Deepwater Horizon MC 252 Oil Spill · Deepwater Horizon MC 252 Governing law is the Oil Pollution...

Deepwater Horizon

MC 252 Oil Spill

Deepwater Horizon MC 252

Governing law is the Oil Pollution Acti (OPA)

Governor named State Response Lead Agencies:

• Mississippi Department of Marine Resources

• Mississippi Department of Env Quality

Federal Lead for Response under OPA is the United States Coast Guard

Emergency Response follows the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the Incident Command System (ICS).

USCG establishes a Unified Command System

• This was done around April 23, 2010

Deepwater Horizon MC 252

Unified Command System, ICS, OPA and the National Contingency Plan (NCP)

• Declared Spill of National Significance

• Admiral Allen named as National Incident Commander (NIC)

Unified Area Command (UAC) established at Roberts, LA to direct critical resources from around the world

Incident Command Posts set up at:

• Houston ICP – Tasked with well control

• Houma ICP – Tasked with LA Sector

• Mobile ICP – Tasked with MS, AL, FL

• St Petersburg ICP – Stood up precautionary

• Tindal Air Force Base – Air Traffic Control

Deepwater Horizon MC 252

Sector Mobile Unified Command

• Unified Command establishes span of control and dictates all parties must approve plans

• Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC) does have final authority and ultimate responsibility under the law

Members of Sector Mobile Incident Command

• US CG

• Responsible Party (BP)

• US EPA

• US Dept of Interior

• MS On Scene Coordinator

• AL On Scene Coordinator

• FL On Scene Coordinator

Unified Command

Sector Mobile ICP

Unified Command

Sector Mobile ICP

Unified Command

Sector Mobile ICP

Response Agencies(Pertaining to Mississippi)

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)

Mississippi Department of Marine Resources

Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH)

Mississippi National Guard (MNG)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

US Coast Guard (USCG)

SCAT

Shoreline Clean-Up and Assessment Teams

The Objective of a SCAT

Survey/Program

The primary purpose of SCAT (Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Technique) is to provide:

DECISION SUPPORT FOR SHORELINE TREATMENT

PLANNING AND RESPONSE OPERATIONS from Day 1 to the

LAST INSPECTION

Key Components of a SCAT

Survey/Program

Systematic data collection (Forms based on Observations)

Identification of resources (physical, ecological, cultural, human use) affected by the spill (oil + operations)

Identification of factors that may assist or constrain operations

Treatment recommendations

The Five SCAT Principles A systematic survey of all shorelines in the

affected area

Division of the coast into segments

Use of a standard set of terms and definitions for documentation

A team of interagency personnel to represent land ownership, land use, management or trustee interests.

Provides management and operational support until all treatment activities and inspections have been completed.

The 3 Phases of a SCAT

Program

INITIAL PHASE - AERIAL SCAT

aerial observations provide the initial direction for operations

rapid data collection/turnaround

provides “big picture” – scales the problem

SECOND PHASE – GROUND SCAT

ground surveys provide detailed information and treatment recommendations

adjust need to stay ahead of shoreline operations

LATER PHASES

post-treatment ground surveys support the inspection, monitoring, and “sign-off” process

Shoreline Segmentation

The shoreline is divided into working units called SEGMENTS within which the shoreline character is relatively homogeneous in terms of physical features and sediment type.

Each segment is given a unique location identifier and is surveyed.

Shoreline Segmentation Segment lengths are small enough to

obtain adequate resolution and detail on the distribution of oil, but not so small that too much data are generated.

Segments are numbered based on an alpha-numeric numbering scheme with an alphabetical prefix (e.g., MSHR = Mississippi Harrison) followed by a number based on an alongshore sequence (MSHR-6).

Shoreline Segmentation

ExampleIsland

AB-2

AB-3

AB-4

AB-5

AB-1

The Description of Shoreline

Oiling Conditions STEP 1: Divide Coast into Segments

STEP 2: Describe Shoreline Character within Segment

STEP 3: Describe Surface Oil• length of oiled shore within segment

• width of oiled band

• % distribution of oil in band

• thickness of oil cover

• describe oil character (If tar balls then # of tar balls)

Standard Terms and

Definitions

standard terms and definitions provide an accurate description of the oiling conditions

consistency - everyone uses the same language

avoids misunderstanding, misinterpretation, and confusion

Essential SCAT DataGeneral

• location, date, time, segment code

• information on SCAT team members

• map (sketch)

Surface Oiling

• Length and Width of oiled section or subdivision

• Location of oil relative to Tidal Zones or Lake/River Levels

• Distribution (percent Surface Coverage to nearest 5 or 10%)

• Oil Thickness

• Oil Character

MC 252 Shoreline Response Talking Points Shoreline Response Stages/UAC Transition Plan Levels

Stage I (Levels I & II of UAC Transition Plan): On-water recovery of floating oil slicks in nearshore waters

Stage II (Levels I & II of UAC Transition Plan): Initial cleaning of bulk oil from intertidal areas until the source is controlled

Stage III (Levels III – VI of UAC Transition Plan)• Level III: Detailed Cleanup to Achieve 2010 No

Further Treatment

• Level IV: Maintenance & Monitoring

• Level V: Re-evaluation of Level IV Shoreline Segments & Implementation of Sign-off Process

• Level VI: End State Status: Long-Term Monitoring and Restoration

MC 252 Shoreline Response Talking PointsStage III – Level III-VI Progression

SCAT

Stage II

SCAT Stage III

2010 NFT

UAC Level III UAC Level IV UAC Level V UAC Level VI

Pictures of Mississippi

SCAT Teams in Action

MDEQ

Environmental

Sampling

MDEQ Sampling

MDEQ Sampling

MDEQ Sampling

MDEQ Sampling

MDEQ Sampling

MDEQ Air SamplingMississippi Gulf Coast Monitoring Sites

MS State Waters – All Tissue Samples

Submitted for Chemical Analysis

5/26/10 to 8/18/10

Seafood Sampling Results

Sample

Dates:

5/26/10-

9/28/10

Total Analyzed

Above

Levels of

Concern

Lab

Results

Pending

Shrimp 60 53 0 7

Crab 87 75 0 12

Finfish 113 95 0 18

Oysters 43 30 0 13

All Seafood 303 253 0 50

General Pictures of

Aerial Recon

MDEQ Operations Near Well Site

MDEQ Aerial Recon with MSARNG

MDEQ Aerial Recon with MSARNG

MDEQ Aerial Recon with MSARNG

General Pictures of

Activities

MDEQ

MDEQ Biloxi Staging Area

MDEQ Oil Sheen out Near Well Site

Transition from Response

Long Term Remediation and Monitoring

Natural Resources Damage Assesment (NRDA)

• Detailed process that is spelled out in the Oil Pollution Act (OPA)

Restoration

• Environmental Restoration through NRDA

• Gulfcoast Restoration through Governor’s Commission

• Federal Restoration through Presidential appointment of Ray Mabus

Monitoring

What has been done so far

• Response

• NRDA

What is underway

What is Planned

Types of Activities

NRDA Baseline – 77 sites

Air / Boat recon – 51 sites

Sentinel – Island Pass Sampling – 5 sites• 296 samples (May 19 – Aug 6)

Bay & Estuary (2/WK) – 5 sites

Harbors - 12

Tissue - 197

Complaints / VoO reports - 44

Submerged Oil Survey

Sampling Locations

560

24 16 0

6321

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Water Sed Other

Total

Detected

Results Summary

MS Sound Submerged Oil Survey

PlanPartner with UIC Mobile

Purpose – search for presence of subsurface material in the MS Sound (recoverable)

• 26 Vessels of Opportunity – pad survey

• 6 DEQ skimmers – sampling

Oil Range Organics, Diesel Range Organics, Gasoline Range Organics, Semi-Volatile compounds, Volatile compounds, Dispersants, Plankton and adsorbent pads for ORO

• 1 Fluorometer Vessel (VoO)

• 1 Sediment Vessel (VoO)

MS Sound Submerged Oil

Survey Plan

MS Sound

Submerged Oil Survey Summary

2100 adsorbent pad drops

• 6 suspect areas sampled for water column

• 3 additional sites sampled due to presence of light sheen

45 sediment sites screened

• 10 samples collected for analysis

No Oil found with Fluorometer

• 100% complete

MS Sound Submerged Oil Survey Sample Results

Water samples (4 complete)

• non-detect on chemical parameters

• Plankton being analyzed at GCRL

Sediment

• None determined to contain oil by FTIR analysis

Pads

• Questionable due to mfg of pads

Gulfwide Sampling EffortAs of 10/06/2010

Water Samples

• 20,022 Deep Sea Water Samples

• 3119 Off Shore Water Samples

• 6790 Near Shore Water Samples

Sediment Samples

• 50 Deep Sea Sediment Samples

• 145 Off Shore Sediment Samples

• 1313 Near Shore Sediment Samples

Impacts

As of 10/05/2010

• 104 miles of shoreline experiencing moderate to heavy oil impacts

9 of these miles in MS

• Approximately 485 miles of shoreline experiencing light to trace oil impacts

81 of these miles in MS

Continuing Activities by DEQ

Additional sample sites

Response to direct calls from public

Respond to reports by fishermen

Natural Resource Damage Assessment

Submerged Oil Survey South if Islands