One-Gulf Plan Overview

1
One-Gulf Plan Overview

• Presented by Bill Goetzee
• USCG District Eight New Orleans

2
What is the One Plan?

• Common portions of Area Contingency Plans (ACPs)
  adopted by several Area Committees known as
  Base Plan
• Area Specific Plan information (Geographic
  Response Plans) submitted for participating Gulf
  Coast FOSC/COTP Zones

3
Background

• ACPs plan for oil hazmat spill response and
  marine fire fighting
• Jointly created by Area Committees with federal,
  state, local, trustee, and industry responders
  for a specific geographic area
• ACPs are required by OPA 1990 NCP
• 60 Coastal Area Committees established by OPA
• ACPs are based upon the National Contingency Plan
  and Regional Contingency Plans

4
Background

• CG headquarters provided direction on format for
  ACPs
• Each Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC) area has
  a separate ACP
• Each Area Committee is required to exercise its
  ACP under the guidance of the USCG once every
  Three (3) years.

5
One Plan Historical Timeline

• Concept introduced at Clean Gulf 1999
• Planners from three FOSC zones TGLO held
  development meetings
• MSO Port Arthur wrote base plan, which was
  finalized March 2001

6
Contents of One Plan

• Chapters follow Incident Command System (ICS)
  structure and CG Headquarters format
• 1000 Introduction
• 2000 Command
• 3000 Operations
• 4000 Planning
• 5000 Logistics
• 6000 Finance
• 7000 Hazmat
• 8000 Marine Fire Fighting
• 9000 Admin

7
Contents of Geographic Response Plan

• Content specific to each area
• Sensitive sites/Atlas
• Communications/Contact Lists
• Resources (OSRO/Salvage/Fire-Fighting)

8
Benefits of One-Gulf Plan

• More useful ACP by separating plan along the
  lines of planning response
• Reduces production time eliminates duplication
  of effort
• Coordination across AC boundaries creating
  regional consistency
• Benefit to vessel, pipeline and OCS plan-holders
  as well as the responder community
• Allows unit planners to focus their time on most
  important parts of ACP sensitive sites
  resources
• ICS format supports responders ICS position
• In short A better plan with less work

9
Who is using One-Gulf Plan

• FOSC Corpus Christi
• FOSC Houston-Galveston
• FOSC Port Arthur
• FOSC Morgan City
• FOSC New Orleans
• FOSC Mobile

10
(No Transcript)
11
Where to Find It

• In the 2008 Response Toolkit CD-ROM from TGLO
• Online at
• http//www.glo.state.tx.us/oilspill
• http//homeport.uscg.mil

12
Homeport Port Directory Tab
http//homeport.uscg.mil
13
Area Committee Process
Drills/Exercises
Outreach
GRP Workshops
Other Activities
STEERING COMMITTEE
Area Planning Committee
Area Maritime Security Committee
WORKGROUPS
Tribes
Other interested parties
Public
Industry
Contractors
14
Relationship of Plans
National Response Framework (NRF)
15
MEXUS Plan

• 2000 Using a 1980 Agreement as a foundation, the
  Mexican Navy and the USCG signed the MEXUS Plan a
  contingency plan to coordinate bilateral response
  to pollution incidents, or threats, in the
  coastal waters between Mexico and the United
  States.

16
Relationship of Plans
National Response Framework (NRF)
17
Salvage Marine Fire-Fighting Under 33 CFR 155
USCG is amending the VRP Salvage Marine FF
requirements for TV carrying Oil. Final Rule 30
JAN 2009
18
(No Transcript)
19
The Incident

• November 7, 2007 The M/V Cosco Busan strikes
  the Bay Bridge tearing a 100 ft. long gash in its
  hull damaging two fuel tanks
• 58,000 gallons of bunker fuel enters the Bay in
  10 seconds
• The USCG DFG-OSPR are notified and respond
  immediately, on-scene in 50 minutes.
• At its farthest extent, the spill impacts beaches
  wildlife.

20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24

• NCP Cites
• 40 CFR 300. 317
• Safety of Human Life must be given the top
  priority during every response action...and
  ensure the safety of response personnel.
• FOSC Responsible for safety of all responders
• Comply with requirements of 29 CFR 1910.120

25
National Response TeamEvaluating Volunteer
Guidance
NRT
RRT 6
Guidance for use of Volunteers
26
Volunteer Issues
27
Volunteer, Wildlife, Waste Disposal Issues
remain some of our most significant Challenges
28
Incident Specific Preparedness Review

• The goal of the ISPR is to document a thorough
  assessment of the Coast Guard preparedness
  process.
• The primary mission of an ISPR team is not to
  grade or critically evaluate the actual response
  efforts undertaken, but instead, study the
  implication and effectiveness of the ACP and its
  integration with vessel response plans, facility
  response plans and other relevant and applicable
  plans in effect at the federal, state, and local
  levels.

29
Incident Specific Preparedness ReviewM/V Cosco
Busan Response

• Preparedness
• Available Resources
• Command Post Logistics
• Low Visibility Procedures
• Other Local Plans
• ACP Committee Representation
• Priority Protection Area Identification
• Exercises (Federal, State, Local)
• Ship-Specific Plans
• Training (all levels)
• Volunteers (convergent wildlife)
• Bird Rescue

30
Incident Specific Preparedness ReviewM/V Cosco
Busan Response

• Response
• Notifications (By RP, OSROs, USCG, State
  Locals)
• Media
• Volunteers (training, wildlife)
• Bird Rescue
• Initial Response Actions (OSROs, USCG, STATE, RP)
• USCG Command Center VTS
• Spill Volume Quantification
• Remote Sensing
• On-Water Recovery
• Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Teams (SCAT)

31
ALCOAST 541/07
32
(No Transcript)
33
Identify Specific Low Visibility Response
Procedures
34
Advanced Remote Sensing Technologies
?
35
ALCOAST 022/09
36
Area Contingency Plans Cont.

• When implemented, ACPs must be adequate to
  remove, mitigate, and prevent a worst case
  discharge of oil or hazardous material from any
  source that poses a substantial threat.

37
Federal Partnership Opportunities under Auspices
of ACP/GRP

• DOD DOE have their own pre-designated OSC.
• DOE to engage USCG for MOA/MOU

38
(No Transcript)
39
Strategic Petroleum Reserve Sites
LOUISIANA
TEXAS
MISSISSIPPI
Beaumont
Lake Charles
Port Arthur
BAYOU CHOCTAW
BIG HILL
Houston
New Orleans
Texas City
WEST HACKBERRY
ST. JAMES
WEEKS ISLAND
BRYAN MOUND
SPR STORAGE FACILITY
LEASED TERMINAL
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
FORMER SPR FACILITIES
40
West Hackberry
41
Bayou Choctaw
42
Continuing Improvements

• The ACP is a living document which needs to be
  regularly updated to remain current.
• Logistical information and sensitive sites are
  always changing.

43
ACP Development and Exercise Process

• ACP Development
• PREP Exercise
• Lessons Learned
• ACP Revision/Update

44
Sensitive Site Information

• Environmental Economic Site Summary Sheets
• Description of the Site and Location
• Seasonal Concerns
• Resources at Risk and Trustees
• Other Important Site Information
• Response Strategy
• Map of Site
• Showing boom and
• skimmer placement

45
Sector New Orleans, LA
46
(No Transcript)
47
(No Transcript)
48
(No Transcript)
49
(No Transcript)
50
EPA USCG Response BoundaryTexas-Louisiana
Coastline
51
(No Transcript)
52

• Other Recent ACP Initiatives

53
Algiers Water Intake
Gretna Water Intake
54
(No Transcript)
55
(No Transcript)
56
(No Transcript)
57
(No Transcript)
58
Whats Next

• Firm up Consolidated efforts to manage
  volunteers.
• Continue to identify specific response procedures
  unique to specific geo areas.
• Identify Low Visibility Response Procedures
  (where possible) while maintaining safety.

59
Summary

• Area Contingency Plans Area Committee process
  provide for enhanced preparedness
• Room for improvement always exists - planning
  underway to make ACPs even more useful
• Electronic interactive versions of ACPs under
  development
• ACPs interactive with state plans where
  compacts/MOAs exist (FL, CA, TX, EPA inland)
• ACPs and hyperlinks to state plans, posted on
  USCG Homeport websites

http//homeport.uscg.mil
60
Area Contingency Plans General Observations

• Planning Tool v. Response Tool
• Environmentally Sensitive Area portions
• praised as most valuable
• Three-year NPREP exercise and ACP review/revision
  cycle now standardized
• Excellent participation in Area Planning
  Committee process
• Cumbersome documents in paper form

61
The Way Forward

• Organize ACP program parallel to NRF/NIMS/ICS
  response management structure
• Continue guidance outreach for standardized
  format w/maintenance of NIMS/ICS language
• Explore future GIS applications with NOAA,
  state/local government, and private institutions
• Harmonize NPREP with DHS Homeland Security
  Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) to
  exercise ACP
• Increase involvement and participation by RRTs
  and industry players in PREP exercises.

62
Contact InformationBill Goetzee504-671-2234Wi
lliam.W.Goetzee_at_uscg.mil
63
(No Transcript)