Panelists at a hearing today on the risk of oil spills in Washington state praised initiatives such as the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund but expressed concerns...
SEATTLE — Panelists at a hearing today on the risk of oil spills in Washington state praised initiatives such as the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund but expressed concerns about liability caps, salvage efforts and cleanup methods.
“Spills are still continuing far too often,” said Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., who arranged the field hearing. And cleanup costs work out to about $1,000 for every gallon of oil released, she said.
Cantwell heard from eight panelists representing government agencies, area tribes and organizations such as the Western States Petroleum Association.
The Pacific Northwest and the Puget Sound area have arguably the strongest safety net in the country, said Capt. Myles “Chip” Boothe, chief of the Marine Safety Division of the Seattle-based 13th Coast Guard District.
But there are areas for improvement, Boothe said. “We must remain ever-vigilant to address the risk of future pollution.”
Providing that vigilance costs money, though, and costs could outpace money available in the federal domain, he said, referring to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.
That fund, created under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, requires vessels and their operators to cover cleanup costs at various capped amounts, with the fund — generated by an industry tax and spill-related fines — picking up the balance, said Cantwell spokeswoman Charla Neuman.
Between 1997 and 2004, Washington state received more than $5 million from the fund, she said.
The fund had been expected to run out of money by 2009, Neuman said. But it was reinstated as part of the federal energy bill passed by Congress last week and sent to President Bush, she said.
The provision imposing a nickel-a-barrel tax on oil companies when the fund dips below $2 billion could go into effect as early as April 2006, Neuman said.
Just last week, Sunoco agreed to pay $2.7 million into the fund as penalty for Clean Water Act violations in a 192,000-gallon crude oil spill in the John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge in Pennsylvania.
A basic tenet of the 1990 law is that polluters should pay, Boothe said, adding that he hoped the liability caps would increase.
The Coast Guard is doing a number of things to improve response to oil spills, Boothe said.
“The Dalco Passage Spill makes us much more trigger-happy” about lessons learned, he said, referring to a 1,000-gallon spill last fall between Tacoma and Vashon Island.
Fred Felleman, Northwest director for Ocean Advocates, said he wants to know what will happen when a large oil spills occurs.
“There can be no question that a major oil spill would be the straw that breaks the ecosystem’s back,” Felleman said.
In a prepared statement, Dale Jensen, of the state Department of Ecology, said he is concerned that new Homeland Security responsibilities and budget constraints will undercut Coast Guard efforts in oil spill prevention and response.
“We urge Congress to provide more resources to the Coast Guard commensurate with the increased demands that are placed on the agency,” he wrote.
Boothe said Coast Guard officials have “steadfastly led” efforts described under the 1990 Oil Pollution Act.
David Sones, vice chairman of the Makah Tribal Council, said he’s concerned about long-term effects of oil spills. He said he also hopes all tools available are used for cleanup — both mechanical and chemical options.