BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 414 Hearing Date: September
10, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Jackson | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Version: |September 4, 2015 Amended |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Katharine Moore |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Oil spill response.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Existing federal law addresses oil spills in the navigable
waters of the United States through the creation of a
comprehensive prevention, response, liability and compensation
program through the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, as amended. This
law assigned numerous duties to the U.S. Coast Guard related to
oil spills and increased federal oversight of maritime
transportation. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and
other federal entities also have prescribed duties under the Oil
Pollution Act. One required element is the development of
regional plans to plan and prepare for oil spills on a regional
scale.
Existing federal regulation establishes Regional Response Teams
representing different geographic regions to support emergency
response. Team membership includes representatives of both
federal and state entities with relevant expertise and the team
provides regional planning and coordination of preparedness and
response actions, including to oil spills (see Title 40, Code of
Federal Regulations, section 300.115). Through the required
planning processes (i.e. the development of regional plans)
information regarding the appropriate use of chemical
dispersants and other agents to control oil spills must be
developed.
SB 414 (Jackson) Page 2
of ?
Existing state law:
1)Establishes the Lempert-Keene-Seastrand Oil Spill Prevention
and Response Act (Act) (SB 2040, Chapter 1248, Statutes of
1990), as amended. This Act created the Office of Spill
Prevention and Response (OSPR) in the Department of Fish and
Wildlife. The Act contains numerous provisions including,
among others, those related to planning for and responding to
oil spills, fees to pay for planning and response and wildlife
care and rehabilitation in the event of a spill.
2)Establishes OSPR's mission to provide the best achievable
protection of California's natural resources and the public
health and safety by preventing, preparing for, and responding
to spills of oil and other deleterious materials to all waters
of the state, and to restore and enhance affected resources.
3)Provides for the appointment of the OSPR administrator
(administrator) to lead OSPR.
4)Establishes the Oil Spill Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
with specified membership to provide public input and
independent judgment of the actions of the administrator.
5)Provides for the possibility of both criminal and civil
remedies in the event of an oil spill. The amount of an
administrative civil penalty for an oil spill is based on the
volume of oil spilled reduced by the amount of oil cleaned up.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would make several changes to state law regarding oil
spill preparedness, prevention and response. Specifically, this
bill would:
1)Require the administrator to:
SB 414 (Jackson) Page 3
of ?
a) Arrange drills and exercises with the U.S. Coast Guard,
as specified.
b) Consult peer-reviewed scientific literature with respect
to studies of chemical dispersants and to ask that the
California Dispersant Plan be updated by May 1, 2016. The
studies are expanded to include bioremediation and
biological agents in addition to dispersants and other
chemical agents.
c) Provide written notification, as specified, to the
Legislature within three days of use of dispersants in an
oil spill.
d) Report to the Legislature, as specified, on the
effectiveness of the use of dispersants on oil spill
response within two months of their use.
e) Support the Regional Response Team in its efforts to
update chemical dispersant use plans, as specifies.
f) Submit a report to the Legislature by January 1, 2017
assessing best achievable technology of equipment for oil
spill prevention, preparedness and response. This shall
include an assessment of a new method - estimated recovery
system potential - for evaluating oil skimmers.
g) Update regulations governing the adequacy of oil spill
contingency plans for best achievable technologies for oil
spill prevention and response by July 1, 2018, as
specified.
h) Direct the Harbor Safety Committees to assess the
presence and capability of tugs in certain areas to provide
emergency towing of vessels, as specified. San Francisco
Bay and Los Angeles/Long Beach harbor assessment shall be
SB 414 (Jackson) Page 4
of ?
completed by May 1, 2016 and other harbors by January 1,
2020.
2)Require the TAC to convene a taskforce with specified
membership to evaluate and make recommendations on the use of
"vessels of opportunity", such as commercial fishing vessels,
to respond to oil spills in marine waters. The evaluation
shall include certain topics and include two public meetings.
The TAC shall make a recommendation to the administrator by
January 1, 2017. If necessary, the administrator shall update
regulations by January 1, 2018 to include vessels of
opportunity.
3)Delete the provision requiring the administrative civil
penalty take into consideration how much oil was cleaned up.
4)Delete obsolete provisions.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, "On May 19 of this year, tragedy struck
again when an onshore pipeline carrying crude oil ruptured and
spilled over 100,000 gallons of oil, over 20,000 gallons of
which ended up in the ocean off the Santa Barbara Coastline. To
date this spill has caused significant negative impacts to the
ocean, local beaches, wildlife, and the local economy. Although
the investigation in the response and the oil spill - dubbed the
Refugio Oil Spill - is ongoing, several deficiencies in our
ability to immediately response to these disasters and act
quickly to protect our environment have been highlighted."
"SB 414 will help make oil spill response faster, more
effective, and more environmentally friendly."
The Pacific Merchant Shipping Association notes that its members
are regulated by OSPR and writes that it supports that OSPR
"maintain its vigilance in assessing and accommodating advances
in technologies and practices in order to provide the best
achievable protection to state waters."
SB 414 (Jackson) Page 5
of ?
The San Francisco Bar Pilots Association adds that this bill
"would require [OSPR] to improve its voluntary program for local
fishermen and women to utilize their vessels and experience with
local waters to be trained as first responders to oil spills."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received
COMMENTS
The Refugio Beach spill. On May 19, 2015 a pipeline owned by
Houston-based Plains All American Pipeline ruptured spilling
(according to the operator) up to an estimated 140,000 gallons
of heavy crude oil along the Gaviota coast at Refugio Beach in
Santa Barbara County. The release was from a 10.6 mile long,
24-inch diameter pipeline and (according to the operator) as
much as 21,000 gallons of oil ended up in coastal waters. News
reports indicate the pipeline was potentially severely corroded
where it ruptured.
The main oil spill stretched over 9 miles of California
coastline and tar balls associated with the spill were found,
according to news reports, as far south as Los Angeles County.
Shoreline and beaches were affected by the spill and nesting
areas for protected species were also affected. Approximately
250 birds and 170 mammals in addition to a large number of
marine invertebrates were known to be impacted by the spill.
Although some of the birds and mammals have been released
following treatment, most are dead. A 23 mile by 6 mile area
was closed to fishing for over one month and beaches were
closed, including over the Memorial Day weekend, resulting in
economic losses. The fishery and beaches have since re-opened.
It is important to acknowledge that oil spills, in addition to
the short-term impacts on impacted wildlife noted above may also
have long-term effects on affected species. Recent work, for
example, has shown that a delayed effect of the 1989 Exxon
Valdez oil spill is likely to include significant subsequent
salmon and herring population declines in the Prince William
Sound. Embryonic salmon and herring exposed to very low
concentrations of crude oil developed heart defects which likely
impacted their chances for survival.
SB 414 (Jackson) Page 6
of ?
The Refugio spill clean-up is in its third phase with Shoreline
Cleanup Assessment Technique teams continuing to survey and
monitor the impacted area. The Natural Resources Damage
Assessment has begun. The spill and the events leading up to
the spill remain under investigation.
The use of chemical dispersants in oil spill response.
According to an OSPR fact sheet, dispersants are usually not
applied to oil spills in near shore areas, for example, where
sea grass beds, oyster beds, mariculture or coral reefs are
present. The fact sheet further states that spill responders
are generally "reluctant" to use dispersants in shallow waters
less than 30 feet deep. Chemical dispersants were not used in
the response to the Refugio Beach spill which occurred in near
shore shallow waters.
The California Dispersant Plan is part of federal oil spill
contingency planning. In general dispersant use is pre-approved
in federal waters outside National Marine Sanctuaries and more
than 3 miles away from the California/Oregon and
California/Mexico borders. For state waters and in other areas,
there is a process established by which dispersants may, on a
case-by-case basis, be used. The California Dispersant Plan
notes that the U.S. Coast Guard, the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, other federal entities and OSPR "agree that
one of the primary methods of controlling discharged oil shall
be the physical removal of the oil by mechanical means."
Dispersants are not without risks. For example, following the
unprecedented use - both in volume, location in the water column
and duration - of chemical dispersants following the 2010
Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico, new research,
published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, has shown
that the dispersants, alone or in combination with spilled oil,
are more toxic to at least some species than the spilled oil by
itself. Scientific research has also suggested that the
dispersants used in the subsurface did not biodegrade. Further,
the toxicity has only been evaluated for a limited number of
species affected by the spill. The impacts of the use of
dispersants in the Deepwater Horizon spill response continues.
SB 414 (Jackson) Page 7
of ?
Oil spill response equipment evaluation. The Ocean Studies Board
of the National Research Council in November 2013 found that a
new method proposed for estimating the efficiency of oil
skimmers - the estimated recovery system potential or ERSP - to
be "basically sound and a substantial improvement over method
currently employed" by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement (BSEE - one of the federal offshore oil regulators).
The Ocean Studies Board provided further recommendations on how
best to implement this method and notes that ERSP was developed
following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill because limitations
in the existing methodology became apparent during that spill
response.
SUPPORT
Audubon California
Azul
Black Surfers Collective
California Coastal Protection Network
California Coastal Protection Network
California League of Conservation Voters
California Environmental Justice Alliance
Center for Biological Diversity
Clean Water Action
Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation
Defenders of Wildlife
Environment California
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin
Environmental Defense Center
Friends of the Earth
City of Goleta
Heal the Bay
Humboldt Baykeeper
National Parks Conservation Association
Natural Resources Defense Council
Ocean Conservancy
Pacific Merchant Shipping Association
Planning and Conservation League
San Francisco Bar Pilots Association
Santa Barbara Channelkeeper
Sierra Club California
SB 414 (Jackson) Page 8
of ?
Surfrider Foundation
Surfrider Foundation, South Bay Chapter
Surfrider Foundation, Santa Barbara Chapter
the Trust for Public Land
the Wildlands Conservancy
OPPOSITION
None Received
-- END --