540N05004
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
The U.S. EPA's Oil Program Report
October 2005
Contents
Oil Program Becomes Part of the EPA
Office of Emergency Management... 1
Oil Program Becomes Part of the
EPA Office of Emergency
Management
intended to assist regional inspectors in
reviewing a facility's implementation of
the SPCC rule at 40 CFR part 112. With
its publication, EPA seeks to establish a
consistent understanding among regional
EPA Prepares for Publication of the A new EPA Office of Emergency EpA inspectors on how particular
SPCC Guidance for Regional Management (OEM) consolidates the provisions of the rule may be applied.
Inspectors 1 Office of Solid Waste and Emergency The guidance document wiu also be
Response's emergency prevention, available on the EPA Oil Program Web
Spring 2006 EPA Freshwater Sp.lls preparedness, and response duties by ^ tQ both Qwners and ators Qf
Symoosmm 2 joining together the Oil Program Center, ^^ ^ may be subject to m£ spcc
Recap: 2005 international Oi, SpiM l^L^E^^ ^ ""* «* ** ^ PUbHc » * *""* °D
Conference 2 Chemical Emergency how EPA intends the SPCC rule to be
PreParednessandPreventlon0ffice-T° implemented
Oil Matched to Dalco Passage Oil Spill, ensure that the United States 1S better
Update 2 Prepared for environmental emergencies, EpA developed this guidance document
OEM works with other EPA partners, foj. ^^ inspectors to hdp darify the
Hurricane Katrina Pollution Response federal agencies, state and local response role rf^ inspector ^ ^ reyiew ^
Efforts 3 agencies' and industr^ to Prevent evaluation of the performance-based
accidents as well as maintain superior
4 -ponse capabiht.es. Oil spill pLention
issues are now addressed m the impracticability determinations, and
Boott Hydropower Facility Oil Release, Regulatory and Policy Development j ky ^ The document is
Massachusetts 4 Division' whlle Preparedness and response organized into seven ch ters and includes
matters are m two separate dms.ons of seyeral appendices for the inspector's
Release from Unknown Source, Bangor, OEM, the National Planning and reference.
Maine 5 Preparedness and Program Operations and
unocoSeWeC,e,nW,terAC, £S£±S^""" Ch.p.er ,: .n^duc,,.™ d™, |he
C,a,m, P,nnsy,»ania ^,.^J %£££%££ SP^l',^
Clean Water Act Administrative __,. _, r-r.ii-- ^ i the Jul^2002 amendments.
Complaint Settled, West Virginia 6 EPA Prepares for Publication of the
SPCC Guidance for Regional Chapter 2: Applicability of the SPCC
Owensboro Grain Crude Tank Spill, Inspectors Rule clarifies the facilities, activities, and
Kentucky 6 equipment that are regulated under the
... . „-..„. EPA is nrenarine to release its tnill SPCC rule by providing an in-depth
High-pressure Pipeline Break, crA is> preparing 10 release us a/w/ jr ,.,... . - ,
Kansas 7 Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure discussion of the applicability criteria and
(SPCC) Rule Guidance for Regional relevant scenarios.
Fremont Paving Oil Spill, Colorado 7 Inspectors. The guidance document is
-------
October 2005
Chapter 3: Environmental Equivalence
discusses the use of the environmental
equivalence provision, lists the substantive
requirements eligible for the provision,
clarifies certain policy areas, provides
examples, and describes the role of the
EPA inspector in reviewing and evaluating
deviations based on environmental
equivalence.
Chapter 4: Secondary Containment and
Impracticability Determinations
describes the various secondary
containment requirements and
demonstrates how these requirements
apply to specific equipment and activities
at an SPCC-regulated facility. This
chapter also discusses the impracticability
determination provision of the rule, the
additional requirements that accompany
an impracticability determination, and the
documentation needed to support such a
determination. The role of the EPA
inspector in reviewing and evaluating
secondary containment requirements and
impracticability determinations is also
discussed.
Chapter 5: Oil/Water Separators
addresses the applicability of the SPCC
rule to various scenarios involving oil/
water separators and other equipment.
Chapter 6: Facility Diagrams provides
guidelines on the necessary level of detail
for a facility diagram included in an SPCC
Plan. This chapter also includes example
facility diagrams for different types of
facilities.
Chapter 7: Inspections, Evaluation, and
Testing provides an overview of the
SPCC inspection, evaluation, and testing
requirements, as well as how
environmental equivalence may apply for
these requirements. The role of the EPA
inspector in determining a facility's
compliance with the inspection,
evaluation, and testing rule requirements
and a summary of industry standards, code
requirements, and recommended practices
that apply to different types of equipment
are also discussed.
The guidance includes several appendices
that provide supplementary information
for inspectors. There is a sample
contingency plan and two sample SPCC
Plans, one for a production facility and
another for a bulk storage facility.
Additional appendices include a summary
of the 2002 amendments to the SPCC rule,
SPCC inspection checklists, and
additional policy documents that are cited
throughout the guidance.
The guidance document is currently
undergoing the last stages of the review
process and will be made available to the
public within the next several weeks.
Please see the EPA Oil Program Web site
at http://www.epa.gov/oilspill. The
guidance is a living document and EPA
will revise it in the future as needed.
Questions regarding the SPCC rule and
the SPCC guidance document should be
directed to the Superfund, TRI, EPCRA,
RMP, and Oil Information Center, which
is a publicly accessible service that
provides up-to-date information on several
EPA programs. It does not provide
regulatory interpretations, but maintains
up-to-date information on the availability
of publications and other resources. The
Information Center is open Monday
through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. Eastern Time (except federal
holidays). Contact the Information Center
toll-free at (800) 424-9346 or (703) 412-
9810 in the Washington, D.C., area. More
information on the Information Center is
available at http://www.epa.gov/
superfund/resources/infocenter/index.htm.
Plan to Attend!
Spring 2006 EPA Freshwater Spills
Symposium, Portland, Oregon
The Freshwater Spills Symposium Design
Team, consisting of OEM staff and
representatives from the EPA regions,
states, and industry, is gearing up for the
Sixth Annual Freshwater Spills
Symposium (FSS) in Portland, Oregon.
The 2006 Freshwater Spills Symposium
will be held in late April or early May. A
Call for Papers and a brochure are
available on the website. Abstracts are
due November 15,2005.
For up-to-date FSS 2006 information and
free registration, please visit
www.freshwaterspills.net/fss2006 or see
www.epa.gov/oilspill. For more
information on FSS 2006, please contact
Leigh DeHaven, OEM, at
oilinfo@epa.gov or (202) 564-1974.
Recap: 2005 International Oil Spill
Conference
May 14-19, 2005, Miami Beach,
Florida
Many thanks go out to the EPA regional
and headquarters staff and contractors
who contributed to the success of the
International Oil Spill Conference (IOSC),
which took place in Miami Beach, Florida,
on May 14-19, 2005. The theme for the
conference was "Prevention,
Preparedness, Response and Restoration-
Raising Global Standards." More than
1,300 participants, representing 66
countries, attended the conference.
Conducted since 1969, the IOSC is the
preeminent gathering of oil spill response
experts from around the world and
provides a unique opportunity to catch up
on major developments in the field and
interact with knowledgeable experts on oil
spill issues. The 2005 conference
included informative sessions on
dispersant effectiveness, natural resource
damage assessment, chemical
countermeasures, preparedness and
planning, education and training, security
and legal considerations, and a variety of
other interesting and timely topics.
EPA provided platform session chairs,
paper authors, poster presenters, a poster
session chairperson, and IOSC panelists
for the Hot Topic, Athos I Spill on the
Delaware River, and National Response
Team sessions. IOSC booth exhibitors
included the Environmental Response
Team (ERT), Region 4, Region 6, and
EPA Headquarters. EPA also provided
instructors on the Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC)
rule.
Oil Matched to Dalco Passage Oil
Spill, Follow-up to the January
2005 Update
Source: USCG District 13 Press Release,
December 23, 2004.
2005
In October 2004, more than 1,000 gallons
of oil spilled into Puget Sound from a
U.S. EPA Oil Program Update
-------
October 2005
previously unknown source. The spill
occurred in Dalco Passage, a channel
between Tacoma and Vason, Washington.
Investigators with the Washington State
Department of Ecology took "oil
fingerprints" from ships in the area at the
time of the spill to match the types of oil
spilled to oil found on the ships.
In December 2004, oil sample tests
conducted by both state and federal
laboratories indicated that a Polar Texas
oil tanker, owned by ConocoPhillips, was
the source of the oil that soiled beaches
around Dalco Passage. The cleanup drew
nearly $2 million from federal and state
oil spill contingency funds. In a
December 23 press release, Rear Admiral
Jeffrey Garrett of the U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG) indicated that there was "more
work to do before determining what
enforcement action, if any, to take." The
USCG and the Washington State
Department of Ecology lead a continuing
investigation of the spill.
Hurricane Katrina Pollution
Response Efforts
Source: USCG, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security Press Release,
September 9, 2005, updated October 15th.
The Coast Guard Sector New Orleans
Federal On-Scene Coordinator established
a forward operating base in Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, to coordinate pollution
response efforts in the wake of Hurricane
Katrina. USCG, EPA, and the State of
Louisiana are working together with local
industries to recover spilled oil and
mitigate further environmental damage
resulting from the hurricane. The
following companies are working with
officials to remediate releases from their
properties and points of operation:
• Murphy Oil Corporation, located
near Chalmette, Louisiana,
estimated a discharge of 25,000
barrels (bbls) of oil as a result of
the hurricane. While the vast
majority of the product was
contained within the existing
secondary containment unit, an
unknown quantity of oil escaped
this containment and entered
surrounding neighborhoods.
EPA and USCG are overseeing
ongoing oil recovery operations.
As of October 15, 2005, 18,000
bbls of oil have been recovered
using twelve vacuum trucks and
ten drum skimmers. Plans have
been made to use two high-
volume pumps that will operate
24 hours per day.
• Shell Pipeline Company LP
confirmed that damage from
Hurricane Katrina resulted in two
crude oil spills from company-
owned assets in Pilottown and
Nairn, southern Louisiana. The
Pilottown incident, in which
approximately 25,400 bbls of
crude oil from an above-ground
storage tank leaked into a tank
dike, appears to have been
caused by wind damage. To date,
more than 20,400 bbls have been
recovered. Recovery efforts
include deployment of
USCG sampling in Potash, LA
approximately 2,800 feet of
absorbent boom and 2,000 feet of
eight-inch hard boom. No
further pollution is expected as
the oil/water mixture within the
secondary containment unit has
been pumped to a level below the
break in the storage tank.
In Nairn, approximately 3,300
bbls of crude oil leaked from a
20-inch pipeline that was
damaged as a result of a breach
in a hurricane protection levee.
The pipeline has been secured
and pollution response equipment
and responders are on scene and
cleaning up the remaining free
product. Approximately 300 bbls
have been recovered.
• Bass Enterprises reported a
discharge of approximately
90,000 bbls of oil from two
U.S. EPA Oil Program Update
-------
October 2005
storage tanks into the secondary
containment system surrounding
the tanks. Approximately 7,500
bbls have been recovered.
Preliminary tests indicate that the
majority of the oil is contained
within the secondary containment
levee, and approximately 7,500
bbls remain in the tanks. The oil
in the containment system is
being transferred to a barge. In
addition, booms have been
successfully deployed to contain
a visible sheen on the river.
• Chevron Empire Facility reported
a discharge of 34,000 bbls of oil
into secondary containment. The
majority of the oil is contained at
the facility. Pollution response
equipment and responders are on
scene and oil is being pumped
out of secondary containment.
Less than 2,000 bbls have been
recovered.
• Chevron Pipeline Company
reported a discharge of 200 bbls
of oil into West Bay, near Venice,
Louisiana. Approximately 100
bbls of oil have already
evaporated and approximately
100 bbls of oil/water mixture
have been recovered.
• Venice Energy Services
Company reported a discharge of
unknown quantity into the
facility's secondary containment
in Tant Phine Pass near Venice,
Louisiana. The Louisiana
Department of Environmental
Quality and USCG are
overseeing the recovery.
Pollution response equipment
and responders are on scene.
Motiva, Premcor to Settle for $23.7
Million
Source: http://www. usdoj.gov/enrd/
motiva_cdfmal.pdf
On September 20, 2005, the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ) announced
that Motiva Enterprises and Premcor
Refining Group Inc. agreed to a settlement
in a lawsuit arising from an explosion at a
Delaware refinery that killed one worker,
injured others, and spilled 100,000 gallons
of spent sulfuric liquid into the Delaware
River (United States v. Motiva Enterprises
LLC, D. Del., No. 02-1292-SLR, 9/20/
05). According to DOJ the settlement of
nearly $23.7 million in damages is one of
the largest involving violations of
environmental laws at a single facility, and
is the largest sum ever collected in
Delaware for environmental violations.
The lawsuit was filed following the
explosion of a 415,000-gallon sulfuric liquid
tank at the Delaware City Refinery owned
by Motiva at the time of the explosion,
July 17, 2001. The lawsuit, brought by
DOJ, EPA, and the State of Delaware,
alleged violations of the federal Clean
Water Act; Clean Air Act; the
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act; and
numerous state environmental statutes.
Under a consent decree filed in U.S.
District Court for the District of Delaware,
Motiva, an oil refining and retail company
owned by Shell Oil Co. and Saudi
Refining Inc., will pay a $12 million civil
penalty, finance a series of environmental
projects costing more than $4 million, and
reimburse the federal and Delaware
governments $170,000. The Premcor
Refining Group Inc., which in 2004
purchased the Delaware refinery where
the tank exploded, joined in the settlement
and agreed to safety controls at the
Delaware facility worth approximately
$7.5 million.
The environmental projects planned by
Motiva as part of the settlement include
the purchasing and maintaining of three
hybrid transit buses for the Delaware
transit authority; constructing of native-
species shellfish beds; funding, installing
and operating a water quality monitoring
station on the Delaware River; purchasing
emergency equipment worth
approximately $165,000 for the Delaware
City Fire Co.; and constructing a
meteorological facility near the refinery to
assess wind and weather conditions to
mitigate adverse results in the event of
future accidents. Premcor also agreed to
place a conservation easement on more
than 285 acres of ecologically significant
land near the refinery and committed
$447,500 to restoration activities.
Delaware Governor Ruth Ann Minner said
that the enactment of Delaware's Above
Ground Storage Tank Act and
improvements from the settlement would
ensure that the facility would operate more
safely. The chief of the Civil Division of
the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District
of Delaware, Rudolph Contreras, observed
that valuable lessons could be learned
from this accident. He noted that the
company paid more than $58 million for
putting off inspections of the tank that
exploded, a task that might have cost just
thousands of dollars. "This fact alone
should be a clear message to other
companies that cutting corners on safety
and the environment makes no economic
sense," Contreras said. A Motiva
company spokesman indicated that the
company is pleased "to close this difficult
chapter in Motiva's history," and
emphasized that the company has
cooperated with state and federal officials.
Motiva settled one previous lawsuit
concerning willful violations of
occupational safety and health laws
resulting in the death of a worker. In July
2003, Motiva plead guilty to Delaware
state charges and paid $296,000 in
penalties. In March 2004, the company
settled criminal charges with DOJ for $10
million and agreed to pay $36.4 million to
the widow and family of the worker who
died.
Regional Oil News: Spills
and Settlements
Region 1
Boott Hydropower Facility Oil Release,
Massachusetts
On June 24, 2005, EPA arrived at the
Boott Hydropower Facility, owned and
operated by Enel Corporation, to
investigate a reported release to the
Merrimack River. The facility is located
along the Merrimack River in Lowell,
Massachusetts.
The Lowell Fire Department also
responded to a report of a visible sheen on
the Merrimack River and determined that
U.S. EPA Oil Program Update
-------
October 2005
Tailrace and Merrimack River
the Boott facility was the source of a
hydraulic oil release. The fire department
notified the National Response Center and
Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection (MADEP), and
deployed curtain and sausage boom in the
tailrace to contain any further release of
hydraulic oil. In addition, the Lowell Fire
Department notified downstream water
suppliers in the communities of
Tewksbury, Methuen, Lawrence, and
Andover. Tewksbury Water Supply
requested contingency provisions
(personnel and containment booms
adjacent to the water intake) to protect its
water intake until the situation was fully
stabilized.
That morning Boott facility personnel shut
down the power generation system after
observing increased vibrations. Shortly
after, a low oil-level alarm sounded on the
400-gallon hydraulic oil head tank that
gravity feeds lubricating oil to
hydropower components. Facility
personnel observed a sheen in the tailrace
and closed head and tailgates of the
facility. Debris in the gate area prevented
the tailgate from closing completely but
was removed by a diver the next morning.
With the oil tank empty, a majority of the
product was trapped within the draft tube
(the portion of the facility between the
head and tailgates through which water
moves and impels the turbines).
On June 27 the draft tube was pumped and
the product was recovered. Based on the
volume of the empty tank head, the
facility operator initially indicated that a
potential maximum of 400 gallons was
released to the Merrimack River. Final
estimates indicate that of the 1,420 gallons
of oil released into the draft tube, 1,403
gallons were recovered into a vacuum
truck and 17 gallons were released into the
river. The Responsible Party will continue
to remediate any residual oil left in the
tube and repair the system under the
direction of a Licensed Site Professional
with oversight from MADEP.
For more information, please see http://
epaosc.net/
BoottHydroPowerFacilityOilRelease, or
contact Daniel Wainberg, On-Scene
Coordinator (OSC), at
wainberg.daniel@epa.gov.
Release From Unknown Source,
Bangor, Maine
On April 4, 2005, the Maine Department
of Environmental Protection (MEDEP)
requested that EPA respond to a release of
jet fuel to Birch Stream in Bangor, Maine.
Birch Stream is a tributary of the
Kenduskeag Stream, itself a tributary of
the Penobscot River that flows to the Gulf
of Maine. A MEDEP representative
observed oiled wildlife at the scene.
MEDEP oversaw initial response activities
performed by the City of Bangor, owner
of the Bangor International Airport, and its
U.S. EPA Oil Program Update
-------
October 2005
Collection point upstream of underflow dam
contractor. Workers set boom at the
underflow dam at the culvert that leads to
Birch Stream. Boom was also maintained
at two culverts upstream of the underflow
dam. A total of 375 gallons of oil/water
mixture was recovered from the underflow
dam collection area. Oiled debris,
sorbent, and foliage was also recovered
from stormwater drainage areas and
shipped for disposal.
After surveying the area, a U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) representative
confirmed that one muskrat had died of oil
exposure. FWS did not report other
immediate concerns regarding impact to
fish and wildlife and did not recommend
further actions.
The source of the release is still unknown.
The airport has current civilian and
military operations, and is located on a
former Air Force facility. Dye testing
performed during the spill linked a
retention pond on the Maine Air National
Guard 101st Refueling Wing with the
discharge to Birch Stream. The City of
Bangor is working with the Maine Air
National Guard, under EPA's response
authority, to identify the type and source
of jet fuel released, and perform the
cleanup.
EPA and MEDEP will continue to oversee
the source investigation and identification.
For more information, please contact
Mary Ellen Stanton, OSC, at (617) 918-
1256, or Steve Mierzykowski, FWS, at
(207) 827-5938 x!4.
Region 3
EPA and SUNOCO Settle Clean Water
Act Penalty Claim
Sunoco, Inc. and Sun Pipeline Company
agreed to pay more than $3.6 million to
settle a Clean Water Act lawsuit arising
from a February 2000 oil spill at the John
Heinz National Wildlife Refuge at
Tinicum, in Pennsylvania. An estimated
192,000 gallons of crude oil was
discharged into a pond and surrounding
wetlands at the refuge from a cracked
pipeline. The refuge contains the largest
remaining
freshwater tidal
wetland area in
Pennsylvania.
DOJ filed the
settlement papers
on July 27, 2005, in
federal district
court in
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, on
behalf of EPA.
Pursuant to the
Consent Decree,
Sunoco will pay a
civil penalty of
$2,742,600 to the
Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund and
$865,000 to resolve
claims of natural
resource damages
by the U.S.
Department of the
Interior (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife
Service).
For more
information, please contact Paula Curtin at
(304) 234-0256, or Mike Welsh at (215)
814-3285.
Clean Water Act Administrative
Complaint Settled
Columbia Natural Resources agreed to
pay a $3,437 penalty to settle a Clean
Water Act lawsuit for violations resulting
from a discharge of crude oil from a
storage tank in Smithfield, West Virginia.
An Administrative Complaint was issued,
pursuant to Section 31 l(b)(6)(B)(i) of the
CWA, and proposed a Class I penalty in
the amount of $3,437. USCG received a
check in this amount.
For more information, please contact
Paula Curtin at (304) 234-0256.
Region 4
Owensboro Grain Crude Tank Spill,
Kentucky
On June 8, 2004, Owensboro Grain
Company (OG) reported an estimated
6,000-gallon release of crude soybean oil
U.S. EPA Oil Program Update
-------
October 2005
Tank farm and contained soil
at its tank farm in Owensboro, Kentucky
(NRC Report No. 724374). All oil was
contained within a grassy, diked area and
no product was discharged to surface
water. The Owensboro Grain Company
hired a cleanup contractor to remediate the
spill. Further direction on cleanup will be
provided by the Kentucky Department for
Environmental Protection.
EPA inspected the spill site with OG staff
on June 10, 2004. The inspection
confirmed that all oil product had been
contained within the diked area and
subsequently removed. The affected soils
have been excavated, staged, and covered.
For more information please contact Art
Smith, OSC, at (502) 905-7559.
Region 7
High-pressure Pipeline Break, Kansas
A high-pressure, 10-inch pipeline break
occurred on the morning of May 23, 2005,
in the Fairfax District of Kansas City,
Kansas. Initial estimates indicated a
release of 20,000 gallons of gasoline onto
the ground and into storm sewers in the
area. EPA OSC, Don Lininger, supported
the Wyandotte County Emergency
Management in the unified command.
The contractor for the potentially
responsible party, Magellan Pipeline,
deployed booms and conducted recovery
and monitoring operations in and around
the spill site with EPA oversight.
EPA, in association with several mutual
aid HAZMAT teams, conducted air
monitoring along a rail line adjacent to the
spill that was shut down. Other areas
monitored include a nearby Board of
Public Utilities (BPU) facility (where a
power plant was shut down for safety
reasons), the outfalls from the storm
sewers to the Missouri River, and all areas
where free product was recovered. Air
monitoring data was processed using
Scribe data management software and the
FAST system. All air monitoring data and
the locations of sewer lines were mapped
with assistance from the Unified
Government's GIS Coordinator.
The BPU resumed power plant operations
on May 24, 2005, while the sewer lines on
the BPU property were flushed throughout
the afternoon. USCG personnel
monitored the outfalls to ensure that all
flushed material was recovered, after
which EPA conducted air monitoring of
the sewer lines. The Department of
Transportation's Office of Pipeline Safety
oversaw the removal and replacement of
the broken pipeline.
For more information please contact Don
Lininger at lininger.don@epa.gov, or Eric
Nold at nold.eric@epa.gov, or visit http://
epaosc.net/site_profile.asp?site_id=1627.
Region 8
Fremont Paving Oil Spill, Colorado
In May 2005, EPA received conflicting
reports regarding the extent of a spill into
Freemont Ditch, Oak Creek, and the
Arkansas River in Canon City, Colorado.
On May 4, a private citizen notified the
Responders at BPU power plant
U.S. EPA Oil Program Update
-------
October 2005
Sampling at Oak Creek
National Response Center (NRC) and the
local fire department of a spill, and
indicated that the spill was being cleaned
up by Fremont Paving and Redi-Mix, Inc.,
the responsible party (RP). The following
morning the RP notified NRC of a spill of
100 to 200 gallons but did not state that a
waterway was affected. However, other
sources indicated the spill was more
severe than as reported to NRC. EPA
mobilized with two START contractors to
the site on May 5, 2005, at which time the
OSC confirmed that the spill entered
navigable waters.
The RP is an asphalt mixing facility that
has a 10,000-gallon capacity tank where it
stores reprocessed oil for fuel to heat
asphalt. The RP reported that the oil had
been released from a drain plug at the
bottom of the oil tank. The tank did not
have secondary containment and the
facility did not have an SPCC Plan. Oil
samples from spill areas, retention ponds,
and facility tanks were submitted for
fingerprint analysis.
Investigation revealed that the oil flowed
at least 13 miles down irrigation and water
supply ditches and creeks, including the
Fawn Hollow drainage, Chandler Creek,
Oak Creek, Minnequa Canal, the City of
Florence Flood Irrigation System, the
Arkansas River, and Fremont Ditch,
which was running full. The Arkansas
River had a visible sheen and some free
product was trapped in snags along its
riverbank. The Pueblo and Charles
reservoirs, approximately 25 miles
downstream, were not affected, although
downstream water users were notified.
Cleanup crews staged absorbent booms on
the affected waterways to catch any
residual oil. The RP's contractor, Custom
Environmental, will maintain the booms.
The bulk of the oil was trapped at a beaver
dam on Oak Creek. Crews removed two
oil-soaked beaver dams and installed an
underflow dam on Oak Creek. EPA, its
contractors, and the USCG Pacific Strike
Team demobilized from the site but will
visit periodically to monitor the progress
of the residual oil cleanup. No further
POLREPs (Pollution Reports) will be
issued for this site and EPA will notify the
USCG case officer when the site is closed.
The RP still needs to cleanup the facility
property where oil, discharged from the
retention pond into Fremont Ditch, soaked
the hillside.
Custom Environmental used several 2000-
gallon capacity vacuum trucks to remove
trapped oil. Since the beginning of the
cleanup operations, approximately 50,000
gallons of material, including an
estimated 8,000 gallons of oil, have been
removed. Recovered oil, which contains
debris and sediment, is being solidified in
concrete at a nearby landfill.
Impacts to Bureau of Land Management
land downstream of the spill were
assessed and are minimal. The impact to
cropland along the irrigation ditches is
also believed to be minimal. Two dead
beavers and several dead fish were seen
on-site and an oiled muskrat was taken to
an animal control facility.
For more information please contact Paul
Peronard, OSC, at (303) 312-6808.
About the Update
The goal of the EPA Oil Program
Center Update is to provide
straight-forward information to
keep EPA Regional staff, other
federal agencies and
departments, industries and
businesses, and the regulated
community current with the
latest developments. The
Update is produced quarterly,
using a compilation of several
sources. The views expressed
here are not necessarily those
of the U.S. EPA.
8
U.S. EPA Oil Program Update
-------
|