government what we're saying is that the government when we had a disk on track to the worst case discharge analysis it had to be done by everybody in the offshore drilling had a lease for offshore drilling had to do  response plan which is required in the open with that worst case discharge we then spies on things exploration plan and the government approved that approved a worst case discharge under over a fifteen other parents then you have b p and they sa that one which is in the judge the joint appendix at thirteen seventeen on page twenty nine it tells you at the top of the page thirteen seventeen yes and then if you go to short appendix page fourteen zero six which is place twenty nine of regulation and this next paragraph changed the rules the next paragraph says now where we used to say do this calculus in this way that we say don't worry about anyway they have a whole what is the difference in your life time the difference in the calculation is there you no longer consider anything being in the well bore in other words drilling its successor and as an obstruction just assume it's all wide open and consider all reservoirs not just where you're drilling to but anything you might pass through is coming through the hole but i need some winds and that a change in the slides because that wasn't required that that rule look at the top that says this is the requirements of two fifty four forty seven b that mean there was no actual change to the overregulation right well this is where we get into one three one seven one three one seven the middle of the page background first sentence ok i'm showing you what i have is one three one seven it doesn't look like what you're holding up i have the same problem with the  court all here on behalf of champion the argument is that the changes to the worst case discharge which is a concept that you only find under the oil pollution act you can start with the statu and follow it right through the regulations it was a longstanding interpretation that's undisputed the government offered no whether or not exchange two of or over regulation is correct the  it a change in accordance with folks love rather than a change to open because also has no worst case discharge the whole response plan everybody has to prepare response and that's a problem we can't afford this billion eight when doing a response point everybody has to have a response plan and you have to certify you're capable of performing obviously well they change tell you how you defined worst case discharge which is only defined into four seven i mean skinny two five zero point two five four point four so so only place you find a definition that changed by this f a q by the explicit terms they said they're that's right and that's where the definition is contained that's what has the definition has a hoax was not concerned with the worst case to scary scenario they say they are but they chose to  the congress granted the authority the president who delegated to the interior the ability to issue regulations and the or pollution act that's the only act that all the right that requires a response maybe it doesn't but i mean under hoax laws when the secretary of the interior independently have the authority to require a response on that's an interesting question there was nothing explicitly delegated to interior in obsolete to do that now you might be able to read between the lines you know i haven't done that analysis there might be some loose language in the case there may be protons rationing waste and conservation why or let's talk about let's talk about the f a q and i'm sorry i'm going over time but if you take a look at to see if you take a look at that f a q that we're discussing right now it says where were  according to my brief it side of the page j a six six three six six six three six six three yes ok if you go down to question fifteen it says thirty c f r two five four point four seven b steps and that citation right there is to the only regulatory definition that there is for worst case discharge which wasn't changed well that's what we since m it was changed judge yes it was not done by changing the language of the regulations but it was certainly changed by what follows for instance of four years beforehand you counted the fact that you had a blowout prevent that if it was less than that you wouldn't count if if that's no longer the case according to this and that's one of the reasons it's actually quite technical but the court of lower court found as a fact that i change the result of the calculation secondly if you look at a team says assume the wellbore is free of drill pipe logging tools or equipment that's question eighteen is not connected to the wellhead ok how do we know these are changes because there's never been required that while it's in the record as as evidence that this was not there before what is it to you i think they do in that if they say it's evolved it's undisputed that this changed the calculation as the lower court found it's undisputed posing a supplemental acquirements it's not in the regulation or changing interpretation of the regulation or whatever for example let's take the simplest one were the early regulation seems to say thirty days scenario and then there's a generally an email or something like that that changes at the hundred twenty that the change right it is a change for purposes of submitting an expiration plan or development and production plan and the authority to change that was brought about here was brought about pursuant to oak hill because under the under the new lease the lease incorporates future regulatory action under  they say no no this isn't an ok so it seems it's an overturned how do i know that there well you know your honor because exploration plans and development production plans are pure ox low documents right there's not a single overexcited in this n p l not one where they are cited and trying to be very well there are cite isn't that thank you documents that counsel for tutoring his argument that's talks about where in the regulations so that term is used and you know for regulations it is it is definitely there but when interior latches on to that and brings it over for purposes of exploration plan or development direction plant interior is doing that have by the way and so what you're saying if i understand correctly is that the regulations don't specifically on of these exploration plans correct but say you're on the oprah regulations open regulations themselves to be seen by themselves do not apply to the exploration plans they apply yes they do your honor along with many other activities i do believe under oath but open does mention often but none of those again know the open regulations changed well what the interpretation of them may have changed the assumptions going into something of the change how did thirty days get changed to one hundred twenty day what happened to change that well that was informal guidance from well it's a change you said you used to have to do thirty days which is what oprah regulations that now you want to do one hundred twenty days when your honour's what authority or what two fifty dog two thirty c f r two fifty two one m m s has the authority now the o e m has the authority to require additional information as part of an exploration plan or development plan two fifty two eighty four gives m authority to require an operator submit a revised expiration plan based on a change in circumstance of these this authority again these are in the existing regulations in existence at the time this lease was issue seven days and so the secretary recently said thirty days is insufficient and within my authority that i have from congress in oslo to protect the plan for the future you're right yes your honor to protect the environment and balance that against the need to develop the resources i'm going to ask to see and i'm going to ask to make sure that everybody is out there drilling can respond to this kind of lot and if they can't then you're not going to drill and that is that is within the secretary's authority eleven he reaches out and says contractor you can no longer enter the installation no nobody's arm the we couldn't change the regulatory structure of the deepwater horizon disaster the question is was that  and talks about the regulatory authority and again the two fifty three to fifty series now the five fifty series those are off the regulations talks about the authority to do that now one other thing coun with exploration plans or development and production plans at all and certainly can page thirteen seventy one that n c l is not some reincarnation i think counsel said of n t l o six the challenge it's not what that relates to is something completely separate question still is for the first question is is it is a particular action public in general and i think that question would still be answered yes regardless of what regulations under republican john everybody has to do it you know what the contract allocates of the list to use regulatory changes  i don't understand what the sovereign acts dokken yesterday under those circumstances would that you don't already have based on the soundtrack one melts in this case your honor that could be true if the court were to the whole idea of creating all of your response plans falls under open now what is under actually is that actually gives the sector to or the right to ask for this information today and if you look at the rules it says yes for an a for an exploration plan you can ask for that information how you calculate that is ok that is clearly under over and you can see it clearly by looking at two fifty four  seven and two fifty four point two six those are opa regulations they both say thirty days they both said thirty days now they are telling us two hundred twenty days they tell us through the open ho in reality in fact as even the cook local recognized just look at what happened it went from fifteen hundred barrels a day they changed the rule and it went to two hundred eighteen thousand barrels of a day and they're saying that's not a substantive change opa that calculation worst case of storage is created by the oil pollution that the regulations relating to the calculation the horse has discharged over regulations they change that they change that rules they change the thirty days they change how you calculated and in such a monumental way that it went from fifteen hundred barrels to two hundred eighteen thousand barrels a day now what happens is the reason the facts explore ation plan is they say now when you apply for the expiration plan you have to certify that you can clean up something four times bigger than the the number b p fifty thousand this is they're telling us now two hundred eighteen thousand on your new calculation and certified us that you can point that out we can do that that they contracted with us to go do that under these local rules when we enter this contract that overrules said you do it this way and you come foreseeable this is something that's changing the overrules changing knocks the rules yes clearly worst case discharge is open there's no doubt about it that the words appear over here because they say you can ask about it you can ask what that information is when you get to changing the the method to calculate that's a whole different ball game that changed all kinds of things that changed the bond we had to put up it went from thirty five now to two hundred fifty that financially we can do it we did that with a fifteen hundred under the original local rules we did certify century did sort of how they could do that they came back and said we're changing the over rules which changing the calculation now  can't do that we can't do it in the multiple billions and went from four million to over so the two million was actually fifty thousand the big because they didn't say she'd go well of course not but they can't they couldn't say that but