August 3, 2009 DROT Spill Prevention &
Response Plan Amendments - click
here (note: this
document was received by Inletkeeper on August 24, and an
analysis of it is not included in the above-referenced report;
Inletkeeper will analyze the plan changes as soon as possible).
Large file - approx. 5 mb.
HOMER, AK – Cook Inletkeeper today released a
timeline of events surrounding the eruption of the Mount Redoubt
volcano in Cook Inlet in March 2009, including an analysis of
the extreme threats posed to Cook Inlet fisheries from over 6
million gallons of oil stored nearby at the Drift River Oil
Terminal. The report details numerous break-downs in state and
federal spill prevention and response rules instituted after the
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill in 1989, and emphasizes how
everyday Alaskans were cut out of important decisions. The
report – which raises serious questions left unresolved by the
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC) and Chevron – provides important examples
how future offshore and onshore oil and gas production may be
regulated in Bristol Bay, the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas and
elsewhere in Alaska. A copy of the report can be found at:
www.inletkeeper.org/watershedwatch/redoubt2009/redoubt.htm
“We needed to create a record of what
happened at the Drift River Oil Terminal in 2009, so it doesn’t
happen again in Cook Inlet, and so other areas of Alaska don’t
suffer from the very same type of complacency that brought us
the Exxon Valdez,” said Bob Shavelson, Executive Director
of Cook Inletkeeper. “From day one, we were amazed at the lack
of planning, the lack of spill response capacity, and the lack
of openness that continues to this day.”
Some important questions raised in the report
include:
- Why did the ADEC and USCG allow Chevron to
withhold from the public the volume of oil at the Drift River
Terminal when Mt. Redoubt became active in early 2009, when such
information is made public on a daily basis at the Valdez Marine
terminal? Had the oil volume been made public, it would have
been clear prior to Mt. Redoubt’s initial eruption that spill
response equipment in Cook Inlet could not address a
catastrophic release.
- Why did re-starting the Drift River Oil
Terminal immediately after the March 22 eruption take precedence
over protecting Cook Inlet’s valuable fisheries? According to
ADEC, only when Chevron decided to suspend operations at the
facility two weeks after the first eruption did other spill
prevention options (i.e. draining the oil tanks and ballasting
them with water) become available that better protected Cook
Inlet fisheries from a catastrophic spill.
- Why did it take Chevron nearly 4 weeks
after evacuating the facility on March 22 to submit the
legally-required notice of non-readiness to ADEC, affirming it
could not effectively respond to a catastrophic release from the
Drift River Oil Terminal? And why didn’t ADEC require Chevron to
include in its spill response plan the capacity to address a
catastrophic release from all the storage tanks and pipelines at
the facility as required by state law?
- Why has ADEC cut the public out of the
process for amending the spill prevention and response plan at
the facility? ADEC has characterized plan changes as “minor
amendments” not requiring public notice and comment, when in
fact significant plan changes have been made since before March
22.
“Commercial fishermen have followed the
events surrounding the Drift River Oil Terminal for many years,
because the facility sits atop our invaluable Cook Inlet
fisheries” said Roland Maw, Executive Director of United Cook
Inlet Drift Association. “We were extremely disappointed in the
lack of information we received during the 2009 incident, and
hope the state and federal agencies can open the process to
allow Alaskans to help decide how best to protect our fisheries.
”
“At the most basic level, we hope ADEC will
reconsider its decision to cut Alaskans out of important
decisions regarding the Drift River Terminal,” said Shavelson.
“Alaskans shouldn’t have to endure expensive and protracted
appeals to simply have a say in protecting our fisheries
resources from the threat of more oil spills.”
In a related event, the USCG
announced on August 18 that it was withdrawing a proposed rule
to consider tug escorts for laden single hull tankers in Cook
Inlet and elsewhere. Because Chevron’s plans to now reroute oil
around the Drift River Terminal storage tanks will increase
tanker transits to twice monthly, the USCG decision highlights
the risks of navigation and potential oil spills to Cook Inlet
fisheries. To see the USCG announcement, click
here, and to see Inletkeeper comments on the proposed rule,
click
here.
March 27th - Petition to
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, Requesting an Emergency
Declaration for the Drift River Oil Terminal at the Base of
Mount Redoubt
RE: DRIFT RIVER TERMINAL HOLDING 6
MILLION GALLONS OF OIL AT BASE OF ACTIVE VOLCANO IN COOK
INLET, ALASKA
Dear Secretary Napolitano:
The undersigned organizations represent
thousands of Alaskans concerned about sustainable jobs,
clean water and healthy salmon. We are writing to ask you
to take swift action to protect Alaska fisheries and the
countless people they support from the threat of a major oil
spill in Cook Inlet, Alaska.
As you may know, on March 22, 2009, the
Mt. Redoubt volcano entered an eruption phase.[1]
At the base of Mt. Redoubt lies an oil terminal – the Drift
River Terminal (DFT) – holding over 6 million gallons of
oil. Pyroclastic flows and multiple eruptions from the
volcano are now threatening the DFT with mud, water, ice and
debris flows. To date, existing containment systems have
protected the tank farm, though the facility is clearly in a
precarious state. Today, another massive eruption blew
ash over 65,000 feet into the atmosphere and created
substantial additional flooding. Cook Inlet supports a
world class salmon fishery, an endangered stock of Beluga
whales and other sensitive resources that would be severely
impacted should a catastrophic spill occur.
This scenario did not unfold overnight.
Similar events transpired during the 1989-90 eruption of
Mt. Redoubt. In the current instance, the Mt. Redoubt
volcano has been in a heightened state of seismic activity
since late Fall 2008. Since that time, the DFT operator –
Cook Inlet Pipeline Company, a Chevron Corporation
subsidiary – has refused to release to the public
information on the facility’s Volcano Readiness Plan and the
volume of oil remaining in the facility’s tank farm, citing
Homeland Security Act exclusions. The U.S. Coast Guard and
other state and federal agencies acquiesced in this
situation, despite the fact the Alyeska Pipeline Service
Company releases tank volume information for the Valdez
Marine Terminal in Prince William Sound, Alaska, on a daily
basis.
We are writing to you now to
highlight the urgency of 6 million gallons of oil sitting at
the base of an erupting volcano. Cook Inlet fisheries are
valued at well over $1.5 billion annually, and they support
vital commercial, sport, subsistence and personal use
economies. In the wake of the 20th Anniversary
of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, Alaskans are all too
familiar with the complacency and lack of preventative
safeguards that have produced dire results in the past.
Experts at the Alaska Volcano Observatory predict Mt.
Redoubt eruptions could continue for weeks or months. Maybe
the DFT will ride out this latest episode with its product
intact. But the risks are too high – and the resources and
people they support too important – to take that chance.
In 2006, sea ice and large tides ripped
the T/V Seabulk Pride from its mooring at Nikiski in
Cook Inlet, and the tanker ran aground with more than 5
million gallons of product aboard. At that time, spill
response assets had to be diverted from Prince William
Sound, because adequate response capacity did not exist in
Cook Inlet. Fortunately, only a small spill occurred. But
it remains unclear whether spill response capabilities exist
to address a 6 million gallon spill amidst Cook Inlet’s
spectacular fisheries.
Had we understood the severity of this
situation prior to the volcanic eruption, there would have
been ample time to implement a more thoughtful spill
prevention strategy. Unfortunately, the public’s
right-to-know was frustrated under the illusion of Homeland
Security Act concerns, and we only learned the true volume
of oil remaining in the DFT tanks this week. We urge you
now to order the immediate draw-down of oil at the DFT in a
safe and orderly manner, until volcanic activity at Mt.
Redoubt ceases to pose a serious threat.
Thank you for your immediate attention to
this pressing matter, and we look forward to your response.
The Chevron Corporation Has
Left 6 Million Gallons of Oil at
the Base of an Erupting
Volcano in Alaska’s Cook Inlet
Take 5 Minutes to Help Protect Alaska Salmon & the People
and Communities They Support
Background:
The Chevron Corporation (Cook Inlet Pipeline Company)
operates the Drift River Terminal on the west side of Cook
Inlet in Southcentral Alaska (www.chevron-pipeline.com/newsupdates.asp).
The facility contains an oil storage tank farm and sits at
the base of the Mt. Redoubt volcano, which has shown
increasing seismic activity since last Fall. In discussions
over oil spill prevention, Chevron refused to make public
its Volcano Readiness Plan, and refused to reveal the volume
of oil remaining in the storage tanks, citing Homeland
Security Act concerns. The U.S. Coast Guard (www.uscgalaska.com/go/site/780/),
the U.S. EPA and other state and federal agencies refused to
press the matter, despite the fact oil tank volumes are
revealed on a daily basis at the Valdez Marine Terminal in
Prince William Sound.
Current
Status:
On March 22, Mt. Redoubt erupted, sending massive floods of
water, ice, mud and debris (called “lahars”) in and around
the Drift River Terminal, and Chevron finally revealed it
had left 6 million gallons of oil at the now-abandoned
facility. Similar conditions occurred during Mt. Redoubt’s
last eruption in 1989-90. The protective diking system
surrounding the tank farm has so far prevented any major
incursions, though water has penetrated the outer layer of
protection. On March 26, another massive eruption occurred,
sending a lahar down towards the facility; current impacts
remain unknown (see recent images:
www.avo.alaska.edu/images/recent_images.php). The Alaska
Volcano Observatory (www.avo.alaska.edu/activity/Redoubt.php)
predicts Mt. Redoubt will continue to erupt for a period of
weeks to months. The Drift River Terminal sits above Cook
Inlet salmon fisheries valued at over a $1.5 billion
annually which support vital commercial, sport, subsistence
and personal use economies. For more information and
updates, see
www.inletkeeper.org or call Cook Inletkeeper at
907.235.4068 ext. 22.
Talking
Points:
·On
the 20th Anniversary of the Exxon Valdez Oil
Spill, we must learn from the past and take swift action to
prevent a major oil spill in Alaska salmon and other
fisheries.
·The
tank farm at the Drift River Terminal should be drawn-down
as soon as safely possible until volcanic threats to the
facility pass.
·Congressional
and state-level hearings should investigate why Chevron was
allowed to hide behind the Homeland Security Act, and to
make sure it does not happen again.
ANCHORAGE, AK – Cook Inletkeeper today called on Chevron and
responsible state and federal agencies to draw-down oil stored
at the base of the erupting Mt. Redoubt volcano in Cook Inlet,
Alaska. Chevron had previously refused to divulge the volume of
oil in tanks at the Drift River Terminal, citing Homeland
Security Act concerns. At the outset of the Mt. Redoubt eruption
yesterday, however, Chevron announced over 6 million gallons of
oil remaining at the tank farm. Reports late Monday revealed
significant flooding and debris flows at the Drift River
terminal.
“Since the start of the current seismic activity at Mt. Redoubt,
Cook Inletkeeper has been criticized for asking Chevron how much
oil remained in the tanks at Drift River, and why it could hide
behind the Homeland Security Act when Alyeska reports the same
information every day at the Valdez Terminal,” said Bob
Shavelson, Executive Director of Cook Inletkeeper. “Now it’s
time for Chevron and the responsible state and federal agencies
to safeguard Cook Inlet fisheries and the families and
businesses they support, and to get the oil out of the terminal
in a safe and responsible manner.”
The Drift River terminal sits immediately adjacent to Drift
River, which experienced similar flooding that threatened the
oil facility the last time Mt. Redoubt erupted in 1989-1990. The
facility sits in the middle of Cook Inlet’s rich and highly
productive sport and commercial fisheries. The Alaska Department
of Fish & Game estimates the value of commercial and sportcaught
fish in Upper Cook Inlet at well over $1.5 billion in 2008.
“We depend on clean and healthy Cook Inlet fisheries to feed our
families,” said Tom Evans, an Alaskan Native from the Village of
Nanwalek in Lower Cook Inlet. “It makes no sense to store oil at
the base of an erupting volcano.”
“Today is the 20
th
anniversary of the Exxon Valdez oil
spill, and we’ve learned that complacency is not one decision,
or 100 decisions, but thousands of small decisions that lead up
to a regulatory safety net that’s riddled with gaping holes,”
said Shavelson. “We call the situation in Cook Inlet “The 1000
cuts of Complacency,” and it’s time we learned the lessons of
the Exxon Valdez.”
“My livelihood depends on fresh, healthy Cook Inlet salmon,”
said Ben Jackinsky, a commercial setnet fisherman from Kasilof.
“This is a replay from the last eruption in 1989, and Chevron
and our state and federal agencies need to take steps now to
protect our fisheries.”
In public statements, Chevron has suggested it retained oil in 2
of the 7 tanks at Drift River to maintain tank stability. But
the fact that 5 tanks are apparently empty undermines Chevron’s
rationale.
“Worker safety is paramount, and we need to ensure the oil can
be removed in a safe and orderly fashion,” said Shavelson. “But
we never knew Chevron planned to keep 6 million gallons of crude
at the base of an erupting volcano until yesterday, because
Chevron kept hiding behind the façade of Homeland Security.”
Public agencies responsible for the safe and legal operation of
the Drift River terminal include the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation and the Alaska Department of Fish &
Game.
