State Oceanic Administration and North Sea Branch Jointly Cover Identification Report on Bohai Oil Spill

On July 26 lawyer Tang Huadong received the “Notice of Postponed Reply to Application for Governmental Information Disclosure” from the North Sea Branch of the State Oceanic Administration. The Notice advised that reply to the Application for Governmental Information Disclosure submitted on July 3rd by Mr Tang, which requested the disclosure of the oil fingerprint identification reports concerning the oil spill of Penglai 19-3 oilfield in Bohai Bay caused by ConocoPhillips, would be postponed.  

According to lawyer Zhang Haijun, volunteer lawyer of the China Environment Federation and partner of Beijing DHH Law Firm, the oil spill was an extraordinary and serious inland sea oil spill accident and caused huge losses to local coastal fishermen and farmers. Though ConocoPhillips and CNOOC admitted responsibility for this accident, what is puzzling and annoying is that relevant authorities and maritime courts are assisting ConocoPhillips and CNOOC in concealing facts. They are hindering fishermen and farmers from claiming for compensation.

ConocoPhillips and CNOOC have asserted that the oil fingerprints which have been identified are inconsistent with that of the polluted area. The reports on oil fingerprints identification were made by the North Sea Branch of the State Oceanic Administration, which alleged that the identified fingerprints of oil spilled in Shandong and some other coastal polluted areas are inconsistent with that spilled from Penglai 19-3 oilfield.

Given the inconsistency, who and what caused the pollution? As the authority in charge of the protection of seas the North Sea Branch of the State Oceanic Administration should give a clear answer to the public. The public deserve full disclosure of the reports.

The excuse given for postponing the reply for information disclosure was that the Administration needed to solicit the third party’s opinion.  As to whether it’s necessary to solicit the third party’s opinion, lawyer Zhang Haijun said: “It is a confession! The so called “third party” can only be the wrongdoer! It’s as ridiculous as asking for the rapist’s opinion upon identifying the sperm.”

As to whether and when the Oil Fingerprint Identification Report would be disclosed lawyer Wang Haijun pessimistically predicted that the State would finally decline to disclose the report and especially the sampling process on the excuses of protecting third party’s interests or state secrets etc. 

If the reports on oil fingerprints identification  were overturned tens of thousands of fishermen and fish farmers would be compensated and ConocoPhillips and CNOOC would pay an estimated amount of more than one billion RMB. “It looks like a huge amount but the daily profit of Penglai 19-3 oilfield is more than one hundred million RMB”, said Lawyer Wang Haijun.

It is also reported that lawyer Jia Fangyi, who first represented Zhuji Island fishermen to make a compensation claim on April 15th this year, and who brought polluted oil samples to the State Oceanic Administration for identification, has not obtained any identification report. Moreover, up to July 27th Qingdao Maritime Court has accepted the bill of complaint by more than 900 fishermen but Tianjin Maritime Court is still refusing to accept the plaintiffs’ bill of complaint.