While Refueling Ships in Casco Bay, No Need for Precaution Against Oil Spills
Retired ship Captain Daniel Milligan, on Sunday, 26th June, had raced from his home on his motorcycle to observe an incident from the shore through a pair of binoculars. A a barge weighed down with fuel and riding low in the water slipped behind Fort Gorges to meet an anchored cargo ship.The anchored cargo vessel was refueling, taking on heavy oil being pumped from the barge.
Ship-to-ship fuel transfers are routine. However, in the current period, they have become infrequent events in the waters of Casco Bay. Captain Milligan and others are bothered that no precautionary measures are taken against a possible oil spill – these at-sea refueling stops generally occur without the use of floating barriers meant to block the spread of oil in the case of a spill.
When a ship is moored in a berth for refuelling, it is a standard practice to set up one of these containment devices, known as a boom But Maine law does not require their use when vessels are refueling in open water.
This is confirmed by The Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the Casco bay-keeper that ships have refueled in Casco Bay without a boom.
Countering on the low probability of a spill against the high cost and difficulty of setting up a boom around anchored ships, this practice is a regulatory ‘trade-off’.
However, this is argued by some water watchers, oil professionals and lawmakers that transferring oil in open water without the insurance of a containment device is an unnecessary and unacceptable risk.
Mike Herz, a Maine resident who served 20 years as the San Francisco bay-keeper and worked on the Alaska Oil Spill Commission for the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, observed the damage done by an oil spill and said booms serve as important protections against human error. He said that when moving large quantities of oil product under high pressure and a human making the decision about how to start and stop the flow of oil, there’s the threat of spills.
It is noted that there has not been a major spill in Maine since 1996. However, spills do happen during fuel transfers.
In a global context, according to statistics compiled by International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation, between 1974 and 2015, ship-to-ship fuel transfers resulted in 607 spills, ranging in size from 2,225 gallons or less, up to 222,432 gallons or greater.
In Portland, which stakes much of its reputation on its harbor, a spill would be especially damaging to the economy and the quality of life in the city.
Marine Law and about the Boom
Maine law requires that a boom is deployed anytime a tanker ship is unloading oil, and most dock operators insist that one be used by refueling ships as a protective measure and way of limiting their liability. But out in the public waters of Casco Bay, fuel transfers are overseen by U.S. Coast Guard and MDEP.
A deployed containment boom, which resembles a thick inflatable hose, sits partially submerged in the water around a ship, creating a ring that would hold in oil in the event of a spill. The barriers are meant to guard against oil polluting a shoreline and make it easier to skim or vacuum spilled fuel off the surface of the water.
Point of view from the other side
Peter Blanchard, who heads oil spill contingency planning for the MDEP, says there are a couple of reasons ships transferring fuel while anchored are not required to use a boom by Maine law.
First, the volume of oil used to fuel a ship is much smaller than the load carried by a tanker. Second, the companies that refuel ships and sell the fuel — Sprague Energy and Global Partners LP — have an strong records transferring fuel, a process called bunkering, without incident. Further, setting up a floating boom in the open, possible choppy, water is time consuming, logistically challenging and expensive.
This position was echoed by Casco Baykeeper Ivy Frignoca, an environmental attorney, who said ships transferring oil in the bay without a protective barrier pose “no imminent threat.”
The number of ships refueling in the bay has dropped as low oil prices have slowed tanker traffic in and out of Portland — but neither could offer precise figures.
Different standards in different coasts
In Washington state, for instance, ships transferring oil in bulk to other vessels are required to either use a containment boom as long as it is safe to do so or have a boom on hand and take other precautionary measures, depending on the rate at which fuel is being pumped.
Herz, the former San Francisco baykeeper, said Maine legislators should consider tightening regulation around booming ships. But he and Carolyn Latti, a maritime attorney based in Boston, said pushing through new legislation in this field is always a challenge.
Portland state Senator Anne Haskell said she is considering sponsoring legislation around it.
Did you subscribe for our daily newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Bangor Daily News
