2013 HSC Summit DraftNotesFINAL - Oil Spill Task...

WEST COAST HARBOR SAFETY COMMITTEE SUMMIT SUMMARY NOTES October 29-‐30, 2013 Napa, California

SUMMIT PARTICIPANTS: Harbor Safety Committee Panel: CAPT Richard Goben – Chair, San Diego HSC John Strong – Chair, Los Angeles/Long Beach HSC Lynn Korwatch – Chair, San Francisco HSC John Veentjer – Chair, Puget Sound HSC Eric Burnette – Vice Chair, Lower Columbia Region HSC Suzie Howser – Chair, Humboldt Bay HSC John Gillespie – Chair, Grays Harbor HSC Andrew Harvey – Chair, Port Hueneme HSC Office of Spill Prevention and Response (OSPR) Staff: Thomas M. Cullen, Jr., Administrator; Ted Mar, Marine Safety Branch Chief; Mike Coyne; Al Storm; Jack Prescott; CAPT Jeff Cowen; Reuben Macaspac Pacific States/British Columbia Oil Spill Task Force Sarah Brace, Hilary Wilkinson; Also attending: Gerry Wheaton, NOAA; Ray Keehe, Norton Lily; Tim Petrusha, Humboldt Bay Harbor District; Leslie Pearson, Pearson Consulting; David Pearson, Pearson Consulting; Alison Allali, Harley Marine; Amy Wirts, USCG; John Berge, Pacific Merchant Shipping Association; Greg Stump, USCG Sector SF; Jason Tama, USCG Sector SF; Alan Steinbrugge, SF Marine Exchange; John Doucette, West Way Terminals; Linda Scourtis, Bay Conservation and Development Commission; Matthew Peake, Phillips 66; Bob Gregory, Foss Maritime; Brad Westlund, AMNAV.

Harbor Safety Committee Panel members (left to right): Sarah Brace, Tom Cullen, Suzie Howser, Andrew Harvey, Richard Goben, Eric Burnette, Lynn Korwatch, John Gillespie, John Veentjer

October 2013 Harbor Safety Summit Notes 2

DAY 1: OCTOBER 29 The California Harbor Safety Committee Chairs convened their annual meeting with OSPR from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 29 2013; other West Coast Harbor Safety Committee Chairs were invited to the summit. Mike Coyne, Oil Spill Prevention Specialist of OSPR, facilitated the meeting. 1. Introductory Comments • Mike Coyne welcomed the panel and audience and announced that the meeting was co-‐hosted by

OSPR Marine Safety Branch (MSB) and the Pacific States/British Columbia Oil Spill Task Force. • Mike introduced Tom Cullen, Administrator of OSPR, who welcomed everyone and thanked OSPR’s

Marine Safety Branch for hosting the Summit. He introduced Sarah Brace, Executive Coordinator of the BC/States Task Force. He noted that the BC/States Task Force’s Annual Meeting held in Seattle in September was a success and helped him better understand emerging trends around energy transport. Two issues that OSPR is currently focused on include 1) changes in crude oil transport by rail and 2) the need to look more carefully at emerging spill prevention and response technologies.

• Sarah Brace, Executive Coordinator, BC/States Task Force, provided updates about their recent activities, including 1) publication of the 2013 Pacific States/British Columbia Oil Spill Task Force Annual Report, and 2) increased focus on emerging issues such as changing trends in oil movement, derelict and sunken vessels, and the state of the science of dispersants. She noted that the BC/States Task Force’s website has a page devoted to Harbor Safety Committees and that she is working to identify additional ways that OSTF can continue to support their work.

• Each HSC chair introduced himself/herself. 2. Overview of FY 2011/12/13 Activities: Accomplishments, New Best Maritime Practices, Issues, Concerns, Comments, and Recommendations LA/LONG BEACH CHAIR CAPT JOHN STRONG

• LA/LB HSC is working with Gerry Wheaton at NOAA to include more information about their activities in the Coast Pilot

• Container crane placement is emerging as a problem due to larger ships • The bunkering DVD has been helpful – Captain Strong would like to see the entire West Coast

move in the same direction. The DVD ensures a level playing field on rules and regulations • Tongas are emerging as a problem and the LA/LB HSC has been tapped to help keep an eye on

the issue • The LA/LB Harbor Safety Plan update is underway. They plan to make it a “living” document by

posting those updates not requiring a vote on-‐line immediately. Environmental representatives are working on the environmental chapter so that the link between prevention and pollution is clearer.

• The most important achievement of the LA/LB HSC recently has been to facilitate a successful Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Standards (MOTEMS) presentation for CA oil terminals.

SAN FRANCISCO CHAIR LYNN KORWATCH

• Recently, the SF HSC reevaluated their operations and developed new Best Practices as a result of an incident involving the Overseas Reymar, which struck a tower on the Bay Bridge.

• The America’s Cup went very smoothly, which was a big achievement and a good reflection of the work of the SF HSC.


• A recent issue that has emerged involves clearance of large container vessels under the Bay Bridge. An air gap sensor funded by CalTrans will be installed in several weeks to address it.

• Workgroup updates: - Tug: developed a BMP for planning and executing towing operations that involve “dead”

ships. - Ferry Operations: Developed guidance for vessel of neutral assistance. - Navigation: worked with the Port of Oakland to install a visibility sensor (funded by

USCG). Two additional sensors are being pursued with OSPR. - Dredging: has been meeting continually with National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA) and Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) to identify areas that need additional sounding.

- Prevention through People: San Francisco HSC Continues to work on small vessel advisory for sailboats and kayaks.

PUGET SOUND CHAIR JOHN VEENTJER

• There has been an increase in participation in the Puget Sound HSC, with more buy-‐in to the their work than in the past 3-‐5 years.

• Most of their focus has been on completing a Vessel Traffic Risk Assessment study, an effort resulting from a lawsuit involving BP–Cherry Point. The study includes data from WA and BC. Results so far show that there has been far less traffic in 2010 than in 2005 due to bigger ships and changing demands for cargo. Vessel traffic has decreased for 20 years, with 600 fewer ships in 2011 than in 1999.

• They are developing a new website. • They continue to update their Work Plan and are in the process of making it a living document. • One of the challenges facing this HSC is the ever-‐changing marine industry – specifically, the

transport of oil by rail, as well as increases in the use of Liquified Natural Gas (LNG). He specifically noted that Totem Ocean Trailer Express (TOTE) and the WA State Ferry System are converting some or all of their fleets to LNG.

• Additional issues they face include volunteer membership dues, consistent participation and getting people to attend meetings.

SAN DIEGO CHAIR RICH GOBEN

• Lessons learned regarding the Japanese tsunami’s impacts to San Diego bay were highlighted – specifically; San Diego did not face one single event but a 4-‐day event, with water “sloshing” back in forth in the harbor throughout this timeframe.

• Several issues were highlighted, including: - Seaplanes: The Captain of the Port asked the HSC to look at seaplane activity. It is a

confusing regulatory issue as seaplanes are considered vessels on water, but not in the air. The issue remains unresolved.

- Cruise ships: The industry is down; San Diego is not a deep water port - Navy pier: this needs to be rebuilt to accommodate larger ships. This has the potential

to disrupt marine life. - Bait barges: Their current location is challenging for various reasons (e.g. proximity to

the naval fuel pier) and proposals are underway to figure out where best to locate them. - Lobster fishermen -‐ are not observing shipping lane rules - Yachts – numerous large yachts are coming into the bay and their owners are unaware

that nontank vessel contingency plans are required. SD HSC is working to get something into the Coast Pilot to help address this.

• They are working with head of safety from the Coronado Hospital to plan an evacuation event.


LOWER COLUMBIA REGION VICE-‐CHAIR ERIC BURNETTE (STANDING-‐IN FOR ROMAN GEIGLE)

• Their HSC has been working closely with ACOE to install 3 new buoys in the Columbia River to address the problem of ships being unable to clear the Columbia River bar during marginal conditions due to low sulfur fuels. Anchorages continue to be limited despite the 3 new buoys, and they are pursuing funding from ACOE for an additional 8-‐10 more.

• A PowerPoint Presentation on Columbia River Vessel Arrival/Departure Analysis was provided.

HUMBOLDT BAY CHAIR SUZIE HOWSER • Best practices for small craft, large ships and barges were included in the 2012 Harbor Safety

Plan. • All fuel in Humboldt Bay is received via barges. • The Humboldt Emergency Plan is underway. It is a huge effort that FEMA just signed off on and

will ultimately result in a 600-‐page plan. It is being undertaken because of Humboldt Bay’s status as the only deep-‐water port in the Cascadia subduction zone. Emergency planning is needed so that if an earthquake occurs, access to the bay for delivery of water food, and medical supplies can happen.

• The Scripps West Coast buoy program is in jeopardy because ACOE funding is now being routed through the CA Department of Parks and Recreation (CA Parks and Rec) instead of Boating & Waterways. CA Parks and Rec is having problems releasing funds to Scripps because some buoys are outside of California and/or the U.S.

• There are dredging issues due to lack of funding from ACOE. • Another issue noted was shoaling around buoy 9, creates waves and swells that can create

problems. • The Humboldt HSC is pre-‐approving letters that can be quickly sent to ACOE in the event that

dredging issues surface during the winter season. • The Harbor District acquired a pulp mill with a lot of pickling liquors still on site. There are

transportation issues in terms of moving the liquors to recycling locations off-‐site and EPA has been involved. A contract has been signed with Harley Marine to transport the liquors to Washington – it should be completed by March 2014.

GRAYS HARBOR CHAIR JOHN GILLEPSIE

• Grays Harbor HSC is the only one operating rail-‐to-‐coast in Washington State. They have a diversity of marine cargos, including logs, autos, dry bulk, bulk liquid, and wood chips. The Port of Grays Harbor has grown significantly in recent years, with $200 million in private investments since 2008.

• They are seeing a projected growth in the number of vessels and so are trying to beef up the HSC. There are currently 9 formal members. They have determined membership criteria, their charter, and have drafted their Standards of Care. John asked for input by other HSC chairs about their approach to drafting the SOCs and beefing up the HSC, specifically:

- Is their approach to the SOCs correct? - What authority are other HSC’s relying on for enforcement of SOCs? - What entities have voting authority? - How are other HSCs funded? (Currently, Grays Harbor is 100% volunteer funded).

PORT HUENEME CHAIR ANDREW HARVEY

• Port Hueneme is a Navy-‐controlled port • Two incidents that Port Hueneme HSC is currently dealing with include:


- An ongoing issue involving sailboats during Wednesday night races in the Channel Islands. Sailboats are using the Channel Island Yacht Point as a turning buoy, which has angered shippers.

- An inbound ship blacking-‐out at the sea buoy.

3. OSPR’s vessel risk analysis program and database Mike Coyne provided a presentation on how OSPR has developed its risk-‐based database. The approach is based on the assumption that every vessel arriving in CA poses a risk. Their objectives include:

• Quantify the risk • Develop a database that addresses four categories of risk including:

1. Compliance with OSPR regulations 2. Age of vessel 3. Vessels’ past behavior (loss of propulsion, loss of steering, groundings, pollution

incidents) 4. Company performance index

• Focus OSPR’s resources on low performing vessels and operators. Additional risk factors that help identify low performers include:

- Name changes - Hull type - Number of Port State Control boardings

• Break the chain of events that cause pollution incidents • They are trying to mimic much of what USCG is already doing. He extended thanks to Gary

Toledo, Reuben Macaspac, Nora Maxfield and Adeline Brown for helping to put this system together.

• There were 945 OSPR boardings in 2012, 82 of which were targeted by the risk assessment program.

Questions/Comments:

1. How many staff members are needed to maintain the database? Response: It’s a huge effort. Maintenance and updating database with new figures takes two students a full summer.

2. Are you only looking at oil on water? What is the over arching risk you are trying to identify? Response: Those vessels with higher potential for spilling oil or pollution.

4. Report on FY 2011/12/13 HSP Recommendations Implemented; Recommendations/Issues Needing Resolution Humboldt By HSC -‐ Al Storm

• An overview of OSPR’s role relative to Harbor Safety Committees was provided. OSPR looks at recommendations from HSCs, and OSPR is obligated under the Harbor Safety Act to implement them. OSPR is limited in the amount it can spend on implementing the recommendations.

• OSPR also makes recommendations of its own to improve navigational safety to prevent oil spills. Examples include recommendations to ACOE for dredging operations, USCG for navigational aids. Recently, they made a recommendation to Scripps to maintain their buoy program.

• Recent recommendations that OSPR has reviewed from Humboldt HSC include: - A request to petition USCG to ensure that Port Authorities are being notified properly - A request to help the county with their emergency operations plan.


- Port Authority requested to be notified when a Captain of the Port order was given to a vessel alternating its movement. OSPR was tasked to petition the Coast Guard. The Port of Humboldt Bay helped complete the task.

- Recommendations requiring OSPR funding remain unimplemented, e.g., PORTS and dredging.

- Chevron is funding PORTS O&M for 5 years. Would like OSPR to find O&M funding after that. Low probability that this will occur.

San Francisco HSC -‐ Jeff Cowan The SF HSC is working on a variety of issues including:

• Designating anchorages • Dredging – an important issue in SF, ACOE has announced that the expense of dredging

operations will result in smaller ports ceasing to function • Bay Bridge Delta-‐Eco span issues • Dead ship tows – they have developed BMPs on this issue • Outfall from Overseas Reymar – temporary supplemental guidelines recommended the use of

the Alpha-‐Bravo or Delta-‐Eco span of the Bay Bridge. Ships are not departing Oakland when visibility is less than .5 miles.

• They conducted a successful tabletop exercise to determine towing capabilities when ships are DIW offshore (dead in the water). Distance of tugs from the bay to offshore locations of DIW ships is a concern.

Port Hueneme HSC – Reuben Macaspac • A recommendation from Port Hueneme HSC to OSPR is to fund PORTS on a statewide basis

LA/Long Beach HSC – Mike Coyne

• It has been a quiet year for LA/LB HSC with no real pressing issues. • There is a new process for the LA/LB HSC Plan approval process (flow diagram previously shown

by John Strong) • Recommendations:

- PORTS system funding is still needed (this is an ongoing recommendation that has not yet been addressed)

- Need for pleasure craft operators to practice safer boater practices - Best practices for bunkering

San Diego HSC – Jack Prescott

• An LED light survey has been completed by NOAA and USCG • Like the other HSCs, PORTS and dredging are major issues. He noted that OSPR has looked at

both issues and has concluded that the current funding structure is unsatisfactory.

• The issue of seaplanes was brought to the HSC in 2009 when a large seaplane company wanted to establish an operation in San Diego Bay. Environmental groups were concerned because of migratory sea birds. Questions regarding jurisdictional authority continue, with the FAA saying that USCG regulates them once they land on water. However, communication issues between planes and boats are a problem; SD HSC is trying to figure it out. There is no VTS in San Diego because vessel traffic is largely military. Security is conducted by the Harbor Police, Military Police and closed-‐circuit cameras.


• Membership has been an issue – a quorum hasn’t been possible to achieve for several years. It is difficult to replace departing members. The California Coastal Commission’s ongoing involvement was noted as a positive presence, providing continuity.

5. Round Table Discussion Tom Cullen introduced the round table discussion and posed the following question to HSC chairs: how well are new technologies to prevent oil spills being utilized? He noted that a small but vocal NGO (Marin County Environmental Action (MCEA)) recently criticized OSPR for failure to achieve best achievable protection using best available technologies. Three specific requests made by MCEA of OSPR include: 1) improving the use of offshore response tugs (look at PNW as a model), 2) take the lead on outlawing dispersants and 3) conduct more unannounced equipment-‐deployment drills in the shipping channels. OSPR has responded to them both in writing and in person. He noted that OSPR hosts a biennial technology conference and posed the question as to whether they should make it an annual meeting and increase the emphasis on prevention (it is currently focused on response technologies). He also asked if a blue ribbon panel should be convened to evaluate and make recommendations about best achievable technology. Responses from HSC chairs on the above questions:

• Lynn Korwatch -‐ The AIS system has become robust. Alaska uses every technology they can get, including satellite. They have vessels subscribe to this system to avoid collisions, stay on route etc.

• Gerry Wheaton – Gary Toledo was working on an emerging technology document that can be updated to help move the topic forward.

Other questions asked/issues raised by the panel

• Loss of Propulsion incidents: Is there a technology that can help with loss of propulsion incidents resulting from fuel switching? Response: some cruise ship companies are using a scrubber; USCG noted they are not seeing many loss of propulsion incidents.

• Standards of Care – OSPR’s value on this issue was noted • An incident involving a tanker being cut off by an off-‐duty LA fireman on a small craft was raised.

It was impossible to get information about the incident after the fact and a request for increased transparency was made.

- John Veentjer shared that VTS data analyzed so far shows that 90% of the problems on Puget Sound involve fishing vessels and whale watching vessels.

- Lynn Korwatch noted that SF HSC has both recreational and fishing interests represented on their committee and they are very vocal about their colleagues causing problems. SF HSC has developed a strong relationship with the environmental community.

6. Day 1 Summary – Takeaway and follow-‐up Sarah Brace provided a recap of the day, including:

• She will share information from the meeting with BC/States Task Force members • She shared an idea for how the BC/States Task Force can further support the work of the Harbor

Safety Committees – to create case studies from each of the HSC’s to post on the BC/States Task Force’s website. This would provide an opportunity to share issues and lessons learned from the various HSCs, (e.g., risk assessment, tsunami, HSP revision streamlining, etc), products and other HSC news.


DAY 2: OCTOBER 30 1. Ted Mar, Marine Safety Branch, OSPR – Harmonization of Local Bunkering BMPs into a Regional Bunkering Safety Video Ted provided an overview of a non-‐regulatory approach to achieve bunkering BMPs – specifically, a Bunkering Safety video that was recently developed with the BC/States Task Force’s support. Bunkering BMPS are only an issue for two California HSCs-‐ LA/LB and SF. Highlights of the presentation include:

• The transfer of fuel into a vessel requires safety diligence, crew training and compliance with state and federal laws. A 480-‐gallon bunkering spill in 2009 was the impetus for the bunkering laws.

• HSCs develop Best Maritime Practices for bunkering • The video is the result of a West Coast work group that primarily involved CA and WA. The CA

version is based on an old WA state bunkering video – the original producers (Maritime Training Services) were hired to produce the new one. The video is owned by the BC/States Task Force and is a good example of collaboration.

• There have been zero bunkering spills since 2011. Questions/comments:

• Is the video on YouTube? Response: Yes • Has this migrated to other regions in the US, such as the Gulf or the East Coast? Response: not

sure • A discussion regarding the best distribution method for the video occurred. There are several

distribution limitations – including the ability to send and receive emails or faxes on ships, or to make or receive telephone calls. The best way is to go directly to the owners or operators of the shipping lines. FOSS Maritime has made about 500 copies and distributed it to all of their tank barge captains – it has been a very good tool and is now shown in safety pre-‐transfer meetings. The cost is minimal compared to the benefit of having educated crews. Face to face pre-‐bunkering meetings are now common practice.

2. Sherry Lippiatt, NOAA Marine Debris Program – Grant from the Japanese Government for Clean-‐Up of Tsunami Debirs; Update on Debris Movement Sherry is the California Regional Coordinator for NOAA’s marine debris program and leads the marine debris monitoring project for UC Santa Cruz. Her program is regionally based and focuses on prevention, research, and removal. Her presentation focused on a grant from the Japanese government to clean up tsunami debris. Highlights include:

• The Japanese government provided $5 million to west coast U.S. states to help clean up tsunami debris. Funding was dispersed through grants to AK, WA, OR, CA and HI. States can request additional funding as needed.

• An estimated 5 million tons of debris washed out to sea; it is likely that 70% sank right away, leaving 1.7 million tons remaining floating.

• There are numerous challenges involved with cleanup, including: the size of the ocean, a lack of an accurate estimate, dispersal rates, weather, forecasting difficulties and media misrepresentation.

• NASA and NOAA satellite services coordinated on the effort to detect the debris’ dispersal. After 1 month, no debris could be detected.


• They are also using remote sensing techniques and have looked at a 400 square km. Nothing has been detected through satellite detection. Factors responsible for debris movement include wind and currents.

• It is extremely difficult to forecast the movement of debris; there was a lot of inaccurate information. Since 2011 there have been 1800 official reports of debris; only 35 items could be confirmed to originate from the tsunami.

• Despite media reports and public concerns, the chances that tsunami debris is radioactive is highly unlikely due to:

- Debris emanated from an area that was much larger than where radioactivity occurred - Debris washed out to sea prior to the meltdown of the reactor - The two radioactive elements – iodine 131 and Cesium would not last at sea. The former

has a half-‐life of 8 ½ days and the latter is water-‐soluble. • Unmanned aircraft systems (PUMA aircraft) were also used in the effort. • They are currently using a GNOME “hindcast” model, which uses known winds and currents to

figure out where debris is now. The results show that the highest windage debris occurred in fall/winter 2011.

• Seasonal variation will continue to bring lower floating material to shore. • States have developed their own marine debris plans. See NOAA website for more information. • Next steps include:

- At-‐sea detection - Invasive species monitoring (invasives are an issue) - Refine models - Get contingency plans in place - Increase awareness

2. Jeff Wilson, Chevron -‐ Avoiding Whale Strikes Jeff provided an overview of the El Segundo Marine Terminal Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Avoidance Training Program. Highlights include:

• The El Segundo Terminal provides 20% of all motor vehicle fuels consumed in Southern California, and 40% of the jet fuel used at LAX

• 85% of all raw material comes via water • Chevron spent 10 years working to renew their 30-‐year lease, which the CA States Land

Commission approved in 2010. Over 60 mitigation measures are included in this new lease, including the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Avoidance Training program.

• The program includes 90-‐page manual and a 3-‐hour training program for vessel operators. • Chevron partnered with Cabiollo Marine Aquarium (CMA) to develop the program, which is

specific to the route between ports of LA and El Segundo Marine Terminal. There are 14 ships at each of their two births per month.

• So far 40 vessel operators have been certified. Questions/comments:

• Have there been any cases of whale strikes? Response: No. • What is the speed in whale sighting areas? Response: 10 knots • Are extra crew assigned as lookouts? Response: They must have a minimum of two trained

observers. • Did you partner with NOAA on this program? Response: No, we relied on the local experts at

CMA


4. Keith Barnes, Harley Marine Service -‐ LNG bunkering Keith Barnes provided an overview of Harley Marine Service’s experience with LNG facilities. Highlights include:

• The U.S. has the most LNG facilities in the world • Economics are driving the move towards LNG • Three types of LNG facilities exist: export, import and processing. • Safety is the biggest issue. LNG has an excellent safety record.

Questions/Comments

• How will personnel be licensed for LNG? Response: This is still being worked out. • Explain the ATB configuration? Response: Because the tug will be fueled by LNG it is capable of

taking fuel off cargo on the barge. • Most LNG ships will be mostly dual fuel vessels. ATV tugs will run off LNG. • In the next 10 years, a predicted 30-‐40% of bunkering will be for LNG. There are new barges

being constructed and the hope is to have an LNG barge in place by winter 2014 for service on the West Coast. It’s in its infancy but is coming. They will head to Norway to witness the SeaGas company bunkering the ferries there.

• How much more effective is LNG? Response: Air standards: burn ultra=low sulphur bunker, scrubbers, etc. Ultra low diesel. The capitalization to convert ships is a too up between meeting new and proposed clean air standards

• There has been a lot of pushback on LNG facilities. Facilities are being proposed in Vancouver, WA, Kitimas, B.C., and Gig Harbor WA

• An LNG forum was held in Seattle – hosted by the Coast Guard (Sector Puget Sound, which is positioning itself to be a national leader on the issue)

5. John Gillespie, Grays Harbor HSC – Imperium Renewables John provided an update on what is happening at Grays Harbor in regards to the increased movement of crude by rail. Highlights include:

• The movement of crude by rail is growing significantly. In 2008, there were 9500 cars; in 2012, 200,000, and in the first half of 2013 there have already been 300,000.

• Part of the growth is attributable to President Obama’s Energy Independence efforts – drilling for oil in the Bakken is growing significantly, from 500,000 BPD in 2012 to 780,000 BPD in Feb 2013.

• Oil trains typically carry 100-‐120 cars of crude oil; each car can hold between 120 and 720 barrels. The discrepancy is due to the fact that the newer trains are larger.

• Railroads have oil spill contingency plans; however, it is very difficult, due to security reasons, to get access to them. The focus of the contingency plans is primarily to get railroads operating again and is not necessarily focused on cleanup.

• Imperium – Grays Harbor is putting in a crude by rail terminal. During the permitting process, they brought in the RR to show the contingency plan to the City of Grays Harbor and the WA State Department of Ecology. Ecology said it was a good plan. Imperium will bring in full cars, offload the fuel to tanks and load them onto barges.

• They currently operate as a Class 1 terminal; they also have biodiesel, diesel, jet fuel, ethanol and crude oil. Ship traffic is about 140-‐150 ships now. They estimate an additional 200 vessel calls per year when they are fully operational.


6. Jason Tama, USCG Sector San Francisco – North American Emissions Control Area Jason provided an overview of the North American Emissions Control Area (ECA). Highlights include:

• The North American ECA extends to 200 nautical miles and is jointly enforced by USCG and EPA • Distillate fuel is not required for compliance • Conclusions and issues raised so far include:

- There are numerous reporting challenges - What does fuel switching–related actually mean - 70% LOP experienced during inbound - Slow speed maneuvering - Reluctance to use CARB Safety exemption - LOP numbers remain above historic

7. Summit Summary/Action Items – Sarah Brace Sarah thanked OSPR and the HSC representatives for the opportunity to participate and reiterated her idea from earlier in the day regarding the BC/States Task Force supporting the work of the HSCs by facilitating an exchange of lessons learned and case studies that could then be posted on the BC/States Task Force’s HSC page.

8. Summit Closing Remarks Tom Cullen thanked his OSPR staff, HSC chairs and all other participants for their participation. Summit adjourned.

OSPR Personnel (L to R): Jeff Cohen, Ted Mar, Al Storm, Tom Cullen, Reuben Macaspac, Mike Shayne, Jack Prescott.

2013 HSC Summit DraftNotesFINAL - Oil Spill Task...

Documents

Transcript of 2013 HSC Summit DraftNotesFINAL - Oil Spill Task...