BP Complaints

CLICK HERE FOR AUDIO FILE

CLICK HERE TO SEE GRAPHICS FROM TODAY’S CONFERENCE

Paul Zukunft:        Well, good afternoon.  Thank you for joining us.  And again, it’s great to be joined by NOAA, our scientific support coordinator, and also with David who represents academia as we look at this phase of the operation, as we look at what’s below the surface.

And I’m also joined by the captain of the NOAA research vessel Pisces, Jesse Stark.  And it’s great to be pier side before this vessel prepares to set sail this afternoon on a very critical mission integral to this oil spill.

Just to bring you up to date on where we are with the spill, we still have a very active response across the four states and the Gulf of Mexico and Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.  On Wednesday, I was down in Bay Jimmy down in Barataria Bay where we had over 600 workers working off a floating barge responding to oil in that area in a very isolated marshland.

But there’s still removal operations taking place as I speak today.  So we’re still recovering oil, but at the same time, our next area of concern, as it has been from day one, is what is below the surface.

We heard that the well was killed on the 19th of September, and actually we’ve had no oil introduced – no new oil since the 15th of July, and our oil trajectory grid went to a white screen with no recoverable oil since on or about the 1st of August.

So now our challenge is to look at what is on the sea floor, and so the NOAA vessel Pisces is one of several vessels that will participate in that mission.  I have the best of science here surrounding me just as we did, when we did that relief well, which was a feat – quite a feat onto itself to be able to intercept that well from three miles away, a seven-inch casing intercepting a seven-inch casing.

Well, now we need to verify with the best of science what is in that water column, what is in the sea floor, down to depths up to and exceeding 5,000 feet integral to this oil spill response.  So that’s where we’re going in the next phase of this operation.  And I do look forward to seeing the NOAA vessel Pisces get underway for this mission this afternoon.

With that, I’ll turn it over to Dr. Janet Baran.

 Janet Baran:          Baran, yes, thank you, Admiral.

So we’re very glad to be here today on the NOAA ship Pisces.  The Pisces has been a very important part of our mission this whole summer.  It’s been out doing acoustic monitoring during the well head integrity tests as well as doing water sampling in the last couple cruises.

We have been working on monitoring the subsurface since early May and continue to do so.  This – our monitoring covers the near shore, the south and the deep water, from the surface to the bottom of the ocean.  And we’re looking to really understand if there is any recoverable oil or if there’s anything else that we can do about it.

We’ve had numerous vessels out.  Currently we have about six vessels who are working in the continental shelf and deep water doing sediment and water sampling, and this vessel will be part of that.  All vessels are coordinated through unified area command, and we even host a call every day between all the chief scientists to talk about what they’re finding so that we can (adaptably) change our missions if there is something we find.

To date, we have collected more than 30,000 samples in the Gulf of Mexico, from the Texas-Louisiana border to the Florida Keys.  Last week we had over six vessels out, mostly doing water sampling.  This week has been the initiation of most of our deeper water sediment sampling.

The Gyre went out this week as well as the Ocean Veritas and now the Pisces.  These three vessels will do all the deeper water sediment sampling.  We have a couple vessels out in the near shore doing sediment and water sampling, that’s up to three nautical miles from the shore, doing a wide sweep to ensure that there is no oil in the sediment.

We find very little amounts of (residue) oil on near shore.  It’s being degraded naturally and recovered where possible.  And we really are committed to ensuring the safety of the Gulf and restoring the Gulf as we move out of this phase of trying to determine how we can fix things – not fix things – how we can stop and recover oil and moving to restoration.

We have teams out, part of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment Team, who will be looking at the long-term impacts and helping restore the Gulf. We do have a couple of resources which may be helpful to you.  We have a live mission log at NOAA.gov where we have blogs from all of our vessels that are out, giving live updates on what they’re finding.  And also, if you would like to see the sampling location data and results, you can go to GeoPlatform.gov.

And with that, I’m going to turn it over to Dr. David Valentine who is our chief scientist on this mission.

 David Valentine:   My name is Dr. David Valentine, I’m a professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara, and I’m here representing academia.  I’m serving currently as chief scientist on the NOAA ship Pisces for this expedition.

Joining me – I have additional academic scientists from a number of institutions, including the U.S. Geological Survey, East Carolina University, California Institute of Technology and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

We have four main sampling areas that we’re targeting – or four main sampling devices, I should specify, that allow us to collect sediment, allow us to visualize sediment on the sea floor, allow us to collect and analyze water from the deep waters as well as tools that are available shipboard to visualize natural seepage that may be occurring from the sea floor.

And with that, I’ll turn it back over to Janet.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you for taking my call.  I have a question about seafood testing.  Is it possible to get that answered?

Paul Zukunft:        Go ahead, Nancy.  I’ll answer that.  This is Rear Admiral Zukunft.  I’ll be happy to take that question.

Nancy MacKenzie:     OK, I’ve actually been trying to get this answered for a while.  When the shrimp are seafood tested, sensory and chemical analysis, do you know if that is with the shells on or off?

Paul Zukunft:        That question I do not know.  I do know it goes through a two-stage test, and the more elaborate test is when it goes through a GC-MS test.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right.

Paul Zukunft:        For any presence of hydrocarbon that would, in all likelihood, test the shell and flesh.  But I can’t say …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, I’m interested in that and whether they’re deveined or not.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, best place to answer that would be …

Nancy MacKenzie:     And I’ve really been trying to get that answered for three weeks, so …

Paul Zukunft:        Or with the Food and Drug Administration.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, having difficulty there, so I was hoping that you’d be able to.  But here’s one that you – that you all – probably more up your alley.  If the protocol for reopening fishing areas is the evaluation of oil movement, oil in the water column, sheen on the water and the seafood assessment, why are so many square miles still closed?  Does that mean that the seafood is tainted or there’s oil in the water?

Paul Zukunft:        No, right now we’re waiting to get a representational sample for a number of fish species in those federal waters that remain closed.  We do have a number of vessels that are out there with NOAA observers on there to actually catch those fish and then run those through the laboratory results.  And so that is actually part of the process to get those areas reopened.

But the key part is having a representational sample.  And as you realize, we did have 8,000 square miles that were just reopened on the 21st of September, and then also recreational fishing for red snapper was opened.  There was allowable quota remaining for red snapper, so for Friday, Saturday and Sunday, starting on October 1st for the next eight-week period, that red snapper season will be opened for recreational fishing, not for commercial though.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right, right, OK, well just one last thing as long as we’re talking about it.  On the e-mails that I get, it says that areas remain closed to balance economic and public health concerns, and I’m not sure exactly what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you had broken up through part of that, did you …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Oh, I’m sorry, it’s – the e-mails that I get, you know the by the numbers (sent) from the unified command, says that the areas remain closed due to balance economic and public health concerns.  And I’m not exactly sure what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, yea, those areas were closed when there was oil in those areas, and that was due to the concern for public health if fish were to be caught from there, and should there be polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, found in the fish flesh.  So that’s why there were closed.

And obviously we can close an area quite quickly to go through the requisite sampling protocols to then reopen it.  It is a somewhat time-consuming process.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        So it is a process where we error on the side of caution.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        Anytime – you know the economic indicator there, if that fish is caught and, for whatever reason, it is not found to be in compliance, it could actually have a detrimental effect you know on the economic fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico.

So you probably heard on a number of a blogs – and it is – it is the most-sampled seafood anywhere in the face of the Earth.  But again, if there’s going to be any error in this process, it will be on the side of caution.  But again, I am working extremely closely with the NOAA Marine Fishery Service, who in turn works with the Food and Drug Administration on the sampling protocols that – to continue to reopen those closed areas.  And they are gradually reopening.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you, I appreciate your time.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

Operator:               Your next question comes from the line of Laura Parker with AOL News.

Laura Parker:         Yes, I have a – sort of a big-picture question in terms of the total effort involving the – NOAA’s research.  It was announced, I think it was last week, or in the last few days, that NOAA’s now embarking on a larger systematic effort to understand the oil in the water and sort out some of the differences between academic sciences and government scientists with regard to oil on the – on the sea floor and plume and so on.

Can you lay out how and when some of these particular issues may be resolved?  Is this – is there sort of a map that you set out for how you’re going to get to the bottom of some of these things?  Or will these be you know many months away?

Janet Baran:          This is Janet Baran, (inaudible) many months away.  So we already have – there’s two parts of it.  There’s water and sediment.  So the water sampling has been going on all summer.  We have a team in place at unified area command that represents six different agencies that is an operational science advisory team.  And they are analyzing all the data as it’s coming in to make recommendations of when we reach the – reach the end game of the response, not the restoration, not the long-term care of the Gulf.

And so the water sampling is mostly completed.  But the analysis is still ongoing.  The team is in place.  They are looking at the data every day and trying to determine if there are gaps of what we need to infill or if we have completed and have an answer to the American public.

The second part is the sediment.  And, as I said, the Gyre, the Ocean Veritas and the Pisces will be out doing the sediment sampling.  And so it’s expected within the next couple weeks we will have all of the sediment samples, and that same team will be looking at what that tells us and if there needs to be additional sampling.

Much of the near shore sediment sampling is already completed, and the indicators we’re getting from there so far is a lack of presence of oil in the sediment.

Laura Parker:         Have you – I mean, come – have you been able to resolve sort of the issue of the plume, for instance?  We’ve got the – what the Berkeley Labs report versus the Woods Hole report …

Janet Baran:          Sure.

Laura Parker:         Or is there – has there just been a change from the date of the one and the date of the other?

Janet Baran:          Sure, a lot of those were based in samples that were taken in June.  And Dr. Chris Reddy, who was a part of the Woods Hole study, has – was the academic liaison at unified area command the last couple of weeks.  And we have engaged with him and talked about what he found.

Our vessels were out there also, looking at all that.  And those academic data have been included into the response database.  So we’re looking at all of it in total.

Currently what we’re finding is that dilution has occurred.  So over time, more and more water has mixed in.  And also the microbes have continued to decrease the amount of oil that would be in that area.  We’re finding less and less what we could consider (hits) and having to use more and more sophisticated instruments …

Laura Parker:         I’m sorry, you broke up a little bit.  Finding less and less …

Janet Baran:          I would say any kind of – any kind of signal at all in the water column.  And what we’re finding is that the concentrations are now in the parts of a billion.  So we’re having to use more and more sophisticated instruments to even see if there is this dispersed oil cloud and that’s all.

Laura Parker:         And what?

Janet Baran:          That’s all.

Laura Parker:         Oh, and what about the sediment on the sea?  Because I’m sure you’re very well familiar with what Mandy Joye is finding at the University of Georgia, and I think she had something in her blog about it earlier in the month.

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  So Dr. Samuel Walker, who is also part of the subsurface monitoring team, he got in contact with Dr. Joye, and she has shared her locations, and we will be going and revisiting those.  We want to ensure that we’re not just taking observations and doing – we want to make sure we’re doing a full analysis.  And so this is part of why we are going and looking at where she has sampled.

Laura Parker:         So in both of those instances of the plume and the oil on the floor, on the sea floor, you’re taking that – these other analyses into account and looking at them, but you guys have not – you’re not at the stage where you’ve reached any conclusion on either of them.  Is that what you’re saying?

Janet Baran:          I wouldn’t say that exactly.  The sediment sampling we’ve only just initiated, so we have not gone to those sites yet.  And the water sampling we have always been in (agreeance) with our academic partners that there was this layer in the water column.  It still exists, however it is at much lower concentrations and continues to degrade over time.

David Valentine:   This is Dave Valentine.  I think I can follow up a little bit, having been involved in many of these discussions.  With regard to the sediments, that’s really one of the primary targets of this upcoming cruise, and we have two tools that we are using to address this issue of whether or not there’s oil that has fallen into the sediments and is sitting there.  We’re doing extensive coring operations with a sort of corer that preserves that interface very, very well.

Onboard, we have the (mastectrometers) that we need to quantify the amount of oil that may be there on the sediment surface.  We also have a towed camera system that we’ll be deploying.  We can tow it along the sea floor.  It resides about nine to 15 feet above the sea floor and is dragged by the boat.  That takes pictures of the sea floor, about 2,000 images for every five-hour deployment.

And with that, we are hoping to look for the distribution of oil, if there is oil on the sea floor, to help us understand exactly what the patterns of deposition of this oil may be, if it’s there, and we’ll follow up, then, with the coring to quantify how much is there in those areas.

Janet Baran:          And also fingerprint – that’s the key here, too, is that we want to ensure chemically, if we do find oil, we need to check that it is MC252.  There are plenty of natural seeps in the Gulf of Mexico, which can cause oil to be found within sediment.

Laura Parker:         Right.  When is the Pisces coming back?

Janet Baran:          The Pisces will be out until October 4.

Laura Parker:         But you send this – you can send – you’re sending data in every day, is that correct?

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  We have a secure FTP site, and they’re – they will be uploading all of their analysis.  There – some of the – there will be additional work done on samples in labs that take longer than what can be done here.

Laura Parker:         And do you have a target date for when you’ll release your findings from this particular trip?

Janet Baran:          Not at this time.  We will continue to update – as we get results.  Science, unfortunately, takes more time than we care to admit, and we want to make sure that we fully investigate this and have strong conclusions.

Laura Parker:         And are you – in addition to – as things break down, are you looking at all of the things that are in the – in the – you know as they – the breakdown products that result from the breaking down of the oil?  I’m wording that badly.

David Valentine:   I guess I can take that to a certain – this is Dave Valentine.  I can’t …

Laura Parker:         There’s – do you need me to reword it?  Because I’ve worded it badly, but I think you might get my point.

David Valentine:   Yes, I do, and the compounds that are being analyzed for are the standard toxic compounds that are known in oil.  And these include the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as well as other hydrocarbon components within oil.

The issue of breakdown products is a very tricky one, and it moves into the academic realm, which I’m always happy to talk about, because I’m a geochemist, and that’s what I do for a living.  But it’s – you know it’s really insider talk, insider speak.  A lot of it – and the bottom line is that – so the kinds of breakdown products that we’re talking about tend to be fairly low on concentration.  These are intermediates or terminal products.  And they’re not – they’re very difficult things to analyze, and they tend to be at very low concentration.

Personally, we are trying to look for those at very trace levels.  That’s one of the things that my research entails.  But it’s not, to my knowledge, part of the standard plan, because these compounds tend to be very, very low in concentration.

Russell Tippets:     OK, can we get the next caller, please, to ensure everybody gets a question answered timely?

Operator:               OK, and your next question comes from the line of (Laurie Wiegler).

(Laurie Wiegler):    (Laurie Wiegler), thank you.

Hi, thank you very much for taking my call.  If more oil is found, and we know that it will be, I’m curious what the next step is for NOAA.  Is bioremediation a possibility?  Do you just let it continue to disperse?  What’s your game plan?

Paul Zukunft:        Actually, in terms of the response, that’s – this is Admiral Zukunft, the federal on-scene coordinator.  You know just bear in mind, right now what we’ve been detecting in that water column is parts per million and parts per billion.  And actually, we had – we’re seeing more and more in the parts per billion, which lends itself to the fact that there is some natural biodegradation taking place in the Gulf of Mexico, which is actually quite common in a body of water that has a significant amount of natural seeps and hydrocarbons occurring naturally, plus the fact that this well is located in relative proximity to the outflow of the Mississippi River, which is also rich in nutrients.

So, again, the key part of this study that’s ongoing is to detect any significant amounts, beyond what we’ve seen so far, but we need to expand the scope of that monitoring effort.  The preponderance of the sampling data right now has been in the water column.  This next phase is very focused upon what’s in that sediment layer as well.

And then, depending on what we find from those – you know from the sampling and analytic data – at that point, we can then consider if in fact there is an appropriate response protocol to address that.  But right now, that’s not one that I would make unilaterally.  We have a regional response team that would actually share that data, and then they would ultimately provide me recommendations whether to use such intervention methods such as bioremediation.

(Laurie Wiegler):    Thank you.  May I just ask one more follow-up to that?  Is Admiral Thad Allen no longer involved in this?  And, would that change if you decided to have another effort there to, say with the bioremediation or for cleaning up any excess oil that’s found?

Paul Zukunft:        Yes, Admiral Allen and I did a press conference yesterday where he announced that he will be retiring a week from today.  I will continue in my role as federal on-scene coordinator, as I have for some time now.  And the regional response team does provide these recommendations to the federal on-scene coordinator.

And at the same time, I also have direct access to all the interagency administrators and will assume that capacity from Admiral Allen as he goes into retirement, which certainly falls within my purview as the federal on-scene coordinator.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, thank you, and I apologize for that.  I was not on the call yesterday.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you’re quite welcome.  Actually, you know this was a local press conference.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK.

Paul Zukunft:        So, no, you did not miss that.

(Laurie Wiegler):    All right.

Paull Zukunft:        But I am the one they call Admiral Z.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, yes, I know who you are.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

END

CLICK HERE FOR AUDIO FILE

CLICK HERE TO SEE GRAPHICS FROM TODAY’S CONFERENCE

Paul Zukunft:        Well, good afternoon.  Thank you for joining us.  And again, it’s great to be joined by NOAA, our scientific support coordinator, and also with David who represents academia as we look at this phase of the operation, as we look at what’s below the surface.

And I’m also joined by the captain of the NOAA research vessel Pisces, Jesse Stark.  And it’s great to be pier side before this vessel prepares to set sail this afternoon on a very critical mission integral to this oil spill.

Just to bring you up to date on where we are with the spill, we still have a very active response across the four states and the Gulf of Mexico and Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.  On Wednesday, I was down in Bay Jimmy down in Barataria Bay where we had over 600 workers working off a floating barge responding to oil in that area in a very isolated marshland.

But there’s still removal operations taking place as I speak today.  So we’re still recovering oil, but at the same time, our next area of concern, as it has been from day one, is what is below the surface.

We heard that the well was killed on the 19th of September, and actually we’ve had no oil introduced – no new oil since the 15th of July, and our oil trajectory grid went to a white screen with no recoverable oil since on or about the 1st of August.

So now our challenge is to look at what is on the sea floor, and so the NOAA vessel Pisces is one of several vessels that will participate in that mission.  I have the best of science here surrounding me just as we did, when we did that relief well, which was a feat – quite a feat onto itself to be able to intercept that well from three miles away, a seven-inch casing intercepting a seven-inch casing.

Well, now we need to verify with the best of science what is in that water column, what is in the sea floor, down to depths up to and exceeding 5,000 feet integral to this oil spill response.  So that’s where we’re going in the next phase of this operation.  And I do look forward to seeing the NOAA vessel Pisces get underway for this mission this afternoon.

With that, I’ll turn it over to Dr. Janet Baran.

 Janet Baran:          Baran, yes, thank you, Admiral.

So we’re very glad to be here today on the NOAA ship Pisces.  The Pisces has been a very important part of our mission this whole summer.  It’s been out doing acoustic monitoring during the well head integrity tests as well as doing water sampling in the last couple cruises.

We have been working on monitoring the subsurface since early May and continue to do so.  This – our monitoring covers the near shore, the south and the deep water, from the surface to the bottom of the ocean.  And we’re looking to really understand if there is any recoverable oil or if there’s anything else that we can do about it.

We’ve had numerous vessels out.  Currently we have about six vessels who are working in the continental shelf and deep water doing sediment and water sampling, and this vessel will be part of that.  All vessels are coordinated through unified area command, and we even host a call every day between all the chief scientists to talk about what they’re finding so that we can (adaptably) change our missions if there is something we find.

To date, we have collected more than 30,000 samples in the Gulf of Mexico, from the Texas-Louisiana border to the Florida Keys.  Last week we had over six vessels out, mostly doing water sampling.  This week has been the initiation of most of our deeper water sediment sampling.

The Gyre went out this week as well as the Ocean Veritas and now the Pisces.  These three vessels will do all the deeper water sediment sampling.  We have a couple vessels out in the near shore doing sediment and water sampling, that’s up to three nautical miles from the shore, doing a wide sweep to ensure that there is no oil in the sediment.

We find very little amounts of (residue) oil on near shore.  It’s being degraded naturally and recovered where possible.  And we really are committed to ensuring the safety of the Gulf and restoring the Gulf as we move out of this phase of trying to determine how we can fix things – not fix things – how we can stop and recover oil and moving to restoration.

We have teams out, part of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment Team, who will be looking at the long-term impacts and helping restore the Gulf. We do have a couple of resources which may be helpful to you.  We have a live mission log at NOAA.gov where we have blogs from all of our vessels that are out, giving live updates on what they’re finding.  And also, if you would like to see the sampling location data and results, you can go to GeoPlatform.gov.

And with that, I’m going to turn it over to Dr. David Valentine who is our chief scientist on this mission.

 David Valentine:   My name is Dr. David Valentine, I’m a professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara, and I’m here representing academia.  I’m serving currently as chief scientist on the NOAA ship Pisces for this expedition.

Joining me – I have additional academic scientists from a number of institutions, including the U.S. Geological Survey, East Carolina University, California Institute of Technology and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

We have four main sampling areas that we’re targeting – or four main sampling devices, I should specify, that allow us to collect sediment, allow us to visualize sediment on the sea floor, allow us to collect and analyze water from the deep waters as well as tools that are available shipboard to visualize natural seepage that may be occurring from the sea floor.

And with that, I’ll turn it back over to Janet.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you for taking my call.  I have a question about seafood testing.  Is it possible to get that answered?

Paul Zukunft:        Go ahead, Nancy.  I’ll answer that.  This is Rear Admiral Zukunft.  I’ll be happy to take that question.

Nancy MacKenzie:     OK, I’ve actually been trying to get this answered for a while.  When the shrimp are seafood tested, sensory and chemical analysis, do you know if that is with the shells on or off?

Paul Zukunft:        That question I do not know.  I do know it goes through a two-stage test, and the more elaborate test is when it goes through a GC-MS test.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right.

Paul Zukunft:        For any presence of hydrocarbon that would, in all likelihood, test the shell and flesh.  But I can’t say …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, I’m interested in that and whether they’re deveined or not.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, best place to answer that would be …

Nancy MacKenzie:     And I’ve really been trying to get that answered for three weeks, so …

Paul Zukunft:        Or with the Food and Drug Administration.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, having difficulty there, so I was hoping that you’d be able to.  But here’s one that you – that you all – probably more up your alley.  If the protocol for reopening fishing areas is the evaluation of oil movement, oil in the water column, sheen on the water and the seafood assessment, why are so many square miles still closed?  Does that mean that the seafood is tainted or there’s oil in the water?

Paul Zukunft:        No, right now we’re waiting to get a representational sample for a number of fish species in those federal waters that remain closed.  We do have a number of vessels that are out there with NOAA observers on there to actually catch those fish and then run those through the laboratory results.  And so that is actually part of the process to get those areas reopened.

But the key part is having a representational sample.  And as you realize, we did have 8,000 square miles that were just reopened on the 21st of September, and then also recreational fishing for red snapper was opened.  There was allowable quota remaining for red snapper, so for Friday, Saturday and Sunday, starting on October 1st for the next eight-week period, that red snapper season will be opened for recreational fishing, not for commercial though.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right, right, OK, well just one last thing as long as we’re talking about it.  On the e-mails that I get, it says that areas remain closed to balance economic and public health concerns, and I’m not sure exactly what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you had broken up through part of that, did you …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Oh, I’m sorry, it’s – the e-mails that I get, you know the by the numbers (sent) from the unified command, says that the areas remain closed due to balance economic and public health concerns.  And I’m not exactly sure what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, yea, those areas were closed when there was oil in those areas, and that was due to the concern for public health if fish were to be caught from there, and should there be polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, found in the fish flesh.  So that’s why there were closed.

And obviously we can close an area quite quickly to go through the requisite sampling protocols to then reopen it.  It is a somewhat time-consuming process.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        So it is a process where we error on the side of caution.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        Anytime – you know the economic indicator there, if that fish is caught and, for whatever reason, it is not found to be in compliance, it could actually have a detrimental effect you know on the economic fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico.

So you probably heard on a number of a blogs – and it is – it is the most-sampled seafood anywhere in the face of the Earth.  But again, if there’s going to be any error in this process, it will be on the side of caution.  But again, I am working extremely closely with the NOAA Marine Fishery Service, who in turn works with the Food and Drug Administration on the sampling protocols that – to continue to reopen those closed areas.  And they are gradually reopening.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you, I appreciate your time.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

Operator:               Your next question comes from the line of Laura Parker with AOL News.

Laura Parker:         Yes, I have a – sort of a big-picture question in terms of the total effort involving the – NOAA’s research.  It was announced, I think it was last week, or in the last few days, that NOAA’s now embarking on a larger systematic effort to understand the oil in the water and sort out some of the differences between academic sciences and government scientists with regard to oil on the – on the sea floor and plume and so on.

Can you lay out how and when some of these particular issues may be resolved?  Is this – is there sort of a map that you set out for how you’re going to get to the bottom of some of these things?  Or will these be you know many months away?

Janet Baran:          This is Janet Baran, (inaudible) many months away.  So we already have – there’s two parts of it.  There’s water and sediment.  So the water sampling has been going on all summer.  We have a team in place at unified area command that represents six different agencies that is an operational science advisory team.  And they are analyzing all the data as it’s coming in to make recommendations of when we reach the – reach the end game of the response, not the restoration, not the long-term care of the Gulf.

And so the water sampling is mostly completed.  But the analysis is still ongoing.  The team is in place.  They are looking at the data every day and trying to determine if there are gaps of what we need to infill or if we have completed and have an answer to the American public.

The second part is the sediment.  And, as I said, the Gyre, the Ocean Veritas and the Pisces will be out doing the sediment sampling.  And so it’s expected within the next couple weeks we will have all of the sediment samples, and that same team will be looking at what that tells us and if there needs to be additional sampling.

Much of the near shore sediment sampling is already completed, and the indicators we’re getting from there so far is a lack of presence of oil in the sediment.

Laura Parker:         Have you – I mean, come – have you been able to resolve sort of the issue of the plume, for instance?  We’ve got the – what the Berkeley Labs report versus the Woods Hole report …

Janet Baran:          Sure.

Laura Parker:         Or is there – has there just been a change from the date of the one and the date of the other?

Janet Baran:          Sure, a lot of those were based in samples that were taken in June.  And Dr. Chris Reddy, who was a part of the Woods Hole study, has – was the academic liaison at unified area command the last couple of weeks.  And we have engaged with him and talked about what he found.

Our vessels were out there also, looking at all that.  And those academic data have been included into the response database.  So we’re looking at all of it in total.

Currently what we’re finding is that dilution has occurred.  So over time, more and more water has mixed in.  And also the microbes have continued to decrease the amount of oil that would be in that area.  We’re finding less and less what we could consider (hits) and having to use more and more sophisticated instruments …

Laura Parker:         I’m sorry, you broke up a little bit.  Finding less and less …

Janet Baran:          I would say any kind of – any kind of signal at all in the water column.  And what we’re finding is that the concentrations are now in the parts of a billion.  So we’re having to use more and more sophisticated instruments to even see if there is this dispersed oil cloud and that’s all.

Laura Parker:         And what?

Janet Baran:          That’s all.

Laura Parker:         Oh, and what about the sediment on the sea?  Because I’m sure you’re very well familiar with what Mandy Joye is finding at the University of Georgia, and I think she had something in her blog about it earlier in the month.

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  So Dr. Samuel Walker, who is also part of the subsurface monitoring team, he got in contact with Dr. Joye, and she has shared her locations, and we will be going and revisiting those.  We want to ensure that we’re not just taking observations and doing – we want to make sure we’re doing a full analysis.  And so this is part of why we are going and looking at where she has sampled.

Laura Parker:         So in both of those instances of the plume and the oil on the floor, on the sea floor, you’re taking that – these other analyses into account and looking at them, but you guys have not – you’re not at the stage where you’ve reached any conclusion on either of them.  Is that what you’re saying?

Janet Baran:          I wouldn’t say that exactly.  The sediment sampling we’ve only just initiated, so we have not gone to those sites yet.  And the water sampling we have always been in (agreeance) with our academic partners that there was this layer in the water column.  It still exists, however it is at much lower concentrations and continues to degrade over time.

David Valentine:   This is Dave Valentine.  I think I can follow up a little bit, having been involved in many of these discussions.  With regard to the sediments, that’s really one of the primary targets of this upcoming cruise, and we have two tools that we are using to address this issue of whether or not there’s oil that has fallen into the sediments and is sitting there.  We’re doing extensive coring operations with a sort of corer that preserves that interface very, very well.

Onboard, we have the (mastectrometers) that we need to quantify the amount of oil that may be there on the sediment surface.  We also have a towed camera system that we’ll be deploying.  We can tow it along the sea floor.  It resides about nine to 15 feet above the sea floor and is dragged by the boat.  That takes pictures of the sea floor, about 2,000 images for every five-hour deployment.

And with that, we are hoping to look for the distribution of oil, if there is oil on the sea floor, to help us understand exactly what the patterns of deposition of this oil may be, if it’s there, and we’ll follow up, then, with the coring to quantify how much is there in those areas.

Janet Baran:          And also fingerprint – that’s the key here, too, is that we want to ensure chemically, if we do find oil, we need to check that it is MC252.  There are plenty of natural seeps in the Gulf of Mexico, which can cause oil to be found within sediment.

Laura Parker:         Right.  When is the Pisces coming back?

Janet Baran:          The Pisces will be out until October 4.

Laura Parker:         But you send this – you can send – you’re sending data in every day, is that correct?

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  We have a secure FTP site, and they’re – they will be uploading all of their analysis.  There – some of the – there will be additional work done on samples in labs that take longer than what can be done here.

Laura Parker:         And do you have a target date for when you’ll release your findings from this particular trip?

Janet Baran:          Not at this time.  We will continue to update – as we get results.  Science, unfortunately, takes more time than we care to admit, and we want to make sure that we fully investigate this and have strong conclusions.

Laura Parker:         And are you – in addition to – as things break down, are you looking at all of the things that are in the – in the – you know as they – the breakdown products that result from the breaking down of the oil?  I’m wording that badly.

David Valentine:   I guess I can take that to a certain – this is Dave Valentine.  I can’t …

Laura Parker:         There’s – do you need me to reword it?  Because I’ve worded it badly, but I think you might get my point.

David Valentine:   Yes, I do, and the compounds that are being analyzed for are the standard toxic compounds that are known in oil.  And these include the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as well as other hydrocarbon components within oil.

The issue of breakdown products is a very tricky one, and it moves into the academic realm, which I’m always happy to talk about, because I’m a geochemist, and that’s what I do for a living.  But it’s – you know it’s really insider talk, insider speak.  A lot of it – and the bottom line is that – so the kinds of breakdown products that we’re talking about tend to be fairly low on concentration.  These are intermediates or terminal products.  And they’re not – they’re very difficult things to analyze, and they tend to be at very low concentration.

Personally, we are trying to look for those at very trace levels.  That’s one of the things that my research entails.  But it’s not, to my knowledge, part of the standard plan, because these compounds tend to be very, very low in concentration.

Russell Tippets:     OK, can we get the next caller, please, to ensure everybody gets a question answered timely?

Operator:               OK, and your next question comes from the line of (Laurie Wiegler).

(Laurie Wiegler):    (Laurie Wiegler), thank you.

Hi, thank you very much for taking my call.  If more oil is found, and we know that it will be, I’m curious what the next step is for NOAA.  Is bioremediation a possibility?  Do you just let it continue to disperse?  What’s your game plan?

Paul Zukunft:        Actually, in terms of the response, that’s – this is Admiral Zukunft, the federal on-scene coordinator.  You know just bear in mind, right now what we’ve been detecting in that water column is parts per million and parts per billion.  And actually, we had – we’re seeing more and more in the parts per billion, which lends itself to the fact that there is some natural biodegradation taking place in the Gulf of Mexico, which is actually quite common in a body of water that has a significant amount of natural seeps and hydrocarbons occurring naturally, plus the fact that this well is located in relative proximity to the outflow of the Mississippi River, which is also rich in nutrients.

So, again, the key part of this study that’s ongoing is to detect any significant amounts, beyond what we’ve seen so far, but we need to expand the scope of that monitoring effort.  The preponderance of the sampling data right now has been in the water column.  This next phase is very focused upon what’s in that sediment layer as well.

And then, depending on what we find from those – you know from the sampling and analytic data – at that point, we can then consider if in fact there is an appropriate response protocol to address that.  But right now, that’s not one that I would make unilaterally.  We have a regional response team that would actually share that data, and then they would ultimately provide me recommendations whether to use such intervention methods such as bioremediation.

(Laurie Wiegler):    Thank you.  May I just ask one more follow-up to that?  Is Admiral Thad Allen no longer involved in this?  And, would that change if you decided to have another effort there to, say with the bioremediation or for cleaning up any excess oil that’s found?

Paul Zukunft:        Yes, Admiral Allen and I did a press conference yesterday where he announced that he will be retiring a week from today.  I will continue in my role as federal on-scene coordinator, as I have for some time now.  And the regional response team does provide these recommendations to the federal on-scene coordinator.

And at the same time, I also have direct access to all the interagency administrators and will assume that capacity from Admiral Allen as he goes into retirement, which certainly falls within my purview as the federal on-scene coordinator.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, thank you, and I apologize for that.  I was not on the call yesterday.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you’re quite welcome.  Actually, you know this was a local press conference.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK.

Paul Zukunft:        So, no, you did not miss that.

(Laurie Wiegler):    All right.

Paull Zukunft:        But I am the one they call Admiral Z.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, yes, I know who you are.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

END

CLICK HERE FOR AUDIO FILE

CLICK HERE TO SEE GRAPHICS FROM TODAY’S CONFERENCE

Paul Zukunft:        Well, good afternoon.  Thank you for joining us.  And again, it’s great to be joined by NOAA, our scientific support coordinator, and also with David who represents academia as we look at this phase of the operation, as we look at what’s below the surface.

And I’m also joined by the captain of the NOAA research vessel Pisces, Jesse Stark.  And it’s great to be pier side before this vessel prepares to set sail this afternoon on a very critical mission integral to this oil spill.

Just to bring you up to date on where we are with the spill, we still have a very active response across the four states and the Gulf of Mexico and Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.  On Wednesday, I was down in Bay Jimmy down in Barataria Bay where we had over 600 workers working off a floating barge responding to oil in that area in a very isolated marshland.

But there’s still removal operations taking place as I speak today.  So we’re still recovering oil, but at the same time, our next area of concern, as it has been from day one, is what is below the surface.

We heard that the well was killed on the 19th of September, and actually we’ve had no oil introduced – no new oil since the 15th of July, and our oil trajectory grid went to a white screen with no recoverable oil since on or about the 1st of August.

So now our challenge is to look at what is on the sea floor, and so the NOAA vessel Pisces is one of several vessels that will participate in that mission.  I have the best of science here surrounding me just as we did, when we did that relief well, which was a feat – quite a feat onto itself to be able to intercept that well from three miles away, a seven-inch casing intercepting a seven-inch casing.

Well, now we need to verify with the best of science what is in that water column, what is in the sea floor, down to depths up to and exceeding 5,000 feet integral to this oil spill response.  So that’s where we’re going in the next phase of this operation.  And I do look forward to seeing the NOAA vessel Pisces get underway for this mission this afternoon.

With that, I’ll turn it over to Dr. Janet Baran.

 Janet Baran:          Baran, yes, thank you, Admiral.

So we’re very glad to be here today on the NOAA ship Pisces.  The Pisces has been a very important part of our mission this whole summer.  It’s been out doing acoustic monitoring during the well head integrity tests as well as doing water sampling in the last couple cruises.

We have been working on monitoring the subsurface since early May and continue to do so.  This – our monitoring covers the near shore, the south and the deep water, from the surface to the bottom of the ocean.  And we’re looking to really understand if there is any recoverable oil or if there’s anything else that we can do about it.

We’ve had numerous vessels out.  Currently we have about six vessels who are working in the continental shelf and deep water doing sediment and water sampling, and this vessel will be part of that.  All vessels are coordinated through unified area command, and we even host a call every day between all the chief scientists to talk about what they’re finding so that we can (adaptably) change our missions if there is something we find.

To date, we have collected more than 30,000 samples in the Gulf of Mexico, from the Texas-Louisiana border to the Florida Keys.  Last week we had over six vessels out, mostly doing water sampling.  This week has been the initiation of most of our deeper water sediment sampling.

The Gyre went out this week as well as the Ocean Veritas and now the Pisces.  These three vessels will do all the deeper water sediment sampling.  We have a couple vessels out in the near shore doing sediment and water sampling, that’s up to three nautical miles from the shore, doing a wide sweep to ensure that there is no oil in the sediment.

We find very little amounts of (residue) oil on near shore.  It’s being degraded naturally and recovered where possible.  And we really are committed to ensuring the safety of the Gulf and restoring the Gulf as we move out of this phase of trying to determine how we can fix things – not fix things – how we can stop and recover oil and moving to restoration.

We have teams out, part of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment Team, who will be looking at the long-term impacts and helping restore the Gulf. We do have a couple of resources which may be helpful to you.  We have a live mission log at NOAA.gov where we have blogs from all of our vessels that are out, giving live updates on what they’re finding.  And also, if you would like to see the sampling location data and results, you can go to GeoPlatform.gov.

And with that, I’m going to turn it over to Dr. David Valentine who is our chief scientist on this mission.

 David Valentine:   My name is Dr. David Valentine, I’m a professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara, and I’m here representing academia.  I’m serving currently as chief scientist on the NOAA ship Pisces for this expedition.

Joining me – I have additional academic scientists from a number of institutions, including the U.S. Geological Survey, East Carolina University, California Institute of Technology and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

We have four main sampling areas that we’re targeting – or four main sampling devices, I should specify, that allow us to collect sediment, allow us to visualize sediment on the sea floor, allow us to collect and analyze water from the deep waters as well as tools that are available shipboard to visualize natural seepage that may be occurring from the sea floor.

And with that, I’ll turn it back over to Janet.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you for taking my call.  I have a question about seafood testing.  Is it possible to get that answered?

Paul Zukunft:        Go ahead, Nancy.  I’ll answer that.  This is Rear Admiral Zukunft.  I’ll be happy to take that question.

Nancy MacKenzie:     OK, I’ve actually been trying to get this answered for a while.  When the shrimp are seafood tested, sensory and chemical analysis, do you know if that is with the shells on or off?

Paul Zukunft:        That question I do not know.  I do know it goes through a two-stage test, and the more elaborate test is when it goes through a GC-MS test.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right.

Paul Zukunft:        For any presence of hydrocarbon that would, in all likelihood, test the shell and flesh.  But I can’t say …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, I’m interested in that and whether they’re deveined or not.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, best place to answer that would be …

Nancy MacKenzie:     And I’ve really been trying to get that answered for three weeks, so …

Paul Zukunft:        Or with the Food and Drug Administration.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, having difficulty there, so I was hoping that you’d be able to.  But here’s one that you – that you all – probably more up your alley.  If the protocol for reopening fishing areas is the evaluation of oil movement, oil in the water column, sheen on the water and the seafood assessment, why are so many square miles still closed?  Does that mean that the seafood is tainted or there’s oil in the water?

Paul Zukunft:        No, right now we’re waiting to get a representational sample for a number of fish species in those federal waters that remain closed.  We do have a number of vessels that are out there with NOAA observers on there to actually catch those fish and then run those through the laboratory results.  And so that is actually part of the process to get those areas reopened.

But the key part is having a representational sample.  And as you realize, we did have 8,000 square miles that were just reopened on the 21st of September, and then also recreational fishing for red snapper was opened.  There was allowable quota remaining for red snapper, so for Friday, Saturday and Sunday, starting on October 1st for the next eight-week period, that red snapper season will be opened for recreational fishing, not for commercial though.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right, right, OK, well just one last thing as long as we’re talking about it.  On the e-mails that I get, it says that areas remain closed to balance economic and public health concerns, and I’m not sure exactly what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you had broken up through part of that, did you …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Oh, I’m sorry, it’s – the e-mails that I get, you know the by the numbers (sent) from the unified command, says that the areas remain closed due to balance economic and public health concerns.  And I’m not exactly sure what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, yea, those areas were closed when there was oil in those areas, and that was due to the concern for public health if fish were to be caught from there, and should there be polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, found in the fish flesh.  So that’s why there were closed.

And obviously we can close an area quite quickly to go through the requisite sampling protocols to then reopen it.  It is a somewhat time-consuming process.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        So it is a process where we error on the side of caution.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        Anytime – you know the economic indicator there, if that fish is caught and, for whatever reason, it is not found to be in compliance, it could actually have a detrimental effect you know on the economic fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico.

So you probably heard on a number of a blogs – and it is – it is the most-sampled seafood anywhere in the face of the Earth.  But again, if there’s going to be any error in this process, it will be on the side of caution.  But again, I am working extremely closely with the NOAA Marine Fishery Service, who in turn works with the Food and Drug Administration on the sampling protocols that – to continue to reopen those closed areas.  And they are gradually reopening.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you, I appreciate your time.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

Operator:               Your next question comes from the line of Laura Parker with AOL News.

Laura Parker:         Yes, I have a – sort of a big-picture question in terms of the total effort involving the – NOAA’s research.  It was announced, I think it was last week, or in the last few days, that NOAA’s now embarking on a larger systematic effort to understand the oil in the water and sort out some of the differences between academic sciences and government scientists with regard to oil on the – on the sea floor and plume and so on.

Can you lay out how and when some of these particular issues may be resolved?  Is this – is there sort of a map that you set out for how you’re going to get to the bottom of some of these things?  Or will these be you know many months away?

Janet Baran:          This is Janet Baran, (inaudible) many months away.  So we already have – there’s two parts of it.  There’s water and sediment.  So the water sampling has been going on all summer.  We have a team in place at unified area command that represents six different agencies that is an operational science advisory team.  And they are analyzing all the data as it’s coming in to make recommendations of when we reach the – reach the end game of the response, not the restoration, not the long-term care of the Gulf.

And so the water sampling is mostly completed.  But the analysis is still ongoing.  The team is in place.  They are looking at the data every day and trying to determine if there are gaps of what we need to infill or if we have completed and have an answer to the American public.

The second part is the sediment.  And, as I said, the Gyre, the Ocean Veritas and the Pisces will be out doing the sediment sampling.  And so it’s expected within the next couple weeks we will have all of the sediment samples, and that same team will be looking at what that tells us and if there needs to be additional sampling.

Much of the near shore sediment sampling is already completed, and the indicators we’re getting from there so far is a lack of presence of oil in the sediment.

Laura Parker:         Have you – I mean, come – have you been able to resolve sort of the issue of the plume, for instance?  We’ve got the – what the Berkeley Labs report versus the Woods Hole report …

Janet Baran:          Sure.

Laura Parker:         Or is there – has there just been a change from the date of the one and the date of the other?

Janet Baran:          Sure, a lot of those were based in samples that were taken in June.  And Dr. Chris Reddy, who was a part of the Woods Hole study, has – was the academic liaison at unified area command the last couple of weeks.  And we have engaged with him and talked about what he found.

Our vessels were out there also, looking at all that.  And those academic data have been included into the response database.  So we’re looking at all of it in total.

Currently what we’re finding is that dilution has occurred.  So over time, more and more water has mixed in.  And also the microbes have continued to decrease the amount of oil that would be in that area.  We’re finding less and less what we could consider (hits) and having to use more and more sophisticated instruments …

Laura Parker:         I’m sorry, you broke up a little bit.  Finding less and less …

Janet Baran:          I would say any kind of – any kind of signal at all in the water column.  And what we’re finding is that the concentrations are now in the parts of a billion.  So we’re having to use more and more sophisticated instruments to even see if there is this dispersed oil cloud and that’s all.

Laura Parker:         And what?

Janet Baran:          That’s all.

Laura Parker:         Oh, and what about the sediment on the sea?  Because I’m sure you’re very well familiar with what Mandy Joye is finding at the University of Georgia, and I think she had something in her blog about it earlier in the month.

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  So Dr. Samuel Walker, who is also part of the subsurface monitoring team, he got in contact with Dr. Joye, and she has shared her locations, and we will be going and revisiting those.  We want to ensure that we’re not just taking observations and doing – we want to make sure we’re doing a full analysis.  And so this is part of why we are going and looking at where she has sampled.

Laura Parker:         So in both of those instances of the plume and the oil on the floor, on the sea floor, you’re taking that – these other analyses into account and looking at them, but you guys have not – you’re not at the stage where you’ve reached any conclusion on either of them.  Is that what you’re saying?

Janet Baran:          I wouldn’t say that exactly.  The sediment sampling we’ve only just initiated, so we have not gone to those sites yet.  And the water sampling we have always been in (agreeance) with our academic partners that there was this layer in the water column.  It still exists, however it is at much lower concentrations and continues to degrade over time.

David Valentine:   This is Dave Valentine.  I think I can follow up a little bit, having been involved in many of these discussions.  With regard to the sediments, that’s really one of the primary targets of this upcoming cruise, and we have two tools that we are using to address this issue of whether or not there’s oil that has fallen into the sediments and is sitting there.  We’re doing extensive coring operations with a sort of corer that preserves that interface very, very well.

Onboard, we have the (mastectrometers) that we need to quantify the amount of oil that may be there on the sediment surface.  We also have a towed camera system that we’ll be deploying.  We can tow it along the sea floor.  It resides about nine to 15 feet above the sea floor and is dragged by the boat.  That takes pictures of the sea floor, about 2,000 images for every five-hour deployment.

And with that, we are hoping to look for the distribution of oil, if there is oil on the sea floor, to help us understand exactly what the patterns of deposition of this oil may be, if it’s there, and we’ll follow up, then, with the coring to quantify how much is there in those areas.

Janet Baran:          And also fingerprint – that’s the key here, too, is that we want to ensure chemically, if we do find oil, we need to check that it is MC252.  There are plenty of natural seeps in the Gulf of Mexico, which can cause oil to be found within sediment.

Laura Parker:         Right.  When is the Pisces coming back?

Janet Baran:          The Pisces will be out until October 4.

Laura Parker:         But you send this – you can send – you’re sending data in every day, is that correct?

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  We have a secure FTP site, and they’re – they will be uploading all of their analysis.  There – some of the – there will be additional work done on samples in labs that take longer than what can be done here.

Laura Parker:         And do you have a target date for when you’ll release your findings from this particular trip?

Janet Baran:          Not at this time.  We will continue to update – as we get results.  Science, unfortunately, takes more time than we care to admit, and we want to make sure that we fully investigate this and have strong conclusions.

Laura Parker:         And are you – in addition to – as things break down, are you looking at all of the things that are in the – in the – you know as they – the breakdown products that result from the breaking down of the oil?  I’m wording that badly.

David Valentine:   I guess I can take that to a certain – this is Dave Valentine.  I can’t …

Laura Parker:         There’s – do you need me to reword it?  Because I’ve worded it badly, but I think you might get my point.

David Valentine:   Yes, I do, and the compounds that are being analyzed for are the standard toxic compounds that are known in oil.  And these include the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as well as other hydrocarbon components within oil.

The issue of breakdown products is a very tricky one, and it moves into the academic realm, which I’m always happy to talk about, because I’m a geochemist, and that’s what I do for a living.  But it’s – you know it’s really insider talk, insider speak.  A lot of it – and the bottom line is that – so the kinds of breakdown products that we’re talking about tend to be fairly low on concentration.  These are intermediates or terminal products.  And they’re not – they’re very difficult things to analyze, and they tend to be at very low concentration.

Personally, we are trying to look for those at very trace levels.  That’s one of the things that my research entails.  But it’s not, to my knowledge, part of the standard plan, because these compounds tend to be very, very low in concentration.

Russell Tippets:     OK, can we get the next caller, please, to ensure everybody gets a question answered timely?

Operator:               OK, and your next question comes from the line of (Laurie Wiegler).

(Laurie Wiegler):    (Laurie Wiegler), thank you.

Hi, thank you very much for taking my call.  If more oil is found, and we know that it will be, I’m curious what the next step is for NOAA.  Is bioremediation a possibility?  Do you just let it continue to disperse?  What’s your game plan?

Paul Zukunft:        Actually, in terms of the response, that’s – this is Admiral Zukunft, the federal on-scene coordinator.  You know just bear in mind, right now what we’ve been detecting in that water column is parts per million and parts per billion.  And actually, we had – we’re seeing more and more in the parts per billion, which lends itself to the fact that there is some natural biodegradation taking place in the Gulf of Mexico, which is actually quite common in a body of water that has a significant amount of natural seeps and hydrocarbons occurring naturally, plus the fact that this well is located in relative proximity to the outflow of the Mississippi River, which is also rich in nutrients.

So, again, the key part of this study that’s ongoing is to detect any significant amounts, beyond what we’ve seen so far, but we need to expand the scope of that monitoring effort.  The preponderance of the sampling data right now has been in the water column.  This next phase is very focused upon what’s in that sediment layer as well.

And then, depending on what we find from those – you know from the sampling and analytic data – at that point, we can then consider if in fact there is an appropriate response protocol to address that.  But right now, that’s not one that I would make unilaterally.  We have a regional response team that would actually share that data, and then they would ultimately provide me recommendations whether to use such intervention methods such as bioremediation.

(Laurie Wiegler):    Thank you.  May I just ask one more follow-up to that?  Is Admiral Thad Allen no longer involved in this?  And, would that change if you decided to have another effort there to, say with the bioremediation or for cleaning up any excess oil that’s found?

Paul Zukunft:        Yes, Admiral Allen and I did a press conference yesterday where he announced that he will be retiring a week from today.  I will continue in my role as federal on-scene coordinator, as I have for some time now.  And the regional response team does provide these recommendations to the federal on-scene coordinator.

And at the same time, I also have direct access to all the interagency administrators and will assume that capacity from Admiral Allen as he goes into retirement, which certainly falls within my purview as the federal on-scene coordinator.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, thank you, and I apologize for that.  I was not on the call yesterday.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you’re quite welcome.  Actually, you know this was a local press conference.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK.

Paul Zukunft:        So, no, you did not miss that.

(Laurie Wiegler):    All right.

Paull Zukunft:        But I am the one they call Admiral Z.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, yes, I know who you are.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

END

CLICK HERE FOR AUDIO FILE

CLICK HERE TO SEE GRAPHICS FROM TODAY’S CONFERENCE

Paul Zukunft:        Well, good afternoon.  Thank you for joining us.  And again, it’s great to be joined by NOAA, our scientific support coordinator, and also with David who represents academia as we look at this phase of the operation, as we look at what’s below the surface.

And I’m also joined by the captain of the NOAA research vessel Pisces, Jesse Stark.  And it’s great to be pier side before this vessel prepares to set sail this afternoon on a very critical mission integral to this oil spill.

Just to bring you up to date on where we are with the spill, we still have a very active response across the four states and the Gulf of Mexico and Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.  On Wednesday, I was down in Bay Jimmy down in Barataria Bay where we had over 600 workers working off a floating barge responding to oil in that area in a very isolated marshland.

But there’s still removal operations taking place as I speak today.  So we’re still recovering oil, but at the same time, our next area of concern, as it has been from day one, is what is below the surface.

We heard that the well was killed on the 19th of September, and actually we’ve had no oil introduced – no new oil since the 15th of July, and our oil trajectory grid went to a white screen with no recoverable oil since on or about the 1st of August.

So now our challenge is to look at what is on the sea floor, and so the NOAA vessel Pisces is one of several vessels that will participate in that mission.  I have the best of science here surrounding me just as we did, when we did that relief well, which was a feat – quite a feat onto itself to be able to intercept that well from three miles away, a seven-inch casing intercepting a seven-inch casing.

Well, now we need to verify with the best of science what is in that water column, what is in the sea floor, down to depths up to and exceeding 5,000 feet integral to this oil spill response.  So that’s where we’re going in the next phase of this operation.  And I do look forward to seeing the NOAA vessel Pisces get underway for this mission this afternoon.

With that, I’ll turn it over to Dr. Janet Baran.

 Janet Baran:          Baran, yes, thank you, Admiral.

So we’re very glad to be here today on the NOAA ship Pisces.  The Pisces has been a very important part of our mission this whole summer.  It’s been out doing acoustic monitoring during the well head integrity tests as well as doing water sampling in the last couple cruises.

We have been working on monitoring the subsurface since early May and continue to do so.  This – our monitoring covers the near shore, the south and the deep water, from the surface to the bottom of the ocean.  And we’re looking to really understand if there is any recoverable oil or if there’s anything else that we can do about it.

We’ve had numerous vessels out.  Currently we have about six vessels who are working in the continental shelf and deep water doing sediment and water sampling, and this vessel will be part of that.  All vessels are coordinated through unified area command, and we even host a call every day between all the chief scientists to talk about what they’re finding so that we can (adaptably) change our missions if there is something we find.

To date, we have collected more than 30,000 samples in the Gulf of Mexico, from the Texas-Louisiana border to the Florida Keys.  Last week we had over six vessels out, mostly doing water sampling.  This week has been the initiation of most of our deeper water sediment sampling.

The Gyre went out this week as well as the Ocean Veritas and now the Pisces.  These three vessels will do all the deeper water sediment sampling.  We have a couple vessels out in the near shore doing sediment and water sampling, that’s up to three nautical miles from the shore, doing a wide sweep to ensure that there is no oil in the sediment.

We find very little amounts of (residue) oil on near shore.  It’s being degraded naturally and recovered where possible.  And we really are committed to ensuring the safety of the Gulf and restoring the Gulf as we move out of this phase of trying to determine how we can fix things – not fix things – how we can stop and recover oil and moving to restoration.

We have teams out, part of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment Team, who will be looking at the long-term impacts and helping restore the Gulf. We do have a couple of resources which may be helpful to you.  We have a live mission log at NOAA.gov where we have blogs from all of our vessels that are out, giving live updates on what they’re finding.  And also, if you would like to see the sampling location data and results, you can go to GeoPlatform.gov.

And with that, I’m going to turn it over to Dr. David Valentine who is our chief scientist on this mission.

 David Valentine:   My name is Dr. David Valentine, I’m a professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara, and I’m here representing academia.  I’m serving currently as chief scientist on the NOAA ship Pisces for this expedition.

Joining me – I have additional academic scientists from a number of institutions, including the U.S. Geological Survey, East Carolina University, California Institute of Technology and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

We have four main sampling areas that we’re targeting – or four main sampling devices, I should specify, that allow us to collect sediment, allow us to visualize sediment on the sea floor, allow us to collect and analyze water from the deep waters as well as tools that are available shipboard to visualize natural seepage that may be occurring from the sea floor.

And with that, I’ll turn it back over to Janet.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you for taking my call.  I have a question about seafood testing.  Is it possible to get that answered?

Paul Zukunft:        Go ahead, Nancy.  I’ll answer that.  This is Rear Admiral Zukunft.  I’ll be happy to take that question.

Nancy MacKenzie:     OK, I’ve actually been trying to get this answered for a while.  When the shrimp are seafood tested, sensory and chemical analysis, do you know if that is with the shells on or off?

Paul Zukunft:        That question I do not know.  I do know it goes through a two-stage test, and the more elaborate test is when it goes through a GC-MS test.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right.

Paul Zukunft:        For any presence of hydrocarbon that would, in all likelihood, test the shell and flesh.  But I can’t say …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, I’m interested in that and whether they’re deveined or not.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, best place to answer that would be …

Nancy MacKenzie:     And I’ve really been trying to get that answered for three weeks, so …

Paul Zukunft:        Or with the Food and Drug Administration.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, having difficulty there, so I was hoping that you’d be able to.  But here’s one that you – that you all – probably more up your alley.  If the protocol for reopening fishing areas is the evaluation of oil movement, oil in the water column, sheen on the water and the seafood assessment, why are so many square miles still closed?  Does that mean that the seafood is tainted or there’s oil in the water?

Paul Zukunft:        No, right now we’re waiting to get a representational sample for a number of fish species in those federal waters that remain closed.  We do have a number of vessels that are out there with NOAA observers on there to actually catch those fish and then run those through the laboratory results.  And so that is actually part of the process to get those areas reopened.

But the key part is having a representational sample.  And as you realize, we did have 8,000 square miles that were just reopened on the 21st of September, and then also recreational fishing for red snapper was opened.  There was allowable quota remaining for red snapper, so for Friday, Saturday and Sunday, starting on October 1st for the next eight-week period, that red snapper season will be opened for recreational fishing, not for commercial though.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right, right, OK, well just one last thing as long as we’re talking about it.  On the e-mails that I get, it says that areas remain closed to balance economic and public health concerns, and I’m not sure exactly what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you had broken up through part of that, did you …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Oh, I’m sorry, it’s – the e-mails that I get, you know the by the numbers (sent) from the unified command, says that the areas remain closed due to balance economic and public health concerns.  And I’m not exactly sure what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, yea, those areas were closed when there was oil in those areas, and that was due to the concern for public health if fish were to be caught from there, and should there be polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, found in the fish flesh.  So that’s why there were closed.

And obviously we can close an area quite quickly to go through the requisite sampling protocols to then reopen it.  It is a somewhat time-consuming process.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        So it is a process where we error on the side of caution.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        Anytime – you know the economic indicator there, if that fish is caught and, for whatever reason, it is not found to be in compliance, it could actually have a detrimental effect you know on the economic fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico.

So you probably heard on a number of a blogs – and it is – it is the most-sampled seafood anywhere in the face of the Earth.  But again, if there’s going to be any error in this process, it will be on the side of caution.  But again, I am working extremely closely with the NOAA Marine Fishery Service, who in turn works with the Food and Drug Administration on the sampling protocols that – to continue to reopen those closed areas.  And they are gradually reopening.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you, I appreciate your time.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

Operator:               Your next question comes from the line of Laura Parker with AOL News.

Laura Parker:         Yes, I have a – sort of a big-picture question in terms of the total effort involving the – NOAA’s research.  It was announced, I think it was last week, or in the last few days, that NOAA’s now embarking on a larger systematic effort to understand the oil in the water and sort out some of the differences between academic sciences and government scientists with regard to oil on the – on the sea floor and plume and so on.

Can you lay out how and when some of these particular issues may be resolved?  Is this – is there sort of a map that you set out for how you’re going to get to the bottom of some of these things?  Or will these be you know many months away?

Janet Baran:          This is Janet Baran, (inaudible) many months away.  So we already have – there’s two parts of it.  There’s water and sediment.  So the water sampling has been going on all summer.  We have a team in place at unified area command that represents six different agencies that is an operational science advisory team.  And they are analyzing all the data as it’s coming in to make recommendations of when we reach the – reach the end game of the response, not the restoration, not the long-term care of the Gulf.

And so the water sampling is mostly completed.  But the analysis is still ongoing.  The team is in place.  They are looking at the data every day and trying to determine if there are gaps of what we need to infill or if we have completed and have an answer to the American public.

The second part is the sediment.  And, as I said, the Gyre, the Ocean Veritas and the Pisces will be out doing the sediment sampling.  And so it’s expected within the next couple weeks we will have all of the sediment samples, and that same team will be looking at what that tells us and if there needs to be additional sampling.

Much of the near shore sediment sampling is already completed, and the indicators we’re getting from there so far is a lack of presence of oil in the sediment.

Laura Parker:         Have you – I mean, come – have you been able to resolve sort of the issue of the plume, for instance?  We’ve got the – what the Berkeley Labs report versus the Woods Hole report …

Janet Baran:          Sure.

Laura Parker:         Or is there – has there just been a change from the date of the one and the date of the other?

Janet Baran:          Sure, a lot of those were based in samples that were taken in June.  And Dr. Chris Reddy, who was a part of the Woods Hole study, has – was the academic liaison at unified area command the last couple of weeks.  And we have engaged with him and talked about what he found.

Our vessels were out there also, looking at all that.  And those academic data have been included into the response database.  So we’re looking at all of it in total.

Currently what we’re finding is that dilution has occurred.  So over time, more and more water has mixed in.  And also the microbes have continued to decrease the amount of oil that would be in that area.  We’re finding less and less what we could consider (hits) and having to use more and more sophisticated instruments …

Laura Parker:         I’m sorry, you broke up a little bit.  Finding less and less …

Janet Baran:          I would say any kind of – any kind of signal at all in the water column.  And what we’re finding is that the concentrations are now in the parts of a billion.  So we’re having to use more and more sophisticated instruments to even see if there is this dispersed oil cloud and that’s all.

Laura Parker:         And what?

Janet Baran:          That’s all.

Laura Parker:         Oh, and what about the sediment on the sea?  Because I’m sure you’re very well familiar with what Mandy Joye is finding at the University of Georgia, and I think she had something in her blog about it earlier in the month.

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  So Dr. Samuel Walker, who is also part of the subsurface monitoring team, he got in contact with Dr. Joye, and she has shared her locations, and we will be going and revisiting those.  We want to ensure that we’re not just taking observations and doing – we want to make sure we’re doing a full analysis.  And so this is part of why we are going and looking at where she has sampled.

Laura Parker:         So in both of those instances of the plume and the oil on the floor, on the sea floor, you’re taking that – these other analyses into account and looking at them, but you guys have not – you’re not at the stage where you’ve reached any conclusion on either of them.  Is that what you’re saying?

Janet Baran:          I wouldn’t say that exactly.  The sediment sampling we’ve only just initiated, so we have not gone to those sites yet.  And the water sampling we have always been in (agreeance) with our academic partners that there was this layer in the water column.  It still exists, however it is at much lower concentrations and continues to degrade over time.

David Valentine:   This is Dave Valentine.  I think I can follow up a little bit, having been involved in many of these discussions.  With regard to the sediments, that’s really one of the primary targets of this upcoming cruise, and we have two tools that we are using to address this issue of whether or not there’s oil that has fallen into the sediments and is sitting there.  We’re doing extensive coring operations with a sort of corer that preserves that interface very, very well.

Onboard, we have the (mastectrometers) that we need to quantify the amount of oil that may be there on the sediment surface.  We also have a towed camera system that we’ll be deploying.  We can tow it along the sea floor.  It resides about nine to 15 feet above the sea floor and is dragged by the boat.  That takes pictures of the sea floor, about 2,000 images for every five-hour deployment.

And with that, we are hoping to look for the distribution of oil, if there is oil on the sea floor, to help us understand exactly what the patterns of deposition of this oil may be, if it’s there, and we’ll follow up, then, with the coring to quantify how much is there in those areas.

Janet Baran:          And also fingerprint – that’s the key here, too, is that we want to ensure chemically, if we do find oil, we need to check that it is MC252.  There are plenty of natural seeps in the Gulf of Mexico, which can cause oil to be found within sediment.

Laura Parker:         Right.  When is the Pisces coming back?

Janet Baran:          The Pisces will be out until October 4.

Laura Parker:         But you send this – you can send – you’re sending data in every day, is that correct?

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  We have a secure FTP site, and they’re – they will be uploading all of their analysis.  There – some of the – there will be additional work done on samples in labs that take longer than what can be done here.

Laura Parker:         And do you have a target date for when you’ll release your findings from this particular trip?

Janet Baran:          Not at this time.  We will continue to update – as we get results.  Science, unfortunately, takes more time than we care to admit, and we want to make sure that we fully investigate this and have strong conclusions.

Laura Parker:         And are you – in addition to – as things break down, are you looking at all of the things that are in the – in the – you know as they – the breakdown products that result from the breaking down of the oil?  I’m wording that badly.

David Valentine:   I guess I can take that to a certain – this is Dave Valentine.  I can’t …

Laura Parker:         There’s – do you need me to reword it?  Because I’ve worded it badly, but I think you might get my point.

David Valentine:   Yes, I do, and the compounds that are being analyzed for are the standard toxic compounds that are known in oil.  And these include the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as well as other hydrocarbon components within oil.

The issue of breakdown products is a very tricky one, and it moves into the academic realm, which I’m always happy to talk about, because I’m a geochemist, and that’s what I do for a living.  But it’s – you know it’s really insider talk, insider speak.  A lot of it – and the bottom line is that – so the kinds of breakdown products that we’re talking about tend to be fairly low on concentration.  These are intermediates or terminal products.  And they’re not – they’re very difficult things to analyze, and they tend to be at very low concentration.

Personally, we are trying to look for those at very trace levels.  That’s one of the things that my research entails.  But it’s not, to my knowledge, part of the standard plan, because these compounds tend to be very, very low in concentration.

Russell Tippets:     OK, can we get the next caller, please, to ensure everybody gets a question answered timely?

Operator:               OK, and your next question comes from the line of (Laurie Wiegler).

(Laurie Wiegler):    (Laurie Wiegler), thank you.

Hi, thank you very much for taking my call.  If more oil is found, and we know that it will be, I’m curious what the next step is for NOAA.  Is bioremediation a possibility?  Do you just let it continue to disperse?  What’s your game plan?

Paul Zukunft:        Actually, in terms of the response, that’s – this is Admiral Zukunft, the federal on-scene coordinator.  You know just bear in mind, right now what we’ve been detecting in that water column is parts per million and parts per billion.  And actually, we had – we’re seeing more and more in the parts per billion, which lends itself to the fact that there is some natural biodegradation taking place in the Gulf of Mexico, which is actually quite common in a body of water that has a significant amount of natural seeps and hydrocarbons occurring naturally, plus the fact that this well is located in relative proximity to the outflow of the Mississippi River, which is also rich in nutrients.

So, again, the key part of this study that’s ongoing is to detect any significant amounts, beyond what we’ve seen so far, but we need to expand the scope of that monitoring effort.  The preponderance of the sampling data right now has been in the water column.  This next phase is very focused upon what’s in that sediment layer as well.

And then, depending on what we find from those – you know from the sampling and analytic data – at that point, we can then consider if in fact there is an appropriate response protocol to address that.  But right now, that’s not one that I would make unilaterally.  We have a regional response team that would actually share that data, and then they would ultimately provide me recommendations whether to use such intervention methods such as bioremediation.

(Laurie Wiegler):    Thank you.  May I just ask one more follow-up to that?  Is Admiral Thad Allen no longer involved in this?  And, would that change if you decided to have another effort there to, say with the bioremediation or for cleaning up any excess oil that’s found?

Paul Zukunft:        Yes, Admiral Allen and I did a press conference yesterday where he announced that he will be retiring a week from today.  I will continue in my role as federal on-scene coordinator, as I have for some time now.  And the regional response team does provide these recommendations to the federal on-scene coordinator.

And at the same time, I also have direct access to all the interagency administrators and will assume that capacity from Admiral Allen as he goes into retirement, which certainly falls within my purview as the federal on-scene coordinator.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, thank you, and I apologize for that.  I was not on the call yesterday.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you’re quite welcome.  Actually, you know this was a local press conference.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK.

Paul Zukunft:        So, no, you did not miss that.

(Laurie Wiegler):    All right.

Paull Zukunft:        But I am the one they call Admiral Z.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, yes, I know who you are.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

END

CLICK HERE FOR AUDIO FILE

CLICK HERE TO SEE GRAPHICS FROM TODAY’S CONFERENCE

Paul Zukunft:        Well, good afternoon.  Thank you for joining us.  And again, it’s great to be joined by NOAA, our scientific support coordinator, and also with David who represents academia as we look at this phase of the operation, as we look at what’s below the surface.

And I’m also joined by the captain of the NOAA research vessel Pisces, Jesse Stark.  And it’s great to be pier side before this vessel prepares to set sail this afternoon on a very critical mission integral to this oil spill.

Just to bring you up to date on where we are with the spill, we still have a very active response across the four states and the Gulf of Mexico and Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.  On Wednesday, I was down in Bay Jimmy down in Barataria Bay where we had over 600 workers working off a floating barge responding to oil in that area in a very isolated marshland.

But there’s still removal operations taking place as I speak today.  So we’re still recovering oil, but at the same time, our next area of concern, as it has been from day one, is what is below the surface.

We heard that the well was killed on the 19th of September, and actually we’ve had no oil introduced – no new oil since the 15th of July, and our oil trajectory grid went to a white screen with no recoverable oil since on or about the 1st of August.

So now our challenge is to look at what is on the sea floor, and so the NOAA vessel Pisces is one of several vessels that will participate in that mission.  I have the best of science here surrounding me just as we did, when we did that relief well, which was a feat – quite a feat onto itself to be able to intercept that well from three miles away, a seven-inch casing intercepting a seven-inch casing.

Well, now we need to verify with the best of science what is in that water column, what is in the sea floor, down to depths up to and exceeding 5,000 feet integral to this oil spill response.  So that’s where we’re going in the next phase of this operation.  And I do look forward to seeing the NOAA vessel Pisces get underway for this mission this afternoon.

With that, I’ll turn it over to Dr. Janet Baran.

 Janet Baran:          Baran, yes, thank you, Admiral.

So we’re very glad to be here today on the NOAA ship Pisces.  The Pisces has been a very important part of our mission this whole summer.  It’s been out doing acoustic monitoring during the well head integrity tests as well as doing water sampling in the last couple cruises.

We have been working on monitoring the subsurface since early May and continue to do so.  This – our monitoring covers the near shore, the south and the deep water, from the surface to the bottom of the ocean.  And we’re looking to really understand if there is any recoverable oil or if there’s anything else that we can do about it.

We’ve had numerous vessels out.  Currently we have about six vessels who are working in the continental shelf and deep water doing sediment and water sampling, and this vessel will be part of that.  All vessels are coordinated through unified area command, and we even host a call every day between all the chief scientists to talk about what they’re finding so that we can (adaptably) change our missions if there is something we find.

To date, we have collected more than 30,000 samples in the Gulf of Mexico, from the Texas-Louisiana border to the Florida Keys.  Last week we had over six vessels out, mostly doing water sampling.  This week has been the initiation of most of our deeper water sediment sampling.

The Gyre went out this week as well as the Ocean Veritas and now the Pisces.  These three vessels will do all the deeper water sediment sampling.  We have a couple vessels out in the near shore doing sediment and water sampling, that’s up to three nautical miles from the shore, doing a wide sweep to ensure that there is no oil in the sediment.

We find very little amounts of (residue) oil on near shore.  It’s being degraded naturally and recovered where possible.  And we really are committed to ensuring the safety of the Gulf and restoring the Gulf as we move out of this phase of trying to determine how we can fix things – not fix things – how we can stop and recover oil and moving to restoration.

We have teams out, part of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment Team, who will be looking at the long-term impacts and helping restore the Gulf. We do have a couple of resources which may be helpful to you.  We have a live mission log at NOAA.gov where we have blogs from all of our vessels that are out, giving live updates on what they’re finding.  And also, if you would like to see the sampling location data and results, you can go to GeoPlatform.gov.

And with that, I’m going to turn it over to Dr. David Valentine who is our chief scientist on this mission.

 David Valentine:   My name is Dr. David Valentine, I’m a professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara, and I’m here representing academia.  I’m serving currently as chief scientist on the NOAA ship Pisces for this expedition.

Joining me – I have additional academic scientists from a number of institutions, including the U.S. Geological Survey, East Carolina University, California Institute of Technology and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

We have four main sampling areas that we’re targeting – or four main sampling devices, I should specify, that allow us to collect sediment, allow us to visualize sediment on the sea floor, allow us to collect and analyze water from the deep waters as well as tools that are available shipboard to visualize natural seepage that may be occurring from the sea floor.

And with that, I’ll turn it back over to Janet.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you for taking my call.  I have a question about seafood testing.  Is it possible to get that answered?

Paul Zukunft:        Go ahead, Nancy.  I’ll answer that.  This is Rear Admiral Zukunft.  I’ll be happy to take that question.

Nancy MacKenzie:     OK, I’ve actually been trying to get this answered for a while.  When the shrimp are seafood tested, sensory and chemical analysis, do you know if that is with the shells on or off?

Paul Zukunft:        That question I do not know.  I do know it goes through a two-stage test, and the more elaborate test is when it goes through a GC-MS test.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right.

Paul Zukunft:        For any presence of hydrocarbon that would, in all likelihood, test the shell and flesh.  But I can’t say …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, I’m interested in that and whether they’re deveined or not.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, best place to answer that would be …

Nancy MacKenzie:     And I’ve really been trying to get that answered for three weeks, so …

Paul Zukunft:        Or with the Food and Drug Administration.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, having difficulty there, so I was hoping that you’d be able to.  But here’s one that you – that you all – probably more up your alley.  If the protocol for reopening fishing areas is the evaluation of oil movement, oil in the water column, sheen on the water and the seafood assessment, why are so many square miles still closed?  Does that mean that the seafood is tainted or there’s oil in the water?

Paul Zukunft:        No, right now we’re waiting to get a representational sample for a number of fish species in those federal waters that remain closed.  We do have a number of vessels that are out there with NOAA observers on there to actually catch those fish and then run those through the laboratory results.  And so that is actually part of the process to get those areas reopened.

But the key part is having a representational sample.  And as you realize, we did have 8,000 square miles that were just reopened on the 21st of September, and then also recreational fishing for red snapper was opened.  There was allowable quota remaining for red snapper, so for Friday, Saturday and Sunday, starting on October 1st for the next eight-week period, that red snapper season will be opened for recreational fishing, not for commercial though.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right, right, OK, well just one last thing as long as we’re talking about it.  On the e-mails that I get, it says that areas remain closed to balance economic and public health concerns, and I’m not sure exactly what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you had broken up through part of that, did you …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Oh, I’m sorry, it’s – the e-mails that I get, you know the by the numbers (sent) from the unified command, says that the areas remain closed due to balance economic and public health concerns.  And I’m not exactly sure what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, yea, those areas were closed when there was oil in those areas, and that was due to the concern for public health if fish were to be caught from there, and should there be polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, found in the fish flesh.  So that’s why there were closed.

And obviously we can close an area quite quickly to go through the requisite sampling protocols to then reopen it.  It is a somewhat time-consuming process.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        So it is a process where we error on the side of caution.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        Anytime – you know the economic indicator there, if that fish is caught and, for whatever reason, it is not found to be in compliance, it could actually have a detrimental effect you know on the economic fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico.

So you probably heard on a number of a blogs – and it is – it is the most-sampled seafood anywhere in the face of the Earth.  But again, if there’s going to be any error in this process, it will be on the side of caution.  But again, I am working extremely closely with the NOAA Marine Fishery Service, who in turn works with the Food and Drug Administration on the sampling protocols that – to continue to reopen those closed areas.  And they are gradually reopening.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you, I appreciate your time.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

Operator:               Your next question comes from the line of Laura Parker with AOL News.

Laura Parker:         Yes, I have a – sort of a big-picture question in terms of the total effort involving the – NOAA’s research.  It was announced, I think it was last week, or in the last few days, that NOAA’s now embarking on a larger systematic effort to understand the oil in the water and sort out some of the differences between academic sciences and government scientists with regard to oil on the – on the sea floor and plume and so on.

Can you lay out how and when some of these particular issues may be resolved?  Is this – is there sort of a map that you set out for how you’re going to get to the bottom of some of these things?  Or will these be you know many months away?

Janet Baran:          This is Janet Baran, (inaudible) many months away.  So we already have – there’s two parts of it.  There’s water and sediment.  So the water sampling has been going on all summer.  We have a team in place at unified area command that represents six different agencies that is an operational science advisory team.  And they are analyzing all the data as it’s coming in to make recommendations of when we reach the – reach the end game of the response, not the restoration, not the long-term care of the Gulf.

And so the water sampling is mostly completed.  But the analysis is still ongoing.  The team is in place.  They are looking at the data every day and trying to determine if there are gaps of what we need to infill or if we have completed and have an answer to the American public.

The second part is the sediment.  And, as I said, the Gyre, the Ocean Veritas and the Pisces will be out doing the sediment sampling.  And so it’s expected within the next couple weeks we will have all of the sediment samples, and that same team will be looking at what that tells us and if there needs to be additional sampling.

Much of the near shore sediment sampling is already completed, and the indicators we’re getting from there so far is a lack of presence of oil in the sediment.

Laura Parker:         Have you – I mean, come – have you been able to resolve sort of the issue of the plume, for instance?  We’ve got the – what the Berkeley Labs report versus the Woods Hole report …

Janet Baran:          Sure.

Laura Parker:         Or is there – has there just been a change from the date of the one and the date of the other?

Janet Baran:          Sure, a lot of those were based in samples that were taken in June.  And Dr. Chris Reddy, who was a part of the Woods Hole study, has – was the academic liaison at unified area command the last couple of weeks.  And we have engaged with him and talked about what he found.

Our vessels were out there also, looking at all that.  And those academic data have been included into the response database.  So we’re looking at all of it in total.

Currently what we’re finding is that dilution has occurred.  So over time, more and more water has mixed in.  And also the microbes have continued to decrease the amount of oil that would be in that area.  We’re finding less and less what we could consider (hits) and having to use more and more sophisticated instruments …

Laura Parker:         I’m sorry, you broke up a little bit.  Finding less and less …

Janet Baran:          I would say any kind of – any kind of signal at all in the water column.  And what we’re finding is that the concentrations are now in the parts of a billion.  So we’re having to use more and more sophisticated instruments to even see if there is this dispersed oil cloud and that’s all.

Laura Parker:         And what?

Janet Baran:          That’s all.

Laura Parker:         Oh, and what about the sediment on the sea?  Because I’m sure you’re very well familiar with what Mandy Joye is finding at the University of Georgia, and I think she had something in her blog about it earlier in the month.

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  So Dr. Samuel Walker, who is also part of the subsurface monitoring team, he got in contact with Dr. Joye, and she has shared her locations, and we will be going and revisiting those.  We want to ensure that we’re not just taking observations and doing – we want to make sure we’re doing a full analysis.  And so this is part of why we are going and looking at where she has sampled.

Laura Parker:         So in both of those instances of the plume and the oil on the floor, on the sea floor, you’re taking that – these other analyses into account and looking at them, but you guys have not – you’re not at the stage where you’ve reached any conclusion on either of them.  Is that what you’re saying?

Janet Baran:          I wouldn’t say that exactly.  The sediment sampling we’ve only just initiated, so we have not gone to those sites yet.  And the water sampling we have always been in (agreeance) with our academic partners that there was this layer in the water column.  It still exists, however it is at much lower concentrations and continues to degrade over time.

David Valentine:   This is Dave Valentine.  I think I can follow up a little bit, having been involved in many of these discussions.  With regard to the sediments, that’s really one of the primary targets of this upcoming cruise, and we have two tools that we are using to address this issue of whether or not there’s oil that has fallen into the sediments and is sitting there.  We’re doing extensive coring operations with a sort of corer that preserves that interface very, very well.

Onboard, we have the (mastectrometers) that we need to quantify the amount of oil that may be there on the sediment surface.  We also have a towed camera system that we’ll be deploying.  We can tow it along the sea floor.  It resides about nine to 15 feet above the sea floor and is dragged by the boat.  That takes pictures of the sea floor, about 2,000 images for every five-hour deployment.

And with that, we are hoping to look for the distribution of oil, if there is oil on the sea floor, to help us understand exactly what the patterns of deposition of this oil may be, if it’s there, and we’ll follow up, then, with the coring to quantify how much is there in those areas.

Janet Baran:          And also fingerprint – that’s the key here, too, is that we want to ensure chemically, if we do find oil, we need to check that it is MC252.  There are plenty of natural seeps in the Gulf of Mexico, which can cause oil to be found within sediment.

Laura Parker:         Right.  When is the Pisces coming back?

Janet Baran:          The Pisces will be out until October 4.

Laura Parker:         But you send this – you can send – you’re sending data in every day, is that correct?

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  We have a secure FTP site, and they’re – they will be uploading all of their analysis.  There – some of the – there will be additional work done on samples in labs that take longer than what can be done here.

Laura Parker:         And do you have a target date for when you’ll release your findings from this particular trip?

Janet Baran:          Not at this time.  We will continue to update – as we get results.  Science, unfortunately, takes more time than we care to admit, and we want to make sure that we fully investigate this and have strong conclusions.

Laura Parker:         And are you – in addition to – as things break down, are you looking at all of the things that are in the – in the – you know as they – the breakdown products that result from the breaking down of the oil?  I’m wording that badly.

David Valentine:   I guess I can take that to a certain – this is Dave Valentine.  I can’t …

Laura Parker:         There’s – do you need me to reword it?  Because I’ve worded it badly, but I think you might get my point.

David Valentine:   Yes, I do, and the compounds that are being analyzed for are the standard toxic compounds that are known in oil.  And these include the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as well as other hydrocarbon components within oil.

The issue of breakdown products is a very tricky one, and it moves into the academic realm, which I’m always happy to talk about, because I’m a geochemist, and that’s what I do for a living.  But it’s – you know it’s really insider talk, insider speak.  A lot of it – and the bottom line is that – so the kinds of breakdown products that we’re talking about tend to be fairly low on concentration.  These are intermediates or terminal products.  And they’re not – they’re very difficult things to analyze, and they tend to be at very low concentration.

Personally, we are trying to look for those at very trace levels.  That’s one of the things that my research entails.  But it’s not, to my knowledge, part of the standard plan, because these compounds tend to be very, very low in concentration.

Russell Tippets:     OK, can we get the next caller, please, to ensure everybody gets a question answered timely?

Operator:               OK, and your next question comes from the line of (Laurie Wiegler).

(Laurie Wiegler):    (Laurie Wiegler), thank you.

Hi, thank you very much for taking my call.  If more oil is found, and we know that it will be, I’m curious what the next step is for NOAA.  Is bioremediation a possibility?  Do you just let it continue to disperse?  What’s your game plan?

Paul Zukunft:        Actually, in terms of the response, that’s – this is Admiral Zukunft, the federal on-scene coordinator.  You know just bear in mind, right now what we’ve been detecting in that water column is parts per million and parts per billion.  And actually, we had – we’re seeing more and more in the parts per billion, which lends itself to the fact that there is some natural biodegradation taking place in the Gulf of Mexico, which is actually quite common in a body of water that has a significant amount of natural seeps and hydrocarbons occurring naturally, plus the fact that this well is located in relative proximity to the outflow of the Mississippi River, which is also rich in nutrients.

So, again, the key part of this study that’s ongoing is to detect any significant amounts, beyond what we’ve seen so far, but we need to expand the scope of that monitoring effort.  The preponderance of the sampling data right now has been in the water column.  This next phase is very focused upon what’s in that sediment layer as well.

And then, depending on what we find from those – you know from the sampling and analytic data – at that point, we can then consider if in fact there is an appropriate response protocol to address that.  But right now, that’s not one that I would make unilaterally.  We have a regional response team that would actually share that data, and then they would ultimately provide me recommendations whether to use such intervention methods such as bioremediation.

(Laurie Wiegler):    Thank you.  May I just ask one more follow-up to that?  Is Admiral Thad Allen no longer involved in this?  And, would that change if you decided to have another effort there to, say with the bioremediation or for cleaning up any excess oil that’s found?

Paul Zukunft:        Yes, Admiral Allen and I did a press conference yesterday where he announced that he will be retiring a week from today.  I will continue in my role as federal on-scene coordinator, as I have for some time now.  And the regional response team does provide these recommendations to the federal on-scene coordinator.

And at the same time, I also have direct access to all the interagency administrators and will assume that capacity from Admiral Allen as he goes into retirement, which certainly falls within my purview as the federal on-scene coordinator.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, thank you, and I apologize for that.  I was not on the call yesterday.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you’re quite welcome.  Actually, you know this was a local press conference.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK.

Paul Zukunft:        So, no, you did not miss that.

(Laurie Wiegler):    All right.

Paull Zukunft:        But I am the one they call Admiral Z.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, yes, I know who you are.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

END

CLICK HERE FOR AUDIO FILE

CLICK HERE TO SEE GRAPHICS FROM TODAY’S CONFERENCE

Paul Zukunft:        Well, good afternoon.  Thank you for joining us.  And again, it’s great to be joined by NOAA, our scientific support coordinator, and also with David who represents academia as we look at this phase of the operation, as we look at what’s below the surface.

And I’m also joined by the captain of the NOAA research vessel Pisces, Jesse Stark.  And it’s great to be pier side before this vessel prepares to set sail this afternoon on a very critical mission integral to this oil spill.

Just to bring you up to date on where we are with the spill, we still have a very active response across the four states and the Gulf of Mexico and Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.  On Wednesday, I was down in Bay Jimmy down in Barataria Bay where we had over 600 workers working off a floating barge responding to oil in that area in a very isolated marshland.

But there’s still removal operations taking place as I speak today.  So we’re still recovering oil, but at the same time, our next area of concern, as it has been from day one, is what is below the surface.

We heard that the well was killed on the 19th of September, and actually we’ve had no oil introduced – no new oil since the 15th of July, and our oil trajectory grid went to a white screen with no recoverable oil since on or about the 1st of August.

So now our challenge is to look at what is on the sea floor, and so the NOAA vessel Pisces is one of several vessels that will participate in that mission.  I have the best of science here surrounding me just as we did, when we did that relief well, which was a feat – quite a feat onto itself to be able to intercept that well from three miles away, a seven-inch casing intercepting a seven-inch casing.

Well, now we need to verify with the best of science what is in that water column, what is in the sea floor, down to depths up to and exceeding 5,000 feet integral to this oil spill response.  So that’s where we’re going in the next phase of this operation.  And I do look forward to seeing the NOAA vessel Pisces get underway for this mission this afternoon.

With that, I’ll turn it over to Dr. Janet Baran.

 Janet Baran:          Baran, yes, thank you, Admiral.

So we’re very glad to be here today on the NOAA ship Pisces.  The Pisces has been a very important part of our mission this whole summer.  It’s been out doing acoustic monitoring during the well head integrity tests as well as doing water sampling in the last couple cruises.

We have been working on monitoring the subsurface since early May and continue to do so.  This – our monitoring covers the near shore, the south and the deep water, from the surface to the bottom of the ocean.  And we’re looking to really understand if there is any recoverable oil or if there’s anything else that we can do about it.

We’ve had numerous vessels out.  Currently we have about six vessels who are working in the continental shelf and deep water doing sediment and water sampling, and this vessel will be part of that.  All vessels are coordinated through unified area command, and we even host a call every day between all the chief scientists to talk about what they’re finding so that we can (adaptably) change our missions if there is something we find.

To date, we have collected more than 30,000 samples in the Gulf of Mexico, from the Texas-Louisiana border to the Florida Keys.  Last week we had over six vessels out, mostly doing water sampling.  This week has been the initiation of most of our deeper water sediment sampling.

The Gyre went out this week as well as the Ocean Veritas and now the Pisces.  These three vessels will do all the deeper water sediment sampling.  We have a couple vessels out in the near shore doing sediment and water sampling, that’s up to three nautical miles from the shore, doing a wide sweep to ensure that there is no oil in the sediment.

We find very little amounts of (residue) oil on near shore.  It’s being degraded naturally and recovered where possible.  And we really are committed to ensuring the safety of the Gulf and restoring the Gulf as we move out of this phase of trying to determine how we can fix things – not fix things – how we can stop and recover oil and moving to restoration.

We have teams out, part of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment Team, who will be looking at the long-term impacts and helping restore the Gulf. We do have a couple of resources which may be helpful to you.  We have a live mission log at NOAA.gov where we have blogs from all of our vessels that are out, giving live updates on what they’re finding.  And also, if you would like to see the sampling location data and results, you can go to GeoPlatform.gov.

And with that, I’m going to turn it over to Dr. David Valentine who is our chief scientist on this mission.

 David Valentine:   My name is Dr. David Valentine, I’m a professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara, and I’m here representing academia.  I’m serving currently as chief scientist on the NOAA ship Pisces for this expedition.

Joining me – I have additional academic scientists from a number of institutions, including the U.S. Geological Survey, East Carolina University, California Institute of Technology and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

We have four main sampling areas that we’re targeting – or four main sampling devices, I should specify, that allow us to collect sediment, allow us to visualize sediment on the sea floor, allow us to collect and analyze water from the deep waters as well as tools that are available shipboard to visualize natural seepage that may be occurring from the sea floor.

And with that, I’ll turn it back over to Janet.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you for taking my call.  I have a question about seafood testing.  Is it possible to get that answered?

Paul Zukunft:        Go ahead, Nancy.  I’ll answer that.  This is Rear Admiral Zukunft.  I’ll be happy to take that question.

Nancy MacKenzie:     OK, I’ve actually been trying to get this answered for a while.  When the shrimp are seafood tested, sensory and chemical analysis, do you know if that is with the shells on or off?

Paul Zukunft:        That question I do not know.  I do know it goes through a two-stage test, and the more elaborate test is when it goes through a GC-MS test.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right.

Paul Zukunft:        For any presence of hydrocarbon that would, in all likelihood, test the shell and flesh.  But I can’t say …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, I’m interested in that and whether they’re deveined or not.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, best place to answer that would be …

Nancy MacKenzie:     And I’ve really been trying to get that answered for three weeks, so …

Paul Zukunft:        Or with the Food and Drug Administration.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Yes, having difficulty there, so I was hoping that you’d be able to.  But here’s one that you – that you all – probably more up your alley.  If the protocol for reopening fishing areas is the evaluation of oil movement, oil in the water column, sheen on the water and the seafood assessment, why are so many square miles still closed?  Does that mean that the seafood is tainted or there’s oil in the water?

Paul Zukunft:        No, right now we’re waiting to get a representational sample for a number of fish species in those federal waters that remain closed.  We do have a number of vessels that are out there with NOAA observers on there to actually catch those fish and then run those through the laboratory results.  And so that is actually part of the process to get those areas reopened.

But the key part is having a representational sample.  And as you realize, we did have 8,000 square miles that were just reopened on the 21st of September, and then also recreational fishing for red snapper was opened.  There was allowable quota remaining for red snapper, so for Friday, Saturday and Sunday, starting on October 1st for the next eight-week period, that red snapper season will be opened for recreational fishing, not for commercial though.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Right, right, OK, well just one last thing as long as we’re talking about it.  On the e-mails that I get, it says that areas remain closed to balance economic and public health concerns, and I’m not sure exactly what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you had broken up through part of that, did you …

Nancy MacKenzie:     Oh, I’m sorry, it’s – the e-mails that I get, you know the by the numbers (sent) from the unified command, says that the areas remain closed due to balance economic and public health concerns.  And I’m not exactly sure what that means.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, yea, those areas were closed when there was oil in those areas, and that was due to the concern for public health if fish were to be caught from there, and should there be polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, found in the fish flesh.  So that’s why there were closed.

And obviously we can close an area quite quickly to go through the requisite sampling protocols to then reopen it.  It is a somewhat time-consuming process.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        So it is a process where we error on the side of caution.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Sure.

Paul Zukunft:        Anytime – you know the economic indicator there, if that fish is caught and, for whatever reason, it is not found to be in compliance, it could actually have a detrimental effect you know on the economic fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico.

So you probably heard on a number of a blogs – and it is – it is the most-sampled seafood anywhere in the face of the Earth.  But again, if there’s going to be any error in this process, it will be on the side of caution.  But again, I am working extremely closely with the NOAA Marine Fishery Service, who in turn works with the Food and Drug Administration on the sampling protocols that – to continue to reopen those closed areas.  And they are gradually reopening.

Nancy MacKenzie:     Thank you, I appreciate your time.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

Operator:               Your next question comes from the line of Laura Parker with AOL News.

Laura Parker:         Yes, I have a – sort of a big-picture question in terms of the total effort involving the – NOAA’s research.  It was announced, I think it was last week, or in the last few days, that NOAA’s now embarking on a larger systematic effort to understand the oil in the water and sort out some of the differences between academic sciences and government scientists with regard to oil on the – on the sea floor and plume and so on.

Can you lay out how and when some of these particular issues may be resolved?  Is this – is there sort of a map that you set out for how you’re going to get to the bottom of some of these things?  Or will these be you know many months away?

Janet Baran:          This is Janet Baran, (inaudible) many months away.  So we already have – there’s two parts of it.  There’s water and sediment.  So the water sampling has been going on all summer.  We have a team in place at unified area command that represents six different agencies that is an operational science advisory team.  And they are analyzing all the data as it’s coming in to make recommendations of when we reach the – reach the end game of the response, not the restoration, not the long-term care of the Gulf.

And so the water sampling is mostly completed.  But the analysis is still ongoing.  The team is in place.  They are looking at the data every day and trying to determine if there are gaps of what we need to infill or if we have completed and have an answer to the American public.

The second part is the sediment.  And, as I said, the Gyre, the Ocean Veritas and the Pisces will be out doing the sediment sampling.  And so it’s expected within the next couple weeks we will have all of the sediment samples, and that same team will be looking at what that tells us and if there needs to be additional sampling.

Much of the near shore sediment sampling is already completed, and the indicators we’re getting from there so far is a lack of presence of oil in the sediment.

Laura Parker:         Have you – I mean, come – have you been able to resolve sort of the issue of the plume, for instance?  We’ve got the – what the Berkeley Labs report versus the Woods Hole report …

Janet Baran:          Sure.

Laura Parker:         Or is there – has there just been a change from the date of the one and the date of the other?

Janet Baran:          Sure, a lot of those were based in samples that were taken in June.  And Dr. Chris Reddy, who was a part of the Woods Hole study, has – was the academic liaison at unified area command the last couple of weeks.  And we have engaged with him and talked about what he found.

Our vessels were out there also, looking at all that.  And those academic data have been included into the response database.  So we’re looking at all of it in total.

Currently what we’re finding is that dilution has occurred.  So over time, more and more water has mixed in.  And also the microbes have continued to decrease the amount of oil that would be in that area.  We’re finding less and less what we could consider (hits) and having to use more and more sophisticated instruments …

Laura Parker:         I’m sorry, you broke up a little bit.  Finding less and less …

Janet Baran:          I would say any kind of – any kind of signal at all in the water column.  And what we’re finding is that the concentrations are now in the parts of a billion.  So we’re having to use more and more sophisticated instruments to even see if there is this dispersed oil cloud and that’s all.

Laura Parker:         And what?

Janet Baran:          That’s all.

Laura Parker:         Oh, and what about the sediment on the sea?  Because I’m sure you’re very well familiar with what Mandy Joye is finding at the University of Georgia, and I think she had something in her blog about it earlier in the month.

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  So Dr. Samuel Walker, who is also part of the subsurface monitoring team, he got in contact with Dr. Joye, and she has shared her locations, and we will be going and revisiting those.  We want to ensure that we’re not just taking observations and doing – we want to make sure we’re doing a full analysis.  And so this is part of why we are going and looking at where she has sampled.

Laura Parker:         So in both of those instances of the plume and the oil on the floor, on the sea floor, you’re taking that – these other analyses into account and looking at them, but you guys have not – you’re not at the stage where you’ve reached any conclusion on either of them.  Is that what you’re saying?

Janet Baran:          I wouldn’t say that exactly.  The sediment sampling we’ve only just initiated, so we have not gone to those sites yet.  And the water sampling we have always been in (agreeance) with our academic partners that there was this layer in the water column.  It still exists, however it is at much lower concentrations and continues to degrade over time.

David Valentine:   This is Dave Valentine.  I think I can follow up a little bit, having been involved in many of these discussions.  With regard to the sediments, that’s really one of the primary targets of this upcoming cruise, and we have two tools that we are using to address this issue of whether or not there’s oil that has fallen into the sediments and is sitting there.  We’re doing extensive coring operations with a sort of corer that preserves that interface very, very well.

Onboard, we have the (mastectrometers) that we need to quantify the amount of oil that may be there on the sediment surface.  We also have a towed camera system that we’ll be deploying.  We can tow it along the sea floor.  It resides about nine to 15 feet above the sea floor and is dragged by the boat.  That takes pictures of the sea floor, about 2,000 images for every five-hour deployment.

And with that, we are hoping to look for the distribution of oil, if there is oil on the sea floor, to help us understand exactly what the patterns of deposition of this oil may be, if it’s there, and we’ll follow up, then, with the coring to quantify how much is there in those areas.

Janet Baran:          And also fingerprint – that’s the key here, too, is that we want to ensure chemically, if we do find oil, we need to check that it is MC252.  There are plenty of natural seeps in the Gulf of Mexico, which can cause oil to be found within sediment.

Laura Parker:         Right.  When is the Pisces coming back?

Janet Baran:          The Pisces will be out until October 4.

Laura Parker:         But you send this – you can send – you’re sending data in every day, is that correct?

Janet Baran:          That is correct.  We have a secure FTP site, and they’re – they will be uploading all of their analysis.  There – some of the – there will be additional work done on samples in labs that take longer than what can be done here.

Laura Parker:         And do you have a target date for when you’ll release your findings from this particular trip?

Janet Baran:          Not at this time.  We will continue to update – as we get results.  Science, unfortunately, takes more time than we care to admit, and we want to make sure that we fully investigate this and have strong conclusions.

Laura Parker:         And are you – in addition to – as things break down, are you looking at all of the things that are in the – in the – you know as they – the breakdown products that result from the breaking down of the oil?  I’m wording that badly.

David Valentine:   I guess I can take that to a certain – this is Dave Valentine.  I can’t …

Laura Parker:         There’s – do you need me to reword it?  Because I’ve worded it badly, but I think you might get my point.

David Valentine:   Yes, I do, and the compounds that are being analyzed for are the standard toxic compounds that are known in oil.  And these include the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as well as other hydrocarbon components within oil.

The issue of breakdown products is a very tricky one, and it moves into the academic realm, which I’m always happy to talk about, because I’m a geochemist, and that’s what I do for a living.  But it’s – you know it’s really insider talk, insider speak.  A lot of it – and the bottom line is that – so the kinds of breakdown products that we’re talking about tend to be fairly low on concentration.  These are intermediates or terminal products.  And they’re not – they’re very difficult things to analyze, and they tend to be at very low concentration.

Personally, we are trying to look for those at very trace levels.  That’s one of the things that my research entails.  But it’s not, to my knowledge, part of the standard plan, because these compounds tend to be very, very low in concentration.

Russell Tippets:     OK, can we get the next caller, please, to ensure everybody gets a question answered timely?

Operator:               OK, and your next question comes from the line of (Laurie Wiegler).

(Laurie Wiegler):    (Laurie Wiegler), thank you.

Hi, thank you very much for taking my call.  If more oil is found, and we know that it will be, I’m curious what the next step is for NOAA.  Is bioremediation a possibility?  Do you just let it continue to disperse?  What’s your game plan?

Paul Zukunft:        Actually, in terms of the response, that’s – this is Admiral Zukunft, the federal on-scene coordinator.  You know just bear in mind, right now what we’ve been detecting in that water column is parts per million and parts per billion.  And actually, we had – we’re seeing more and more in the parts per billion, which lends itself to the fact that there is some natural biodegradation taking place in the Gulf of Mexico, which is actually quite common in a body of water that has a significant amount of natural seeps and hydrocarbons occurring naturally, plus the fact that this well is located in relative proximity to the outflow of the Mississippi River, which is also rich in nutrients.

So, again, the key part of this study that’s ongoing is to detect any significant amounts, beyond what we’ve seen so far, but we need to expand the scope of that monitoring effort.  The preponderance of the sampling data right now has been in the water column.  This next phase is very focused upon what’s in that sediment layer as well.

And then, depending on what we find from those – you know from the sampling and analytic data – at that point, we can then consider if in fact there is an appropriate response protocol to address that.  But right now, that’s not one that I would make unilaterally.  We have a regional response team that would actually share that data, and then they would ultimately provide me recommendations whether to use such intervention methods such as bioremediation.

(Laurie Wiegler):    Thank you.  May I just ask one more follow-up to that?  Is Admiral Thad Allen no longer involved in this?  And, would that change if you decided to have another effort there to, say with the bioremediation or for cleaning up any excess oil that’s found?

Paul Zukunft:        Yes, Admiral Allen and I did a press conference yesterday where he announced that he will be retiring a week from today.  I will continue in my role as federal on-scene coordinator, as I have for some time now.  And the regional response team does provide these recommendations to the federal on-scene coordinator.

And at the same time, I also have direct access to all the interagency administrators and will assume that capacity from Admiral Allen as he goes into retirement, which certainly falls within my purview as the federal on-scene coordinator.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, thank you, and I apologize for that.  I was not on the call yesterday.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, you’re quite welcome.  Actually, you know this was a local press conference.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK.

Paul Zukunft:        So, no, you did not miss that.

(Laurie Wiegler):    All right.

Paull Zukunft:        But I am the one they call Admiral Z.

(Laurie Wiegler):    OK, yes, I know who you are.  Thank you.

Paul Zukunft:        OK, thank you.

END

CLICK HERE FOR AUDIO

Paul Zukunft:        OK, good afternoon everybody.  This is Rear Admiral Paul Zukunft, Federal on-scene coordinator and I’ve down here for over 3-1/2 months now and I’ve been overseeing the response aspect of this operation. 

In my operation and in Admiral Allen’s, we’re split between surface and subsurface.  Admiral focused primarily on controlling the source of the spill whereas I was dealing with the recovery of oil and then removing it from the shorelines as well. 

So where we are today, I just returned from Bay Jimmy where we have one of our divisions working under the Venice branch which is in Plaquemines Parish.  This is one of eight locations in these marsh areas where we still have residual oil which is a very labor intensive effort but we’re able to get into some of these areas using some of the technology that actually was – came to surface.

We used a Schafer skimming system by Mr. Schafer from Plaquemines Parish that invented this vaccum device where we can get adjacent to that marsh, remove oil.  But we have about 600 people just working at this site alone today down at Bay Jimmy.

Those folks live out in the floating barge, a flotell as we call it, but so there was concern earlier now that the well is dead, where do we go forward.  We haven’t any oil released since the 15th of July.  We continue to respond to these pockets of oil.  They are basically job sites now where we still have residual oil and 600 miles of coast line that is still affected.

When people think coastline, you normally think the straight coastline of a Florida panhandle.  When you get over here in Louisiana, its back in marshes and estuaries and very remote locations so logistics is our challenge but again there is still plenty of work remaining.

They have about 23,000 people in this response effort as I speak today.  What we did earlier this week was we consolidated our headquarters function and we consolidated the headquarters functions in Houma, in Mobile combine them in with the Unified Area Command in New Orleans.

What that did was it drew down about 1,800 people that work in a headquarters oversight capacity to minimize our footprint.  It has also streamlined our internal communications and that’s moving ahead quite smoothly.  

So besides the oil that’s on the, in the marshes and on the beaches of Florida, Alabama and Mississippi our other area of focus is what’s below the surface.  I have Dr. Sam Walker with NOAA and they’ve been an integral part of this operation from day one as has the scientific community.

Just as it was science that came up with the solution to shut in this well and deem it effectively dead it’s also science we have called upon here as we look at what is in that water column.  What’s in those deep sea sediments and does it oppose a risk to sea food safety and for the safety of the United States.  So I’ve asked Sam Walker to provide an oversight of our subsea monitoring program and then at that point I would be happy to entertain any questions.

Sam Walker:          Thank you Admiral.  This is Sam Walker with NOAA and I’m just going to run down a couple of the key points in terms of our status with our subsurface monitoring.  We’ve been conducting this since late April as a matter of fact and monitoring the sub surface with respect to dispersant use there.  But subsequent to the well being capped we’ve continued to do that work both in the deep water but also on the shelf, on the Continental shelf and then in the near shore areas.

And so that’s a very comprehensive expanse all the way from the shoreline into the deep water.  And what we are trying to get a handle on is you know what is the form of oil if any that remains and can we take action against that oil.  And so we are doing that with a series of different technologies.  We are using surface vessels that monitor down through the water column.  We’re using ocean gliders that help to check presence of hydrocarbons in the water column.

We’re also taking sediment cores on the sea floor itself and having those analyzed so we’re looking at things comprehensively.  And as the Admiral has pointed out on numerous occasions as has NOAA’s administrator Dr. Lubchenco you know there are in fact places where oil still resides particularly in the near shore area where it’s being entrained in sediments, and so we’re very aware of those.  We are also trying to look a little bit more comprehensively in the deep water based on some reports from academic vessels here in recent weeks.

And so we are responding to that we’re in contact with those University researchers and making sure that we’re going back and revisiting the same places.  One thing to keep in mind is that the time line upon which these samples can be returned from a lab in order to render a result about the source of that oil is a little bit longer than what we can do on a daily basis.

So sometimes it takes a week or more to return those data sets but what we can do is on a daily basis talk about the number of samples that have been taken the number of vessels that are deployed in order to take these samples and then also return back a presence or absence of oil at those locations.  But what we can’t do on a daily basis is immediately turn around a result for the source of that oil.

But what we can say is that over the past couple of months since the well has been capped we’ve been seeing a very clear trend of diminished concentrations particularly in the water column.  We are down into the parts per billion range now which is not actionable for this source oil but we are continuing to track that and that’s a natural transition into the Natural Resources Damage Assessment phase of this incident which is different than the response.

And so we’re working very closely with our colleagues in that part of the phase to indicate to them where we’re seeing these traces so they can continue their work for ecosystem assessment over the long term and that’s a really critical point in terms of transitioning in this incident.  The other thing that we’ve been doing is continuing to actively engage the academic community particularly here in the Gulf. 

We’ve been working with researchers from states all across the Gulf including those at USF and Texas A&M, at LSU, Southern Mississippi; these are academic institutions that are well respected.

And bring tremendous expertise to the table, just for example right now we have the chief scientists on the NOAA ship Pisces, that have been involves they’re from Texas A&M.  That’s David Valentine, he was actually in the press here the other day talking about his missions.

So we’re bringing that expertise on board as we have all summer to help guide some of our sampling.  The other technologies that I mentioned briefly are really autonomist vessels and so we’re using ocean gliders some of you have had exposure to those technologies before.

But they allow us to work in sort of a sentinel mode where as the surface vessels are doing very explicit sampling through the water column.  And so ocean gliders tend to be used up on the continental shelf and they would look for presence or absences of hydrocarbons.

We’ve been doing that all summer long, but the particular focus on the West Florida shelf is there’s concerns about oil being entrained there in the loop current.  And also on the shelf along the northern Gulf Coast, we’ve had very little indication of cross-shelf transport.

So that’s a key message because that’s what we’re looking for is that concern about transport from deeper water into the near-shore environment, where humans could come in contact with it.

And the last point I’ll make before I turn it back over to the Admiral or take questions, is we’re also working closely and continue to work closely with the fisheries community.  Both, the Seafood Safety Component and the Fisheries Closures group as well within the national fishery service.

And so we’re making sure there are data in the subsurface monitoring is shared with those groups to help inform their decision making.  So I’ll be happy to take any questions along with the Admiral.

Operator:               At this time if you would like to ask a question press star one on your telephone key pad.  We’ll pause for a moment to compile the Q&A roster.

Your first question comes from the line of (Tom Fowler) with the Houston Chronicle.

(Tom Fowler):       (Taking my question), this is a question about dispersant, my understanding was as I remember it – was remembering it that the dispersement stops – stop the use of it of weeks ago.

But I keep reading online a couple different news sources that are using antidotal reports from some boat owners and so forth saying that they’re spotting people still out there doing, doing – using dispersant and given in certain sites, maybe not on the aerial sparing and so forth.

But, just wanted to get a clarification on the use of dispersants, and if it’s still being used in limited cases or what the status is of that.

Paul Zukunft:        Thank you obviously happy to take that question, the last time we used dispersants were on July 19th on that day we used 200 gallons of dispersant out at the well site.  Because we had a high POC levels, but that’s the last time we’ve used dispersant.

Certainly in the public awareness has been peaked throughout this spill, and we’re very wary of that as well.  They’re also been several fish kills due to hypoxia which is a natural recurrence, this time of year where there’s low oxygen levels.

But again the last time that we used dispersants coincident with this spill was on the 19th of July.

(Tom Fowler):       And that’s for – including as far as you know that BP and other contractors as well as the Coast Guard and the other vessels of opportunity that were involved.

Paul Zukunft:        Yes as the federal on-scene coordinator all of those applications of dispersant, each and every one, whether it’s subsea or surface, whether it’s from an airplane or a vessel are approved by me in consultation with the EPA and so the vessels of opportunity do not have the autonomy to use dispersant and really there is no one out there in the field right because we have not had any recoverable oil and sheening since on or about the first of August.

Male:                     OK, thank you. 

Operator:               Your next question comes from the line of Mark Chediak with Bloomberg News.  Mark your line is open.

Mark Chediak:      Yes, I’m speaking hello can you hear me?  Hello?

Paul Zukunft:        Yes Mark we can hear you. 

Mark Chediak:      OK, yes I was trying to get the spelling of Sam Walker’s name last name and his title. 

Sam Walker:          Yes, I can take that, this is Sam Walker, the last name is spelled W-A-L-K-E-R.

Mark Chediak:      OK and your title?

Sam Walker:          Well I’m here within area command, I’m coordinating the subsurface monitoring unit. 

Mark Chediak:      OK thank you, that’s all I had.

Operator:               Your next question is from the line of Bettina Boxall with Los Angeles Time.

Bettina Boxall:      Hi, thank you Sam could talk a little bit more about what is being found in the sediments and how you think they became – the oil became bound up in the sediments and what quantities we’re talking about and exactly where you’re finding that.

Sam Walker:          Yes, I’m happy to take that question so maybe I’ll take it from the how it gets there is probably the most natural place to start.  So there are a couple different ways oil can be entrained in sediments certainly in the near-shore environment that’s driven largely by the natural energy of waves and the tides. 

So if you’re in a place where you have sandy sediments this is the most likely place you would find oil entrained.  And we – you know we have good sense of where those are just based upon soil mapping you know in the near shore environment.  So in particular you’re seeing – you’re seeing like sandy beaches and trop areas and things like that. 

But typically the way that oil is entrained is two primary functions.  One is it gets captured on sediment, like I was just describing or it has a particular molecular construct that makes it heavier and makes it you know it’s natural buoyancy is then impaired so it would – it would actually sink in the water column. 

That tends to be a very small fraction of most hydrocarbons.  And this particular source oil, it’s something on the order of about one percent of the total volume of this source oil would have those sorts of properties, but because dispersant was used in the subsurface you know that’s probably somewhat less. 

And so those are typically the two ways that you would find it in sediments.  And then you know one thing to keep in mind as well is that as Admiral pointed out even when you find oil it has to be actionable in a way that’s not damaging to – further damaging to the environment so there has to be a balance in the net environment impact before you could actually take action.

And so we evaluate those things when those opportunities arise.  And that’s very important so thinking about you know what it would take to remove oil at 5,000 feet is not an insignificant equation. 

Bettina Boxall:      And so this oil bound in the sediment is near shore though in shallower waters I take it?

Sam Walker:          Well so I mean you know we are definitely finding oil there, we have been throughout this incident right and so what we’re trying to do is narrow that search target so that we can – we are moving along the shore in a very systematic manner right now using a couple of different methodologies.

So for example we’re using absorbent pads where we’re actually pressed down into the sediment in the near source environment, we’re using snorkeling teams that are actually visually looking, we’re using something called *fluorometry*, which is you know an instrument that measures hydrocarbon presence in the water column. 

And we’re also using the Snare Sentinel Program which you know uses almost like a pom-pom looking device to indicate the presence and absence of oil.  So we’re being very systematic in the near shore environment so that we can narrow down our search window and then we can make tactical decisions and the Coast Guard can make tactical decisions about where to deploy resources to help clean up that oil.

But that’s a very different environment than in the deepwater.  And in the deepwater you know you can’t send out a snorkeling team at 5,000 feet to look for oil.  So we have to use different technologies and so we’re using high resolution cameras on ROVs.  We’re using what is a classic tool in oceanography which is a sediment coring device at depth and then bringing those samples to the surface where they’re visually inspected.

They’re also run through the gas chromatograph, mass spectrometer, which is you know which is a way to analyze data, chemically analyze data very quickly.  So that we have a screening process that’s right there on the ships to indicate presence, absence and concentration.  But I think a really important point to take away here is that in order to establish the source of that oil we have to do additional chemical analysis.

And so just because we’re finding oil you know the responsible thing to do here on the scientific side but also in terms of response is to ensure the source of the oil.  And so we’re doing a couple of other things to meet that need.  We’re mapping – continuing to map and characterize from a chemical standpoint a lot of the natural seeps that are in the source area within about a 30 kilometer ring. 

We’re working with a number of federal agencies, NOAA working with a number of other federal agencies like the USGS to map those out using acoustics and then actually capturing samples from those natural seeps so that we can help distinguish between the different sources in the primary area of interest. 

Bettina Boxall:      Thank you.

Operator:               Your next question is from the line of Dan Vergano with USA Today.

Dan Vergano:        Thanks very much, I was wondering if Sam could say anything about the deep sea plume reports from some academic researchers a few weeks ago, I think they were in the parts per million they said for June when the one plume was sized.  I wondered does anything you found say anything about that?

Sam Walker:          Dan can you be a little bit more specific about which reports because you know. 

Dan Vergano:        There was a report in Science Magazine that said sort of the size of a plume from the spill…

Sam Walker:          Right.

Dan Vergano:        (Inaudible).

Sam Walker:          I don’t want to speak for you but you’re most likely referring to the Woods Hole study that…

Dan Vergano:        Yes that’s right.

Sam Walker:         Got that right?  OK.  So you know certainly NOAA’s position long standing position on academic research is to respect the independence of it.  We worked very closely with Chris Reddy who is one of the primary authors on that report.  In fact he was just here at area command as our academic liaison that’s a position that we’ve established here for quite some time. 

And you know so we respect the results of their study, went through the peer review process.  The thing to really keep in mind is that that report was published in Science about two months after the date it was actually captured.  And it was actually published you know subsequent to the well being capped.  And so the results of what they you know what they found were actually relevant to a timeframe that was several months prior.

And you know (Chris) and (Rich Commily) who were the primary authors there made that very clear in their press conferences and so the evidence that they had was supported by a lot of other vessels sampling at the same time.  What we can say is that in subsequent weeks, months really since they’ve been out there we are continuing to find lower and lower and lower concentrations. 

And so we’re going back and revisiting a lot of the areas where these early cruises were done and we are not finding the concentrations that they found.  The sub surface oil that’s indicated there is much more dispersed and so – I mean I think they’re work is perfectly valid. 

You know we support their work and others of independent research but it really needs to be kept in mind this is an incredibly dynamic environment that we’re talking in the Gulf.  And the 5,000 feet of water column you have a lot of currents moving around, you have a lot of different processes that are taking place on both the chemical side and the biological side that change that equation on a – you know even a minute-by-minute basis.  So that’s why …

Male:                     So there’s no sign of that kind of cloudy concentration of plume currently that’s all gone according to what – now.

Paul Zukunft:        Well it is – yes, the concentrations that they were reporting from June are not indicated in any of our sampling here over the past couple of months certainly, since the well has been capped.

Male:                     Very good thank you.

Operator:               At this time, we will only take two more questions.  Your next question comes from the line of Paula Dittrick with Oil &Gas Journal.

Paula Dittrick:       This is a question for Sam I was wondering if the oil ever got in the loop current there have been some concern early on about that and then it sort of dropped by the way side.

Sam Walker:          Well certainly you know the surface expression that was shown early on you know I tend to focus my work in sub surface so I’ll just speak to you know what is certainly available in the public realm.  But surface trajectories that we shown is the official maps to the response you know did indicate some entrainment in the loop current but that tends to be a surface express type phenomenon so. 

 Oil that makes it to the surface and maintains that buoyancy would not at all be expected to get back into the sub surface and find its way down into the sediments or something like that.  I’m not sure if that’s speaking directly to your question. 

What I can tell you is that we’ve had a number of very explicit cruises that came up from the floor to straits that worked along both the continental shelf and also into the deeper water where the loop current in fact is down. 

And you know they reported to the unified command on a daily basis and throughout those two cruises that were done in August we had no indication from those vessels that they were finding oil in the sub surface.

Paula Dittrick:       Thank you.

Operator:               Your next question is a follow-up from the line of Mark Chediak with Bloomberg News.

Mark Chediak:      Hi, can you hear me?  Hello.

Sam Walker:          Yes, we can hear you.

Mark Chediak:      OK, yes, just a follow-up question regarding the consolidation of headquarters.  Where are the headquarters being consolidated?  And didn’t I hear that 1,800 people were – had left the scene of the result of that, is that correct.

Paul Zukunft:        That is correct we located on 1250 Poydras Street.  So we consolidated two headquarters functions where we started to see redundancy in our purchasing functions or logistics functions so we were able to cut back a number of people that way.  And then also we centralized our joint information center so for those that are looking for updates there really is a one-stop shop for you.

Mark Chediak:      And that’s at New Orleans, is that correct?

Paul Zukunft:        That’s in New Orleans that’s correct.

Mark Chediak:      OK thank you.

END

Below is a transcript from Wednesday’s press briefing and teleconference by Admiral Thad Allen, National Incident Commander for the Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill and Dr. Jane Lubchenco, NOAA Administrator

A downloadable audio file of the conference is available here.

Graphics used during the press briefing are available here and here.

Photos of subsurface equipment are available here, here, and here.

September 15, 2010

Admiral Allen:      Thank you.  Good morning from Kenner, Louisiana.  I’m delighted to be here today with representatives of the seafood industry and the restaurant industry together with the (inaudible) representative of academia and Dr. Jane Lubchenco the NOAA administrator.

I want to hit a couple of things this morning, give you an update and then Dr. Lubchenco is going to come up and we’re going to talk about subsea oil monitoring and our intentions and (inaudible) on that.

But first of all I’d like to point out a few folks that are here with me behind me today that are joining us here at Kenner.  First one is Harlon Pearce
who is chair of the Louisiana Seafood Promotion Board.  We also have the executive director of the Louisiana Seafood Promotion Board, Ewell Smith.  Ewell, thank you for being here and Jim Funk the executive director of the Louisiana Restaurant Association.

As you know the issue of seafood safety has loomed large in the media and elsewhere.  I’m here to tell you this is my third day in the Gulf and I’ve had seafood every day I’ve been here.  This is the most tested and safest seafood in the world right now.  This seafood is ready for the rest of the world and the world needs to know that.  And I’m here with the members of the community involved with preparing that seafood to get it out to you to let you know that the Gulf is ready and you should have no qualms about getting seafood that has been tested from the Gulf.

If I could real quick we started this morning the final drilling process to close in on the bottom of the Macondo Well.  As you know we’ve had several segments of activity that have taken place.  It started with the static kill to fill the well with cement.  We’ve ended a number of tests.  We concluded (inaudible) to remove the blowout preventer.

That has been done.  As you know that equipment has all been shipped to the Coast Guard base at the NASA (inaudible) in New Orleans where it remains under supervision of the joint investigation team and the Department of Justice.

We are demobilizing what’s not needed at the well site right now.  And as we speak, earlier this morning, Development Driller III began the last drilling (inaudible) into the annulus of the drill pipe and we would expect some time in the next 24 hours to actually intercept the well.

The steps after the well intercept will be to ascertain the condition of the annulus.  As you know we do not know what the condition of the annulus is whether or not there are hydrocarbons in it, communication with the reservoir and so forth.  Today will give us a lot of information especially when we get close and finally conduct the intercept looking at the changes in pressure of the drilling mud that’s going in and out.

That will be something that we’re monitoring very closely.  And we will give you update throughout the day.  I have been notifying and updating the senior leadership in Washington as we move forward.

What I would like to do now is just shift to the next part of the opening statements and then we’ll be glad to take some questions from you.  From the start we have known that this has been the largest oil spill in U.S. history.  We know that the impacts of this spill have been far reaching.

We have been defending the coastline from Port St. Joe, Florida over to tar balls that have come to shore in Texas.  And there are concerns about how much oil is in the water and the amount of hydrocarbons, how that’s affecting the Gulf.  We work very close with the Unified Area Command here in New Orleans under the leadership of Admiral Zukunft who will continue to direct our operations when the National Incident Command is redeployed here shortly.

And we have worked with NOAA, our federal counterparts and academia to take a look at the (inaudible) possible for subsea monitoring for hydrocarbons.  A lot of unanswered questions, we’ve never had a spill of this magnitude.  The public wants to know what’s going on and quite frankly we all do too.

There has been a massive effort to conduct sampling from the start of this event.  We’re going to give you a little bit more detail this morning about how we’ve been moving forward and how we intend to move forward in the future to try and get as much information as we can, to make that information transparent and talk about the implications of the data that’s in relation to the future of the Gulf.

So with that I’d like to now introduce Jane Lubchenco, the administrator of NOAA who is going to make some opening remarks about a subsea oil sampling.  And she has some distinguished members of the federal government and academia with her.  Jane?

Jane Lubchenco:   Thanks, Admiral Allen.  Hello everyone thank you for joining us.  I echo Admiral Allen’s thanks for Harlan Pearce and his colleagues for hosting us here today.  When NOAA first became involved at the very earliest hours in responding to the deep water horizon spill we pledged to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with fishermen of the region.

And our continued interactions and partnership with them are a signal of how committed we are jointly to restoring the health of the Gulf and bringing us back to a very healthy state so that everyone cal feel completely comfortable with the quality of the seafood and the safety of the seafood from this region.

I’d like to introduce a few folks to you today.  Some of the senior scientists at NOAA who are working on monitoring efforts that we’re going to b talking about today and some individuals from the academic communities and independent research institutions that we’ve been partnering closely with.

As I introduce each of you guys if you’ll just raise your hands so folks will know who you are.  Okay, Sam Walker, Steve Layman and Steve Murawski, all NOAA senior scientists who are individuals that bring deep knowledge about oil, oil response and the science in the Gulf to this task.

A number of individuals from our academic and private research institution partners, Dr. Michael Carron of the Northern Gulf Institute, Dr. V.J. John and Dr. Gary McPherson of Tulane University, Dr. Richard Shaw from Louisiana State University, Dr. William Hogarth and Dr. Ernst Peebles from the University of South Florida, Dr. Chris Reddy of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Dr. Richard Gregg of Florida A&M, and we’re also joined by Jacqueline Patterson of the NAACP.

I welcome all of them and thank them for their efforts.  They have been involved in the number of research missions out on the water to try to understand this event.  And they have been very helpful in organizing meetings with academic and independent research institutions, folks from the Gulf and elsewhere to help us understand what’s actually playing out, what’s happening on the water, beneath the water, at the edges of the shore and to help us craft the kind of quality research studies that will enable us to better understand what’s happening and what we might see in the future.

As an academic more than 35 years I can attest to the importance of what academic institutions and independent research institutions bring to an effort like this.  We really do need the best scientists in the country focusing on understanding that has already happened, what the impact is and how to guide our actions bring the Gulf back to health.

Although I’m the administrator of NOAA here today I can also say that the entire federal family is deeply committed to understanding the impact of this spill on the health of the Gulf and the millions of people who depend on it for their lives and livelihood.

It’s been 62 days now since oil has stopped flowing into the Gulf but our federal response remains vigilant in its effort to recover oil, to clean up beaches and marshes and to rehabilitate wildlife.

We continue to monitor the movements and the (inaudible) of oil especially beneath the surface.  And we are doing so in collaboration with our academic and research institution partners.  We are indeed seeing a number of encouraging signs, a reflection of this is that we have re-opened almost 40,000 square miles of the Gulf to fishing.

As you will recall at the heights about 37 percent of the Gulf was closed to fishing in federal waters.  We have been nibbling around the edges opening up more and more area.  The area that remains closed today is at 16.5 percent.

So we’re making good progress and sampling very, very carefully making sure that areas that we are opening is, in fact, safe to reopen and that the seafood is free of contaminants.  We’re also releasing rehabilitated sea turtles back into the Gulf, individuals that were recovered some of which have been rehabilitated in the lab and are now able to released into a Gulf.

To date we have released 284 turtles back into the Gulf and that is, in fact, good news indeed.  And yet we are mindful of the need to understand how much oil remains, where it is and in what concentrations and how rapidly it’s being naturally degraded.  Today we are gathered together with the folks behind me to take stock of what we have learned to date, tell you what yet needs to be done.

We are in the midst of a comprehensive collaborative effort to monitor the fate of the oil and the disbursement sub surface.

And it’s in the subsurface that our efforts are focused squarely.  Its subsea monitoring program conducted under the direction of the federal on scene coordinator includes extensive monitoring and sampling done to date, more than 30,000 samples so far.

And we’ll continue where needed to allow us to answer the question what is the fate of the oil and the disbursements in the subsurface?  So this monitoring effort is an aggressive one to be conducted as an integrated strategic plan working closely with states, academic, and private research institution partners.

We have and will continue to monitor, sample and study the oil and disbursements from the near shore to the open ocean, from the surface to the seafloor.  This ongoing monitoring effort has three primary goals.

One is to monitor and assess the distribution, concentration, and degradation of any oils that remain in the water or on the seafloor.  Two, to look for disbursements or break down products of disbursements remaining in the water, and three, to identify any additional response actions needed to address any recoverable oil.

We have already tested extensively.  In the near shore and the offshore and will continue to do so.  Near shore data continues to be generated on a daily basis building upon the approximately 5,000 near shore water and sediment samples that were collected as of September 11.

These samples are in addition to a number of observational techniques employed in the near shore to help responders find oil.  Turning to the offshore the water column has been extensively sampled within 75 kilometers of the well head using fluorometry, particle analyzers, oxygen probes, and hydrocarbon analysis as well as standard connectivity, temperature, and depth for CTG sensor cap.

The federal government working with our academic partners is committed to doing everything it takes for as long as it takes to respond to this oil, to assess the damage, and to restore the habitat and sustain the quality of life in the Gulf.

What has all of this sampling revealed?  We have a fair amount of information about what’s happening along the coast.  Much of that oil, some of which still remains, continues to be cleaned up.  There continues to be a very small amount of residual oil in the near shore.

And that is both being degraded naturally as well as being recovered.  In the water column there continues to be some amount of oil in the subsurface especially in this layer that is between about 3,000 and 4,300 feet, very, very (inaudible), very microscopic droplets of oil and the parts from millions to parts per billion, (inaudible) and disbursed does not necessarily mean benign.

We continue to actively sample and characterize where that is and the rate at which it is being degraded.  The indications are that that degradation is proceeding and we intend to get more definitive information upon that in the not too distant future.

There is oil that is being observed on the sediment, in the sediments on the seafloor surface.  Much of the ongoing monitoring is designed to understand better where that is, what impact it may be having and we look forward to reporting on that also in due time.

So ultimately people in the region and across the country really want to do is Gulf seafood safe to eat?  Are the waters safe to swim in?  Where can we fish with our families and friends?  In short, folks want to know if it’s OK to eat, swim and fish and that kind of information that we committed to identifying those questions, answers to those questions when we can reassure folks that in fact, when and if it is OK to eat, swim and fish.

This monitoring lays the foundation for additional research into the long-term impact of the spill on the health of the Gulf and it will go a long way toward restoring the Gulf and restoring public confidence in this unique and very valuable ecosystem.  So with that we’re happy to take questions and I’ll invite Admiral Allen to join me in that.

Admiral Allen:      Let me – let me make one quick statement.  I’m not sure I’ll have an opportunity to do a public press event with Jane Lubchenco before we transition this organization.  Jane and I met over a year ago we made a trip to the Arctic together.

This has been a professional and a personal collaboration that’s been wonderful for me and I just want to thank her as a friend and colleague for the help she’s given me, first as a (inaudible) on the Coast Guard and National Incident Commander, so thank you Jane.

Jane Lubchenco:   Thanks Admiral, I appreciate that.

Admiral Allen:      Okay.  Identify yourself and your affiliation please.

Harry Weber:       (Inaudible).

Admiral Allen:      Harry we’ve always said it would be about 96 hours total until the (inaudible)  is done, cured and we do pressure testing.  So four days from now to be all done.

Male:                   (Inaudible).

Admiral Allen:      Yes.  It could be sooner depending on when they intercept the (inaudible), the condition of the annulus, how much (inaudible) is required and the carrying time and the pressure test, but that is the sequence.

Male:                   Ninety-six hours.  (Inaudible).

Admiral Allen:      Four days from now, that’s what we’re looking at right now, yes.

Female:               (Inaudible).

Jane Lubchenco:   So let me be clear, there have been a lot of mischaracterizations of the oil budget report that we released.  But that oil budget report says very simply that a quarter of the oil has been burned, skimmed or recovered from the well.  A quarter of the oil has been evaporated, so that half of nearly 5 million barrels of which released, is – has gone from the system.

Another quarter (inaudible) was at some point in the subsurface.  That’s not an insignificant amount, one quarter sounds like a small amount, but that’s the equivalent to four Exxon-Valdez oil spills, so that’s actually a fair amount of oil.  That’s not what’s out there now because it is being degraded as we speak.  And one of the purposes of the ongoing monitoring is to understand better how much of that subsurface oil is still out there and how fast it is disappearing.

The remaining quarter was – what is left over from what you can measure directly or estimate with some degree of confidence, that quarter which is what we call residual is in fact – was at some point light sheen or tar balls or oil that has been washed upon beaches, much of which has now been recovered.  So the budget was intended to give us a sense of where did that nearly 5 million barrels of oil go.

It is not a characterization of what’s out there now because it is being – continuing to be recovered, continuing to be naturally biodegraded.  And that’s why this monitoring effort that is underway is critically important to give us a sense of what remains out there, how fast it’s disappearing.

 Male:                 (Inaudible)

Jane Lubchenco:   When we released the report at that time, a quarter of the 5 million barrels could not be either measured directly or estimated with some degree of confidence.  It’s what was left over, that was residual at that time.  It is not a reflection of what’s happening now because much of that has continued to biodegrade, much of that has now been removed from the beaches.

Male:                     The numbers have gone down?

Jane Lubchenco:    All of those numbers are going down.  The numbers – the residual is probably going down, what’s in the subsurface is probably going down.  We don’t yet know at what rate which is why this monitoring is so important.

Female:                 (Inaudible).

Jane Lubchenco:    One of the most important things that we are doing now is getting as much information as possible from research expeditions, from our academic partners and from the unified command monitoring, overseeing monitoring that is underway to really understand better what’s happening in the sediment, what’s happening on the sea floor.

And we are getting reports that there is oil that’s there, that’s very valuable information and that has been folded into the monitoring that we have underway.  There will be active sampling of sediments in the deep sea and in the near shore to better understand exactly how much is out there.  At some point we will really be interested in what impact that’s having as well because that’s critically important.

But right now our focus is understanding what is left both in the water column and on the sediment on the sea floor.  And we’re doing that in partnership with many of our academic colleagues and that effort is intended to give us a better sense of what’s out there.

Female:               (Inaudible) put that down.  How much money is there (inaudible).

Jane Lubchenco:   The sampling efforts that is underway and will be continuing is an effort to really characterize what’s on the sea floor, that is indeed – it requires specialized equipment, it requires people who know how to use that equipment and it requires good orchestration so that we’re sampling where we need to sample and in a strategic fashion informed by what we know about what’s happening elsewhere.

I can’t give you a figure for how expensive it is, but it does require ships and equipment and if monitoring efforts is part of the response to the spill.

Admiral Allen:      Let me just add on to it.  One of the reasons that we’re both standing here today is the responsibility I have as a National Incident Commander for the response and recovery of oil, is to deal with it until it’s not there anymore, how clean is clean along with shoreline and the marshes.  We’re dealing with an area where we’ve never dealt with this much oil in the subsea area before, so I’m actually utilizing the authority that I have under my response authorities to direct this action to begin so we know it is part of the response, fate of the oil.

We also are going to need to know the fate of the oil for long-term damage assessment and the actions that will follow.  So there’s a – there’s a certainly amount of urgency to know right away what’s happening, (inaudible) about it, but in the long-term, the long-term recovery in the Gulf is (inaudible) dependent on as much data as we can get.

And the best way to do that is through a unified effort.  And if you’ve got a certain amount of resources to deploy and you know you want to check for sediment, that’s (done) if you can organize it together and create the synergies between the public and private sector academia and so forth.  One more question we’ll go to the phones here.

Male:                   Admiral would you step down (inaudible).

Admiral Allen:      I don’t think anything could be farther from the truth.  You know one of my jobs as a National Incident Commander was interfaced with the administration of Congress and other folks in Washington about what was going on down here.  There will be a (inaudible) handoff between myself and Admiral Paul Zukunft who is already running the Unified Area Command.

Who actually is a junior officer and he was stationed in the Coast Guard with a commercial fisherman.  You’re not losing any area of expertise by the leader that’s going to be continuing after I’m gone, you need somebody that’s been working in this area for several months now that knows it from prior assignments and knows the lifestyle, the culture and the way of life of the Gulf.  So I think everybody’s going to be fine.

Jane Lubchenco:   Admiral Z will have not only a great, talented team of folks down here in the region with him, but he will be backed up by a team of very committed folks in Washington, D.C.  the President has made it clear that we are not going any place, that we are seeing this through and that the efforts is not winding down, the effort is transiting, we are pivoting from mostly response efforts to a recovery and restoration effort.

Underpinning all of that will be good scientific information, which is why this monitoring effort and the resource damage assessment effort and the recovery effort will all be underpinned by good science.

Female:              (Inaudible).

Admiral Allen:      Frankly since you asked, I’m about ready to transition.  This is a shared responsibility between the folks that are standing by this microphone and you all out there.  That’s how we talk about this, how we explain it, how we answer questions, it’s not just the questions we answer, it’s how you report it.  And everybody in the country, in the world sees what’s reported out of the Gulf.

We’ve stood here and told you and I have told you I don’t know how many times, that the seafood coming out of the Gulf is the most tested seafood anywhere in the United States and probably the world.  If it comes out of the Gulf and it is then tested it’s safe.

I think we have a joint responsibility not only to our professions but to the Gulf to speak clearly, frankly, and honestly about that.  And create proper perceptions in the mind of the American public about what the conditions are down here.

Jane Lubchenco:   NOAA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the States have been working very closely together to protect the integrity of seafood.  In addition to what Admiral Allen said about getting the word out, our focus has been squarely making sure that that seafood is safe.

And our first line of defense was to close areas to fishing if there was oil present, as we – as oil is receding as it is being degraded we’ve been very actively sampling throughout the Gulf in areas that were oiled.

And then reopening areas where in fact the sampling shows that the oil is gone number one, and number two that the seafood is not contaminated.  The seafood has been very rigorously tested, we feel confident that it is safe, it’s free of contaminants, and we want very much indeed to get the word out.

Admiral Allen:      Thanks we’re going to go to questions on the phone now Operator.

Operator:            Yes sir your first question comes from the line of Kristen Hayes with Reuters.

Kristen Hays:      Hello, Admiral I hope you’re not going to miss us when you make the hand over.

Admiral Allen:     I’ll miss you terribly.

Kristen Hays:      I’m sure you will, just a quick question, first with drilling resuming and you know zeroing in on the intercept.  Do you expect anymore ranging runs between now and then and when do you think BP is going to start doing those surveys you mentioned before on the Deepwater Horizon Rig preparing to actually pull it up from the ocean floor?

Admiral Allen:      The questions for those in the audience here was we’re expecting more ranging runs before intercept and what about a survey of the Deepwater Horizon Rig?  Actually they’re using a novel technology that allows the ability to do some ranging with the actual drill string that’s down there.

They’re going to try and use that and if they’re successful in using this new technology, it would not require them to pull the drill string out and do another ranging run with the wire they have to send out.

If that’s the case, that would (inaudible) some time out of the intercept that they expect to happen in the next 24 hours.  Regarding the survey of the people on Horizon themselves, I would defer that and we’ll put some information out to the joint information center of the Unified Area Command.

There is an intent to do an extensive survey of the people at Horizon Rig with (inaudible) that will probably be on the (inaudible).  That is something they are looking for in the future but it is not being scheduled yet due to the media concerns with moving the blowout preventer and (inaudible) package as part of the joint investigation.

But we’ll post more information on that.

Kristen Hays:      Okay. Thank you.

Operator:            Your next question comes from the line of Brett Clanton with Houston Chronicle.

Brett Clanton:      Admiral hi, thanks for taking my question.  Is there a chance when you do intercept the annulus that you’ll determine that’s it’s not necessary to inject mud and cement that it’s – you’ll discover that maybe it has been sealed with the static kill.

And then also just some I’m – just to make sure I’m completely sure, there is no plan to also enter the casing with a relief well, correct?

Admiral Allen:      The question is; is there any chance we would intercept the annulus and not pump cement and do we plan to intercept the casing?  Had we done it a traditional bottom kill we would have done both, intercepted the casing and the annulus.

Basically as I said before to fill in the tree rings till the tree was filled, the inner core of the tree was filled, because of a static kill right now.

So we’re sort of concerned with the annulus and the actual actions taken will be depending on the condition of the annulus when the intercepts made.  The first indication we will get with that will be any change of pressure in the drilling fluids or the strum in that drill bit when the interception is made.  At that point, I think there will be a characterization made of the annulus itself and a decision made on how to proceed at that point.

I can’t predict what will happen because as we said the final question in this whole killing of the well has been the condition f the annulus.  I don’t think we think there will be any blockage here I think we think we’re going to need to pump cement but that will not be verified until we actually do the intercept.  Next question.

Operator:        Your next question comes from the line of Jim Polson with Bloomberg News.

Jim Polson:      Thank you Admiral. This question is for Doctor Lubchenco.  Can you quantify for us the amount of effort that’s going into delineating and assessing the subsea oil sediment?

Jane Lubchenco:   I can’t quantify it right on the spot but I’m happy to provide that information once we have clarity on exactly how many ships, what the effort is, how many institutions are working on that.  If there is a very considerable effort and it has been gaining a lot of momentum as additional resources are brought to bear in terms of equipment and ships and other things.  I can’t give you a summary of those now but I’m happy to as soon as we have that synthesized.

Jim Polson:           Thank you.

Admiral Allen:      Let me – only intents of this effort is not unlike the air surveillance we had in trying to figure out what we were seeing out there.  And if you remember, we took control of the air space.  We integrated all of the air sorties via air coordination center in (inaudible) Air Force Base under the first Air Force.

And what we’ve got is a similar situation where we have a large number of federal vessels, a large number of academic institutions, private contractors, and vessels that are capable of doing work out there.  Part of this planning process that we’re working through is to unify that entire effort, coordinate it, and basically put what I would call a multi agency or governmental public private sector task force on the task.  Next question.

Operator:               Your next question comes from the line of Dorothy Kendrick with Louisiana Public.

Dorothy Kendrick: Louisiana Public Broadcasting I guess this is for Doctor Lubchenco.  When you talk about this oil that’s about 3,000 feet beneath the ocean surface I’m wondering with the way the ocean churns is there possibility that some of that oil will be churning up to the surface or how does that work?

Jane Lubchenco:   The question is will the oil that is subsurface now at this layer between about 3,000 and 4,300 feet eventually make its way to the surface.  We believe that’s probably unlikely.  The oil that is in this subsurface very defused cloud of hyperscopic droplets got there because as the oil was being released from the riser pipe or the well head it was shot out under great pressure, it was hot hitting cold water, and it was broken up into very, very small microscopic droplets of oil.

In that particular layer those droplets appear to be neutrally buoyant and are simply moving outward from the well in this very defused cloud and earlier on, on Measurement syndicated it was in parts per million that these microscopic droplets are.  And they are very, very tiny they’re about the size of the thickness of a human hair.

It’s about one micron thick so about the thickness of a human hair to give you a sense of the size.  And those microscopic droplets are in the process many of them of being biodegraded naturally by the bacteria by the microbes that are in the water.  In very, very small droplets the microbes can attack them from all sides and essentially those microbes eat oil.

And that is the process of natural biodegradation that we know is under way and that we are getting a better handle on exactly how fast it’s happening and at what rate the oil in that subsurface cloud is disappearing.

Admiral Allen:      This is a footnote you heard me say many times how unique this response has been because we’re dealing with a source that is 5,000 feet below the surface with no human access.  Well beyond that to just underscore what Doctor Lubchenco said the hydrocarbons in that reservoir are over 200 degrees it’s around boiling on the surface.

And when they come out of that well, they’re encountering water that’s 39 degrees.  When you hear about hydrates and everything else, the chemistry and the organic things that happen under those pressures at those temperature differentials are things we have not encountered before in a spill response.  We’ll take two more questions operator.

Operator:              Your next question comes from the line of Anne Thompson with NBC News.  Anne your line is open.  Your next question comes from the line Richard Fossa with Los Angeles Times.

Richard Fossa:      I was wondering – is it going to be difficult to hear you from a long distance telephone.  Could you go over again when the drilling process began, when you expect to intercept the well, when you’ll begin finish pumping mud and cement if you need to have mud and cement, and what time you’ll declare the well killed if that can be what you declare?

Admiral Allen:      Just to summarize again, in the last 24-hour period we proceeded to go ahead and drill to the intercept.  At the time we started drilling we estimated that we were 3.5 horizontal feet away and 50 feet away from the intercept.  We drilled down (inaudible), we went through the drill string, we put in a ranging tool just to make sure that we wanted to calibrate what the ranging tool told us versus the equipment that now allows us to do some ranging measurements from inside the drill bit.

The drill string is now packed and it’s commenced drilling so the air at this moment as we’re speaking drilling that last 20/25 feet and they are almost touching the well at this time.  That’s the report I got just before I came out here.  When we do the intercept, which will be imminently I will say in the next 24 hours because they may elect to pull that drill bit back do another ranging run, which would add time.  That’s the reason I’m not going to say it’s going to happen in the next hour.

Sometime in the next 24-hour period, we should do the well intercept.  Once the well is intercepted, we’ll have to understand from the pressure differentials and the drilling fluids the nature of the annulus.  Once that’s been determined decision, will be made on cement and then once it’s cemented the cement will have to adhere and be pressure tested.

That entire element from this morning I would estimate to be about 96 hours.  That could actually move to the left depending on whether or not they have to do that last ranging run.  But for the purpose of creating expectations well within a 96 hour window of killing the well.

Richard Fossa:      That was all.

Operator:             Your next …

Admiral Allen:      Thanks very much.

Jane Lubchenco:   Thanks everyone.

Admiral Allen:      That ends our call ladies and gentlemen.

Operator:            This concludes today’s conference call you may now disconnect.

Below is a transcript from Friday’s teleconference press briefing by Administrator for NOAA, Dr. Jane Lubchenco, to discuss the reopening of federal waters along western Louisana

A downloadable audio file of the conference is available here.

August 27, 2010

10 a.m. EDT

Kevin Griffis:    Great, thank you.  Thank you, everyone, for joining us today.  This is Kevin Griffis with the Department of Commerce, and I’m joined today by Jane Lubchenco, the undersecretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere.  She is going to announce today the opening of some closed federal waters and the steps that we’re taking to reach that decision.

 And so without further ado, I’m going to hand it over to Dr. Lubchenco.

Jane Lubchenco:     Thanks, Kevin.    Good morning, everyone.  Thanks for joining us.  I’m happy to announce today the reopening of 4,281 square miles of federal waters in the northwestern corner of the federal closed area.  This is an area that’s just off the western coast of Louisiana.  Today’s reopening represents 7.4 percent of the currently closed area. 

 NOAA’s decision today to reopen waters to commercial and recreational fishing we believe is the right one for fishermen and for American consumers.  It gives fishermen access to important fishing grounds.  And because NOAA followed a reopening protocol also agreed to by the FDA and the gulf states, it also protects consumers and helps prevent contaminated seafood from entering the marketplace.

That reopening protocol entails a three-pronged approach.  The first condition for reopening in an area is that oil is not present and not expected to be present in the foreseeable future.  Second, samples must pass sensory analysis.  And, third, they must pass chemical analysis.  The area that we are opening today for fishing meets all three of these criteria. 

On July 18, NOAA data showed no oil in the area.  Light sheen was observed on July 29, and none since then.  Trajectory models show that the area is at a low risk for future exposure to oil.  And fish caught in the area and tested by NOAA experts have shown no signs of contamination.

Between July 26th and July 29, NOAA sampled the area for both shrimp and finfish, including mackerel and snapper.  Sensory analyses were performed on 41 samples and chemical analyses on 125 specimens.  Sensory analyses found no detectable oil or dispersant, odors, or flavors, and results of chemical analyses were well below the levels of concern.

But we believe our sampling work is not done.  To continue to ensure that the seafood from this and other open areas in the gulf is free of contaminants, NOAA will continue to test seafood.  We are also continuing dock-side and market-based sampling in partnership with the FDA.

When the BP Deepwater Horizon crisis first began, I met with recreational and commercial fishermen throughout the region and with consumer advocates.  We pledged to stand shoulder to shoulder with Gulf Coast fishermen and their families during these difficult times and to do everything possible to protect the integrity and the safety of seafood reaching the marketplace.

We are fulfilling that promise, and I can assure you that NOAA will continue to work aggressively to keep seafood safe, get fishermen back on the water doing what they love, and restore the gulf ecosystem that supports this area’s special way of life.

 Thanks.  And I’d be happy to take any questions.

 Operator:        Thank you…

 Kevin Griffis:    Thank you – sorry.  Thank you, Dr. Lubchenco.

 Operator:         And you would like to ask questions at this time?

 Kevin Griffis:    We have Eileen Fleming from National Public Radio.

 Eileen Fleming:   Dr. Lubchenco (inaudible) Jindal said this morning that the seafood for Louisiana is tested seven times, which is more than much of the country, which is not tested at all.  I was wondering if you could talk about those seven tests and what the status is for testing for chemical dispersants.

Jane Lubchenco:     Eileen, the states, including Louisiana, have responsibility for regulating fisheries in their state waters, which for Louisiana is from the shore to three miles out.  NOAA has responsibility for regulating the fisheries in federal waters, which is from three miles all the way out to 200 nautical miles from the shore.

The protocols that we agreed upon between NOAA and FDA and the states are ones that we are all following.  For federal waters, which was the announcement that we are making today, NOAA does the sampling, and NOAA does the testing, and then we turn those results over to FDA, who’s responsible for certifying the safety of seafood.  So just to clarify, in federal waters, NOAA is responsible for opening or closing waters, but FDA certifies whether the seafood is safe. 

In state waters, the states do the sampling.  They turn them over to NOAA and FDA for testing.  And then, again, FDA does the certification.

So what I can describe to you are the sampling protocols that NOAA uses for federal waters, but I cannot describe any extra sampling that the states are doing.  So the seven types of samples that the governor was referring to, I’m not sure quite what that means.

The states agreed to follow the same protocols that we do.  And that’s what we have done and will continue to do.

 Operator:  At this time, I would like to inform everyone, in order to ask a question, press star, then the number one on your telephone keypad. 

 Your next question comes from the line of Harry Weber with the Associated Press.

 Harry Weber:    Morning, Dr. Lubchenco.  If my math is correct, the reopening of these waters will leave about 53,700 square miles of federal waters still closed.  Is that correct?  Can you give us an update?

 Jane Lubchenco: I – yes.  The area that remains closed is 48,114 square miles.  And that’s…

 Harry Weber:    And that stretches from where to where?

 Jane Lubchenco:   Twenty percent of federal waters in the gulf.

 Harry Weber:  That represents 20 percent of federal waters in the gulf?

 Jane Lubchenco:     Correct.  So at the – we began closing waters when – in early May when there was oil and expanded that closed area through time as the oil was moving outward from the wellhead.  At its height, the maximum closed area was 37 percent of the federal waters in the gulf.  And that’s 88,522 square miles.

Once the oil was no longer flowing from the well, and once the oil began to dissipate, we have been reopening areas.  This is the third area that we are announcing today.  The first one was opened July 22nd, and that was off the Florida peninsula.  And then on August 10th, we reopened another area off the Florida panhandle.  And so this one off western Louisiana is the third area to be reopened.

And what we’re doing is sort of nibbling at the edges, if you will.  Areas that have been free from oil for the longest time and that were oiled the least are teed up first for consideration for reopening.  We go in and do sampling of seafood from those areas that we are considering, and then if they pass the tests that I described in my opening comments, that area will be reopened.

So currently, we have an area that is just about 20 percent of federal waters still closed. 

 Operator:  Your next question comes from the line of Mario Garcia with NBC News.

 Mario Garcia:  (inaudible) Lubchenco, thanks for taking my question.  Just moving forward, the systems you described in place thus far, obviously, (involved with) large and constant flux.  What is the protocol for testing, for instance, in areas that are reopened we continue to test to see the status? 

And then moving, you know, much forward or slightly more forward than just, you know, these waters, fishermen we talk to here – some of the concern, obviously, is that, you know, the adult fish now that could be caught may or may not be OK, but, you know, there’s concern about future generations and once, you know, maybe getting into the soil or, you know, in the larvae, et cetera.  What will the longer-term testing entail?

 Jane Lubchenco:    Thanks for those questions, Mario.  Those are great ones.  We will – we are continuing to test in areas that we have reopened.  And we’ll continue to do so.

In other words, in parallel to testing areas that are under consideration for reopening, we will also be retesting areas that have already been opened.

In addition to that, we are doing dock-side sampling.  In other words, when commercial vessels bring seafood into the port, NOAA is doing sampling there as an extra check.  And FDA is, in addition to that, doing samples of seafood that’s in the market.  So that’s the answer to your first question.  

The long-term sampling and long-term potential impacts is an area that is under active investigation.  We have been and will continue to do extensive monitoring of oil in the gulf, which is now primarily subsurface and appears to be biodegrading relatively rapidly, but the oil that is subsurface and surface oil might have had – might have already affected the young juvenile stages. 

And we remain concerned about the impacts that that might have and are continuing to evaluate that very, very closely.  We feel completely confident that the seafood that is in the market now is safe for human consumption, safe and free from contaminants from the spill, and we will continue to investigate the longer-term impacts this spill may have had.

We are in the process of working closely with many of the academic institutions in the region and elsewhere and many of our federal partners in designing some very aggressive short-term and long-term monitoring and evaluation.  And, of course, part of our responsibility is to evaluate the long-term impacts of the spill.

So we won’t have the answers to all of that for quite some time, but are working very carefully and aggressively on that.

 Kevin Griffis:  OK.  I think we have time for a couple more questions.

 Operator:  Your next question comes from the line of (Laurie Wegler) with Examiner.com.

 (Laurie Wegler):     Hi, yes, it’s (Laurie Wegler).  Thank you very much, Dr. Lubchenco.  I actually just filed a story today about the ongoing expedition of Oceana out in the gulf, which is investigating deepwater, subsea oil plume, and so on and so forth, and taking tests regularly.

I wonder, since the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill is unprecedented, what model are you using as a gauge that tells you that X number of tests – that pass the tests make it OK to open these waters?

 Jane Lubchenco:    Our testing is designed to give us a representative sample of the type of seafood that would be caught in any particular area under consideration for reopening and to sample enough individuals of those different species so that we think that that sample is more than adequate to give us information about if there is any contamination.

We know that we can detect contaminants.  We know that we can measure – we can detect them and measure them.  And the areas that we have reopened have shown they have all passed our tests.

You mentioned that this area or that this spill is unprecedented.  That is absolutely the case.  And it is for that very reason that we have – that we are proceeding very cautiously.  We are focusing squarely on making sure that seafood is free of contaminants from the spill.  And we are engaging with many of our academic and federal partners in a very substantial effort to continue to monitor and understand the impacts of this spill.  And that will likely take a number of years to fully appreciate and understand what impacts have transpired.

 Kevin Griffis:  All right.  We have time for one more question.

 Operator:   Your last question comes from the line of (Ken Cooper) with Orange Beach News.

(Ken Cooper):  Hi, and thank you for taking my question.  I was wondering if you have any kind of time estimate on when the waters off of Alabama coast along the Florida panhandle would be open.

Jane Lubchenco:  (Ken), I don’t have a precise date for that.  That is an area that has been free of oil for some time.  And we have been sampling and running those tests.

I know that that area is of keen interest to many people.  And so we are proceeding as quickly as we can, but also as cautiously as we can to make sure that any seafood from that area is completely safe.  So what I can tell you is that that area has been sampled and that we will let you know as soon as we have any news to report on that.

Kevin Griffis:  All right.  Thank you, Dr. Lubchenco.

Jane Lubchenco:   Thank you, everyone. 

Kevin Griffis:   Thanks, everyone.  Please feel free to give us a call if you have follow-up questions.  Have a good day. 

Jane Lubchenco:   Kevin, let me mention one more thing.  I’m sorry.  There is a fact sheet that we have prepared that’s a one-pager that describes many of the protocols.  And a link to that fact sheet will be on the release that we will be sending to all reporters on this call.

So I’d just draw your attention to that and thank you again.

Kevin Griffis: All right.  Thank you.

Operator:  Thank you.  That does conclude today’s conference call.  You may now disconnect.

END