(3) comments Back to story

PD Hyatt

"The money from the act is supposed to go toward coastal areas where environmental and economic damage occurred because of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill."
With the above statement I fail to see how Galveston county would qualify for one nickel of that Horizon money....I would love for the paper to tell us all how Galveston county was affected by that accident. Funny how I don't seem to remember that we had oil washing up on our beaches or had any wildlife affected here in Galveston county....

John Ferguson Staff
John Wayne Ferguson

Hey PD, that's something we've reported on before. While some Deepwater tar was found on Galveston beaches, but it definitely didn't cover the area the way it did in Louisiana.

The local argument about damages comes down to economic losses. BP might have challenged some of the claims, if the company had chosen to contest the lawsuit. But they dropped the legal fights when they made a settlement last year.

You can read about some of the local economic loss arguments in this article from 2015.
http://www.galvnews.com/news/article_76bc58de-2787-11e5-b83a-0b45e7da8390.html

Anna Lopez

Gentlemen, there is a fundamental misunderstanding in your comments. The federal RESTORE Act was signed into law in 2012. The RESTORE Act establishes a regional approach to restore the long-term environmental health of the Gulf Coast region and to facilitate its economic development and is NOT directly correlated to damages in specific areas, but rather is envisioned to improve our Gulf coast region through the preservation of natural resources and their activation as economic resources. The funds are generated by the fines levied by the federal government against the companies responsible. The article you posted, John, is related to legal actions taken by the Park Board and other regional municipal governments that were adversely affected by the spill economically or physically. Those claims were made and validated by the court and settlements were awarded based on documentation submitted. Both funds, while stemming from the spill, have different underlying motives and aims. In other words, the settlement received and written about in the linked article were directly generated by damage, whereas the RESTORE grant award is a larger effort to improve (not repair) our ecosystems and utilizes funding made available from fines levied for non-compliance. That is why other projects to make the RESTORE list include flood levy repairs, removal of unauthorized oil and gas well stubs, tourism marketing and mobile wayfinding as well as groin construction and drainage projects.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.