xv EPA
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
The Journal of the U.S. EPA Oil Program
October 2003
Contents
Pipeline System Owners and Operators
have Homework and Help 1
SONS Oil Spill Drill to Test Preparedness
forthe "Big One" 1
7th International Effects of Oil on Wildlife
Conference 2
Oil in the Sea 2
Recycling Waste, Creating Oil 3
Illegal Sludge Discharge at Sea - Bigger
Threat than Accidental Spills? 4
Oil Spills off British Coasts 5
Tasman Spirit Sinks 6
Tricolor Spill in North Sea 7
OP-Skimmer 7
U.S.EPA Oil Program Infoline 7
About the Oil DROP
The Oil DROP is a biannual, informal
journal of EPA's Oil Program. The Oil
DROP seeks to attract a broad
audience within the general public,
including concerned citizens, students
and environmental groups, and
highlight current developments related
to oil spills. The journal covers oil
spills in the United States and through-
out the world, and emphasizes the
effects these spills have on wildlife
and ecosystems. The Oil DROP is
available on the Oil Program
homepage at www.epa.gov/oilspill.
Pipeline System Owners and
Operators have Homework and
Help
If a pipeline carrying 20,000 barrels of oil
per day ruptures near a densely populated
area, what paths will the oil travel and
how much area will be covered? Owners
and operators of U.S. pipeline systems
will be required to answer this and other
questions for at least half of their pipeline
systems as of September 2004. These
requirements are mandated by new
regulations under the Pipeline Safety
Improvement Act, passed in 2002. The
new rules require pipeline owners and
operators to assess potential effects to
"high consequence areas" if a pipeline
system segment should leak or fail. High
consequence areas are considered
populated areas, environmentally sensitive
areas, and commercially navigable
waterways, where an oil spill would be
especially damaging to human health or
the environment.
A new environmental modeling tool called
OILMAPZ^jVD may help companies
determine how a spill in a specific given
location could affect high consequence
areas. The model, developed by Applied
Science Associates, Inc., uses elevation
data from the U.S. Geological Survey's
digital elevation model and hydrological
information about local waterways to
model where, and how far, a potential spill
in a given area could flow.
OILMAPLAND was designed to be
compatible with the geographic
information systems already used by
industry to track locations of their
pipelines and facilities.
For more information about high
consequence areas, visit the U.S.
Department of Transportation Office of
Pipeline Safety Web site at ops.dot.gov.
For more information about
OILMAPLAND, visit the Applied Science
Associates, Inc. Web site at
www.appsci.com.
SONS Oil Spill Drill to Test
Preparedness forthe "Big One"
Are responders adequately prepared for a
catastrophic oil spill like the 1989 Exxon
Valdez disaster? Every few years, the U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG) holds a "Spill of
National Significance" (SONS) drill to
test preparedness and practices response
procedures.
SONS are considered those spills that are
so severe, large, or threatening to the
public or the environment that they
require an extraordinarily complex
response and call for more resources than
local area responders can provide.
Responding to SONS requires the
coordination of multiple federal, state,
local, and industry responders. Previous
SONS exercises have been held in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Valdez,
Alaska; and New Orleans, Louisiana.
This year, California was selected by
USCG to host the exercise.
A major portion of California, and
possibly Mexico, will be affected by the
-------
Recent "SONS" in California
Date
11/24/01
1 2/30/00
2/28/00
9/6/99
11/10/98
Location
Bolinas to Carmel
E. Walker River
Ventura County
Eureka
Port of Long Beach
Source
SS Jacob Luckenbach
tank truck accident
tank truck accident
M/V Stuyvesant
M/T Neapolis
Source: "The OSPR News
Product
bunker fuel
#6 fuel oil
crude oil
bunker fuel
crude oil
Estimated
Barrels
unknown
86
143
48
150
", Spring 2003 edition, Issue 1, Vol. 10.
2004 SONS exercise. In order to test the
preparedness of both regional and national
response systems, a simulated spill
scenario will overtax the resources of the
local area and cause the National
Response System to be activated. The
multi-day drill will involve setting up
command posts, moving and deploying
cleanup and containment equipment
throughout California, and importing
response resources from outside
California. The scenario will test multiple
oil spill contingency plans, including the
State of California's plan; the EPA Region
9 Contingency Plan (which includes the
states of Arizona, California, Hawaii, and
Nevada, the tribal nations of the
Southwest, and the Pacific Islands); the
National Contingency Plan; and the
international Mexico-U.S. Response Plan.
The 2004 SONS Exercise is sponsored by
USCG, the California Department of Fish
and Game's Office of Spill Prevention and
Response (OSPR), and the American
Petroleum Institute (API). For more
information, please visit the OSPR Web
site at www.dfg.ca.gov/ospr/.
7th International Effects of Oil on
Wildlife Conference
Initiated in 1982 by the Tri-State Bird
Rescue Research Center, the International
Effects of Oil on Wildlife Conference
initially brought together a modest number
of parties interested in preventing the
effects of oil pollution on aquatic wildlife.
The conference has since developed into
one of the most effective forums for
bringing together all interested parties,
including biologists, veterinarians,
rehabilitators, government wildlife
representatives, environmental non-
governmental organizations and other
stakeholders.
Prior to expansion of the International
Effects of Oil on Wildlife Conference
participant base, the conference was
hosted exclusively in the United States.
However, as a result of growing interest,
the conference was, for the first time, held
in Europe at the Hamburg Convention
Center in Germany on October 14-16,
2003. In addition to attracting a wider
spectrum of participants, the location of
this year's conference promoted even
greater involvement from government and
industry representatives, idea sharing, and
cooperation. The conference, co-hosted
by the International Fund for Animal
Welfare and the International Bird Rescue
Research Center, was held to promote
information exchange on planning,
prevention, and response efforts for those
working in fields related to oil pollution
and its impact on wildlife.
The themes of the 7th International Effects
of Oil on Wildlife Conference included:
• The challenges of cooperative cross-
border planning and response;
• The problem of chronic oiling; and
• Evaluation and post-release studies.
Program schedule sessions included:
• Resources at risk;
• Planning and preparedness;
• Rehabilitation management and
techniques;
• Wildlife response case histories;
• Chronic oiling and prevention; and
• Evaluation and post release.
For more information, please visit the
conference web site at
www.eowconference.org.
Oil in the Sea
A report issued this year by the National
Academy of Science National Research
Council, Oil in the Sea III: Inputs, Fates,
and Effects, estimates that 29 million
gallons of petroleum enter North
American ocean waters each year as a
result of human activities. Nearly 85%
comes from land-based runoff, polluted
rivers, airplanes, and small boats and jet
skis, while less than 8% results from
tanker or pipeline spills. Oil exploration
and extraction are responsible for only 1%
of the petroleum that enters North
American ocean waters.
Oil in the Sea III is the third report from
the National Academies on this subject,
with the last report published in 1985. In
addition to updating the previous report,
Oil in the Sea III proposes a clear
methodology for estimating petroleum
inputs to the sea and recommends further
monitoring and assessment to help
prioritize prevention and response efforts.
The current report benefitted from more
complete information on petroleum
releases and their impact on the
environment now available from
governmental and private databases.
The report discusses petroleum inputs into
North American and worldwide marine
waters from four major sources: natural
seeps and anthropogenic releases that
occur during the extraction, transportation,
and consumption of petroleum. In
addition, the report highlights major
findings on each source and discusses
their regional variation in North American
marine waters. The report did not
specifically address inland waters and
many non-transportation-related facilities.
Natural seeps, which occur when crude oil
seeps into water from geologic strata
beneath the sea floor, are often used to
identify potential economic reserves of
petroleum. They contribute the highest
amount of petroleum to the marine
environment, accounting for 45% the total
annual load to the world's oceans and
60% of the estimated total load into North
American waters.
USEPA Oil DROP
October 2003
-------
Historically, oil and gas exploration and
production of petroleum have represented
a significant source of spills. However,
improved production technology and
safety training have dramatically reduced
both blowouts and daily operational spills
during the past decade. Today, accidental
spills from platforms represent about 1%
of petroleum inputs in North American
waters and about 3% worldwide.
Releases from petroleum transport amount
to less than 4% of petroleum inputs to
North American waters and less than 13%
worldwide. The major sources of
transportation-related spills include
pipeline spills, tank vessel spills,
operational discharges from cargo
washings, and coastal facilities spills. By
increasing regulation, phasing out older
vessels, and introducing new technology
and safety precautions, transportation-
related spills have decreased. However,
with much of the 23,000 miles of
transportation pipeline in the United States
over 30 years old, the report recommends
further efforts to decrease the likelihood
of spills from this source.
Consumption-related inputs, usually from
individual car or boat owners, marine
vessels, or airplanes, contribute one-third
of the total load of petroleum to the sea.
This accounts for 85% of the
anthropogenic load to North American
ocean waters and 70% worldwide. Land
runoff, which contributes to polluted
rivers and streams that eventually empty
to the sea, is highest near urbanized areas
and refineries. In addition, oil runoff from
cars and trucks is increased in areas with
expanding roads and parking lots to
accommodate growing populations.
However, regulating and phasing out
inefficient two-stroke engines commonly
used in recreational vehicles has helped to
reduce the amount of oil discharged into
the sea and the report recommends that
this continues.
Given that study focuses on marine
waters, many types of inland non-
transportation-related facilities are not
directly addressed. The authors only took
into account oil spills that occurred
directly into marine waters or that
occurred within estuarine waters within
three miles of the mouth of the estuary.
Urban runoff data were based on oil and
grease measurements in various rivers.
Such measurements would, theoretically,
include upstream inputs from vessels,
facilities, and pipelines, as well as any
urban runoff. However, the study does
not provide conclusive information on the
relative importance of non-transportation-
related facilities - particularly those
located on inland waters.
Moreover, although the report provides
useful data on the relative contributions of
different sources to petroleum inputs to
Run-off from petroleum facilities is a primary source of oil in the sea. Photo courtesy USCG
USEPA Oil DROP
October 2003
the sea, such data do not necessarily
indicate the severity of individual spills
from these same sources. For example,
urban runoff may be responsible for more
total oil into the marine environment over
a decade, but a single tanker spill in a
vulnerable location could cause
significantly greater environmental and
socioeconomic impacts. The same could
be said for non-transportation-related
facility spills.
Oil in the Sea III was sponsored by the
U.S. Minerals Management Service, U.S.
Geological Survey, U.S. Department of
Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Coast
Guard, U.S. Navy, American Petroleum
Institute, and the National Ocean
Industries Association. The report can be
ordered online at http://books.nap.edu/
catalog/10388.html or by calling 1-800-
624-6242.
Recycling Waste, Creating Oil
A revolutionary new process, thermal
depolymerization (TDP), was being tested
at the first industrial-sized installation of
its kind in Carthage, Missouri. ConAgra
Butterball turkey plant was the first
facility to use this technology on a large
scale. Developed by chief executive of
Changing World Technologies, Brian S.
Appel, the process involves cooking and
pressurizing waste turkey parts to produce
a thick liquid that can then be refined into
three products: high-quality oil, clean
burning gas, or purified minerals that can
be used as fuels, fertilizers, or specialty
chemicals for manufacturing. The $20
million facility is capable of grinding up,
heating, pressurizing, and processing 200
tons of waste turkey parts and producing
roughly 600 barrels of oil daily. As of the
end of May 2003, the facility was no
longer in the testing phase and had begun
production.
Essentially, TDP accelerates the naturally
occurring process called subduction.
Subduction is the process by which
petroleum deposits are created from
decomposing, one-celled organisms
through the pressure and heat of plate
tectonic movement, a process normally
-------
taking hundreds of thousands of years.
Unlike other solid-to-liquid-fuel
processes, TOP is most like naturally
occurring subduction because it accepts
almost any carbon-based feedstock. Some
examples of feedstock include old
computers, old tires, municipal garbage,
medical waste, hog manure, and even
sewage.
TOP successfully replicates the process of
subduction by heating and pressurizing
polymers—long chains of hydrogen,
oxygen, and carbon-bearing molecules—
and creating short-chain petroleum
hydrocarbons through a series of steps.
Arguably the most attractive element of
TOP is that all byproducts from the
process are recycled—the water is treated
in a municipal water treatment plant, gases
are used to generate electricity that run the
facility, and the final products, oil and
carbon, are sold. On average, the entire
process takes about two hours.
While the concept of converting organic
solids into liquid fuel using waste
products is not a new one, high costs
prevented the creation of a process usable
on an industrial scale. However,
economically-viable TOP has attracted the
attention of not only private business, but
also the federal government. USEPA
awarded a $5 million grant to help
develop the ConAgra plant. Remaining
development costs for the $20 million
facility were shared between Changing
World Technologies and ConAgra Foods
through a partnership to develop the
process and advance the
commercialization of the technique.
Eleven more projects are planned, three of
which have received grants totaling $10
million from the Department of Energy.
Projects include: another turkey plant in
Colorado, a poultry plant in Alaska, and
an onion dehydration plant in Nevada. In
all, as of May 2003, private investors
contributed a total of $40 million to the
endeavor, while the federal government
awarded grants of over $12 million. This
is a seemingly small prices to pay for a
process that could potentially change the
way the world handles waste and energy
resources; a process that could even
reduce global warming.
Illegal Sludge Discharge at Sea -
Bigger Threat than Accidental
Spills?
A recent federal crackdown provided
evidence that the problem of illegal
dumping at sea may be far greater than
previously known. In the Pacific
Northwest alone, there were seven cases
over the past year involving the
intentional release of toxic, oily sludge by
twenty ships. In Alaska in 2002, Boyang
Marine and Boyang Ltd. agreed to pay $5
million in damages after admitting that
their entire 12-ship fleet had hidden illegal
discharges for seven years. Their
corporate officers had obtained false
waste-disposal receipts and ordered
engineers to repaint bolts attached to
illegal bypass hoses to hide their use.
They also instructed a captain and crew to
lie to a grand jury. Several corporate
managers and directors in South Korea
were indicted in this case and are
considered fugitives. One chief engineer
pleaded guilty this year to discharging 20
tons of oily sludge on one trip from Japan
to Vancouver, Washington. In April 2003,
a South Korean engineer surrendered to
U.S. marshals for pollution charges and
another awaited sentencing in Tacoma,
Washington. The Department of Justice is
investigating additional vessel owners and
operators.
These cases have generated millions of
dollars in fines and resulted in jail time for
one captain and six chief engineers
responsible for installing devices to
illegally discharge engine room waste into
the sea and falsifying records to cover it
up. Crewmembers have been ordered to
hide evidence, produce phony waste-
disposal receipts, and lie to the courts in
an effort to cover up the practice of illegal
dumping. It is unknown how often such
illegal dumping occurs, but investigators
say that many incidents go unnoticed.
When inspectors find a more reliable way
to discover illegal dumping, it may prove
to be far more common than accidental
spills, and a greater threat to the marine
environment.
Cargo and container ships have
procedures to follow when disposing of
the waste oil, solvents, and lubricants that
collect over time in a ship's engine room.
Normally, the water and oil are separated
and the oil is stored in a tank as sludge.
Some ships burn this sludge in
incinerators on the ship. Others store it
until the ship reaches port, where it can be
disposed of properly. Disposing of the
sludge properly can be expensive and time
consuming. Instead of following these
procedures, disreputable engineers install
hoses to bypass pollution-control systems
and simply pump the waste overboard.
Vessels are required by international law
to track all use of oil in an "oil record
book." Investigators can sometimes find
evidence of illegal discharge when
residual oil is found in places where oil
use has not been reported in the book.
Other times, they have to rely on luck to
catch violators. In an Oregon in 2002, a
former crewmember tipped off
investigators by e-mail with pictures of an
illegal hose system used for dumping
waste. In another Washington incident,
the Royal Canadian Air Force passed over
a ship discharging waste and noticed the
oil in its wake.
Oil and oily waste can kill fish, marine
mammals, birds and their offspring, and
destroy plant life. Even small spills can
damage the ecological balance in certain
areas and cause long-term harm to the
environment and aquatic life. It is
difficult to determine exactly how much
damage is caused by illegal dumping,
partly because it is unknown how much
oily waste is being dumped.
A National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
study estimated last year that ships
worldwide generate 500 million gallons of
this sludge. NAS estimates that roughly 5
percent of waste from the largest tankers
was discharged illegally and that 15
percent generated by smaller ships was
discharged illegally. The study concluded
that 65 million gallons is dumped
annually. Approximately 6,100 trips are
made by commercial shipping vessels in
and out of Washington State waters
annually, and a large container ship can
produce 1,000 gallons of toxic sludge
while traveling between Asia and the West
Coast.
USEPA Oil DROP
October 2003
-------
UK Spill Timeline
^^H
0
0
0
o
^^H
— Dec. 2002
Dec. 2002
Jan. 2003
Feb. 2003
Mar. 2003
_ May 2003
Location
Lincolnshire Coastline
Brayford Pool
Marina in Lincoln
Suffolk
Wigtown Bay
Blyth Harbor
Type of Oil Spilled
Old (Weathered)
Unknown
Diesel Fuel
Unknown
Diesel Fuel
Fuel Oil
Suspected Source
Sunken Ship
Unknown
Sunken Cabin Cruiser
Leaking Pipeline
Sunken Ship
Cargo Ship
Some Washington state inspectors feel the
study significantly underestimates the
problem. The practice is widespread, they
say, because until recently, violators were
seldom brought to justice, and rarely
served jail time. When interviewed
y investigators, crewmembers who ha
e served on multiple ships have reported
that illegal dumping is a commonly accept
d practice within the industry.
An organization that represents cargo
vessels in Washington state waters
disagrees. They contend that most
companies do not commit these crimes
because the risk of fines and loss of
reputation is too great. They argue that
there is no basis to blame the entire
industry for the problem.
Oil Spills off British Coasts
Over a period of just five months from
mid-December 2002 through May 2003,
England experienced numerous oil spills.
The most recent of these spills occurred at
a Northumberland port in Blyth Harbor,
just east of London. Over a half ton of
fuel oil was thought to have leaked from a
docked ship. A Chinese-owned cargo ship
carrying plywood from Indonesia, which
was first spotted by harbor pilots, was
suspected to be responsible for the spill.
Following containment of the spill, a
cleanup operation began that kept
mortality rates of birds and fish quite low.
USEPA Oil DROP
October 2003
A search began for those responsible who,
once found, could face extremely high
fines and up to a two-year prison sentence.
A Port of Blyth spokesperson indicated
that this spill was possibly the largest the
port had ever seen.
Two months prior, in March 2003, another
oil spill occurred in Wigtown Bay which
was thought to have come from a recently
sunken thirty-two-foot vessel, the Solway
Hunter. The boating accident resulted in a
large surface-water diesel oil spill close to
Ross Bay near Krikcudbright, about 375
miles northwest of London.
In a separate incident in February 2003,
thirty swans were taken to a wildlife
hospital after being covered with oil from
a spill that took place in Suffolk. The spill
came from a leaking pipeline at
Felixstowe Harbor, about 100 miles
northeast of London. The type of oil
spilled was unknown.
On January 19, 2003, just one month
before the Suffolk spill, animal welfare
officials were rescuing swans from a
marina in Lincoln to be taken to a wildlife
hospital for cleaning after yet another fuel
spill in that area. Officers said they had
spotted over a dozen contaminated fowl
and expected the problem would get
worse. This spill consisted of diesel fuel
that leaked from a cabin cruiser sunken in
Brayford Pool, over 200 miles west of
London.
On New Year's Eve 2002, more than 60
swans were rescued from Brayford Pool
after they were covered in oil that came
from an unknown source.
In mid-December 2002, a spill washed up
on the Lincolnshire coastline in the form
of spongy oil lumps between Skegness
and Mablethorpe, a five-mile coastal
stretch over 100 miles north of London.
First spotted by people walking along the
beach, the discovery followed previous
sightings of similar spills in the area
earlier that month. The spills along the
Lincolnshire coast were initially thought
to have been caused by dumping from
tankers or to have risen from shipwrecks.
Oil samples were laboratory tested to
determine if the oil found earlier in the
month came from the same source as that
found in mid-December. Results showed
the oil had been in the water over a long
period of time indicating that the oil had
most likely emerged from a previously
sunken ship or through tank washing. A
spokesman from the British Maritime
Coastguard Agency (MCA) noted that
many hundreds of shipwrecks exist
around this part of the Lincolnshire
coastline. Due to the heavy weathering of
the oil, it was thought that a ship sunk as
long ago as World War II could have
caused the oil spills in East Anglia. The
MCA Shipping Minister explained that
-------
some ships could take up to 60 years to
rust and leak out the bunker oil from tanks
that fueled the engines of these older
ships.
Tasman Spirit Sinks
The Tasman Spirit, a single-hulled oil
tanker, ran aground in the Arabian Sea off
the coast of Karachi, Pakistan, in bad
weather and a high monsoon tide on July
27,2003. The tanker was carrying a cargo
of 67,000 tons of Iranian crude oil and
was destined for the Pakistan National
Shipping Corporation. An estimated
30,000 tons of oil spilled into the sea
making it the worst spill on Pakistan's
Arabian Sea Coast.
Three attempts to tow the ship away
failed. Cracks appeared in the hull of the
ship on August 14, 2003, and the tanker
broke into two pieces shortly after. About
37,000 tons of oil were salvaged from the
ship during a 15-day rescue operation.
A 7.5 km stretch of coastline endured the
worst of the oil spill, and residents have
found hundreds of oil-soaked sea animals
along the shores. Residents near the
beach and adjacent islands have
complained of headaches, nausea, and
respiratory problems, and many Karachi
restaurants have stopped serving seafood.
The spilled crude oil created a film on the
water that posed an immediate threat to
the foraging grounds of migratory birds
and marine life. The oil covered bird
breeding grounds and penetrated 30 to 45
cm below the surface. The oil slick posed
a threat to sea plankton which are a vital
part of the food chain. Truckloads of sand
and fish, crabs, and other marine species
covered with oil were removed from the
nearby beaches. Environmentalists
believe it will take months to clean and
restore Karachi's beaches now covered
with a think layer of black crude and
littered with dead fish, turtles, and sea
snakes.
The Karachi Port Trust has lodged a
formal complaint with the International
Maritime Organization (IMO) and is
claiming damages against Polembros, the
Greek company who owns the Tasman
Spirit. Under the International
Convention on Civil Liability for Oil
Pollution, the owner is liable for damages
up to $3.8 million, plus $538 for each
additional gross ton of oil over 5,000 tons
of oil spilled.
The Pakistan National Committee (PNC)
of the World Conservation Union (IUCN),
at a meeting of 16 member organizations,
urged all the Federal and Sindh
government agencies and others
concerned, to urgently take necessary
actions to avert accidents like the Tasman
Spirit spill in the future and to minimize
the impact of this tragedy on human and
marine life. After a comprehensive
analysis of the situation, the PNC
proposed nine specific actions to remedy
the current situation and to deal with
Tasman Spirit, Oil Spill Incident, Pakistan, 27 July 200
Karachi Harbour
Syste
..lands
t
Lsgs»&
3o-!l Stt&
10t-imj
Map Coutesy of International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation Limited
USEPA Oil DROP
October 2003
-------
similar emergencies in the future. Specific
actions include a qualitative assessment of
the impact of the oil spill on human and
aquatic life, reinstatement of the Marine
Pollution Control Board, review and
approval of the National Oil Spill
Contingency Plan (currently in draft
form), creation of a multi-disciplinary
Emergency Response Team, and review of
existing environmental laws to ensure they
protect the marine environment, coastal
resources and facilities from pollution.
Tricolor Spill in North Sea
The Tricolor, a 50,000 ton vessel carrying
nearly 3,000 luxury cars, sank in the
English Channel after colliding with a
container ship in thick fog on December
14,2002. About 3,000 gallons of heavy
fuel oil leaked from the Tricolor creating
an oil slick more than 2 miles long and
160 yards wide.
Rough weather hampered efforts to
combat the slick at sea and much of the
spill broke into segments that drifted
toward the Belgium coast. In the days
immediately after the collision, hundreds
of birds were found dead on the beaches
covered in oil, and environmental
protection officials believe many more
died at sea.
Belgian and Dutch salvage firms have
begun cutting up the vessel, but the
salvage operation involves a high risk of
pollution. The carve-up and removal
efforts have been repeatedly delayed due
to bad weather conditions. During
salvage operations in 2003, the sunken
Tricolor appeared to leak an additional 80
to 100 tons of heavy oil. Two ships and a
reconnaissance aircraft monitored the
slick, but there was no immediate danger
to the Belgian coast. The salvage
company claims it has stopped the leak
and the Belgian Coast Guard has declared
that the worst appears to be over.
OP-Skimmer
The following announcement does not
constitute EPA endorsement or EPA
approval of the product described. It is
intended only to notify the response
community of newly available equipment.
USEPA Oil DROP
October 2003
The idea for the OP-Skimmer developed
after problems were encountered while
collecting spilled oil and garbage during
the Gulf War. The OP-Skimmer,
manufactured by Rasmussen Enterprise
AS, is a serf-propelled, serf-contained
vessel, which collects and transports oil
from spills and garbage floating on the
water. It was primarily designed for
emergency uses, but may be used for day-
to-day purposes including harbor
maintenance, garbage collecting, and fire
fighting.
The skimmer employs a device called a
"snail house" that drags surface water
(along with oil or other floating objects)
into the vessel, where the oil floats on top
of the water. Surplus water is pressed out
through valves in the bottom of the hull,
maintaining sea level. The skimmer is
equipped with fire fighting equipment that
can also spread oil absorbing materials
and chemicals. The OP-Skimmer is easy
to use, requiring limited instruction on
operation and maintenance procedures
from qualified technicians.
For more information, contact:
Rasmussen Enterprise AS
P.O. Box 2075 Posebyen
Festningsgt. 8
4668 Kristiansand
Norway
+ 47 38 07 06 80 (phone)
+ 47 38 07 06 79 (fax)
rasenter@online.no
U.S. EPA Oil Program Infoline
The EPA's Oil Program offers a variety of
information about oil spill prevention and
response through its Internet web site
(www.epa.gov/oilspill). This information
serves as a resource for businesses that are
subject to oil spill regulations, emergency
personnel that respond to oil spills,
students, teachers, and the general public.
One of the most popular features of the
web site is the email infoline
(www.epa.gov/oilspill/comment.htmor
oilinfo@epa.gov). This feature allows the
public to contact Oil Program personnel to
ask specific questions that may not be
answered elsewhere on the web site.
People who do not have access to Internet
can reach the infoline voice mail system at
1-800-424-9346.
Oil Program staff and the EPA Call Center
respond to approximately 70-90 public
inquiries each month. They provide
answers to oil facility owners and
technical professionals regarding oil spill
regulations, offer information to
concerned citizens about how to report a
suspected spill, provide information on the
environmental impacts of oil spills, and
respond to requests for data about oil
spills.
Examples of typical questions answered
through the infoline include:
What would be an environmentally
conscious method of cleaning crude
oil from a beach?
Can you provide or direct me to
information on biological oil cleanup
agents?
I am doing a high school science
experiment involving oil spills. Can
you provide me with examples of
how to demonstrate or simulate an
oil spill in a classroom laboratory
environment?
• How are wildlife oiled during an oil
spill incident rehabilitated?
Is it true that vegetable and cooking
oils are also regulated by the EPA?
What oil regulations apply to
transfer facilities? What regulations
apply to marinas?
• Does the professional engineer that
certifies my facility's Spill Pollution
Control and Countermeasures
(SPCC) Plan have to be licensed in
the state my facility is located in?
Many of the questions submitted to the Oil
Program through infoline are from
students and teachers seeking information
for classroom and science fair projects
dealing with oil spills. Oil Program staff
are pleased to have the opportunity to
respond to questions from interested
individuals. Visit the website, send an
email, or call the infoline phone number if
you have question for the EPA Oil
Program.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
5203G
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
First-Class
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
Permit No. G-35
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
OEPPR
Office of Emergency
Preparedness and Response
Oil Program 5203G
EPA 540-N-03-003
OSWER 9360.8-63
October 2003
Beatriz Oliveira, Editor,
Oil Program
703-603-1229
David Evans, Director
Oil Program
703-603-8760
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Mail Code 5203G
Washington, D.C. 20460
------- |