Month: May 2013

The Observer newsletter – May 2013

by

Articles from the May issue of The Observer newsletter are now online.

  1. Valdez students make adjustments to a remotely operated vehicle they designed and built during a recent program by the Prince William Sound Science Center. The students used the vehicles to respond to a mock oil spill. Photo by Kara Johnson.
    Valdez students make adjustments to a remotely operated vehicle they designed and built during a recent program by the Prince William Sound Science Center. The students used the vehicles to respond to a mock oil spill. Photo by Kara Johnson.

    Council and partners work to permit oil spill simulant for response training
    Because evaluating the effectiveness of oil recovery efforts during trainings and drills can be difficult, the council has been working to find an appropriate oil simulant. A simulant would mimic oil on water and provide responders with a practice target and help to increase proficiency with response gear and tactics.
    Read more: Council and partners work to permit oil spill simulant for response training

  2. Review of proposed contingency plan shows some areas improved, others need more detail
    The council has been analyzing proposed changes to the Valdez Marine Terminal Oil Discharge Prevention and Contingency Plan during a recent public review.
    Read more: Review of proposed contingency plan shows some areas improved, others need more detail

  3. Colder and saltier water increases toxic effects of dispersed oil
    Temperature and salinity of water can have an effect on how toxic dispersed oil is to organisms in the environment, a council study has found.
    Read more: Colder and saltier water increases toxic effects of dispersed oil

    Read more

Council and partners work to permit oil spill simulant for response training

by

By JEREMY ROBIDA
Council project manager

Because evaluating the effectiveness of oil recovery efforts during trainings and drills can be difficult, the council has been working to find an appropriate oil simulant. A simulant would mimic oil on water and provide responders with a practice target and help to increase proficiency with response gear and tactics.

In March, the council partnered with Cordova’s Oil Spill Recovery Institute and the Spill Control Association of America to host a workshop to address this topic. The workshop was held at the Seattle campus of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, or NOAA.

Although the council is interested in improving training locally, the broader goal of the partnership and workshop was to address simulant use on a national level.

Twenty-seven people participated, and the workshop featured two panels that addressed the need for simulants, permitting and other regulatory requirements, and concerns related to their use. The panels were composed of representatives from spill response organizations, NOAA, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, representatives from the U.S. Coast Guard’s National Response Team, and the council, among others.

The workshop concluded with a final group discussion on the next steps for this effort and consensus was reached on a number of items including:

  1. There is a need for simulants. Some of the possible uses are: a training aid for practice with boom deployment, skimmer testing, recovery of spilled oil in arctic conditions, and tracking spilled oil.
  2. Different materials have unique characteristics useful for varying goals and conditions. For example, floating wood chips could work for boom practice, but might not be practical for certain skimmers.
  3. There is a difference between particle based simulants such as wood chips, pine needles or oranges, and liquid based simulants such as fish oil, or vegetable oil. This distinction could complicate the permitting process.
  4. Raising public awareness of simulants and their benefits to spill response preparedness would be positive. 

At the end of the workshop, the group had unanswered questions, such as:

  • Can an ongoing blanket permit for certain particle based simulants be achieved?
  • Do simulants need to be used in every exercise and deployment?
  • Would responders be liable if only a portion of the simulant were recovered?

While the idea seems simple, the issue is complex. Federal and state laws regarding permitting are unclear and full of potential obstacles.

The next stage of the project will be a white paper which will describe the topics and consensus items discussed at the workshop, and next steps. The council hopes that the paper can be presented at an upcoming oil spill response conference. Work continues with the goal of enhancing oil spill recovery efforts in Prince William Sound.

REPORT:  The full report is now available on our Oil Simulants project page.

Review of proposed contingency plan shows some areas improved, others need more detail

by

By LINDA SWISS
Council project manager

The council has been analyzing proposed changes to the Valdez Marine Terminal Oil Discharge Prevention and Contingency Plan during a recent public review.

This plan, created and managed by Alyeska Pipeline Service Company, describes how the company would contain and clean up oil spilled from the terminal in Valdez.

The current plan is being reformatted into four separate volumes. One of the new volumes describes tactics specific to oil spilled on land. The council applauded creation of this user-friendly manual.

The council also supports the addition of a technical manual which focuses on marine spill response operations. This manual is part of the tanker oil spill contingency plan, which underwent a similar review process in 2012.

The council has expressed concerns that the proposed new plan may not contain enough detail to demonstrate Alyeska’s ability to fully respond to a spill as required by state and federal regulations.

The review was extensive, requiring a page-by-page comparison between the proposed plan and the previous plan. The changes were significant enough to require a separate document explaining why some information was deleted and where that information, if still required, now appears in the plan.

During the first phase of the public review, the council submitted requests for additional information to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, the agency in charge of the review process. The council was looking for more information on prevention and response training, facility descriptions, and additional details on preventing a spill.
The council identified several areas of concern, including:

  • Integrity of the secondary containment liners for the terminal’s crude oil storage tanks. The liners serve as a barrier in the event a tank ruptures, and must remain “sufficiently impermeable” according to state regulations. If the liner is considered still in good condition, Alyeska is able to plan for a smaller spill, thus requiring less personnel and equipment for a response.
  • Whether adequate equipment and personnel with the necessary level of training are available to respond to a spill.
  • Lack of details on prevention and response training.
  • Specifics on handling, transporting and disposing of waste generated from a spill, available in the current plan, are not included in the proposed plan.
  • Making sure that enough detail exists on required prevention measures such as leak detection, tank overfill alarms, and inspection schedules.
  • Information that was previously available in the plan such as facility diagrams and maps have been removed.

The plan is reviewed and updated every five years. The last time the plan was renewed was 2008.

The first version of the proposed new plan was submitted by Alyeska to the agency for a “sufficiency review” in October 2012. That review was to determine whether the plan contained sufficient information for the next step of the process, the public review. The agency found that the draft plan needed additional information before being reviewed by the public. Alyeska revised the plan and the agency deemed it satisfactory for review on February 14, 2013.

The council submitted requests for information in March. Once the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation reviews all input from the public, they will determine areas where more detail is needed, and issue requests for more information to Alyeska.

The next step will be for Alyeska to respond to the department.

The current plan expires on May 9, 2013.

Colder and saltier water increases toxic effects of dispersed oil

by

Temperature and salinity of water can have an effect on how toxic dispersed oil is to organisms in the environment, a council study has found.

The Canadian Centre for Offshore Oil, the Bedford Institute of Oceanography and Department of Fisheries and Oceans conducted a council-sponsored study to look at the absorption of dispersed crude oil during the early life stages of herring, salmon and cod when the fish are most sensitive to toxins.

For example, the study found two main causes of higher toxic effects on herring:

  1. Herring in cold waters develop at a slower rate than their warm water counterparts.
  2. The breakdown of chemicals in cold water is significantly slower than in warm water.

These two factors mean the herring are exposed to toxins for a longer period during their early, more sensitive, life stages.
The study also found that herring were 200 times more sensitive to chemically dispersed crude oil than previously reported.

The council has long endorsed mechanical recovery as the primary tool to combat an oil spill. Unlike dispersant use, which spreads the oil through the water, mechanical recovery with booms and skimmers removes oil from the water.

For more on the council’s research on oil spill dispersants, visit our Dispersants project page.

 

Skip to content