Homer Alaska - Business

It's a world now hyper-sensitive to oil spills, given the undersea blowout in the Gulf of Mexico.

Alaskans are asking how well industry is prepared to handle a spill, and how the government can assure them that the industry's preparations are real.

There are no clear answers.

But Alaska's spill prevention and cleanup requirements do appear to be more stringent than those of many other states, and compared to those of the U.S. Mineral Management Service that were in effect in the Gulf of Mexico at the time BP lost control of its exploration well.

This is what Alaska state agencies believe, anyway. However, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, the state agency charged with preventing and managing oil spill risk, plans a detailed comparison of Alaska's rules to those in the Gulf of Mexico.

If some fine-tuning is needed, it will be done, state officials say.

Betty Schorr, manager of the state's spill preparedness group in the environmental conservation department, said Alaska's core prevention and response strategy is built around three elements: prevention, or taking steps to prevent spills in the first place; financial responsibility, meaning a private firm or agency transporting crude oil or fuel must show it has the resources sufficient to handle spill (usually insurance); and a contingency plan to show how an operator will mobilize the equipment and people to contain and clean up a spill.

The contingency plan is important. No tanker or fuel barge sails into Alaska waters without a spill containment and cleanup plan approved by the state DEC. No crude oil tank with a capacity of more than 5,000 barrels or fuel storage tank with a capacity of more than 10,000 barrels can operate without the "C-plan" either.

In essence, the plan is a detailed description of resources available and how things will be done if an accident happens.

But a plan is only as good as the ability to execute it. How do we know it will be followed?

There's never absolute certainty, but in this case, assurance boils down to having good people on DEC's staff with the judgment and experience to know when a spill plan is realistic and that the resources listed are really there, Schorr said.

Most states have contingency plan requirements, but in a lot of cases it's just a form with boxes to be checked off, she said. No one really reads the plans, at least closely. A lot of that is because of budget constraints.

This is not a problem in Alaska, because the state's spill prevention group is funded indirectly but mostly from industry in the form of a tax on oil production. Revenue from the tax, which has been as much as 5 cents a barrel, flows into a fund from which the Legislature appropriates money for DEC's spill group.

Oil revenues do fund 90 percent of the state's budget.

As for experience, most of those who review spill plans have either industry or military experience, Schorr said.

The spill plan reviewers don't see the contracts operators of oil facilities have with cleanup contractors. Still, there are only a handful of spill contractors and cooperatives in Alaska, and it seems everyone knows everyone else in the cleanup world.

The C-plans must be renewed every five years, so the DEC and the companies have an opportunity to make changes to keep the plans up to date. There are about 140 regulated facilities around the state that are required to file contingency plans.

Most importantly, however, are the requirements for periodic drills and exercises in the spill plans, which are monitored by DEC staff. Seeing people following the plan provides some assurances.

Much of DEC's resources are devoted to ensuring that higher-risk operations, like crude oil tankers, oil production systems and exploration wells, are ready to handle spills.

Prince William Sound operators are required to have a major drill to test their systems every year, Schorr said. This year Sea River, which carries oil for ExxonMobil Corp., was host of the exercise. The year before, Polar Tankers, ConocoPhillips' tanker company, was responsible.

Similar annual exercises, called the Mutual Aid Drill, are held yearly on the North Slope, with different scenarios for a spill. A producing unit sponsors the test, with Alaska Clean Seas one of the state's major cleanup companies playing a support role. The mutual aid part is the requirement for all field operating groups, no matter what company, to assist each other with people and equipment if a spill happens.

Alyeska Pipeline Service Co., operator of the trans-Alaska pipeline system, has a contingency plan for pipeline spills and conducts drills and exercises to test its response capabilities.

DEC has 40 people in its spill group and the number has been stable over the past few years, Schorr said.

One problem, however, is that the work load is getting bigger.

DEC became responsible for oversight for the Alaska Railroad in recent years, and after the 2006 leaks in oil field pipelines on the North Slope, the agency was made responsible for inspection and regulation of flow lines from wells to processing facilities.

Previously no government agency provided oversight of flow lines.

The agency's responsibilities for "non-crude" or fuel vessels and tank farms also has grown.

Tim Bradner is a reporter for the Alaska Journal of Commerce.