Testimony

• Captain Myles Boothe

  Chief, Marine Safety Division

  13th Coast Guard District, US Coast Guard
  Read statement

  Testimony

  Captain Myles Boothe

  Click here for Captain Boothe's testimony.

• Mr. Douglas Helton

  Incident Operations Coordinator

  Office of Response and Restoration, NOAA
  Read statement

  Testimony

  Mr. Douglas Helton

  Click here for Mr. Helton's testimony.

• Mr. David Sones

  Vice-Chair of Makah Tribal Council

  Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission
  Read statement

  Testimony

  Mr. David Sones

  United States Senate
  Committee on Commerce, Science
  And Transportation
  Washington, DC 20510-6125
  
  29 July 2005
  
  Senator Cantwell and Members of the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation: My name is David Sones. I am Vice Chairman of the Makah Tribal Council and I am speaking on behalf of the 19 other Washington State Treaty Tribes that make-up the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC). We appreciate the opportunity to present to you our Tribal interests and concerns in regard to the development and implementation of oil spill policy. We would like to thank Senator Cantwell and the Fisheries and Coast Guard Sub- Committee for holding this field hearing and for recognizing the mutual trust responsibility that exists between the Federal and Tribal governments to defend our treaty protected resources from the long-term cultural, economic and social impacts of a major oil spill. The NWIFC Tribes and Makah Tribe recognize that it is a matter of when, not if, the waterways in the state of Washington will experience another oil spill. In fact, as we are preparing this testimony the Canadian fishing vessel, Ocean Tor, has been drifting capsized for over 24 hours carrying four thousands gallons of fuel oil and 350 gallons of hydraulic oil through our Usual and Accustomed fishing area. In our case the Makah Tribe is not only a resource manager with the state and federal governments, we are first responders, contracted by major oil spill response organizations to assist in timely and capable responses to oil spills off the Olympic Coast and in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. These waters are transited by 10,000 commercial vessels annually carrying over 15 billion gallons of oil. Other NWIFC Tribes could offer the same oil spill response capability if properly trained by the spill response companies. The Makah Tribe has first hand experience with three of the largest oil spills in Washington State (General Meiggs, 2,300,000 gallons in 1972; Nestucca, 231,000 gallons in 1988, Tenyo Maru, 400,000 gallons in 1991). However, the Makah Tribe does not have a monopoly on suffering the negative impacts of oil spills. The Suquamish Tribe, Duamish, Puyallup and Muckelshoot Tribes have recently been impacted by the October 2004 Dalco Pass spill while the Suquamish Tribe was particularly impacted by the December 2003 spill at Point Wells. Like the spills off Cape Flattery, little was recovered from these incidents before oil hit the beach and tribal notification and the opportunity for tribal involvement in the decision-making process was difficult to establish. We believe the Washington State Legislature has recognized the importance of tribal notification from the time a spill is detected, but there is still a need to assure Tribal input in the Incident Command established during a spill. For example Tribal input in the Incident Command is crucial to the proposed USCG rule making aimed at requiring new application capabilities for oil spill dispersants while maintaining response-requirement levels for mechanical recovery. Decisions relating to dispersant use need to be made on a timely basis, but need to consider long-term impacts on the ability of tribes to harvest shellfish as well as impacts on the ability to recover un-dispersed oil through skimming or in situ burning. The Makah Tribe has repeatedly supported the maintenance of a full toolkit of oil spill response options. We Tribes depend on the federal government to assist us in developing the assurances that our treaty-protected interests will be represented when policy decisions are being made. These decisions include not only having a seat at the Incident Command but also formal consultation when major rulemakings are undertaken, such as the USCG proposed 2003 Removal Equipment Requirements and Alternative Technology Revisions (USCG-2001-8661). The Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement associated with this rule making has a written comment deadline of August 1, 2005. We concur with Washington State Department of Ecology that there continues to be a need to increase mechanical recovery equipment capabilities rather than decrease them. It is the NWIFC Tribal members position that treaty protected resources cannot be simply calculated as a cost of doing business reflected in the cost of a barrel retrieved scenario but rather represents far reaching cultural and economic implications. We also believe that offering a credit to offset purchases of in situ burn equipment does not encourage the maintenance of a full toolkit. To that end we are concerned that proposed DOE contingency planning standards that are more stringent than the proposed USCG rules will be interpreted by the USCG to “frustrate its purpose”, this rule has implications for “Federalism” which is explicitly allowed for under Executive Order 13132, but contradicted in the proposed USCG rule. The Makah Tribe realized the need for greater tribal involvement in the oil spill arena as well as the limitations in our technical ability to review and comment on various state and federal oil spill policy documents had become problematic. To address that shortcoming we solicited technical support from NOAA HAZMAT in Seattle to assist us with navigating and clarifying issues of particular concern to the Tribe. This initial request highlighted the underlying necessity to develop a partnership between the Makah Tribe and NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program through Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. We hope to develop similar collaborations with the EPA, Coast Guard and Navy next year. This collaboration between the National Marine Sanctuary Program and the Makah Tribe is just beginning yet progressing well. The necessity of stationing dedicated response gear became evident to the MTC when in order to respond to the Dalco Pass spill much of the spill response gear situated at Neah Bay had to be redirected to other areas. The Washington State DOE just released a study showing that 15 additional spill response vessels would be needed to respond to a 420,000-gallon spill in the San Juan Islands. If such additional assets are needed in close proximity to four oil refineries where the majority of our spill response assets are pre-positioned, the same or even more would be needed to address a spill in the more remote waters of the Olympic coast. We support the DOE’s call for training fishermen to assist in spill response and believe that tribal fishermen may be particularly helpful in that they are more likely to be present in the State year round. While the Makah Tribe is part of the region’s front line of defense on the outer coast we believe equipment and training that is reconciled to ocean conditions can be further developed. It would be a considerable improvement if the on-water identification phase of an oil spill response were conducted as soon as possible after an incident occurs. We need to build the capacity to provide the Makah Indian Tribe and other NWIFC member Tribes with personnel trained in such procedures and to have equipment pre-positioned to respond to the spill once it is detected. We recognize that the Strait of Juan de Fuca receives more vessel traffic bound to ports in British Columbia and Washington State than any other water body in North America. Further, we understand that current projections suggest trade volumes are expected to double or triple in the next 10 to 20 years. We understand these projections to affect an increase in the number and size of ships calling on our waters. These larger ships require larger tugs to tow them, especially off the coast where high winds and waves counteract a tug’s ability to assist a vessel. The rescue tug stationed in Neah Bay is only available on a seasonal basis and only assured State funding for another three years. The Makah Tribe fully supports the year-round positioning of a rescue tug in Neah Bay outfitted with multi-mission capability. The outer coast of the State of Washington includes the Olympic National Park, three National Wildlife Refuges and Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, numerous species listed under the Endangered Species Act, and the four tribal reservations that are located there. While the federal government has much vested interest in protecting the outer coast from the impacts of an oil spill it makes sense for the federal government to support year round funding of a rescue tug. The Makah Tribal Council believes addressing these interests translates to increasing the salvage, rescue, and towing capability for the outer coast. According to the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Program’s efforts to monitor vessel compliance with the Area To Be Avoided (ATBA) off the coast, 142 tugs with oil barges transited through the ATBA in 2004. While this represents a 75% compliance rate of the tugs and barges that avoided the ATBA, of the remaining 25%, just one accident with a laden oil barge can impact us for over 10 years. We therefore view near shore transits of laden oil barges to be one of the greatest risks to our treaty protected resources and our way of life. Two National Academy of Sciences reports on the state of US salvage capability point out the immediate need for improved salvage capacity in the United States. The US Coast Guard is tasked with completing the Salvage and Firefighting rule making as part of OPA’90. During the December 6th 2004 incident involving the Selendang Ayu over 400,000 gallons of oil spilled in the waters surrounding the Aleutian Islands. The Coast Guard and the State of Alaska, despite expending considerable resources in responding to the incident were unable to prevent the Selendang Ayu from grounding. Governor Murkowsky of Alaska has since called for Coast Guard vessels to be equipped with rescue towing capability. This option should be kept in mind for remote areas such as Neah Bay. Alternatively, uniquely capable Navy Powhatan Class salvage tugs could be strategically stationed in Neah Bay and operated by either private contractors, Military Sealift Command, the Navy or the Coast Guard. In our own waters during a November 11th incident with a cargo ship the Neah Bay Rescue tug had to travel 16 hours round trip Neah Bay to Port Angeles and back in order to pick up salvage equipment and boom – resources that could reside in Neah Bay. The salvage master and dive crew could have been transited into Neah Bay rather than having the tug make the trip to PA. Fortunately the bulk carrier Thrasyvoulos V was well offshore when the call came in. Passage of a strong Salvage and Firefighting rule should be a priority of this year. The National Academy of Science has also sponsored two separate reports on the state of knowledge regarding oil spill dispersants. We are reviewing this second study carefully and are concerned to find that the unknowns are still unknown. The lack of solid conclusions about the efficacy and effects of dispersants in cold water and nearshore environments raises concerns with the Makah Tribe and the Northwest Indian Fish Commission Tribes in regard to the appropriate application of dispersants in our waters and the rigor with which such information is being sought. Finally, in order for the Makah Tribe and the NW Indian Fisheries Commission to understand a real world picture of our state of readiness for oil spill response we need to conduct oil spill drill. We know how difficult it is to respond to a spill in our region from first hand experience, we do not have a clear understanding on how that overall capability has changed or improved in recent years. The Makah Tribe would do its part in assisting with the coordination of a spill drill to be conducted off the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary enabling us a realistic evaluation of our oil spill response capabilities. A goal of the original OCNMS Management Plan was to conduct an oil spill drill within the sanctuary boundaries. In closing we appreciate the Senator’s leadership in reinstating the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) and increasing its cap to $3 billion. We respectfully request that tribal governments be allowed to draw from this account in the same manner as the USCG and EPA. This ability will increase our capacity to address the risks associated with the increasing volumes of trade moving through our shared waters. To summarize, the Makah Tribe and the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission Tribes stand ready to constructively contribute the level of oil spill readiness in Washington State through our participation in the development of oil spill policy, the Incident Command System and as spill response contractors. However, in order maximize our contributions, increased levels of consultation will be needed with the tribes before and during our next oil spill. We see opportunities for improvements to our oil spill prevention and response capabilities at the Federal level through the finalization of the Salvage and Firefighting rule, continued funding of a rescue tug in Neah Bay, oil spill drills being used to identify where to stockpile equipment appropriate to the operating environment, evaluation of the oil barge traffic moving through the ATBA and the ability for State and Tribal governments to exceed federal response standards where appropriate. We have a mutual trust obligation to protect the treaty resources of the 20 federally recognized Indian tribes in the Pacific Northwest. We appreciate Senator Cantwell’s leadership in calling for this hearing and look forward to working with her and the Committee to see that the recommendations are implemented. Thank you, Dave Sones Vice Chairman Makah Tribal Council

• Mr. Dale Jensen

  Spill Prevention, Preparedness and Response Program Manager

  Washington State Department of Ecology
  Read statement

  Testimony

  Mr. Dale Jensen

  Click here for Mr. Jensen's testimony.

• Mr. Fred Felleman

  Northwest Director

  Ocean Advocates
  Read statement

  Witness Panel 2

  Mr. Fred Felleman

  Click here for Mr. Felleman's testimony.

• Mr. Richard Wright

  Pacific/Northwest Region Vice President

  Marine Spill Response Corporation
  Read statement

  Witness Panel 2

  Mr. Richard Wright

  Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
  Transportation
  August 1, 2005
  Seattle, Washington
  
  Marine Spill Response Corporation (MSRC)
  Richard Wright
  MSRC Pacific/Northwest Region Vice President
  
  
  Good morning. My name is Richard Wright. I am the Region Vice President of the Marine Spill Response Corporation Pacific/Northwest Region that encompasses Washington, Oregon, and Hawaii. Prior to the merger last April of MSRC and Clean Sound Cooperative, Inc., I was the President of the latter response organization. I am also a retired U. S. Coast Guard Captain. The Marine Spill Response Corporation (MSRC) is the largest oil spill response and clean up company operating in the United States. MSRC is a private, not-for-profit organization founded in 1990 by industry as a direct result of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. MSRC is funded by the Marine Preservation Association (MPA) whose Member companies include those involved in the transportation of petroleum products by water, refining companies, pipeline companies, energy companies as well as various other types of shippers. Since the passage of OPA-90, MPA member companies have funded in excess of $1 billion dollars to MSRC to develop and enhance oil spill response capability. In April of this year, MSRC merged with Clean Sound Cooperative Inc., an Everett, Washington based, industry funded not-for-profit response organization in existence since 1971 to provide spill response services to the oil industry in western Washington. At the time of the merger, both MSRC and Clean Sound independently had significant resources that greatly exceeded the U. S. Coast Guard planning capacities required to meet both Facility Response Plans as well as Vessel Response Plans under OPA-90 regulations. This merger has enhanced the readiness and response capabilities in the State of Washington by making a larger inventory of resources available as well as access to the broader resource base of MSRC on the west coast and nationally. Importantly, the merged organization provides the ability for a Member or the U. S. Coast Guard to call-out and manage all of the combined resources with a single phone call. As we all know, in an emergency situation, minimizing the interfaces and simplifying decision-making is critical to the success of the response – particularly in the earliest hours. The merger combines the talents of both MSRC and the former Clean Sound, who together have responded to over 500 spills throughout the United States. In addition, a Memorandum of Agreement between MSRC and Burrard Clean Operations in British Columbia, Canada, affords MSRC access to the considerable assets of that response organization. Nationally, MSRC has 400 dedicated personnel and 88 equipment sites along the U. S. Coastline including the U. S. Caribbean and the Hawaiian Islands. MSRC’s entire inventory includes 15 multi-million dollar state-of- the art “Responder” Class Oil Spill Response Vessels and over 100 additional supporting oil spill response vessels and storage barges, 600,000 feet of boom, 240 skimming systems, and mobile emergency tele-communications capability. In addition to our own inventory, MSRC has contracts with approximately 90 environmental service providers at over 200 locations nationwide to provide additional resources at the time of a spill. In Washington State alone, at manned sites in Tacoma, Port Angeles, Anacortes, Bellingham, Seattle, and Everett, MSRC has over 60 full-time personnel managing the most comprehensive inventory of response resources and equipment in any one area in the entire United States. This includes dedicated 16 primary response vessels, over 40 support vessels, approximately 120,000 feet of boom, 44 skimming systems, and four large barges (with a total capacity of over 94,000 barrels or almost 4,000,000 gallons) to ensure that recovered oil/water product does not constrain the clean-up. While the above information may seem to be mere facts, please allow me to put this level of resource base into perspective. Guidelines developed by the United States Coast Guard for classification of Oil Spill Removal Organizations (OSROs) are based on the OSRO’s ability to bring quantities of resources to various locations within certain timeframes. These resources include skimming capacity, booming capacity, and storage capacity. MSRC has received the highest rating available under this system that was developed as part of OPA-90. Further, through industry commitment and funding, MSRC’s resource base is far in excess of what the regulatory guidelines require, even for those with the highest ratings. For example, depending on which location in the Puget Sound area is selected, our skimming capacities exceed such guidelines for initial timeframe requirements by at least fivefold. Similarly, our storage and booming capacities exceed the federal guidelines by over more than double, and in some cases by as much as ten-fold. The above are calculated only referencing MSRC owned and dedicated equipment and not contractor resources that would greatly supplement this capability. Obviously, the above greatly demonstrates the commitment on the part of MSRC and the funding companies of MPA to exceed federal requirements, thereby ensuring a strong and robust response capability in the event of an incident in Washington State. Furthermore, all the MPA member companies operate a significant exercise and drill program on a regular basis with MSRC to ensure that not only the resource base is constantly tested, but also to ensure that the management processes are in place to successfully respond to any discharges. I am available to answer any questions the Committee may have.

• Dr. Thomas Leschine

  Director of the School of Marine Affairs

  University of Washington
  Read statement

  Witness Panel 2

  Dr. Thomas Leschine

  Click here for Dr. Leschine's testimony.

• Mr. Frank Holmes

  Northwest Regional Manager

  Western States Petroleum Association
  Read statement

  Witness Panel 2

  Mr. Frank Holmes

  Written Statement of
  Frank E. Holmes
  Manager – Northwest Region
  Western States Petroleum Association
  Before the
  U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
  Transportation Subcommittee on Fisheries and Coast Guard
  
  Field hearing on risk of oil pollution from vessels in
  Washington State
  
  August 1, 2005
  10:00 a.m.
  
  Port of Seattle
  Seattle, Washington
  
  Good Morning my name is Frank Holmes. I am the Manager for the Northwest Region for Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA). WSPA is the petroleum trade association for the six western states. Our members produce, refine, market and transport petroleum and petroleum products. We provide the transportation fuels that transparently move the entire economy of the Northwest, and we do so while responsibly managing virtually every drop of oil and product throughout the distribution system. Thank you for inviting us to participate on this panel today to discuss the very important topic of oil spill prevention and response in the state of Washington. I am surprised that for a hearing on oil spills the oil industry was not contacted to participate until last Wednesday evening for today’s Senate Hearing. Our members are committed to oil spill prevention and timely and effective response in the case of an incident. Washington State is a major refining center with five refineries located in the western portion of the state. These five refineries have a combined crude oil processing capacity of approximately 621,000 barrels per day (in 2003 operated at 94% of capacity). Washington does not have any oil and gas production so all of the petroleum the state consumes needs to be transported into the state. 85% of the crude oil refined in the state is transported to the refineries by tanker, with the remaining being brought in by pipeline from Canada. 38% of petroleum products produced in Washington are transported by vessel with 50% being transported by pipeline. The Puget Sound is a safe waterway and supports marine vessel activities from both the United States and Canada. This marine vessel activity includes a wide range of uses from transportation of goods and products, to military operations, to fishing, to recreational boaters. The petroleum industry has always been supportive of a robust oil spill prevention and response program. We willingly pay the barrel tax that funds the Department of Ecology’s Oil Spill Prevention and Response Program. The industry is a very active participant in the Oil Spill Prevention and Response actions in Washington State. The industry is engaged in every venue possible to consider improvements in oil spill prevention and response along with investing heavily at our facilities and in new vessels to protect the Puget Sound. Here are some of the more recent and ongoing examples: 1. Through the Pacific States / British Columbia Oil Spill Task Force, the shipping routes were moved further offshore so the tanker traffic of persistent oil is 50 miles or more offshore along with the tug and barge traffic being 25 miles offshore. 2. In cooperation with the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, an Area to Be Avoided (ATBA) was established which moved vessel traffic entering and leaving the Strait of Juan de Fuca further away from the sensitive areas. 3. The Coast Guard moved the entry buoy to the Strait of Juan de Fuca 10 miles further offshore – again to be more protective by moving all vessels further offshore. 4. Under the OPA 90 the oil industry is spending billions of dollars to build the safest double hull / redundant system tank ships in the world. 5. U.S. and Canadian industry jointly instituted the International Tug of Opportunity System (ITOS) to track and identify tugs within the Puget Sound that could be called for support if needed by a vessel. ITOS is now being enhanced with the installation of the Automatic Identification System (AIS) by the Coast Guard which, in real-time identifies most vessels over 65 feet and towing vessels over 26 feet. 6. The industry supported placement of an equitably funded dedicated tug at the entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca during the 9-month long Oil Spill Risk Management stakeholder process in 1999 and 2000 and subsequent legislative funding efforts. 7. The petroleum industry is spending millions of dollars annually to fund Oil Spill Response Organizations (OSROs) such as MSRC, located here in the Puget Sound. This funding provides for the acquisition of appropriate equipment and the continuous staffing of trained personnel. 8. Individual companies have expended large amounts for dedicated equipment at their facilities and have ongoing extensive training and drill programs that keep employees ready to respond in the case of an incident. 9. Industry participates in the Puget Sound Harbor Safety Committee which has developed the Puget Sound Harbor Safety Plan and Standards of Care that focus on reducing the risks of spills. 10. Industry participates in the NW Area Committee which developed the Area Contingency Plan for the Puget Sound. Industry and OSROs have been instrumental in testing the protection strategies for the geographic Response Plans (GRP) for sensitive sites throughout Puget Sound. 11. The petroleum industry provides the bulk of the funding for the Washington State Department of Ecology Oil Spill program and the State’s Contingency fund. 12. The Washington State Legislature has established an Oil Spill Advisory Council under the Governor’s office that is currently being set up. Industry hopes to actively participate in the council’s efforts. 13. Industry is currently an active participant in ongoing oil spill regulatory activities such as: a. The re-write of the Washington State Oil Spill Contingency Plan Regulation through a stakeholders work group. This effort will include a review of the response equipment requirements for the state. b. Participation in the stakeholder work group to develop Oil Transfer Regulations as required under legislation passed last year. This regulatory effort focuses on booming and manpower requirements during transfer operations. c. Industry has worked very closely with the USCG on the Outer Coast Logistics Project to develop an initial database identifying logistical, and communication needs as well as local tribal and agency contact information. This effort is continuing: Another USCG drill is planned for this fall. This is not a comprehensive list of activities but I hope it gave you a sense of the very large amount of serious attention being put toward the issue of Oil Spill Prevention and Response. NO ONE wants to spill oil. Industry is actively engaged in conducting the appropriate activities and practices to reduce the risk inherent in the transportation of oil and to prevent spills from happening. Industry is also trained and ready to respond to any spill incident that may occur in Washington. Thank you for inviting me to participate.