HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 2593
As Reported by House Committee On:
Natural Resources, Ecology & Parks
Title: An act relating to oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response.
Brief Description: Changing provisions relating to oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response.
Sponsors: Representatives Appleton, B. Sullivan, Jarrett, Morris, Hankins, Chase, McIntire, Dickerson, McCoy, Conway, Green, Darneille, Schual-Berke, Lovick, Pettigrew, Sommers, Ericks, Lantz, Hasegawa, Morrell, Kenney, Haler, Springer, Roberts, P. Sullivan, Strow, Miloscia, Wallace, Cody, Sells, Moeller, Dunshee, Williams, O'Brien, McDermott, Kessler, Woods, Kilmer, Eickmeyer, Hunt, Flannigan, Takko, Nixon, Rodne, Simpson, Linville and Kagi; by request of Department of Ecology.
Brief History:
Natural Resources, Ecology & Parks: 1/20/06, 1/27/06 [DPS].
Brief Summary of Substitute Bill |
|
|
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, ECOLOGY & PARKS
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 6 members: Representatives B. Sullivan, Chair; Upthegrove, Vice Chair; Dickerson, Eickmeyer, Hunt and Kagi.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 5 members: Representatives Buck, Ranking Minority Member; Kretz, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Blake, Chandler and Orcutt.
Staff: Amy Van Horn (786-7168).
Background:
The Legislature enacted oil spill prevention and response measures in 1991, and expanded on
those laws in 2004. The 2004 legislation adopted a goal of zero oil spills for the state. The
Director of the Department of Ecology (Department) has the primary authority to oversee oil
spill prevention, abatement, response, containment, and cleanup efforts in state waters. The
oil spill program requires vessels and oil transfer facilities to have oil spill prevention plans,
contingency response plans in the event of a spill, and financial responsibility for spills.
Department Advisory Committee
In 2004, the Department formed an advisory committee to help devise a regulatory system for
the fueling of vessels and ships. As required by the 2004 law, the Department reported to the
Legislature on December 15, 2004. The advisory committee reported its plan to continue its
work and make a final report to the Legislature in the future.
Contingency and Prevention Plans
Owners and operators of onshore and offshore facilities and all covered vessels must prepare
and submit oil spill contingency and prevention plans to the Department. Oil spill prevention
plans must establish compliance with federal law, and comply with a number of personnel
and equipment requirements. Prevention plans are valid for five years and may be combined
with contingency plans. Facilities may opt to submit contingency plans for tank vessels
unloading at the facility.
Persons or facilities conducting ship refueling, bunkering, or lightering of petroleum products
are required to have containment and recovery equipment readily available according to
Department standards.
Department Rulemaking
The Department must adopt rules for ship refueling, bunkering, and transfers of oil to tank
vessels by June 30, 2006. The rules must establish standards for the circumstances under
which containment equipment should be deployed. The Department has the authority to
require alternate oil containment measures, including the use of automatic shutoff devices
and alarms, extra personnel, or containment equipment that is deployed quickly and
effectively.
The standards for ship refueling and oil transfers must be suitable to the environmental and
operational conditions of the regulated facilities. In addition, the Department must consult
with the United States Coast Guard to develop state standards that are compatible with
federal requirements. The Department must have a process for immediately notifying
affected tribes of any oil spill, and shellfish beds must be considered in oil spill contingency
plans.
Federal Legislation
The federal government and the Coast Guard, a federal agency, regulate oil tankers. In 2000,
the United States Supreme Court found that federal law preempted four of the Department's
rules addressing oil tankers [United States v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89 (2000)]. The court held that
the federal government alone may regulate the design, construction, alteration, repair,
maintenance, operation, equipping, personnel qualification, and manning of oil tankers. The
court found that the state may adopt regulations governing oil tankers under some
circumstances, particularly if those regulations do not have an extraterritorial effect on the
tankers and address the peculiarities of local waters.
Summary of Substitute Bill:
Scaled Rules According to Risk
The Department must categorize oil transfers by volume and other risk factors, and scale
refueling rules based on the relative risk posed by a particular oil transfer.
Random Practice Drills
The Department must, by rule, adopt procedures to determine the adequacy of oil spill
contingency plans held by tank vessels, cargo vessels, and passenger vessels. The
Department must conduct random, unannounced practice drills to test the contingency plans,
and report on how well a vessel's performance during a drill satisfied the elements of its
contingency plan.
Fuel Trucks
The Department shall adopt rules to enhance the safety of oil transfers from fuel trucks.
Inspection and Notice Authority
The Department has the authority to require prior notice of the time, location, and volume of
any transfer of oil that the department defines as posing a higher risk. The Department may
conduct inspections of oil transfer operations.
Additional Oil Containment Safeguards
The Department's authority is expanded from the ability to require alternative oil
containment safeguards to the authority to require additional oil containment safeguards
during any transfer of oil.
Force of Administrative Rules
The Department may issue administrative orders if oil transfer operations violate Department
rules addressing oil spill prevention and contingency plans.
Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:
The Department is directed to categorize oil transfers by volume and other risk factors, and to
scale refueling rules based on the relative risk posed by a particular transfer of oil. The
Department may only require prior notice of the time, location, and volume of oil transfers it
deems "higher risk" transfers.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Available.
Effective Date of Substitute Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Testimony For: (In support) Oil spills in this area have damaged beaches and wildlife all the
way across Puget Sound. Major oil transfers take place in Washington waters, and a major
spill would be disastrous. It would devastate bird species that winter in Puget Sound. The
bill is a compromise. Eighty-six percent of spills are not regulated by the Department of
Natural Resources. It is important to test plans before a crisis actually occurs.
(With concerns) The law must be more clear about which types of facilities it will regulate.
Marine fuel operators should be in the discussion. Rules should be scaled down for smaller,
less risky oil transfers. The agency should be given more time to make its rule so that all the
problems can be worked out first.
Testimony Against: None.
Persons Testifying: (In support) Representative Appleton, prime sponsor; Heath Packard,
Audubon Society; Dale Jensen, Department of Ecology; Anne Criss, Puget Sound Action
Team; Steve Robinson, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission; Bruce Wishart, People for
Puget Sound; Greg Hanon, Western States Petroleum Association; and Brett Bishop, Pacific
Coast Shellfish Growers Association.
(With concerns) Eric Johnson, Washington Public Ports Association; Rick Wickman,
Columbia River Steamship Operators Association; Randy Ray, Pacific Seafood Processors
Association; and Charlie Brown, Washington Oil Marketers Association.