com>
Sent: Thursday,.June 24, 2010 1:50 PM
To: Mafk£ B•nfi•ld .•./•.•i• •-i •.-•-. :.... ..-..•
Subject: FW: Action: proposa for gap assessment workshop Discussion of biological/
ecological studies program minutes and actions
FYI
Subject: RE: Action: proposal for gap assessment workshop Discussion of biological/ecological studiesprogram minutes and actions
My only comments are associated with the developing definitions of the three main study areas:
Questions have been raised as to just which effort / study falls into which area (i.e. investigations of meso-pelagics being
carried to the surface NRDA or fate& effects or maybe a topic for GRI???) What budget should we be using ?.
Can we "direct" GRI funding to a specific study (as we now see the Governor's offices trying to do)?
What influence do we have over the vessels/equipment driving the studies vs the questions?
Importance: High
<< File: Proposal for Ecological & Biological workshop June 24.doc >>
All ;.• ..:•,, ':.• •"::i,:" •:•,!•::;:•, :".;"•:'"":'"•" •' "
Here is the one pager in response to action for point3 below. It is a little basic but think you will get the point of
what the team discussed on 21st June this week, ....................
Please can you review and feed back your comments so we can finalise and take this forward for approval so
we can keep the action moving on this scope.
The team here will start working the next more detailed steps and we will need your input to help shape that
successfully. The timing to undertake this workshop will be dependent on your feedback and how we choose
to approach this ie one big workshop, orsma er discrete sessions leading to a concluding workshop etc.
:' "' "•: "i": -'• "•''" •';'' "" "'"";;
Sue Ford will be taking over tonight and she will take this forward with /ou. Comments should come back to this
email address please
Thanks
Liz
Environmental Lead
HSE Technical team
GoM response
Tel +1 281 366 8687,
Cell: +1 281 832 6477
Email: MC252 HSE TechSup_Environ_Lead
Hi All,
Please find below the minutes of this moming's meeting as well as the actions agreed going forward:
Attendees: Liz Rogers, Peter Collingson, Russell Putt, Victor Kremesec, Andrew Hill, A1 Maki, Larry Malnor, Arden Ahnell,
Karen Ragoonanan-Jalim
Key discussions:
1. Update on workshop conducted on Sunday 20th June 2010, at Houma: The workshop included approximately 28 participants from
different agencies and included NRDA representatives. The purpose of the workshop was to attempt to coordinate the sampling
programs ongoing at this time for the various agencies, at the various sites, as it became evident that not all the programs had a clear
scope of work with clearly outlined objectives. One request coming from New Orleans was for BP to ensure that there are BP-badged
SMEs in each of the thirteen (13) Technical Wgrking Groups (TWGs) that have been assembled by NRDA. This would then allow
BP to have a voice within the NRDA programs and allow for better Collaborations on NRDA scope of work and sampling programs.
Action: Liz to work with Robin Bullock/Joyce Mile•to identify the BP:badged employees already tagged to the individual
TWGs and fill gaps as identified.
Action: Liz to fonvard RFI for GR[ to Larry for distribution.to the team for their comment and feedback on the ToR for this
program.
".' "•- =:.i•'"•--""""-•"
3. Gap Assessment How do we determine what biological/ecological studies we (BP) will need to do, in order to satisfy specific
requirements (legislative/litigation, informing the response and remediation/restoration strategies, informing lessons learned to the rest
of the business)? One approach discussed was to apply the Conceptual Model (from Mark Fraker) against each TWG (which
themselves are framed against a.conceptual model) to (t) test that the NRDA scope is appropriate and (2) identify gaps in the work
that NRDA may be doing. Once gaps have been identified, one approach to close the gaps will be to attempt (through the specific
TWG BP-badged SME) to influence the NRDA scope going forward or, failing that, commission our own study. The latter will need
to be carefully understood (reviewed by Legal) for litigation and other unintended consequences.
The next step identified was to prepare a one pager of a proposal, to be submitted to David Rainey and Bob Dudley, outlining the
justification for what we believe needs to be done regarding the biological studies program as well as the short term action
(identification ofBP-badged TWG SMEs to support NRDA, moving forward with the ConcePtual Modeling application to each
TWG, etc) and longer term actions (incorporation of this model into the new organization).
It was also agreed during the discussion that this wotk'is not owfied by'the' UAC (focus ig '0r• •'esponse);neither is it owned by N'RDA
(they have their focused program) and so should be led by the Environmental Technical Support team (supporting the BST).
4. Question on how we handle the NOAA vessels that are currently en route to the Gulf to support the spill Agreement in the
meeting that UAC has to take a position on this, i.e. each vessel going out to support the work in the Gulf must have a clear scope of
work prior to beginning any program.
Action: Arden and Andy to accumulate the positive data, interpret this data and determine the message to be shared. This
will then be circulated through UAC for publication (Liz will also take it to the Houston Press Office for publication).
7. Request from the site to aggressively pursue the resourcing of support staff, reporting to the Environmental Liaison, who will be
dedicated to documenting and following up on all the sampling and monitoring programs ongoing.
Please feel free to contact me for any queries or concerns you may have with the details attached.