The U.S. Maritime Administration has sent a third set of
documents related to the original Nov.
4, 2013 Freedom of Information Act request.
Once again, redaction has stricken key elements of
information from the documents. As before, with all the agencies that have
responded to this point, MARAD is using Exemption 5 for deliberative,
pre-process discussion as well as attorney-client privilege. Much of this
information would have direct bearing on how MARAD handled the STORIS situation
and is key to gaining a full understanding of how the ship was allowed to be
sold and exported. All of these points will have to be argued on appeal for the
redaction and withholding of information. If these officials did nothing wrong
and their decisions were sound, then why are they withholding information? The
correspondence between MARAD officials regarding STORIS is also marked as “low
importance,” which says a lot about their attitude about the ship and the
related situation.
Pg 2-3 – There is discussion among MARAD officials regarding
the ship’s departure and whether or not the ship is truly free of regulated
PCBs. MARAD officials claim that they are not responsible for the issues
related to STORIS as the ship belonged to the U.S. Coast Guard and she was
merely a “custody ship” at the Suisun Bay Reserve Fleet. Therefore, it is
MARAD’s position that the regulations and court-ordered procedures for issues
such as hull cleaning for invasive species and removal of potential pollution
did not apply to STORIS. A lot of this communication is a matter of MARAD
officials covering themselves to absolve the agency and those involved from any
kind of wrongdoing.
The fact that MARAD officials themselves seemed to be
questioning whether STORIS was actually free of regulated PCBs is important. I
think they knew that the ship had to have some kind of contamination that would
have been problematic for excessing and foreign dismantling. How could they not
know, considering it’s their job to handle obsolete ships, many of which were
of the same type of construction and vintage as STORIS?
Conspicuously absent in all of this correspondence is any
reference to Section 3502 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization
Act of 2009 which set into federal law the requirement that U.S. government
vessels have to be dismantled in U.S. ship recycling facilities. STORIS was
allowed to be exported for dismantling in a substandard scrap facility in Ensenada.
MARAD officials should also have recognized that it was illegal for GSA to sell
STORIS at auction because her tonnage exceeded 1,500 tons. This was a violation
of 40 U.S.C. 548 (http://goo.gl/uVDtHa).
Whether this is part of the redacted information for deliberative or
attorney-client privilege remains to be seen. Regardless, the federal
government VIOLATED the very laws they were supposed to be following. As
indicated in earlier posts on March 12 and May 9, Denise Rucker Krepp, former
chief counsel for MARAD, has identified these violations.
On page 3, there is a comment regarding Jeff Siragusa of
MARAD inspecting STORIS and making note of “a lot of new wiring.” While this
may be true, that there was new wiring in many locations on the ship,
particularly the main control board, there was also a substantial quantity of
old wiring. We know it was there based on sworn statements provided by two key
members of the ship’s last crew, an EM2 and BMC. This old wiring was
conveniently ignored by the Coast Guard in declaring the ship “free of
regulated PCBs” and it was apparently ignored by Jeff Siragusa. The rest of the comment regarding Siragusa was
redacted by MARAD as “pre-decision, deliberative process” protected. What does
it say, that the wiring looked fine, posed no problem and the ship was clean?
What is MARAD hiding with the redaction? Again, this gets to the very core of
the information that we are seeking regarding the government’s assessment and
disposal of STORIS.
Last fall, I had spoken with Gary Whitney, the general
manager of the Mare Island Ship Yard. He told me that he walked away from
bidding on STORIS as a potential scrap project because it was readily apparent
to him that there was a lot of old wiring on the ship as well as other
materials that likely harbored hazardous materials. Again, when I asked him
about the presence of PCBs on board STORIS, his reply was that he didn't
actually test for PCBs, but he saw enough to believe they were there. He said
that if the Mexicans were going to look for PCBs, they would find them. Apparently
the Mexicans really weren't looking for PCBs or at least not very hard.
It is interesting to note that Jeff Siragusa was vice-president
and program manager at a ship recycling business known as North American Ship
Recycling (NASR) located at the old Bethlehem Steel Sparrows Point (Baltimore,
MD) shipyard. In 2007, NASR was targeted by
a lawsuit filed by Clean Venture, an environmental remediation contractor that
did not receive payment for two vessels being scrapped. Elements of the lawsuit
involved accusations under federal racketeering laws. NASR seemingly
disappeared in the middle of the night, leaving behind a controversy and two
partially dismantled ships, the USS HOIST (ARS-40) and the USS SPHINX (ARL-24).
Both ships were determined to contain
hazardous materials, particularly the SPHINX, which was identified as containing
waste oil, lead paint and PCBs.
The Hampton Roads Pilot (Virginia), published stories
related to the debacle as it involved several ships from the James River
Reserve Fleet:
The Baltimore
Sun also has several stories in its archives related to NASR, its creation and
its disappearance.
The suit was settled confidentially in late December 2007
before it made it into court.
In the stories, MARAD officials are quoted in regard to the
problems that the NASR shutdown and associated controversy caused for the
government:
“The U.S. Maritime Administration, which oversees the fleet,
said in a statement Thursday that it is ‘disappointed’ by the sudden closure.
‘All rights and remedies available to the agency related to those contracts,
and NASR's failure to perform under those contracts, are being pursued, but
cannot be discussed,’ according to the statement released by Susan Clark, an
agency spokeswoman.” – Shipyard closure sinks plan for 6 ‘Ghost Fleet’ ships –
Scott Harper, Pilot Online 11/9/07
The situation couldn’t have caused too much trouble for
MARAD if they turned around and hired Jeff Siragusa from the wayward firm to be
a Contracting Officer Technical Representative for MARAD. His name shows up in
a search of MARAD ship disposal documents from 2009-10 with a Washington,
DC, phone number. Now he’s apparently in California.
I wonder how other private ship scrapping firms felt to have a former
competitor working for the government for the very agency from which they
relied on to purchase ships or bid on contracts for shipbreaking, their very
lifeblood?
There is also some sarcasm related to U.S. Metals Recovery
actually taking the ship from the SBRF, with a comment from William Cahill of
MARAD stating “I guess they mean it this time.” So apparently, there were
previous false starts and failures to move the ship to the annoyance of MARAD
officials.
Pages 7-26 involved internal MARAD communications in
response to a message I sent MARAD’s chief counsel on Oct. 29, the Monday
following STORIS’ departure from Suisun
Bay. Again, it is a matter of
putting together a consistent, united front to address my inquiry as well as
the other inquiries that might come in from the media or Congressional
officials.
Pages 27-28 discuss STORIS, GLACIER and PLANETREE (but not
IRIS) and their situation within the SBRF, MARAD custody and Coast Guard
ownership.
No comments:
Post a Comment