API PUBL 4686-1999 1999 Oil Spill Conference Proceedings《1999年溢油会议议事录》.pdf

1、 1999 International Oil Spill Conference SECTION I-MONDAY, MARCH 8,1999 SECTION II-TUESDAY, MARCH 9,1999 SECTION III-WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10,1999 SECTION IV-THURSDAY, MARCH 11,1999 SECTION V-POSTER PRESENTATIONS Proceedings 1999 International Oil Spill Conference Beyond 2000 Balancing Perspectives March

2、 841,1999 Seattle, Washington USCG USEPA API IPIECA IMO Sponsored by US. Coast Guard US. Environmental Protection Agency American Petroleum Institute International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association International Maritime Organization Printed in the United States of America Li

3、brary of Congress Catalog No. 75-4161 American Petroleum Institute publication no. 4686B American Petroleum Institute 1220 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005 Type set by Soza i Mendelssohn, hing A., 51 1, 1279 Menot, Lnack, 21,1071 Merlin, Franois-X, 195,771 Memck, Gary, 443,725 Memck, Jason, 403 M

4、eyer, Trygve, 1093 Meyers, Timothy E., 1043 Michel, Jacqueline, 591,825, 1109,1283 Milanes, Andrew, 613 Milbury, Jim, 1141 Miller, Gerry E., i 147 Miller, Karen M., 1065 Mitchell, David, 751 Moller, T. H., 693 Montello, Todd M., 1239 Moon, Sean, 947,957 Moore, Jon, i5 Mora, David, 519 Morganti, Mike

5、, 541 Moms, Ron, 807 Mossman, D. C., 1075 Moteleb, Moustafa, 485 Mott, Joanna B., 757 Moyano, Juan Miguel, 3 Mueller, Danica C., 1049 Mullin, Joseph V., 541,777,1167, 1261,. Murphy, Stephen M., 127 1269,1287 Nadeau, Royal, 541 Nakad, Jane, 323 Nauke, Manfred, 1093 Neff, Jerry M., 119 Neilson, David

6、E, 1 123 Nelson, Robert, 541 Nesbitt, Brian W., 651 Niblock, Ian, 135 Nodar, Miguel Alberto, 1107 OBrien, Patrick, 971 OConnor, Thomas P., 701 OMara, Dennis, 95 i Ogawa, Akihiro, 271, 101 1 Olagbende, O. T., 731 Olleveant, Andrew, 165 OMalley, Mark, 437,567 Onder, Ali, 165 Mtz, Barbara E., 29 Osborn

7、e, Mike, 165 Osen, Holly E., 629 Ott, Gary L, 7,899,903 Ouchl, Joji, 1193 Overton, Edward B., 225 Owens, Edward H., 453,503,549,943 Oyama, Hayato, 1 i 13 Page, David S., i 19 Pahl, James W., 1279 Parker-Hall, Heather A., 889 Payne, James R., i 109,1179 Penland, Shea, 613 Penn, Tony, 577 Perkins, Rob

8、ert A., 1035 Permenter, Floyd R., 855 Perry, Robin, 149 Peschel, Jim E., 367 Petch, Stuart, 751 Petrocchi, Andrea, 919 Pichler, Chris, 613 Pier, Paul, 489 Pita, A., 1059 Plourde, Kristy L., 3 i 7,427 Pollock, Greg, 329 Pond, Robert G., 7,237,585 Porcelli, Filippo, 1039 Powers, Ross E., 8 15 Prince,

9、Michael, 1133 Prince, Roger C., 357,549,1075 Prosperi, Giulio, 1039 Purandare, Jaydeep A., 489 Pumell, Karen J., 459 Rallo, M., 1059 Rath, Robert H., 743 Rauch, Christian H., 471 Raybum, Thomas, 967 Read, Scott Jeremy, 1219 Reed, Mark, 295 Reeser, Paul, 485 Reid, Robert O., 11 75 Redly, Timothy J.,

10、881, 1089, 1179 Rhoton, Sara L., 1035 Richardson, Ten L., 1019 Richter, Zachary D., 1035 Rinelli, Robert A., 647 Roberson, Melissia G., 555 Roberts, Paulene O., 225,349, 1003 Rockel, Mark, 245 Roderick, Gail S., 535 Rogers, William C., 635 Rome, D. D. Buzz, 807 Rotan, Dean, 677,787 Rousseau, Christo

11、phe, 141 Rubec, Peter, 859,943 Rusin, Jan, 915 Rye, Henrik, 295 Sacceddu, Pasquale, 1039 Sahatjian, Laune Crick, 715 Saito, Masaki, 1193 Salerno, Brian M., 25 Salinas, Jimmy A., 913 Sames, Christina, 825 Sawano, Nobuhiro, 1083 Scholz, Debra K., 237,585 Schrader, Robert J., 1239 Schutenberg, Heidi, 6

12、9 Schutz, Steve, 541 Schuyler, Alan, 905 Seavey, Julie A., 203 Sergy, Gary A., 503,549,1199 Sheehan, Daniel F., 655 Shier, iarry, 1249 Shigenaka, Gary, 111,349, 1003 Shikida, Asami, 11 19 Sienkiewicz, A. Mark, 503 Sigouin, L., 1211, 1287 Simecek-Beatty, Debra, 63 Simon, Mark A., 1053 Singer, Michael

13、 M., 1031 Singsaas, Ivar, 295 Sktun, Helge Mohn, 909 Skrobe, Laura, 993 Slyman, Paul M., 41 1 Smith, Dale, 329 Smith, Dean C., 1203 Smith, Gerard W., 423 Snoeks, nse, 709 Snyder, Mike, 233 Solis, Ruben S., 1175 Solsberg, Laurie, 3 Sonal, George A., 1019 Sowby, Michael L., 1031 Sowles, Art, 981 Spies

14、, Peggy, 329 Spink, John, 165 St. Pierre, Sylvie, 765 Stalcup, Dana, 933 Steen, Alexis, 607, 1027 Steinbeck, John, 339 Stephens, Frank L., 219 Stoker, Sam W., 119 Stone, John P., 833 Stout, Scott A., 203 Stubblefield, William, 607 Subsits, Joe, 389 Suidan, Makram T., 471,485,489, Svenson, Anders, 12

15、15 Swannell, Richard P. J., 169, 751 Takahata, Tetsuo, 59 Tarpley, John, 863,989 Tasaki, Ryo, 271, 101 i Tavel, Nelson Garcia, 1233 Tavel, Shan, 927 Taylor, Peter Mark, 165, 333 Tebeau, Pete, 417 Tell, Joan G., 1195 Tennant, Kit, 87 Thakur, Raj, 1087 Thayer, Evan C., 709,1195 Thiam, Malamine, 333 Th

16、omas, Lome, 839 Thompson, Neil, 993 Thompson, Shaw, 613 Thomson, Ed, 981 Thorman, Jan C., 363 Thornborough, James A., 333 Thumen, Cari, 613 Tiercelin, Claudine, 21 Tischer, Steve, 613 Tjeerdema, Ronald S., 1031 Toia, Robert F., 597 Tomasi, Theodore, 245 Trling, Gustaf, 289 Torres, Carlos Alberto, 81

17、7 Townsend, Richard T., 477 Tramier, Bernard, 801 Travis, Bob, 725 Tremblay, Gilles H., 765, 1075 Trudei, Ken, 807 Tseng, Florina, 229 Tunnell, J. W.,Jr., 1257 Turpin, Rod, 541,1287 Turton, David J., 971 Tyler, Andrew, 15,915 Uhler, Allen D., 203 Uhler, Richard M., 203 Uraizee, Farooq, 1019 Urban, R

18、obert W., 963 Uzzell, Jesse, 737,909 Van Cott, Paul, 1089 Van Dorp, J. Rene, 403 Vandermeulen, J. H., 1075 Vaughn, Doris, 933 Venosa, Albert D., 471,485,489,1019,1065 Viale-Rigo, Mma Elena, 1 127 Vidrine, Tony, 613 Vidrine, Grant, 867 Wadsworth, Tim, 985,1189 Waldron, Jonathan K., 1157 Walker, Ann H

19、ayward, 237,585,849,877 Wang,Zhendi, 211,541,1211,1287 Ward, Kathleen, 863 Webb, Enc C., 51 1 Weiss, Steven P., 49 Wells, Peter, 1093 Wesley, David, 63 Westerholm, David, 967 White, Carolyn M., 53,671 White, Ian, 97 Whitlock, Jane S., 373 1019 Whitney, John, 981 Whittle, K. J., 693 Widiarso, Didik,

20、21 Wiens, lohn A., 127 Willis, Alyson, 751 Wilson, J. E. H., 1075 Winner, J. K., 859 Wischmann, Steve, 233, 839 Withers, Kim, 1257 Wohlgeschaffen, Gary D., 765,1075 Wolf, Martha A., 311,819,821 Wong, Eva, 1275 Wong, Kau-Fui Vincent, 1253 Wood, Peter, 915 Worley, Ray, 933 Wotherspoon, Paul, 3 Yamagis

21、hi, Susumu, 781 Yamanouchi, Hiroshi, 781 Yender, Ruth, 467 Yoshioka, Gary A., 257, 1275 Zengel, Scott A., 1109, 1283 Zetterberg, Anne, 1215 xxv Section I MONDAY, MARCH 8,1999 Session MIA: Planning US3 Chairman: Barbara Omitz Law Offices of Shellman thus, their preparedness plan- ning consists mainly

22、 of good training that includes experience, practice, and performance of basic but critical response tasks (Ott and Stalfort, 1997). Procedural .individual Tasks .nierxcmcaJ i -Goal Identification I F I Type of Planning -Kales 1 . I Organizational .Problem Solving *Group Dynamics I Figure 1. Range o

23、f complexity and planning needs. During a complex spill, however, the response organization typically becomes increasingly larger, requiring more and more complex management and tasking to efficiently and effectively respond. This complexity is, in part, due to the dramatic increase of the publics a

24、wareness and interest in the spills impact (Stal- fort, 1995). To respond effectively to complex spills, a response organiza- tion must already have well-grounded skills in organizational dynamics, group problem-solving, and risk communications de- livered with success in mind (Covello, 1996; Sandma

25、n, 1995). Consequently, response planning must tend away from a simple resource listing strategy and/or narrow-task orientation, to a more success-based planning orientation that helps the organization resolve conflicts, solve response resource problems, reach con- sensus on priorities, and skillful

26、ly communicate with the public. The Area Committees are the logical groups to perform this type of problem-solving and success-based planning. “Success” and Area Contingency Plans There is no connection between success and current ACPs. Current ACP guidelines provide basic guidance on how to draft a

27、nd assemble an ACP-guidance that was developed post-Emon Valdez and was a best effort in bringing response plans into com- pliance with the new Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA, 90). The guidance focuses on planning as a process. it identifies the plan- ning documents themselves as a repository for co

28、nsensus agree- ments related to spill risk, sensitive areas, response priorities, cleanup strategies, and organization for response. The guidance urges each Area Committee to address ali of these issues based on local concerns and priorities. The guidance leaves decisions as to planning effectivenes

29、s to the local community. The guidance does not provide any suggestions on evaluating the resulting plans or response strategies in terms of most effective or efficient re- sponse. An unstated premise of the guidance is that, if the plan is a based on community consensus (if it represents what “feel

30、s good” to the community) then it is likely to produce a successful response. In order for this process to result in successful plans, several things are necessary. First, the entire response community (fed- eral, state, and local agencies; industry; and concerned environ- mentalists and marine reso

31、urce users) must participate in an on- going dialogue that leads to consensus decisions. Second, partici- pants in the planning process must have the technical competence to reach appropriate consensus decisions. Third, because the tasks are complex and priorities and concerns are dynamic, planning

32、must be approached as an iterative process, with each planning cycle validating or modifying previous consensus and then fur- ther refining estimates of risk, sensitivities, response strategies, etc. AI1 of this results in a sort of socio-scientific process whose benefits are difficult to quantify,

33、especially outside of the imme- diate community. n a naiioiiai kvel, whht: gagp_ ?s I?.PISK the effectiveness of the process, federal agencies and the corpo- rate offices of industry plan holders are unable to estimate whether a given area is able to mount a “Best Response” or even an effective resp

34、onse. Hard science and technical solutions are much more quantifiable and defensible. is there hard science like criteria behind the current batch of ACPs? Is this kind of criteria recognizable, consistently developed, and consistently employed? To a certain extent, these concerns and questions are

35、war- ranted. Our anecdotal observations comparing resources for plan- ning on the West and East Coasts illustrates that the ACP process has progressed unevenly across the country. In some areas, the entire response community is involved proactively and routinely. In other areas, only a few members o

36、f the community participate regularly in planning activities. In a few areas, the entire planning process has been left to the Coast Guard On-Scene Coordinator with the rest of community becoming involved only during re- sponse or an occasional exercise. The questions that we should ask before commi

37、tting more planning resources include: Which plans are effective? What are their deficiencies? How can they be improved? Recently, several university-based studies looked at best-re- sponse concepts and identified critical success factors common to responses to oil discharges and hazardous materials

38、 releases (Har- rald, 1993). However, ACP guidelines have not kept pace with these new concepts and thus continue to promote regulatory and format compliance over development of demonstrably successful response strategies (Abordaif, 1997). This lack of success-based planning guidance may prevent Are

39、a Committees from develop- ing ACPs that promote “Best Response” when activated and fol- lowed. Current ACP guidelines. Todays guidelines for Area Com- mittees and the format for ACPs are contained in a 1992 Coast Guard policy document (COMMANDANT NOTICE 16471, 30 Sep 92). These guidelines helped to

40、 establish and define the role of the Area Committee in the National Response Systems con- tingency planning process. At that time, the required format be- came the standard nomenclature in all ACPs. The only known measurement guidelines for ACPs were contained in a 1993 Coast Guard Headquarters let

41、ter (Areu Contingency Plan Review Guidence, 1993). These guidelines focused on format, participa- tion levels, development of three scenarios, and addressing topics such as dispersants and bioremediation. Proposed ACP guidelines focus on format, not success. An update of the Area Committee guideline

42、s was proposed and cir- PLANNING US3 9 culated as a draft on May 29, 1997. An important objective was to ensure nationwide uniformity of ACPs by converting the for- mat of all the Plans into the incident command system (ICs) for- mat rather than a military style such as the Joint Operational Plannin

43、g Walker, 1995). There are a number of Critical Success Factors for each Key Business Driver. An oil spill response that achieves all or most of these factors will, according to the Best Response pre- cepts, be judged as a success. Table 1 is an example of the Best Response model. Key Elements: Ther

44、e are four key element categories, all linked to critical success factors: objectives, organization, re- sources, and mobilization. An organization must focus on these elements in order to prepare for a Best Response. Objectives. Objectives help the organization understand its responsibility and define priorities for achieving the critical success factors and other tasks that may be as- signed. Objectives should answer the question, “What is 8 8 8