other spills. Both
ten- and 30-year exposure durations were used in risk calculations for the J N oil spill. Consumption
ulie risks for the Ex on Valdezspill were calculated for both ten and 70-year (lifetime) exposure durations.
x Seafood Consumption Rate (CR): Typically, consumption rates are calculated for average and
upper-end consumers and correspond to the quantity of seafood (units expressed as grams) that an
individual may consume per day. The values used for serving sizes and frequency of seafood meals
are often adjusted, due to the signicant variability in seafood consumption among individuals and
particular groups.
39
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Data from national surveys, such as the Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII)
conducted by USDA, can be used to help estimate national seafood consumption rates. The consump-
tion rate typically used for the average U.S. seafood consumer is 7.5 grams/person/ day. This value
is derived from the assumption that an average seafood consumer eats one 8-ounce (227 grams)
seafood meal (such as a sh llet) once a month (per 70 kg consumer body weight for adults) (USEPA
2000b).
The carcinogenic risk assessment conducted after the Ex on Valdezoil spill used seafood
x consumption rates calculated from subsistence harvest survey data (Bolger et al. 1996; Bolger and
Carrington 1999). Residents of Alaska Native communities rely on local nsh and shellsh resources
for signicant portions of their diets. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence
Consumption had conducted household harvest studies before the spill (Fall 1999; Scott et al. 1992).
Subsistence consumption rates were estimated to be 89 grams/person/day for salmon, 52 grams/
person/ day for other nsh, 21 grams/person/day for crustaceans, and 2 grams/person/day for bivalve
mollusks. Note that these consumption levels are much higher than those derived for the general U.S.
population from national survey data, described above.
The New Carissa and Kure risk assessments used shellsh consumption rates for the aver-
age commercial product consumer of 7.5 g/ day (Challenger and Mauseth 1998; Gilroy 2000). An
upper-end consumption rate of 32.5 g/day (one meal/week) for the New Carissa risk assessment was
based on a reasonable estimate for local recreational harvesters/ consumers (Gilroy 2000). Upper-end
consumption rates of 50g/day and 30g/day were used for the Kure and North Cape risk assessments,
respectively (Mauseth et al. 1997). For the J N oil spill, average consumption rates of lobster were
ulie assumed to be 13.6 g/day.
Seaf A ood dvisoryand A ction L evels f P rom revious U Oil Sp .S. ills
The action or advisory levels resulting from cancer risk calculations differ among spills,
depending on the assumptions made and input values selected. At the New Carissa oil spill, the
Oregon Health Division calculated action levels for average and upper-end shellsh consumers of 45
ppb BaP equivalents (BaPE) and 10 ppb BaPE, respectively (Gilroy 2000). Action levels derived by the
California Department of Health Services for average and upper-end shellsh consumers following
the Kure spill were 34 ppb BaPE and 5 ppb BaPE, respectively. At the North Cape oil spill, the Rhode
Island Department of Health essentially applied a BaPE criterion of 20 ppb for the maximally exposed
lobster consumer over the ve-year exposure duration. Action levels calculated by the Maine Bureau
of Health for lobster consumption after the J N oil spill for ten and 30- year exposure durations
ulie were 50 ppb and 16 ppb BaPE, respectively. Advisory levels for subsistence consumers after the Ex on
x Valdezoil spill, assuming a ten-year exposure period, were three ppb BaPE for salmon, ve ppb BaPE for
nsh, 11 ppb BaPE for crustaceans, and 120 ppb BaPE for bivalve mollusks. Advisory levels based on a
lifetime exposure assumption were approximately an order of magnitude lower. None of the nsh or
shellsh samples collected from harvesting areas near Prince William Sound exceeded these advisory
levels. Interestingly, the upper-bound lifetime cancer risk for Alaskan subsistence seafood consumers
eating the most contaminated bivalve mollusks from the spill area was calculated to be two orders of
magnitude lower than the lifetime risk calculated for consumers of locally smoked salmon (Bolger et al.
1996).
At several of these spills, the calculated action levels were used as recommended levels for
reopening harvest of closed seafood sheries. For example, at the New Carissa oil spill, shellsh were
considered safe if all samples contained less than 10 ppb BaP equivalents. If any shellsh tissue levels
were above 45 ppb BaP equivalents, shellsh in those areas would be considered unsafe, and further
40
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
monitoring considered necessary. If samples contained more than 10 ppb but less than 45 ppb BaP
equivalents, the need for further monitoring would be assessed on a case-by-case basis. A similar
tiered approach was used at the Kure oil spill. If all samples contained less than 5 ppb BaP equivalents,
shellsh beds could be reopened. If any samples contained between 5 and 34 ppb BaP equivalents,
the need for further action before reopening would be assessed. If any samples contained more than
34 ppb BaP equivalents, additional sampling and environmental monitoring prior to reopening would
be considered.
T E he quivalencyA p p roach f Risk A or ssessment
The equivalency approach used in relative cancer risk assessment is a method used for assess-
ing the risk of exposure to a mixture of several different compounds that are related in terms of chemi-
cal and biological activity. Rather than calculating individual risks for each compound, one component
of known potency is used as a standard. Concentrations of each of the other compounds are adjusted
based on their estimated potency relative to the standard, to calculate an equivalent concentration for
the standard. Summing the equivalent concentrations yields a single number from which the cancer
risk can be estimated (ICF-Clements 1988; Bolger and Carrington 1999).
This toxicity equivalency approach has been widely used for mixtures of dioxins and furans,
for example. The relative potencies of individual dioxin and furan compounds are expressed in terms
of 2,3,7,8-tetra-chlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) equivalents. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was chosen as the
standard by which the potency of individual dioxin and furan compounds are estimated because most
laboratory studies on the effects of dioxins have been conducted using 2,3,7,8-TCDD. Data are more
limited on the effects of other congeners. The same approach can be used with petroleum com-
pounds, which also occur in complex mixtures.
BaP equivalency approach for PAH contamination
Bolger and Carrington (1999) provide a good summary of the rationale for using an equiva-
lency approach to risk assessment for PAHs. Toxicological data available for BaP are much better than
data available for any of the other PAHs. Though there is not adequate data to assess risks for indi-
vidual PAHs, there is sufcient study data for several compounds to enable approximation of cancer
potencies relative to BaP. The equivalency approach thereby relies most heavily on data considered
to be the most sound and least likely to need revision. Though the cancer risk calculated by this
method is an estimate, it is more reasonable than estimates obtained either by ignoring all but a few
well-studied compounds or by assuming all congeners have equivalent potencies. On the other hand,
compounds for which there isnt enough toxicity data to calculate a cancer potency relative to BaP are
omitted from the total, even though some of these compounds may contribute to carcinogenicity. As
can be seen from the lists in Table IV-1, few of the PAH compounds typically measured (see Table II-3)
are included in the BaP equivalency total. Furthermore, the PAHs for which cancer potencies relative to
BaP have been calculated occur predominately in pyrogenic rather than petrogenic sources.
The potencies relative to BaP of other PAHs are based primarily on animal bioassay studies.
Estimates of the potencies can differ depending on the studies selected to derive them. For instance,
ICF-Clements (1988) incorporated data into their potency model only if BaP was tested in the same
bioassay system as the other PAHs, in the same laboratory, and at the same time. Different mathemati-
cal models also may yield different potencies. Examples of potencies for PAHs relative to BaP used or
suggested by various agencies and researchers are listed in Table IV-1. Most of these estimates are
similar, though some differ by as much as an order of magnitude.
41
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Ta I -1. R la P Hp ncye tima sde d f va ble V e tive A ote s te rive rom riouss ource .
s
Relative PAH Potency
Compound
Benzo[a]pyrene Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene Pyrene Benzo[b]fluoranthene Benzo[k]fluoranthene Benzo[g,h,i]perylene Fluoranthene Benz[a]anthracene Chrysene Anthanthrene Benzo[j]fluoranthene Benzo[e]pyrene Cyclopentadieno[c,d]-pyrene Anthracene Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Fluorene 2-Methylnaphthalene Naphthalene Phenanthrene 0.145 0.0044 0.320** 0.061
0.004
0.023
0.01
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.1 0.001
a
ICF/EPA
b
USEPA
c
FDA
d
CA EPA
Nisbet &
e
Lagoy
1
5
0.1
0.001
1.0 1.11 0.232 0.081 0.140 0.066 0.022
1.0 1.0 0.1
1.00 1.05 0.25 0.13*
1.00 0.36 0.10
0.1 0.01
0.11 0.07 0.03 0.02* 0.014 0.013
0.10 0.10
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.10 0.01
0.1
0.01
ICF-Clements Associates (1988).
** Identied in Nisbet and LaGoy (1992) as anthracene.
b U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1993).

c U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Contaminants Standards Monitoring and Programs Branch,
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (Bolger et al. 1996)
* Division of Mathematics, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
d California Environmental Protection Agency (1997).

e Nisbet and LaGoy (1992).
Equivalency calculations
To estimate the total amount of PAHs in a sample, it is rst necessary to calculate the weighted
potency for each compound by multiplying the relative potency (see Table IV of the compound by
-1) the concentration (wet weight) of that compound in the tissue sample. The products of these calcula-
tions can then be summed and added to the total amount of BaP in the sample (the product of the
tissue concentration of BaP multiplied by a potency of 1.0) to estimate the total concentration of BaP
equivalents.
42
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
The equation is shown below:

The variables are dened as follows:

TPAH
total PAH exposure

= n = the total number of indicator PAHs exclusive of BaP
y
exposure to the jth indicator PAH
= j
R
relative potency of the jth indicator PAH compared to BaP
= j
x = exposure to BaP
The assumption that exposure to several carcinogenic PAHs in a mixture will have the same
carcinogenic effect as exposure to each compound separately at the same dose (dose additivity
assumption) is reasonable because most PAHs appear to metabolize to similar reactive derivatives
that produce similar histological effects (ICF-Clements 1988).
H uman Consump tion Rate A ssump tions
Ideally, risk assessments should be based on actual seafood consumption levels for the
exposed population rather than default values, such as national averages for consumption rates.
Unfortunately, data on seafood consumption levels may not be readily available for all consumer
groups. Because seafood advisories or harvest restrictions often are based on cancer risk calculations,
it is important to understand how consumption rate assumptions affect cancer risk calculations and,
therefore, may affect seafood management decisions after a spill.
Groups of consumers that may be impacted by contaminated seafood include:
Consumers of commercially harvested seafood;
Consumers of recreationally harvested seafood; and
Subsistence shers and harvesters and their families and communities.
Consumption estimates for consumers of commercially harvested seafood
Consumers of commercially sold products often are not members of the local population in
the spill region where the seafood is harvested, therefore national seafood consumption data may be
appropriate for deriving consumption estimates to use in cancer risk calculations for these consumers.
As summarized by USEPA (2000b), various surveys have reported mean seafood consumption rates
for the general U.S. population ranging from 6.5 - 20.1 g/day, and 95th percentile consumption rates
ranging from 41.7 102 g/day. Rates were based on consumption of commercial and recreational
freshwater, saltwater, and estuarine seafood. Before using rates within these ranges for any actual risk
assessment calculations, it is important to refer to the original data sources. Closures of commercial
sheries and aquaculture have occurred following several recent oil spills, including the Ex on Valdez x ,
Kure, North Cape, J N, and New Carissa. ulie
43
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Consumption estimates for consumers of seafood harvested recreationally or for

subsistence use
Consumers of seafood harvested recreationally or for subsistence use are generally of greater
concern than the general population when estimating risk because they tend to have higher seafood
consumption rates and rely more heavily on local seafood resources for sources of protein. Conse-
quently, these seafood consumers may be at greater risk of health effects than the general population.
National average consumption rates may underestimate their exposure. On the other hand, overesti-
mates of their consumption rates may result in unnecessarily conservative advisories or harvest restric-
tions, limiting use of an important food source, with concomitant detrimental health, economic and
cultural consequences.
For these reasons, we do not recommend using national survey data to develop local risk
assessments if more accurate local seafood consumption information is available or can be collected
and analyzed in a reasonable time frame. Data sources that can provide useful information on com-
munity consumption habits include:
Creel surveys: Creel surveys are conducted by state sh and wildlife management agencies,
and consist of on-site interviews of shers. Information is collected on species, sizes, and quantities of
sh caught and taken home.
Fishing license surveys: Although demographic information on the licenses is limited, a
record of names, addresses, license purchase locations, and duration of shing seasons may be avail-
able, enabling consumption surveys to be conducted through the mail.
Subsistence surveys: Some state agencies conduct periodic subsistence surveys, such as
the baseline research conducted by the Division of Subsistence of the Alaska Department of Fish and
Game on subsistence sh and wildlife use by Alaska Native communities.
Anecdotal information: Useful anecdotal information on consumption habits of non-shers,
especially people from minority and low-income populations who may be sold or given sh privately,
can be gathered by speaking with local community groups in an informal setting.
Behavioral risk surveillance surveys (BRSS): These are random telephone surveys funded by
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Some states have added questions on
sher demographics and consumption.
If it is not possible to use local, community-specic information on seafood consumption by
recreational or subsistence shers, it may be feasible to use survey data generated from a previously
studied representative population that may have similar consumption patterns to the group of inter-
est. Summaries of seafood consumption data obtained from sport and subsistence sher surveys are
shown in Tables IV-2 and IV-3, from USEPA (2000b).
44
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
cons tion ta f E A 000b) .

Ta I -2 S ort h rs
ump da ( rom US P 2 ble V . p s e a
Seafood Consumption Rates (grams/day)

Fisher Group
Mean
Alabama Louisiana
(coastal)
New York New York
(Hudson River)
Michigan Michigan Michigan Wisconsin (10
counties)
Wisconsin (10
counties)
Ontario Los Angeles
Harbor
Washington State
(Commencement
Bay)
Washington State
(Columbia River)
Maine (inland
waters)
7.7 6.4 2.0 13 26
28.1 40.9 14.5 18.3 44.7 12.3 26.1 22.5 37 23 225 54 37.3 63.4 30 62 50 80 45.8 65
Median
80th Percen-
90th Percen-
95th Percen-
tile
tile
tile
50.7
Fish Type
F+S, F+C
F+S, R+C
F+S, F+C
F+S,R
F+S,R
F+S, F+C
F, R
F, R
F, R+C
F, R
S, R
S, R
F+S, R+C
F, R
F = freshwater, S = saltwater, R = recreationally caught, C = commercially caught.

a Sport shers may include individuals who eat sport-caught sh as a large portion of their diets.
Ta I -3 S is nceh rs
ump da ( rom US P 2 ble V . ubs te s e a
cons tion ta f E A 000b) .
Seafood Consumption Rates (grams/day)

Fisher Group
Mean Great Lakes Tribes Columbia River Tribes High-end Caucasian con-
sumers on Lake Michigan
Native Alaskan adults 351 58.7
b
48
c
27
95th Percentile
Max 1,426
Fish Type
F
F
170 144
132
F
F+S
109
F = sh, S = shellsh.
a Subsistence shers include individuals who eat sport-caught sh at high rates but do not sub-
sist on sh as a large part of their diets.
b Data from 1982 survey of sh eaters.
c Data from 1989 survey of sh eaters.
45
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Consumption estimates for other potentially at-risk groups
Other factors that should be considered when estimating risk are age, reproductive status,
general health, and additional occupational or life style exposure potential. For instance, though
young children may eat smaller portions than adults, they may consume signicantly more seafood
per unit body weight. Therefore, a typical risk estimate for a 60-70 kg adult consuming an 8-ounce
portion of seafood over a specied time period may underestimate a childs potential exposure level.
When children are considered in risk assessment calculations, the USEPA uses an average body weight
of 14.5 kg for children under 6 years old. Risks to developing children over a large range of body
weights, however, may not be estimated accurately using this value (USEPA 2000b).
Fetuses may be susceptible to maternal PAH exposure because their enzymatic systems are
too immature to eliminate toxic metabolites that readily pass through the embryonic and fetal blood-
brain barrier. Therefore, it is important to inform women of reproductive age if action levels and con-
sumption limits for PAHs are generated for a carcinogenic endpoint. The elderly, people with certain
diseases, and people who may be exposed to PAHs through smoking or at high levels occupationally
also may be more susceptible to the effects of PAH exposure from seafood consumption than the gen-
eral population. Consequently, it may be advisable for people in these groups to limit their consump-
tion of contaminated seafood to levels below those considered safe for the general population.
Considering that many local seafood consumers may fall into these potentially higher-risk
groups, risk estimates based on average body weights, meal sizes, and consumption estimates for the
general population may not accurately reect actual risk levels of the exposed population. Therefore,
it is important to communicate to the public the assumptions (i.e., body weights, meal sizes, meal fre-
quencies) used to generate risk estimates and action or advisory levels.
For further information on calculating risk-based consumption limits for nsh and shellsh,
see the third edition of the USEPA Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish
Advisories Volume 2: Risk Assessment and Fish Consumption Limits (2000b).
46
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
V.
RISK COMMUNICATION
General Considerations
Risk communication is dened as an interactive process of exchange of information and opin-

ions concerning risk and risk-related factors among risk assessors, risk managers, consumers, and other
interested parties (FAO/WHO 1998). The denition of risk is essential to the discussion. Risk has been
dened as a combination of the probability, or frequency, of occurrence to a dened hazard and the
magnitude of the consequences of the occurrence (Warner 1992 cited in Jones and Hood 1996). Both
technical and social factors should be considered when communicating information on the health and
safety of seafood following an oil spill, particularly when dealing with different groups. The risks and
consequences have different meanings for the subsistence user, sport sher, average consumer, com-
mercial sher, elected ofcial, regulator, and responsible party representative. Regulators and scientists
measure risk quantitatively and accept the uncertainty inherent in the risk-assessment process. The
public perceives risk more qualitatively and subjectively, and is inuenced by prior experience with
similar risks and information made available to them. The public wants to know whether the seafood
is safe to eat; yet the answers given are typically posed in terms of acceptable risk or not a signicant
risk. Risk communicators should be aware of and try to overcome: 1) gaps in knowledge, 2) obstacles
inherent in the uncertainties of scientic risk assessment, and 3) barriers to effective risk communica-
tion (Nighswander and Peacock 1999).
General recommendations f risk communication duringoil sp include:

or ills
General recommendations for risk communication during oil spills include:
Be proactive. Acknowledge and discuss the potential impacts to seafood safety from an oil
spill as soon as possible. Establish a group responsible for assessing the risks to seafood early
and review the risks as necessary as the spill evolves and new information is made available.
Keep the public informed. Tell the public what you are doing to determine whether seafood
safety is at risk. Release information quickly. Publish maps showing where and what type
of seafood samples are being collected, and how they are being tested. Identify a Point of
Contact for further information, and make sure that the public can reach the Point of Contact
without delay. Make sure that the Point of Contact has the most current information and is
prepared to answer questions, or knows how to get answers quickly. Response to all requests
for information is important. Consider a web-based strategy for distributing seafood safety
information, where individuals can check to see whether seafood in their area has been tested
and to obtain test results.
Meet directly with affected groups to discuss the issues and process. Direct meetings with
groups such as commercial shing associations, recreational users, subsistence users, seafood
vendors, etc. providing opportunities to ask questions can be very effective. However, meet-
ings can fail if the risk communicators are not prepared or knowledgeable, or appear to be
withholding information. Specialized bulletins or communication methods may be necessary
for special groups, such as Native American subsistence users and non-English-speaking users.
Use unambiguous terms whenever possible. Health risks are commonly described in terms of
probabilities of cancer based on assumed consumption rates and periods. It is assumed that
carcinogens do not have safe thresholds for exposures; that is, any exposure to a carcinogen
47
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
may pose some cancer risk (USEPA 2000b). However, it is both useful and appropriate to dene
safe and unsafe levels of PAHs in seafood based on risk rates that are commonly considered
to be acceptable. For example, water-quality criteria for carcinogenic contaminants in water
-5 -6. usually use risk rates in the range of 10
to 10
The general public understands the concepts
of acceptable risks, although there may be components of society where these risks conict
with local cultures, such as the Alaska Native subsistence users during the Ex on Valdezoil spill
x (Field et al. 1999). As long as the risk communicators clearly dene what is meant by safe and
unsafe, these terms are appropriate.
L essons L earned f P rom revious Oil Sp ills
The Ex on Valdezand New Carissa oil spills provide examples of the range of issues faced in
x dealing with seafood safety at oil spills and the lessons learned in terms of risk communication. Each is
summarized briey below.
The Ex on Valdezoil spill impacted subsistence seafood users over a distance of nearly 800
x kilometers, affecting 1,750 kilometers of shoreline and the harvest areas of 15 predominantly Alaska
Native villages (Field et al. 1999). It was perceived that seafood safety for subsistence users was
addressed relatively late in the spill response, and the active role of the responsible party in the sea-
food safety studies was a constant source of suspicion on the part of the village residents. Further-
more, there were conicts in terms of the technical guidance for seafood safety (use your own sensory
tests and avoid collecting seafood in areas that showed evidence of oil) and the subsistence users
expectations that chemical testing would provide denitive answers to the questions about whether
it was safe to eat the seafood. An Oil Spill Health Task Force, formed after the spill to deal with sub-
sistence seafood issues, had to deal with the complex cultural issues of Native Alaskan subsistence
users without any guidance or health criteria. In fact, much of the guidance in use today with regard
to seafood risk from petroleum contamination is based on the approach developed by the task force
for this spill. Fall et al. (1999) provided a ten-year perspective on the lessons learned for this spill with a
signicant impact to Native subsistence users:
The active role of the responsible party was met with considerable skepticism and resulted in
perceived conict of interests that affected all phases of data collection, interpretation, and
recommendations.
There were signicant cultural conicts in dening seafood safety and edibility. A spill that
impacted so many animals and habitats was perceived to also have signicant impacts to
human health, regardless of the information provided on actual health risks to consumers in
the impact area.
There was a perceived double standard for subsistence users, compared with commercial
sheries. Some commercial sheries were closed within the rst year after the spill, applying a
zero-tolerance policy in order to protect the market for Alaskan salmon, which was not based
on concerns about consumer safety. In contrast, subsistence users were told to avoid oiled
areas and not eat food that smelled or tasted like oil.
There was a need for direct communication with village residents, especially during the rst
year when concerns were greatest. Individual community members will not necessarily receive
health-safety information distributed to community representatives. Formal mechanisms are
needed for soliciting feedback and evaluating how well the risk communication efforts are
being received.
48
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
x In contrast to the Ex on Valdezoil spill, the New Carissa oil spill outside Coos Bay, Oregon
occurred in a region of commercial and recreational sheries where health advisories are routine. The
Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) regulates commercial shellsh harvest under a strict water
quality standard set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which assumes there may be raw con-
sumption of the product. Commercial sheries are routinely closed depending on the amount of rain-
fall within specic watersheds, based on established correlations between rainfall and coliform counts.
Rainfall closures are a common occurrence, and there are established communication mechanisms
for notication of rainfall closures and openings. With regard to recreational sheries, clamming and
mussel harvesting are often closed due to domoic acid or amnesic shellsh poisoning. Figures V-1
and V-2 show ofcial notications for closure and opening of shellsh harvests during the New Carissa
oil spill. Commercial and recreational users are accustomed to notications of closures and openings
based on accepted criteria for seafood safety. The closure of both commercial and recreational shell-
sh harvests during the New Carissa oil spill was met with limited resistance and confusion because of
this established relationship between the regulator and user communities.
49
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
F ureV Comme l s e s ha s clos noticeis ue duringth Nw Ca s oil s ill.

ig -1. rcia h llh rve t ure s d e e ris a p
To: Interested Parties
From: Date: Subject: Oregon Department of Agriculture, Shellsh Program
February 1 7, 1 999 (corrected update)
Status of Commercial Shellsh Rainfall Closure
Commercial shellsh harvest is regulated by the Department of Agriculture (ODA) under a strict water
quality standard set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which assumes there may be raw
consumption of the product. ODA does not close recreational shellsh areas without the cooperation of
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODF&W). When sewage or biotoxin contamination is evident,
this agency will confer with ODF&W, DEQ and local county health departments to determine whether
recreational shellsh harvesters are at risk and if they should be notied that shellsh harvest is closed.
Call (503) 986-4720.
Nehalem Bay remains closed. Nehalem R did not fall below 7 since it peaked on 2/8. Nehalem closes if
rainfall at Tillamook over 1 in 24 hrs (new plan using river stage in works).
Tillamook Bay, Main Bay closed today, February 1 7, 1 999. The Wilson rose above 7 about 1 am today.
The Main Bay is closed when Wilson R. exceeds 7.0.
Cape Meares Area of Tillamook Bay remains closed. Cape Meares is closed for 7 days if 24 hrs rainfall
exceeds 1or when Wilson R. exceeds 7.0.
Netarts Bay is open. This bay is closed for shellsh toxin events or ooding catastrophes.
Yaquina Bay, Main River, is open. This area closes for 5 days when Toledo rainfall exceeds 1.5/24 hrs or
if 3 days accumulative rain exceeds 3 .
Winchester Bay and the Umpqua River to Big Bend, remains closed for rainfall; and harvest
restrictions are ongoing due to potential for contamination from the New Carissa oil spill. This
area closes for 7 days when the river exceeds 7.5 or > 1.5/24 hrs.
Umpqua R. Triangle, So Jetty, closed today February 1 7, 1 999 for rainfall/river ht; and harvest
restrictions are ongoing due to potential for contamination from the New Carissa oil spill. The
Umpqua went over 12 at around 4pm today. This area closes for 5 days if Umpqua R. @ Elkton exceeds
12 or rainfall > 2.0/24 hrs.
Lower Coos Bay is closed; harvest restrictions are ongoing due to potential for contamination
from the New Carissa oil spill. (down bay from No. Bend airport) is not closed for rainfall events.
Upper Coos Bay, opened February 1 2, 1 999 from rainfall closure; but harvest restrictions are
ongoing due to potential for contamination from the New Carissa oil spill. Upper Coos is closed 5
days if 24 hr rainfall exceeds 1.5 or 3 day accumulative rainfall exceeds 3
South & Joe Ney Sloughs opened, February 1 2, 1 999 from rainfall closure; but harvest restrictions
are ongoing due to potential for contamination from the New Carissa oil spill. So Slough is closed 5
days if 24 hr rainfall exceeds 1.5 or 3 day accumulative rainfall exceeds 3 In addition to rainfall criteria,
Upper So. Slough (area above Younker Pt) closes when tidal exchange exceeds 7.5. During tidal closures
growers may tend but not move shellstock.
50
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
F ureV . S e s h rve t clos noticeis ue duringth Nw Ca s oil s ill.

ig -2 h llh a s ure s d e e ris a p
Lower Coos Bay and the Charleston Boat Basin Area Added to Clamming and Mussel Closure Due
to Oil Leaks From the New Carissa
Oy Harvesting on Hold
ster February 1 2, 1 999. The Oregon Department of Agriculture is adding Lower Coos Bay and the Charles-
ton Boat Basin to the areas closed to shellsh harvesting as result of the oil spilling from the New Carissa.
Surveys of the area made today indicate that oil sheen and oil globules are visible in these areas. The
upper boundary for the Lower Coos Bay closure is the railroad bridge above North Bend; the upper
boundary for the boat basin area closure is the Charleston Bridge.
Mussel and clam harvesting was prohibited on the beaches in Coos and Douglas counties yesterday
due to possible contamination from the New Carissa oil spill. The extent of contamination on the
beaches and bays is being surveyed today. These areas remain closed at this time. The public should
take heed of any signs on Coos and Douglas County beaches and bays that alert them to shellsh clo-
sures.
The Department has required oyster growers to limit harvesting to areas that have been surveyed and
conrmed to be unaffected by the spread of oil. This is an ongoing process due to the changing tides
and the survey reporting process. At this time no oil has been seen in the oyster growing areas. Com-
mercial oyster harvest will be prohibited from any areas contaminated by oil. There are inspectors on
the scene to inspect shellsh and assure commercial shellsh safety.
The Department is in contact with natural resource advisors at the incident command and will keep the
public and the commercial industry advised of shellsh safety information.
For more information call the Department of Agricultures shellsh information line at (503) 986-4728 or
Ron McKay at (503) 986-4720.
CommunicatingRelative Risks
Risk communicators commonly compare the relative risk of a specic activity to known risks
of other activities. For example, the public is accustomed to hearing the risks of death by automobile
accident or airplane crash. These are considered voluntary risks taken by people who decide to drive
or y after considering the risks and benets associated with these activities, whether or not their per-
ceptions are realistic. The public generally will accept risks from voluntary activities that are roughly
1,000 times greater than involuntary risks that provide the same level of benets (Starr 1996).
Because the potential human-health risks from eating seafood contaminated by an oil spill are
associated with PAHs, it is tempting to compare the PAH levels in seafood samples with those found
in other food sources. PAHs are ubiquitous contaminants, measurable in many foods. Table V sum-
-1 marizes the levels of PAHs in some commonly consumed foods. Based on information from previous
spills, PAH levels in seafood from oil-spill-contaminated waters generally are considerably lower than
PAH levels found in smoked foods. During the Ex on Valdezoil spill, however, village community resi-
x dents became upset when it was pointed out that samples of smoked sh from the villages contained
carcinogenic hydrocarbon levels hundreds of times higher than any shellsh samples collected from
oiled beaches, and nearly 10,000 times higher than wild salmon (Nighswander and Peacock 1999). The
residents considered eating smoked salmon to be an acceptable, voluntary risk, and eating oil-con-
taminated seafood to be an involuntary, unacceptable risk. Guidelines for risk communication include
being sensitive to the distinction between voluntary and involuntary risk, and avoiding risk compari-
sons that equate the two (Chess et al. 1994). Risk comparisons should be made carefully.
51
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Ta V P H in f ( olg r a Ca ton 19 9 .
ble -1. A s oods B e nd rring 9)
Source
Corn oil Smoked meat and fish Bakers yeast Kale
PAH (ppb or g/kg)

2-10 10-20 10-350 60-500
B[a]P (ppb or g/kg)
0.4-1.0
0.3-60
2-40
13-48
52
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
VI. Literature Cited
Ackman, R.G. and H. Heras. 1992. Tainting by short-term exposure of Atlantic salmon to water soluble
petroleum hydrocarbons. In Proceedings of the 15th Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Program T echnical Semi-
nar. Environment Canada, Ottawa. 2:757-762.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1995. Toxicological Prole for Polycyclic
Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health
Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1994. Compilation of ASTM Standard Denitions,
Eighth Edition. Philadelphia: ASTM.
Bender, M.E., P.O. DeFur, and R.J. Huggett. 1986. Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon monitoring in estu-
aries utilizing: oysters, brackish water clams and sediments. In Oceans 86 Conference Record,Monitoring
Strategies Sy mposium,Vol. 3. Piscataway, New Jersey and Washington, D.C.: Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers and Marine Technology Society. pp. 791-796.
Boehm, P.D. and J.G. Quinn. 1977. The persistence of chronically accumulated hydrocarbons in the hard
shell clam Mercenaria mercenaria. Marine Biology44: 227-233.
Bolger, M. and C. Carrington. 1999. Hazard and risk assessment of crude oil in subsistence seafood sam-
ples from Prince William Sound: lessons learned from the Ex on Valdez In L. Jay Field et al. (eds.). Evalu-
x . ating and Communicating Subsistence Seafood Safetyin a Cross-Cultural Contex Lessons Learned from
t: the Ex on ValdezOil Spill. Pensacola: Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. pp. 195-204.
x Bolger, M., S.H. Henry, and C.D. Carrington. 1996. Hazard and risk assessment of crude oil contaminants
in subsistence seafood samples from Prince William Sound. American Fisheries Sy mposium 18:837-843.
California Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Public health goals for benzo[a]pyrene in drinking
water. Sacramento: Pesticide and Environmental Toxicology Section, Ofce of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment.
Challenger, G.E. and G.S. Mauseth. 1998. Closing and opening sheries following oil spills; a case study
in Humboldt Bay, California. In Proceedings of the 21st Arctic and Marine Oilspill Program T echnical Semi-
nar,Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, June 10-12, 1998, 1:167-179.
Chess, C., B.J. Hance, and P.M. Sandman. 1994. Improving dialogue with communities: a short guide for
government risk communication. New Brunswick, New Jersey: New Jersey Department of Environmen-
tal Protection, Division of Science and Research and Environmental Communication Research Program;
New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station; and Cook College, Rutgers University.
Coates, P.J. 1998. The Sea Empress oil spill and its effect on the shermen and sheries of South West
Wales. In R. Edwards and H. Sime (eds.). The Sea Empress Oil Spill. London: The Chartered Institution of
Water and Environmental Management. pp. 137-151.
Conover, R.J. 1971. Some relations between zooplankton and bunker C oil in Chedabucto Bay following
the wreck of the tanker Arrow. J ournal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 28:1327-1330.
Davies, J.M., A.D. McIntosh, R. Stagg, G. Topping, and J. Rees. 1997. The fate of the Braer oil in the marine
and terrestrial environments. In J.M. Davies and G. Topping (eds.). The Impact of an Oil Spill in Turbulent
Waters: The Braer. Edinburgh: The Stationery Ofce LTD. pp. 26-41.
Davis, H.K., E.N. Geelhoed, A.W. MacCrae, and P. Howgate. 1992. Sensory analysis of trout tainted by
diesel fuel in ambient water. Water Science T echnology25:11-18.
53
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Davis, H.K., N. Shepherd, and C.F. Moffat. 1995. Uptake and depuration of oil taint from sh. In Proceed-
ings of the Second International Research and Development Conference, International Maritime Organiza-
tion, London, pp. 353-361.
DiSalvo, L.H., H.E. Guard, and L. Hunter. 1975. Tissue hydrocarbon burden of mussels as potential moni-
tor of environmental hydrocarbon insult. Environ Science & T echnology9:247-251.
Ernst, R., J. Carter, and N. Ratnayake. 1989a. Tainting and toxicity in sea scallops (Placopecten magellan-
cius) exposed to the water-soluble fraction of Scotian Shelf natural gas condensate. Dartmouth, Nova
Scotia: Marine Environment Protection Branch, Environment Canada.
Ernst, R.J., W.M.N. Ratnayake, T.E. Farquharson, R.G. Ackman, W.G. Tidmarsh, and J.A. Carter. 1989b. Taint-
ing of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) by petroleum hydrocarbons. In F.R. Engelhardt et al. (eds.) Drilling
Wastes. New York: Elsevier Applied Science. pp. 827-839.
Fall, James A. 1999. Changes in subsistence uses of sh and wildlife resources following the Exxon
V aldez oil spill. In: L. Jay Field et al. (eds). Evaluating and Communicating Subsistence Seafood Safetyin a
Cross-Cultural Contex Lessons Learned from the Ex on ValdezOil Spill. Pensacola: Society of Environmen-
t: x tal Toxicology and Chemistry. pp. 51-104.
Fall, J.A. and L.J. Field. 1996. Subsistence uses of sh and wildlife before and after the Ex on Valdezoil
x mposium 18:819-836.
spill. American Fisheries SocietySy Fall, J.A., L.J. Field, T.S. Nighswander, J.E. Stein, and M. Bolger. 1999. Overview of lessons learned from
the Ex on Valdezoil spill: a 10-year retrospective. In L.J. Field et al. (eds.). Evaluating and Communicating
x Subsistence Seafood Safetyin a Cross-Cultural Contex Lessons Learned from the Ex on ValdezOil Spill.
t: x Pensacola: Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. pp. 237-269.
Field, L.J., J.A. Fall, T.S. Nighswander, N. Peacock, and U. V aranasi (eds.). 1999. Evaluating and Communicat-
ing Subsistence Seafood Safetyin a Cross-Cultural Contex Lessons Learned from the Ex on ValdezOil Spill.
t: x Pensacola: Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 338 pp.
Fingas, M., B. Fieldhouse, and J. Mullin. 1994. Studies of water-in-oil emulsions and techniques to mea-
sure emulsion treating agents. In Proceeding of the 17th Arctic and Marine Oilspill Program T echnical
Seminar, V ancouver, British Columbia, June, 8-10, 1998, 1:213-244.
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization (FAO/WHO). 1998. Joint FAP/WHO
expert consultation on the application of risk communication to food standards and safety matters,
February 2-6, 1998, Italian Ministry of Health, Rome.
Food Technology Sensory Evaluation Division. 1981. Sensory evaluation guide for testing food and
beverage products. Food Technology35(11):50-59.
French, D.P. 1998. Modeling the impacts of the North Cape oil spill. In Proceedings of the 21st Arctic
Marine Oil Spill Program T echnical Seminar, Environment Canada, Ottawa, 1: 387-430.
French, D.P. 2000. Estimation of oil toxicity using an additive toxicity model. In Proceedings of the 23rd
Arctic Marine Oil Spill Program Technical Seminar, Environment Canada, Ottawa, 1: 561-600.
Fucik, K.W. and J.M. Neff. 1977. Effects of temperature and salinity on naphthalenes uptake in the
temperate clam Rangia cuneata and the boreal clam Protothaca staminea. In W.D. Wolfe (ed.) Fate and
Effects of Petroleum Hy drocarbons in Marine Organisms and Ecosy stems. New York: Pergamon Press. pp.
305-312.
GESAMP (IMO/FAO/UNESCO/WMO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientic Aspects
of Marine Pollution). 1977. Impact of oil on the marine environment. Reports and Studies No. 6. Rome:
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 250 pp.
54
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Gilroy, D.J. 2000. Derivation of shellsh harvest reopening criteria following the New Carissa oil spill in
Coos Bay, Oregon. J ournal ofT icologyand Environmental Health,Part A,60:317-329.
ox Hayes, M.O. and J. Michel. 1999. Factors determining the long-term persistence of Ex on Valdezoil in
x gravel beaches. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38:92-101.
Hellou J. 1996. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in marine mammals, nsh, and mollusks. In G.H.
Heinz and A.W. Redmon-Norwood (eds.). Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue
Concentrations. Boca Raton, Florida: Lewis Publishers. pp. 229-250.
Heras, H., R.G. Ackman, and E.J. MacPherson. 1992. Tainting of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) by petro-
leum hydrocarbons during a short-term exposure. Marine Pollution Bulletin 24:310-315.
Heras, H., S. Zhou, and R.G. Ackman. 1993. Uptake and depuration of petroleum hydrocarbons by
Atlantic salmon: effect of different lipid levels. In Proceedings of the 16th Arctic Marine Oil Spill Program
Technical Seminar 1:343-351.
Howgate, P., P.R. Mackie, K.J. Whittel, J. Farmer, A.D. McIntyre, and A. Eleftheriou. 1977. Petroleum tainting
in sh. Rapports et proces-verbaux des reunions. In Conseil permanent international pour lex ploration
de la Mer 171:143-146.
Hufnagle, L.C. Jr., S.E. Camarata, D. Ernest, C.A. Krone, S.-L. Chan, and M.M. Krahn. 1999. Development and
application of a high-performance liquid chromatography screening method for aromatic compounds
in invertebrate tissues. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Tox icology37:220-226.
ICF-Clements Associates. 1988. Comparative potency approach for estimating the cancer risk associ-
ated with exposure to mixtures of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Interim nal report EPA 68/02/
4403. Fairfax, Virginia: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). 1994. EPAs carcinogenicity risk assessment verication
endeavor work group. Cincinnati: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Criteria and
Assessment Ofce.
International Standards Organization (ISO). 1992. Sensory Analysis Methodology V ocabulary.
Report ISO 5942. Geneva: ISO.
Jacques Whitford Environment Limited. 1992. Characteristics of tainting in farmed Atlantic salmon and
cultured blue mussels, exposed to water soluble fractions of Brent crude oil and Scotian Shelf conden-
sate. Dartmouth, Nova Scotia: Marine Environment Protection Branch, Environment Canada. 30 pp.
Javitz, H. 1980. Seafood consumption data analysis. Final Report. EPA 68/01/3887. Washington, D.C.:
Ofce of Water Regulations and Standards. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Jokuty, P, S. Whiticar, Z. Wang, M. Fingas, B. Fieldhouse, P. Lambert, and J. Mullin. 1999. Properties of crude
oils and oil products. EE-165. Ottawa, Ontario: Environment Canada.
Jones, D. and C. Hood. 1996. Introduction. In: C. Hood and D.K.C Jones (eds.). Accident and Design: Con-
temporaryDebates in Risk Management. London: UCL Press.
Jordan, R.E. and J.R. Payne. 1980. Fate and Weathering of Petroleum Spills in the Marine Environment. Ann
Arbor: Ann Arbor Science. 174 pp.
Jovanovich, M.C. and K.R. Marion. 1987. Seasonal variation in uptake and depuration of anthracene by
the brackish water clam Rangia cuneata. Marine Biology95:395-403.
Kennedy, C.J., K.A.Gill, and P.J. Walsh. 1989. Thermal modulation of benzo[a]pyrene uptake in the gull
toadsh, Opsanus beta. Environmental T icologyand Chemistry8:863-869. ox
55
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Kingston, P. 1999. Recovery of the marine environment following the Braer spill, Shetland. In Proceed-
ings 1999 Oil Spill Conference, Seattle, Washington, March 8-11, 1999, pp. 103-109.
Krahn, M.M., D.G. Burrows, G.M. Ylitalo, D.W. Brown, C.A. Wigren, T.K. Collier, S-L. Chan, and U. V aranasi.
1992. Mass spectrometric analysis for aromatic compounds in bile of sh sampled after the Ex on
x Valdezoil spill. Environmental Science & T echnology26(1): 116-126.
Krahn, M.M., T.K. Collier, and D.C. Malins. 1982. Aromatic hydrocarbon metabolites in sh: automated
extraction and high-performance liquid chromatographic separation into conjugate and non-conju-
gate fractions. J ournal of Chromatography236:441-452.
Krahn, M.M., L.K. Moore, and W.D. MacLeod, Jr. 1986. Standard Analytical Procedures of the NOAA
National Analytical Facility, 1986: Metabolites of aromatic compounds in sh bile. NOAA Technical
Memorandum NMFS F/NWC-102. Seattle: National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
Krahn, M.M., M.S. Myers, D.G. Burrows, and D.C. Malins. 1984. Determination of metabolites of xenobiot-
enobiotica 14(8):633-646.
ics in the bile of sh from polluted waterways. X Krahn, M.M, G.M. Ylitalo, J. Buzitis, J.L. Bolton, C.A. Wigren, S-L. Chan, and U. V aranashi. 1993a. Analyses for
petroleum-related contaminants in marine sh and sediments following the Gulf oil spill. Marine Pollu-
tion Bulletin 27:285-292.
Krahn, M.M., G.M. Ylitalo, J. Buzitis, S.-L.-Chan, and U. V aranasi. 1993b. Rapid high-performance liquid
chromatographic methods that screen for aromatic compounds in environmental samples. J ournal of
Chromatography642:15-32.
Krahn, M.M., G. M. Ylitalo, J. Buzitis, S.-L. Chan, U. V aranasi, T.L. Wade, T.J. Jackson, J.M. Brooks, D.A. Wolfe,
and C-A. Manen. 1993c. Comparison of high-performance liquid chromatography/uorescence screen-
ing and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis for aromatic compounds in sediments
sampled after the Ex on Valdezoil spill. Environmental Science & T x echnology27(4):699-708.
Krahn, M.M., G.M. Ylitalo, J. Buzitis, C.A. Krone, J.E. Stein, S.-L.-Chan, and U. V aranasi. 1993d. Screening
methods for assessing damage to natural resources following the Ex on Valdezoil spill. In Proceedings
x of the 1993 Oil Spill Conference, Tampa, Florida, March 29-April 1, 1993. pp. 872-873.
Krahn, M.M., G.M. Ylitalo, J. Joss, and S.-L.-Chan. 1991. Rapid, semi-quantitative screening of sediments
for aromatic compounds using sonic extraction and HPLC/uorescence analysis. Marine Environmental
Research 31:175-196.
Landrum, P.F. 1982. Uptake, depuration, and biotransformation of anthracene by the scud Pontoporeia
hoy Chemosphere 11:1049-1057.
i. Lauenstein, G.G. and A.Y. Cantillo (eds.). 1993. Sampling and analytical methods of the National Status
and Trends Program, National Benthic Surveillance and Mussel Watch Projects 1984-1992, V IV Com-
ol. , prehensive descriptions of trace organic analytical methods. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOAA
ORCA 71. Silver Spring, Maryland: Ofce of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment, NOAA. 181
pp.
Law, R.J. and J. Hellou. 1999. Contamination of sh and shellsh following oil spill incidents. Environ-
mental Geoscience 6:90-98.
Law, R.J., C.A. Kelly, K.L. Graham, R.J. Woodhead, P.E.J. Dyrynda, and E.A. Dyrynda. 1997. Hydrocarbons
and PAHs in sh and shellsh from southwest Wales following the Sea Empress oil spill in 1996. In Pro-
ceedings 1997 International Oil Spill Conference, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, April 7-10, 1997, pp. 205-211.
56
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Lehr, W, D. Wesley, D. Simecek-Beatty, R. Jones, G. Kachook and J. Lankford. 2000. Algorithm and Inter-
face Modications of the NOAA Oil Spill Behavior Model. In Proceedings of the 23rd Arctic and Marine Oil
Spill Technical Seminar, V ancouver, British Columbia, June, 14-16, 2000, 2:525-540.
Lockhart, W.L. and R.W. Danell. 1992. Field and experimental tainting of arctic freshwater sh by crude
and rened petroleum products. In Proceedings of the 15th Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Program Technical
Seminar, Edmonton, Alberta, pp. 763-771.
Mackenzie, K.M. and D.M. Angevine. 1981. Infertility in mice exposed in utero to benzo[a]pyrene. Biol-
ogyof Reproduction 24:183-191.
Marsh, J.W., J.K. Chipman, and D.R. Livingstone. 1992. Activation of xenobiotics to reactive and muta-
genic products by the marine invertebrates My tilus edulis, Carcinus maenus, and Asterias rubens. Aquatic
T icology22:115-128.
ox Mauseth, G.S. and G.E. Challenger. 2001. Trends in Rescinding Seafood Harvest Closures Following Oil
Spills. In Proceeding of the 2001 International Oil Spill Conference, Tampa, Florida, March 26-29, 2001, pp.
679-684.
Mauseth, G..S., C.A. Martin, and K. Whittle. 1997. Closing and reopening sheries following oil spills;
three different cases with similar problems. In Proceedings of the 21st Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Program
ancouver, British Columbia, Canada, June 11-13, 1997, 2:1283-1303.
Technical Seminar, V McAuliffe, C.D. 1987. Organism exposure to volatile/soluble hydrocarbons from crude oil spills-a eld
and laboratory comparison. In Proceedings 1987 Oil Spill Conference, Baltimore, Maryland, April 6-9, 1987,
pp. 275-288.
Meador, J.P., R. Stein, and U. V aranasi. 1995. Bioaccumulation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by
marine organisms. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and T icology143:79-165.
ox Mearns, A.J. 1995. Elements to be considered in assessing the effectiveness and effects of shoreline
countermeasures. Spill Science & TechnologyBulletin 2:5-10.
Mearns, A.J., G. Lauenstein, and T. OConnor. 1998. The U.S. Mussel Watch: Nationwide geographic and
longterm trends of PAHs in coastal mussels and oysters. In Proceedings of the 21st Arctic and Marine Oil
Spill Technical Seminar 1:465-472.
Mearns, A.J., T.P. OConnor, and G.G. Lauenstein. 1999. Relevance of the national mussel watch program
to seafood sheries management issues during oil spill response. In Proceedings 1999 International Oil
Spill Conference, Seattle, Washington, March 8-11, 1999, pp. 701-708.
Mearns, A.J. and R. Yender. 1997. Workshop on managing seafood problems during the response phase
of an oil spill. In Proceedings of the 20th Arctic and Marine Oil Spill T echnical Seminar 1:203-217.
Michel, J. 2000. Interim Preassessment Report, M/ New Carissa Oil Spill, Coos Bay and Waldport,
V Oregon. Silver Spring, Maryland: Damage Assessment Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. 84 pp. and appendices.
Moller, T.H., B. Dicks, and C.N. Goodman. 1989. Fisheries and mariculture affected by oil spills. In Proceed-
ings 1989 Oil Spill Conference, San Antonio, Texas, February 13-16, 1989, pp. 389-394.
Moller, T. H., B. Dicks, K.J. Whittle, and M. Girin. 1999. Fishing and harvesting bans in oil spill response. In
Proceedings 1999 International Oil Spill Conference, Seattle, Washington, March 8-11, 1999. pp. 693-699.
Motohiro, T. and Z. Iseya. 1976. Effects of water polluted by oil on aquatic organisms. II. n-parafns,
aromatic hydrocarbons and crude oil concentration on taint in scallop (Pecten y essoensis). Bulletin of the
Hokkaido UniversityFacultyof Fisheries 26:367-371.
57
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and American Petroleum Institute (API).
1994. Inland oil spills: Options for minimizing environmental impacts of freshwater spill response.
American Petroleum Institute Publ. No. 4558. Seattle and Washington, D.C.: NOAA and API. 130 pp.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and American Petroleum Institute (API).
2001. Environmental considerations for marine oil spill response. American Petroleum Institute Publica-
tion No. 4706. Seattle and Washington, D.C.: NOAA and API.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Rhode Island Department of Environmen-
tal Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1999. Restoration plan and environmental assess-
ment for the January 19, 1996 North Cape oil spill. Silver Spring, Maryland: Damage Assessment Center,
Ofce of Response and Restoration.
National Research Council (NRC). 1983. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the aquatic environment:
Formation, sources, fate and effects on aquatic biota. NRCC 18981. Washington, D.C: National Academy
Press. pp. 106-107.
National Research Council (NRC). 1985. Oil in the Sea: Inputs,Fates,and Effects. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press. 601 pp.
National Research Council (NRC). 1999. Spills of Nonoating Oils: Risk and Response. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press. 75 pp.
National Research Council (NRC). 2002. Oil in the Sea III: Inputs. Washington, D.C.: National Academy
Press. 260 pp. + appendices.
Nighswander, T. and N. Peacock. 1999. The communication of health risk from subsistence seafood in
a cross-cultural setting: Lessons learned from the Ex on Valdez In L.J. Field et al. (eds). Evaluating and
x . Communicating Subsistence Seafood Safetyin a Cross-Cultural Contex Lessons Learned from the Ex on
t: x ValdezOil Spill. Pensacola: Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. pp. 205-236.
Nisbet, I.C.T. and P.K. LaGoy. 1992. Toxic Equivalency Factors (TEFs) for polycyclic aromatic hydrocar-
bons (PAHs). RegulatoryT icologyand Pharmacology16:290-300.
ox Payne, J.R. and W.B. Driskell. 1999. Analysis of water samples collected in support of the M/ New Carissa
V oil spill natural resource damage assessment. Silver Spring, Maryland: Damage Assessment Center,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 69 pp.
Reilly, T. I. and R.K. York. 2001. Guidance on sensory testing and monitoring of seafood for presence of
petroleum taint following an oil spill. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OR&R 9. Seattle: Ofce of
Response and Restoration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 109 pp.
RPI International, Inc. 1987. Natural resource response guide: Marine sh. Seattle: Ocean Assessments
Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 95 pp.
RPI International, Inc. 1989. Natural resource response guide: Marine shellsh. Seattle: Ocean Assess-
ments Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 95 pp.
Salazar, M.H. and S. M. Salazar. 2001. Standard guide for conducting in-situ eld bioassays with marine,
estuarine and freshwater bivalves. In 2001 Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Philadelphia: American Soci-
ety for Testing and Materials.
Sauer, T.C., and P.D. Boehm. 1995. Hydrocarbon chemistry analytical methods for oil spill assessments.
MSRC Technical Report Series 95-032. Washington, D.C.: Marine Spill Response Corporation 114 pp.
Scott, C.L., A.W. Paige, G. Jennings, and L. Brown. 1992. Community prole database catalog. Technical
Paper 104. Juneau: Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence.
58
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Shigenaka, G. and C.B. Henry, Jr. 1995. Use of mussels and semipermeable membrane devices to assess
bioavailability of residual polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons three years after the Ex on Valdezoil spill.
x In G. Wells et al. (eds.). Ex on ValdezOil Spill: Fate and Effects in Alaskan Waters. ASTM STP 1219. Philadel-
x phia: American Society for Testing and Materials. pp. 239-260.
Shigenaka, G. (ed.). 1997. Integrating physical and biological studies of recovery from the Ex on Valdez x
oil spill. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 114. Seattle: Ofce of Ocean Resources Conserva-
tion and Assessment, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 206 pp.
Spacie, A. and J.L. Hamelink. 1982. Alternative models for describing the bioconcentration of organics
in sh. Environmental T icologyand Chemistry1:309-320.
ox Starr, C. 1996. Social benet versus technological risk. Science 165:1232-1238.
Topping, G., J.M. Davies, P.R. Mackie, and C.F. Moffat. 1997. The impact of the Braer spill on commercial
sh and shellsh. In J.M. Davies and G. Topping (eds.). The Impact of an Oil Spill in Turbulent Waters: The
Braer. Edinburgh: The Stationery Ofce LTD. pp. 121-143.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1993. Provisional guidance for quantitative risk assess-
ment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. EPA/600/R-93/089. Final Draft. Cincinnati: Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Ofce, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 20 pp.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1994. USEPA contract laboratory program national
functional guidelines for organic data review. Publication 9240.1-05. Washington, D.C.: Ofce of Emer-
gency and Remedial Response, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2000a. Guidance for assessing chemical contaminant
data for use in sh advisories, V olume 1: Fish sampling and analysis, Third Edition. EPA 823/ 00/007.
B/ Washington, D.C.: Ofce of Science and Technology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2000b. Guidance for assessing chemical contaminant
data for use in sh advisories, V olume 2: Risk assessment and sh consumption limits, Third Edition.
EPA 823/B/00/008. Washington, D.C.: Ofce of Science and Technology, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
V aranasi, U., J.E. Stein, M. Nishimoto. 1989. Biotransformation and disposition of polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH) in sh. In: U. V aranasi (ed.). Metabolism of Poly clic Aromatic Hy cy drocarbons in the
Aquatic Environment. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. pp. 94-149.
Whittle, K.J., D.A. Anderson, P.R. Mackie, C.F. Moffat, N.J. Shephard, and A.H. McVicar. 1997. The impact of
the Braer oil on caged salmon. In J.M. Davies and G. Topping (eds.). The Impact of an Oil Spill in Turbulent
Waters: The Braer. Edinburgh: The Stationery Ofce LTD. pp. 144-160.
59
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
VII. Glossary of Terms
API gravity: An arbitrary scale expressing the gravity or density of liquid petroleum products. The
petroleum industry uses API gravity rather than density because the API scale provides greater dis-
tinction between different kinds of oils than does specic gravity. The measuring scale is calibrated in
terms of degrees API. API gravity is determined by the equation API at 60F = 141.5/oil density -131.5.
API gravity is based on the density of pure water with an arbitrary API gravity value of 10. The higher
the API gravity, the lighter the product. Light crude oils generally exceed 38 degrees API and heavy
crude oils are commonly labeled as all crude oils with an API gravity of 22 degrees or below. Interme-
diate crude oils fall in the range of 22 degrees to 38 degrees API gravity. Most oils have densities that
are less than water and will generally oat on the water surface. Oils with a specic gravity greater
than 1.0 (API gravity of less than 10) will sink in fresh water (which has a specic gravity of 1.0 and an
API gravity of 10). Non-oating oils in seawater have a specic gravity greater than 1.02 or an API grav-
ity less than 7.
Adulteration: A food is deemed to be adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleteri-
ous substance that may render it injurious to health, or if it contains any lthy, putrid, or decomposed
substances, or if it is otherwise unt for food.
Advection: The transport of oil by water currents.
Aerial observation: Trained experts y in helicopters or airplanes to make systematic observations
on the position of oil slicks and stranded oil, oceanographic features that might inuence oil behavior
(such as eddies, rip currents, river outow plumes, current speeds), distribution of wildlife (birds, turtles,
marine mammals), or the effectiveness of response operations (dispersant applications, skimming).
Aliphatics: Hydrocarbon compounds composed of straight or branched chains of hydrogen and
carbon. They have low water solubility and low aquatic toxicity. The low molecular weight compounds
have high rates of microbial degradation.
Aromatics: Hydrocarbon compounds that contain one or more benzene rings. Mono-aromatics
include benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) (also
sometimes referred to as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons) contain two or more benzene rings.
Most of the toxicity of oil to water-column organisms results from the low molecular weight aromatic
compounds.
Asphaltenes: Large, heavy compounds in oil that weather extremely slowly. Not present in light,
rened products such as gasoline and diesel. Can be the dominant group of compounds in heavy
rened oils.
Barrel: A volume measure of oil = 42 U.S. gallons.
Benthos/Benthic: Animals associated with the bottom of a body of water. If the animals are on the
surface, they are called epifauna; if they live in the sediment, they are called infauna.
Bioaccumulation: The net accumulation of a substance by an organism as a result of uptake from all
environmental sources and all possible routes of exposure, including contact, respiration, and inges-
tion.
Bioconcentration: The net accumulation of a substance as a result of uptake directly from aqueous
solution.
60
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Biodegradation: The breakdown of substances such as oil by microbes (bacteria, fungi, yeast) as they
use it as a food source. Intermediate products are formed during the process, but the nal products
are carbon dioxide and water. This process is limited to a great extent by temperature, nutrient and
oxygen availability, and the amount of oil present.
Biomagnication: The increase in body burden of a contaminant with trophic level.
Density of oil (specic and API gravity): Mass of a given volume of oil (in grams/ 3
used to dene
cm
) light and heavy oils. Also measured in specic gravity (the oils relative density compared with that
of water at 15C). The higher the specic gravity, the heavier the product. API gravity is based on the
density of pure water with an arbitrary API gravity value of 10. The higher the API gravity, the lighter
the product. Most oils have densities that are less than water and generally will oat on water. Non-
oating oils in seawater have a specic gravity greater than 1.02 or an API gravity less than 7.
Dispersants: Specially designed products composed of detergent-like solvents and agents applied
directly from planes, helicopters, or vessels to help break oil slicks into small droplets that disperse into
the water column and spread in three dimensions through natural water movement.
Dispersion: The process of breaking oil into very small particles or droplets (ranging in size from less
than 0.5 microns to several mm) that mix into the water column. The smaller droplets will not reoat
to the surface, but rather will move with the currents; larger droplets may reoat under calm condi-
tions and reform slicks or sheens.
Dissolution: Loss of water-soluble components of oil into water. Compounds in oil are only very
slightly soluble (maximum water-soluble fraction for crude oils in salt water is usually 10 to 30 ppm).
Distillation Fractions: The fraction (generally measured by volume) of oil that is boiled off at a given
temperature. Used in models to predict the amount of oil loss via evaporation.
Elimination: All of the processes that can decrease tissue concentrations of a contaminant, including
metabolism, excretion, and diffusive loss.
Emulsication (mousse formation): The process whereby small water droplets are incorporated
into the oil, changing many of the oils properties. Often has the consistency of chocolate mousse.
Water content can be as high as 80%, increasing the volume of oily material for recovery and disposal.
Greatly affects the efciency of skimmers and pumps.
Evaporation: Transfer of the volatile fractions in oil from the liquid phase to the vapor phase. It is the
single most important weathering process for the rst several days of an oil spill.
Fingerprinting: Chemical analyses and interpretations used to compare an oil (usually the spilled oil)
with other oils to determine whether they are from the same source. It is a critical process when the
spill source is unknown. It is also important to determine the source of oil in environmental samples,
such as seafood, compared to background contamination.
Growth Dilution: The process whereby the rate of accumulation is exceeded by the rate of tissue
growth so that when the concentration is expressed on mass of chemical per mass of tissue over time,
it appears as though elimination is occurring because the tissue concentration is decreasing.
Half-life: The time it takes for the concentration of a compound to decrease by half.
HAZMAT: NOAA Hazardous Material Response Division. Coordinates scientic support to the U.S.
Coast Guard for oil and chemical spills. Has information for oil spill response at Web sites:
http://response.restoration.noaa.gov and http://www.IncidentNews.gov
High-molecular weight PAHs: PAHs with 4-6 benzene rings.
61
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Hydrophobic: Water-fearing, a substance that is attracted to oil, lipids, and fats and repelled by
water.
Lipophilic: Lipid-loving, a substance that is attracted to oil, lipids, and fats.
Low-molecular weight PAHs: PAHs with 2-3 benzene rings.
Metabolism: Enzymatic process that converts insoluble petroleum hydrocarbons into more soluble
breakdown products (metabolites) that can be more readily excreted by animals that have a kidney or
kidney-like organ.
Microbes: At oil spills, the focus is on bacteria, fungi, and yeast that are able to degrade petroleum
hydrocarbons.
Pelagic: Marine animals that live free from direct dependence on the sea bottom or shore. Free-swim-
ming forms are nektonic; oating forms are planktonic.
Petrogenic: Hydrocarbons derived from petroleum oils, in contrast to pyrogenic hydrocarbons,
derived from the combustion of fossil fuels.
Photo-oxidation: The process by which the components in oil are chemically transformed through a
photochemical reaction, in the presence of oxygen.
Polar compounds: V heavy, persistent compounds in oil, including asphaltenes (very large com-
ery pounds) and resins (smaller compounds that bond with sulfur, nitrogen, or oxygen). Slowest to biode-
grade.
Pour point: The temperature to which a substance must be heated to make it ow. Oils with a high
pour point can congeal into semi-solid masses when spilled.
Pyrogenic: Hydrocarbons derived from the combustion of fossil fuels.
Salinity: A measure of how much salt is dissolved in water. Full strength seawater is about 35 parts
per thousand (ppt). Freshwater is 0 ppt. The water in estuaries is a mixture of these two.
Saturates: Group of petroleum hydrocarbons consisting primarily of alkanes, but also cyclo-alkanes
and waxes (large saturates).
Scientic Support Coordinator (SSC): Provides liaison with the scientic research and response com-
munity to the U.S. Coast Guard for oil and chemical spills.
Sedimentation: When particles suspended in the water column settle to the bottom. Can include set-
tling of silt and clay in calm water and oil and sand mixtures in the surf zone and in rivers.
Sheen: A very thin layer of oil on water. Color indicates the thickness and volume per area:
Silver sheen 0.00007 mm 75 gallons/square nautical mile
150 gallons/square nautical mile
300 gallons/square nautical mile
1,000 gallons/square nautical mile
3,000 gallons/square nautical mile
First color trace 0.0001 mm Rainbow colors 0.0003 mm Dull colors Dark colors 0.001 mm 0.003 mm
Solubility: How much of an oil will enter the water column on a molecular basis. Solubility of oil in
water is generally <100 parts per million (ppm); thus it not a signicant loss mechanism for oil.
Taint: An off-avor or off-odor in seafood that is not typical of the avor or odor of the seafood itself.
Tonnes (metric): a weight measure for oil, approximately = 300 gallons.
62
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Toxicity (acute and chronic): An adverse affect on a living organism caused by exposure to a contam-
inant, such as oil. Acute toxicity occurs over a very short exposure period (hours to days) and usually
results in death. Chronic toxicity occurs from long-term exposure (weeks or more) and causes impacts
to reproduction, growth, and behavior.
Trajectory: A prediction of where the oil will be transported by wind and currents over time.
Uptake: Acquisition of a substance from the environment by an organism as a result of any active
or passive process. Uptake is controlled externally by the partitioning behavior of the contaminant
(between sediment, water, and food) and internally by the organisms behavior and physiology.
Viscosity: Resistance to ow in a liquid. Determines whether dispersants will be effective on an oil
slick. Viscosity increases as it gets colder and as the oil weathers. Low viscosity is like water, medium
viscosity is like molasses, and high viscosity is like tar.
Weathering: Changes in the physical and chemical properties of oil due to natural processes that
begin when the discharge occurs and continue until the oil is removed. Major weathering processes
include evaporation, emulsication, dissolution, photo-oxidation, and biodegradation.
63
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Appendix
64
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3

NOAA/NMFS NATIONAL SENSORY SECTION

CHAIN OF CUSTODY FORM
7600 Sand Point W NE, Seattle, W ay A
For more information contact Michael DiLiberti
978-281-9123 or FAX 978-281-9125
Sampler_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sample Type
(Tissue, oil, water. Include
species name and tissue type)

Project_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________
Sample
I.D. #
Date
Collected
Location
Collected by Relinquished by: (signature)
Relinquished by: (signature) Relinquished by: (signature) Relinquished by: (signature) Relinquished by: (signature)
* If shipped, include carrier name and copy of shipping invoice
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3

Comments
Received by:(signature) Received by:(signature)
Condition: Condition:
Date/Time
Date/Time
Received by:(signature) Received by:(signature) Received by:(signature) Received by:(signature)
Condition: Condition: Condition: Condition:
Date/Time
Date/Time
Date/Time
Date/Time
65
Donald L. Evans
Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce
Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., USN (Ret.)
Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator
Jamison S. Hawkins
Acting Assistant Administrator for
Ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management,
NOAA Ocean Service
November 2002
U.S. Depart ment of Commerce Nat ional Oceanic and A mospheric A t dminist ion NOA s Nat rat A ional Ocean Serv ice
66
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.3
Document ID: 0.7.19.1897.4

Subject: DWH UPDATES 6.18.2010
OMAO DWH Ship Tasking - Program Impacts 061410-1.docx
PRIORITY
ISSUES
RESPONSE OPERATIONS - NIC/ICC/NRT See PowerPoint Attached "Quad_18Jun.pptx"
SCIENCE See PDF attached "NOAA Science Briefing June 21.pdf"
LMR Fisheries Closures
* There was no change to the closed area for June 17, 2010, The closed area remains 80,806 sq mi (209,286 sq km) and
covers about 33% of the GOM EEZ.
Seafood Inspection
* Steven W ilson, Peter Koufopoulos, Nancy Beck and Jeff Bigler of the EPA worked to finalize the re-opening protocol.
This was generally accepted by the Gulf States on the States Call.
* Completed the third States Sensory Screener Class in Pascagoula, MS.
* Three NW FSC staff are in Pascagoula assisting NSIL staff in preparing for analysis fish and shellfish to be shipped for
chemical analyses.
* NW FSC is continuing chemical analysis of blue crab muscle and hepatopancreas (tomalley).
* The complete seafood inspection report is attached.
* 397 stranded (increase of 8 from June 16)
o 37 of the stranded were found alive (increase of 3 from June 16)
o 241 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (increase of 5 from June 16)
* To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 5 dead stranded sea turtle and 6 live stranded turtles
(2 of which were caught in skimming operations).
* To date, visible evidence of oil has been documented externally on 69 live sea turtles and 3 dead sea turtle captured
during directed turtle surveys.
LMR (2) * 46 dolphins have been verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 1 from June 16).
o 2 were live stranded dolphins, one of which that died shortly after stranding, one that was euthanized upon stranding and
one that stranded live in boom and was freed immediately (increase of 1 from June 16)
o 2 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (decrease of 1 from June 16)
o 7 full necropsies performed (increase of 1 from June 16)
o Necropsy results are pending for all animals necropsied to date.
* 1 dead stranded sperm whale has been verified to date within the designated spill area (no change from June 16)
* A marine mammal carcass retrieval and disposal plan and a sampling and disposal plan for dead marine mammals
observed by NOAA vessels are being finalized.
* The complete health and stranding report, turtle stranding map, dolphin stranding map, and large whale stranding map
are attached.
NRDA 1. Technical W orking Group Updates
Shoreline: Four teams went out in the field to complete pre-assessment shoreline surveys in Barataria Bay.
Team 1- Shoreline pre-assessment along northern edges of Hospital Bay. Vegetation oiled within areas with previous
SCAT data; condition varied between no visible vegetation oiling to a solid band of oil several feet into the marsh. Oiling
within the water was predominately silver sheen with some sheening from oiled vegetation which produced rainbow
sheens from the thicker bands. Moderate to heavy oiling was present along the edges of Hospital Bay where SCAT data
showed moderate oiling. Oiling within the water was predominately silver sheen with some small pea sized droplets with
silver stringers.
Team 2 - Shoreline pre-assessment from Port Sulphur Marina out to W ilkinson Bay. Shoreline covered with heavy to
moderate oiling, some oil sheen on water. Response activity included absorbent boom along some shoreline. At some
waypoints lightly oiled shoreline with no sheen on water.

Team 3- collected NRDA pre-assessment data on the south side of East Timbalier Island with one additional point taken
on the north side. Assessment began at the east end of the island (were SCAT data was not mapped) and progressed
westward (to were SCAT data was available). Assessment stopped mid island to avoid a storm and began again at the
same point approximately 2 hours later.
Team 4 assessed the several islands and the mainland coast directly north of the western end of Grand Isle, LA. Team
four found the southwest end of the island to be moderately oiled with Spartina alterniflora covered from bottom to top at
the outer edge ranging to 25 inches. Shoreline oil penetration was 10 feet from waters edge. The remainder of the island
was clean with the exception of four spots of light oiling. The northern island in the northeast corner of Porpoise Bay was
clean on the northeastern side with the exception of about 900 feet of light oiling along the southern end. The
southernmost of the two islands on this corner of Porpoise Bay was clean on the eastern and southern exposures.
NRDA (2) Sample Intake Teams Samples processed at shoreline as of 6/17/10:
Chemistry: As of June 17th, approximately 6500 samples have been collected to support NRDA baseline and pre-
assessment data collection. The total number of samples drastically increased in the last two days due to Entrixs field
samples being added to the trustee sample tracking database. The total number of samples now consists of approximately
61% water samples, 28% sediment samples, and 5% or less of tissue, oil (tarballs), oil on water product, and dispersant.
Water Column: NRDA sampling activities are ongoing aboard 6 vessels.
Brooks McCall: Deep water sampling 5 km N of well head.
Jack Fitz: At sea on cruise 3. Deepwater ROV sampling NW of wellhead at 2km ring. They are sampling in the rising
plume.
Ocean Veritas: In Port Fourchon, LA rotating with Brooks McCall for deepwater sampling.
Thomas Jefferson: Establishing baseline with CTD casts and coastal sampling.
Rachel Bordelon: In Houma, getting underway 6/18. Will be supporting the Jack Fitz with acoustic surveys.
Endeavor: In transit to deploy drifters and conduct deep water sampling.
Fish: Field team tested active and passive methods for detecting submerged oil in Barataria Bay. NGO representatives
observed field activities (See Media/Outreach Update below).
Human Use: Boat ramp and shore fishing counts in LA, MS, AL and FL.
NRDA (3) SAV: Teams sampled in Mobile Bay, AL, St Josephs Bay, FL and Chocohatchee Bay, FL collecting
baseline vegetation and sediment samples. Currently identifying long-term sampling dates and sites for injury assessment
phase.
Marine Mammals: Marine Mammal survey team aboard Gordon Gunter is underway on a sperm whale preassessment
survey. Five bottlenose dolphin biopsies were collected in St. Joseph Bay as part of a Pre-Assessment Plan. Aerial survey
conducted to assess marine mammals and sea turtles in oil and support rescue operations. One marine mammal was in
water with little to no oil. No turtles were seen.
Media/Outreach Update:
Tom Brosnan hosted representatives from Ocean Conservancy, Oceana, and Gulf Restoration Network and they
accompanied a field team testing methods for detecting submerged oil. A member of the field team provided a brief
explanation of the field activities in the beginning and answered a few questions on what we saw at the end. The NGO
representative gained a new appreciation for the logistical challenges, the scope of the issues and the good work being
done.
ASSETS AND PLATFORMS The following digital files are attached. Information is current as of Date Time Group in
subject line.
4. DWH Ship Tasking Impacts.

5. DWH Aircraft Tasking Impacts.
OPERATIONAL
REGIONAL No Report
LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOV'T AFFAIRS No Report
COMMS / PUBLIC AFFAIRS No Report
EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT Interactions:
Confirmed NOAA speaker for the Greater New Orleans Disaster Response Partnership monthly meeting on June 23, 2010.
Mark Schexnayder, from the LSU AgCenter and the Louisiana Sea Grant College Program, will be able to give an
overview of NOAA's role
in the response to the oil spill as well as Sea Grant's involvement.
Connected Karrie Carnes at NOAA Santuaries in Key West, FL with Mike Spranger of FL Sea Grant to discuss outreach
efforts in the FL Keys.
Set up NOAA speakers for the weekly NGO telecom hosted by the White House and coordinated with CEQ and WH-OPE
in the a.m. planning tagup. Buck Sutter and Doug Helton were our NOAA representatives this week. Questions focused
mainly on the flow rate, subsurface oil and trajectory.
Complaint e-mails:
External Affairs received 1 email over the past 24 hours. We responded
to it and 2 more sent yesterday. The topic was a suggested calculation
of oil flow.
Mass Notifications: None today.
DATA INFORMATION See PowerPoint Attached "DWH Activities Report Quad OCIO 061810.pptx"
IA/ INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 1. A request for a briefing was received by NMFS/IA from the Mexican Embassy in
Washington. We understand the issues Mexico wishes to have covered are: the spread of the oil, the areas where the
currents may take it, the impact on the fisheries, and any preventive or remedial action that can be foreseen and undertaken
or aspect that NOAA may deem relevant. We are working with the State Department to respond. (Note: an offer of a
briefing was conveyed by the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City to appropriate officials who declined the offer).
2. The response to the Bahamas questions was sent to OMB for final clearance. Once cleared, they will be transmitted to
the U.S. Embassy, Nassau, for delivery.
3. A meeting is called next Wednesday to include each Line Office and Bonnie Ponwith of the Gulf of Mexico LME
Project to begin discussing long term Gulf recovery and restoration in line with the Presidents speech this week.
4. In 2 areas of follow-up, we are both seeking a read-out from the Cuba Desk on their meeting today with a Cuban
delegation working with State to respond to Margaret Springs request for a listing of offers of assistance made by foreign
governments.
LEGAL / GC No Report
POLICY / BUDGET No Report
NOAA Data and Information Management Activities Report
June 18, 2010

Information as of June 18, 2010
Critical Issues for Discussion/Action
Key Results
Regarding Data.gov, the site will be available at

www.data.gov/restorethegulf -- but will not go live until the actual
www.RestoreTheGulf.gov site goes live--live date postponed until Monday
at the earliest.
EPA identified four components they want to have added into
geoplatform.gov. These files have sampling locations only -- with hyperlink
back to www.epa.gov/bpspill to obtain the sampling data. EPA continues
work on additional services that will contain the same points along with
data. Ultimately getting the points and data showing up in
geoplatform.gov.
None
Yesterdays Activities Recap
Current Unified Command site deepwaterhorizonresponse.com site is

migrating to restorethegulf.gov as early as tomorrow June 18, and the
geoplatform.gov/gulfresponse is in a very prominent location on this new
website (snapshot attached). The restorethegulf.gov site will also have a
prominent link to data.gov. Additionally, a separate data.gov oil spill site
(maybe www.data.gov/bpoilspill) is in development and may go live tomorrow
as well.
Upcoming Activities
A demo of geoplatform.gov is scheduled for Tracy Warings DWH

Integrated Services Team Tuesday June 22 at FEMA HQ.
Effort to consolidate BP and government geo spatial data is underway.

Coast Guard migrating BP GIS capabilities and data into their
environment to share the data with ERMA government and public viewers.
Coast Guard GIS services not to be used as the COP viewer in the
Unified or Area commands-- ERMA is to serve that role.
Tentative meeting scheduled for Tuesday June 22 evening with Federal
Geospatial leads to discuss how take advantage of the energy and
interest and continue to build out the concepts of the Geospatial Platform.
EPA data public release is now tied to the data.gov and restorethegulf.gov
development. Coast Guard is working the migration of BP data to the Coast
Guard environment and then replication to NOAA for ERMA or
geoplatform.gov. DHS considers this option to be suboptimal, so we are
reviewing options. NOAA reviewed the current BP data base and many of
the layers are duplicative or already incorporated within ERMA. Additionally,
most of the BP database lacks attribution, and some BP data would be
restricted access and not for public display due to security restrictions.
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
(
(!
!
(
!
(
30N !
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
30N
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(

28N

(

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
26N
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
FL
30N
30N

28N
(
Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
!
(
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
26N
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
30N !
!
(
(
((!
!
((
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
( !
(!
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
((!
(
(!
(!
(!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
((
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
((
!
!(!
(

!
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
(!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(!((
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(!
(
!
((
(
!
((
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(!
!
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
( (!
!
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
28N
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
)
"
!
)
(
!
!
)"
"
(
(
)
!
(
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
)
)
)
)"
)"
)"
"
"
"
"
"
)
)
)
)
)
"
"
"
) )
" "
)

" ) )
)"
"
)
)
)
"
"
"
)
"
)"
"
! "
")

)
"
)
"
)
)
"
( )
"
"
)

)
)
"
"
""
))

)
"
"
)
)
) "
"
) )
" ) )
"

)
"
"
)
"
)
"
)
*
#
#
*
Skimmer-caught:
* #
New
* #
Confirmed Location
#
*
"
New
)
"
)
Confirmed Location
"
)
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
90W
88W
86W
NOAA Science
June 21, 2010

As of 18 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48 N43
N57
N46
N68
N42
N44
N47
N49
N51
N52
Status Today
DWH Loop Current, Departed today @ 0900L, MacDill AFB
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Flying Cloud, MN. GRAV-D installation.
CALNEX, Sacramento, CA
Tail Doppler Radar testing, MacDill AFB
Marine mammal survey, Dutch Harbor, AK
NOAA Response Operations Activities Report
18 June
Key Results
(eg. visual map , table)

Off-shore oil forecast on hold coordinated with
NMFS
Items in review:

o
Letter from 22 Senators under review at DOC
Long-term oil trajectory pending OMB comments

o
Aerial observer training this weekend, Mobile AL,
o
13 trainees
o
Loop Current product under review at DOC
USCG C-130 Overflight out of Clearwater, FL

M/V Becker Florida Peninsula Sentry ship
Both looking for oil north of Florida Keys
Todays Activities
Upcoming Activities

Long-term oil movement release

Communicating risk to South Florida

FDA Food desk activated to address seafood
contamination issues and liaise with National
Center for Health Services

Robert now NOLA CP:
1250 Poydras St, New Orleans, LA 70113

Florida Peninsula Command Post stood up in Miami

ERMA demo with ADM Allen

Working on materials to communicate nature of risk
to South Florida

NRT meeting held

Reviewed Incident Specific Addendum to NCP
1st Relief Well

Backup Relief Well
0 20 40 60 80 100
Done Drilled

Thursday, June 17, 2010
Seafood Inspection Program (SIP):
Steven Wilson, Peter Koufopoulos, Nancy Beck and Jeff Bigler of the EPA worked to finalize the
re-opening protocol. This was generally accepted by the Gulf States on the States Call today.
SIP personnel, led by Robert Downs, is in the final day of the third States Sensory Screener Class
in Pascagoula, MS.
Three NWFSC staff are in Pascagoula assisting NSIL staff in preparing for analysis fish and
shellfish to be shipped for chemical analyses.
NWFSC is continuing chemical analysis of blue crab muscle and hepatopancreas (tomalley).
National Seafood Inspection Laboratory (NSIL)
Manually generated & QA-ed seafood sample status summary from seafood safety sample
Identified seafood processing training facility in Pascagoula (owned by Mississippi State

University) as candidate for use in increasing NSIL's seafood sample capacity.
Evaluating data received to date in regards to seafood safety sample receipt, log-in, and
processing; for purpose of determining data base structure and format in order to design an
efficient sample log-in and tracking system.
Programming database front end for seafood safety sample data management
Hosting SIP Sensory Training Session for group of State personnel.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.1
NOAA Data and Information Management Activities Report
June 18, 2010

Information as of June 18, 2010
Key Results
Regarding Data.gov, the site will be available at
None
www.data.gov/restorethegulf -- but will not go live until the actual

www.RestoreTheGulf.gov site goes live--live date postponed until Monday
at the earliest.
EPA identified four components they want to have added into
geoplatform.gov. These files have sampling locations only -- with
hyperlink back to www.epa.gov/bpspill to obtain the sampling data. EPA
continues work on additional services that will contain the same points
along with data. Ultimately getting the points and data showing up in
geoplatform.gov.
Current Unified Command site deepwaterhorizonresponse.com site is

migrating to restorethegulf.gov as early as tomorrow June 18, and the
geoplatform.gov/gulfresponse is in a very prominent location on this new
website (snapshot attached). The restorethegulf.gov site will also have a
prominent link to data.gov. Additionally, a separate data.gov oil spill site
(maybe www.data.gov/bpoilspill) is in development and may go live
tomorrow as well.
EPA data public release is now tied to the data.gov and restorethegulf.gov
development. Coast Guard is working the migration of BP data to the Coast
Guard environment and then replication to NOAA for ERMA or
geoplatform.gov. DHS considers this option to be suboptimal, so we are
reviewing options. NOAA reviewed the current BP data base and many of
the layers are duplicative or already incorporated within ERMA.
Additionally, most of the BP database lacks attribution, and some BP data
would be restricted access and not for public display due to security
restrictions.
Upcoming Activities
A demo of geoplatform.gov is scheduled for Tracy W arings DW H

Integrated Services Team Tuesday June 22 at FEMA HQ.
Effort to consolidate BP and government geo spatial data is underway.
Coast Guard migrating BP GIS capabilities and data into their
environment to share the data with ERMA government and public
viewers. Coast Guard GIS services not to be used as the COP viewer
in the Unified or Area commands-- ERMA is to serve that role.
Tentative meeting scheduled for Tuesday June 22 evening with Federal
Geospatial leads to discuss how take advantage of the energy and
interest and continue to build out the concepts of the Geospatial Platform.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.2
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
30N !
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(

28N Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
(
!
28N
26N
0 25
50
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.3
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
FL
30N
30N

28N Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
(
!
28N
!
(
26N
0 25
50
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.4
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
30N !
( !
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
(!
( !
!
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
(!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
( (
( !
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
((
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
(
!
(!
(
!
!
(
(
(!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
!
( (
(
!
!
(
!
((
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
!
(

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Skimmer-caught:
#
* New
#
#
"
New
)
"
Confirmed Location
)
"
)
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
"
!
!
"
(
!
)
(
)
!
(
!
*
(
!
(
#
#
*
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
"
"
)
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
)"
)
)
"
"
(
)
"
"
"
)
!
)
)
"
"
)
)
"
"
)
"
"
)
)
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
"
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
28N
28N
0 25
50 90W
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.5

Increase of 8 turtle strandings (1 dead in LA, 3 dead and 3 live in MS, 1 dead oiled in AL
from June 16)
Increase of 1 in the number of dolphin strandings (1 live sub adult dolphin was trapped
between two oil booms in FL. Responders were able to move outer boom so dolphin
could swim out on its own. There was no visible oil on the dolphin or in the area where
the dolphin was found, but oil was on the outside of the two booms, therefore the dolphin
was classified as oiled).
Sea Turtles
469 total sea turtles verified to date within the designated spill area (increase of 8 from June 16
report)

29 live turtles in rehabilitation (increase of 3 from June 16)
72 turtles collected during directed turtle sampling efforts (no change from June 16)
o o

strandings.
in rehab):

from June 16)
16)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.6


o o o o

Marine Mammals
16).
43 were dead stranded* dolphins (no change from June 16)

euthanized upon stranding and one that stranded live in boom and was freed immediately
1 dead stranded sperm whale has been verified to date within the designated spill area (no
change from June 16)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.6
were euthanized):

from June 16)
10 partial necropsies performed (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (no change from
June 16)
to recover (no change from June 16)
2 carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants (decrease of 1 from June
16)

from June 16)
16)
Dolphins: Three of the verified dolphins had evidence of external oil on the tongue and/or
determine whether the two dead animals were externally oiled pre- or post-mortem. All
other necropsy findings are pending.

of 2010.
o o o
o

Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.6

(2003-2007).
A marine mammal carcass retrieval and disposal plan and a sampling and disposal plan
for dead marine mammals observed by NOAA vessels are being finalized.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.6
NOAA Science
June 21, 2010
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Topic Areas


Turtles
Dolphins
Whales

NOAA Assets

IOOS gliders
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7

for June 18, 2010
The large loop eddy (Eddy Franklin)
continues to be mostly isolated from the Loop
Current.
Inflow from Yucatan continues to mostly

bypass eddy Franklin and flow more directly
into the Florida Straits.
There is potential for full attachment in the
next few days to weeks.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
15 day surface drifter trajectories (starting points indicated by squares)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Next flyovers will begin June 28
Turtles
Turtle Status
469
363
95
7
4
7
17
59
46
241
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Next flyovers will begin June 28
Dolphins
Dolphin Status
46
43
0
2
1
15
10
7
11
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Whale Status
Whales
The NOAA Ship Pisces reported a dead 25 ft sperm
whale located 150 miles due south of Pascagoula,

MS on June 15, 2010.
The whale was decomposed and heavily
scavenged by sharks.
There was no oil in the vicinity.

The whale was photodocumented, sampled
(skin/blubber, external swab), and marked with blue

paint to reduce resighting/resampling.
NOAA and the Unified Command Wildlife Branch
have had numerous reports of sperm whales
sighted swimming in the oil, but this is the first
confirmed report of a dead whale since the

Deepwater Horizon oil spill began.
Total Verified Whales

Total dead stranded whales
Total live whales currently in rehabilitation
Total live whales stranded that died in care
Total live released whales
Verified strandings but animals not collected due to
stage of decomposition or unable to recover
Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage
warrants
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
Sperm whales are the only endangered resident
cetacean in the upper Gulf of Mexico. Their prime

habitat and feeding area are in the upper Gulf
offshore area, they feed and live at depth in areas
where undersea and aerial dispersants and oil have

been present for many weeks, and they feed on
deepwater squid which may also be impacted by
the oil and dispersants.
The NOAA Ship Gordon Gunter sailed yesterday for
a multi-week cruise to do photo-identification,
assessments, and biopsy of sperm whales, tag sperm whales and
Brydes
whales, and other offshore cetaceans as well as to
Brydes whales and to
conduct prey density studies.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Chemical analyses of 13 shrimp and oysters composites passed QA/QC and were posted on the
NWFSC website--[results summarized on next slide]--concentrations were well below levels of concern
Another set of fish and shellfish samples (composites) will be analyzed on GC/MS today

Additional fish and shellfish samples continue to be processed for chemical analysis
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Concentrations (ng/g, wet weight) of selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons measured in edible tissues of shellfish collected in the Gulf of
Mexico region as part of the Deepwater Horizon MC Canyon 252- Seafood Safety Response 2010
Region
Chandeleur
Sound, MS
Pink Shrimp
Sound Chandeleur
White
Sound, MS
Shrimp
Sound Chandeleur
Sound, MS
Pink Shrimp
Sound Northern Gulf
Pink Shrimp
of Mexico Northern Gulf
Pink Shrimp
of Mexico Species Pink Shrimp Pink Shrimp Northern Gulf
Pink Shrimp
of Mexico White
Shrimp White
Shrimp Brown
Shrimp White
Shrimp Brown
Shrimp Oyster Collection
Da te
Closure Area
Sta tus NPH FLU ANT PHN / FLA PY R BAA CHR/ rphn T BaP LMWAHs HMWAHs
Baseline
<0.32
0.54
<0.18
<0.18
<0.27
<0.31
<0.28
3.6
< LOQ
Baseline
0.67
<0.25
0.43
<0.15
<0.15
<0.22
<0.25
<0.23
1.9
< LOQ
Baseline Baseline Baseline Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline -
0.72 0.83 0.75 0.96 0.78 0.79 0.79 0.76 0.81 0.82 0.63 1.2
<0.23 <0.20 <0.26 <0.24 <0.25 <0.25 0.39 0.22 <0.22 0.24 <0.26 2.3
0.43 0.4 0.38 0.41 0.35 0.37 1.3 0.58 0.53 0.85 0.63 7.17
<0.14 <0.11 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.17 0.75
<0.13 <0.11 0.3 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.17 0.98
<0.20 <0.17 <0.22 <0.22 <0.23 <0.23 <0.20 <0.20 <0.19 <0.19 <0.25 0.4
<0.23 <0.19 <0.25 <0.26 <0.26 <0.26 <0.23 <0.23 <0.22 <0.22 <0.28 1.9
<0.21 <0.17 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.24 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.25 <0.24
2 2.3 2 2.5 2 2.2 5.2 2.8 2.5 3.1 2.1 41
< LOQ
< LOQ
0.68
< LOQ
< LOQ
< LOQ
< LOQ
0.19
0.19
< LOQ
< LOQ
5.2
NPH = napthalene, FLU = Flourene, ANT /PHN = anthracene/phenanthrene, FLA = fluoranthene, CHR = chrysene, BaP = benzo[a]pyrene,
BAA = benz[a]anthracene, PY = pyrene
R Lower molecular weight AHs (LMWAHs) < 3 benzene rings; Higher molecular weight AHs (HMWAHs) > 3 benzene rings
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Summary Info of US IOOS Assets deployed 18 June 2010
see graphic on next slide

Gliders: 8 Deployed by US IOOS Partners
MACOORA (2-Rutgers RU21 & RU23; 1-Univ. of Delaware UD134)
Mote Marine Lab (1 Waldo)
GCOOS (1-USM/Univ of Washington-Applied Physics Lab; SG515)
SCCOOS (1-Scripps/WHOI; Spray40)
US Navy (SG135, SG137)
Glider Note: USF glider that stopped reporting was damaged by a remora fish.
Recovered 6/14. Redeployment TBD .
High Frequency Radars (HFRs): 5 operational in the Gulf of Mexico.
GCOOS (3 Univ of Southern Mississippi)
SECOORA (2 Univ of South Florida). 2 of 3 radars operational. Surface current data
available off SW Florida coast from Venice and Naples, FL HFR sites. Target 6/23 to
restore Reddington ,FL radar.
HFR Note: 1-hour average current from the two HFR clusters are displayed
Drifters from Navy and Horizon Marine are displayed
Glider information and data available at http://rucool.marine.rutgers.edu/deepwater
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
US IOOS Assets Deployed 18 June 2010
USM HFRs
USM HFR (3)
USF HFRs
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
US IOOS HFR Surface Currents and Spill Trajectory Forecast
GreenUSM HFRs
arrows represent 25-hr average surface currents observed by HFRs
USM HFR (3)
USF HFRs
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7

As of 18 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48 N43
N57
N46
N68
N42
N44
N47
N49
N51
N52
Status Today
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
NOAA Ship Positions

As of 18 JUN 2010
M2
DY
MF
SH
DJ
RA
FA
HB
DE RB
R2
HA
SE
EX
Indonesia
NF
KA
PC
TJ
GU
= underway
= alongside
Status Today
Departed Woods Hole, MA 6/18 enroute GOMEX for DWH ops (seafood study).
DE
ETA Key West, FL 6/24 for staging, ETD 6/25.
Departed 6/15 for continued DWH ops (acoustics and water sampling). ETA Key
TJ
West, FL 7/2
HB Alongside Newport, RI. ETD 7/6 for scheduled project
Alongside Charleston, SC. Departure delayed to ~6/25 following repairs.
NF
Expecting tasking for DWH ops.
RB Alongside Norfolk, VA. Shipyard repair contract ends 8/13
Departed 6/15 for DWH marine mammal survey. ETA Mobile, AL 6/21 for repairs
GU
(~ 2 days in drydock) then resume ops. ETA Pascagoula, MS 6/26
Departed 6/14 for scheduled project in GOMEX, no DWH tasking yet. ETA
PC
Pascagoula, MS 7/2
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. ETD ~6/19 for sea trials, ~6/20 for DWH shrimp
R2
trawl/ichthyoplankton survey (approx 4-5 days), then resume scheduled work.
ID
ID Status Today
FA Alongside Port Angeles, WA. Departure 06/21 for scheduled project
SH Alongside Seattle, WA. Departure 6/25 for scheduled project
MF Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/21 Seattle, WA
DY Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/24 Dutch Harbor, AK
HA
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 06/26 Pearl Harbor
M2 Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 07/04 San Francisco
SE Alongside Pearl Harbor, HI. Departure 7/6 for scheduled project
KA Alongside San Diego, CA. Departure 7/8 for scheduled project
RA Alongside Cascade, OR for major repair period
DJ Alongside Seattle, WA. Decommissioning on week of 08/02
EX Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/20 Bitung, Indonesia
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7

As of 18 JUN 2010
BB CA
RB OV
RC
JF
GY CH
EN
BM
WS
= underway
= alongside
ID BM BB CH CA EN GY JF OV RB RC WS Type R/V Brooks McCall M/V Bunny Bordelon R/V Cape Hatteras R/V Caretta R/V Endeavor R/V Gandy
R/V Jack Fitz R/V Ocean Veritas M/V Rachel Bordelon R/V Ryan Chouest R/V Walton Smith Status Today
Deep water sampling 5km N of wellhead and working NE and E at 5km.
In Houma, LA
Deepwater sampling, CTDs, and surface sampling 5nm N of wellhead.
In transit to working grounds, ETA approx 0000, 19 JUN 10. Deploying four drifters for NMFS.
Reef fish surveys out of Panama City, FL.
Deepwater ROV sampling W of wellhead at 2km ring.
In Houma, LA
In Theodore, AL, departing in PM.
In Miami, FL
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.7

As of 18 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48 N43
N57
N46
N68
N42
N44
N47
N49
N51
N52
Status Today
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.8
NOAA Ship Positions

As of 18 JUN 2010
M2
DY
SH
DJ
RA
FA
HB
MF
DE RB
R2
HA
SE
KA
PC
TJ
GU
= underway
NF
EX
Indonesia
= alongside
ID DE TJ HB NF RB GU PC R2 Status Today
Departed Woods Hole, MA 6/18 enroute GOMEX for DWH ops (seafood study).
ETA Key West, FL 6/24 for staging, ETD 6/25.
Departed 6/15 for continued DWH ops (acoustics and water sampling). ETA Key
West, FL 7/2
Alongside Newport, RI. ETD 7/6 for scheduled project
Departed 6/15 for DWH marine mammal survey. ETA Mobile, AL 6/21 for repairs
(~ 2 days in drydock) then resume ops. ETA Pascagoula, MS 6/26
Pascagoula, MS 7/2
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. ETD ~6/19 for sea trials, ~6/20 for DWH shrimp
ID FA SH MF DY HA SE KA RA DJ EX
Status Today
Alongside Port Angeles, WA. Departure 06/21 for scheduled project
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/21 Seattle, WA
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 06/26 Pearl Harbor
Alongside Cascade, OR for major repair period
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/20 Bitung, Indonesia
M2 Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 07/04 San Francisco
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.8

As of 18 JUN 2010
BB CA
RB OV
RC
JF
GY EN
CH
BM
WS
= underway
= alongside
ID BM BB CH CA EN GY JF OV RB RC WS Type R/V Brooks McCall M/V Bunny Bordelon R/V Cape Hatteras R/V Caretta R/V Endeavor R/V Gandy
R/V Jack Fitz R/V Ocean Veritas M/V Rachel Bordelon R/V Ryan Chouest R/V Walton Smith Status Today
In Houma, LA
In Houma, LA
In Miami, FL
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.8
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.8
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.8
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.8
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.8
Jun
Jul Aug Sep
Oct
Nov
N42 WP-3D
DWH Gulf Loop
Hurricane Season
DWH Loop Current, Departed 6/18, 0900L, MacDill AFB
CALNEX Hurricane Season
DWH Multi Spectral

N48 Twin Otter

N56 Twin Otter
N57 Twin Otter
CALNEX
Harbor Seals
Steller Sea Lions
Harbor Seals
BWASP
NERW
BOWFEST
N68 King Air
Bigelow
Delaware II
MX
Cetacean Abundance
Mapping
Bottom Trawl
ECOMON
Benthic
ECOMON
Atl. Herring
Departed Woods Hole, MA 6/18 enroute GOMEX for DWH ops (seafood study). ETA Key West, FL 6/24 for staging, ETD 6/25.
Brown
Foster
GRNMS
Repairs
Tsunami/Trop. Atl
Gunter
DWH
Repairs
Marine Mammals
F.I.
Fall Plankton
Jefferson
DWH
FGBNMS
Key West
Chesapeake Bay
Oregon II
MRP/Trials
Groundfish
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. ETD ~6/19 for sea trials, ~6/20 for DWH shrimp trawl/ichthyoplankton survey (approx 4-5 days), then resume scheduled work.
Pisces
Warranty
SEAMAP Reef Fish
Departed 6/14 for scheduled project in GOMEX, no DWH tasking yet. ETA Pascagoula, MS 7/2
Jun Jul
Aug
Sep Oct
Nov
R/V HST
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.12
R/V Gandy
R/V Caretta
R/V Harold B
NOAA Small Boat conducting reef fish surveys out of Panama City, F L.
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.12
25' Parker
NOS small boat w/ twin outboards in Charleston, SC, available for deployment and trailerable
Other Assets
Jun
Jul Aug Sep
Oct
Nov
Beau Rivage
Brooks McCall
Bunny Bordelon
Capt Hatteras
Endeavor
Jack Fitz
Ocean Veritas
Pelican
Rachel Bordelon
Ryan Chouest
Walton Smith
IOOS Gliders
NAVO Gliders
In Panama City gearing up bottom long line operations

In Houma, LA
LOOP current study for MMS scheduled to begin 6/27
In Houma, LA
In Theodore, AL, departing in PM
In Miami, FL
DWH*
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.12
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.12
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.12
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.12
SHIPS
06/15 06/26
Foster June 5 June 19 None: NF-10-05, Grays Reef
Comments
survey. ETA Mobile, AL 6/21 for repairs (~ 2
days in drydock) then resume ops. ETA
Pascagoula, MS 6/26
a/s Charleston, SC for z-drive repairs.
Cancelled leg 2 of GRNMS project in order to
complete repairs and allow time to transit to
GOM in support of DWH efforts. Departure
delayed to June 25, GOM arrival ~ June 30th.
Awaiting final DWH project instructions and
tasking.
Thomas
Jefferson
the oil.)
Delaware
II
Foster Gunter July 5 July 18 July 18 August 4 tbd tbd DE-10-05 Benthic Habitat Departed Woods Hole, MA 6/18 enroute
GOMEX for DWH ops (seafood study). ETA
Key West, FL 6/24 for staging, ETD 6/25.
all 7 DAS
in Pascagoula
time during this mission period June 15 tbd TJ-10-03 FGBNMS Departed Galveston, TX 6/15 for continued
DWH ops (acoustics and water sampling).
Arrival Key West, FL 7/2
Alongside Pascagoula, MS. ETD ~6/19 for sea
trials, ~6/20 for DWH shrimp
days), then resume scheduled work.
Departed 6/15 for DWH marine mammal

trawl/ichthyoplankton survey (approx 4-5
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.13

23 DAS
September
September
3
28
impacted by oil
2 or 3 legs for water and reprovisioning
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.13
Aircraft
Asset N42RF
WP-3D
several days. DWH Loop Current flight,
departed 6/18, 0900L, MacDill AFB
N43RF
WP-3D
N46RF
Twin
Otter
April September
N57RF
Twin
Otter
June 7 September
N68RF
King Air
April September
mapping.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.13
NOAA Response Operations Activities Report
18 June
Key Results
(eg. visual map , table)
Off-shore oil forecast on hold coordinated with

NMFS
Items in review:
o Letter from 22 Senators under review at DOC

o Long-term oil trajectory pending OMB comments
o Aerial observer training this weekend, Mobile AL,
13 trainees
o Loop Current product under review at DOC
USCG C-130 Overflight out of Clearwater, FL

M/V Becker Florida Peninsula Sentry ship
Both looking for oil north of Florida Keys
Todays Activities
Robert now NOLA CP:

1250 Poydras St, New Orleans, LA 70113
Florida Peninsula Command Post stood up in Miami
ERMA demo with ADM Allen
Working on materials to communicate nature of risk
to South Florida
NRT meeting held
Reviewed Incident Specific Addendum to NCP

Upcoming Activities
Long-term oil movement release

Communicating risk to South Florida
FDA Food desk activated to address seafood
contamination issues and liaise with National
Center for Health Services
1st Relief Well

Backup Relief Well
0 50 100
Done
Drilled
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.14
Column1 Backup Relief Well 1st Relief Well
Drilled 21 46
Done
104
104
To resize chart data range, drag lower right corner of range.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1947.14.1

From: "Jainey.Bavishi" <[email protected]>
Subject: DWH ACTIONS AND UPDATES 06.19.2010
To: DWH leadership <[email protected]>,"'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>
DWH ACTIONS and UPDATES, 06.19.2010.xls
Mammal_Turtle_Data_18_June.xls
Mammal_Turtle_Data_18_June_Summary.xls
OMAO DWH Ship Tasking - Program Impacts 061410-1.docx
*RESPONSE OPERATIONS - NIC/ICC/NRT*

No Report
*SCIENCE*
o NOAA scientists have been routinely analyzing water samples taken in
and around the well head at depth to monitor for the presence of
dispersant compound and in particular the major COREXIT components of
propylene glycol (1,2-propanediol) and 2-butoxy ethanol. These
""solvents"" are up to 30% of the volume of the dispersant mixture. We
have not seen in any of the samples analyzed (~150), any of these
substances (with Method Detection Limits (MDL) of 0.6 and 0.2 ppm
respectively).
o A modified form of the NOAA draft data and clearance policy was
submitted to the JAG to potentially use it as the clearance policy of
that interagency group
*
LMR*
Fisheries Closures
There was no change to the closed area for June 19, 2010, The closed
area remains 80,806 sq mi (209,286 sq km) and covers about 33% of the
GOM EEZ.
Seafood Inspection
On June 18 there was a conference with Department of Commerce Public
Affairs to go over the seafood safety process and methods for tracking
samples. There was confusion by the press over a statement regarding
samples we had received which turned out to be completely false.
Next week we will issue an update on the status of sampling cruises and
samples being processed and analyzed.
Increase of 11 turtle strandings (1 dead in FL, 1 dead in AL, 4 dead in
MS, 2 dead in LA and 1 live oiled from off of LA; 1 dead from FL & 1
dead in LA from June 17)
Increase of 1 dolphin stranding (correction of 1 dead from LA from May 29)
Dolphin necropsy status was re-evaluated for all cases, causing numbers
in each category to be recalculated
The current designated spill area encompasses the coastline from the
Texas/Louisiana border to Apalachicola (Franklin County), Florida. All
stranded animals within this geographic range are being examined
following the oil spill response protocols.
The complete health and stranding report, stranding maps and summary are
attached.
*NRDA*
Quad Report Attached
*
ASSETS AND PLATFORMS*
The following digital files are attached. Information is current as of
19 1500 June 10.
*
REGIONAL*
No Report
*
LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOVT AFFAIRS*
No Report
*
COMMS / PUBLIC AFFAIRS*
No Report
*EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT*
No Report
*DATA INFORMATION*
No Report
*INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS*
No Report
*
LEGAL / GC*
No Report
*POLICY / BUDGET*
No Report
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
(
(!
!
(
!
(
30N !
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
30N
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(

28N

(

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
26N
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
FL
30N
30N

28N
(
Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
!
(
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
26N
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
30N !
!
(
(
((!
!
((
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
( !
(!
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(!
!
((
(
(
(
(!
(!
!
(!
!
((
(
!
!
!
!
!
(
!

(
((
!
(
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(!
(
!(!((
(
!
(
(
!
(

!
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(!
(
((
!
( !
!
!
(
!
!
( (
(
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
!!
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
(!
!
!
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
( (
!
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(!
(
(
(!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
!
(
!
(
!
(

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
28N
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
)
!
!
!
"
!
(
!
(
)
(
)"
"
)
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
*
#
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
)
)
)
)"
)"
)"
"
"
"
"
"
)
)
)
)
)
"
"
"
) )
" "
)

" ) )
)"
"
)
)
)
"
"
"
)
"
)"
"
!
")

)
"
)
"
"
)
"
( )
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
"
""
))

)
"
"
)
)
) "
"
) )
" ) )
"

)
"
"
)
"
)
"
)
#
*
Skimmer-caught:
#
New
* #
Confirmed Location
* #
*
"
)
New
"
)
Confirmed Location
"
)
28N
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
Kilometers
100 150 200
25
50
26N
90W
88W
86W

As of 19 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48 N43
N57
N46
N68
N42
N44
N47
N49
N51
N52
Status Today
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
NOAA NRDA Activities Report
6/19/2010
Information as of 6/18/10
Key Results
None
Technical
Working
Groups
Field
Teams or
Ship
Deployed
4 Teams
Location
Data collected
Shoreline
1) Hospital &
Wilkinson Bay, 2)
Lake Grande Ecaille,
3) Calumet Island,
and 4) Landry Bay,
Mud Lake
5 km N of well head
Data sheets,
waypoint tracklogs,
and photos.
Observations
compared with
SCAT data,
Deep water
sampling
Plume sampling
Lab sample inventory:

Total: 7,025 samples (60% water, 30%sediement)
Upcoming Activities
Technical working groups developing work plans and

identifying opportunities for restoration
Field Teams

Shoreline teams to Barataria Bay

SAV field team to St. Andrews Bay, FL 6/22

Marine Mammal photo-id and biopsy teams

Marine mammal and sea turtle flights M,W, Sat.

Fish team testing methods for submerged oil

Human Use boat ramp and shore fishing counts

continuing in LA, MS, AL and FL
Water
Column
Brooks
McCall
Jack Fitz
2 km ring from well

head
Coastal sampling LA
Thomas
Jefferson
Endeavor
CTD casts
In transit
Deep water
sampling, drifters
7 sightings with
approx. 95 dolphins
Marine
Mammals
and Sea
Turtles
Dolphin
photo-id
survey
Gordon
Gunter
Barataria Bay and

Bay des Ileitis
Transects S of FL
panhandle
Acoustic surveys
PRIORITY
ISSUE TEAMS
NIC/ICC/NRT
SCIENCE
STATUS UPDATES
No Report
LEAD
Bill Conner
NOTES
o NOAA scientists have been routinely analyzing water samples taken in and around the well head at depth to monitor for
the presence of dispersant compound and in particular the major COREXIT components of propylene glycol (1,2-
propanediol) and 2-butoxy ethanol. These "solvents" are up to 30% of the volume of the dispersant mixture. We have not
seen in any of the samples analyzed (~150), any of these substances (with Method Detection Limits (MDL) of 0.6 and 0.2
ppm respectively).
o A modified form of the NOAA draft data and clearance policy was submitted to the JAG to potentially use it as the
clearance policy of that interagency group
Steve Murawski
LMR
Fisheries Closures
There was no change to the closed area for June 19, 2010, The closed area remains 80,806 sq mi (209,286 sq km) and
covers about 33% of the GOM EEZ.
John Oliver
Seafood Inspection
On June 18 there was a conference with Department of Commerce Public Affairs to go over the seafood safety process and
methods for tracking samples. There was confusion by the press over a statement regarding samples we had received which
turned out to be completely false.
Next week we will issue an update on the status of sampling cruises and samples being processed and analyzed.
Increase of 11 turtle strandings (1 dead in FL, 1 dead in AL, 4 dead in MS, 2 dead in LA and 1 live oiled from off of LA; 1
dead from FL & 1 dead in LA from June 17)
Dolphin necropsy status was re-evaluated for all cases, causing numbers in each category to be recalculated
The current designated spill area encompasses the coastline from the Texas/Louisiana border to Apalachicola (Franklin
County), Florida. All stranded animals within this geographic range are being examined following the oil spill response
protocols.
The complete health and stranding report, stranding maps and summary are attached.
NRDA
Quad Report Attached
Tony Penn
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.1
The following digital files are attached. Information is current as of 19 1500 June 10.
Phil Kenul
FUNCTION TEAMS
REGIONAL No Report Buck Sutter
John Gray
Justin Kenney
Andy Winer
Joe Klimavicz
Jim Turner
Lois Schiffer
Sally Yozell LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOVT
No Report AFFAIRS
COMMS / PUBLIC AFFAIRS EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT DATA INFORMATION INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS LEGAL / GC POLICY / BUDGET No Report No Report No Report No Report No Report No Report
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.1
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
30N !
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
FL
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(

28N Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
(
!
28N
26N
0 25
50
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.2
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
FL
30N
30N

28N Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
FORECASTUNCERTAINTY
Uncertainty - 24Hr
(
!
28N
!
(
26N
0 25
50
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
92W
90W
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.3
94W
92W
90W
88W
86W
32N
32N
LA
MS
AL
30N !
( !
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
(!
( !
!
(
(
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
(!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
( (
( !
!
(
!
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
((
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
(!
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
( (
(
!
!
(
!
((
!
!
(
(
!
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
)
!
!
(
(
"
!
(
"
(
)
!
!
(
#
(
(
!
*
FL
!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
30N

Strandings:
!
New
(
!
Confirmed Location
(
!
(
Skimmer-caught:
* New
#
#
#
"
New
)
"
Confirmed Location
)
"
)
Trajectory - 24Hr
FORECASTHEAVY
FORECASTMEDIUM
FORECASTLIGHT
Uncertainty - 24Hr
94W
92W
#
*
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
)
)
"
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
"
"
)
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
)
"
)
)"
)
)
"
"
(
)
"
"
"
)
!
)
)
"

"
)
)
"
"
)
"
"
)
)
)
"
"
)
"
)
)
)
"
"
"
)
"
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
28N
28N
0 25
50 90W
100
150
Kilometers
200
26N
88W
86W
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.4
Defined Categories of Stranded Marine Mammals/Sea Turtles During MC 252 Spill

1) Visibly Oiled
a. Evidence of external oiling (live or dead animals); or
b. Evidence of internal oiling on initial exam: Oil in oral cavity, nares or blowhole (live or dead animals); or
c. Evidence of internal oiling on necropsy: Oil in esophagus, gastrointestinal tract and/or respiratory tract (dead animals).
2) Not Visibly Oiled: Do not meet criteria above. Note not visibly oiled does not imply cause of death nor whether this event
impacted the animal.
Procedures for Determining Oiling Status in Marine Mammals or Sea Turtles
1) Upon report of stranded animal, designated members of the Wildlife Branch (trained to appropriate evidence collection and
Chain of Custody procedure) will be dispatched to the site for initial evaluation.
2) All animals within the designated spill area will be immediately externally evaluated, sampled, and photographed following
NOAAs Marine Mammal Oil Spill Response Guidelines or the established Sea Turtle MS 252 Response Guidelines.
a. All animals within a specified distance that affected mammals or turtles may travel or float after being affected
(distance to be determined upon daily consultation with the Envt Unit within the Planning Section and the NRDA Unit) will
be immediately externally evaluated and, if suspicious, will be externally sampled.
b. Those animals not within or adjacent to the designated spill area should not be considered as part of this spill and
not be accounted for in the spill documentation (but standard stranding procedures should be followed).
3) All stranded animals will be grossly evaluated by necropsy (cetacea at site of stranding, at the primary care facility, or at a pre-
determined necropsy site if logistically feasible, sea turtles at the primary care facility or at a designated remote pathology
center).
a. For certain carcasses, such as turtles with open coelomic cavities or dolphins in advanced state of decomposition and
no intact GI tract, it may not be possible to pathologically determine cause of death or pathologies and collect useable
tissues. The sampling of these animals will be for the presence of external oil only.
4) Oiling status will be determined based on external and internal gross evaluation. NOTE THAT THE DETERMINATION OF OILING
STATUS DOES NOT ESTABLISH SUB-APPARENT OIL EXPOSURE OR THE CAUSE OF DEATH. In fact, some gross pathological changes,
such as respiratory damage or significant irritation to ocular tissues or mucous membranes, can be associated with oil exposure.
The determination of these types of impacts must come from further evaluation of the samples and other evidence, such as
histopathological evaluation of tissues and/or PAH analysis of the biological samples.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Summary Totals
TOTAL Dolphins
Live Oiled Subtotal 30 Apr-31 May Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 Category Totals Species Total
0 0 0 1 0 1 Unoiled 0 2 0 0 0 2 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 47
Oiled 1 2 0 0 0 3 Dead
Unoiled 31 8 0 0 0 39 Pending
0 2 0 0 0 2 Date
Totals
32 14
0
1
0
47
Subtotal 30 Apr-31 May

1) Visibly Oiled
b. Evidence of internal oiling on initial exam: Oil in oral cavity, nares or blowhole (live or dead
animals); or
c. Evidence of internal oiling on necropsy: Oil in esophagus, gastrointestinal tract and/or
respiratory tract (dead animals).
2) Not Visibly Oiled: Do not meet criteria above. Note not visibly oiled does not imply cause of
death nor whether this event impacted the animal.
1) Upon report of stranded animal, designated members of the Wildlife Branch (trained to
appropriate evidence collection and Chain of Custody procedure) will be dispatched to the site for
initial animals within the designated spill area will be immediately externally evaluated, sampled,
2) Allevaluation.
and photographed following NOAAs Marine Mammal Oil Spill Response Guidelines or the
established Sea Turtle MS 252 Response Guidelines.
a. All animals within a specified distance that affected mammals or turtles may travel or
float after being affected (distance to be determined upon daily consultation with the Envt
Unit within the Planning Section and the NRDA Unit) will be immediately externally evaluated
and, if suspicious, will be externally sampled.
b. Those animals not within or adjacent to the designated spill area should not be
considered as part of this spill and not be accounted for in the spill documentation (but
standard stranding procedures should be followed).
3) All stranded animals will be grossly evaluated by necropsy (cetacea at site of stranding, at the
primary care facility, or at a pre-determined necropsy site if logistically feasible, sea turtles at the
primary care facility or at a designated remote pathology center).
a. For certain carcasses, such as turtles with open coelomic cavities or dolphins in advanced
state of decomposition and no intact GI tract, it may not be possible to pathologically

determine cause of death or pathologies and collect useable tissues. The sampling of these
animals will be for the presence of external oil only.
4) Oiling status will be determined based on external and internal gross evaluation. NOTE THAT THE
DETERMINATION OF OILING STATUS DOES NOT ESTABLISH SUB-APPARENT OIL EXPOSURE OR THE
CAUSE OF DEATH. In fact, some gross pathological changes, such as respiratory damage or significant
irritation to ocular tissues or mucous membranes, can be associated with oil exposure. The
determination of these types of impacts must come from further evaluation of the samples and
other evidence, such as histopathological evaluation of tissues and/or PAH analysis of the biological
Page 2 of 9
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Summary Totals
TOTAL Whales
0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 1 Date
Totals
0 1
0
0
0
1

1) Visibly Oiled
b. Evidence of internal oiling on initial exam: Oil in oral cavity, nares or blowhole (live or
dead animals); or
2) Allevaluation.
Unit within the Planning Section and the NRDA Unit) will be immediately externally
evaluated and, if suspicious, will be externally sampled.
a. For certain carcasses, such as turtles with open coelomic cavities or dolphins in
advanced state of decomposition and no intact GI tract, it may not be possible to

pathologically determine cause of death or pathologies and collect useable tissues. The
sampling of these animals will be for the presence of external oil only.
4) Oiling status will be determined based on external and internal gross evaluation. NOTE THAT
THE DETERMINATION OF OILING STATUS DOES NOT ESTABLISH SUB-APPARENT OIL EXPOSURE OR
THE CAUSE OF DEATH. In fact, some gross pathological changes, such as respiratory damage or
significant irritation to ocular tissues or mucous membranes, can be associated with oil exposure.
The determination of these types of impacts must come from further evaluation of the samples and
Page 3 of 9
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Summary Totals
TOTAL Turtles
Live Strandings Subtotal 30 Apr-31 May Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 Category Totals Species Total
2 3 1 0 0 6 17 9 0 3 0 29 0 2 0 0 0 2 1 3 1 0 0 5 Dead Strandings
82 0 0 0 0 82 153 111 5 6 8 283 Live Directed Captures
Dead Directed Captures
Date
10 53 6 0 1 70 480
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 265
184
13
9
9
480
Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending
Totals

1) Visibly Oiled
c. Evidence of internal oiling on necropsy: Oil in esophagus, gastrointestinal tract and/or respiratory tract (dead
animals).
1) Upon report of stranded animal, designated members of the Wildlife Branch (trained to appropriate evidence collection
and Chain of Custody procedure) will be dispatched to the site for initial evaluation.
2) All animals within the designated spill area will be immediately externally evaluated, sampled, and photographed
following NOAAs Marine Mammal Oil Spill Response Guidelines or the established Sea Turtle MS 252 Response
Guidelines.
(distance to be determined upon daily consultation with the Envt Unit within the Planning Section and the NRDA Unit)
will be immediately externally evaluated and, if suspicious, will be externally sampled.
b. Those animals not within or adjacent to the designated spill area should not be considered as part of this spill
and not be accounted for in the spill documentation (but standard stranding procedures should be followed).
3) All stranded animals will be grossly evaluated by necropsy (cetacea at site of stranding, at the primary care facility, or at a
pre-determined necropsy site if logistically feasible, sea turtles at the primary care facility or at a designated remote pathology
center).
a. For certain carcasses, such as turtles with open coelomic cavities or dolphins in advanced state of decomposition
and no intact GI tract, it may not be possible to pathologically determine cause of death or pathologies and collect
useable tissues. The sampling of these animals will be for the presence of external oil only.
4) Oiling status will be determined based on external and internal gross evaluation. NOTE THAT THE DETERMINATION OF
OILING STATUS DOES NOT ESTABLISH SUB-APPARENT OIL EXPOSURE OR THE CAUSE OF DEATH. In fact, some gross pathological
changes, such as respiratory damage or significant irritation to ocular tissues or mucous membranes, can be associated with oil
exposure. The determination of these types of impacts must come from further evaluation of the samples and other evidence,
such as histopathological evaluation of tissues and/or PAH analysis of the biological samples.
Page 4 of 9
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Summary Totals
370
Page 5 of 9
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Status Summary
Dolphin Status
Total Verified Dolphins Total dead stranded dolphins Total live dolphins currently in rehabilitation Total live dolphins stranded that died in care Total live released dolphins Dolphin Necropsy Status
Number collected and unable to perform necropsies (e.g., advanced
decomposition) Number of partial necropsies performed (e.g., due to scavenging or autolysis) Number of full necropsies performed Verified strandings but animals not collected due to stage of decomposition or
unable to recover
Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants Whale Status
Total Verified Whales Total dead stranded whales Total live whales currently in rehabilitation Total live whales stranded that died in care Total live released whales Whale Necropsy Status
unable to recover
Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants Turtle Status
Total Verified Turtles Total turtles found dead Total live turtles currently in rehabilitation Total live turtles that died in rehabilitation Total live turtles released Turtle Necropsy Status
unable to recover Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants
46
251
7
17
59
480
373
96
7
4
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
25
7
8
4
47
44
0
2
1
Page 6 of 9
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Dolphins
TOTAL Dolphins
Live Oiled Subtotal 30 Apr-31 May Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 TOTALS Species Total
0 0 0 1 0 1 Dead
Date
Totals
32
14
0
1
0
47
Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending

0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 47
Dolphins - FLORIDA
Live Dead
1 2 0 0 0 3 31 8 0 0 0 39 0 2 0 0 0 2
Dolphins - MISSISSIPPI
Live Oiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled Pendin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
Dolphins - LOUISIANA
Live Oiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled Pendin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
Oiled 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 Dead
Unoile 20 6 0 0 0 26 Pendin
0
0
0
0
0
0
Oiled 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dead
Unoile 8 1 0 0 0 9 Pendin
0
1
0
0
0
1
Oiled Subtotal 30 Apr-31 May Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 TOTALS Species Total
0 0 0 1 0 1
Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

Dolphins - ALABAMA
Live Dead
0 0 0 0 0 0 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0
Page 7 of 9
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Whales
TOTAL Whales
Live Oiled Subtotal 30 Apr-31 May Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 Category Totals Species Group Total
0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Whales - FLORIDA
0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Whales - ALABAMA
Live
0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Whales - Off-Shore
0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0
1
0
0
0
1
Unoiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Live Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 Oiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dead
Unoiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Live Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Whales - LOUISIANA
Dead
Unoiled Pending
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 Whales - MISSISSIPPI
Dead
Unoiled Pending
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0 1 0 0 0 1 Date
Totals
0
1
0
0
0
1
Page 8 of 9
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Turtles
TOTAL Turtles
Live Strandings
Dead Strandings
Live Directed Captures
Oiled 0 3 0 0 3 Unoiled Pending
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Date
Totals
Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Subtotal 30 Apr-31

May
Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 Category Totals Species Total
Turtles - FLORIDA
Live
Subtotal 30 Apr-31
May
Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 TOTALS Species Total
0 1 1 0 0 2 4 3 0 0 0 7 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 49
Turtles - ALABAMA
Live Subtotal 30 Apr-31
May
Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 TOTALS Species Total
0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 63
5 0 0 0 0 5 Dead
0 0 0 0 0 0 Dead
2 3 1 0 0 6 17 9 0 3 0 29 0 2 0 0 0 2 1 3 1 0 0 5 82 0 0 0 0 82
Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending 153 111 5 6 8 283 1 70 480

0 0 0 0 10 53 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
265
184
13
9
9
480
Turtles - MISSISSIPPI
Live Pending 27 10 0 1 1 39 Oiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled Pending 9 4 0 3 0 16 0 1 0 0 0 1 203
Turtles - LOUISIANA
Live Pending 43 9 0 0 1 53 Oiled 2 0 0 0 0 2 Unoiled Pending 2 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 92
Unoiled Pendin
2 0 0 0 0 2 61
15
0
2
2
80
Unoiled Pendin
75 0 0 0 0 75 22
77
5
3
4
111
Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled
Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled
Turtles - Dedicated On-Water Turtle Surveys

Live Dead
Pending
0
0
0
0
0
Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Subtotal 30 Apr-31

May
Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10
18-Jun-10 TOTALS Species Total
1 70 0 0 0 0 0 3 73
0 0 10 53 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
Page 9 of 9
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.5
Summary Totals
TOTAL Dolphins
0 0 0 1 0 1 Unoiled 0 2 0 0 0 2 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 47
0 2 0 0 0 2 Date
Totals
32 14
0
1
0
47

1) Visibly Oiled
b. Evidence of internal oiling on initial exam: Oil in oral cavity, nares or blowhole (live or dead
animals); or
2) Allevaluation.
Unit within the Planning Section and the NRDA Unit) will be immediately externally evaluated
and, if suspicious, will be externally sampled.
a. For certain carcasses, such as turtles with open coelomic cavities or dolphins in advanced
state of decomposition and no intact GI tract, it may not be possible to pathologically

determine cause of death or pathologies and collect useable tissues. The sampling of these
animals will be for the presence of external oil only.
4) Oiling status will be determined based on external and internal gross evaluation. NOTE THAT THE
DETERMINATION OF OILING STATUS DOES NOT ESTABLISH SUB-APPARENT OIL EXPOSURE OR THE
CAUSE OF DEATH. In fact, some gross pathological changes, such as respiratory damage or significant
irritation to ocular tissues or mucous membranes, can be associated with oil exposure. The
determination of these types of impacts must come from further evaluation of the samples and
Page 1 of 5
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.6
Summary Totals
TOTAL Whales
0 0 0 0 0 0 Unoiled 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pending 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 1 Date
Totals
0 1
0
0
0
1

1) Visibly Oiled
b. Evidence of internal oiling on initial exam: Oil in oral cavity, nares or blowhole (live or
dead animals); or
2) Allevaluation.
Unit within the Planning Section and the NRDA Unit) will be immediately externally
evaluated and, if suspicious, will be externally sampled.
a. For certain carcasses, such as turtles with open coelomic cavities or dolphins in
advanced state of decomposition and no intact GI tract, it may not be possible to

pathologically determine cause of death or pathologies and collect useable tissues. The
sampling of these animals will be for the presence of external oil only.
4) Oiling status will be determined based on external and internal gross evaluation. NOTE THAT
THE DETERMINATION OF OILING STATUS DOES NOT ESTABLISH SUB-APPARENT OIL EXPOSURE OR
THE CAUSE OF DEATH. In fact, some gross pathological changes, such as respiratory damage or
significant irritation to ocular tissues or mucous membranes, can be associated with oil exposure.
The determination of these types of impacts must come from further evaluation of the samples and
Page 2 of 5
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.6
Summary Totals
TOTAL Turtles
Live Strandings Subtotal 30 Apr-31 May Subtotal 1 Jun-15 Jun 16-Jun-10 17-Jun-10 18-Jun-10 Category Totals Species Total
2 3 1 0 0 6 17 9 0 3 0 29 0 2 0 0 0 2 1 3 1 0 0 5 Dead Strandings
82 0 0 0 0 82 153 111 5 6 8 283 Live Directed Captures
Date
10 53 6 0 1 70 480
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 265
184
13
9
9
480
Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending Oiled Unoiled Pending
Totals

1) Visibly Oiled
c. Evidence of internal oiling on necropsy: Oil in esophagus, gastrointestinal tract and/or respiratory tract (dead
animals).
1) Upon report of stranded animal, designated members of the Wildlife Branch (trained to appropriate evidence collection
and Chain of Custody procedure) will be dispatched to the site for initial evaluation.
2) All animals within the designated spill area will be immediately externally evaluated, sampled, and photographed
following NOAAs Marine Mammal Oil Spill Response Guidelines or the established Sea Turtle MS 252 Response
Guidelines.
(distance to be determined upon daily consultation with the Envt Unit within the Planning Section and the NRDA Unit)
will be immediately externally evaluated and, if suspicious, will be externally sampled.
b. Those animals not within or adjacent to the designated spill area should not be considered as part of this spill
and not be accounted for in the spill documentation (but standard stranding procedures should be followed).
3) All stranded animals will be grossly evaluated by necropsy (cetacea at site of stranding, at the primary care facility, or at a
pre-determined necropsy site if logistically feasible, sea turtles at the primary care facility or at a designated remote pathology
center).
a. For certain carcasses, such as turtles with open coelomic cavities or dolphins in advanced state of decomposition
and no intact GI tract, it may not be possible to pathologically determine cause of death or pathologies and collect
useable tissues. The sampling of these animals will be for the presence of external oil only.
4) Oiling status will be determined based on external and internal gross evaluation. NOTE THAT THE DETERMINATION OF
OILING STATUS DOES NOT ESTABLISH SUB-APPARENT OIL EXPOSURE OR THE CAUSE OF DEATH. In fact, some gross pathological
changes, such as respiratory damage or significant irritation to ocular tissues or mucous membranes, can be associated with oil
exposure. The determination of these types of impacts must come from further evaluation of the samples and other evidence,
such as histopathological evaluation of tissues and/or PAH analysis of the biological samples.
Page 3 of 5
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.6
Summary Totals
370
Page 4 of 5
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.6
Status Summary
Dolphin Status
Total Verified Dolphins Total dead stranded dolphins Total live dolphins currently in rehabilitation Total live dolphins stranded that died in care Total live released dolphins Dolphin Necropsy Status
unable to recover
Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants Whale Status
Total Verified Whales Total dead stranded whales Total live whales currently in rehabilitation Total live whales stranded that died in care Total live released whales Whale Necropsy Status
unable to recover
Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants Turtle Status
Total Verified Turtles Total turtles found dead Total live turtles currently in rehabilitation Total live turtles that died in rehabilitation Total live turtles released Turtle Necropsy Status
unable to recover Carcasses to be necropsied, if decomposition stage warrants
46
251
7
17
59
480
373
96
7
4
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
25
7
8
4
47
44
0
2
1
Page 5 of 5
As of 3/29/2011 9:57 PM
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.6

Increase of 11 turtle strandings (1 dead in FL, 1 dead in AL, 4 dead in MS, 2 dead in LA
and 1 live oiled from off of LA; 1 dead from FL & 1 dead in LA from June 17)
Dolphin necropsy status was re-evaluated for all cases, causing numbers in each category
to be recalculated
Sea Turtles
17 report)

o o

strandings.
in rehab):

from June 17)
17)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.7


o o o o

Marine Mammals
17).

3 were live stranded dolphins, one of which died shortly after stranding, one that was
euthanized upon stranding and one that stranded live in boom and was freed immediately
(no change from June 17)
1 dead stranded sperm whale has been verified to date within the designated spill area (no
change from June 17)
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.7
were euthanized):

25 assessed and unable to perform necropsies (e.g. advanced decomposition) (increase of
10 from June 17)
7 partial necropsies performed (e.g. due to scavenging or autolysis) (decrease of 3 from
June 17)
recover (decrease of 7 from June 17)

from June 17)
17)
Dolphins: Three of the verified dolphins had evidence of external oil on the tongue and/or
determine whether the two dead animals were externally oiled pre- or post-mortem. All
other necropsy findings are pending.

of 2010.
o o o
o

Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.7

(2003-2007).
A marine mammal carcass retrieval and disposal plan and a sampling and disposal plan
for dead marine mammals observed by NOAA vessels are being finalized.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.7

As of 19 JUN 2010
N56
N45
N48
N43
N57
N46
N68
N42
N44
N47
N49
N51
N52
Status Today
CALNEX, Ontario, CA
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.8
NOAA Ship Positions

As of 19 JUN 2010
M2
DY
SH
DJ
RA
FA
HB
MF
RB
R2
HA
KA
TJ TJ
GU
NF
DE
SE EX
Indonesia
PC
= underway
= alongside
ID TJ HB NF RB GU Status Today
Underway for continued DWH ops (acoustics and water sampling). Replenish
supplies 06/21, Pascagoula. ETA Key West, FL 7/2
Alongside Newport, RI. ETD 7/6 for scheduled project
Underway for DWH ops (marine mammal survey). ETA Mobile, AL 6/21 for
repairs (~ 2 days in drydock) then resume ops. ETA Pascagoula, MS 6/26
PC
Pascagoula, MS 7/2
R2 ETD for sea trials 06/20. ETD Pascagoula, MS 6/22 for DWH shrimp
ETA Galveston 06/30.
ID
FA SH MF DY
Status Today
Alongside Port Angeles, WA. Departure 06/21 for scheduled project

Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 6/21 Seattle, WA
HA
Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 06/26 Pearl Harbor, HI
M2 SE KA RA DJ EX DE Underway on scheduled project. Arrival 07/04 San Francisco
Alongside Cascade, OR for major repair period
Alongside Seattle, WA. Decommissioning scheduled week of 08/02
Arrive today, Bitung, Indonesia (International Date Line
Underway en route GOMEX for DWH ops (seafood study). Arrival Key West, FL
06/24 for staging. Departure 06/25
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.8

As of 18 JUN 2010
BB CA
RB OV
RC
GY
EN
EN CH
BM
JF
WS
= underway
= alongside
Type R/V Brooks McCall M/V Bunny Bordelon R/V Cape Hatteras R/V Caretta R/V Endeavor R/V Gandy
R/V Jack Fitz R/V Ocean Veritas M/V Rachel Bordelon R/V Ryan Chouest R/V Walton Smith
Status Today
In Houma, LA
In Houma, LA
In Miami, FL
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.8
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.8
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.8
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.8
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.8
NOAA NRDA Activities Report
6/19/2010
Information as of 6/18/10
Key Results
None
Technical
Working
Groups
Field
Teams or
Ship
Deployed
Shoreline 4 Teams 1) Hospital &

Wilkinson Bay, 2)
Lake Grande Ecaille,
3) Calumet Island,
and 4) Landry Bay,
Mud Lake
Water
Column
Data sheets,
waypoint tracklogs,
and photos.
Observations
compared with
SCAT data,
Deep water
sampling
2 km ring from well
head
Plume sampling
Location
Data collected
Lab sample inventory:
Total: 7,025 samples (60% water, 30%sediement)
Upcoming Activities
Technical working groups developing work plans and

identifying opportunities for restoration
Field Teams
Shoreline teams to Barataria Bay
SAV field team to St. Andrews Bay, FL 6/22
Marine Mammal photo-id and biopsy teams
Marine mammal and sea turtle flights M,W, Sat.
Fish team testing methods for submerged oil
Human Use boat ramp and shore fishing counts
continuing in LA, MS, AL and FL
Brooks
McCall
Jack Fitz
5 km N of well head
Thomas
Jefferson
Endeavor
Coastal sampling LA
CTD casts
In transit
Deep water
sampling, drifters
Marine
Mammals
and Sea
Turtles
Dolphin
photo-id
survey
Gordon
Gunter
Barataria Bay and

Bay des Ileitis
7 sightings with
approx. 95
dolphins
Transects S of FL
panhandle
Acoustic surveys
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.9
Jun
Jul Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
N42 WP-3D
DWH Gulf Loop
Hurricane Season
CALNEX
Hurricane Season
DWH Multi Spectral

N48 Twin Otter

N56 Twin Otter
N57 Twin Otter
CALNEX
Harbor Seals
Steller Sea Lions
Harbor Seals
BWASP
NERW
BOWFEST
N68 King Air
Bigelow
Delaware II
MX
Cetacean Abundance
Mapping
Bottom Trawl
ECOMON
Benthic
ECOMON
Atl. Herring
Underway en route GOMEX for DWH ops (seafood study). Arrival Key West, FL 06/24 for staging. Departure 06/25
Brown
Foster
GRNMS
Repairs
Tsunami/Trop. Atl
Gunter
DWH
Repairs
Marine Mammals
F.I.
Fall Plankton
Jefferson
DWH
FGBNMS
Key West
Chesapeake Bay
Oregon II
MRP/Trials
Groundfish
ETD for sea trials 06/20. ETD Pascagoula, MS 6/22 for DWH shrimp trawl/ichthyoplankton survey (approx 4-5 days), then resume scheduled work. ETA Galveston 06/30.
Pisces
Warranty
SEAMAP Reef Fish
Departed 6/14 for scheduled project in GOMEX, no DWH tasking yet. ETA Pascagoula, MS 7/2
Jun Jul
Aug
Sep Oct
Nov
R/V HST
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.12
R/V Gandy
R/V Caretta
R/V Harold B
NOAA Small Boat conducting reef fish surveys out of Panama City, F L.
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.12
25' Parker
NOS small boat w/ twin outboards in Charleston, SC, available for deployment and trailerable
Other Assets
Jun
Jul Aug
Sep Oct
Nov
Beau Rivage
Brooks McCall
Bunny Bordelon
Capt Hatteras
Endeavor
Jack Fitz
Ocean Veritas
Pelican
Rachel Bordelon
Ryan Chouest
Walton Smith
IOOS Gliders
NAVO Gliders
In Panama City gearing up bottom long line operations

In Houma, LA
LOOP current study for MMS scheduled to begin 6/27
In Houma, LA
In Theodore, AL, departing in PM
In Miami, FL
DWH*
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.12
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.12
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.12
3/29/2011
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.12
SHIPS
06/15 06/26
Foster June 5 June 19 None: NF-10-05, Grays Reef
Comments
survey). ETA Mobile, AL 6/21 for repairs (~
2 days in drydock) then resume ops. ETA
Pascagoula, MS 6/26
a/s Charleston, SC for z-drive repairs.
Cancelled leg 2 of GRNMS project in order to
complete repairs and allow time to transit to
GOM in support of DWH efforts. Departure
delayed to June 25, GOM arrival ~ June 30th.
Awaiting final DWH project instructions and
tasking.
Thomas
Jefferson
the oil.)
Delaware
II
Foster Gunter July 5 July 18 July 18 August 4 June18 tbd DE-10-05 Benthic Habitat Underway en route GOMEX for DWH ops
(seafood study). Arrival Key West, FL 06/24
for staging. Departure 06/25
all 7 DAS
in Pascagoula
time during this mission period June 15 tbd TJ-10-03 FGBNMS Underway for continued DWH ops (acoustics
and water sampling). Replenish supplies
06/21, Pascagoula. ETA Key West, FL 7/2
ETD for sea trials 06/20. ETD Pascagoula, MS
6/22 for DWH shrimp trawl/ichthyoplankton
scheduled work. ETA Galveston 06/30.
Underway for DWH ops (marine mammal

survey (approx 4-5 days), then resume
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.13

23 DAS
September
September
3
28
impacted by oil
2 or 3 legs for water and reprovisioning
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.13
Aircraft
Asset N42RF
WP-3D
several days. DWH Loop Current flight,
departed 6/18, 0900L, MacDill AFB
N43RF
WP-3D
N46RF
Twin
Otter
April September
N57RF
Twin
Otter
June 7 September
N68RF
King Air
April September
mapping.
Document ID: 0.7.19.1893.13

From: Shelby Walker <[email protected]>
Subject: Actions from this mornings call-June 20
To: Jen Pizza <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,"[email protected]"
<[email protected]>,_HQ Deep Water Horizon Staff <[email protected]>
Summary of actions from this morning's call.

Fisheries
W ill investigate what "Dolphin necropsy status was re-evaluated for all cases, causing
numbers in each category to be recalculated" really means and report back.
Science
Bob Haddad will follow-up with EPA tonight on the status of their dispersant testing to
ensure that EPA and NOAA are using the same method and will report back tomorrow.
Science to look at the toxicity of two of the dispersant compounds-propylene glycol (1,2-
propanediol) and 2-butoxy ethanol.
Science box on engagement:
to continue to examine engaging with the external community e.g., monthly or
bimonthly science meetings.
investigating how NOAA will engage with those institutions receiving BP funding.
Need to examine how to fully engage with social science
Need to follow-up on the status of the June 30 meeting.-From Andy W iner-"FYI.
Upcoming summit in Mississippi dealing with social and economic issues. I am trying to
determine what role, if any, NOAA or Sea Grant have at this Summit." - [Additional
information was recevied by Andy and LaDonn Swann. Dr. Robinson was copied]
Data and Information

Joe will investigate posting historical data to ERMA and how we can highlight new
information being posted (e.g., press release, etc).
Received(Date): Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:58:31 +0100

Subject: BP Gulf of Mexico Update for June 20

06/20/2010 9:00 AM EDT

the Gulf of Mexico:
1. 2. Offshore - to stop the flow of oil on the sea floor;
3. Onshore to protect and cleanup the shoreline, inform the public, and compensate
impacted people.

Highlights
11,047 barrels of oil captured by the LMRP Cap on June 19.

x Q4000 drilling platform connected to valves on blowout preventer captured and

flared 9,994 barrels of oil on June 19.
x x
Over $107 million in claims paid as of June 19 see State Summaries.

Over 100,000 Alternative Response Technology submissions have been received.

Offshore Sea Floor

Containment Recovery
Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap 11,047 barrels of oil were captured

x through the LMRP cap during the past 24-hour period (an additional 14,446 barrels
were captured on Friday). Total recovery from the LMRP Cap is 238,870 barrels to
date. Oil and natural gas are being carried to the surface through a riser pipe and oil is
being stored on the Discoverer Enterprise. The gas is being flared; 25.6 million cubic
feet were burned on June 19 (an additional 29.6 million cubic feet were captured on
Friday).
x Q4000 Direct Connect to Blowout Preventer This containment system, which is

connected directly to the BOP and carries oil and gas through a manifold and hoses to
the Q4000 vessel, flared 9,994 barrels of oil and 17.8 million cubic feet of gas on June
19 (an additional 10,016 barrels of oil and 17.8 million cubic feet of gas were flared on
Friday). Because the Q4000 does not have storage capacity, it uses a specialized
clean-burning system to flare captured oil and gas.
Permanent
Riser Systems BP is bringing in two additional ships that will
x be connected to permanent riser systems. These systems will be capable of quick
disconnect/reconnect in the event of a hurricane. The first riser has been fabricated and
is being installed. The second riser is in the design stage. More information can be
found under Technical Update on BPs website at:
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9033572&contentId=7061710
th
New Technical Update slides - June 18
:
http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/incident_respon
se/STAGING/local_assets/downloads_pdfs/Technical_briefing_061810.pdf
continues, with approximately 17,780 gallons applied on June 19.
kill by pumping heavy mud and cement into the wellbore. It is estimated the total
x The first relief well (work being performed by the Development Driller III) is at

approximately 16,000 feet below sea level. This well was spudded on May 2.
x The second relief well (work being performed by Development Driller II) is at

approximately 10,000 feet below sea level. Drilling began on May 16.

Skimming Vessels Over 400 skimmers designed to separate oil from water are
deployed across the Gulf. Over 530,000 barrels of oil-water mix have been recovered
and treated.
Surface Dispersant 8,380 gallons of dispersant were applied on the surface

yesterday.
In-Situ Burning 5 burns were conducted in the last 24-hour period (an additional 16
burns were conducted on Friday). 150,000 total barrels are estimated to have been
consumed through burns.
BP Environmental Monitoring Program As part of the response effort, several

ongoing sampling and monitoring programs have been implemented based on the type
of impact or location and trajectory of the spill. Monitoring and sampling programs are
being conducted for:
x x x x x
air quality

water
quality
water
column sampling
submerged oil, and

worker health.



Interactive Mapping Websites BP has developed an Interactive Mapping Tool meant

to provide a one-stop shop for detailed near-real-time information about the response to
the Deepwater Horizon BP oil spill. The tool integrates the latest data on the oil spills
trajectory, fishery closed areas, wildlife and place-based Gulf Coast resources, locations
of oiled shoreline and other data points. The BP mapping tool is located at:
http://www.gulfofmexicoresponsemap.com. The U.S. Government has also created a

mapping tool that is located at: www.GeoPlatform.gov/gulfresponse.

x BP is receiving approximately 5,000 suggestions per day on innovative

ways to stop the flow of oil or contain the oil spill. Our team of engineers is reviewing
these as quickly as possible. To submit alternative response technology, or offer
services or products, call (281) 366-5511, or go online at: www.horizonedocs.com.
After forms are received they are reviewed by a team of technical and operational
personnel who assess need, technical feasibility and application.
x The U.S.
white papers that cover: oil sensing improvements to response and detection; oil
Boom Update More than 2.6 million feet of containment boom is deployed or
assigned across the Gulf with 762,000 feet in staging areas. 3.9 million feet of sorbent
boom is deployed with more than 1.9 million feet in staging areas.
Volunteers and Training Volunteers are being trained in five different modules that
range from safety for beach clean-up, to wildlife monitoring, handling of hazardous
materials and vessel operation for laying boom. Information about training can be found
at www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com under volunteers.
State Specific Websites
x x

x x
Louisiana:

Onshore Claims
Over $100 million in claims paid BP has paid $107 million to residents along the Gulf Coast for claims filed as
a result of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. BP has issued more than 31,000 checks in the past seven weeks in response to about
64,000 claims to date. A 1,000-member claim team is working around the clock to
receive and process claims. There are 33 field offices set up in the States of Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama and Florida, and BP is accepting calls through an 800 number as
well as accepting applications online. BP has received about 84,000 calls for claims.
The average time from filing a claim to checks being issued is 4 days for individuals and
seven days for more complex business claims that have provided supporting
documentation. BP's commitment is to move expeditiously and fairly to meet the needs
of the residents of the Gulf Coast.

Filing Claims The contact number for claims is (800) 440-0858. In person claims can
www.bp.com/claims. Note: No person asserting a claim or receiving payment for
interim benefits will be asked or required to sign a release or waive any rights to assert
additional claims, to file an individual legal action, or to participate in other legal actions
associated with the Deepwater Horizon incident.

State-by-State Claims Summary as of June 19
State Louisiana Alabama Florida Mississippi Texas Georgia Other Grand Total
$59,353,335
$18,429,135
$15,072,798
$11,313,404
$1,810,738
$325,274
$1,175,901
$107,480,585
Claims Offices 33 Claims Offices are open across the Gulf Coast to provide locations
where people can go to file or discuss claims. There are more than 170 operators
answering phones, and 667 claims adjusters are staffing the offices.
Belle
Chasse/Gretna



5703 Hwy 56
Chauvin, LA 70344

Cut
(Lafourche Parish)
Off

Unit 2
Cut Off, LA 70345





Suite 2 & 3
Houma, LA 70363



Town Hall
Lafitte, LA 70067


931 US Hwy 90 East



4375 Michoud Blvd


New Orleans East (Orleans Parish) BP Office

4655 Michoud Blvd., Suite D6 (first floor)



956 S. Lewis Street



Slidell, LA 70461

St.
1345 Bayou Rd


41093 Hwy LA 23



Westwego, LA 77094


1171 Highway 90
Biloxi


Biloxi, MS 39532

Pascagoula

5912 Old Mobile Hwy

Suite 3

Bayou LaBatre




1008 Alabama Avenue


Foley

Suite 104
Foley, AL 36535


Suite 1



Suite 1
Mobile, AL 36606


194 14th Street

Suite 105



Suite A&B


Suite 13



Unit B-9


7885 Overseas Hwy

Marathon, FL 33050





3960 Navy Boulevard

Suite 16-17
Pensacola, FL 32507


106 Trade Circle

Suite A



Suite H
Key West, FL 33040

Santa
5008 US Hwy 98W

Unit 6&7

Contact Information

(866) 448-5816
Volunteers to request volunteer information
(866) 448-5816
(281) 366-5511
Services to register as consultant, contractor, vendor, or

(281) 366-5511
(866) 905-4492 or (866)
647-2338
(281) 366-3123
(800) 440-0858

(985) 902-5231 or (985)
center
902-5240
(251) 445-8965
center
Transocean Hotline
(832) 587-8554
MI Swaco Hotline BP Family and third-party contractor hotline Twitter: Oil_Spill_2010

(888) 318-6765
(281) 366-5578
Karen St John
BP America
B6 Privacy

From: "Dave.Westerholm" <[email protected]>
Subject: My thoughts on key messages
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],[email protected], [email protected]
My Thoughts:
1. Use Science to Respond
2. Protect human health
3. Protect our fish and wildlife
4. Assess Damage
5. Restore and Recover
If you just want 3 then:
1. Use Science to Respond
2. Protect human health, fish and wildlife
3. Assess Damage, Restore and Recover
Here is how some of our work falls out into the above categories
1. Use Science to Respond (subsea, surface and shoreline)
SSCs, weather, oceanographic data, modeling, undersea strategies, at sea actions (dispersants,
in situ burn, boom placement), shoreline clean-up, alternative technologies, scientific workshops
2. Protect human health
Seafood safety testing, fisheries closures, assisting EPA with air monitoring
3. Protect our fish and wildlife
Response strategies, booming, rescue, rehab, coordination with ops on EFH, ESA, MMA, etc.
4. Assess Damage
SCAT, damage assessment sampling and evaluation
5. Restore and Recover
Recommendations on cleanup, alternative technologies such as bioremediation,
scientific/academic involvement, long-term strategies
[email protected] wrote:
FYI
Subject:
FW : The federal DW H effort
From:
Mary Glackin <[email protected]>
Date:
Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:19:23 -0400
To:
David Kennedy <[email protected]>
To:
David Kennedy <[email protected]>
Here is the other one.

From: Jane Lubchenco [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 1:33 PM
To: Justin Kenney; '[email protected]'; David Kennedy ([email protected]);
Andrew Winer; Margaret Spring
Cc: Jane Lubchenco
Subject: The federal DWH effort
This may be too in the weeds, but it may trigger some ideas. Just sharing some
packaging thoughts.
Heres a reorganized list to consider refining vis a vis the federal response.

The What
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
The How
1. 2. 3. 4. Direct BP
Use the best science and scientists
Hire Locals
Work closely with state and local governments Kill the well
Intercept the oil
Clean it up
Save Wildlife
Protect Seafood Markets
Protect Citizen and Worker Health
Assess Damage
Restore/Recover health of the Gulf and Gulf Coast communities
5. 6.
Be open and transparent: Share information widely

Facilitate reimbursements/claims

Subject: FW: Oil Spill Clean-up X CHALLENGE
To: "Oil spill staff ([email protected])" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Dave Westerholm ([email protected])" <[email protected]>
Ocean X PRIZE Suite AdvisoryCommittee- Biographical Information 032310.pdf
Here is the background on this X Prize proposal on oil spills.

I asked Dave to come up with key issues we need to address, and any suggestions for how to improve,
then present to Dr. Lubchenco/Dr. Robinson to determine whether to go forward and what team we
should put on this and reach out to the X-Prize committee.

I would suggest including others who have been on top of the X-Prize topic in a non-oil spill context
(OAR), which include Steve Hammond, Paul Sandifer (and PCO Frank Parker), so we dont disconnect
this too much. In fact, OAR could help staff on next steps, with ORR members as key advisors on the
specific topic.

Thanks,

Margaret

Margaret Spring
Chief of Staff
14th & Constitution Avenue NW , Room 5128
W ashington, DC 20230
B6 Privacy
From: Kalil, Thomas A. [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 1:10 PM
To: Margaret Spring
Subject: RE: Oil Spill Clean-up X CHALLENGE
Dear Margaret:

You are the first.

I am attaching the Ocean X Prize advisory committee.

OSTP staff identified the following subject matter experts at NOAA.

Restoration Project

Margaret Davidson
Director, Coastal Services Center

[email protected]
Phone:
Buck Sutter
B6 Privacy
Deputy Regional Administrator, NMFS SE Regional Office

[email protected]
Phone:

Get the Oil Out of the Water Project
Amy Merten
B6 Privacy

[email protected]

Bill Lehr

[email protected]
From: Margaret Spring [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Kalil, Thomas A.
Subject: RE: Oil Spill Clean-up X CHALLENGE
Great, t hanks! Who have you discussed with at NOAA thus far?

Margaret Spring
Chief of Staff
14th & Constitution Avenue NW, Room 5128
B6 Privacy
From: Kalil, Thomas A. [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Margaret Spring
Subject: Oil Spill Clean-up X CHALLENGE
Dear Margaret:
I think the idea below is worth pursuing and I am on your schedule for 5:30 this evening to
discuss
Best,
Tom Kalil
Name: Oil Spill Clean-Up X CHALLENGE

Purse: $3M
Develop rapidly-deployable and affordable methods for clean-up of crude oil on the coastline and on
the sea surface.
Guidelines Summary:

Teams register to compete in one of two categories:
1. Coastal Clean Up; or
2. Sea Surface Clean Up.
The cost to register will be $2,500.00 for each category.

Teams will be judged on their plans to maximize clean-up at the lowest unit cost in these 2 categories
using approaches that may include containment, dispersant or bio-degradation. Plans must be submitted
online via a form-based query. Submissions can supplemented with additional materials (videos,
drawings, and the like.) Submissions must be received in 30 days from the launch of the competition.

Teams for Costal Clean Up must submit a their plans to:
Clean-up a minimum of 1 mile of coastal zone from 95% of crude oil contaminants within 7 days.
Show that all material and techniques are environmentally safe
Show solution deployment at mid-tidal zone.
Demonstrate that clean-up waste can enter the commercial waste management infrastructure.
Estimate required manpower.
Demonstrate that solution can be deployable within 30 days of design completion in a coastal zone
of the following conditions: marshes, sandy beaches, rocky shores and pebble beaches.

Teams for Sea Surface Clean Up must submit a design to:
Clean up 250,000 barrels of oil at sea surface, within 1 mile of spill site, under conditions of 2-3 feet
of surface waves, air temperature of 25C and 85% humidity with 50% overcast conditions.
Team must demonstrate containment of 95% of its content in a period of 5 days.
Demonstrate that clean-up waste can enter the commercial waste management infrastructure.
Estimate required manpower.

Responsive Document - CREW: NOAA: Regarding BP Oil Spill: 4/3/2012 - (Part 2) Pages From FOIA 2010-377 ORR OHC Interim 4 1 To 3596 Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Responsive Document - CREW: NOAA: Regarding BP Oil Spill: 4/3/2012 - (Part 2) Pages From FOIA 2010-377 ORR OHC Interim 4 1 To 3596 Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Responsive Document - CREW: NOAA: Regarding BP Oil Spill: 4/3/2012 - (Part 2) Pages From FOIA 2010-377 ORR OHC Interim 4 1 To 3596 Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Regional Response Teams on the advisability of continuing the current level of

Anticipated outcomes include novel approaches for characterizing the magnitude,

Given the challenge, we expect the formation of semi-permanent working groups

A roll-out of the re-opening protocol, as well as baseline and post-spill testing

Barrier Island Proposal:

SENSITIVE AND PRIVILEGED: DO NOT COPY WITHOUT PERMISSION

Document ID: 0.7.19.1779.1

Received(Date): Tue, 25 May 2010 17:49:59 -0400

From: McGrath, Shaun L. [mailto:Shaun L. [email protected]]

Wednesday, May 26 Call with Governors

Document ID: 0.7.19.1931

in Houma today will meet with Gov. Jindal

Document ID: 0.7.19.1931

Document ID: 0.7.19.1931

Received(Date): Wed, 26 May 2010 12:15:10 +0100

Update Regarding ROV Monitoring of 'Top Kill' Procedure

Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Response Update

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

$29.4 million in total claims paid to date.

Offshore Sea Floor

Top Kill Activities

x The top kill

Drilling relief wells

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

Containment Recovery System

Offshore Surface Spill Response

Onshore - Shoreline Protection and Community Outreach

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

Vessels of Opportunity Program

x Volunteers and Training BP has opened 22 Community Outreach Centers across

Summary of Regional Operations and Outreach

Robert Unified Area Command

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

Houma Incident Command Post

Venice Community Outreach Center, Staging Area

St. Mary Staging Area

2766 Belle Chasse

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

New Orleans, LA 70461

$17.2 million has been paid in claims in Louisiana.

Pascagoula Community Outreach Center, Staging Area

Waveland Community Outreach Center

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

Mobile Incident Command Post, Community Outreach Center

Dauphin Staging Area

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

Environment / Community Hotline to report oil on the beach or shoreline

Vessels of Opportunity to report and register boats available to assist

Training for questions about training requirements, times and locations,

Ideas to Submit File online at http://www.horizonedocs.com/index.html

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

Document ID: 0.7.19.1706

Received(Date): Wed, 26 May 2010 07:52:48 -0400

Please see attached for the latest.

Document ID: 0.7.19.2145

For Internal Use

May 26, 2010

For Internal Use