Policy Watch

Making Connections During the Annual CVD

AAPG’s CVD team: (top row, from left) Art Johnson, Roger Humphreville and Don Juckett;
(middle row) Dan Billman, Edith Allison, Paul Britt and Richard Ball; (bottom row) Jim Hill,
Carol Hill, (guest) Shawn Woodbridge, Valary Schulz, Pete Mackenzie and Connie Mongold.
AAPG’s CVD team: (top row, from left) Art Johnson, Roger Humphreville and Don Juckett; (middle row) Dan Billman, Edith Allison, Paul Britt and Richard Ball; (bottom row) Jim Hill, Carol Hill, (guest) Shawn Woodbridge, Valary Schulz, Pete Mackenzie and Connie Mongold.

As part of our spring – or almost spring – Congressional Visits Days (CVD) on March 10-12, AAPG members visited agency and congressional offices, advocating for geoscience research and science-based regulation, learning about the activities and opinions of decision makers, and establishing contacts for future communication.

Our only complaint was that so few AAPG members were able to join us.

This year our group of 11 – together or as smaller groups – met with six executive branch agencies plus 16 senators’ or representatives’ offices.

The fact that Congress set aside last year’s budget sequester (across-the-board cuts) and approved a federal spending bill in January may have been the source of this year’s more forward-looking discussions with both executive branch agencies and congressional offices.

AAPG Secretary Richard Ball, part of the
CVD team, archives the experience.
AAPG Secretary Richard Ball, part of the CVD team, archives the experience.

It also is likely that recurring visits with AAPG members over the past several years are leading to more informed and forward-looking discussions.

Many of the groups that we met included well-informed, high-level managers – a sign of how much they value our visits. These meetings also provided information on new programs or initiatives, which may be useful to members who are reading this article.

(If you wish additional information or instructions on how to provide input to government decision makers contact Edith Allison by email or call 202-643-6533.)

During the meetings, AAPG members stressed that they and their colleagues are available as a source of accurate, unbiased scientific information about petroleum and environmental geoscience.

Many of the groups that we met asked for our input and coordination on issues of common interest, for example:

The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) are charged with managing offshore energy activities. During our discussions the agencies described their difficulties in recruiting geologists, geophysicists and engineers, which is made more difficult by the high demand by industry for these same professions and higher industry salaries.

AAPG members provided the appropriate AAPG contacts for two AAPG opportunities: Student expos and the Imperial Barrel Award competition.

BSEE wants to hear from companies that wish to be involved in the new Ocean Energy Safety Institute (OEIS), managed by the Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station, to enhance communication and coordination for offshore safety.

OEIS is planning several forums this spring to encourage industry, academia and industry collaboration and communication.

BOEM officials stated their plans to ask the AAPG Committee on Resource Evaluation to peer review the 2016 update of OCS technically recoverable resources. This AAPG committee has assisted U.S. government agencies for many years by peer-reviewing assessments.

Another opportunity for AAPG members, and other stakeholders: We will be invited to contribute to the BOEM 2017-21 five-year plan starting with the “Request for Information” later this year.

Our group met with senior managers of the EPA Office of Atmospheric Programs, which is responsible for climate change activities and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

This was AAPG’s first meeting with EPA offices that are responsible for monitoring and regulating oil and gas industry air emissions.

The EPA managers seemed unfamiliar with the upstream oil and gas industry, which is not unexpected given that most emission reporting is done by downstream operations.

EPA invited comments on the latest GHG emissions report and planned changes in the reporting rules. Pete Mackenzie offered to provide information from recent studies documenting emissions.

A couple weeks after our meeting the White House announced its Climate Action Plan, which directs EPA to solicit expert input on methane emissions from oil and gas operations as a basis for deciding on the need to regulate industry methane emissions. In mid-April, EPA will release five white papers on potentially significant sources of methane and VOC emissions from the oil and gas sector nationwide:

  • Hydraulically fractured oil wells.
  • Liquids unloading.
  • Leaks.
  • Pneumatic devices.
  • Compressors.

EPA will be accepting public comments. AAPG’s energy and geoscience policy office will publicize the white papers with instructions on how to respond.

The EPA contacts established during the CVD meetings will help AAPG members to be involved in the discussions about industry methane emissions, which could have a significant impact on industry operations and the cost of energy to consumers.

The AAPG group divided in two in order to visit both the majority and minority staff of the House Natural Resources Committee, one of three House committees involved in energy policy and regulation.

(The other relevant House committees are Energy and Commerce, and Science, Space and Technology.)

Both majority and minority staff include scientists and are knowledgeable in industry issues. The majority staff asked AAPG members to let them know about industry activities and issues that might precede congressional involvement.

Meetings with individual Senate or House members were a mix of new introductions and renewed acquaintances. Several DPA members have participated in several CVDs and the annual September Geo-CVDs. Recurring meetings with congressional staff build a strong foundation for them to seek AAPG members’ opinions.

Congress does the majority of its work through committees and their subcommittees. Committees conduct hearings and develop legislation under Congress’ responsibilities to legislate and oversee the executive branch.

The House has 23 committees and 104 subcommittees; the Senate has 17 committees and 70 subcommittees. The senators and representatives that our members met are members of the committees most influential in oil and natural gas science, research and regulation – for example, Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and David Vitter (R-La.) are the chair and ranking member of the Environmental and Public Works Committee that oversees the EPA.

AAPG members at CVD also met with representatives on two of the major House energy and science committees: Energy and Commerce, and Science, Space and Technology.

With a larger group, we could have an opportunity to establish communication with a representative on the Natural Resources Committee.

Another opportunity to visit Congress with a group of AAPG members is Geoscience Congressional Visits Day on Sept. 17-18. More information is available at the American Geosciences Institute website.

Comments (0)


Policy Watch

Policy Watch - Edie Allison
Edie Allison began as the Director of the AAPG Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington D.C. in 2012.

Policy Watch

Policy Watch is a monthly column of the EXPLORER written by the director of AAPG's  Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington, D.C. *The first article appeared in February 2006 under the name "Washington Watch" and the column name was changed to "Policy Watch" in January 2013 to broaden the subject matter to a more global view.

View column archives

See Also: Book

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3972 Book

See Also: CD DVD

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4560 CD-DVD

See Also: DL Abstract

The Guadalupe Mountains (USA) expose shelf to basin cross-sections of the Permian Capitan depositional system along 70 km of depositional strike, providing an excellent outcrop analog for studying the processes that generate early fractures within carbonate platform strata.

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 10302 DL Abstract

The results of regional deep seismic acquisition in the South Atlantic continental margins have shed new lights on the birth and development of sedimentary basins formed during the Gondwana breakup. Recent models of mantle exhumation as observed in the deep water Iberian margin have been applied extensively to the interpretation of several basins in the Eastern Brazilian and West African conjugate margins. However, the tectonic development of these basins is markedly different from the magma-poor margins, and in this lecture we emphasize the contrasts from the tectono-sedimentary features imaged in deep-penetrating seismic profiles that extend from the platform towards the oceanic crust, which indicate that the Red Sea constitutes a better analogue for the birth of divergent continental margins.

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3088 DL Abstract

See Also: Field Seminar

This six-day field seminar is designed to provide participants with an appreciation of the broad range of deep-water reservoir facies, the mechanisms by which they were deposited, their predictive attributes, their reservoir heterogeneity and their stratigraphic architecture.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/fs-Deep-Water Siliciclastic Reservoirs-California.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 46 Field Seminar