MANAGING MULTIPLE OIL SPILLS FROM A NATURAL DISASTER: THE KATRINA OIL SPILL RESPONSES

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 1219-1223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Cantin ◽  
Roger Laferriere ◽  
Larry Hewett ◽  
Charlie Henry
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Hurricane Katrina ◽  
Natural Disaster ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
The United States ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Response Options ◽  
National Response ◽  
Response Plan

ABSTRACT Every nation faces the possibility of a major natural disaster and few plans are in place to deal with the massive consequences that follow. When Hurricane Katrina reached landfall, the human toll and extent of damage made it the worst natural disaster in American history. The news headlines were filled with the images of desperation and the efforts of the thousands of heroes across the spectrum of government who worked tirelessly to help the citizens of the Gulf Coast of the United States recover. Less visible to the American public was the vast environmental impact caused by millions of gallons of oil released by hundreds of individual oil spills. The total oil volume lost to the environment is estimated at over 8.2 million gallons, making it the second largest oil spill in United States history. Moreover, this spill was the first major environmental disaster managed under the newly published National Response Plan, a plan developed following the tragic events of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This paper will describe how response managers overcame the incredible challenges of managing multiple oil spills in an enormous area devoid of the support infrastructure, human resources and the logistics network normally present in major spills within the United States. The authors will offer a first hand account of the strategies employed by the response management system assembled to combat the spills. They will describe key lessons learned in overcoming competition for critical resources; the importance of combining scientific, legal and other support in determining response options such as burning and debris removal; and the methodology employed in creating a Unified Area Command that included multiple responsible parties. Finally, this paper will provide insights to processes within the Joint Field Office, an element of the National Response Plan, and how well it performed in supporting response efforts.

Comparing Oil Spill Rates Using Different Data Sources1

2003 ◽  
Vol 2003 (1) ◽  
pp. 861-871 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana Stalcup ◽  
Gary Yoshioka ◽  
Elizabeth Black ◽  
Madelyn Carpenter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
The United States ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Online Database ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
National Response ◽  
Planning Methods ◽  
Different Sources

ABSTRACT Different sources of data on past oil spill incidents contain different kinds of information about each incident and different degrees of accuracy. The appropriate data can be used to develop spill statistics and spill rate relationships. This paper examines data on reported oil spills that have occurred in the United States. Characteristics studied include the number of spills, spill sizes, spill sources, and the types of oil spilled. Studying characteristics of past spills can help government and industry to determine the scope of oil spill prevention policies and response planning methods. The main data sources used for this paper include the Oil Spill Intelligence Report's International Oil Spill Statistics annual summaries and the National Response Center online database. This report provides a discussion of the accuracy of information from sources of oil spill data, to help support the development of spill statistics and spill rate relationships.

Maintaining Ecosystem Integrity Using Geographic-Specific Tactical Response Plans

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 (1) ◽  
pp. 1221-1227
Author(s):  
Cynthia A. Lederer ◽  
Jerzy J. Kichner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Environmental Response ◽  
Ecosystem Integrity ◽  
Response Options ◽  
Incident Command

ABSTRACT There were approximately 7,900 oil spills reported to the United States Coast Guard (USCG) totaling 410,000 gallons in the navigable waterways of the United States in 1997. The USCG acts as the Federal On-Scene Coordinator for coastal oil spills and is responsible for ensuring an environmental and economic balanced oil clean up operation. The majority of oil spill responses are reactive in nature and driven by the need to remove the oil from the environment expeditiously in concurrence with public expectations. In a reactive response the primary focus is on the removal of oil with less emphasis on the ecosystem integrity of an area due to time constraints. A proactive response is an environmentally driven response, which is referred to as an “environmental response.” An environmental response is accomplished utilizing Geographic-Specific Tactical Response Plans (GSTRPs) to select response options based on area specific environmental concerns. Essential to the effective use of this system is the identification and prioritization of environmentally sensitive areas and the designation of divisions prior to an oil spill. The GSTRPs compile information in the Area Contingency Plan (ACP) into a tactical field resource document. The required information in the ACPs have turned them into a cumulative response database. The GSTRPs balance the environment and maritime commerce by providing a field tool, which identifies area specific biological, ecological, physical, chemical, archaeo-cultural, and socio-economic concerns. The information in these plans allows minimal oversight and decreases the time spent on decision making during the first 24 hours of a response. This tool is reality-based for required resources, protection strategies, and area size. It was developed specifically for use in the Incident Command System and is effectively an Incident Action Plan for the first crucial hours of oil spill response operations.

COMPARISON OF OIL SPILL RATES IN DIFFERENT REGIONS OF THE UNITED STATES

1997 ◽  
Vol 1997 (1) ◽  
pp. 947-949
Author(s):  
Gary Yoshioka ◽  
Brad Kaiman ◽  
Eva Wong
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Coastal Area ◽  
East Coast ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Gulf Coast ◽  
The United States ◽  
Movement Data ◽  
Exposure Variable ◽  
Over Time

ABSTRACT Recent studies of oil spills of more than 10,000 gallons examined spill rates in certain East Coast and Gulf Coast regions of the United States. Using oil movement data as the exposure variable, these studies found similar spill rates among the regions and over time. This analysis expands upon these earlier studies by examining the California coastal area and by calculating new spill rates using refining capacity as the exposure variable.

The Exxon Valdez Oil-spill: Ecological and Social Consequences

1992 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. Shaw
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
The United States ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Prince William Sound ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Public Attention ◽  
Exxon Valdez

Major oil-spills, such as occurred following the grounding of the tanker Exxon Valdez in March 1989 in Prince William Sound, Alaska, account for only a small fraction of the total anthropogenic input of petroleum to the marine environment. Yet major spills can result in significant and even acute impacts, trigger ecological changes requiring decades for recovery, and command considerable public attention. Thus catastrophic oil-spills in general, and the Exxon Valdez spill in particular, differ from other chronic human alterations of coastal marine systems.Estimates of the fate of the 38,000 metric tons of crude oil lost by the Exxon Valdez are imprecise, but perhaps 30–40% evaporated, 10–25% was recovered, and the rest remains in the marine environment. Roughly 1,500 km of coastline were oiled in varying degrees. Much of this coastline consists of gravel beaches into which oil penetrated to depths as great as 1 m.The ecological effects of the spill on the marine environments of Prince William Sound and adjacent coastal areas of the Gulf of Alaska were extensive, but natural recovery, aided by clean-up efforts, is expected. Judging by the consequences of other oil-spills affecting rocky shorelines, as well as previous natural and anthropogenic disturbances to Prince William Sound, it appears likely that most affected biotic communities and ecosystems will recover to approximately their pre-spill functional and structural characteristic within from five to twenty-five years.This oil-spill had major social effects. Many individuals, whether personally present or viewing the spill around the world on television, were saddened by the environmental damage, and felt that an important public trust had been broken. These feelings, together with dissatisfaction with the results of early clean-up efforts, gave rise to popular sentiment in favour of every possible clean-up and mitigation effort — regardless of cost, effectiveness, or possible negative consequences.The response to the Exxon Valdez oil-spill by government and the oil industry revealed serious inadequacies in the plans and institutions for dealing with major marine oilspills in the United States. Attempts to recover spilled oil, and to respond to the spill's environmental consequences, were hampered by a low level of preparedness and lack of clear agreement about the goals of response efforts. Attempts are under way to improve oil-spill prevention and response capabilities in Alaska and the rest of the United States. However, these efforts are not yet complete, and it remains to be seen whether an improved response will be made to the next major oil-spill.

INFORMATION TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS FROM FRESHWATER OIL SPILLS

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 965-966
Author(s):  
David E. Fritz ◽  
Alexis E. Steen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Work Group ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Petroleum Institute ◽  
Freshwater Habitats ◽  
Human Health Effects

ABSTRACT The American Petroleum Institute (API) has the only program in the United States dedicated to freshwater oil spill research. In existence since 1990, the API Inland Spills Work Group consists of representatives from industry and government. Projects have included a manual prepared with NOAA that evaluates cleanup techniques in order to minimize environmental impacts of spills in freshwater habitats, a literature review and annotated bibliography of environmental and human health effects of freshwater oil spills, a study of chemical treating agents for use in freshwater applications, and an evaluation of in situ burning of oil spilled in marshes.

REVIEW OF DISPERSANT USE IN U.S. GULF OF MEXICO WATERS SINCE THE OIL POLLUTION ACT OF 1990

2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 439-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie Henry
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Gulf Of Mexico ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Contingency Planning ◽  
Monitoring Plan ◽  
Response Team ◽  
Spilled Oil

ABSTRACT Since the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90), dispersants have been used as part of a combined response to mitigate seven oil spills in United States Gulf of Mexico (GOM) waters. Of the dispersant operations reported, four utilized the Regional Response Team VI pre-approval authority to the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) that requires a monitoring plan. The successful integration of dispersant pre-authorization along with a fully funded ready response delivery system maintained by industry contributed to the successful use of dispersants to aid in mitigating spilled oil. A key element to gaining the original pre-approval authority was a functional operational monitoring plan. While each response was considered a successful dispersant operation, each incident provided valuable lessons learned that have been integrated into subsequent contingency planning and modifications to existing pre-authorization requirements in the GOM. This paper provides a chronological review of oil spill responses where dispersants were applied in the GOM since OPA 90.

NOAA OFFICE OF RESPONSE AND RESTORATION'S ROLE DURING OIL SPILLS WHERE MARINE MAMMALS ARE INVOLVED

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 991-994
Author(s):  
Troy L. Baker ◽  
Jim Jeansonne ◽  
Charlie Henry ◽  
John Tarpley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Marine Mammal ◽  
Marine Mammals ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
The United States ◽  
Southeast United States ◽  
High Profile ◽  
Unified Command ◽  
Spilled Oil

ABSTRACT Providing rapid and humane care for distressed or threatened marine mammals is crucial to the ultimate success of such actions. Recently, in the southeast United States, marine mammals were observed in the vicinity of several oil spills. Proper coordination of marine mammal rescue or recovery actions with the Unified Command (UC) is essential for response personnel safety and increased probability of saving the affected animals. In the event of animal mortalities, effective coordination between the marine mammal resource agencies and the UC helps ensure the preservation of causal evidence. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration'S (NOAA'S) Office of Response and Restoration (OR&R), generally through the NOAA Scientific Support Coordinator (SSC), is able to assist the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) and UC in addressing the threat of spilled oil on potentially affected marine mammals. Response actions during recent spills included: documenting the animals’ type and location, notification of the marine mammal agencies and teams responsible for their recovery and care, and coordination between the spill response and the marine mammal response. The actions of responders during recent spills involving marine mammals are summarized and relevant issues discussed, including properly characterizing the threat to marine mammals from spilled oil. The recent oil spill responses involving marine mammals in the southeastern U.S. are applicable to future spills throughout the United States and potentially worldwide. These recent incidents underscore the need to fully understand and plan for high profile wildlife issues during oil spill responses.

Responding to Vessel Groundings and Oil Spills in National Parks and Marine Sanctuaries1

2003 ◽  
Vol 2003 (1) ◽  
pp. 903-908
Author(s):  
James E. Elliott
Keyword(s):  
National Parks ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Florida Keys ◽  
The United States ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
System Response ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Unified Command

ABSTRACT The United States National Park System contains over two million acres of submerged lands, and the nation's thirteen marine sanctuaries have over 18,000 square miles of ocean waters and habitats. From the public's perspective, national parks and marine sanctuaries are public goods that should be protected for future generations. Historically, however, response operations within these protected waters have not consistently preserved the environmental integrity of the nation's valuable resources. Vessels are often abandoned and remain aground, thereby emitting residual oil and physically damaging coral reefs and seagrass beds after the responders have removed the accessible oil. Additionally, responders often fail to consult with natural resource trustees and, as a result, physically damage the environment during response operations. This paper presents case studies and lessons learned from vessel groundings and oil spill response operations in national parks, marine sanctuaries, and other protected areas, from the Point Reyes National Seashore to the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary. The topics of Natural Resource Trustee consultations, application of the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, effective use of the Unified Command System, response cost internalization methods, and ecological sustainability are logically presented to argue for a more proactive and consistent national response posture in protected waters.“Surely our people do not understand even yet the rich heritage that is theirs … Our people should see to it that they are preserved for their children and their children's children forever, with their majestic beauty all unmarred.”—President Theodore Roosevelt (Shullery, 1979)

Improving Seafood Safety Management after an Oil Spill

2003 ◽  
Vol 2003 (1) ◽  
pp. 1303-1310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth A. Yender
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Safety Management ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
The United States ◽  
Recent Experience ◽  
Seafood Safety ◽  
Polycyclic Aromatic ◽  
State And Local

ABSTRACT Recent experience indicates that promptly providing state and local seafood safety managers with key information and assistance during an oil spill response can help prevent unnecessary restrictions on seafood harvest. Efforts by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Office of Response and Restoration (ORR) to help facilitate and expedite the decision-making process of seafood safety managers after an oil spill include two recently published guidebooks on seafood testing and risk assessment. Of particular interest is a comparison of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) criteria established for seafood at past United States oil spills. Depending on assumptions made in the health risk calculations, criteria for shellfish ranged from 5 to 120 parts per billion (ppb) benzo[a]pyrene equivalents. Nearly all seafood samples analyzed at these spills passed established criteria, indicating oil spills in the United States have not posed significant risk to human health through consumption of PAH-contaminated seafood. Seafood marketability has more often been impacted, due to petroleum taint (off-odor or off-flavor). Evaluation of seafood marketability can be facilitated through employment of standardized sensory testing protocols for detecting petroleum taint, such as those recently published by NOAA.

JOINT MEXICO-UNITED STATES OIL SPILL RESPONSE PREPAREDNESS TRAINING ACTIVITIES

2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 711-714
Author(s):  
Heather A. Parker-Hall ◽  
Timothy P. Holmes ◽  
Norma A. Hernandez Ramirez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Joint Training ◽  
Response Team ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT Exercise and evaluation of the Pacific Annex of the Joint Contingency Plan Between the United Mexican States and the United States of America Regarding Pollution of the Marine Environment by Discharges of Hydrocarbons or Other Hazardous Substances (MEXUSPLAN) uncovered a significant need for joint training between spill responders, planners, decision-makers and stakeholders on both sides of our border. Sponsored by U.S. Coast Guard District 11 (USCG Dll) and the Second Mexican Naval Zone (ZN2), a series of training sessions were held for Mexican officials from the Northern Baja California region and Mexico City in early 2003. The first of these well-attended sessions was held in two locations: San Diego, CA and Ensenada, Mexico in February 2003. The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Hazmat facilitated the first session, the Joint Mexico-United States Oil Spill Science Forum. It provided a scientific view of oil spills. The following joint session facilitated by USCG Dll and held in Ensenada was a tabletop exercise designed in preparation for the signing of the MEXUSPAC Annex. Through the use of a spill drill scenario, this session included instruction and dialogue about the roles and responsibilities of both U.S. and Mexican spill responders. Both sessions included presentations from several agencies of the Regional Response Team IX/Joint Response Team: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, U.S. Dept. of the Interior and California's Office of Spill Prevention and Response. Industry partners also contributed topics of discussion, further complementing the U.S. response landscape. Mexican response agencies, including PEMEX, SAGARPA, SEMARNAT and PROFEPA, provided valuable input ensuring dialogue helping to identify additional joint response gaps. Upon the most significant gaps brought to light was the need for additional information regarding dispersant use by Mexican agencies, particularly in light of the approaching international SONS Exercise in April 2004. To this end, USCG Dll and NOAA HAZMAT developed and presented a modified Ecological Risk Assessment for their Mexican counterparts. Hosted by ZN2 in October 2003, this highly successful workshop brought together many key decision makers, planners and stakeholders from both sides of the border to discuss tradeoffs inherent in the use of existing spill response tools, including dispersants. Joint training and discussion sessions such as these are key to ensuring any measure of success in a joint spill response. Several additional training and discussion topics designed for the Mexican-U.S. joint response forum have been identified with many in the planning phase. Acknowledging the similarities as well as differences in response systems of our two nations' is essential to the success of these joint collaborations. Such continued efforts will help bridge existing gaps.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document