United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
EPA 540-N-00-0012
OSWER 9360.8-23
My 2000
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Oil Program Center 5203G
Volume 3 Number 4
THel»EI!A?LQil Program
Contents
PEPCO Oil Spill at Chalk Point,
Maryland
Selection Guide for Oil Spill Applied
Technologies
Midnight Dumping at Mud Creek
New Efforts to Improve Pipeline
Safety
Sixth International Conference on
Effects of Oil on Wildlife
National Conference on Aboveground
Storage Tanks
Bellingham Pipeline Spill Update
Citizens' Council Examines Dispersed
OilToxicity
Overview of EORRA
Other Oil Spills in the News
Attention AST Owners
9
10
About The Update
EPA's Oil Spill Program Update is
produced quarterly, using informa-
tion provided by EPA Regional staff,
and in accordance with Regions'
information needs. The goal of the
Update is to provide straight-forward
information to keep EPA Regional
staff, other federal agencies and
departments, industries and busi-
nesses, and the regulated community
current with the latest developments.
The Update is distributed in hard
copy and is available on the Oil
Program homepage at www.epa.gov/
oilspUL
PEPCO Oil Spill at Chalk
Point, Maryland
The worst oil spill in Potomac
Electric Power Company's
(PEPCO) 104-year history took
place on April 7, 2000, at the
Chalk Point power plant in
Aquasco, Maryland when an oil
pipeline that feeds the plant
ruptured, releasing 129,000
gallons of fuel oil
into Swanson Creek f--—~"
Marsh. The pipeline i '-.£
stretches for 51.5 ! ;
miles along | :
Maryland's I
Patuxent River
shore.
PEPCO notified
EPA of the spill on
the night of Friday
April 7 and began
its response by
placing containment
booms around the
creek. Three EPA
on-scene coordina-
tors (OSCs) were
dispatched to the
site early Saturday
morning. Initial
response efforts
were hampered by a
shortage of equipment, such as the
proper type of booms and drum
skimmers to remove floating oil.
Response was also hampered by
weather-a heavy storm with 50-
knot winds descended on the area
Saturday night and swept much of
the remaining oil over the booms,
affecting a 17-mile stretch of the
Patuxent River and shoreline.
- Saanf
-------
The Patuxent River spill injured hundreds of animals.
The Chalk Point spill response is
among the most extensive in
Region 3 history. EPA dispatched
a total of six OSCs, two commu-
nity involvement coordinators, the
removal program section chief,
and various other officials to the
scene to assist in overseeing
cleanup efforts. The initial
cleanup effort involved skimming
free-floating oil from the river
channel, and cleaning the affected
shores. This effort ran through the
end of April, when the focus
switched to long-term remediation,
such as cleaning damaged shore-
line properties. As of mid-May,
the lead OSC expected to continue
overseeing onsite cleanup through
early July, ensuring that the long-
term efforts would not cause
greater environmental damage
Beatriz Oliveira, Editor,
Oil Program Center
703/603-1229
David Lopez, Director
Oil Program Center
703/603-8760
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Mail Code 5203G
Washington, D.C. 20460
than the
incident itself.
The Patuxent
River is now
open for all
recreational
and commer-
cial activities.
The 45-acre
marsh sur-
rounding Chalk
Point is a
natural wildlife
and fish
habitat, and is
particularly
environmentally sensitive. The
site also contains sheltered tidal
flats and freshwater marshes and
swamps, in which seven endan-
gered and threatened species
reside. An estimated 30 percent of
the spilled oil soaked into the
marsh. The spill killed more than
100 birds, reptiles, and mammals
and injured or sickened hundreds
more. Many of the animals
affected by the spill were rescued
by the Chesapeake Wildlife
Sanctuary for cleanup and treat-
ment, and returned to the area.
Some of the concerns of Maryland
state officials and residents are a
possible drop in tourism and the
safety of seafood consumption as a
result of the spill. Local residents
have reported fish kills, but
investigations do not show a link
between the kills and the oil spill.
In late April, state officials de-
clared fish, crab, and other shell-
fish safe for consumption, but
cautioned that if fish or shellfish
caught in the Patuxent smell like
petroleum, they should be returned
to the water.
The Department of Transportation,
Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS)
closed the pipeline and issued a
Corrective Action Order (CAO) on
April 13, 2000. The CAO called
for a review of PEPCO leak
detection and repair procedures,
inspection of existing equipment,
expansion of the scope of the
current operating procedures,
extensive personnel training in
emergency procedures, and review
of personnel qualifications. The
CAO was later amended to include
OPS's concerns about a 1997
inspection log notation showing
that a pipeline repair took place
near the crack. Although there is a
record of repair in this area, no
repair material was located during
the excavation following the spill.
Although a final report is not
expected for a year, OPS is
concerned that PEPCO may have
bypassed meters and pressure
gauges during maintenance
preparations, failed to properly
monitor for leaks, and did not keep
experienced welders on hand to
repair the pipeline. OPS has
proposed that PEPCO re-examine
its emergency preparedness plans,
and look at the relationship
As a result of concerns about
possible lapses in mainte-
nance and spill prevention
practices in pipeline opera-
tions nationwide, OPS
proposed federal legislation
that strengthens the pipeline
standards currently in place
for high consequence areas.
Corrosion and physical
damage to the pipeline are
the main causes of pipeline
ruptures. The legislation
would require integrity testing
every 10 years, and would
cost the industry approxi-
mately $3.3 million each year.
Public interest groups would
prefer testing more often.
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
-------
between pipeline failures and the ing vendors' requests to use their
lack of preventive measures taken, products.
Officials and citizens have criti-
cized PEPCO's response as too
slow and lacking in resources. A
class action suit has been filed on
behalf of those affected by the
incident, and other lawsuits
continue to follow. PEPCO's
initial response was specifically
targeted by EPA, who charged that
confusion surrounded PEPCO's
containment efforts and contri-
buted to the extent of the post-
storm contamination.
Selection Guide for Oil
Spill Applied Technolo-
gies
The EPA Region 3 Spill Response
Countermeasures Work Group and
the Region 4 Regional Response
Team have developed a Selection
Guide for Oil Spill Applied
Technologies. The Selection
Guide provides on-scene coordina-
tors (OSCs) and other response
decision-makers with easy-to-use
technical information on a variety
of countermeasure technologies.
It is a compilation of information
and guidance on the use of re-
sponse actions that are relatively
unfamiliar to OSCs and other
re spenders.
The Selection Guide is useful in
both inland and coastal areas. It is
intended to support spill response
actions as well as planning. The
information provided in the
Selection Guide is also intended to
assist decision-makers in evaluat-
The Selection Guide consists of
two volumes:
Volume I, the Decision-making
Selection Guide, is designed to
provide response decision-makers
all information to conduct evalu-
ations of a preliminary technology
category, individual product, or
technology during planning or
incident-specific use.
Volume II, Guidance Proce-
dures, contains Region-specific
implementation/operation plans
for spill countermeasures tech-
nologies.
A five-day workshop was held at
the U.S. Coast Guard Reserve
Training Center in Yorktown,
Virginia from April 17 to April 21,
2000, to finalize the Selection
Guide. Participants, representing
the various levels of oil spill
response decision-making, came
together and revised the document
to address the needs of all deci-
sion-makers. Workshop partici-
pants formed a development
committee which will meet again
to determine a plan for maintain-
ing and updating the Selection
Guide, and to specify requirements
for an electronic version to be
posted on a web site at some
future date. The immediate
results of the workshop are a
revised edition of the guide
available in paper copy and PDF
format. Although the current PDF
edition will not be interactive, it
will be accessible, readable, and
printable from a web site.
For more information, please
contact Linda J. Ziegler, Chair,
Spill Response Countermeasures
Workgroup, Regional Response
Team III, at (215) 814-3277.
Midnight Dumping at
Mud Creek
This article describes the investi-
gation and clean-up of two petro-
leum contaminated sites in Iowa,
A-l Septic Services in Altoona,
and Iowa Sanitation Environmen-
tal Services, Inc., located in
Southeast Des Moines. It also
describes the eventual prosecution
of Gilbert Thomas, the operator of
both businesses.
A-l Septic Site
From 1989 to 1991, Gilbert G.
Thomas operated A-l Septic
Services and regularly hauled
septic wastes to the Des Moines
Wastewater Reclamation Author-
ity (DMWRA). In late 1991, part
of the DMWRA facility was
evacuated due to explosive vapors.
Evidence suggests that Thomas
pumped fuel wastes into the
facility. His septic waste hauling
license was revoked.
Following a fire at the A-l Septic
site in late 1993, the Iowa State
Fire Marshall inspected the
property and found the site to be
out of compliance with at least
seven regulations of the Iowa Fire
Code regarding fuel storage tanks.
Thomas was ordered to comply
with the regulations.
Sometime after midnight on May
8, 1998, a private citizen reported
strong petroleum/chemical odors
on Highway 6 east of Altoona,
Iowa. Investigators from the Iowa
Department of Natural Resources
(IDNR) discovered a petroleum
slick in an unnamed tributary to
Mud Creek. The slick was traced
upstream to the A-l Septic site.
IDNR had received several
previous reports of oil sheens in
Mud Creek but none of these
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
-------
could be definitively traced to the
A-l Septic site.
When IDNR investigated the A-l
Septic site, it discovered several
pools of petroleum wastes, and
dead trees near a drainage area
that fed a creek running through
the property. Investigators also
noticed what appeared to be an
attempt to contain the contami-
nated drainage area by covering it
with soil. Investigators also
observed PVC pipe drains in
Thomas' truck garage, and another
PVC pipe end in the drainage area
500 feet northeast of the truck
garage towards Mud Creek. When
asked, Thomas denied that the two
PVC pipe ends were connected. It
was later learned that the pipes
were indeed connected. Enough
evidence had been collected to
raise suspicions of criminal
activity. A search warrant was
obtained by the Iowa Attorney
General's Office, and co-served
with the EPA's Criminal Investiga-
tions Division.
One of the more important objec-
tives at this site was to discover
the exact location of all buried
PVC pipe and to determine the
extent of subsurface soil contami-
nation. Eventually over 750 feet
of perforated and non-perforated
4-inch and 6-inch buried PVC pipe
were unearthed revealing a
clandestine disposal system that
extended from the truck garage to
approximately 50 feet from Mud
Creek.
Sample data showed that soils near
the perforated PVC pipe, and
non-perforated but leaking PVC
pipe, were contaminated at levels
over 25 times the regulatory limit
for total extractable hydrocarbons.
Over 13,000 tons of contaminated
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
soils were hauled off-site in 865
truck loads. This amount of
contaminated soil would fill one
football field to a depth of about
13 feet. More than 1,750 gallons
of hazardous petroleum wastes and
2,280 gallons of non-hazardous
petroleum wastes were removed.
Iowa Sanitation, Inc. Site
Under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), EPA
conducted compliance inspections
at a second site, Iowa Sanitation
and Environmental Services, Inc.,
in 1994 and 1995. This site was
also operated by Thomas, but
owned by his brother. A notice of
violation was issued to Iowa
Sanitation on April 16, 1996.
Initial emergency removal actions
began in late July 1998. They
included removal of 6,000 gallons
of liquid hazardous wastes from a
poorly constructed concrete
settling tank. Disposal of on-site
waste included the removal of
42,000 gallons of ethanol and
butanol contaminated wastewater
from on-site storage tanks;
pumping and proper disposal of
17,025 gallons of hazardous waste
oil from the nine on-site storage
tanks; pumping of 4,361 gallons of
hazardous waste (which included
trichloroethylene and oil contain-
ing low levels of PCBs) from two
storage tanks; and excavation,
transportation, and disposal of
7,431 tons of petroleum contami-
nated soils/sludges (over 450 truck
loads).
On-site activities conducted in
November and December of 1998,
included removal of a concrete
settling tank; removal and stabili-
zation of tank bottom sludge;
removal of contaminated soil;
sampling of contaminated ground-
water; the disposal of contami-
nated water from the area of
excavation within the groundwater
table; and backfilling of the
excavation area and site restora-
tion.
During the excavation of contami-
nated soils, a PVC pipe was
uncovered by EPA that, with the
help of officials from DMWRA,
was determined to be illegally
connected to the sewer line.
Sections of this PVC pipe had
sludges caked on the inside walls
and were similar to those wastes
found on-site previously.
Also during the excavation,
groundwater discovered at a depth
of 22 feet was found to be con-
taminated. Decisions regarding
possible groundwater remediation
are being reviewed by EPA at this
time.
Post-Removal Assessments
Based on the removal confirma-
tion data from both sites, it
appears that the on-site source(s)
no longer presents a threat for
continued migration to ground-
water, surface water, soil exposure
or air pathways. Although a
release to surface water had
occurred at the A-l Septic site, the
analytical data indicated no
residual sediment contamination in
the creek. The contaminated soil
sources have been mitigated by the
clean-up actions, and only low
levels of contaminants in subsur-
face soils exist on either site. At
the A-l Septic site, no ground-
water contamination was dis-
covered during the investigation.
Screening of surrounding drinking
water wells indicated no petro-
leum contamination.
-------
Prosecution
By late spring of 1999, the State of
Iowa charged Thomas with seven
individual aggravated environmen-
tal crime misdemeanors, each of
which carried up to a two-year
prison sentence and from $25,000
to $50,000. He also was indicted
on the felony count of Ongoing
Criminal Conduct-Continuing
Criminal Enterprise, a Class B
felony which carries a minimum
sentence of 25 years in prison.
This count was based on the
allegation that Thomas told
customers that the wastes were
being transported and disposed of
properly, which in fact they
weren't, and charged his custom-
ers thousands of dollars for the
fraudulent service.
Gilbert Thomas was convicted of
all eight counts related to illegal
hauling, illegal disposal, illegal
sewer connection, and illegal
storage. He plead guilty to a Class
C felony-Theft by Deception. He
was sentenced to 10 years in
prison and fined $100,000. Pros-
ecutors stated that this unusually
stiff sentence fit the magnitude of
his acts. "It's the kind of thing that
should deter other waste haulers
from doing the same thing," said
Douglas Marek, Deputy State
Attorney General. The cleanup,
prosecution, and investigation at
the two sites will cost taxpayers
about $1.2 million.
For more information, contact
Jereme Altendorf, EPA Region 7,
at (913) 551-9714.
New Efforts to Improve
Pipeline Safety
Vice President Al Gore recently
announced an effort to increase
pipeline safety requirements, raise
fines for safety violations, and
provide more information about
pipeline safety to the public. The
effort would also allow states to
regulate pipeline construction
more stringently and to become
more involved in pipeline accident
investigation. This initiative,
introduced on April 11, 2000,
specifically targets EPA's environ-
mentally sensitive and highly
populated regions.
In an effort to address the concerns
of citizens who feel uninformed
about pipelines that run through
and near their towns, the initiative
proposes requiring pipeline
operators to make maps, manuals,
and emergency response plans
available to local residents. To
ensure operator compliance with
safety guidelines, the initiative
would raise the fine for spills
resulting from an over-pressurized
pipeline to $500,000—20 times
the current penalty.
Congress is likely to reauthorize
the 1990 Pipeline Safety Act
during its 2000 session. The
Administration is hopeful that this
pipeline safety initiative will be
part of that reauthorization.
However, it appears to be a low
priority on Congress' list.
Regardless of Congressional
action, federal agencies will
continue efforts to improve
pipeline safety. A February 4,
2000 Memorandum of Under-
standing (MOU) between the
Department of Transportation
Vice President Gore's call for improvements in pipeline safety
follows a number of serious accidents that served to heighten
awareness of the dangers and environmental threats from pipelines
that carry petroleum and petroleum products.
• June 10,1999, a ruptured pipeline in Bellingham, Washington,
released 277,000 gallons of gasoline. The fumes, and the
resulting explosion were responsible for three deaths, millions of
dollars in property damage, severe environmental damage, and
disruptions in local water supplies.
• The worst oil spill in Kentucky history occurred on January 27,
2000, when a pipeline ruptured and released nearly 500,000
gallons of crude oil. The spilled oil is a lingering threat to the
Kentucky River, which provides drinking water for the Town of
Lexington.
• On February 5, 2000, 67,000 gallons of oil leaked from a crude
oil pipeline, polluting the John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge in
Pennsylvania. The spill affected many of the severely endan-
gered species living nearby.
• In March 2000, a spill of about 564,000 gallons of unleaded
gasoline containing methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) by Explorer
Pipeline Co. in Hunt County, Texas contaminated Lake Tawakoni,
fouling about one-third of Dallas Texas' drinking water supply.
• On April 7, 2000, a broken pipeline spilled 129,000 gallons of oil
into a marsh at Chalk Point, Maryland. (See story on page 1.)
Although the number of pipeline spills has been on the decline since
1990, the average volume of spills has increased. DOT'S Office of
Pipeline Safety has found a 38 percent increase in the amount of oil
spilled from 1996 through 1999, when compared to 1991 through
1995.
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
-------
(DOT) and EPA is an example of
improving regulatory cooperation
for better pipeline safety perfor-
mance. The MOU clarified
jurisdictional issues over storage
tanks at transportation-related and
non-transportation-related facili-
ties. It also spelled out joint goals
for EPA's Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response and
DOT's Office of Pipeline Safety.
Sixth International
Conference on Effects of
Oil on Wildlife
Tri-State Bird Rescue & Research,
Inc. hosted the Sixth International
Conference on Effects of Oil on
Wildlife on March 30-31, 2000, in
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
The conference focused on
planning, prevention, prepared-
ness, and working cooperatively
with stakeholders to minimize the
consequences of oil spills to
wildlife and to maximize planning
efforts to ensure the most efficient,
effective response possible.
Discussions involved standards of
care for oiled wildlife, contin-
Workers minimize trauma to
injured animals
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
gency planning efforts acrossthe
U.S. and around the world, and
results of long-term post-release
monitoring studies. There were
over 150 attendees from 12
countries and 5 continents.
Mark Struthers McBride, the
mayor of Myrtle Beach, gave a
welcome address and thanked all
involved in last year's mystery oil
spill in Myrtle Beach. According
to the mayor, the source of the
spill was never found. Close to
100 miles of coastline were
affected; from Wilmington, North
Carolina to Charleston, South
Carolina. Over 200 birds were
impacted by this incident. With no
response facility available in the
immediate area, businesses,
private citizens and the community
pulled together to create a wildlife
rehabilitation center. One impor-
tant component of this coopera-
tion, is the passion and dedication
demonstrated by this community
to protect wildlife. Several local
volunteers who worked on the
1999 spill, also assisted in the
organization of this year's confer-
ence.
In his keynote address, Ron
Britton of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, pointed out that there are
seven basic challenges facing
wildlife rescuers and
rehabilitators: 1) maintaining the
drive and dedication needed to
protect wildlife; 2) problem
solving; 3) determining goals and
obtaining funding to achieve these
goals; 4) planning to ensure best
response; 5) integrating prevention
into the planning process; 6)
practicing training guidelines and
being prepared; and 7) evaluating
and learning lessons from past oil
spills. Britton also noted that the
Third Biennial Freshwater Spills
Symposium's major theme, the
development of partnerships and
coordination of prevention,
planning and response efforts
among federal agencies, states,
tribes, local communities and
industry, can be applied to maxi-
mize preparedness by wildlife
rescuers and responders.
Tri-State demonstrated manual
bird washing and Elf Atochem
North America, Inc., demonstrated
a bird washing machine which is
designed to perform a thorough
and quick (7 minute) washing of
oil soaked birds in order to mini-
mize trauma. In cooperation with
Yves Rocher Laboratories, ELF's
research teams have also come up
with a surfactant (detergent)
specially formulated for this
purpose.
Other sponsors of the event
included The Humane Society of
the United States, the International
Fund for Animal Welfare, The
Water Quality Insurance Syndi-
cate, Clean Caribbean Coopera-
tive, Texaco, Chevron, Sunoco,
and API, among others.
For more information on this
conference, please contact Tri-
State Bird Rescue & Research,
Inc. at (302) 737-7241, or at 110
Possum Hollow Road, Newark,
Delaware 19711.
National Conference on
Aboveground Storage
Tanks
The Third Annual National
Conference on Aboveground
Storage Tanks was held May 9-11,
2000 in Tampa, Florida. The
meeting brought together leaders
of industry and a wide variety of
state, local, and federal regulators
to discuss issues involving
aboveground storage tanks
-------
(ASTs). The conference provided
a forum to inform the oil commu-
nity on the latest developments in
spill prevention, notify industry of
the latest regulations, and to share
views on the best practical meth-
ods for oil spill prevention.
The conference included talks by
industry and regulators and
covered a variety of topics.
Presenters addressed regulatory
issues, inspection and maintenance
of tanks, secondary containment
issues, and factors that promote
tank corrosion and how to mitigate
them.
Regulators informed industry of
current and new regulations and
standards for ASTs and pipelines.
Members of industry explained
new technologies developed for
preventing oil spills. Participants
were also informed of how indi-
vidual companies have dealt with
compliance issues and regulations.
Two open panel discussions
addressed secondary containment
in ASTs and pipelines. During
these panels, a variety of views
were presented and regulators and
industry leaders were able to
express their opinions on these
topics.
The keynote address was given by
David Lopez, Director of the EPA
Oil Program Center (OPC). Lopez
spoke about two themes in OPC
activities. First, OPC looks at
what elements are necessary to
minimize oil pollution. Second, it
tries to build relationships. OPC
and industry need to have strong
ties in order to minimize spills and
their impacts. Success is achieved
through an integrated approach
which includes prevention,
preparedness and response.
The first step toward improved
performance is better prevention.
There is a strong need to get
stakeholders involved in order to
gain a better understanding of how
all interested parties can make
regulations work. On the same
note, it is necessary to ensure
compliance with the policies that
are in place. Furthermore, EPA
needs to increase its focus on
inspections, new technologies, and
further outreach.
The second step is preparedness.
All oil facilities must make sure an
emergency plan is viable, should a
spill occur. To do this they must
remain active and continue
training so that a plan can be
implemented at any time. Also,
stakeholders should be involved in
making sure a facility is prepared.
The final step is response. During
a response, it is important that the
roles and responsibilities of
individuals are clearly defined and
that the individuals are know-
ledgeable and capable of per-
forming the response action.
Government agencies and re-
sponsible parties should both be
included in the response. Other
federal agencies should be brought
in as necessary. There must be a
continuing dialogue among all
involved parties to continue
improving response capabilities.
Lopez concluded the keynote
speech by noting that forums such
as the AST conference are impor-
tant. They allow industry and
regulators to meet, exchange ideas,
and identify needs before a
situation occurs. There is no room
for complacency when it comes to
preventing spills. There is room
for improvement and a need to
continue to do more to prevent oil
spills.
Bellingham Pipeline
Spill Update
More than a year has passed since
a pipeline ruptured along
Whatcom Creek in Bellingham,
Washington spilling more than
250,000 gallons of gasoline. The
rupture, which occurred June 10,
1999, resulted in a thick cloud of
gasoline vapors which overcame
one man who fell into the creek
and drowned. The vapors ex-
ploded, leading to the deaths of
two boys who were playing near
the creek.
The cause of the spill is still under
investigation and a long section of
the pipeline remains closed while
the Department of Transportation
(DOT) continues its inquiry into
the maintenance and operations
practices of the Olympic Pipe Line
Company, the owner of the
pipeline. Pipeline operators, who
inexplicably shut off, and then
restarted pumps after the rupture
occurred, continue to refuse to talk
with inspectors invoking their
Fifth Amendment rights against
self incrimination.
Inspections following the accident
have revealed a number of defects
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
-------
The exact cause of the Bellingham pipeline discharge is still un-
known.
in the line that require further
inspection and repairs. Olympic
must excavate and inspect any
damage that appears to have been
caused by an outside force. The
DOT's Office of Pipeline Safety
has instructed Olympic to inspect
the pipeline using devices known
as "smart pigs" that travel through
the pipe looking for damage and
weak spots. Several local repre-
sentatives, however, are convinced
that Olympic should use pressure
tests to ensure the integrity of the
entire pipeline.
On June 6, DOT announced a
penalty of $3.05 million against
Olympic for violations of pipeline
safety regulations. In levying the
fine, DOT cited a failure to inspect
defects in the area of the rupture
and operating in an unsafe condi-
tion. Olympic detected 279
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
defects during inspections in 1996
and 1997. Some of these were in
the area of the break but were not
excavated for visual inspections—
fewer than 10 percent of the
defects were excavated. Olympic
records show that an engineer
came to the site to conduct a visual
inspection but did not perform the
inspection because the site was a
difficult area to access.
For more information about the
events leading up to the spill, and
the response effort following the
spill, see the July 1999 and
October 1999 issues of the Oil
Spill Program Update.
Citizens' Council Exam-
ines Dispersed Oil Toxic-
ity
In its on-going effort to investigate
technologies for responding to oil
spills, the Prince William Sound
Regional Citizens' Advisory
Council recently released a white
paper titled Dispersed Oil Toxicity
Issues: A Review of Existing
Research and Recommendations
for Future Studies. The paper
contains a review of existing
research on the subject and
recommendations for future
studies. The council views the use
of chemical dispersants on oil
spills with caution and supports
scientific research to help answer
outstanding questions.
For example, the Council notes
that there is little understanding
about how chemically dispersed
oil behaves in the water column
from the surface of the sea to the
bottom, or how it affects the
species that live there. And
virtually nothing is known about
how dispersed oil is affected by
sunlight, although it is known to
increase the toxicity of un-dis-
persed crude oil. This process is
called photoenhancement and
substances susceptible to it are
called phototoxic. The council is
particularly interested in the role
of photoenhancement in the fate of
chemically dispersed oil in the
ocean.
Photoenhanced toxicity of un-
dispersed oil has been documented
in a number of cases. Various
studies have shown the toxicity of
hydrocarbons and other com-
pounds increased from two-fold to
a thousand-fold in the presence of
ultraviolet light similar to sunlight.
Photoenhanced toxicity to aquatic
organisms may occur in two ways:
through photomodification or
photosensitization. In
photomodification, the ultraviolet
light changes the chemical in the
water to make it more toxic. In
-------
photosensitization, an aquatic
organism eats the oil, then the oil
inside the organism absorbs
ultraviolet energy, causing tissue
damage in the organism. Evidence
suggests that the photoenhanced
toxicity of oil occurs through
photosensitization rather than
photomodification.
In preparing the white paper, the
Council did not find any published
studies that consider the
photoenhanced toxicity of oil in
Alaskan waters, or that evaluate
the photoenhanced toxicity of
chemically dispersed oil in any
kind of sea water. The council
believes this is a large gap in the
understanding of the use of
chemical dispersants. To help
promote research in this area, the
council has asked Dr. Mace
Barren, an expert in the field of
photoenhanced toxicity, to prepare
a peer-reviewed paper on the
potential for photoenhanced
toxicity of oil in Prince William
Sound and Gulf of Alaska waters.
In a presentation to the Council in
December, Dr. Barren explained
the potential for photoenhanced
toxicity of spilled oil in the
council's region. North Slope
crude has been shown to be
phototoxic in laboratory tests.
Sufficient ultraviolet radiation
may penetrate the water of Prince
William Sound and the Gulf of
Alaska to produce photoenhanced
toxicity. However, no research has
been done to evaluate this poten-
tial. Dr. Barren will elaborate on
research experiments and studies
that could answer these questions.
In addition to photoenhanced
toxicity, other research recommen-
dations are contained in the paper
on the toxicity of dispersed oil.
Other possible subjects include
testing the effectiveness of the
dispersants stockpiled in Alaska,
toxicological testing of these
dispersants, and a dispersants risk
analysis.
To learn more about these recom-
mendations, view the white paper
on the Council's web site at
www.pwsrcac.org, or request a
copy from the Anchorage office.
Overview of EORRA
The Oil Pollution Act (OPA)
applies to vegetable oils and
animal fats, as well as petroleum-
based oils. Collectively known by
the oil industry as edible oils,
vegetable oils and animal fats
share a number of properties with
petroleum-based oils and are
addressed in some of the same
laws and regulations. However,
edible oils also have unique
properties and are addressed by
the Edible Oil Regulatory Reform
Act of 1995 (EORRA).
Similar in chemical structure to
petroleum-based oils, edible oils,
when spilled, cause many of the
same undesirable effects on the
environment that petroleum oils
do. Edible oils may coat organ-
isms, often leading to oxygen
depletion or hypothermia. They
may be toxic to organisms, destroy
food supplies, and produce odors.
They can also degrade shorelines,
wreak havoc on water treatment
plants, and be persistent in the
environment.
EORRA requires most Federal
regulations and guidance docu-
ments (excluding those of the
Food and Drug Administration and
the Food Safety and Inspection
Service) to use separate classifica-
tions for petroleum-based oils and
non-petroleum oils, including
edible oils. The language of future
legislation is therefore required to
be clear as to whether it applies to
edible oils, petroleum oils, or both.
OPA addresses both petroleum and
non-petroleum oils. It requires
facilities to prepare Facility
Response Plans (FRPs) if they
store certain quantities of edible
oils or if a spill from the facility
might cause significant and
substantial harm to the environ-
ment. An FRP outlines a contin-
gency plan to be followed, should
oil be discharged to the environ-
ment. Under OPA, the FRP
requirements for edible oil are
more flexible than those for
petroleum facilities. EORRA
provisions that amend the Oil
Pollution Prevention Response
regulation (40 CFR Part 112) have
led EPA to propose a specific
methodology to handle, store, and
transport edible oils when plan-
ning response actions. This notice
was published in the Federal
Register on April 8, 1999. EPA
accepted comments on the pro-
posed rule and the advanced notice
of the proposed rule making
through June 9, 1999 and July 7,
1999, respectively. A final rule is
pending.
Other Oil Spills in the
News
Crude Oil Spill at Miller Branch
Creek
Approximately 80 barrels of crude
oil made its way into a creek bed
in Stiles, Louisiana, on February
17, 2000. The spill resulted from
a broken pipeline that had snapped
when a tree fell onto it. Approxi-
mately 200 yards of the creek bed,
which flows into the James Bayou,
was affected. The James Bayou
flows in Caddo Lake which is
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
-------
:'H-'"V - '^.x.^^is&iy-:
, ^£v?3iir..
i .-i^Br -;-- s.- - .ftiKtsfc' ,, --* ' „&:&*,. "Vrt-jfclEsI&i"!;
Fa//en free breaks pipeline at James Bayou.
located two miles south of the
spill.
By February 18, 2000, 30 barrels
of the crude oil had been collected.
The responsible party (RP) for the
spill intends to power wash the
creek bed so that product will flow
into collection points where oil
can be collected using a vacuum
truck.
Another spill for the same RP had
occurred two days earlier not far
from the Stiles site. Approxi-
mately 300 barrels of crude oil
was discharged into a creek when
a bulldozer ran over a pipeline.
The RP plans to repair the pipeline
and bury it three feet below the
mud line as soon as the cleanup
process is completed.
Jet Fuel Spill at Plantation Pipeline
Facility, Fairfax County, Virginia
On January 10, 2000, EPA was
notified of a jet fuel spill from the
Plantation Pipeline facility located
in Newington, Fairfax County,
Virginia. The report did not
indicate the volume of oil re-
leased, however, the oil reached
Accotink Creek through one of its
tributaries. Accotink Creek is a
tributary to the Potomac River.
The cause of the spill is attributed
to a leaking product interface
detection device. An EPA Region
3 team, along with representatives
from the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
will be assessing damage to the
ten-acre wetland area that was
affected by the spill. Plantation
Pipeline Company's cleanup
contractor installed an earthen
underflow dam on Accotink Creek
which prevented the spill from
reaching the Potomac River.
Attention AST Owners:
Tank Failures Lead to
Investigation of Tank
Erection Company
Response to a January 8, 2000
liquid fertilizer release from a one
million-gallon tank in Cincinnati,
Ohio led authorities there to
investigate other tank failures
involving the Carolyn Equipment
Company. The company was
involved in the construction of
several other tanks that have
subsequently failed in Indiana,
Iowa, Michigan, and Ohio.
A local AST registry has been
formed that will aid in the identifi-
cation of ASTs that have been
erected by the company. Tanks
manufactured by the company
should be tested to insure that the
ASTs are structurally sound. For
more information, contact Michael
Kroeger, Assistant Fire Chief,
Cincinnati, at (312) 353-1505.
The company operated out of Ohio
at several locations with different
names:
Carolyn Equipment Company
(1986-March 26, 1990)
1416 High Street
Hamilton, OH
Nationwide Tank Company
(March 26, 1990 - March 22,
1995)
1416 High Street
Hamilton, OH
Nationwide Tank Company (July
1997 -unknown)
10992 Reed Hartman Highway
Cincinnati, OH
The company may have also used
the name J&D Erection.
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
July 2000
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency (5203G)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
------- |