United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
EPA 540-N-01-002
OSWER 9360.8-28
April 2001
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Oil Program Center 5203G
Volume 4 Number 2
Contents
Status and Background of the
Spill Prevention Control and
Countermeasure Rule
1
PREP Exercise-Region IV 3
Solano Way Oil Spill 4
Oil Spill Exercise Generator Software is
Now Available 4
2001 International Oil Spill Conference
and Exhibition
Companies Volunteer to Clean Up
Tank Emissions
Recent Spills ..
Recent Civil Actions Under the
Clean Water Act 7
New STI Standard SP001-00 8
OSC Task Force Training in Phoenix.... 8
Upcoming Events 9
Status and
Background
of the Spill
Prevention
Control and
Counter-
measure Rule
Introduction
The Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure
(SPCC) rule can be found in Title
40 of the Code of Federal Regula-
tions (CFR), Part 112 (Oil Pollution
Prevention). The original 1973
SPCC regulation first became
effective on January 10, 1974,
under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
The rule applies to owners or
operators of facilities that store or
use oil and oil products and who
could discharge oil in amounts that
may harm navigable waters or
adjoining shorelines. A revision to
the rule has been proposed;
however, the rule revision was
signed by Carol Browner on
January 10, 2001, but was never
published due to action of the
current administration. It is not in
effect, and is therefore, not the law.
EPA does not know when or if it
will be published.
About The Update
EPA's Oil Spill Program Update is produced quarterly, using
information provided by EPA Regional staff, and in accor-
dance 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 businesses, and the regulated community
current with the latest developments. The Update is available
on the Oil Program homepage at www.epa.gov/oilspill.
-------
Background of the Oil Pollution
Prevention Regulation
The goal of the oil pollution pre-
vention regulation in 40 CFR Part
112 is to prevent oil discharges
from reaching navigable waters of
the United States or adjoining
shorelines. The rule was also
written to ensure effective re-
sponses to oil discharges. The rule
further specifies that proactive,
and not passive, measures be used
to respond to oil discharges.
The oil pollution regulation contains
two major types of requirements:
prevention requirements (SPCC
rule) and facility response plan
(FRP) requirements. The preven-
tion requirements in Sections 112.1
through 112.7 were first promul-
gated in the 1973 SPCC regulation.
Required under the rule is an
SPCC Plan, that contains mea-
sures to prevent and control oil
spills, including those resulting from
human operational error or equip-
ment failures.
Reasons for Proposed Changes
The impetus behind the proposed
SPCC changes is manifold. First,
the proposed changes stem from
the need to clarify the language
and organization of the rule. The
proposed changes comply with the
Presidential order requiring that all
new rules or rule amendments be
drafted in plain language. The
Highlights of Proposed Rule Revisions
• Exempts facilities with completely buried storage tanks
regulated under 40 CFR Parts 280 or 281;
• Establishes a de minimis container size of 55 gallons;
• Establishes an aboveground storage capacity threshold of
more than 1,320 gallons and removes the 660 gallon
provision;
• Revises the threshold for reporting discharges to EPA to
over 42 gallons combined in 2 discharges in any 12-month
period;
• Allows deviations when equivalent environmental protec-
tion is provided;
• Provides for a flexible plan format, with a cross-reference
showing that all regulatory requirements are met; and
• Extends applicability to the storage and operational use of
oil.
proposed changes would reduce the
information collection on the
regulated community.
The proposed SPCC changes
would reduce the regulatory
burden by approximately 40
percent. The proposed changes
would eliminate duplicate regula-
tion, exempt certain small facilities,
and require consideration of
industry standards in prevention
plans. In most cases, the proposed
rule would also allow an owner or
operator to substitute a required
measure for another providing
equivalent environmental protec-
tion. The number of facilities now
regulated by the SPCC rule would
be reduced by about 51,500
facilities as a result of the
proposed changes.
General Applicability
The current SPCC rule
applies to owners or
operators of facilities that
drill, produce, gather, store,
use, process, refine,
transfer, distribute, or
consume oil and oil prod-
ucts. The revisions clarify applica-
bility to owners or operators that
use oil in quantities that may be
harmful. The revisions also track
the scope of the rule to conform
with the expanded jurisdiction of
the amended CWA. The broad-
ened range includes waters of the
contiguous zone and waters
connected with activity under the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
or Deepwater Port Act, as well as
waters affecting certain natural
resources of the United States.
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
April 2001
-------
Region 4 PREP Exercise in Leland, North Carolina
Summary
If the final SPCC rule is published
in the Federal Register, its effect is
expected to be positive. The
revised rule would not only be
more understandable than the
present rule, but reduce the
number of facilities regulated and
the overall regulatory burden.
PREP Exercise -
Region IV
On October 18,2000, EPA Region
IV conducted an unannounced
government Preparedness for
Response Exercise Program
(PREP) drill at the P&W Waste
Oil Facility in Leland, North
Carolina. The PREP exercise was
conducted as a follow-up action
after a Facility Response Plan/Spill
Prevention Control and Counter-
measure (FRP/SPCC) inspection
on June 27,2000, revealed major
preparedness and structural issues
at the facility, which is located near
the Cape Fear River. The purpose
of this exercise was to verify that
the company is prepared to
implement the procedures and
deploy the equipment identified in
its FRP and to initiate an immedi-
ate and effective response to an
actual incident.
Charles Fitzsimmons, the On-
Scene Coordinator (OSC), and
other Region IV personnel planned
an exercise scenario for the
facility. The scenario involved a
discharge of 36,000 gallons of
waste oil as a result of vandalism,
directly impacting the Cape Fear
River. At a pre-exercise meeting
on October 18, 2000, OSC
Fitzsimmons reviewed the scenario
response with all participants,
excluding the facility.
The participants then proceeded to
the facility and announced the
scenario. While the OSC and the
U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety
Office (USCG MSO) personnel
jointly described the scenario and
observed the follow-up coordina-
tion and notifications implementa-
tion, MSO personnel observed any
health and safety issues. State
water quality personnel observed
from the river the deployment of
contractor resources, including
boats, and boom and skimming
equipment.
The exercise highlighted several of
the facility's internal and external
problems. Internal problems
included inaccurate phone numbers
on the call list, inability to contact
the qualified individual (QI),
confusion regarding initial coordi-
nation of facility manpower, and
little or no threat assessment.
External problems included lack of
ability to direct the Oil Spill Re-
sponse Organization (OSRO),
apparent lack of coordination
between the contractor and the QI,
and delayed response time for
deployment of contractor re-
sources due to an unusable local
boat ramp.
The after-exercise "hot wash,"
with input from all participants,
provided a valuable report to the
facility and also the participating
agencies. USCG discussed the
noted health and safety issues, and
the state water quality personnel
provided good technical advice,
while recognizing their role of
support to the federal OSC.
During an actual release, the OSC
would probably assume coordina-
tion control and direction of the
overall response of an actual
incident, but the exercise helped
the QI realize that a spill of this
magnitude would require refine-
ment of their coordination skills.
The QI also became acutely
aware that the FRP must be
reviewed routinely with the OSRO
at his facility.
For more information, please
contact OSC Charles Fitzsimmons
of EPA Region IV at (404) 562-
8773.
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
April 2001
-------
Solano Way Oil Spill
On December 12, 2000, a Petro-
leum pipeline ruptured adjacent to
a marsh in the San Francisco Bay
area, spilling hydrocarbons into the
Pacheco Slough tidal system.
Since the spill's discovery, over
100,000 gallons of contaminated
water and 31 bins of contaminated
soils have been removed from the
area. Oil Spill Response Organiza-
tion (OSRO) contractors, under
the auspices of federal and state
agencies, responded to the spill to
further mitigate its impacts and
limit the threat of pollution migra-
tion during the rainy season.
The spill occurred on a wetland
area located next to Waterfront
Road, along a corridor laden with
underground pipelines owned by
several different pipeline compa-
nies and utilities, including
Ultramar Refinery, Equilon, Kinder
Morgan, and PG&E. The pipeline
discharge, identified as gasoline,
was contained in a marshy ditch
between railroad tracks and
Waterfront Road. Petroleum
product continued to surface in the
spill area and along the ditch below
the railroad trestle. Both the ditch
and marsh are tidal systems with
outgoing flows reaching the
Pacheco Slough, which is 1/4 mile
away. No petroleum product was
found in the Pacheco Slough or in
any waters leading to the San
Francisco Bay.
OSRO contractors, including the
Clean Bay Consortium, ARE,
Universal Environmental, and
Onyx Environmental, performed
removal actions in coordination
with the California Department of
Fish and Game, the Oil Spill
Prevention and Response Office
(OSPR), the California Regional
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
April 2001
Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB), and a Superfund
Technical and Response Team
(START). Efforts included the use
of booms to contain the oil in the
ditch, sand bags to isolate the spill
from the tidal waters, and vacuum
trucks to remove and transfer the
oil/water mixture from the ditch to
Kinder Morgan on-site storage
tanks. Groundwater samples
collected along the boundary of the
spill area indicate low levels of
hydrocarbon contamination. Iron
bacteria, occurring naturally at the
site, apparently aided in the
breakdown of the spilled low level
petroleum product.
On January 5, 2001, Kinder
Morgan submitted to authorities an
Incident Action Plan with the goal
of preventing clean water from
reaching and spreading the con-
tamination. The plan involved
back filling low lying areas, install-
ing a visqueen cover, constructing
underflow piping to divert surface
water, excavating stained soil, and
monitoring the site before and
during rain events. Contaminated
soils and equipment will be dis-
posed of at the Ford Landfill.
Kinder Morgan will be required to
obtain approvals from the
RWQCB and the county for
contaminated water disposal from
the site.
RWQCB has required Kinder
Morgan to continuously assess the
soil and groundwater contamina-
tion in the hot zone. In addition,
OSPR has set up mammal traps to
determine animal densities in the
area to further assess natural
resource damages.
For more information, contact the
On-Scene Coordinator, Steve
Calanog, at (415) 744-2327.
Oil Spill Exercise
Generator Software
is Now Available
The Environmental Protection
Agency's Software for Environ-
mental Protection Office is intro-
ducing the Oil Spill Exercise
Generator Software (OILSPILL).
This database-driven program,
developed by EPA Region 5 and
Purdue University, allows users to
construct an oil spill exercise or
response drill in a matter of hours,
and to fill out checklists for use in
a final evaluation report.
The software is intended to fill a
specific need in the development
and evaluation of exercises and/or
response drills. With appropriate
inputs, the program will write a
scenario, provide canned weather
conditions, and pro vide inputs or
messages to move the exercise
along. The user is given the
opportunity to customize scenarios
and messages in order to suit his/
her specific situation. The pro-
gram also provides seasonal
weather data for all of the United
States, its Territories, and Canada,
and can be modified to meet the
needs of the user.
The OILSPILL program also has
the advantage of including evalua-
tion checklists for each of the
elements listed in the National
Preparedness for Response
Exercise Program (PREP).
Evaluators can fill out these forms
by hand or electronically, and then
transfer the text into a word
processor for use in an evaluation
report.
While this program provides the
necessary tools for an evaluator to
use, it does not replace a knowl-
edgable and independent evaluator.
-------
The complex matrix of facts that
drive decision-making, and the final
distinction between decisions made
and not made, are best overseen by
an evaluator.
You can read more about the
program, download the manual,
and place an order at the USEPA
Software for Environmental
Protection Web site at
www. epa.go v/seahome.
2001 International
Oil Spill Conference
And Exhibition
The 17 th Biennial International Oil
Spill Conference (IOSC) was held
March 26-29 at the Tampa Con-
vention Center in Tampa, Florida.
Poster, panel, and special sessions
along with exhibits provided
thoughtful and outstanding perspec-
tives on this year's theme, "Global
Strategies for Prevention, Pre-
paredness, Response, and Restora-
tion." The IOSC was jointly
sponsored by the U.S. EPA, U.S.
Coast Guard, the American Petro-
leum Institute, the International
Maritime Organization, and the
International Petroleum Industry
Environmental Conservation
Association.
The conference attracted nearly
2,000 participants from 50 coun-
tries. Over 200 exhibits of materi-
als, equipment, and services from
United States and foreign compa-
nies, institutions, and government
agencies involved in the manufac-
ture, sale, regulation, and use of
products of the oil industry were on
display in the conference trade
exhibition. Scott Carpenter, a
renown aerospace and ocean
engineer, and Stephan P.
Leatherman, the nation's foremost
authority on beach quality and
coastal erosion, were featured
speakers at the conference.
EPA's Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response participated in
several panels and presented papers
in various sessions. Some high-
lights included Steve Luftig and
David Lopez as members of the
opening plenary session discussing
the future of OPA '90; Bud Hunt,
Ray Worley, Nick Nichols and
Beatriz Oliveira made presentations
on Response Plans for Animal Fat
and Vegetable Oil Facilities, The
National Problem of Oil Wells
Fields and Geographic Information
System Standards for the U.S.
EPA's Oil Spill Program, The NCP
Product Schedule, and the Fresh-
water Spills Symposium, respec-
tively. In addition several Oil
Program Center members served as
session chairpersons including
Hugo Fleischman, Ray Worley, and
Bud Hunt. Nick Nichols was
chairperson of the poster sessions,
coordinating the delivery of more
than 100 poster presenta-
tions during the confer-
ence. The EPA Oil
Program Center also
displayed their booth and
distributed outreach
materials. For more
information, contact Nick
Nichols, (703) 603-9918
or Beatriz Oliveira, (703)
603-1229.
Companies Volunteer
to Clean Up Tank
Emissions
In accordance with an agreement
between EPA and the American
Petroleum Institute (API), 61
companies nationwide have agreed
to install greater emission controls
on approximately 866 aboveground
storage tanks fitted with "slotted
guide poles." The guide poles are
slender columns built on the inside
of tanks that allow for fuel sam-
pling and drainage. While guide
poles enable accurate sampling for
the purpose of environmental
compliance, they also allow the
release of volatile organic com-
pounds (VOCs) into the air.
Consequently, EPA had previously
determined that slotted guide poles
have observable emission pathways
that violate federal new source
standards under the Clean Air Act.
The agreement is part of the
Storage Tank Emission Reduction
Program, and is expected to reduce
VOCs by 2,000 tons each year -
the equivalent of removing 76,000
cars from the nation's roads.
VOCs are known to be key con-
tributors to ground-level ozone, or
smog, which can decrease lung
function and aggravate respiratory
problems. The agreement includes
companies with aboveground
storage tanks that store substantial
quantities of volatile organic liquids,
including petroleum products.
In return for their participation with
this agreement, EPA has agreed to
eliminate any penalty obligations
for companies that agree to audit,
disclose, and correct leaks from
tanks fitted with slotted guide
poles. Participating companies
agreed to register their intent to
comply and to submit participation
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
April 2001
-------
agreements. The agreement allows
companies to fit their aboveground
storage tanks with appropriate
emissions controls devices until
June 13,2002, but will allow more
time for any tanks that must be
taken out of service in order to
install these devices.
The agreement is an example of the
environmental benefits that result
from EPA and industry coopera-
tion, and may serve as a model for
future agreements. Details of this
program were published in the
Federal Register on January 14,
2001.
Recent Spills
Yaquina River Oil Spill
In the early hours of January 27,
2001, a tanker truck accident on
Highway 20, near Toledo, Oregon
resulted in the discharge of approxi-
mately 5,800 gallons of No. 6 fuel
oil in an area directly adjacent to
the Yaquina River. A significant
amount entered the river. The
driver from Blue Line Transporta-
tion was killed in the accident.
Approximately 3,500 gallons of oil
were collected for disposal and
recycling immediately after the
spill. In addition, approximately
120 yards of oil soaked soil were
excavated and removed. A total
of 4,200 feet of boom were
deployed and nine yards of pom-
poms were collected and removed,
before operations were scaled-
back due to high level winds and
heavy rains.
Incident response members
included EPA, the U.S. Coast
Guard, the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ),
Blue Line Transportation, the
Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife (ODFW), the Oregon
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
April 2001
Department of Transportation, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
the National Oceanic and Atmo-
spheric Administration.
The spill threatened a variety of
species, including salmon, beaver,
otters, eagles, osprey, ducks, and
geese. Recovery measures needed
to be conducted with care to avoid
harming delicate salmon spawning
beds and to minimize further
damage to the resource.
Mississippi River Oil Spill
On November 29, 2000, the 800-
foot tanker Westchester lost power
and ran aground, spilling 546,000
gallons of crude oil into the Missis-
sippi River 60 miles south of New
Orleans. A 26-mile stretch of the
busy shipping route was closed as a
result, and later reopened to one-
way traffic.
Clean-up efforts were aided by a
timely wind shift, which pushed the
spill away from a Mississippi River
wildlife refuge. The oil was con-
tained by 30,000 feet of boom and
collected by vacuum pumps affixed
to barges. Jimmy Jenkins, secre-
tary of the state Department of
Wildlife and Fisheries, spoke of the
incident," We dodged the
bullet...In my humble opinion,
we're not looking at a whole lot of
damage."
The spill posed a remote threat to
half of Louisiana's oyster beds at
the height of the oyster-farming
season. Although there have been
no reports of oyster bed contami-
nation at this time, oyster farmers
did lose money during the clean-up
period due to lock closures, which
kept them from getting to their
oyster beds.
The tanker's operator, ERMIS
Maritime Corp. of Greece, is not
expected to be cited by the state if
there is no lasting environmental
damage.
Tank Spills 60,000 Gallons of Gas in
Montana
On December 13, 2000, sixty
thousand gallons of gasoline spilled
from a Conoco storage tank,
forcing the evacuation of resi-
dences and businesses in Helena,
Montana. According to a Conoco
spokesman, the spilt fuel remained
contained within a protective berm
surrounding the tank. County
officials reported that gasoline had
initially spilled from two overflow
holes at the top of the storage
tank.
Over 100 residents living within a
half-mile radius of the facility were
evacuated from the area.
A fire suppression foam was
sprayed on the spill to reduce the
threat of fire or explosion during
cleanup. A nearby highway was
closed shortly after motorists
complained of fumes strong enough
to bring tears to their eyes. Planes
were temporarily barred from the
airspace above the plant, and
Montana Rail Link halted its trains
from entering the area to avoid
sparks.
Oil Wells in Los Angeles
In Los Angeles, the oil industry has
developed creative facades to
mask oil operations occurring amid
the glamour of Beverly Hills. In
southern California, where over 9
million residents live on the third
largest oil field in the country, the
oil industry has been forced to
adapted several strategies seeking
to minimize the impacts of their
operations on other land uses.
Seeking to improve the appearance
-------
of oil wells and minimize pump
noise, the oil industry has re-
sponded in a variety of ways. For
example, on Olympic Boulevard in
Beverly Hills, the Venoco oil
company has built a 16-story tower
covered with vinyl material painted
in a floral design to hide a well.
The so called "Tower of Hope"
rises above the Beverly Hills High
School football field, and was
painted by terminally ill children.
Venoco has a total of 14 active
wells at its Olympic Boulevard
site. One of the wells extends a
mile and a half under a tony
shopping district along Rodeo
Drive. "They don't even realize
that there is an oil field here," said
Bill Giardino production foreman of
Veneco's Olympic Boulevard
facility.
Just off the coast of Long Beach
on Island White, one of four
islands built in the 1960s for oil
production, an 18-story production
platform is covered by a sheet
metal skin with horizontal panels
attached to look like terraces.
Tom Hoy, of the City of Long
Beach's Department of Oil
Properties, commented, "We just
have what we hope is an appear-
ance that will be appealing to the
people who use the waterways out
here and who live along the
shoreline." Island White also
boasts a manmade waterfall,
landscaping of banana and palm
trees, and a couple of high curved
cement walls that shield the Long
Beach shorelines.
Oil wells operating along freeways,
in public parks, and nestled be-
tween apartment buildings through-
out Los Angeles, are increasingly
the domain of small oil operations.
Part of their business involves
collecting oil seeps in parking lots at
several downtown locations.
Industry officials maintain that, if
they were not pumping oil from the
ground, oil seeps and methane
buildup would be more of a
problem. Environmental officials
say there are more than 30 oil
seeps in the western part of Los
Angeles alone. State officials say
the oil industry coexists nicely with
its neighbors for the most part.
Recent Civil Actions
Under the Clean
Water Act
Increasingly, Clean Water Act
(CWA) violations are being
enforced through the U.S. Depart-
ment of Justice (DOJ). In Novem-
ber 2000 and January 2001,
lawsuits have been filed that
specifically address the release of
petroleum products into water-
ways. While each lawsuits seeks
slightly different corrective actions
and penalties, they both
share similarities.
In both the Colonial
Pipeline Company
(Colonial) and Garcia
Auto Parts (Garcia)
cases, significant penalties
are being sought under
the CWA. DOJ hopes the
penalties will act as a
stimulus for compliance
with the Act. Under the
CWA, a company may be fined
civil penalties of up to $27,500 for
each day of violation or between
$1,000 and $3,000 per barrel of oil
spilled.
Complaint Against Garcia Auto
Parts
A salvage yard in the District of
Columbia is faced with a civil
action brought in January 2001 by
DOJ. As a follow-up to an investi-
gation conducted by EPA and the
District of Columbia, Garcia Auto
Parts has been charged with the
continual discharge of polluted
storm water into the District of
Columbia sewer system without a
National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES)
permit as required under the Clean
Water Act (CWA). Even though
EPA issued an administrative order
requiring Garcia to implement a
storm water control plan and
obtain a permit, the company has
not complied.
The polluted storm water contains
motor oil, lead from batteries,
organic plastics, and other hazard-
ous materials. The polluted water
is fed from the sewer system into
Hickey Run, a tributary of the
Anacostia River. The Anacostia is
used for recreation and is a
principal tributary to the Potomac
River and Chesapeake Bay.
Polluted storm water has plagued
the Anacostia for years, causing
an increased emphasis on local
industries having adequate storm
water management plans.
The complaint seeks that Garcia
obtain an NPDES storm water
permit from EPA, and injunctive
relief to require alleviation of
hazardous conditions caused by the
discharge of automotive fluids and
other contaminants into storm
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
April 2001
-------
water drains. Owners of industrial
or construction operations of five
acres or more are required to
obtain an NPDES permit before
discharging storm water runoff into
waterways. Each permit must also
include a storm water pollution
prevention plan that addresses oil
spill prevention, shelter of waste
from rain, and employee training.
Colonial Pipeline Lawsuit
On November 28,2000, legal
action was taken by EPA against
the Atlanta-based Colonial Pipeline
Company for alleged violations of
the CWA. Colonial had reportedly
spilled 3 million gallons of oil and
petroleum products in nine states
spanning its pipeline that runs 5,300
miles from Port Arthur, Texas to
Linden, New Jersey. The Colonial
Pipeline Company is the world's
largest pipeline transporter of
refined petroleum products by
volume.
Spills from the Colonial pipeline
may put the many rivers, streams,
and wetlands that it crosses at risk.
For over 20 years, corrosion,
mechanical damage, and operator
error have caused spills in 10 states
throughout the South and East.
One diesel fuel spill into South
Carolina's Reedy River spewed
nearly a million gallons over 34
miles and killed 35,000 fish.
In addition to monetary fines, EPA
is pressing that the court order
Colonial to take preventative
measures. If EPA is successful,
Colonial may have to address
exposed and shallow pipe, as well
as inspect the pipeline and repair
any identified defects. EPA further
requests that Colonial Pipeline
upgrade the cathodic protection
system to control corrosion and
upgrade their leak detection system
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
April 2001
and strategy.
Summary
Federal court actions are
not limited only to large-
scale companies such as
the Colonial Pipeline
Company, but also
extend to lower-volume
companies such as
Garcia Auto Parts. EPA's
goal is to pursue all
violators equally. After
all, it is the size and nature of the
oil spill that affects the environ-
ment, and not the size of the
company.
New STI
Standard
SP001-00
"Inspection of Shop Fabricated
ASTs"
In November 2000, the Steel Tank
Institute (STI) released the new
Standard for Inspection of In-
Service Shop Fabricated
Aboveground Tanks (ASTs) for
Storage of Combustible and
Flammable Liquids (STI Standard
SP001-00). This is one of two
tank inspection standards that will
be cited by the revised Spill
Prevention Control and Counter-
measure (SPCC) Plan final rule,
expected by the end of 2001. EPA
requested the development of the
standard in response to proposed
tank inspection requirements that
will be mandatory in a tank
owner's SPCC Plan. The new
Aboveground storage tanks affected by
new STI standard.
standard covers the inspection of
smaller, shop-fabricated, steel
ASTs, generally manufactured to
standards such as Underwriters
Laboratories UL 142 or UL 2085,
and are intended for storage of
noncorrosive, stable, flammable,
and combustible liquids having a
specific gravity not exceeding that
of water. The inspection will
determine the condition of the tank
and whether it is leaking. For
more information, contact STI by
mail at 560 Oakwood Road, Lake
Zurich, IL 60047, by phone at
(847) 438-8265, by fax at (847)
438-8766, or at its Web site at
www.steeltank. com.
OSC Task Force
Training in Phoenix
The Fourth Annual On-Scene
Coordinator (OSC) Readiness
Training took place in Phoenix,
Arizona from November 13 - 17,
2000. Nick Nichols, Bud Hunt,
Mark Howard, and Ray Worley
presented five classes along with
^ Regional EPA Oil Program and
.^ OSC instructors.
Q
jg The Inland Oil Resources Financial
| Management course provided
s^ OSCs and Oil Program personnel
^ with an understanding of the
J3 elements of financial management
s that are essential in effectively
-------
implementing our response pro-
gram. It also discussed funding
options under the Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund and requirements for
cost documentation.
The Alternative Countermeasures
For Oil Spills course profiled three
Regions' efforts to cleanup oil
spills with alternative techniques,
such as bioremediation and in-situ
burning. The National Contingency
Plan Product Schedule and its
application to area planning and
emergency response decision
making were discussed.
The Area Planning workshop
covered various ways in which an
OSC can develop a basic area plan.
The workshop will present ex-
amples from EPA Regions V, VIII,
and X of the various approaches
OSCs have taken as they worked
on sub-area plans, as well as
advanced planning and exercises
used to test plans.
The SPCC/FRP-The New Rules
course gave a broad overview of
the existing SPCC/FRP regulations
as well as a discussion of the
proposed rule changes currently
being examined by OMB. Topics
included breakout storage tanks,
jurisdiction issues, expedited
enforcement program, unan-
nounced drills, and essential facility
inspection techniques.
The Fuels Management course
provided a comprehensive view of
the fuels industry, including produc-
tion fields, pipelines, refineries,
terminals, service stations, tankers,
rail and truck transport, and
chemical plants. There was a
discussion of EPA regulatory
approaches to solving the environ-
mental problems associated with
the entire industry and how trends
in industry will affect enforcement
in the future.
All classes were well attended, and
course evaluations from the federal
OSCs, state and local officials, and
other federal agencies were very
positive. EPA's Oil Program
continues to update and improve
these popular classes that provide
OSCs with the tools and informa-
tion they need to prevent, prepare,
and respond to oil spill incidents.
Upcoming
Events
Inland Oil Course: Slow &
Backwater Booming
May 21 - 24
Anchorage, Alaska
The slow and backwater practical
course is a hands-on demonstration
of oil recovery methods in slow
water and marsh environments.
Additional emphasis is placed on
product recovery techniques in the
subsurface in order to prevent
discharges to waterways. The
course it taught by current and
former EPA and state responders.
Participants will be instructed on
safe boat handling techniques,
boom deployment, and proper
recovery methods. Instruction will
be provided on proper containment
practices for spills on land. Mini-
mal classroom instruction with
strenuous field exercises compose
the curriculum.
A course prerequisite is to have
attended the ERT's Inland Oil Spills
course. For additional information,
please contact Greg Powell at (513)
569-7537 or Dick Brophy at (513)
521-2730.
Funds Use Seminars
May 1 - 2, 2001
Corpus Christi, Texas
June 26 - 27, 2001
Portland, Oregon
The U.S. Coast Guard's National
Pollution Funds Center (NPFC)
two-day Funds Use Seminar has
been expanded to four concurrent
sessions that cover a broad array
of topics that include financial
management, Coast Guard and
EPA cost documentation, claims,
certificates of financial responsibili-
ties, state removal cost claims,
contracting, natural resource
damage claims, an integrated
natural resource damage case
study, and on-shore facility re-
sponse issues with case studies.
Registration information is available
on the NPFC Web site at
www.uscg.mil/hq/npfc/npfc.htm.
For additional information, please
contact Jan Vorhees at (202) 493-
6719.
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
USEPA Oil Spill Program Update
April 2001
------- |