and covered like 11,000 square miles of ocean before it was done. the scale was inconceivable until it happened. where were you working and what was your job? i worked for the anchorage daily news and i was a reporter at the time, primarily doing investigative work. i had covered oil before the spills. can you tell us what the history of the oil industry was in alaska? how will large was it during that time? knowe modern industry we today got its start in alaska in 1967 when there was a huge oil strike. operating inan the tankerat is when traffic began. 15 years passed before this spill. , froml industry in alaska the day oil was discovered, had an enormous mind share in the state. d as the biggest funding for state government. for a long time, it was the only source that mattered. it produced money so fast that one of the jokes was even the alleges desk alaska legislature alaska legislature could not waste it all. industry was generating all of this money and it to
concern of alaskans and its determination to mount a sustained cleanup effort. our ultimate goal must be the complete restoration of the ecology and the economy of prince william sound. including all of its fish, marine mammals, birds and other wildlife. the exxon corporation has acknowledged responsibility for this spill and its liability for the damages. exxon should remain responsible for both damages and for employing civilian personnel. necessary to control further damage. however, exxon s efforts standing alone are not enough. and after consulting with the congressional delegation, senator ted stevens, senator frank murkowski, congressman don young, i have determined to add additional federal resources to the cleanup effort. in addition of the considerable for federal personnel and equipment already on the scene. this new effort will focus on the job of helping recover all oil now in the water and restoring beaches and other damaged areas. this effort should not in an
that s what we re focused on. and so again you want to make sure everybody is fully and fairly compensateded. that s correct. so why are your lawyers still trying to seek protection in the bankruptcy court? we are not going to revisit those decisions. i think what we re doing is going above and beyond with this compensation program to get to the people. mistakas a unique series of .. ask your bankruptcy lawyers to defend them and get the shield from the bankruptcy court in the course and not have to deal with these cases that come up and to only let the the only solution being mr. feinberg? mr. feinberg s program is a voluntary program. otherwise people have the same rights they have today. they have the same rights, but you re trying to block those rights in the bankruptcy court yes or no? our intent is to do a compensation program and the right thing for these individuals. but you restructing your lawyers to back off the bankruptcy case. so if mr. feinbe
that are still taking place. the issue has been settled. the epa does have the authority bill in. the supreme court has said so twice. that matter believe should now be put to rest. given that fact the agency has decided properly in my view that it should act now to reduce carbon emissions improve the quality of our air protect the health of our people and is part of an effort to address global climate change. the united states climate change is not just environmental issue or an economic issue. climate change also has very real implications for our national security and those concerns must be an important part of any discussion that takes place. .. my hope, however, is that the primary focus will be on the substance of the proposed rule and not epa brought authority to promulgate. that being said, it is clear that the act as it now stands is an imperfect tool to address the unique challenges that climate change presents. congressional action and leaders would be a preferable
we will have opening statements limited to five minutes each followed by introduction and swearing in of witnesses followed by testimony of witnesses. i know that a ranking member sessions will be joining us late. i would like to thank him and members of the subcommittee in our witnesses for being here today to assess faugh. the environmental protection agency. all of them solve contentious environmental problems during their ten years working for republican presidents. now we are banding together to bring attention to the biggest and are meant to travel climate change paper. in a new york times op-ed written last year that i would like to enter into the record without objection, these former administrator stated, we have a message that transcends political affiliation. the united states must move now on the substantive steps to curb climate change they are for in a large choir of voices. the climate declaration as signed by more than 750 companies, including name place