WATCHING WASHINGTON TANKER OWNERS' SPILL RESPONSE

Just before a Feb. 18 deadline, the U.S. Coast Guard said tanker owners had filed more than 1,000 oil spill response plans for their vessels. The 1990 Oil Pollution Act (OPA) required tanker operators to file the plans to show how they would contain and clean up oil spills from their vessels. They must be able to fulfill the details of those plans by Aug. 18. Adm. Arthur Henn, chief of the Coast Guard's marine safety, security, and environmental protection office, testified on the issue at

Feb. 23, 1993

3 min read

Just before a Feb. 18 deadline, the U.S. Coast Guard said tanker owners had filed more than 1,000 oil spill response plans for their vessels.

The 1990 Oil Pollution Act (OPA) required tanker operators to file the plans to show how they would contain and clean up oil spills from their vessels. They must be able to fulfill the details of those plans by Aug. 18.

COAST GUARD ROLE

Adm. Arthur Henn, chief of the Coast Guard's marine safety, security, and environmental protection office, testified on the issue at a House Merchant Marine subcommittee hearing last week.

Rep. Billy Tauzin (D-La.), chairman of the Coast Guard and navigation subcommittee, was concerned about slow implementation of OPA regulations.

The law, passed in reaction to the Exxon Valdez oil spill, set deadlines for administrative action and for the Coast Guard to implement regulations on subjects such as tanker manning and piloting.

The Coast Guard said it has been unable to meet many of those deadlines because of the time it takes to issue rules under the Administrative Procedure Act, the process for clearing rules through the Transportation Department and Office of Management and Budget, and due to the Bush administration's moratoriums on rulemakings.

Tauzin, citing reports that as much as 20% of the world's tanker fleet is substandard, said, "It is incredible that we haven't had a major spill in the past few years." He attributed that to luck and enactment of OPA.

He particularly complained the Coast Guard has just begun a study regarding tanker navigation standards.

And he was concerned about lax training for tanker crews. "The spill involving the Braer in Scotland was a prime example of the type of situation in which double hulls could not have made a differences he said.

"More important is the training and preparation of crews for responding to emergencies of all types. It is likely that a better trained and prepared crew might have responded differently to the emergency they were presented with."

Henn said the Coast Guard will use a contractor to review the tanker spill response plans to determine if each meets requirements and then review the plans in depth. "That may take as long as 2 years."

He agreed with Tauzin that one of the biggest problems facing the industry is the lack of training for tanker crews.

He pledged, "No substandard tanker is going to come to the U.S." and said the Coast Guard has been detaining vessels "on a daily basis" because of one deficiency or another. But none has been turned back.

ONBOARD EQUIPMENT

Tauzin also pressed Henn on why the Coast Guard is not requiring tankers to carry pollution cleanup equipment such as booms and skimmers, a requirement the tanker industry strongly opposes.

Henn explained that, in an emergency, the crew would be far too busy with ballasting, damage control, and other critical chores to spare the manpower to contain the spill.