• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Oil SpillProgram Update
The U.S. EPA’s Oil Program Center Report
ABOUT THE UPDATE
EPA’s “Oil Spill Program Update” is produced quarterly, using information provided by EPA Regional staff, and in accordance withRegions’ information needs. The goal of the Update is to provide straight-forward information to keep EPA Regional staff, otherfederal agencies and departments, industries and businesses, and the regulated community current with the latest developments. TheUpdate is distributed in hardcopy and is available on the Oil Program homepage at
www.epa.gov/oilspill 
.
The NCPCelebrates its30 Anniversary
th
The National Oil and HazardousSubstance Pollution ContingencyPlan (NCP) celebrated its 30thanniversary on November 13, 1998.In the 30 years since it was adopted,the NCP has continued to changeand improve. Responders continueto learn from events like theAshland and
 Exxon Valdez
spillsand incorporate these lessons intothe NCP. In addition, the passageof landmark legislation such as theClean Water Act, CERCLA, andthe Oil Pollution Act of 1990 havebroadened the purview of the NCP.Although expanded in scope, itcontinues to ensure the most nimbleand effective response to the threatsthat oil and hazardous materialsspills pose to human health and theenvironment.
 Early Response Efforts
Prior to 1968, a voluntary“interagency agreement” forresponse to water emergenciesexisted among several offices and major spills of oil and otheragencies. There was no fund for hazardous substances. In Marchresponse and no formal obligation. 1967, the tanker
Torrey Canyon
Several agencies had grounded and sank off Land’s End,responsibilities–for example, the England, spilling 33 million gallonsOffice of Emergency Planning was of crude oil. More than 100 milesresponsible for coordinating an of England’s Cornish Coast, andemergency water preparedness approximately 50 miles of theprogram with other national Brittany Coast in France wereemergency plans; the Department fouled with the oil. The oilof Health, Education, and Welfare damaged beaches, wildlife, fishing,was responsible for developing a and tourist economies. To learnnationwide program to assure how it might cope with such aadequate safe water supplies in an catastrophe in U.S. waters, theemergency; and the Department of United States sent a six-personAgriculture was responsible for team representing several Federalproviding guidance to farmers and Agencies to observe the cleanup of food processors in the conservation the unprecedented spill. The teamand proper and safe use of water, found that there were no clear linesfor managing national forests to of authority, no response plans, andprovide an adequate flow of quality no overall strategy for the cleanup.water, for assisting watershedproject sponsors in providingimpoundments, for providing watersupply forecast information basedupon snowpack surveys, and formaking state and local governmentofficials aware of the availablewater supplies.Until 1967, there was little President to the Secretaries of recognition of the need to address Defense; Interior; Transportation;and prepare for the threats posed by Health, Education, and Welfare;When the team returned, it drafted areport that detailed the status of U.S. spill technology, design of vessels, available equipment, andskilled manpower and presented itto the President of the UnitedStates. This report led to a June 7,1968 memorandum from the
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONTENTS
TheNCPCelebratesits30 
th 
Anniversary ............. 1TheOilPollutionActof1990.. 11 AnniversaryoftheAshlan
th 
OilSpillinFloreffe,PA .... 5 10 AnniversaryofExxonValde
th 
SpillandRestoration Update ................. Region6PilotSPCCExpediteEnforcementProgram .... FirstInlandAreaPlanning/GIS WorkgroupMeetingHeld . 11SPCCAvertsCostsanDamages .............. 11RecentOilSpillNews....... 1
and to the Director of the Office of teams and contingency plans. At necessary to report the incident toScience and Technology. The the national level, the National the JOT. Phase II consisted of memo directed them to develop a Interagency Committee (NIC) was defensive actions to be initiated asnational contingency plan for in charge of reviewing regional soon as possible after discovery andresponding to oil spills. planning efforts, coordinating notification, including putting
The 1968 National Multi-AgencyOil and Hazardous MaterialsContingency Plan
The group of Federal Agenciesdeveloped the National Multi-Agency Oil and HazardousMaterials Contingency Plan, whichwas signed into law on November13, 1968. The objectives were todevelop effective systems fordiscovering and reporting theexistence of a pollution incident,containing the discharge, applyingtechniques for cleanup anddisposal, recovering cleanup costs,and enforcing federal statutes. TheSecretary of the Interior assumedprimary responsibility andestablished a division in the FederalWater Pollution ControlAdministration (FWPCA) inJanuary 1970.The plan established a nationalreaction team and provided for theestablishment of regional reactionreports from the Joint Operations physical barriers or booms in place,Team (JOT) and the Regional or using chemicals or otherOperations Teams (ROTs). materials to restrain the pollutantReports from the JOT and ROTs and its effects on water-relatedfocused on the handling of major or resources. Phase III was theunusual pollution incidents in order responsibility of the OSC. Phaseto improve contingency plans, and IV was carried out by individualmaking recommendations on agencies in accordance withtraining. The Department of existing statutes.Interior representative to the NICserved as chair, and the U.S. CoastGuard representative served as thevice-chair.The FWPCA headed the JOT andthe Coast Guard provided theJOT’s assembly center. Theassembly center consisted of acommunications and map room inthe Coast Guard Headquarters. TheJOT responded to pollutionincidents which exceeded regionalcapabilities, overlapped boundaries,or involved national security or a“major hazard.” The ROTshandled individual response efforts,headed by an On-SceneCommander (OSC), usuallyprovided by the Coast Guard forcoastal and major inland navigablewaters. The plan divided responseto an incident into four separatecategories: Phase I, Discovery andNotification; Phase II, Containmentand Countermeasures; Phase III,Cleanup, Restoration, and Disposal;and Phase IV, Recovery of Damages and Enforcement.Phase I was the first response actionto a pollution incident. Theincident was reported to the ROT,either directly, or by local police,fire, or port authorities. The ROTwould then determine if it was
 Further Changes
In 1970, the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) wasformed and the responsibilities forthe response activities weretransferred from the Department of Interior to the EPA. In 1972, theClean Water Act (CWA) waspassed, requiring that the 1968response plan to be revised toinclude hazardous substances, aswell as oil discharges. Section 311of the CWA provides the EPA andCoast Guard with the authority toestablish a program for preventing,preparing for, and responding to oilspills that occur in navigablewaters. In 1980, the passing of Superfund legislation furtherbroadened the scope of the NCP tocover emergency removal actions atSuperfund sites.The latest revisions to the NCP, in1994, reflect provisions of the OilPollution Act of 1990 (OPA). TheOPA expanded the NCP in a three-tiered approach: the Federalgovernment is required to direct allpublic and private response effortsfor certain types of spill events;Area Committees must developdetailed, location-specific AreaContingency Plans (ACPs); andowners or operators of vessels and
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Kenneth Biglane – NCP Pioneer
The 30th anniversary of the National Contingency Plan (NCP) not onlyrepresents a milestone achievement in environmental protection, itdemonstrates the commitment of the people that made the NCP areality 30 years ago and of those who continue to ensure that we takeevery prudent measure to prevent and prepare for oil spills. As one ofthe earliest proponents of a national effort to prevent and prepare forspills, Kenneth Biglane stands out as an example of this commitment.Throughout the 1950s, in his early career with the State of Louisiana,Biglane worked to control oil pollution and reduce its impacts on localwater quality. In 1967, he was among those dispatched to observeand learn from the
Torrey Canyon 
disaster. The careful analysis ofBiglane and his colleagues became the basis of the NCP. Biglane’scareer followed the growth and transformations of the NCP from theDepartment of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution ControlAdministration, to the newly formed Environmental Protection Agency,where he served as Chairman of the National Response Team (NRT),and Director of the Oil and Special Materials Control Division of theOffice of Water. With the passage of Superfund and establishmentthe Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Biglane served asthe director of the Hazardous Response Support Division, whichincluded the Oil Program, and continued in his role as NRT chair.Kenneth Biglane gained recognition as a national and internationalexpert in all aspects of oil and hazardous materials spills. Even afterhis retirement, he was called on to provide assistance on the
Exxon Valdez 
spill and continued to participate in training sessions for on-scene coordinators and other program staff.Kenneth Biglane was committed to the notion that oil spill preventionand environmental protection were served through the cooperation ofgovernment and industry, and through the coordinated efforts ofvarious federal state and local actors. These characteristics remainstrengths of the NCP today, allowing it to draw on the best skillsavailable to meet response needs and continue to adapt to change.
certain facilities that pose a seriousthreat to the environment mustprepare their own facility responseplans.
Today’s National Contingency Plan
The present NCP retains the samebasic structure as the original 1968plan. The National InteragencyCommittee is replaced by aNational Response Team, theRegional Operations Team byRegional Response Teams, and On-Scene Commanders by On-SceneCoordinators. Because the EPAwas not yet established when the1968 NCP was written, some of theresponsibilities in the present NCPare now shifted into its purviewinstead of the Department of Interior’s or the Coast Guard’s.Each of the levels has differentresponsibilities during a spillresponse.
The National Response Team
-TheNRT is made up of 16 federalagencies, with EPA serving as chairand the U.S. Coast Guard servingas vice-chair. The team does notrespond directly to spills, but assistsby providing information, technicaladvice, and access to resources andequipment during an incident. Inthe event that response is needed bymore than one Region, the NRThelps coordinate response efforts.
 Regional Response Teams
-Thereare 13 RRTs–one for each Region,one for Alaska, one for theCaribbean, and one for the PacificBasin. The RRTs do not respondon-scene, but provide assistance asrequested by the OSC. They areprimarily planning, policy, andcoordinating bodies that assist stateand local governments in preparing,planning, and training foremergency response.
On-Scene Coordinators
-OSCs are Committees, made up of federal,designated for each Region and are state, and local agencyresponsible for coordinating all representatives, develop ACPs forefforts during an incident, including specific areas within the state.response by federal, state, and localagencies, and responsible parties. Although it continues to serve itsThey also provide local support and original purpose, the NCP hasinformation in their response undergone many changes since itcommunities. OSCs are notified of was first enacted. Early lessonsspills by the National Response have helped to strengthen and shapeCenter, which receives notification the plan into its present form–a planof all chemical, radiological, oil, that promotes and establishes linesand biological releases. Under the of coordination and planningdirection of the OSC, Area throughout all levels of response.
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...