Oil Spill Management—The Brazoria County, Texas Approach

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 (1) ◽  
pp. 913-914
Author(s):  
Jimmy A. Salinas
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Exercise Program ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
The Public ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Active Responding ◽  
Protection Strategies ◽  
Amount Of Knowledge ◽  
National Preparedness ◽  
Response Exercise

ABSTRACT Brazoria County, Texas has established a partnership of government, industry, and the public to ensure that management of spills in this county considers the local expertise, resources, and concerns when developing protection strategies and implementing spill response plans. In 1990 the Mega Borg oil spill, which occurred in the Gulf of Mexico, was initially projected to impact Brazoria County beaches and wetlands. In response to this threat the Brazoria County Judge, who is the Local On-Scene Coordinator (LOSC) for the county during emergencies, convened a meeting of the local emergency planning committee (LEPC) and the county's emergency management office. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the spill threat and determine what action, if any, could be taken. The Judge also called on various county officials, industry specialists, local federal trustees, and local environmentalists to participate. The meeting resulted in the establishment of an Oil Spill Subcommittee (OSS) to the LEPC. This subcommittee worked quickly to develop a protection plan should the oil spill threat become a reality. Specific protection priorities for the county's coastal areas was developed and included a contingency of county and industry responders who were prepared to initiate protective measures if required. The County Judge delivered the county's plan, concerns, and support to the Unified Incident Command (UIC) in Galveston, Texas. Since its inception the OSS has been active responding to spill threats, and participating in area wide National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) Exercises in the county. The uniqueness of the OSS is that it draws expertise from different stake holders in the county and melds a local partnership that brings a vast amount of knowledge, experience, and resources in a unified effort. The Brazoria County OSS continues to improve its organization and stands ready to assist spill management when an incident threatens Brazoria County.

THE NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS FOR RESPONSE EXERCISE PROGRAM (PREP) A PAPER TIGER OR DYNAMIC PROCESS?

2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 969-972
Keyword(s):  
Exercise Program ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Incident Management ◽  
Hazardous Substance ◽  
Worst Case ◽  
Continuous Growth ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Self Evaluation ◽  
National Preparedness ◽  
Response Exercise

ABSTRACT The National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program has been in effect for over a decade. There is no doubt that it has been a principal factor in moving the response community from the concept of developing incident management from scratch, to unified performance through organized teams. However, in the past couple of years the PREP approach has reached a certain level and stalled. When one goes to exercise design meetings throughout the country and commonly hear, “we are not ready to deal with this issue,” one must wonder why plans cannot or will not be fully tested after a decade of experience. Is the program working to the degree that is necessary and achievable? For continuous growth of the response community's level of competency in the Incident Command System and oil/hazardous substance response operations, a dynamic exercise program must exist. It is pertinent to ask?Has the National PREP Program reached status quo, and if so are we willing to change in order to improve?What is gained by testing the initial 24-hour period of the response over and over?Do core components of a plan tested during smaller exercises satisfy the effort that would be required for the Worst Case Discharge event?What works best, self-evaluation or independent evaluation?Is agency verification of exercises being done?Are unresolved issues and lessons learned documented, studied, and resolved before the next training or spill?Are lessons learned shared between companies for incorporation into plans?Do either the national or state modified PREP programs promote increased capability of oil spill removal organizations and spill management teams at local, regional, and national levels?Is the true availability of response resources tested through PREP? This paper will compare and contrast the National PREP program conducted by Federal Agencies, to the State of Washington's modified PREP program. The authors will answer these questions and provide recommendations for changes to PREP that will create a more dynamic and meaningful training program.

Santa Monica Bay Prep 94: MAJOR SPILL EXERCISE PLANNING/EXECUTION1

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 1031-1032
Author(s):  
Kara M. Satra
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Exercise Program ◽  
Incident Command System ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
The People ◽  
Santa Monica Bay ◽  
Santa Monica ◽  
Response Exercise ◽  
Responsible Party

ABSTRACT The largest simulated response conducted under the most realistic conditions since the grounding of the Exxon Valdez has been captured on video. It shows the production and execution of the Preparedness for Response Exercise Program oil spill exercise held in September 1994 in Santa Monica Bay. The exercise involved over 500 people from more than 60 organizations. Chevron played the role of responsible party in this simulation of a spill of about 10,000 barrels of crude oil. The video focuses on the incident command system and the people for whom prevention and preparedness is a daily business.

LESSONS LEARNED, BEST PRACTICES, AND COMMON SENSE FROM U.S. GOVERNMENT-LED NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS FOR RESPONSE EXERCISE PROGRAM (PREP) DRILLS

2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 357-361
Author(s):  
Dennis Cashman
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Common Sense ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Exercise Program ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
And Control ◽  
National Preparedness ◽  
Response Exercise

ABSTRACT Professionals who design or participate in oil and hazardous material exercises would benefit from knowing historical lessons learned and best practices relative to the design and execution of exercises before they begin to develop or participate in similar exercises. In accordance with the “National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) Guidelines” the staff at the USCG National Strike Force Coordination Center in Elizabeth City, NC has been in the business of designing, executing, and evaluating U.S. government-led PREP drills since 1993 and have accumulated abundant lessons learned and best practices relative to large scale exercises that would be beneficial to share with the response community. PREP exercises typically require six months to plan and design, three days to execute the drill with up to 300 participants, and three days to draft lessons learned. This paper will focus on lessons learned, problem areas, best practices, work arounds, and common sense pertaining to numerous subjects during the life cycle of designing and executing an exercise such as: Initial Design Phase; Functions of a Joint Design Team; Pre exercise Training; Play and Control Spaces; Communications; Incident Command System; Funding; Logistics; Notifications; Objectives; Public Affairs; and Improvements to Area Contingency Plans.

Cooperative Oil Spill Training—It's in Your Own Backyard

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 (1) ◽  
pp. 367-371
Author(s):  
Jim E. Peschel
Keyword(s):  
Pacific Northwest ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Puget Sound ◽  
Host Community ◽  
Management Skills ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Training Costs ◽  
Actual Equipment ◽  
Protection Strategies ◽  
Spill Control

ABSTRACT In August 1997 the training and education workgroup of the Northwest Area Committee sponsored an Oil Spill Control Course specifically tailored to responders in the Pacific Northwest. The training provided management skills to supervisory field staff within the Operations Section of the Incident Command System. The course focused on personnel and equipment resources located in the Puget Sound region. The syllabus was designed, coordinated, and developed by a consortium of Federal and State regulatory agencies as well as the primary Oil Spill Removal Organizations in the Northwest region. Each agency participated without expending additional training costs by exchanging services-in-kind for quotas. An added benefit of this cooperation was the opportunity to train alongside responders from other agencies and organizations while using the actual equipment available within the region. The course used lectures and field exercises to focus on the Northwest Area Contingency Plan, Geographic Response Plans, oil product identification, shoreline countermeasures, cleanup techniques, and protection strategies typical within the Puget Sound operating environment. By using local instructors, actual equipment, and realistic scenarios, the local response community can continue to benefit from this type of tailor-made training and focus on the actual needs of the host community.

Designing, Executing, and Evaluating a U.S. Government-Led National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) Drill

2003 ◽  
Vol 2003 (1) ◽  
pp. 597-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis Cashman ◽  
Jackie Stephens ◽  
LT Thomas Boyles
Keyword(s):  
Exercise Program ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Initial Contact ◽  
Contact Phase ◽  
Production Phase ◽  
Execution Phase ◽  
Planning Cycle ◽  
Phase Coordination ◽  
National Preparedness ◽  
Response Exercise

ABSTRACT Planning, designing, and executing an area exercise in accordance with the National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) Guidelines is an extensive time and resource undertaking. Since it's inception in 1991, the National Strike Force Coordination Center (NSFCC) has designed, updated and tested a successful exercise development process. This overview of the process outlines requirements necessary to manage a coordinated exercise development, execution, and follow up lessons learned. The process follows a 24-week cycle depending upon the needs of the organizations being exercised. The NSFCC must adhere to and follow the planning cycle because: at least three other government-led exercises are undergoing development at any given time; adequate time is needed for the Joint Design Team to plan effectively and provide the required data to the NSFCC; members of the Area Committee need time to accomplish their own exercise preparation processes; and time is needed to produce the exercise manuals and arrange logistics for personnel and equipment. The cycle is broken into six phases: the Initial Contact Phase, Coordination & Initial Production Phase, Interim Production Phase, Final Production Phase, Exercise Execution Phase, and Report Development Phase (Figure 1).

Massachusetts First Responder Exercises: Preparing Local Communities for Oil Spill Response

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 300125
Author(s):  
Richard Packard ◽  
Mike Popovich ◽  
John Stengel
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
Exercise Program ◽  
First Responders ◽  
Coastal Resources ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Sensitive Areas ◽  
Environmentally Sensitive Areas ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Environmentally Sensitive

As a result of the Buzzards Bay oil spill in 2003, and subsequent passage of the Oil Spill Act of 2004, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, through its Department of Environmental Protection's (MassDEP) Oil Spill Program, has developed a comprehensive, 3-tiered program to protect coastal resources. The program includes three elements: 1) the development of 160 Geographic Response Plans (GRP) to protect environmentally sensitive areas, 2) the acquisition and distribution of 83 oil spill response equipment trailers to coastal communities and, 3) the development of a training and exercise program to better prepare local first responders, including fire departments, police departments, harbormasters and other town officials, to respond to oil spills that threaten environmentally sensitive areas in their communities. This training and exercise program has increased first responders competency and skills as they relate to oil spill response resulting in a higher degree of readiness and preparedness amongst first responders throughout coastal Massachusetts. The program follows standard Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation protocols with clearly defined goals and objectives. Each exercise includes personnel from multiple municipalities working together to achieve the common goal of protecting coastal resources. The objectives of each exercise include, 1) foster inter-agency planning and coordination by providing the opportunity for local responders to work with each other and with Federal and State responders. 2) deploy a GRP protective booming tactic during a simulated incident, 3) promote resource coordination among local responders by coordinating use of assets from participating towns and agencies, 4) improve local oil spill preparedness by deploying equipment from pre-positioned trailers, providing participants hands-on experience in the field, and 5) evaluate the effectiveness of the booming tactic and identify any modifications necessary. Participants utilize the Incident Command System (ICS), operating within a Unified Command structure, testing their ability to effectively communicate goals, objectives and tactics.

Taking a Step Back. Exercises as Training Opportunities.

2003 ◽  
Vol 2003 (1) ◽  
pp. 1055-1058
Author(s):  
Joseph Gleason
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Opportunity To Learn ◽  
The United States ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Response Team ◽  
Personnel Turnover ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Response Exercise

ABSTRACT Historically, many response exercises conducted by the United States Coast Guard and other oil spill response stakeholders have been conducted as functional or full-scale exercises. With the increased demands placed on many U.S. agencies as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11’ 2001, there is a greater need than ever to ensure that time spent in training and exercises produces positive and tangible results for the participants. In preparation for the joint US/Canadian response exercise, CANUSLANT 2002, the U.S. and Canadian Coast Guards decided to take a step back and look at the lessons learned from previous exercises. Based on this review, the Joint Response Team (JRT) decided to focus CANUSLANT 2002 as a training opportunity and to work on the lessons learned that were repeatedly identified in earlier CANUSLANT exercises. Perhaps the most common exercise conducted in oil spill response is the functional “command post” exercise where exercise participants are assigned to ICS (Incident Command System) staff elements. Participants then respond to an exercise scenario and prescripted injects that are provided to drive participant actions. With personnel turnover, transfers, and increased operational demands, many exercise participants struggle through the crisis phase of an incident scenario and never have the opportunity to learn what it is they are supposed to be doing. When all is said and done, many exercise participants are often simply go home happy that the exercise is over and done with. The goal for CANUSLANT 2002 was to produce an exercise where the participants accomplished something tangible; that long pending issues would be discussed and perhaps even resolved. The Exercise Design Team hoped that the participants walked away from the exercise saying that it was time well spent and not simply thankful that the exercise was over. This paper outlines the factors that led to the success of the CANUSLANT 2002 cross border response exercise. This paper also highlights some of the fundamentals for varying your approach to exercises to achieve tangible results while providing personnel the skills and training required to respond in the event of a real disaster.

Optimizing the value of near misses in wildlife response preparedness: The Kulluk Incident

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 2288-2294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curt Clumpner ◽  
Barbara Callahan
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Exercise Program ◽  
Near Miss ◽  
Incident Management ◽  
Near Misses ◽  
Response Options ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Specific Incident ◽  
Unified Command ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT Mitigating the impact of an oil spill on wildlife is one of the stated priorities in nearly every oil spill. Wildlife in some way is regularly included in drills and exercises in many places around the world. While planning, training, and exercising are critical to wildlife preparedness, responders know that nothing compares to real world experience. In many spills and near miss situations, the Wildlife Branch is not activated until after there are documented wildlife impacts. Most incident management teams will only bring in professional oiled wildlife responders when oiling of wildlife has occurred or is imminent. During the December 2013 response to the Kulluk Tow Incident, a small Wildlife Branch was activated as an integral part of the Incident Command structure put in place. The Wildlife Branch proceeded to provide a detailed plan for an active response, if one was needed. Over the next week, while the rig grounded, refloated and finally towed to a place of refuge, the Wildlife Branch, working with the Environmental Unit, developed a wildlife plan that identified the resources at risk, the wildlife response options and the personnel, equipment and facilities that would be needed if oil were to be released. The Alaska Wildlife Response Center was prepared for activation, wildlife responder's availability, and travel time was documented and incident specific equipment gaps were identified and sourced. Additionally, specific incident plans were developed for hazing (bird deterrence), solid waste and wastewater that stood ready for implementation. While Alaska has a robust preparedness and exercise program, the quick decision by Shell and the Unified Command to ensure wildlife response was in place, if needed, provided a real test of the oiled wildlife response system with all the problems, challenges and changing parameters of a real event. It added real value by showing the public and trustees the importance that was placed on wildlife protection as well as by increasing integration, confidence and teamwork in the Alaskan response community.

THE OILING OF ICS

1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Hunter
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Role Of Government ◽  
The Public ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Industry Standard ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Crisis Managers

ABSTRACT The incident command system (ICS) works for oil spills. It should be the industry standard and some will argue that it already is. But there are a number of temptations to fiddle with it. Fueling these inclinations is the fundamental difference between oil spills and natural disasters: Oil spills make the perpetrator fix the problem—under heavy oversight. Add to this difference the public outcry that attends oil spills and the dual role of government as both helper and prosecutor. From these conditions emerge adaptations of ICS which both weaken and strengthen it. The benefits of ICS are diminished by deputy incident commanders who block unified commanders from access to section chiefs, over-zealous crisis managers who displace command post decisions or its information office, separate press offices with party line slants, government law enforcement activity mixed into spill response, nonstandard operations terminology and structure involving “containment and cleanup” or “salvage,” and the commingling of public and private response funds. ICS's application to oil spill response is strengthened by the use of trained unified commanders, deputy incident commanders who operate as staff rather than line, crisis managers who support on-scene objectives, joint information centers, and heavy involvement of skilled, prepared environmental assessment teams in the planning section who generate priorities, strategies, and (operationally coordinated) tactics. Technically, not all these points constitute alterations of ICS, but most do and the others come close. This mixed bag of strengthening and weakening tweaks to oil spill ICS provides an opportunity to take a new look at this faithful friend to the crisis responder.

LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS FOR RESPONSE EXERCISE PROGRAM1

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 543-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Michael Kurgan ◽  
Karen Laney
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Community Response ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Management Service ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Unified Command ◽  
National Preparedness ◽  
Response Exercise

ABSTRACT The National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) was developed to meet the intent of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90). PREP is a unified federal effort and incorporates the exercise requirements of the Coast Guard; Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), Office of Pipeline Safety; and the Minerals Management Service. (MMS). Each year 20 PREP area exercises are held: six led by the federal government and 14 led by the industry. Five of the six government-led exercises are conducted in coastal areas where the Coast Guard is designated as the federal on-scene coordinator (FOSC). One is held in an inland region where the EPA is the FOSC. Each government-led pollution simulation typically involves more than 40 agencies and more than 400 participants. The PREP simulations focus on a geographical community response to a pollution incident with a unified command structure. The unified command is supported by the four basic elements of an incident command system: planning, operations, logistics, and finance. Area PREP exercises create realistic situations focusing on specific objectives. Emphasis is placed on the realism and decision-making process throughout the entire 30 weeks it takes to prepare an exercise. The National Strike Force Coordination Center collects data from critiques and other aspects of the exercise to help create and develop a standard for exercise evaluation. Data collected and lessons learned at each exercise are disseminated throughout the oil spill industry.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document