[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 11279-11287]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           OILSPILL RESPONSE

  Mr. LeMIEUX. Mr. President, I come to the floor, as I did yesterday 
and last week, to talk about the economic and environmental disaster in 
the Gulf of Mexico and the lack of response by this government in 
dealing with the disaster. Everything that can be done should be done 
to stop this oil from coming on our beaches, from going into our 
coastal waterways, and from damaging our way of life on the gulf coast.
  I specifically come to talk about what is happening to Florida. For 
the last week, I have been making statements and questioning why there 
are not more skimmers off the coast of Florida. I have been asking for 
more skimmers to be sent to the Gulf of Mexico for many weeks.
  A week ago today, I met with the President, ADM Thad Allen, and other 
State and local officials in Pensacola to address many issues 
concerning the response to the oilspill. At that time, we were told 
there were 32 skimmers off the coast of Florida. Today, we are told 
there are 20. It makes no sense that there are not more skimmers. 
Admiral Allen has told us there are 2,000 skimmers in the United 
States. We have heard reports of offers of foreign assistance of 
skimmers that are still under consideration or have been declined. Why 
are there not more skimmers in the Gulf of Mexico skimming up the oil 
before it comes onshore? We can't even get a straight number as to how 
many skimmers are off the coast of Florida.
  I have two documents, which I ask unanimous consent to have printed 
in the Record. One is the Deepwater Horizon response of Monday, June 
21, from the State of Florida. The second is the National Incident 
Command response for June 21 from the Coast Guard.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

[[Page 11280]]





[[Page 11281]]



[[Page 11282]]


  Mr. LeMIEUX. The first of these, the Deepwater Horizon response from 
Monday, June 21, says there are 20 skimmers off the coast of Florida. 
The second, from the National Incident Command, says there are 108 off 
the coast of Florida. Last week, we had this same discrepancy between 
these two reports. We questioned the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard told 
us the information contained in the national incident report was not, 
in fact, correct. We can't get a straight answer as to how many 
skimmers are currently off the coast of Florida, but it appears from 
the most reliable information--and I am still waiting for a straight 
answer--that there are only 20. One percent of the skimmers of the 
United States are off the coast of Florida, with the worst economic and 
environmental catastrophe looming off our shores. Huge swathes of water 
are washing up tar balls all the way from Pensacola Beach, now to 
Panama City, FL.
  We received a briefing this morning from the Navy and the Coast 
Guard. I thank Secretary Mabus of the Navy, who provided RADM John 
Haley as well as a captain from the Coast Guard and other folks from 
the Navy to brief me on the status of what skimmers the Navy has and 
what they are doing in the gulf. We found out there are 23 naval 
skimmers, relatively small skimmers that can fit on the back of a truck 
or be put on a train or in an airplane. That is how they were 
transported to the gulf. They are welcome. We are happy they are there. 
There are 6 on the way and 29 skimmers total.
  There are another 35 skimmers they would like to bring down, but they 
are under a category called legally constrained. What does that mean? 
That means that for some reason, the law is prohibiting the Navy and 
the Coast Guard from getting these skimmers here. Why hasn't this been 
waived? Why hasn't the President signed an Executive order? Where is 
the sense of urgency 62 days into this to get these skimmers to the 
gulf coast? We are going to look into what Federal law may be 
prohibiting and legally constraining the Navy and the Coast Guard from 
getting the skimmers. I will offer legislation, if need be, to waive 
that. I have already offered legislation to waive the Jones Act, which 
has been cited as a prohibition or perhaps an obstacle to bringing in 
skimmers from foreign countries.
  Let's talk about that issue. We know there are 2,000 skimmers in the 
United States. Yet only 20 are off the coast of Florida, if that is the 
correct information. We know the Navy wants to bring an additional 35 
skimmers, but they are legally constrained and we have not yet undone 
that or secured those skimmers, some 62 days after the oil started 
flowing.
  Let's talk about foreign offers of assistance. There was a State 
Department report last week: 17 countries have made 21 offers of 
assistance. The Associated Press reported that they had not been 
responded to or had been declined. We have more current information 
than that. The State Department reports about 56 offers of assistance 
from 28 countries and international groups. Of the 56 offers of 
assistance, 5 have been accepted. That includes booms--people could use 
the Internet to send a message about navigation in the gulf--and 
skimmers or skimmer equipment. BP has accepted three offers of 
assistance, including booms and skimmers. Two offers are categorized as 
``unknown'' or ``declined.'' Forty-six offers are currently under 
consideration, 62 days into this incident. Where is the urgency? Where 
is the alacrity of the response to get this done and get these skimmers 
in the gulf?
  I have a document, ``U.S. Department of State Chart on Deepwater 
Horizon Oil Spill Response: International Offers of Assistance from 
Governments and International Bodies,'' dated June 18, 2010. I ask 
unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows: 

[[Page 11283]]





[[Page 11284]]



[[Page 11285]]



[[Page 11286]]



[[Page 11287]]


  Mr. LeMIEUX. This document goes through the various offers of 
assistance and what is the current status of the response. So if we go 
to the European Maritime Safety Agency, skimmers, under consideration. 
May 13 is the date of the offer. As of last Friday, no response. 
Republic of Korea, skimmers, under consideration. May 2, the offer is 
made. As of last Friday, no response. Sweden, April 30, skimmers; more 
skimmers offered on June 15. Under consideration. No response. United 
Arab Emirates, skimmers, under consideration, offer made May 10. No 
response. Why are we not welcoming all of these offers of assistance to 
bring these skimmers and put them in the Gulf of Mexico to suck up the 
oil?
  I wish to show an example of an offer of assistance made to the 
United States. The ship here is from a Dutch company called Dockwise. 
The name of this vessel is the Swan. Unlike some of the skimmers being 
used and deployed by the Navy, which can be put on a train car or flown 
on an airplane to the location--and although very welcome are 
relatively small--this is a massive ship that could take in 20,000 tons 
of oil or an oil-water mixture off of the water. They rig the ship with 
skimming equipment that hangs off the sides.
  So on May 7, Dockwise offered the Swan to the United States. The 
offer went under consideration. After 48 days, the offer for this 
massive ship with 20,000 tons of skimming capacity is still under 
consideration. But the ship is not available anymore because Dockwise 
now has employed the ship for other purposes because the U.S. 
Government, from all the information we have, never got back to them. 
Here is a Dutch company offering us a massive ship to skim 20,000 tons 
of oil and water off the top of the Gulf of Mexico, and the U.S. 
Government doesn't return the phone call. They never hear whether we 
want the ship. People involved with the situation believe the Swan was 
rejected due to Jones Act considerations and that a similar vessel, the 
SEAcorp vessel named the Washington, was chosen instead. The Washington 
is an American flag vessel. Its capacity is 1,000 tons, one-twentieth 
the capacity of the Swan. I am for America first, but why aren't we 
using both of them? There is plenty of oil to skim up. Use the American 
vessel, but don't fail to respond to the Dutch company that has this 
massive ship that has a 20,000-ton skimming capacity. Why would we not 
employ both?
  I could not be more frustrated with the lack of response. I could not 
be more frustrated with the lack of a sense of urgency from this 
administration in getting this job done.
  The people of the State of Florida are scared to death about the 
oilspill. When I was in Pensacola last week, I met a woman who works at 
the pier on Pensacola Beach. I asked her how things were going. She 
serves food at the pier.
  She said: It has been very harrowing for us.
  I asked her: Are people coming out?
  She said: People from north Florida are coming to the beach. These 
are people who haven't been to the beach in a long time.
  I said: Why are they coming?
  She said: They are coming to see the beach one last time, as if they 
were going to visit a friend who was on his or her deathbed. They don't 
believe the beach will ever look the way they remember it looking.
  Why we are not deploying every available national asset, military 
asset, and accepting every offer of assistance from foreign countries 
is beyond belief, and it is not acceptable. I will continue to meet 
with the Coast Guard and the Navy. When I see the President tomorrow at 
the White House, I will raise this issue with him. I will do everything 
I can to keep clamoring for this. It is not acceptable that in this, 
the greatest country in the world, our response would be this anemic.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________