Gulf Offshore Drilling Leases Auction Challenged By Environmentalists

NEW ORLEANS — The federal government will move ahead with the first auction of offshore petroleum leases in the Gulf of Mexico since the Deepwater Horizon disaster – despite a lawsuit challenging the sale.

The suit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Washington claims that the federal government failed to take steps to avoid a repeat of BP's disastrous oil spill in 2010, which leaked more than 200 million gallons of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

The suit was filed by Oceana, Defenders of Wildlife, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Center for Biological Diversity.

Attorney Catherine Wannamaker said the action is not intended to stop the sale, but the groups want the court to vacate an environmental analysis of the sale based on claims within the lawsuit. That could make the sale moot, although a judge eventually could toss the analysis but allow the sale to stand, she said.

The Interior Department's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement plans to auction 3,900 blocks off the Texas coast on Wednesday in New Orleans. The sale covers about 20.6 million acres.

The tracts are far from the site of the BP spill, which began in April 2010 about 50 miles southeast of the mouth of the Mississippi River.

Interior Department spokeswoman Melissa Schwartz said the bids will be opened as scheduled. She said the agency could not comment on the suit.

According to agency figures, the sale has already attracted 241 bids from 20 companies on 191 tracts. The last western Gulf sale in August 2009 drew 189 bids from 27 companies on 162 tracts.

Wannamaker said the offshore regulatory agency "is continuing the same irresponsible approach that led to the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster and harm still being felt in the Gulf."

"It's easier for the government and oil companies to return to business as usual without the oil spill's impacts on the Gulf, but it's illegal and irresponsible," said Wannamaker, an attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, which is representing the environmental groups.

The suit alleges that the government has failed to advance preparedness for offshore oil spills and analyses to prevent oil spills since BP's Macondo well blowout. The environmental groups said the government did not consider the merits of a delay in order to gather more information.

Before the blowout, the government generally held two offshore Gulf leases annually – one for the central Gulf off the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama and a second for the western Gulf, mostly off the Texas coast.

The western Gulf sale in recent years has been focused on potential natural gas finds, while deepwater oil has been more the target in the central Gulf, where the Macondo spill occurred.

Randall Luthi, head of the National Ocean Industries Association, an offshore trade group, said increased risk of lawsuits could chill industry plans to drill offshore, along with a drawn-out permitting process that is "below what is needed to have robust activity in the Gulf." He also said higher minimum bid requirements for deepwater leases could discourage some bidding.

The government has said those minimums were raised to reflect fair market value.

"It probably won't be a record sale," Luthi said of Wednesday's auction. "But it is a sale."

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[Paul Taylor Examiner]

06:56 PM on 12/15/2011

Eco-groups take tax deductible donations from you, foundations and corporations to operate global fear-mongering campaigns about theoretical problems of pollution, species extinction and climate change. These eco-groups also lobby intensely for costly government regulatory controls that are particularly onerous to Americans given Obama’s activist Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

As taxpayer-subsidized nonprofits, these environmental group assets for eco-propaganda, lobbying and litigation have grown to almost $2 billion annually. Perversely over the last decade, U.S. eco-groups have also been subsidized by receiving some 7,500 U.S. EPA grants totaling over $3.8 billion. These green groups spent more than $20 million on 2010 political campaigns and green propaganda. This while the I.R.S. Code Section 501(c)(3) specifically limits nonprofit organization spending on “propaganda.”

Progressive eco-groups damage the American economy by cynically gaming the environmental regulatory system for media attention and profit. They routinely sue American industries to stop energy, infrastructure, manufacturing and job growth. They also file hundreds of law suits every year claiming the Federal Government is not enforcing enough job-killing environmental regulations under the guise of “citizen suits” in Federal Courts, exploiting the Equal Access to Justice Act.

ECOPOLITICS

[D-Driller]

02:09 AM on 12/14/2011

Imagine the progress in renewable energy these groups could make if they'd spend their legal fees on research instead of endlessly, mindlessly sueing oil companies for trying to keep the lights on and the motors running in this gas hog we call a country...

[angusmciver]

11:33 AM on 12/14/2011

Imagine how many more uncleaned big spills, abandoned toxic sites, larger groups of miner deaths, and blown,improperly cased wells there would be if there was no oversight. Companies would cut costs and increase their profits at the expense of everything else. Imagine also in the 70's after the first oil crisis if America had begun to pursue alternatives to oil instead of building up into the 'gas hog' SUV Hummer nation. Mindlessly suing the oil companies might not be necessary in a better world. Mindlessly abusing the environment might not be necessary as well. There is no telling how far along progress in renewables would be were it not for the power of money in the oil industry.

[WESmith]

01:22 AM on 12/14/2011

In 2008, our government made $27 billion in the GOM. In 2009, we only made $9 billion. In 2010, we had the BP blowout. Considering that the government collects about 3 times this amount in taxes, this is a large chunk of money to lose.

[BrokenLinkAgain]

12:00 AM on 12/14/2011

Those that contribute to or are members of Oceana, Defenders of Wildlife, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Center for Biological Diversit, should be prohibited from having in their possession anything that has been produced using or has any content derived from oil, natural gas, or coal.

[angusmciver]

01:10 AM on 12/14/2011

Did you read the article? The action was not to halt the sales, but, more or less to be certain that the government be prepared to prevent and to clean up in the event of another BP style disaster. Do you really not buy that concept? As for me I suck down fossil fuel products like the rest of us but I make every effort to shy away from the practice. Pretty much for now they have us by the nads. Things should have changed long ago but won't until the last drop is burned. Until then I'll get my geothermal heat pump fired up with the solar hot water collectors and hope that the Overseers and Regulators will demand that they work on keeping it clean. Earth First

[BrokenLinkAgain]

01:10 PM on 12/14/2011

Snail Darters! The argument that they, the groups that filed suit, are honestly interested in enabling safe off-shore drilling is disingenuous. I'm all about responsible stewardship but I've been around long enough to know there are many that are intent on forcing a paradigm shift in the energy cycle that technologically we are not ready to make.

I undertook a small solar panel project for my RV, and as you probably know, every part is, from solar panels to energy saving led bulbs to converting stuff to work efficiently on DC, expensive. My system works great but... It sucks when you are off grid, its been raining for two days, batteries low needing a charge and the SEC championship game is on in a several of hours. The solution? I cranked up my 2kw CO2 belching generator, charged the batteries and watched the game. Go Tigers.