Wildlife Response Management during a Federal Incident

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 299560
Author(s):  
Rhonda Murgatroyd ◽  
Alexis Kott ◽  
Lawrence Malizzi
Keyword(s):  
Disaster Response ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Unknown Origin ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
United States Coast Guard ◽  
The People ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Set Up ◽  
South Louisiana

The last days of August 2012 brought Hurricane Isaac's wind and water energy to south Louisiana impacting many parishes with destruction of property and leaving behind severe flooding, making response difficult in some locations. After search and rescue efforts ensuring safety of the people in the areas had been completed, surveys by boat and aircraft began to reveal impacts to wildlife from petroleum product of unknown origin. As in past natural disaster response activations, wildlife professionals expected oil impacted animal cases to remain minimal; however, there was confirmation from some response crews on site that there were in fact affected animals. Given that there was no named Responsible Parties, the United States Coast Guard (USCG), as the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC), took the lead in activation of the Oil Spill Response Organizations (OSROs) and the wildlife personnel to conduct recovery and rehabilitation efforts in coordination with the State of Louisiana. All costs associated with these activities were covered by the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC), which is managed by the USCG as promulgated under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90). Wildlife Response Services, Inc. (WRS) supported by Matrix New World Engineering, Inc. (Matrix), was mobilized on September 2, 2012 to set up a Wildlife Rehabilitation Center (Center) in Belle Chase, Louisiana. The Center was set up in the Bricor Trucking Warehouse and the team had the Center operational the morning of September 3, 2013and received its first animal in the afternoon of that same day. During the response the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) was responsible for oiled wildlife recovery and transport to the Center. Over the course of the response 7 live animals were cared for, most of which were cleaned and eventually released back into the wild. The Hurricane Isaac response demonstrated the leadership of the USCG in organizing oiled wildlife recovery and rehabilitation jointly with LDWF and WRS, as well as with the OSROs. This is a model for responses to future natural disasters.

United States Coast Guard (USCG) C-130 Air Dispersant Delivery System (ADDS) capability history, deployment in remote areas, and associated challenges

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 2017027
Author(s):  
Tim Gunter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Delivery System ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Federal State ◽  
United States Coast Guard ◽  
Remote Areas ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
State And Local

Among the variety of oil spill response countermeasures, including mechanical, chemical, in-situ burning and bioremediation, deployment of chemical dispersants has been successfully utilized in numerous oil spills. This paper will review the history of the United States Coast Guard (USCG) C-130 Air Dispersant Delivery System (ADDS) capability, deployment in remote areas, and associated challenges. ADDS consists of a large tank with dispersant(e.g., 51,000 pounds), owned and operated by an industry partner, used aboard USCG C-130 aircraft designed to be ADDS capable as specified in various agreements for marine environmental protection missions. ADDS is a highly complex tool to utilize, requiring extensive training by air crews and industry equipment technicians to safely and properly deploy during an oil spill response. In 2011, the Commandant of the USCG, Admiral Papp reaffirmed the USCG's C-130 ADDS capability during a hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and the Coast Guard. The use of ADDS in remote areas creates unique challenges, such as logistical coordination between the USCG and spill response industry partners and maintaining proficiency with personnel. It is critical for federal, state, and local agencies, industry, and academia to understand the history and challenges of ADDS to ensure the successful utilization of this response tool in an actual oil spill incident.

USCG RESPONSE EQUIPMENT INTEGRATED LOGISTICS SYSTEM

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 903-903
Author(s):  
Christine Burk ◽  
Joseph Stahovec ◽  
David Vaught
Keyword(s):  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Tracking System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Operational Performance ◽  
Life Cycle Costs ◽  
United States Coast Guard ◽  
Logistics System ◽  
Integrated Logistics ◽  
Removal Equipment

ABSTRACT The United States Coast Guard procured specialized oil spill containment and removal equipment to support the goals of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. To manage the equipment inventories, an integrated logistics maintenance and tracking system (ILS) was implemented. The ILS provides a systematic means for documenting and controlling the configuration of system components so that life-cycle costs, operational performance/use, and equipment readiness can be regulated, tracked, and documented.

scholarly journals UNITED STATES COAST GUARD ENVIRONMENTAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITY “THEN” AND “NOW”

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 459-461
Author(s):  
Leonard Rich
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Emergency Response ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Security Measures ◽  
Worst Case ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT The intent of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA90) is to ensure the U.S. Government is prepared to protect the environment from a catastrophic spill of the magnitude and complexity of the 1989 EXXON VALDEZ oil spill. The OPA90 legislation resulted in an overall restructuring and enhancement of the National Strike Force (NSF), and establishment of District Response Groups who are staffed and equipped with mechanical spill recovery assets and are prepared to take prompt actions to mitigate a worst case discharge scenario. During the early 1990s, over $31 million dollars worth of oil spill response equipment was acquired and placed at 23 locations throughout the United States. Since then, an additional $10 million dollars of environmental emergency response equipment has been added to the USCG'S inventory, and are now located at 16 additional sites. This paper will elaborate on the evolution of the USCG'S environmental emergency response capabilities. In terms of preparedness, it will explain how, where and why the Coast Guard has adjusted its resources and capabilities since the OPA90 legislation. The expanded mission requirements include; redistributing and adjusting the locations of the Vessel of Opportunity Skimming Systems, expanding functional use of the pre-positioned equipment for dewatering during shipboard fires, designing and implementing an offload pumping system for viscous oil at each NSF Strike Team, revisiting the condition and continued use of OPA90 procured first response “band-aid’ equipment, modifying the basic response equipment systems for fast current spill response, and the implementation of the Spilled Oil Recovery System. These actions reflect policy and mission adjustments influenced by an ever changing environment. The Coast Guard has re-organized from the bottom up to meet increased port security measures, and the capability to respond to all-hazard incidents. We must continue to maintain a high state of readiness in the oil spill response environment and accept the need to incorporate change to the equipment and the way we conduct our support to the American public.

The Oil Spill Response Fund – Four Decades of Success

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 2146-2158
Author(s):  
Allen R. Thuring
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Trust Fund ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Response Team ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT This paper examines the oil pollution response fund created by Section 311(k) of the 1972 CWA and then modified, culminating with the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) established by OPA. Could the CWA have been successful absent the provision for a federal fund? This Fund is now four decades old. Has it passed the “test of time”? Did it meet the goals set at its birth? Is it still relevant? Should it continue? CWA Section 311 and later OPA created a range of response tools to deal with oil and hazmat spills on the waters of the US. They established a public/private solution to spill response. Key components:An expectation that the spiller was responsible and liable to clean up the spill;The National Contingency Plan and the Federal On-Scene Coordinator/FOSC;Establishing expertise on “special teams”: the CG's National Strike Force and EPA's Emergency Response Team;An up-front trust fund available only to the FOSC that pays for removals if the responsible party (RP) does not step forward. The fund exists to:Pre-empt the RP from using delay as a response option, despite the law.Give the FOSC money to quickly hire private response companies, if the RP does not act or if the spill's origin is a mystery. Equally important, the CWA and OPA did NOT designate a government agency to “clean up” oil spills. Rather, the law envisioned private companies performing that role, paid for by the spillers/RP or the 311(k)/OSLTF Fund, under the oversight of the USCG or the EPA. It tasked the USCG with managing this Fund. The Fund achieved its results. The US has a robust private oil spill removal sector that responsible parties hire when needed. If an RP does not act, the CG and EPA FOSCs use the Fund to mobilize those same companies to remove oil spills on US waters. The US economy has grown, as has the number of oil spills reported. Cases each year requiring Fund use have not increased proportionally. Responsible parties continue to clean up their spills, as the CWA envisioned. The Fund retains its ability to respond simultaneously to major spills, even during Exxon Valdez and Deepwater Horizon. In forty two years, the Fund has always been available for an FOSC directed removal. The opinions stated in this paper are the author's alone, and do not reflect the official policies of the United States Coast Guard.

U.S. NEED FOR AN INTEGRATED INTERNATIONAL OIL SPILL RESPONSE POLICY1

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (2) ◽  
pp. 1051-1054 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Adams
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Lead Agency ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
International Engagement ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT The United States has several international oil pollution response agreements for which the U.S. Coast Guard serves as lead agency for implementation. However, the United States does not have an integrated plan for implementing these agreements, the criteria to use in determining what level of cooperation is needed, or a strategy for prioritizing which countries with which to engage to forge new agreements. This paper outlines a strategy for international engagement that allows the United States to participate in response-related expertise exchange to ensure appropriate capabilities are available for spills that threaten U.S. interests. Obstacles to developing and implementing the strategy and ways to overcome them also are identified.

Developing an International Oil Spill Policy Strategy for the U.S.

2003 ◽  
Vol 2003 (1) ◽  
pp. 913-917
Author(s):  
Michael Adams
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Foreign Assistance ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Integrated Policy ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT As called for under the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation, 1990 (OPRC), “Parties to the OPRC convention are required to establish measures for dealing with pollution incidents, either nationally or in co-operation with other countries.” As a signatory to OPRC the U.S. Government (USG) has pledged to assist other countries in the development of their own oil spill response capabilities and while USG has many agreements that meet the guidelines of assisting other countries, there is no formal engagement strategy for developing further agreements, no agency championing this effort, and there are many still requiring assistance. However, the United States Coast Guard (USCG) is uniquely positioned to perform the role of drafting an engagement strategy and working with the global community to assist those countries that have yet to develop an adequate oil spill response system of their own due to the lack of resources, expertise or both. There are many hurdles to enabling USCG to assume the OPRC assistance banner that have been previously addressed (Adams, IOSC 2001), which this paper will not seek to readdress. However, if USG does decide to move forward with an integrated policy there remains the need to develop an adequate engagement strategy. This strategy is necessary to ensure the limited resources available for foreign assistance are expended in the most cost effective, ethical and responsible manner possible. There are three alternative strategies I will analyze in an effort to determine the best suited for implementation of this policy. These three strategies are based primarily on 1) environmental need, 2) geographical proximity, and 3) political/economic interests. The goal of this strategy is to effectively implement the oil spill assistance policy alluded to previously in support of the U.S.'s pledge under OPRC. This paper will analyze the success of each strategy making a recommendation on which one USG should pursue.

PROBE FOR OIL POLLUTION EVIDENCE IN THE ENVIRONMENT (POPEIE)

2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 1089-1093
Author(s):  
Richard W. Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
United States Coast Guard ◽  
Initial Testing ◽  
Safety Certification ◽  
Simulated Environment ◽  
Marine Safety

ABSTRACT The United States Coast Guard, 11th District Marine Safety Division, has completed initial testing of the Probe for Oil Pollution Evidence In the Environment (POPEIE). Utilizing a unique combination of new and existing technologies, POPEIE provides a tool to assist in the prosecution of illegal dumping of oil at sea by gathering an oil sample from the sea surface when deployed from aircraft performing pollution patrols. The immediate field sample obtained by POPEIE is used as evidence to help identify and prosecute those who illegally discharge oil at sea. Suspect vessels known to have been in the vicinity, or observed near the slick, are boarded at the earliest opportunity to obtain samples for comparison purposes. Samples obtained by POPEIE and from suspect vessels are forwarded to the USCG Marine Safety Laboratory (MSL). The MSL matches characteristic “fingerprints” of these samples using spectral analysis and provides indisputable evidence for prosecution. Initial testing of POPEIE was conducted at the Oil and Hazardous Materials Simulated Environment Test Tank (OHMSETT). The 11th CG District Marine Safely Division conducted the tests to demonstrate the ability of the sampling mechanism to obtain a sample that would be sufficient for analysis by the MSL. Results showed a 100% success rate at collecting a sample and a 50% success rate at collecting an identifiable sample due to buoyancy problems. Phase 2 POPEIE has been constructed by InterOcean Systems, Inc. and builds on the success of the initial testing, with design modifications to improve reliability and to incorporate a standard electronics package that will make the device compatible with existing USCG systems. Phase 2 POPEIE successfully completed USCG Air Safety Certification and is ready for deployment.

American Bureau of Shipping Activities on Behalf of the United States Coast Guard

1984 ◽  
Vol 21 (03) ◽  
pp. 262-269
Author(s):  
John W. Reiter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Working Relationship ◽  
United States Coast Guard ◽  
Long Period ◽  
The Past ◽  
The U.S

The American Bureau of Shipping and the U.S. Coast Guard have enjoyed an excellent working relationship for a long period of time. This paper gives a brief description of both organizations, describes some of the past cooperative arrangements, and details the latest agreement concerning commercial vessel plan review and inspection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document