INTERTANKO CITES WOES IN MEETING OPA DEADLINE

Independent oil tanker owners have complained to the U.S. Coast Guard of difficulties setting up oil spill response contracts by the Aug. 18 deadline as required by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (Intertanko), Oslo, is seeking an extension of the deadline. Intertanko said owners' costly vessel response plans had been rendered useless by the fact that only one spill contractor now operates on the West Coast but will not offer exclusively

July 26, 1993

3 min read

Independent oil tanker owners have complained to the U.S. Coast Guard of difficulties setting up oil spill response contracts by the Aug. 18 deadline as required by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.

International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (Intertanko), Oslo, is seeking an extension of the deadline.

Intertanko said owners' costly vessel response plans had been rendered useless by the fact that only one spill contractor now operates on the West Coast but will not offer exclusively West Coast coverage.

Intertanko said several owners set up contracts to provide oil spill response throughout U.S. waters with National Response Corp. (NRC), New York, only to have NRC disclose it could not provide coverage on the West Coast.

NRC said the company works by coordinating existing resources available from independent subcontractors. It was possible to build a network for the Gulf and Atlantic coasts, but not so on the West Coast, where spill response is generally handled by large collectives.

"Large West Coast collectives were unwilling to deal through NRC," NRC said. "Smaller independents were more interested but would not have been sufficient as a response network."

MSRC ROLE

Complete U.S. coastal spill coverage is offered by Marine Pollution Association, Scottsdale, Ariz., through its subsidiary Marine Spill Response Corp. (MSRC).

MSRC is a nonprofit organization with a membership of 74 oil companies and shipowners established to clean up major spills.

Intertanko claimed MSRC insisted tanker owners contract only with it to avoid paying for duplicate coverage on the East Coast.

MSRC said the organization had been established to provide major oil spill capabilities unavailable from local contractors. Members were required to provide facilities which together comprised a consistent nationwide response program.

MSRC was not able to provide some services, such as shoreline cleanup. The intention was that members would arrange their own total spill response with a combination of MSRC and local contractors.

EXTENDED DEADLINE SOUGHT

In a letter to Rear Admiral Arthur Henn, the U.S. Coast Guard's environmental protection chief, Intertanko Managing Director Tormod Rafgard asked for an extension of the spill response compliance deadline.

"It appears to us that planning standards and other compliance requirements established by the Coast Guard are simply not congruent with operational realities on the West Coast," said Rafgard.

"We are perturbed by the response of MPA/MSRC to requests by Intertanko members for West Coast cover in cases where they have already entered into agreements with NRC on the Gulf and East Coasts.

"We suggest that this response may be in breach of U.S. antitrust laws and would ask U.S. Coast Guard to consult with the appropriate body regarding the legality of this policy."