[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Coastal Zone information -7 Center e.7 C04ASTAL ZME 'GX. CIEN ER 11111FON ATI ............. nagg; rots+ S V; rM MerA4 tTc4ra ry% -QreN&- 612 nw -ApLAr 7 3 KJO N Uc C a a one o fst ' Z@ion (n or m a t Cen ter 1.3 A 8 5@ G46 R47 1977 C astal Zone NEW ENGLAND RIVER BASINS COMMIS SION 10 form n ati.on 55 COURT STREET* BOSTON. AMASSACI [USETTS 02108 Center NERBC PHONE 1617i:r23-d244 April 12, 1977 MEMORANDUM MOVE ME To: State Coastal Zone Officials From: Russell J. Wilder, Regional OCS Technical Service Subject: Report on the Bureau of Land Manay-ement's Marine Environmental,Studies--P the 'JUN 14 1977 NorCh Atlantic/Geo. Bank Outer Continental Shelf The purpose of this report is to summarize the form and content of the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Marine Environmental Studies Program, and to discuss the usefulness of the results of the studies in making crucial decisions concerning the development of OCS resources. This report represents at least partial fulfillment of the.work element on this subject delineated in the Regional OCS Technical Service workplan completed in February 1977. Background Under "Project1ndependence", developed by the Nixon Administration in 1974, the Bureau of Land Management was instructed to initiate an accelerated -leasing program to vastly increase the amount of submerged lands leased for oil and gas development. This meant that many coastal areas of the United States never subjected to oil and gas exploration before would have tracts leased offshore and at a faster rate than had as yet been experienced anywhere in the United States. In undertaking this accelarated leasing program BLM had to comply with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. As part of the effort to comply with NEPA, BLM initiated the Marine d Studies Program (fun ed by _..,....@-Environmental Congressiona appropriations bills). In New Enaland, the first major involvement of the states in the C. design of the Marine Environmental Studies program was the Bentley College Conference held in May of 1975 to help lay the foundation for a Marine Envir - onmental Studies Plan. StaI Zone n,a on '0' ti @e ejr After the conference, the OCS Task Force for the region, co- chaired by the Department of the Interior and the Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection and supported with staff from NERBC, held nIumerous meetings throughout the summer and fall of 1975 to assist in the design of the Marine Environmental Studies Plan. In December of 1975, the Marine Environmental Study Plan was released by BLM and the resulting comments on the 'plan by states (which were, considerable) were reportedly included in the RFP's for the studies. This is where communication seems to have broken down and states could not tell what the final form and content of the studies were to be. Contracts for the major studies were let during 1976 and data gathering for the biological and physical oceanographic studies will begin in earnest during the summer of this year. Much of the Geology Program field work has been completed with the exception of more cruises scheduled to deploy tripods (used to determine sediment 'transport) and to study seston flux (the movement of total suspended particulates in the water column). A final report on the biological studies is due in July of 1978. The final report on the geology studies is due in June 1978 and in November of 1978 the final report on the physical oceanography studies is due. Tables, that were pro- vided by BLM to attendees of the URI workshop on the studies on April 4, outlining,the status of all the studies and contractors are attached. A short descriptive summary of each of the major studies follows: Biology and Chemistry Program The first year program of the biology and chemistry program under contract to Energy Resources Company, Inc., of Cambridge, Massachusetts is designed to gather. benchmark data on hydrocarbon chemistry, trace metal chemistry and marine microbiology of the water- column. and the sediment@, the structure of sediments and other relative physical parameters and selective biology of the water column and sediments. The selective biology does not include baseline information on primary productivity. The reason given by BLM for not including primary productivity as a baseline study was that too much money would have to be spent to get enough data to be of any value. Primary productivity may be considered in the design of the second year program. Three things should be pointed out here that. severely 'weaken.- the 0 cern ed of'the biological'and. chemical program lor. th se,con. with OCS resource decisions. First, BLM has stated they expect that the final EIS for the North Atlantic will be released in June of this year and Lease Sale #42 may be held in August. This means that any data from the biological studies will be incomplete (the same i6 true for all the other studies) and, of course,. not integrated with other studies and existing data and will not be available for use in either the Environmental Impact Statement or the lease -3- sale. Frank Monastero of BLM said this was true and that he could do little about it because decisions to go ahead with the leasing process are made at a higher level in Interior and did not hinge on the studies, res4ts. This point has been and still is, therefore, a source of great irritation to states., other federal agencies, and the scientific community who are trying to see that decisions about OCS development are made responsibly. Secondly, there has been very little effort to aim the studies at problem solving. The biological and chemical baseline work is being conducted on a day-to-day basis with no communication with the other studies. BLM has set up quar- terly meetings between the principal investigators for coordination, but they mainly cover administ'rative problems. Coordination of daily or weekly activities with the problems of OCS development that need.to have answers, held firmly in the minds of all investigators, would greatly facilitate the production of meaningful results. Finally, if biological baseline work is not started on the plants and animals that make up the primary productivity of Georges Bank until next year, it will be impossible to get a "Pure" sample. This is because if the lease sale is held this summer as BLM says it will, exploratory drilling can begin by late fall or next winter and discharges from drilling operations will have already begun to affect the Bank. Other criticisms of the biology program include no useful coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service and no mechanism to open the quality control of the program to scrutiny by states or other interested parties. Geology Program. The main purpose of the geology studies being conducted by USGS is to assess geologic hazards and collect baseline data prior to and during active drilling. Work on the geological studies has been going on since 1975. The work done is of particular importance to the location of structures off- shore and is heavily weighted towards determining the location of geologic hazards. Studies that make up the Geology Program include: sediment mobility analysis; movement of seston; texture, composition, and age of sediment;- seismic work to find tectonic activity and water mass transport.. This type of information is very important to oil companies and restrictions on drilling activities, found in OCS operating orders, are basedt in part, on this information. The Geology Program has the most direct application to the regulation of activities on the OCS. Integration with the other first year studies, however, is lacking at this time. .,,-:,,Physical Oceanography Program. Physical Oceanography studies field work is being carried out by Ratheon Co. and data analysis has been contracted to EG&G. The study is planned to be carried out over three years and collection of the first year's data is scheduled to begin in August of 1977. Data to be collected consists -4- of surface current, sub-surface currents pressures and temperatures and support hydrography measuring the seasonal temperature- salinity-density structure of the Georges Bank Area. Raytheon has spent the time since the award of the contract in September of 1976 developing hardware representing some new advances in state-of-the-art technology. EG&G is to provide scientific services as its part of the physical Oceanography Program. They will assemble and interpret data collected and provide direction for the design of, the study after the first year. From now through July 1978, EG&G will work on.a:rchiving and developing displays of Raytheon gathered field data. Program continuations will be recommended to BI@M when about half the firs t-year field. programIs complete.. Accordina to EG&G spokesman, Richard Scarlet one of the most important considerations of the program is to: "provide results of physical oceanography studies in the manner needed to assess primary concerns. He further recognizes that: "the transport processes of physical oceano- graphy have a significant effect on biological, chemical and sediment systems.. However, the first year study design does not allow for interaction between physical oceanography, biology, geology and chemistry. Again, it must be pointed out that synthesized data from this and the other studies will not be available for use in (1) preparing the final Environmental Impact Statement, (2) evaluating the lease sale, (3) pre-paring lease stipulations, (4) tailoring operating orders to the region, and (5) evaluating exploration plans if. the leasing process proceeds as- planned by the Department of the Interior. The Task Force recommended 'in its March 28, 1977 letter to Robert Knecht, that the Secretary of the Interior prepare a development phase EIS. This recommendation was also made by the OCS Advisory'Board"Jast fall. By the time a development phase EIS would be prepared, much of the inform- ation derived from the Marine Environmental Studies would be ready, but with the drawbacks of poor timing, non-integration and non-correlation built into the data. Other studies and their timing that are ancillary to the main marine environmental studies are listed in the copy of the table provided by BLM on the status of the program. Summary _In summary, a commonproblem with the studies -as viewed ,by.the states, various commentors from other federal agencies and the scientific community is that the studies are not designed to help give answers to problems perceived to be associated with OCS development. The subject area of the studies does approximate the rec:) mmendations for the first year study design as a result of the Bentley College Conference held to advise BLM on what -5- the studies should cover. However, the management and subsequent direction of the studies does not follow the Bentley Conference. It has been emphasized by many groups over and over, including the OCS Environmental Studies Advisory Committee, that problems associated with OCS development must be identified and information to give answers to the problems must be developed before major decisions are made. However, BLM maintains that studies are begun as far in advance of any scheduled leasing activity as possible so that the maximum amount of information is available- at any given decision point. Also, BLM has said that studies in any given area are slightly different in regard to emphasis or timing because of (among other things) the stage in the leasing process at which the program of study is initiated. In our, case, it would appear that, since this is a frontier area, all pertinent studies could, therefore, be completed prior to leasing. But, as pointed out at the URI workshop, this will not be the case in New England. The funding of the studies will iake place over a period of 8 years with the first three years intensively funded, the next two years at a reduced level, and the final three years at a sustained level. Since the primary contracts have just begun, the studies will not be complete for at least 8 more years. The leasing process will proceed at a pre-determined rate utilizing what information is available at the time each decision point is reached. BLM has said that the process can be stopped if, at a particular point, it is deter- ..mined that there are insufficient data upon which to make a decision. , Measures then can be taken to fill in the.data gaps before proceeding. This would mean that the flow diagram outline given out by BLM at the URI workshop is followed (see attachment). It appears, that, at a technical level, states should determine at this time whether or not the EIS for the lease sale is adequate to protect their interests without inclusio n of significant data from the Marine Environmental Studies Program. Further, if it is decided that states can wait for the devel- op ment phase EIS to include Marine Environmental Studies results, they must evaluate whether or not the data from the studies will be useful in light of some of the problems discussed in this report. Attachments. co 00 0:0 -IM CD rl ----------------------------------------- ------------------- Ll 4 Cc) ;om Cc) 3... r r -4 M-4 -< C: 4.;o rmn rmn W M). Z4 I.- ;uz C. -0-4 z N-J. rm -4 m cw U;o rnz m ZA 'O'D, M rn CD - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4_1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - M F_ -4 z '00 z co a > Cr. 0 CD C'O"' "M -M4 0 M;Q;o ;o z C: cn > :F: 0 td vi En (D 0 V@ (D @-k rt 10" w En 0. cr a :310 r- w P- CD pi cn 0 9L (n " rl, 0 0 0 0 r? rt Z$ :3 0 f@ 0 ro GO r) H- v Zn .1h 23 r) (D :1 P. @Ll r) H- a) 0 0 CL 0 0 cr Pi H r) Di rD 0 F4 0 _-r :2: 1-- El :3 En x r) id (D rr rr w P- En (D (D :j P- P- ..-1 0 rt rt ca :3 :1 rt CL CL 0 0 @n FJ- f: 0 OA 'IN @s 0 rt En )-4 fL 0 ::r (1) 0 (D rt :3 F@ 70 00 n rA W M r-@ CD cn 0 cli 0 ct rp 7 W 0. co ra If 5 tdM 0 :2@ t4 C-1 r-I @d 10 0 rt z @o 0 0 ic :L) > rD :3 r-I CL rr 0 1-4 cn cn " rt 0 (D 0 (.ro @l CD H. :4 (D " l< @j . ul :30 27 :3 0 ;o rr 0 0 M 0 0 m vi (D U) W r-r ILE 0 C) t1a @-A -4 Na w C) Li r) C) rt (n :3 ko Ln a% C31, C) C) F- rr o fD LIQ CL 40% a% (IN 0% (IN ON a% (ON @-, t") . CD ro C? cn M 0 art F@ Li N) %0 G-% Li %.0 S., C) @n t- @.n Li Ln Itz r co t-n --j Ln 0% co C) C) -10 "C3 'o C:) 4- C:) x- C) o C) C) C) (D C) C) C) C) a -lj a% 0 0 v, 0 0 0 C) C) 0 Ln L- C) 0 > > > C-1 ;d > ;o @;j ci > > > > > 0 0 ;* (D r) (D fD -t C, 0 n 0 0 rlt fl? 30 u .0 rr rr -ri e3 rr r? " rt FJ, H, 1@- :I > C: i" r-r H. H. Fi- 4 -11 .4 a) P. < < - < < < a (D (D rr rD M rD M M ro (1) In C: fD (D > 0 0 0 rD P. D cd I C: 0 0 -I rl n ITJ 0 t@ Ih :3 < < 1-j- (D 0 rr cn 0 (A 0 m r) 0 r3 F@ 5 =r e) ig I-- cr cr cr F- M @-A :;a PO ri) ca %D 0 0 ID Pj m PJ (D (") rr -i " rl -11 (1) n rl)a 11 Fl. 00 co o -0 0 V) 3 ko @l a " . :j @o -j rT " rr li ry a) co co 03 > 0 > 0 0-0 @-A rT n " rr @-6 r@ CL In rT @j 0 -Act it Y 1975 1976 1 1977 In-House BILM Planning Conference Study Plan Preparation Information Summary N '*IN Up-dole Hazards Evaluation Seismic Risk Sediment Instobilify Wave 8 Wind 00 Development Scenario Benchmark Ambient Levels Population Studies, Resource Eycluallon, Transport Studies .Water Moss Sediment A= Merchon Effects On Individuals On Ecosystems Figure 3. Study Sequence for the North Atlantic Area NEW ENGLAND RIVER BASINS COMMISSION F 55 COURT STRE T - BOSTON, NIASSACHUSETTS Q2108 RBC PHONE (6171Z@3-64244 March 29, 1977 MEMORANDUM To: Priscilla Newbury, OCS Coordinator Mass. CZM Program From: Russell J. Wilder Regional OCS Technical Service Subject: Review of current Continental Shelf Qperations Notices as administered by the Department of Energy in the United Kingdom In response to your request of the Technical Service t 'o re-riew floperating orders" from other countries and compare them to USGS oper- ating orders and lease stipulations,, copies of Continental Shelf'Operations. Notices requested by the Technical Service from the United Kingdom have been received and reviewed. The bulk of the notices are concerned with personnel safety- in offshore operations. Special emphasis is. given to safety measures to be taken during operations for crane operators and for the transfer of cargo from supply boats to platforms. The April issue of National. Geographic has an interesting article on North Sea operations and describes some of the hazards. Pollution control does not seem to be a serious concern of the notices. Routine discharges are not covered and clean-up equipment is not required. The United Kingdom allows liberal use of dispersants -- a prac- 0 tice prohibited in Massachusetts (see Technical Service's report on the 1977 Oil Spill Conference). Two pieces of legislation that have not been reviewed L Ila- yet that may give more positive control over pollution are the il Pollution Act of 1971 "and the "Durnpinar at Sca Act of 1974". With regard to dumping of refuse at sea, the emphasis is on avoidance of nuisance to fishing operations. Heavy emphasis is placed on proper rig! design for extreme weat er conditions. General criteria for desi-ix in the North Sea are 90 foot waves 125 mph wind and 2-2 1/2 knot current. This is equivalent to a '1100 year storm". By comparison, in the Gulf of Mexico, design criteria is for 65 foot waves., 125 mph wind and 1-1 1/2 knot current. (Source: page 8 of "The Technology of Offshore Drilling, Completion and Production compiled by ETA Offshore Seminars., Inc. 19761T the Petroleum Publishing Co. Tulsa, Oklahoma.) 4, The notices were compared to USGS operating orders and lease 0 stipulations and where they are similiar it is so noted in the following stu-nmary: Notice I - Registration of rigs and platforms and appointment of man- agers in charge of the operation. Notice 2 - Requires repor-ting of accidents and emergencies - inferred C) 0 to be aimed at personnel safety. Notice 3 - Safety measures for personnel during drilling operations. C@ Notice 4 - Safety precautions for personnel to be followed during, welding operations. Notice 5 Emphasizes the need for operators to notify appropriate rescue services promptly. Notice 6 Requires notifying Coast Guard of any proposed weU-testing C) operations involving the flaring of gas. C. Notices 7 and 8 correspond somewhat to OCS operating order No. 7. a) Notice 7 emphasizes transmitting the report of an oil spill to the Coast Guard in such a way as to minixnize "unwar- rented third party speculation" about the spill. It does not require operations to have access to oil spill control equip- ment or to develop an oil spill. contingency plan. b) Notice 8 calls to the attention of operators an "Admirality Notice to Mariners" that requests that mariners refrain from dumping synthetic materials at sea. The notice to mariners points out that "a wide variety of ropes., seismic and other cables and fishing nets which, if lost or discarded at seaY can foul propellers of vessels. " It also points out that discarded plastic sheets baas and bottles can obstruct vessel cooling systems and the dumping of heavy objects can foul fishing nets. It requests that in the event of loss of such materials., every reasonable effort should be made to recover them. I toil Two Pieces of legislation t1hat deal vith (a) and (b) above are the Pollution Act of 1971" and the "Dumping at Sea Act of 1974". Copies of these acts were not supplied by the Dept. of Energy to the Technical Service but have been ordered and upon receipt will be reviewed and compared to the Fed- eral Water Pollution Control Act. -3- Notice 9 Requires close cooperation with agencies overseeing Post Office and other cables so as to avoid damage. Prefers that all drillina be at least one nautical mile from all cables. Notice 10 Liaison with bodies. a) The police of the port in which an installation is.based are responsible for enforcing laws of the 'United Kingdom against offenses occuring on the rig or within 500 meters. b) Emphasize that close relations should be kept with fishing interests. c) Seismic work has to be coordinated with Flag Officer of submarines. Notice 11 Similar to OCS orders 1 2 3 and 4 it does not specify casing 3 and cementing requirements but requires submittal of proposed programs. Notice of intention to drillmust be submitted 28 days in advance of spudding-in. On some blocks, licensees. have been notified that 6 months notice is required. Mie notice places a 2 meter limitation on allowable protrusion of well heads above the sea floor in water less than 45 meters deep. The notice specifies data to be supplied to the Dq) t. of Energy during drilling operations and upon completion of a well. The 01 Ith intent of this requirement is to supply the department wi resource data. Wells to be abandoned must be brought to the attention of the department and when abandonment is approved, a certificate that all strings and casings have been cut 3 me(.ers or more beneath the sea bed must be subni tted. When a well is suspended a report indicating the porous formations encoun- tered must be submitted along with details of the well-head projection. They emphasize marking the site with a bouy. Fin- ally, a well numbering and coordinate system required to be used is specified. Notice 12 Sets out specifications v4th regards to life rafts and survival equipment. Notice 13 Certified lifeboatmen examinations personnel on offshore' installations. Notice 14- Further specifies. acceptable 4--pes of survival craft. -4- Notice 15 Requires the keeping of log books and registration o fp-ersonnel on board installations and making a report of any deaths on an installations. Notice 16 Requires that the Coast Guard for the region in question be notified of rig movement immediately when they take place. Notice 17 Reminds operators that mud circulation systems must be of sound design so as to avoid pipe breakage. Notice 18 Defines "clearways" that are areas of heavy shippiag use. To drill in high density shipping lanes requires a notice lead time of 6 months. To drill in "medium, density" shipping lanes requires a notice lead time of 4 mohths. This notice corres- ponds to lease stipulation No. 3. 'Notice 19. Provides for the inspection by appointed inspectors, of off - shore installations -including operational equipment and the proper reporting of accidents. Notice 20 Specifies safety measures to be taken by the Master of a cargo lp and an offshore hip Whentransferring supplies between his sl@ installation. In regards to oil pollution, special attention is required to insure that "non return valves should be fitted to the end of,oit hoses from the rig to minimize (sic) spillage of oil into the sea. Notice 21 Action required in the event of a -diving accident or fatality so that an investigation into the cause of the mishap can be conducted., Notice 22 Notifies operators of the "Offshore Installations Construction and Survey Regulations" that apply to the fitness of offshore installations to operate in waters around the United Kingdom.. This notice informs operators that copies of the regulations and a publication "Guidance on the Design and Construction of Offshore Installationsif are available from Her Majesty's Sta- tionary Office. It also provides for the issuance of "certificates of fitness. This notice corresponds to OCS. order No. Z., part 1. It also calls for the updating of design as technology improves Massachusetts has requested USGS to. incorporate sirniliar pro- cedures into operating order No. 2. Notice 23 Offshore installations are required to obtain certificates of fitness from a "Certifying Authority". This notice lists five Ship Class- ification Societies appointed as Certifying Authorities by the Secretary of State. Notice 24 Summarizes authorized statutory control of diving operations which provides for diving safety. Notice 25 Calls attent, ion to the need to ensure that the correct breathing mixture is provided. Notice 26 This notice..'Calls attention to certain petroleum production regulations that require the licensee to measure all petroleum produced from, the, area using approved metering methods. Notice 27 This notice calls attention to the regulation that requires em- Ployers of persons Nvho work on or from an offshore installation to obtain insurance against claims for personal injury by his employees. Notice 28 Sets out safety procedures that should be followed in the use of cranes. Notice 29 This notice advises operators of offshore installations that in order to keep a valid Certificate of Fitness., Certifying Authorities must be advised of any modifications, damage and/or repairs to an installation. Notice 30 References Notice 26 which requires metering of production and specifies that production be reported monthly to the Department of Energy. It further specifies the format of the reporting. Notice 31 This notice calls attention to regulations that provide for the day-to-day safety of operations and the safety health and welfare of personnel on and near offshore installations. Z Notice 32 C'alls attention to regulations which require each offshore facility to have an emergency procedure manual, muster Ustsand drills and a stand-by vessel within 5 nautical miles of every manned installation. Notice 33 Reguests operators to notify the department Z8 days prior to any -La proposed geophysical surveys. It requires certain seisomic da& g hered to be submitted to. tha- Iris titu 11-e of -Geolog-ical.Sr-iences at. and certain data: to be submitted to the Departrne'nt of Energy. cc: Coastal Zone Task Force Members Oil Spill Conference TABLE OF CONTENTS I-LEGAL ASPECTS IMC0 and the Evolving International Scheme for Controlling marine Pollution .... 3 Capt. Frederick P. Schubert, United States Coast Guard International Regulation of the Tanker Industry ................................. 7 W. 0. Gray, C. J. Carven, and G. L. Becker, Exxon Corporation Recovering for Marine Life Damage: Legal Aspects of Allocating Social Costs and Protecting Public Interests ............................................ 11 John P. Meck, Deputy Attorney General, State of California, and RobertE. Lutz, McGeorge School of Law Oil Spill Liability and Compensation ("Superfund") ............................. 15 James J. Reynolds, American Institute of Merchant Shipping II-FINANCIAL ASPECTS Estimating the Potential for Future Oil Spills from Tankers, Offshore Development, and Onshore Pipelines ............................... 21 A. H. Beyer, Chevron Oil Field Research Company, and L. J. Painter, Chevron Research Company Controlling Pollution of the Marine Environment: An Economic Analysis ......... 31 Dennis Epple and Michael Visscher, Carnegie-Mellon University; William A. Wallace and John W. Wilkinson, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Problems and Perspectives in the Recovery of Oil Pollution Removal Costs ........ 35 Lt. Cdr. William H. Norris,Lt. Hugh N. Johnston, Jr., US Coast Guard A Model for the Costing of Oil Spill Clearance Operations at Sea ............... 39 P. D. Holmes, British Petroleum, Ltd. SLIKTRAK-A Computer Simulation of Offshore Oil Spills Cleanup, Effects and Associated Costs .................................................... 45 Dr. R. Blaikley, Amoco Europe Inc., G. F. L. Dietzel and A. W. Glass, Shell Internationale Petroleum Inc., Maatschappij, B. V., P. J. van Kleef, Shell Nederland Informtieverwerking B. V. III-SPILL PREVENTION AND COOPERATIVES SPCC Planning: Good Management Practice ................................. 55 David A. Clark, Clark Associates Preventing Oil Spills in the West Coast Forest Industry ........................ 57 L. Melville and P. Hamm, MacMillan Bloedel Limited U.S. Navy R&D Efforts in Support of Oil 0il Pollution Abatement Strategies......... 61 Lt.Cdr. M. Flora and S. Finger, United States Navy vii The Story of A Successful Oil Spill Coopertive--The Corpus Christi Area Oil Spill Control Association .............................................................. 65 Harry L. Franklin, Oil Spill Control Association What Constitutes Good Telecommunications Systems for an Oil Spill Cleanup ........ 69 R. B. Pearce, Standard Oil Company of California IV--CONTINGENCY PLANNING A Dynamic International Contingency Plan .......................................... 79 Cdr. C. R. Corbett, United States Coast Guard and Capt. C. J. Beckett, Canadian Coast Guard The St. Lawrence River Oil Spill of June 23, 1976--Are You Ever Truly Ready? ....... 81 Cdr. Jerome P. Foley and Lt. (jg) Stephen J. Tresidder, United States Coast Guard Oil Spill Contingency Planning for the BP Forties Oilfield Production, Pipeline and Terminal Systems ..................................................... 87 R. J. Fulleylove and T. E. Lester, The British Petroleum Company, Ltd. Oil Spill Control in Alberta ................................................... 91 V. E. Bohme and E. R. Brushett, Energy Resources Conservation Board The Tanker/Pipeline Controversy .................................................. 95 Robert J. Stewart, Martingale, Inc. Technical Support of Spill Control Operations .............................. 101 James P. Marum and Walter R. Quanstrom, Standard Oil Company; Robert G. Will, Amoco Oil Company The Development and Use of Resource Sensitivity Maps for Oil Spill Countermeasurs .................................................................. 105 Suling Hum, Environment Canada Oil Spill Response Planning for Biologically Sensitive Areas ..................... 1ll June Lindstedt-Siva, Atlantic Richfield Company Contingency Planning for the Impact of Oil Spills in Different Coastal Environments of Canada ............................................................ 115 Edward H. Owens, Louisiana State University V--TRAINING A Workshop for Defining the Role of Local Governments in Oil Spill Response ......... 125 W. H. Putman, State of California Resources Agency Oil Spill Control Training: Texas A&M University's Approach ........................ 129 J. Larry Payne, The Texas A&M University System The Spill Training and Education Program of Texas A&I-Corpus Christi ............... 135 Ralph E. Gilchrist, Texas A&I University Canadian Approach to Oil Spill Training ............................................. 137 Garnet H. Kay, Ontario Ministry of the Environment viii A Bad Day at Bunker Point ........................................................... 139 Capt. E. Marcus, Gulf Trading and Transportation Company Hiatusport-An On-Scene Coordinator Role Playing Exercise ............................ 141 Lt. Edward B. Kangster, III, United Stites Coast Guard VI-- MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT Development of an Oil in Water Content Monitor ...................................... 147 A. W. Hornig, J. T. Brownrigg, B. R. Chisholm, and L. P. Giering, Baird-Atomic, Inc.; and Lt.(jg) R. L. Skewes, United States Coast Guard Light Scattering Techniques for Discriminating Between Oil and Particulates in Contaminated Water ................................................................ 153 Bruce Friedman, David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center Development and Test of a Shipboard, Continuous, On-Line Oil-In-Water Content Monitor Using Forward (Laser) Light Scattering Techniques ................... 157 Edward P. Batutis, General Electric Company and Lt.(jg) Robert L. Skewes, United States Coast Guard Monitoring Oil Content in Shipboard Waste Water Discharges by Use of a Multi-phased Dye Transfer Process .................................................. 161 Roy J. Ricci and Anne M. Kelley, INTEX, Inc. Experience in monitoring the Oil Content of Ballast Water Being Discharged by Tankers .............................................................. 165 K. Fleming, Shell International Marine Ltd., and J. P. P. Dick, B. P. Tanker Company Ltd. Quantification of Navy Oils in Detergent Laden Waters ............................... 169 Tsi Shan Yu, David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center Biogenic Hydrocarbons in Intertidal Communities ..................................... 173 Adam Zsolnay, Duke University; Nancy G. Maynard, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Office, and Conrad D. Gebelein, University of California A Liquid Chromatographic Fluorescence Technique for Estimating Crude Oil in Water, Sediment and Biological Material ................................................. 179 D. Howard Miles, Mary Jane Coign, and Lewis R. Brown, Mississippi State University Petroleum and Anthropogenic Influence on the Composition of Sediments from the Southern California Bight ........................................................ 183 W. E. Reed, I. R. Kaplan,and M. Sandstrom, University of California and P. Mankiewicz, Science Applications, Inc. The Coast Guard's Forensic Oil Identfication System ............................... 189 Lt. James C. Clow, United States Coast Guard Feasibility Continuous Monitoring for Oil Pollution Across Channels and Rivers ......... 193 Guy S. Ramble, Jr., and Richard H. Morgan. Ramble, Inc., and Donald R. Jones. Environmental Protection Agency ix The Detection and Mapping of Oil on a Marshy Area by a Remote Luminescent Sensor ..................................................................... 197 Craig McFarlane, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, and Robert Watson, U.S. Geological Survey Comparative Evaluation of Real and Synthetic Aperture Radars for the Detection of Oil Pollution in the Santa Barbara Channel ................................................... 203 Steven P. Kraus and John E. Estes, University of Califomia, and Russell R. Vollmers, United States Coast Guard Current Applications of Remote Oil Monitoring Equipment .................................. 209 Judith A. Wright, Wright & Wright, Inc. Satellite Sentinel for Oil Spills in 1978? ........................................... 211 Warren A. Hovis, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Donald R. Jones, Enviromental Protection Agency U. S. Coast Guard Airborne Oil Surveillance System Status Report ...................... 215 Lt. A. T. Matner, United States Coast Guard, and A. T. Edgerton and D. C. Meeks, Aerojet ElectroSystems Company Aerial Photographic Applications in Support of Oil Spill Cleanup, Control, and Prevention ............................................................................. 221 Donald R. Jones, R. Landers, and A. Pressman, Environmental Protection Agency Prevention of Pollution During Oil Transfer Operations: An Evaluation of USCG Preventive Actions ........................................................... 223 Lt.Cdr. John R. Harrald Lt. Christopher M. Stone, United States Coast Guard; and Kirk R. Karwan, Carnegie-Mellon on University VII-CLEANUP TECHNIQUES Biological Criteria for the Selection of Clean-Up Techniques in Salt Marshes ....... 231 Barbara Westree, URS Research Company Evaluation of Selected Surface Treatment Agents for the Protection of Shorelines from Oil Spills ........................................................... 237 Carl R. Foget, Woodward-Clyde Consultants; Scott Thornton, Texas Research Institute; and Robert Castle, URS Research Company Hackensack Estuary Oil Spill: Cutting Oil-Soaked Marsh Grass as an Innovative Damage Control Technique .............................................. 243 Chester P. Mattson, Nicholas C. Valario, Donald J. Smith, and Susan Anisfield, Hackensack, Meadowlands Deveolopment Commission; George Potera, New Jersey Wetlands Institute A Distributed Reuseable-Sorbent Oil Recovery System ............................ 247 Sidney H. Shaw, Seaward International. Inc., and J. Stephen Dorrier, Environmental Protection Agency An Offshore Mechanized Sorbent Oil Recovery System Using Vessels of Opportunity ............................................................................. 251 Donald E Brunner, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory: James J. Der, Rockwell International Corporation; Donald Hall, Ocean Design Engineering Corporation Effectively Recovering Oil Spills to Groundwater ........................................ 255 David M. Dennis, Michigan Department of Natural Resources Discovery, Containment and Recovery of a Jet Fuel Storage Tank Leak-A Case History ................................................... 259 Andres Talts and John Bauer, U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency; Calvin Martin and Doulas Reeves, Defense Fuel Supply Agency, U.S. Army Practical Recommendations for Oil Spill Debris Disposal ...................... 265 J. S. Farlow and R. Landreth, Environmental Protection Agency; D. E. Ross, SCS Engineers, Inc. Debris Handling System for Navy Harbor Oil Spill Cleanup Operations .......... 271 Paul F. Nadeau, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Black Oil Disposal Techniques ............................................ 277 Neil Wise, Environmental Protection Agency, and CWO Peter A. Brunk, United States Coast Guard Some Studies of an Oil Spillage Due to to the Jacob Maersk Accident .............. 281 L. D. Canelas and J. D. Calejo Monteiro, Gabinete da Area de Sines, Lisbon, Portugal Sinking of Tanker St. Peter Off Colombia ................................... 289 T. M. Hayes, Canadian Coast Guard Underwater Blowout Oil Collection ........................................ 293 Rich. H. Wester gaard, Sentralinstitutt for industriell forsning (Central Institute for Industrial Research), Norway Oil Stick Spreading Beneath a Uniform Ice Cover in the Presence of a Current .... 297 F. B. Weiskopf and M. S. Uzuner, Arctec, Inc. Development of an Arctic Oil Spill Recovery System for Arctic Operations ........ 301 Charles F. Scharfen stein and Michael G. Hoard, Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, Inc. A Field Evaluation of Oil Spill Recovery Devices ............................. 303 L. B. Solsberg, Environment Canada The Application of Existing Oil Spill Abotement to Cold Regions ................ 309 L. A. Schultz and P. C. Deslauriers, Aretee, Inc. Arctic Offshore Oil Spill Concermeasures with Emphasis on an Oil and Gas Blowout in the Southern Beaufort Sea................................................ 313 D. E. Thornton, S. L. Ross, W. J. Logan, and C. W. Ross, Environment Canada VIII-CLEANUP EQUIPMENT Development of a High Current Streamlined Oil Boomq Skimmer for Inland Waterways ............................................................. 323 Blair A. Folsom and Clyde Johnson, Ultrasystems, Inc. Hydrodynamics of a Diversionary Bown ..................................... 329 W. E. McCracken, Mason & Hanger-Silas Mason Co., Inc., and F. J. Freestone, Environmental Protection Agency xi 0 Use of Floating Deflectors for Oil Spill Control in Fast Flowing Waters .......... 335 N. E. Eryuzlu, Canadian Coast Guard and R.Hausser, Lasalle Hydraulics Laboratory, Ltd. Performance Tests of Three Fast Current Oil Recovery Devices ................. 341 Lt. James H. Getman, United States Coast Guard Surface Enhancement-Bringing It All Together .............................. 347 Jack E. Wilson, Naval Facilities Engineering Command French Oil Spill Policy-The Recovery Phase ................................. 355 Philippe Guerin, Secretariat General de la Marine Marchande and Jacques Pichon, Alsthom Techniques des Fluides SOCK-An Oil Skimming Kit for Vessels of Convenience ....................... 361 R. R. Ayers, Shall Development Company and A. V. Barnett, Gulf of Alaska Clean-up Organization Development of Oil Spill Recovery Ship ..................................... 367 Shoji Uchida and Hiroshi Takeshita, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. and Yajuro Seike, Nagasaki Technical Institute Combined Skimmer-Barrier High Seas Oil Recovery System .................... 375 Jerome H. Milgram, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Richard A. Griffiths, United States Coast Guard The Concentrations of Oil in Sea Water Resulting from Natural and Chemically Induced Dispersion of Oil Sticks ................................. 381 D. Cormack and J. A. Nichols, Warren Spring Laboratory Some Recent Observations Regarding the Unique Characteristics and Effectiveness of Self-Mix Chemical Dispersants ............................................ 387 Gerard P. Canevari, Exxon Research and Engineering Company Dispersant Field Trials in Canadian Waters................................. 391 Shawn Gill, Canadian Coast Guard Untlization of Dispersants in Offshore Areas................................. 395 Daniel E. Fitzgerald, Atlantic Richfield Company Considerations for Field Use of Dispersanis ................................. 399 Leo T. McCarthy, Jr., Environmental Protection Agency Techniques for Mixing Dispersant Treated Oil Slicks into the Water.............. 403 Cary F. Smith and W.E. McCracken, Mason & Hanger-Silas Mason Company, Inc. New Concept of Oil Dispersion in View of Clean-Up by Degradution............. 407 C. Bocard, B. Durif-Varambon, C. Gatellier and Ph. Renault,Institut Francais du Petrole; and P.Laboureur and L. Person, P.C.U.K. Centre d'Application Cleaning Agents for Oiled Wildlife ......................................... 411 Alice B. Berkner, David C. Smith, and Anne Stairs Williams, International Bird Rescue Research Center xii Fast Surface Delivery System for Pollution Response Equipment ................. 417 Lt. Richard M. Larrabee, United States Coast Guard, and Russell Ward, Naval Coastal Systems Laboratory Navy Development of Suitable Shipboard Bilge OilWater Separators ............. 423 A. L. Smookler, J. W. Harden, Jr., and P. D. Conroy, David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center New Test Facilities for the Prevention of Oil Pollution in Japan ................. 429 Atsuo Yazaki, The Shipbuilding Research Centre of Japan IX-SPILL BEHAVJOR AND EFFECTS A Computer Simulation Technique for Oil Spills off the New Jersey -Delaware Coastline .............................................................. 437 Lt.Cdr. 1. M. Lissauer, Lt.Cdr. J. C. Bacon, and M. C. Miller, United States Coast Guard New York Harbor Oil Drift Prediction Model .............. 441 Capt. R. C. Kollmeyer and Cadet M. E. Thompson, United States Coast Guard The Use of a Diagnostic Circulation Model for Oil Trajectory Analysis ........... 447 J. A. Gall and Carol H. Pease, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Storm Related Oil Spill Movement on the Beaufort Sea Shelf ................... 455 G. L. Hufford, Lt.Cdr. 1. M. Lissauer, and MST-2 B. D. Thompson, United States Coast Guard ment .... ........ ..... 461 Fate of Crude Oil Spilled in a Simulated Arctic Environ C. MacGregor and A. Y. McLean, Canplan Oceanology Ltd. Fate of Oil from the Supertanker Metula .................................... 465 Roy W. Hann, Jr., Texas A&M University Persistence of Non-Alkane Components of Bunker C Oil in Beach Sediments of Chedabicto Ray, and Lack of Their Metbolism by Molluscs ............... .................................. 469 J. H. Vandermeulen and P. D. Keizer, Bedford Institute of Oceanography; and W. R. Penrose, Fisheries and Marinet Service Subsurface Persistence of Crude Oil Spilled on Land and Its Transport in Groundwater .......................................... 475 J. J. Duffy, Hudson's Bay Oil and Gas Company, Ltd.; E. Peak and M. F. Mohtadi, University of Calgary The Fate of Petroleum in a Soil Environment ................................ 479 L. W. Cresswell, Continental Oil Company Priorities in Fare of Oil Spill Research ..................................... 483 Ronald L. Kolpack, Universiyy of Southern California A Review of Sonic Commonly Used Parameters for the Determination of Oil Pollution .................. ......................................... 487 Michael Gruenfeld and Uwe Frank, Environmental Protection Agency Xiii 0 Responses of the Clam Macoma Balthica to Prudhoe Bay Crude Oil ............. 493 D. G. Shaw, A.J. Paul, and E. R. Smith, institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska Effects of Drill Mud on Sediment Clearing Rates of Certain Hermatypic Corals....495 Jack H. Thompson and Thomas J. Bright, Texas A&M University The Effects of Pelagic Hydrocarbons on the Rocky Intertidal Flora and Fauna of Bermuda .................................................. 499 Nancy G. Maynard, Bureau of Land Management, Conrad D. Gebelein, University of California, and Adam Zsolnay, Duke University Marine Laboratory Ecological Effects of Experimental Oil Spills on Eastern Coastal Plain Estuarine Ecosystems .................................................................... 505 M. E. Bender, E. A. Shearls, R. P. Ayres. C. H. Hershtnec,and R. J. Huggett, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Chemical Investigations of Two Experimental Oil Spills in at Estuarine Ecosystem .............................................................. 511 Rudolph H. Bieri, Vassilios C. Stamoudis, and M. Kent Cueman, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Microbial Responses After Two Experimental Oil Spills in an Eastern Coastal Plain Estuarine Ecosystem .. ..................................................... 517 Howard Kator and Russell Herwig, Virginia Institute of Marine Science The Chesapeake Bay Oil Spill-February 2, 1976: A Case History .............. 523 John V. Roland, Glenn E. Moore and Michael A. Bellanca, Virginia State Water Control Board Effects of the Chesapeake Bay Oil Spill of February 2, 1976 on Salt Marshes of the, Lower Bay .............................................. 529 Carl Hershner and Kenneth Moore, Virginia Institute of Marine Scienc Effects of the March 18, 1973 Oil Spill Near Cabo Rojo, Puerto Rico on Tropical Marine Communities ................................................ 535 Royal J. Nadeau, Environmental Protection Agency: and Eugene T. Bergquist, Environmental Quality Board Oil Pollution and Tropical Littoral Communities: Biological Effects of the 1975 Florida Keys Oil Spill ......................................... 539 Elaine I. Chan, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration The Five-Year Recruitment of Marine Life After the 1971 San Francisco Oil Spill........................................................................ 543 Gordon L. Chan, College of Marin A Continuous Flow Bioassy System for the Exposure of Marine Organisms to Oil .................................................................. 547 Jeffrey L. Hyland, Peter F. Rogerson, and George R. Gardner. Environmental Protection Agency Flow-Through System for Chronic Exposure of Aquatic Organisms to Seawater-Soluble Hydrocarbons from Crude Oil: Construction and Applications ....................................................... 551 William T. Roubal, Donald H. Bovee, Tracy K. Collier, and Susan l. Stranahan, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration xiv 0 Effects of a Continuous Low-Level No. 2 Fuel Dispersion an Laboratory-Held Intertidal Colonies ...................................... 557 J. R. Vanderhorst, R. M. Bean, L. J. Moore, P. Wilkinson, C. I. Gibson, and J. W. Blaylock, Battelle-Northwest Marine Research Laboratory The Sublethal Effects of Natural Chronic Exposure to Petroleum on Marine Invertebrates ..................................................... 563 Dale Straughan, University of Southern Califomia The Effects of Crude Oil on Larvae of Lobster Homarus Americanus............ 569 Joseph M. Forms, Westinghouse Ocean Research Laboratory Sensitivity of Larval and Adult Alaskan Shrimp and Crabs to Acute Exposures of the Water-Soluble Fraction of Cook Inlet Crude Oil ............... 575 C. C. Brodersen, S. D. Rice, J. W. Short,T. A. Mecklenburg, and J. F. Karinen, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA Water Soluble Components of Crude Oils, Fuel Oils, and Used Crankcase Oils ............................................................ 579 Kenneth Winters and Patrick L. Parker, University of Texas Marine Science Institute Extractable Organics and Nonvolatile Hydrocarbons in New York Harbor Waters .......................................................... 583 Thomas D. Searl and Hugh L. Huffman, Jr., Exxon Research and Engineering Co.; and James P. Thomas, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Distribution of Volatile Hydrocarbons in Some Pacific Ocean Waters............. 589 Charles Bruce Koons, Exxon Production Research Company Micro-organisms and Hydrocarbons in the North Sea During July-August, 1975 ....................................................... 593 Carl H. Oppenheimer, The University of Texas Marine Science Institute; Wilfried Gunkel and Guenter Gassmann, Biological Laboratory Helgoland, West Germany Fate of Petroleum Components in Estuarine Waters of the Southeastern United States .......................................... 611 Richard F. Lee, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography Photo-oxidation of Crude Oils........................................... 617 Shinichi Nagata and Goro Kondo, Kobe University of Mercantile Marine, Kobe, Japan Bioavailability of Petroleum Hydrocarbons from Water, Sediments, and Detritius to the Marine Annelid, Neanthes Arenaceodentata................. 621 Steven S. Rossi, Scripps Institution of Oceanography Petroleum Sulfur-Containing Compounds and Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Marine Mollusks Modiolus Demissus and Crassostrea Virginica ............. 627 James L. Lake and Carl Hershner, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Distribution of Naphthalenes within Exposed Fundulus Sintitus and Correlations with Stress Behavior .......................................... 633 D. Dixit, Northern Viginia Community College, and J. W. Anderson. Battelle, Pacific Northwest Division The Uptake of Naphthalenes by the Clam, Rangia Cuneata, in the Vicinity of an Oil Separator Platform in Trinity Bay, Texas ..................... 637 K. W. Fucik, H. W. Armstrong, and J. M. Neff, Texas A&M University xv NE W ENGLAND RIVER BASINS COMMISSION 55 COURT' S@TRSET- BOSTON. INIASSAW IUSFTTS 0210.4 NEROC PHONEWM'2123- G2A4 March 22J. 1977 MEMORANDUM To: State Coastal Zone Officials From: Russell J. Wilder$ Regional OCS Technical Service Subject: Report on 1977 Oil Spill Conference .7 The 1977 Oil Spill.Conference sponsbred by F-PAR the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Coast Guard was held in New Orleans Louisiana on March 8-10, 1977. During the three days of the conference 125 papers were presented representing the work of over 250 authors. The". papers were presented in eight sessions each day with four sessions run- ning concurrently in the morning and afternoon. Over 1, 000 persons par- ticipated in the conference representing state and local governments, EPA, the Coast Guard, regional planning councilst equipment manufacturers., the' oil industry and others. The Regional OCS Technical Service represented the Coastal Zone. Task Force and attended sessions in the following subject areas: (1) effects of oil spilled in coastal estuarine systems (Chesapeake, Bay), (2) spill. prevention and cooperatives, (3) debris disposal, (4) training for oil spill control, (5) contingency planning, and (6) tqchniques for clean-up of spills in marshes. In addition, literature on clean-up equipment and their capabil.- ities were gathered. This literature, along with the proceedings of the conferenceP vAll be retained by the Technical Service for reference and copies of these.materials will be available to states upon request. Members of the Coastal Zone Task Force have expressed con- cerns about ultimate disposal technology for waste oil and debris cleaned up after an oil spill. Also, there are questions, about the availability of clean-UP materials in coastal areas that are cheap, effective and relatively easy to dis- pose of after use. Althouah responsibility for clean-up of an oil spill-may lie with the spiller, the state,, EPA, or the Coast Guard, depending on size., location and the resources. available for spill clean-up, coastal zone officials have a particular concern with the damage to managed coastal resources caused by an oil spill. The sessions attended at the Oil Spill Conference examined pro- blems that should be addressed by coastal zone officials. A summary of these subject areas follows and more material on spe.C*ific areas can be given to states if they indicate an iriterest. -2- %; I Effects of oil Spilled i-n. Coastal Estuarine Systems On February 2, 19 76 the oil transport barg e ST C - 10 1 sank in a storm in Chesapealzee Bay near the mouth of the Potomac River and spilled app.roximately 250.. 000 gallons of No. 6 oil., Oil from the barge washed up on beaches and.rnarshes, on both sides of the bay. The clean-up effort, directed by the Coast Guard, took- over a month, cost nearly $4001, 000 and recovered an estimated 67 percent of the oil spilled. Most of. the oil reco- vered by the clean-up crews was placed in 55@gallon drums and trucked to a nearby landfill site in a relatively unpopulated area and burned. In the process of clean-up, soiled beach grass was cut and removed to the disposal site. Care was taken by the crews not to trample. the grass and recovery of the grasses, mainly Spartina alterniflora was nearly complete by summer. Although an estimated 20 to 50, 000 bi were killed by the spill, preliminary reports. in- dicate that damages to the environment may not be As severe as originally ex- pected. , One of the major problems encountered during clean-up was getting. the necessary approvals from state agencies to. transport the waste over state roads and to find a suitable site where burning of the debris would be allowed. It was felt that prior approval for transportation, burning or other disposal that could be enacted in the case'of a spill would greatly enhance a spill con- tingency plan for the area. After the spill and clean-up operations were ov erf a study by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science was conducted to determine biological im- pact on the aff ected fringe marshes. It was concluded that marsh, gras s, mus s e* and oysters st-udied had returned t'o a healthy condition shortly after the spill was cleaned up. A small snail showed a significant reduction but had returned to normal by October. It was felt, that the minor biblogical impact of this spill was due to the relative non-toxic nature of No. 6 oil$ the fact that it was winter and biota was relatively inactive and that the fringe marshes are in a compara- tively high energy area that reduced the oills' residence time. As a result of the experience with this spill and others along the U. S. East Coast here are some cons ide rations for clean-up bi marsh areas: 1. Care has to be taken not to cause more damage from clean-up operations than from the oil itself. Excess trampling can incorporate oil into sediments where it will remainin an ana- erobic condition. This trampling will also damage roots of C) plants. The "do-nothina" a C> pproach might be considered.the most de.sireable alternative to prevent further damage and should always be evaluated. 2. If marsh grass is destroyed, erosion of the mud flats will take place. -3- techniques have included cutting or burning of "SPartina 3. Clean-up '4:> alterniflora and then removing the crusty residue or oil soaked gras s. 4. Care has to be exercised according to the s e as on of the year and the condition of the -rass. 5. If roots are not damaged and alot of the oil is removed, much of the marsh will recover. 6. Biologists- favor low pressure water flushing of light oils to remove them from marshes. 7. Recent research. has shown that selected surface treatment agents can be used to protect marsh areas and beaches before oil reaches them. The Virginia Institute. of Marine Science also reported on experimental oil spills conducted in the, York River estuary.: It found that weathered crude oil had as great an ecological impact on the biota of the rnarsh as fresh crude oil. 2. Spill Prevention and Cooperatives, Papers were presented on industry's efforts at developing .an effective spill prevention, control and countermeasure (SPCC) plan as required by Section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act-. The papers were aimed at in-, dustry but did offer some practical advice on how an SPCC plan@ can be developed and how a plan can save industry money; from reduced damagge resulting in less., damage payments and fines and from prevention of product loss. In Corpus Christi, Texas, industry and government have formed a s.ucces sful spill cooperative that has been in operation for the last five years. The annual operating cost of the cooperative is split 50-50 bet-@,veen industry C7 and federalt state and local goveinment. The cooperative cleans up spills from industry members and assesses the cost to the member who is the spiller. In the case of "mystery" spills, the Coast Guard pays the cost. The operation of the cooperative has resulted *in an economical way for industry to clean-up spills; an average of 40 cents per gallon. The cooperative was developed out of necessity, because of the concentration of petroleum related industries in the Corpus Christi n e eq t the association maintains for-use b its* area. Atrio g th uipmen members (and non-members who are charged double for use of the equipment) is EPA's beach sand cleaner; a piece of equipment that. can seperate oil from sand fed into it. The association is also the sponsor of the."Area Waterfowl Preser- vation Committee". The committee, con.sisting-of fish.and wildlife experts from universities, state and federal agencies, and the Audubon Society, has the equip- ment and. capability to protect and rescue waterfowl from oil spills. 4 Two papers presented (one unscheduled) emphasized the need for good telecommunication during oil spill clean-up work, including the enormous burden on the on- scene-coordinator to get correct, up to date information to the media as his part in the all-important public relations aspect of spill clean- up. The importance of good telecommunications during oil spill clean-up has been recognized by the FCC and it has designated channel 81 for use between the USCG and civilians working on oil spills. 3. Debris Disposal Four methods for disposal of oil-soaked debris were examined in papers presented by EPA and the Coast Guard. EPA has produced a film entitled Oil Spills: Decisions for Debris Disposal and a detailed, practical manual of practice on the subject. The film is available now and will. be shown at the Coastal Zone Task Force meeting on April 13. The handbook, being printed at this time, will be available by summer. Reclamation of spilled oil is, of course, the most desirable way to dispose of oily debris. This should always be the first consideration when faced with debris disposal. Sometimes the debris can be used as is for some purpose such as incorporating oiled sand and gravel directly into highway construction. But no matter how much of the material can be used or reclaimed there will re- main oil solids not worth cleaning and needing, ultimate disposal. Because oil in an aerobic environment will break down by microbial action, the recommended method for disposal of oily debris is the landspreadinq process where debris size, access to suitable land and climate permits. Generally the oily waste will no longer pose a water contamination problem after three growing seasons of aerobic decomposition. Landspreading, involves preparing a suitable site by scarifying the soil and rototilling the debris into the ground with repeated tillings over the next two years. This method has been used by industry for years to dispose of oily sludges from oil/water separators. It should be noted that landspreading releases unoxidized hydrocarbons into the air and may be subject to air pollution regulations. This problem should be worked out with appropriate regulatory agencies before a disposal problem occurs. ary landfill or other site Anaerobic burial either in a designated sanit is not an ultimate disposal solution. Oil has remained trapped in an anaerobic condition in geologic structures for millions of years before being brought to the surface by man. Therefore, anaerobic burial only stores the oil in the condition in which it was buried for an indefinite amount of time until erosion or activities of man allow it to escape from its near-surface environment and pollute another body of water. Whether oily debris is spread on the land or buried, there may be a definite problem with the uptake of heavy metals by plants. Data on this possible problem is scanty at this time. One of the quickest and cheapest ways of debris disposal is burning. During the Chesapeake Bay oil spill of February 1976 debris was burned at a remote sanitary landfill site with the use of auxillaryfuel and- a forced draft air supply. This method is recommended where more desirable methods are impossible, impractical or cost prohibitive. 4. Training for Oil Spill Control Another aspeet. of dealing with oil spills, and a very important one., is having enough adequately trained people available to carry out an effective oil spill clean-up operation. In 'this regard, six papers were presented by various levels of government on oil spill control training. In California on vernments vvorkshops have,been c ducted for local go to fully explain how they are supposed to participate in the National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan of 1970, The workshops clar- ified the role of local government in the plan and encouraged their support.. Texas A&M. and Texas A&I,Universities offer courses in oil spill control trainina. Texas A&I's proposed curricular e hasizes,.: in a week-Iong MP cours.e. training for non-industry personnel in the preparation of a workable contingency plan and a vehicle-to carry out the plan. Te s A&M emph xa asizes a hands-on approach actually using clean-up equipment andwas originally designed for industry but.can be used by others needing "ho,@r to do it" instruction. Other methods of training were presented-by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment which utilizes videotape.cassettes and a doaumentary film of a simulated oil spill exercise, and by Gulf Tradingand Transportation Company -who employs a combination of seminars, multimedia presentations and role play- ing to sensitize ship personnel and terminal managers to their oil spill respon- sibilities. Finally, the CoastGuard operateis a successful on-scene coordinator (OSC) role -playing exercise called "Hiatusport" for training OSC and staff. The exercise is designed to introduce,, in addition.to the primary task of spill clean- up, significant public relations problems that arise during a major spill. 5. Contingency Planning Eight papers.were presented-onLthe subject of oil spillcontingency planning. One contingency plan that may be of interest to the New England area is the plan developed by the British. Petroleum Company, Limited for its Forties oil field in the U.K. sector of the North Sea. The plan is divided into a marine and terrestrial plan. The marine plan relies heavily on the use of dispersants and the terrestrial plan is designed to protect river crossi-nas where pipelines are most vulnerable to breakage. It should be noted,tha.t the use of dispersants in oil spill control is prohibited in Massachusetts. The important thing is that this plan wa's formulated by the developer of the oil field with coordination and approval by government agencies. Of particular interest to coastal zone officials is. the recommended use of resource bioloo-ical sensitivity maps for oil spill contingency planning. The s.tate of Maine contracted Arthur D. Little to conduct a study that analyzes areas of sensitivity in Portland Harbor and Casco Bay. A copy of this report has been provided to the Technical Service for. use by other states. Mass- achusetts is evaluating its coastal zone for resource sensitivity to oil spills and designating priority areas for protection. HoweverV in addition to iden- tifyinar those areas in most need of protection, the methods of protection and clean-up most suited to the biologic and morphologic conditions of the area should be identified. Many other papers were presented on clean-up equipment for special conditions., legal aspects of oil spills, monitoring equipment and fate and effects of spilled oil. One paper, presented by the Westinghouse Ocean Re-search Lab- oratory, outlined research conducted at the Massachusetts State Lobster,Hatchery on the effects of API reference South Louisiana crude oil upon four 1@a"nd,@stages of American Lobster. Results of the research showed a threshold sensitivity for lanktonic larval lobsters between . I and 1. 0 ' m. It should be noted here p pp that current EPA discharge permits and.OCS operating orders contain prohi- bitations of "no' discharge of free oil" i. e. not a visible sheen. Oil will be noticed as a sheen on a water surface at a concentration of anywhere between 15 and 100 ppm depending on type of oil, temperature and character of the water surfac eV including the presence of surfact-ants and dispersants. Another result of the research showed that the normally light-blue larvae became discolored to a reddish-bro-wn color and would be more likely' to be victims of foraging predators. Some final notes on the conference follow.- (1) The upper limit for wave heiccht in "high seas" for which current oil spill clean.-Up technology is effective is three meters. *(2) Thqre is a heated. controversy between industry and biologists over the use of dispersants. In general, industry claims that dispersants dilute 64.1 and render it less toxic while biologists want some defin- itive data on the effects of its use before its use is expanded. (3) Equipment for clean-up is mainly designed for use in inland waters, harbors, beaches., bays and estuaries where dynamic wave action is diminished. A catalog of some, of the latest equipment is available in the OCS Technical Service office. .(4) Straw remains as the cheapest available sorbent material and although it is not a If ostly mops and pa s, it does -have the iidvantage of beAng s e- ective as more C' d C. 0 biodearadable and will not give off toxic fumes when burned as the synthetic materials will. Enclosure: Table of con-II-ents from conference proceedings th NEW. ENGLAND RIVER BASINS COT"VaIISSION, @4 , @44 55 COURT STREET - BOSTON. MASSACHUSMS 02108 NY-P3C PRONE OAT) 2-23-62-14 'March 2, 1977 MEMORANDUM To: S. Russell Sylva, Chairman, Coastal Zone Task Fo.rce From: Russell J. Wilder, Regional OCS Technical Service Sub ect: Summary of work during February 1977 C> During the first two weeks of February, most of the Technical Service's time was occupied in the'preparation of the report' sent out on February 18 summarizing the major actions taken in New England by federal agencies and states since the wreck of the.Argo Merchant. Inter- views were conducted in person with the New England Regional Commission, Regional Council, and EPA. Telephone interviews were held with Oil & Hazardous Materials section and the Office of International Activities of EPA, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Spilled Oil Research Team of NOAAJ. the National Marine Fisheries Services and all the member states of the Coastal Zone Task Force. The result of this effort was a report that outlined, with regard to oil spill liability and cleanup, all the major reports, studies, Is and task forces, known to be ongoing at present among state and federal pane agencies. Subsequent to this report, it has been learned that the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute is making an assessment of oil cargoes transported by sea in New England with damage risk analyzed by type and volume of oil and type of vessel. The report may not include the area within Lo@hg Island Sound due to the difficulty in identifying cargo routes there. The report is being done for NOAA's MESA program and is expected to be complete by early May. The original purpose of conducting this inventory was to lay the basis for a plan to produce an oil spill "handbook" by. the technical service. book" in use for Portland Harbor and Maine has their own version of a Ithand' -is developing another one for Penobscot Ba :EPA is'in the process of y granting a contract.to develop a national manual of practice for oil spill clean- up and should produce a report by the end of the year. Both of these documents will be drawn upon to produce a useable handbook for all the member states of the Task Force. In conducting research for the February 18 report on studies and task forces, etc. being conducted by federal and state agencies on oil spill prevention.and cleanup, a report by the- federal Regional Coun- cil on the Federal Resj2onse to Coastal Oil_Lollution, was discovered. This report provided a concise summary of federal laws and regulations that apply to coastal oil spills in New England. Copies of the report were sent along to members of the Task. Force on February 25. During February, information has been gathered on the tech- nical content of BLM's Marine Environmental Studies. Briefly, in the Mid-Atlantic and New England, the status of the main environmental 0 studies contracts for FY 1976 ar,e presented in the following table: Area Contractor Amount Date Mid-Atlantac U. of Marylan 2,500 8/1/75 Multi industry forcasting model to evaluate regional economic effects of offshore oil and gas production in the Mid-Atlantic OCS region. BLM & NOAA 17,000 1/29/76' Establishment and operation of an east, coast Continental Shelf Meteoro- logical Buoy Monitoring Network. EPA 4,000 2/10/76 Preparation of an environmental impact statement for the proposed leasing C3 of the Baltimore Canyon OCS in the Atlantic Ocean. BLM & NOAA 603,000 12/16/75 Summarization & Interpretation of historical physical oceanographic and metrolocrical information for the Mid-Atlantic Region. VIMS 2,772,683 9/30/76 Second year Benchmark studies in the Mid-Atlantic OCS Region. Non-Profit Or Yanization 155,904 9/29/76 Center for Natural Areas A sun-imary and analysis of environmental information on the Continental Shelf from the Bay of Fundy to Cape Hatteras. TOTAL $3,012,087 3 Area Contractor Amount Date N. Atlantic USGS 1-0 -0-1 9/24/76 Geolooical Oceanographic Studies of Georges Bank. Dean Bun-i2us-Consultant 7/8/76 Evaluate addendum to proposals submitted for a program.of physical oceanography in the New England OCS area. Dr. C. Crawford- 7/22/76 Consultant Review two proposals for mic ro -biological studies for N. Atlantic Georges Bank and provide detailed analysis for the suitability of proposals for the BLM microbiology program, Dean Bumj2us -Consultant 757.20 8/6/76 Evaluate best and final roposal submitted for a program of physical p oceanography in the New England OCS area. EG&G 6s5,ooo ..9/30/76 Physical Oceanographic Studies of the New En'gland/Georges Bank OCS Area. Energy Resources 2,950,000 9/1,_ 9/27/76 Co. , Inc. Chemical and Biological Benchmark Study for the New England OCS. Rayt eon Co. 3, 330, 000 9/21, 9/30/76 Physical Oceanographic Studies of the New England/ Georges Bank OCS Area, TOTAL $7, 676, 652. 75 The Alaskan OCS has the most contracts awarded for -marine environmental studies. There are nearly 150 contracts fo r research in the Gulf of Alaska, Beaufort, Bering and Chukchi Seas, and most of the contracts C@ are for baseline studies. A list of Alaskan OCS studes is attached. During March, the technical aspects of these contracts will be studied. The studies.will be exarnined.to see how they fulfill the needs of the region and reports-will be'published by the Tochnical Service'on the form and content of the studies. Many people have expressed concern over the environmental impact of drilling muds and cuttings on the Georges Bank fishery. I There C> have been several studies by the oil industry in the Gulf of Mexico that show no toxic effects due to metals or long term physical -damage to SeSsile -4- benthic organisms due to burial by dri 11 cuttings. A report done by the State University System of. Florida, Institute of Oceanography in a 1975 contract for BLM showed that there were nealicrible bioloaic effects due C@ 0 C@ to the discharge of drilling muds and cuttings. The only report of a similar nature known to have been completed in the Georges Bank area was one required by EPA.on the first COST well drilled during th-- summer of 1976. It, however, only evaluated quantitative chemistry and turbidity in the vicinity of the rig - no bioassay'work was done. Region Z, EPA is requiring bioassay work on common zooplankton and diatoms using a re- presentative drilling mud mixture. There may be further room for research. on the toxicity and physical effe@ts of drill muds and cuttings specific to Georges Bank fish resources. Ideallythis research should be done prior to and during the exploratory phase. More detail on this and other studies C@ will be provided in subsequent reports from the Technical Service. cc: F. Gregg, B. Brown, I. Waitsman, V. Ciampa, C-0 Ferber 0 ALASKAN OCS STUDIES Area Contractor Amount Date of Award Bering Sea U. of Alaska $156,278 4/1/75 The distribution, abundance, diversity, and productivity of benthic organisms Beaufort Sea Oregon State U, 137,537 6/1/75 The distrubution, bundance, diversity, and productivity of benthos Beaufort Sea Oregons State U. 59,530 6/l/75 Summarization of existing literature and unpublished data on the distribution, abundance, and life histories of benthic organisisms Bering Sea Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 141,500 5/1/75 Herring Spawning Survey Gulf of Alaska Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 127,000 7/1/75 Benthos of Yakutat Bay Gulf of Alaska Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 53,500 7/l/75 Razor clam density and distribution Gulf of Alaska Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 40,200 7/1/75 Study of the littoral zone of the Kenai Peninsula Gulf of Alaska U. of Washington 63,818 7/1/75 A description and numerical analysis of the factors affecting the processes of production Gulf of Alaska National Marine Fisheries 36,300 7/1/75 Review and evaluation of historical data base on non-salmonid pelagic resources of the shelf and slope Gulf of Alaska National Marine Fisheries 370,000 7/1/75 baseline characterization of the littoral biota Bering Sea National Marine Fisheries 370,000 7/1/75 Baseline characterization of the littoral biota Gulf of Alaska U. of Washington 150,000 7/1/75 Ichthyoplankton of the Gulf Gulf of Alaska Pacific Marine Environmental 150,000 7/1/75 Laboratory Initial, zooplankton investigations Gulf of Alaska Pacific Marine Environmental 155,000 7/l/75 Laboratory Phytoplankton survey Bering, Chukchi, U. of Alaska $213,925 4/1/75 and Beaufort Seas Zooplankton and micronekton survey Bering Sea U. of Alaska 252,715 4/1/75 Phytoplankton Studies Gulf of Alaska National Marina Fisheries 35,000 7/1/75 Baseline studies of demersal resources of the northern shelf and slope Bering Sea National Marine Fisheries 375,000 4/1/75 Baseline studies of demersal resources of the eastetn shelf and slope Beaufort Sea Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 163,100 7/1/75 Estuarine fishery study Gulf of Alaska U. of Alaska 224,428 7/l/75 The distribution, abundance, diversity, and productivity of benthic organisims Gulf of Alaska and U. of Alaska 97,819 4/l/75 Bering_ Sea A summarization of existing literature and unpublished data on the distribution, abundance, and productivitiy of benthic organisms Gulf of Alaska and U. of Alaska 75,163 7/1/75 Bering Sea food and feeding relationships in the benthi and demersal fishes Gulf of Alaska and U. of Alaska 43,962 7/1/75 Bering Sea preparation of illustrated keys to skeletal remains and oto- liths of forage fishes Beaufort Sea U.of Alaska 28,226 4/l/75 Preparation of illistrated keys to skeletal remains and oto- liths of forage fishes Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 20,002 7/l/75 Literature search and data conversion on density distribution Oil fishes Gulf of Alaska and U. of Washington 60,000 7/l/75 Bering Sea ichthyoplankton survey 0 Bearing Sea National Marine Fisheries $45,900 7/1/75 Review of literature and archive data for non-salmonid pelagic fishes Beaufort Sea Western Washington State 231,750 7/1/75 littoral survey Beaufort Sea U. of Washington 300,000 5/16/75 Plankton studies Gulf of Alaska, Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 163,692 9/l/75 Bering, Beaufort Sea Identification, documentation and delineation of coastal migratory bird habitats Bering Sea U. of Wisconsin 32,000 6/1/75 A census of seabirds in the Pribilof Islands Bering See National Marine Fisheries 100,000 7/1/75 Bird and marine mammal ecosystem dynamics Bering Sea U. of California-Irvine 63,666 4/l/75 Baseline studies of Pribilof Island seabirds Gulf of Alaska John Hopkins U. 20,000 6/1/75 Evolution and pathobiology of the herring gull group Gulf of Alaska Oregon State U. 38,722 8/1/75 Community structure, distribution, and interrelationships of marine birds Beaufort Sea U. of California-Bodega Lab 51,473 5/15/75 Dependence of shorebirds on Arctic littcral habitats Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 3,944 4/l/75 Avifaunal utilization of the offshore island near Prudhoe Bay Bering Sea Massachusetts Audubon Society 74,535 5/20/75 Survey of coastal habitats on the south shore of Seward Peninsula Gulf of Alaska and U. of Calgary 12,000 6/l/75 Bering Sea Ecology and behavior of southern hemisphere shearwaters and other seabirds when over the outer continental shelf during the northern Summer. Bering and Beaufort Fish and Wildlife Service $ 51,533 5/10/75 Seas The distribution abundance and feeding ecology of birds as- sociated with pack ice Gulf of Alaska, Fish and Wildlife Service 421,000 5/l/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Seasonal distribution and abundance of marine birds Gulf of Alaska, Fish and Wildlife Service 33,700 6/l/75 Bering Sea Photographic mapping of seabird colonies Gulf of Alaska Fish and Wildlife Service 43,300 7/1/75 Bering, Chukchi, Beaufort Seas Review and analysis of literature and unpublished data on marina birds Gulf of Alaska Fish and Wildlife Service 21,700 7/1/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Migration of birds in Alaskan marine waters subject to influence by OCS development Gulf of Alaska, Fish and Wildlife Service 268,860 5/l/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Feeding ecology and trophic relationships of alaskan marine birds Gulf of Alaska, Fish and Wildlife Service 313,860 5/l/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Population dynamics of marine birds Gulf of Alaska, Fish and Wildlife service 25,300 7/1/75 Bering, Chukchi, Beaufort Seas Preliminary catalog of seabird colonies Baring Sea Fish and Wildlife Service $ 24,000 1/1/76 Distribution of the Pacific walrus Bering, Chukchi, Johns Hopkins U. 10,000 6/10/75 and Beaufort Seas Analysis of marine mammal remote sensing data Bering Sea National Marine Fisheries 166,000 6/10/75 Marine mammal baseline characterization Gulf of Alaska National Marine Fisheries 55,000 7/l/75 Abundance and seasonal distribution of marine mammals Bering Sea National Marine Fisheries $ 61,200 3/15/76 Abundance and seasonal distribution of Bowhead and Belukha Whales Beaufort and National Marine Fisheries 85,000 9/l/75 Chukchi Seas Abundance and seasonal distribution of Bowhead and Belukha Whales Bering and Chukchi U. of Alaska 180,386 6/l/75 Seas Morbidity and mortality of marine mammals Gulf of Alaska Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game, 65,000 7/1/75 Biology of the Harbor Seal Bering and Beaufort Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 127,041 7/1/75 Seas The natural history and ecology of the bearded seal and ringed seal Bering Sea Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 65,997 4/1 75 An aerial census of spotted seals Bering and Beaufort Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 60,041 7/1/75 Seas Trophic relationships among ice inhabiting Phocid seals Gulf of Alaska Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 11,075 7/l/75 Distribution and abundance of sea otters along Kenai Pen- insula, Kamishak Bay and the Kodiak Archipelago Bering Sea Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 9,980 7/1/75 Distribution and abundance of sea otters in southwestern Bristol Bay Gulf of Alaska Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game 157,100 7/l/75 Population assessment, ecology, and trophic relationships of Stellar Sea Lions Bering and Beaufort U. of Alaska 136,045 5/1/75 Seas The relationships of marine mammal distributions, densities, and activities to sea ice conditions. Bering Sea Scripps Institute 47,671 6/l/75 The physiological effect of acute and chronic exposure to hydrocarbons and of petroleum on the near-shore fishes Bering Sea National Marine Fisheries $ 75,000 5/1/75 Physiological impact of oil on pinnipeds Gulf of Alaska, National Marine Fisheries 227,800 4/l/75 Bering, Chukchi, Beaufort Seas Acute and chronic toxicity uptake and depuration, and sublethal metabolic response of alaskan marine organisms to petroleum hydrocarbons Gulf of Alaska, National Marina Fisheries 150,000 7/1/75 Bering, Beaufort- Seas Sublethal effects as reflected by morphologyical, chemical physiological and behavioral indices Gulf of Alaska, National Marine Fisheries 61,000 7/1/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Identification of the major processes in biotransformation of petroleum hydrocarbons and trace metals Gulf of Alaska, National Marine Fisheries 32,300 7/l/75 Bering, Chukchi, Beaufort Seas Assessment of available literature on the effects of oil pol- lution on biota in Arctic and subarctic waters Gulf of Alaska U. of Alaska 62,005 7/1/75 Acute effects of hydrocarbons on pacific herring roe Gulf Alaska Oregon State U. 38,687 7/l/75 Acute and chronic toxicity of seawater extracts of Alaskan Crude oil to zoeae of the Dungeness crab Bering Sea U. of Alaska 77,677 7/1/75 Sublethal effects of hydrocarbons on seagrass photosynthesis Beaufort Sea U. of Louisville 105,183 4/l/75 Potential interactions of microorganisms and pollutants Gulf of Alaska U. of Louisville 105,183 4/l/75 potential interactions of microorganisms and pollutants Gulf of Alaska, National Bureau of Standards 365,000 7/l/75 Bering and Beaufort Seas Trace hydrocarbon analysis in sea ice and at the sea Ice-water interface; analysis of individual high molecualr weight aro- matic hydrocarbons Bering and National Bureau of Standards 76,000 7/1/75 Beaufort Seas Trace element assessment of Alaskan waters - - inorcanic elements Gulf of Alaska, Pacific Marine Envirormental $122,000 7/1/75 Bering Sea Laboratory Distribution of light hydrocarbons (cl-C4) in the shelf water Gulf of Alaska, U. Of Alaska 486,102 7/1/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Natural distribution of trace heavy metals and environmental background Gulf of Alaska, Oregon State U. 125,600 5/1/75 Beaufort Sea Microbial activity and analysis of crude oil degradation by psychrophilic microorganisms Gulf of Alaska, U. of Alaska 523,129 4/l/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Natural distribution and dynamics of hydrocarbons on Alaskan 0CS Bering Sea U. of Alaska 21,425 4/l/75 Microbial release of soluble trace metals from an oil impact- ed sediment Gulf of Alaska, National Marine Fisheries 111,068 7/1/75 Bering, Beaufort, Seas Incidence of pathologic tissue Gulf of Alaska, Battelle-Northwest Labs 149,530 5/1/76 Bering, Chukchi, Beaufort Seas Gulf of Alaska, NOAA- Wave propagation Lab 280,000 5/l/75 Beaufrot Sea Development and operation of coastal HF Current mapping radar Beaufort Sea U.S. Coast Guard 37,200 8/1/75 Shelf surface currents Beaufort Sea U. of Washington 175,000 4/1/75 Current measurements in permanently ice-covered areas using acoustic data retrieval Gulf of Alaska, U. of Alaska 50,372 6/l/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Seasonability and variability and variability of streamflow in, nearshore coast- al areas 0 Gulf of Alaska Pacific Marine Environmental $400,000 5/1/75 Laboratory Study Of mesoscale Oceanographic processes Gulf of Alaska, Pacific Marine Environmental 162,800 7/11/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Laboratory Numerical modelling of Alaskan OCS currents Bering Sea Pacific Marine Environmental 780,000 7/1175 Laboratory Oceanographic processes in Bristol Bay Beaufort Sea U. of Washington 51,726 4/l/75 Salinity/temperature/depth profiling Gulf of Alaska Atlantic Oceanographic and 98,000 7/1/75 Meteorological Laboratories Lagrangian surface current measuremants Gulf of Alaska Naval Postgraduate School 40,000 5/l/75 Preparation of hydrodynamical-numerical and 3-parameter small-mash atmospheric models for coastal waters Gulf of Alaska U. of Alaska 292,386 7/1/75 Definition of mesoscale currents and water masses Bering Sea U. of Alaska 91,815 4/l/75 Historical and statistical oceanographic data analysis Beaufort Sea Environmental Protection 48,395 7/30/75 Agency Pollution transport model in vicinity of Prudhoe Bay Gulf of Alaska; U. of Alaska 220,700 7/1/75 Bearing, Beaufort Seas Assessment of historical marine climatology records Gulf of Alaska National Marine Fisheries 45,000 4/l/75 Physical oceanography resume Chukchi and Beaufort U. of Washington 31,000 5/1/75 Seas Meteorology of the arctic coast Bearing Sea Lamont-Doherty Geological 124,142 5/15/75 Observatory Seismotectonic analysis of the seismic and volcanic hazards in the Probilof Islands Gulf of AIaska U. of Southern California $ 74,529 4/1/75 Coastal morphology and sedimentation processes Gulf of AIaska U. 0f Alaska 30,067 4/l/75 Environmental Geology and geomorphology of the coastal plain Beaufort Sea Cold Regions Research and En- 330,OOO 4/1/75 gineering Laboratory Delineation of subsea permafrostand its engineering characteristics Gulf of Alaska, Pacific Marine Environmental 300,000 4/1/75 Bering Sea Laboratory Distribution, composition and transport of suspended par- ticulate matter Beaufort Sea U.S. Geological Survey 100,000 5/1/75 Characterization of offshore permafrost U.S. Geological Survey 6/l/75 Beufort Sea 200,694 Marine environmental problems in ice covered regions Bering Sea U.S. Geological Survey 115,000 6/1/75 Faulting and slope instability in the St. George Basin and adjacent continental shelf and upper slope Bering Sea U.S. Geological survey 15,000 7/1/75 Study of Yukon delta coastal processes Bering Sea U.S. Geological Survey 50,000 5/l/75 Fault history of pribilof Islands and its relevance to bottom stability in St. George Basin Gulf oF A1aska U.S. Geological Survey 145,000 7/1/75 Earthqauake activity assessment Gulf of Alaska U.S. Geological Survey 140,093 7/1/75 Erosion and deposition of shelf sediments GUlf of A1aska US. Geological Survey 163,649 7/1/75 Faulting and instability of shelf sediments 262,590 7/1/75 Gulf oF Alaska U.S. of Alaska Seismic and volcanic risk studies in Cook inlet-Kodiak-Semidi Island regions Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 102,000 4/1/75 Offshore permafrost-drilling, boundary conditions, properties, processes and models 0 Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska $120,713 4/30/75 Permafrost studies along the coast Bering Sea U. of Alaska 45,626 4/1/75 Benthos-sedimentary substrate interactions Gulf of Alaska U.S. Geological Survey 243,000 6/1/75 Faulting and instability of shelf sediments Gulf of Alaska, Environmental Data Service 25,000 4/1/75 Bering, Beaufort Seas Assessment of historical seismicity records Beaufort Sea Arctic Research Laboratory 18,000 7/1/75 Study of coastal erosion Beaufort Sea L G L,Ltd 39,976 5/l/76 analysis of potential effects of OCS development of barrier Island of Prudhoe Bay Beaufort Sea U. of Washington 42,590 7/l/75 Interaction of oil with sea ice Beaufort Sea Cold regions Research and En- 352,200 4/l/75 gineering Laboratory Dynamics of near shore ice movement Bering, Beaufort Cold Regions Research and en- 288,500 4/1/75 Seas gineering Laboratory Remote sensing program for Arctic offshore ice Chukchi, Beaufort U. of Washington 72,431 5/l/75 Seas Dynamics of near-shore sea ice in the shear zone Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 79,960 4/15/75 Study of climatic effects on fast ice extent and its seasonal decay Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 74,300 4/1/75 Mechanics of origin of pressure ridges, shear ridges, and hummock fields in landfast ice Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 78,645 5/1/75 Morphology of near-shore ice conditions by means of satellite and aerial remote sensing 0 Bering Sea U. of Alaska $ 41,700 5/7/75 Morphology of near-shore ice conditions by means of satellite and aerial remote sensing Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 64,200 5/l/75 Experimental measurements of sea ice failure stresses near grounded structures Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 70,000 6/2/75 Develop historical baseline of ice distribution and extent Beaufort Sea U. of Alaska 116,200 4/11/75 Develop hardware and procedures for in situ measurement of creep in sea ice Gulf of Alaska U. of Alaska 119,561 5/1/75 Bering, Chukchi, Beaufort Seas Operation of an Alaskan facility for applications of remote sensing data to OCS studies Gulf of Alaska, U. Washington 350,000 5/1/76 Bering, Chukchi Seas seasonal density distribution of ichthyoplankton Bearing Chukchi, U. Alaska 52,096 5/1/76 Beaufort Seas density distribution of zooplankton and micronekton Gulf of Alaska U. of Alaska 23,301 5/l/76 Distribution, abundance, and diversity of the epifaunal benqthic organisms in Alitak and Ugak Bays, Kodiak Island Gulf of Alaska U. of Alaska 8,799 5/1/76 Distribution, abundance, diversity, and productivity of benthic organisms Gulf of Alaska Renewable Resources Consulting 20,002 2/1/76 Service sea cliff bird survey Bering Sea L G L, Ltd. 69,098 4/10/76 Population, community structure, and ecology of marine birds on St. Lawrence Island Gulf of Alaska Renewable Resources Consult- 75,190 5/1/76 ing Service Seacliff bird inventory Bering Sea U. of Alaska $82,000 4/1/76 Avian community ecology of the Akulik-Inglutalik River delta Bering Sea College of the Atlantic 79,200 2/10/76 Populations, community structure, and ecology of marine birds, on King Island Chukchi Sea U. of Alaska 143,309 5/1/76 Avian community ecology at two sites on Kotzebue Sound U. of Alaska 434,434 4/1/75 Coordination of the Alaska 0CS program 7/1/75 U. of Alaska 190,754 R/V ACONA and marine logistics support for the Alaska CCS program Science Applications, Inc. 473,966 5/l/76 Program integration for Alaska OCS program Environmental Data Service 2,125 6/15/75 Preparation of coastal strip maps for working base Environmental Data Service 17,000 7/1/75 Establish data file index for the Alaskan MEA program. Environmental Data Service 110,000 7/l/75 Establish and service a project marine baseline data base for the Alaska MEA Program Environmental Data Service 8,000 7/l/75. Provide bibliographic support to Alaskan OCS Energy Program Principal Investigators. -it NEW ENGLAND RIVER BASINS COMMISSION 50 COURT STREET& BOSTON. MASSACHUSETTS 02108 NiRBC PHONE 0;17122-@-6244 February 18, 1977 MEMORANDUM To: State Coastal Zone Officials From: Russell J. Wilder, Regional OCS Technical Service Subject: Oil Spill Update: .4 report on major actions taken in New England by federal agencies and states since the wreck of the Argo Merchant At the January 18th Coastal Zone Task Force meeting, con- siderable attention was given by members to the events surrounding the wreck of the Argo Merchant. It was noted several times by Task Force members that an inventory of actions taken by federal and state agencies as a result of the disaster would be helpful to states in reassessing state policies in recrard to spills and also would be helpful in evaluating the need for any legislative action that arises. The Technical Service, as a first step in the ground work for preparing an oil spill handbook and evaluation of state -of- the- art ollspill control and cleanup technology, has reviewed all the major reports and studies known to be taking place within the New England coastal zone and C3 New York plus the federal agencies having responsibility for oil spill cbn- trol. This review does not address itself to pending legislation at either the state or federal level. It is an inventory of reports on government po- licy and regulatory functions, scientific research and specialty designated panels and task forces. If Task Force members know of other ongoing studies or reports, the Technical Service would appreciate being informed of them. Federal In the federal sector, the Coast- Guard has been in the process of redrafting the original Regional Contingency Plan (RCP) for over a year. The original plan as called for in Section 311 of the FI.VPCA An-lendments of 1972 was drafted in 1973 and as policy shifts and regulatory changes evolved, it was planned to continually update the RGP. It should be noted that the RCP is based on the National Contingency Plan with additions that make it specific to the region such as designation of On Scene Coordinators and other members. It is also important to note that in New Encyland there are two C@ contingency plans: one for coastal spills prepared by the Coast Guard and one for inland spills prepared by EPA. Updating the RCP by the Coast Guard has proved to be a major task that has resulted in a complete redraft on which a first in-house re- view had just been completed by the Coast Guard when the Argo Merchant incident occurred. With more spills taking place since late December, including the Buzzard's Bay accident, the staff member of the Coast Guard ,responsible for the RCP redraft.. had to tur'n to dealing with- the spill it-@ self. In addition, he has been assigned to perform the review of the Mass- achusett's CZM program "Preview" for the Coast Guard. It is not expected that a final draft of the RCP will be completed sooner than next October. The Coast Gua'rd,feels that the fact that the RCP is in draft form has not inhibited their ability to respond to spills nor will there be any major changes in the RCP as a result of recent spills. On January 31Y the Coast Guard adopted regulations to require long-range navigation equipment on all tankers of 1600 or more gross tons; ,regular reporting of a ship's position; testing of ship maneuvering systems before entering or 'getting underway in U.S. waters and notification of the Coast Guard. when navigational equipment is out of order.* These regulations can only be erforced in U.S. waters.. For coastal spills, EPA takes on an environmental advisory role to the Coast Guard and the On Scene Coordinator. During the Argo Merchant spill and more recent incidents, EPA's team from the Surveillance and Analysis Diy@ision performed this function as their part of the Regional ResponseTeam. EPA itself is not initiating any specific studies or reports in the region as a result of the spills except for an assessment of present models for spill trajectories and will be producing a report on April I on alternative impacts from spills on Georges' Bank, based on winds, currents, season., etc. However, ongoing programs will impose additional regulations on.di.schargers of oil and hazardous substances. Specifically, regulations concerning designation of substances.and their removability, rate of pen- alties and definition of harmful quantities of hazardous substances have been drafted and are being reviewed by the assistant administrator. There is Congressional opposition to the reclulations because it is felt by some members of Congress that the proposed penalties are not stiff enough and that it was not Congressional intent to make companies liable for cleanup of non-rennovable hazardous substances (those that cannot:,be cleaned up). These regulations may also be affected by potential oil spill liability legislation," and probably will not be acted on until after a new EPA Ad- -In additio ns--for." 6,.il r dii@b va -Ministrator is named. n, proposed regulatio P- are being developed for publication in early 1978. These regulations will The Congress is considering several pieces of legislation concerning oil spills,-' ke@ among them is the Kennedy-Studds oil spill liability bill. Also, several bills are under consideration to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. It should be noted that an-ionar the states, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut have been considering -state oil spill liability legislation. establish recommen,ded rrethods and procedures for the removal of dis- charged oil and will broaden the scope of the National Contingency Plan which applies only to the actions of federal agencies. It is obvious that coastal states es-pecially will want to comment on these draft regulations. EPA publishes. a quarterly bibliography on "Oil Spill and Oil Pollution Reports" that reviews current scientific and technical publications and research projects in the.field of oil pollution. This compendium of reports is the most up to date dociu-nent known on oil spill technical inform- ation and may be subscribed to from U. S. E. P.A. I Office of Research and Devel-.Cpment, Technical Information Staff, Cincinatti, Ohio 45268. Current copies of the report are available at the EPA and NERBC libraries in Boston. On the day that the Argo Merchant went aground, member@s of NOAA s Spilled Oil R esearch Team from the Environmental Re search Lab in Boulder, Colorado, were flown to the scene. This team, which is part of the Marine Ecosystems Analysis Program (MESA), was particularly interested in oil spill tragectories and performed aerial surveillance of the spill in aircraft provided by the Coast Guard. They have since been deployed to another spill on the Hudson River but continue to maintain a temporary office in Falmouth. The other part of NOAAts response to the spill has been through theNational Marine Fisheries Service in Woods Hole. From the beginning they have initiated, with cooperation from U.R.I., several cruises for biological and sediment research. They have completed among others, 2 cruises on ffieDelaware 2, 1 cruise on the Mount Mitchell (to study larval herring) and are participating in an 18-day fishing cruise on a Polish ship. They have completed several cruise reports including one on ichthypplankton and have sent fish flesh to Seattle for hydrocarbon analysis As a pre- liminary phase of a program to assess the short and long-term effects of the spill, NOAA will be issuing a preliminary report based on information* gathered in these initial cruises. The report will be available from Dr. Robert M. White's office (NOAA, Washington, D.C.) by March Ist. The MESA program has also been busy with the,more recent Buzzard's Bay spill and has contracted Environmental Devices Co. of Marion, Mass. to do sampling in the Bay. In addition,. the. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute is conducting C, sampling in the Bourne area. No deadline for publication of the results of these efforts has been established. MESA has also'noted that, as a result of the Argo Merchant spill, it has become evident that a handbook is needed M - a nd a timp a 'f the --on the characteristic s.of'oil type s, how to, haiadlo@ the C y -have on the environment.* How or when ffiis* document would be prepared has not been elaborated on. Regional A t the request of Massachusetts Lt. Governor Thomas O'Neil, the Federal Regional Commission (FRC) prepared a short report on the federal response to oil spills. This document, which outline s the existing -4- federal laws, regulations and programs that apply to oil spills is be ing drafted in final form at this time and will be available for distribution so on. The Technical Service has reviewed the draft -report and considers it to be a valuable and accurate reference on the subject, and will send copies to the Task Force as soon as the report is available. At this time FRC is not undertaking any further projects in this regard. The New England Regional Commission recently prepared a report for the New England Governor's Conference held on Feb. 4 in Hartford, Connecticut, on improvement of management of oil tanker movements and an analysis of the federal and state response to the Argo Merchant incident. Among its findings was a rer-ornmendation that the Regional Contingency Plan should be reexamined. Emphasis should be placed on risk reduction through the use of more extensive navigational aids and traffic monitoring and tanker construction standards should be re viewed. An expanded report is expected for the next Governors' meeting on March 4th. States Among.the New England states and New York, three have taken significant action as a result of the Argo Merchant incident. Maine's Governor Longley stated in.late December that his state would reassess its position in regard to oil spills. He said he would propose legislation to take the ceiling off Maine's oil--; company- supported fund to pay for oil spill cleanups in the state. Mike McMillen, Economic Development Planning Coordinator for the state,' informed the Technical Service that Maine has developed an "oil spill handbook" of their own for Portland. harbor and is in the process of developing one for Penobscot Bay. The Technical Service will evaluate this document in hopes of adding to a handbook for all the New England coastal states. As noted before, the University of Rhode Island has been par- ticipating in the data gathering cruises being conducted by the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. They also are a part of the suggested "blue ribbon panel" with Woods Hole that will investigate oil spill research needs and make re commendat ions to the Gov- ernor s of. Massachusetts and Rhode Island. The members of the panel have -chosen --the he 'notbeen _yet, but ap roval is expected by end of February. p panel is expected to have afour month life. These identified needs could be used as input to BLM's Environmental. Baseline Studies being conducted in conjunction with leasing of tracts for oil and gas development, as well as providing, guidance to other funding agencies. 'V Finally, the State of Massachusetts, being the most directly involved state.. has undertaken a number of activities as aresult of the spill. First of all, Secretary Murphy has called for the establishment of a federal level cabinet of ocean affairs to be made up of representa- tives from all agencies that deal with ocean resources. On January IS the Secretary presented to Governor Dukakis a chronology of events pre- pared by the Coastal Review Center of the Massachusetts Coastal Zone. Management Program from when the Argo Merchant went aground to January 18, integrating federal, state and local action. . The Executive Office of Environmental Affairs also encouraged the formation of a panel of experts from URI and Woods Hole on research needs concerning oil spills. Currently, the state has created an interagency Task Force to make recommendations on prevention and response to oil spills to the Massachusetts state legislature, the Governor, and the federal govern- ment through various agencies and the Massachusetts Congressional delegation. It is iinknown at this time what form these recommendations will take. The Coastal Zone Task Force has also made recommendations with regard to the Argo Merchant incident. In its comments on BLM's draft Environmental Impact StaLement on OCS Lease Sale #4Z made to BLM on December 21, 1976, the Task Force reinforced state recommendations that ananalysis of the oil spill be included in the final statement. The Task Force also placed heavy emphasis on the need to present data on the short and long-term dollar loss to the fishery (by species) due to oil spills. Emphasis was also placed on navigatio nal safety. NEW ENGLAND RIVER BASINS COMMISSION 55 COURT STREET, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02108 NERBC PHONE (617) 223-6244 JanuarY 21, 1977 MEMORANDUM TO: State Coastal Zone Officials FROM: Russell J. Wilder, Regional Technical Service SUBJECT: Surplus Refining Capacity in Eastern Canada Knowing of your interest in the refinery siting question in New England, I am transmitting to you information concerning surplus refining capacity in Eastern Canada recently published in Oil and Gas Journal (copies attached). Surplus refining capacity in Eastern Canada could significantly affect the decision on the part of industry for locating refineries in New England. By the end of 1978 there could be some 200,000 b/d of surplus refined-products capacity in Ontario and nearly 300,000 b/d in the Atlantic Provinces. The bulk of this surplus is in the Heavy Fuel Oil and Heating Oil categories -- products that are in high demand here in the Northeast. It has been pointed out in the NERBC/RALI "Estimates for New England", the ADL/NERCOM study, and others that refinery siting in New England by industry will be contingent upon the long-term market demand for refined products. Recently, Canada's National Energy Board granted long-term export licenses to ship heavy fuel oil to customers in Michigan. The approvals run until January 1, 1982 and are open to annual surplus determinations after 1978. (See Oil & Gas Journal, January 17, 1977.) Another way to relieve the excess capacity is being considered at this time. Crude from the U. S. would be shipped to Canada under bond and refined products would be shipped back to the U. S. also under bond. It is interesting to note that in spite of Canadian opposition to supertanker traffic in the area, the Pittston Co. is going ahead with its plans to construct a 250,000 b/d plant at East port, Maine. Should work on all EIS matters be completed and permits granted as planned by this Fall, construction on the facility will begin in the Spring of 1978 with the plant coming on line in 1981. The planned production mix will be: 41% #5 oil, 34% #2 Heating oil, 22% Motor Gasoline, and 3% Liquified Petroleum gas. These products are intended for the New York/Northeast area. Attachments (2) ng an n g C P PB S U. Slow economic growth, conseirvation, and new capacity seen intensifying competition in East Canada. Some 200,000 b/d of surplus capacity seen. probable in Ontario by year-end 1978, 300,000 b/d in Atlantic provinces. TED WETT Fig. I Petrochemical Editor Canada's growinc, refining capacity surplus REFINERS in eastern Canada can l - fo, oo@ -ward to stiff marketing com. petition in the next' few years. 2.4 miIii Slow economic arowth and conserva- rwl_ bid in 1973 tion pro-rams will kitensify the highly 2,40 221nt 1@1 Ilion bi*d in W* competitive environment that already exists in'refined products. And exten- sive new capacity is on the way. By the end of 1973, nearly 200,000 b/d of rew refining capacity. will be f k on stream, added to 125,000 b/d o ca pac*ty recently completed. There could some 200,000 b/d of surplu De S. re- fined-products capacity in Ontario and Diesel nearly 300,000 b/d in the Atlantic prov- inces. tionw*, Na Ade, Canadian refining Ca- 045i pacity is about 2.2 million b/d. Esti- nnated 1975 refined product demand is 1.735 million b/d (Figs. 1 and 2). T e four westera. provinces, taken h as amarket unit, are relatively well- @@;22C-0 in Alberta balanced. Surplus capac, A is taken up by demand in British CG- 1975 1977 19781 197? 1974 1974 lumbla, Saskatchewan, and Manit6a. Gulf and Imperial are Alberta's larg- ",@:,f6marily aviat;on fuel. tUght fuel oil. @arotine'-i'ld zlow oil.:.-., est refiners. o 1@ Source: Shell Canaida 11&_ and OG) Imperial recently completed a ma- th a jar expansion oF its capacity wi 140,000-b/d unit at Strathcona, Alta. However, this refinery replaces old British Columbia's proposed govern- on stream in mid-1978. units in Calgary (20,000 b/d), Regina ment-owned 100,000-b/d reffinery has In Sarnia, Ont., Petrosar's giant (32,600 b/d), and Winnipeg (22,000 had anything but smooth sailing. It petrochemical complex is rearing b/d). was to be completed in 1@80. completion. By the end of 1977, this A pipeline-supp]Y system will pro- To date, Britisla Columbia has failed plant will be contributing an esti- vide relined products for the prairie to receive assurance of a lon.--term. mated 100,000 b/d to Vrie refined-prod- provinces. crude supply from Alberta. Proposed ucts maeket, mostly 6001, F.-plus Deferred construction. Much of the location, in Surrey, near Vancouver, heavy fuel oil. additional capacity at one time sched- was turned d own by the Surrey coun- Texaco has adopted a wait-and-see uled for this reE!ion has been deferred. cil. attitude for,itS Tefining. plans..The Husky 0;1 Ltd. planned a 30,000-b/d Consumers' Cooperative Refiner- company now has'a'48,000-b/d unit at. unit at Llovdminster, Alta. Nlarket ies Ltd. is expandina its refinery at Port Credit, Ont. It formerly Nvas conditions, construction-cost increases, Regina, Sask., by 21,00.9 b1d. Comple-. owned by Regent Refin;ng Canada and a possibl- revamp of the proposed tion of the project is scheduled Ltd. and absorbed into the Texaco sys- product slate were cited for the ac- ]a,--- 19T7, bringLn- total capaclry to tem last year. tion. 50,000 b/d,. Much could depend on exisdria ex- These plans could still charge. TvTa- Biggest slirplus. But it's in the eas.'- port conditions at the time the refin- jar precessing unit L proiect ern rel,ion where the big surpius will e-zy isready, a Texaco Canada spo'%-.es- us for be Id from lvlolbil Oil Corp.'s exist when two M. ajar new pro'ect's man says. "We will adjust to the situa- al 'v"o %@_M ME, shutd'awcnomEeast St. Louls, Ill., refinery. are completed. tion as it exists at that time." One The plant was to be designed for ex- Texaco is building a 9'5,000-b/d re- possibility that has been sugaested, panEion to 15,111 bld at a later date, finery at Nanticoke, Ora, It will be t1ough rot by Texaco, is hal the THE OIL AND GAS JOURNAL-JAN. 10, 1977 Fiz@ 2 ditional reductions in operating rdtes for existin- refineries or more shut- '76 refinino, capacity by provinces vs. product demand 0 downs, even the sharp surge in de- mind that would accompany strona economic recovery could not absorb z; -7 expect ad capacity And such 0 b; a surge isn't expected., (cpoci@-,: 2 Demand for refired products will U4 D ern o P d. proximately 5% in 1977 over rise ap -1,746,000 b/d 540 r,33 5!5 1976's 1.75 million b/d, Gulf Canada. Refipwy @x predicts. Slower-than-e.,cpacted eco- x, 444 fif Nat 31, 1716 .1 nomic rowth that was evident in the ON to last half of 1976 is expected to con- for YW 1976- tinue into 1977. Tocether with more ef- factive conservation. programs, this 25a, gy will suppress demand for, ener,, ts, produc Mos the demand is to- increase in expected to be for heavy fuels-as it 15. 69 was in 1976 when overall demand was, 33 7"IA 3 .1 up 5.5 % over 1975. TI demand only E. AaR This increase brought fractionally above! the 1974 level, how- tv ever. projection further Carrying the Shelf Canada Ltd. looks for a prod- ucts-demand increase averaging .3.517olyear from 1974 to 1980. But Poet Cretbt refinery will be shut down the U.S.', also under bond. it expects a sharp increase in demand J once the - ew Nanticoke plant is fiffly Feeling the pineb. Canadian refin- T for heavy fuel oil, particularly in the operational. ers already are feeling the pinch of major eastern markets as new ther- Much of the surplus product in On- surplus capacity and government mal generating plants come on stream. tario could be exported to the U.S., pricing and export policies. Surplus capacity will act as a con- paLrUcalarly heavy Wel oil, Indicatiors Newfoundland Refining Co.'s MOAN straint on Price levels and allow for -e place b/d Come by Chance refineryis shut- effective competition with gas, S@ell that this is begLnning to tali are evident in recent licensing activ- down. Actual,cause of the shutdown feels. ity. was a suit broulght by Atalka & Co., Even so, Canada should have spare Heavy 9_4 exportts. As part of its a major crude supplier through its- refining capacity for some tme to 1 41 L participal ;on in the Petrosar complex, - American sub3idiary, Adantic Trading come. Corp. The suit char-ed default on a Union Carb;de Canada was cornrnitt@,d to take 30,0W b/d of heavy oil for a debt to Atalka. Ews.,ver, depressed coking coimplex In Sarnia. These plans prices on domestic markets and lack D-UY-S-PID rules a I I 0VV haveleer shelv's--d for the@ prl.,sanL of export markets contribuied signifi- Carbide has arranved to sell its cantly to the refinery's troubles. I Or 01, PrFIC increases n share to Consumers' Power, Marys-, Gulf Canada lias bee operatin- its Villa, "flich. 81,000--b/d Point Tupper, N.S., refinery THE Federal Energy Administration have been issued at halt cap ..Y for about a year., has issued an emergency ruling in the Export licenses recently to Sun Oil and Imperial, both Company president, J. L. Sroik, says buy-sell rules for crude oil to take for heavy fuel oil. Sun has a 6-year li- Gulf is koepincy the refineq running into account OPEC price increases ef- cense,, to export, En average of about "in hope that some improvement in the Iective this month. 0 price situati, a c oh hiarch 1977, "0) b/d to Detroit Edis n. Imperial -on r hanl-_: '-Ai import From January throug can exocrt 11,000 bld into Michloan re-ulations or cornoensatlon Mll en- each refiner-seller's sales of allo"cated under two 5-year licenses. able its to eam a reasonable return crude will be. priced at the weighted These licenses viffl be subject to de- on capital employed." avera.e cost of imported crude deliv- tern-tinations, of Canadian surplus Golden Eagle Canada is opemting ered to that reLiner-seller in the month starflna in 1979. its 100,000-b/d St. Romauld, Qua.,' re- of delivery to the buyer, plus the han- Need for heavy fuel oil in the U.S. finery at about 75% of c_apacimv. This dlin- fee. area across t@e lakes from Ontario refinery is designed to prodLce up t to Then, in April 1977, all sales Nvill be has prompted speculation on another 507o heavy fuel oil and was LitenCed made'under the regular rules, so that way to t:s,.! potential Canadian surplus for brisk export activicy. No expen *he sale price for allocated crude Nvill refinin.o, capacity. Consideration is be- license for heavy fuels had b-@en be based on the wei-hted avera-a kia Piven to brincina U.S. crude into availabie since the fou-Lth quar-Ler of landed cost of imported crude in the Cana'da under bonod far processing. Re- 1973. menth of delivery and in the two fired products would be returned to Slow growth predicted. Bar:i1r.'a, ad- preceding months. THE OIL AND GAS JOURNAL-JAN. 17,1977 Canada approves long-term exports of heavy fuel oil CANADA'S National Energy Board (NEB) has granted long-term export licenses to several firms for shipment of heavy fuel oil to customers in Michician. A 6-year license was granted to Sun Oil Ltd. to export 7,117,500 bbl/year to Detroit Edison Co., Detroit. Imperial Oil Ltd. was granted two licenses to export 7.6 million bbl to Cliff Fuel Service Corp., Rapid River, and 18,250,000 bbl to Consumers' Power Co., Essexville. Both approvals are for 5 years from Jan. 1, 1977, and both are subject to annual surplus de- terminations after 1978 and to de- termination of just and reasonable ex- port prices after 1979. Ale NEW ENGLAND RIVER BASINS COMMISSION NERBC 55 COURT STREET a BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS02108 PHONE (617) 223-6244 January 17, 1977 MEMORANDUM TO: State Coastal Zone Officials FROM: Russell, J. Wilder, Regional OCS Te.chnical.Service SUBJECT: USGS Oil Spill Risk Analysis The "Oil Spill Risk Analysis for OCS Lease Sales" that was in preparation at the time the draft environmental statement for OCS Sale #42 was released is now available from: U. S. Dept. of the Interior Geological Survey 4 10 National Center Reston, Virginia 22092 (Ask for Open File Report 76-620) "An Oilspill Risk Analysis for the North Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area" by R. A. Smith and James R. Slack, U. S. Geological Survey, and R. K. Davis, Office of Policy Analysis. The report summarizes results of an oilspill risk analysis conducted for use in the.draft EIS. The analysis was conducted in3 independent parts. The first part deals with the probability of spill occurrence, the second with likely spill trajectories for the times and places spills might occur, and the third part with the spatial and temporal location of specific biological and recreational resources thought to be C, vulnerable to oilspills. Results of the individual parts are combined to give estimates of overall oilspill risk associated with OCS oil and gas L development in the North Atlantic. The data used in the analysis were compiled by BLM specifically for use in preparing the draft environmental statement. 'The. results, represent a.synthesis and.-analysis.'of.existing not a presentation of new material. I 0 CCAST,a,,,@!@ raq; @ N.T.1, n INFUL-9,6ki 9 2", h'@ 1 4z i4o j '@' RER 0 'a 3 6668 14104 5312