1. Spill Prevention, Preparedness and Response Program
May 2016

2. Spill Responses (past 12 months)
Oil 2,995 Hazmat/Pollutant 1,125 Vessel Incident 98 Vessel Spill 28 Drug Lab 18 4,264

3. Response Staffing Full-Time: 0 Full-Time: 4.5 After-Hours: 5
NRDA: 2
EQ Grant: 1
Full-Time: 1.6
After-Hours: 7
Full-Time: 2

4. Multi-Plan Drill Vessel Of Opportunity Aerial Observation
Speed Sweep/Current Buster
Geographic Response Plans
VIP Observers
123 drijlls – worst case, deployment

5. Drill Activity (Jan 2016 – Today)
Table Top 3
Worst-Case Table Top
Equipment Deployment 11
Geographic Response Plan 16
Wildlife
Emergency Response Tow Vessel
Unannounced Drills 2
Self-Certified
Incident Credit 1
Total 35 22 2 1 4 1 2
123 drijlls – worst case, deployment 1 1 1

6. HB 1449 Implementation
But our governor is concerned and he doesn’t want to wait until March 2015 to get results.
He moved up the timeline for our deliverables .
In June Gov. Inslee issued further directions for us to characterize risk of accidents along rail lines and deliver preliminary findings and recommendations by Oct. 1.
###
• Review state and federal laws and rules with respect to rail safety and identify regulatory gaps.
• Assess the relative risk of Bakken crude with respect to other forms of crude oil.
• Identify data and information gaps that hinder improvements in public safety and spill prevention and response.
• Begin development of spill response plans for impacted counties.
• Identify potential actions that can be coordinated with neighboring states and British Columbia.
• Identify, prioritize, and estimate costs for state actions that will improve public safety and spill prevention and response.
• For Governor’s budget propose funding strategy.

7. Safe Oil Transportation ESHB 1449
Definition of “Oil” and “Facility”
Best Available Protection
UTC Inspection Program Funding
EMD Planners
Financial Responsibility Certification
Pilotage, Tug Escort, Safety Measures
Oil Spill Response Account
Pipeline Contingency Plan Update

8. Oil by Rail Transport Advanced Notification
Advance notice of oil by rail transport
• First responders will have the information needed to respond more effectively and immediately to a spill.
• Communities (such as Seattle/Spokane) tribes and local governments will have a better understanding of their risks which allows them to plan accordingly in case an oil spill occurs
Advance notice of biannual pipeline oil movements
Less visible because they’re underground, pipelines will now be required to supply advance notification
Facilities receiving transfers of crude oil via railroads are required to submit a weekly advanced notice. Pipelines carrying crude oil are required to provide biannual reports. On a quarterly basis Ecology will publish aggregate reported information on a statewide basis by route, week, and place of origin of the crude oil. Non-aggregated information that is proprietary, commercial, or financial is exempt from public disclosure; however, Ecology will provide the information to state emergency managers, Tribal and local governments. Updates to data systems will be made to accommodate the additional data and develop reports that would be sent to emergency managers and local governments.
Authority: RCW (new section), and RCW (23) (public disclosure)
Applicable Rule Chapter: WAC Title 173, rulemaking required which will likely result in a new chapter.
Final Deliverable(s):
Adopted rules governing notice of crude oil transfers via railroad and pipeline transports.
Updated data system to accommodate advanced notice information.
A training program to assist oil facilities entering advance notice information and government accessing the information.
Aggregated quarterly reports to the public posted on Ecology’s website.
Timeline:
Identify/obtain staff resources; begin rulemaking & data system updates October 1, 2015
Complete system updates & complete rulemaking September 2016
Begin receiving weekly advanced notices & provide info to gov’ts October 2016
Post quarterly reports to public on Ecology website January 2017
Budget (includes staffing and administration):
$375,000
Staffing: Permanent: .1 FTE
Project: 2.5 FTEs
Outreach:
Stakeholders and Government Partners: Environmental organizations, oil industry, railroad industry, Tribal and local governments, first responders, response organizations, NW Area Committee, Regional Response Team and the public.
Type of Outreach: Seek broad input, including but not limited to: electronic public outreach (website, ) and required public hearings.

9. Oil by Rail Required Contingency Planning
Requires contingency planning for oil by rail transport
• Rail companies now have to demonstrate their ability to respond to an oil spill, in conjunction with state and local efforts.
• Planning work will also include live drills to verify adequacy of the plans.
Extends contingency planning and drill requirements to railroads transporting oil in bulk. Railroads are allowed to submit federal oil spill response plans in lieu of state approved contingency plans until state regulations are developed.
Authority: RCW
Applicable Rule Chapter: WAC Title 173, rulemaking required which will likely result in a new chapter.
Final Deliverable(s):
Adopted rules governing contingency planning for railroads transporting oil in bulk.
Contingency plans that are developed by railroad industry, reviewed by Ecology and tested in drills.
Drill evaluation criteria checklists and other updated drill guidance documents.
Timeline:
Identify and obtain staff resources; i.d. affected RR co.’s begin rulemaking October 1, 2015
Complete rulemaking September 2016
Submittal and review of rail plans Before June 30, 2017
Budget (includes staffing and administration):
$669,000
Staffing: Permanent: 2 FTEs
Outreach:
Stakeholders and Government Partners: Environmental organizations, oil industry, railroad industry, Tribal and local governments, NW Area Committee, Regional Response Team and the public.
Type of Outreach: Seek broad input, including but not limited to: electronic public outreach (website, ) and required public hearings.

10. Geographic Response Planning Continued
Continued development of geographic response plans to provide immediate information and action strategies.
Nine plans were successfully completed July 30, 2015 via 2014 legislative direction.
A review of all state and federal contingency plans must be completed by December 31st, 2015.
Biennial reports must be provided to the Legislature beginning in 2017.
Provide the Legislature a review of all state geographic response plans (GRPs) and any federal requirements as needed in contingency plans by December 31, 2015, followed by biennial updates each December, 2017 through 2021, on progress being made with contingency plan completion. Contract with third parties as practicable, to ensure completion of 50% of targeted GRPs by December 1, 2017.
Authority: RCW (new section)
Applicable Rule Chapter: Not applicable, no rulemaking required.
Final Deliverable(s):
A legislative report which includes a review of all state GRPs and any federal requirements as needed in contingency plans.
Updates to the Legislature on progress made in completing GRPs.
Use contractors to complete 50% of targeted GRPs, if practicable, required in contingency plans, by July,
Timeline:
Conduct gap analysis of GRPs and contingency plans Sept. - November, 2015
Prioritize first round of GRPs and undertake development September 1, 2015
Provide a legislative report December 31, 2015
Prioritize second round of GRPs and undertake development January 1, 2017,
Provide annual legislative updates December 31, 2017, 2019, and 2021
Field test GRPs Ongoing
Budget (includes staffing and administration):
$777,000
Staffing: Permanent: 3 FTEs
Outreach:
Stakeholders and Government Partners: Oil facilities, railroad industry, vessels required to have contingency spill plans, US Coast Guard, environmental organizations, Tribal and local governments, Oregon and Idaho state government agencies, Canadian agencies, first responders, spill response organizations, NW Area Committee, Regional Response Team and the public.
Type of Outreach: Technical outreach regarding experts, electronic public outreach (website, ) and local public meetings to obtain input.

11. protecting Washington
Green River/Duwamish
Columbia River
Green River/Duwamish
protecting Washington
Vessel
Traffic
Safety Evaluation &
Assessment
Develop a vessel traffic risk assessment for the Columbia River with safety recommendations.
• Ecology will work with stakeholders in developing the vessel traffic risk assessment.
• Funding was also appropriated for updates to the current Puget Sound vessel traffic risk assessment for this biennium.
Ecology must complete an evaluation and assessment of vessel traffic management and vessel traffic safety within and near the mouth of the Columbia River. This includes an analysis of the amount of new oil being transferred onto vessels as a result of rail traffic. The assessment will help inform future vessel and rail traffic risk assessments that will be undertaken during the biennium. Ecology is directed to consult with a number of organizations including the US Coast Guard, Oregon pilots and public ports. The assessment must include, but is not limited to addressing: (a) the need for tug escorts for oil tankers, articulated tug barges, and other towed waterborne vessels or barges; (b) best achievable protection; and (c) required tug capabilities to ensure safe escort of vessels. Recommendations made to the Legislature must include vessel traffic management and vessel traffic safety measures, including recommendations for tug escort requirements for vessels transporting oil as bulk cargo.
Authority: RCW (new section)
Applicable Rule Chapter: Not applicable, no rulemaking required.
Final Deliverable(s):
A draft vessel traffic safety evaluation and assessment for the Columbia River provided to the Legislature.
A final vessel traffic safety evaluation and assessment for the Columbia River.
Timeline:
Initial outreach to stakeholders August 1, 2015
Identify and obtain staff and contract resources January 1, 2016
Begin developing vessel traffic risk assessment January 1, 2016
Complete a preliminary draft report June 30, 2017
Provide a draft report to the Legislature December 15, 2017
Complete final report June 30, 2018
Continue updates and modifications as needed Ongoing
Budget (includes staffing and administration):
$688,000
Staffing: Permanent: 2 FTEs (includes other ongoing traffic risk assessment work)
Outreach:
Stakeholders and Government Partners: US Coast Guard, The Oregon Board of Maritime Pilots, Columbia River Harbor Safety Committee, the Columbia River Bar Pilots, the Columbia River Pilots, vessel and facility organizations, Tribal and local governments, ports, environmental organizations, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, NW Area Committee, Regional Response Team and the public.
Type of Outreach: Advisory group meetings, individual stakeholder group meetings, electronic public outreach (website, ).
from potential oil spills

12. protecting Washington Provide
Green River/Duwamish
Green River/Duwamish
protecting Washington
Provide
Provides response equipment-cache grants to tribes and other local first responders.
• Total grant amount for this biennium is approximately $800,000.
Ecology will work with tribes and other stakeholders to develop the grant program. Through this process, Ecology will be able to allocate specific grant amount for each entity.
The intent of the grant program is to be an ongoing program.
Follows success of earlier grants provided in 2006
Provide grants to emergency response organizations for assistance with oil spill and hazardous materials response, and for firefighting equipment and training to meet the requirements of the legislation. A stakeholder group will be convened to assist with developing and administering of the grant program. The stakeholder will consist of first responders, oil spill response cooperatives, oil and rail industry representatives, and businesses that receive liquid bulk crude oil. An analysis will be conducted to evaluate current available resources and the need for response equipment in specific locations. The funding for the grants must be prioritized based on who has the greatest need for the equipment, and coordinated to maximize the benefit of currently available equipment and resources.
Authority: No specific RCW referenced, included in Operating Budget
Applicable Rule Chapter: Not applicable, no rulemaking required.
Final Deliverable(s):
Convene a stakeholder group (see above summary).
An analysis that addresses the following:
Evaluates spill equipment and resources currently located throughout the state.
Reviews local emergency management coordinating efforts for oil spill and hazardous materials response.
Determines equipment needs for additional, new or updated equipment.
Identifies areas/regions with the greatest needs.
Distribute and close out initial cache grant.
Timeline:
Identify and hire grant coordinator October 1, 2015
Begin developing grant administration October 1, 2015
Convene stakeholder group November 1, 2015
Establish grant priorities and eligibility February 1, 2016
Grant applications due April 1, 2016
Develop convenience contracts April 15, 2016
Evaluate applications and award grants May 1, 2016
Begin equipment distribution June 1, 2016
Close out grants June 30, 2017
Budget (includes staffing and administration):
$1,900,000
Staffing: Permanent: 2 FTEs
Project: 2 FTEs
Outreach:
Stakeholders and Government Partners: First responders, oil spill response cooperatives, oil and rail industry representatives, businesses that receive liquid bulk crude oil, Tribal and local governments, environmental organizations, NW Area Committee, Regional Response Team and the public.
Type of Outreach: Formal stakeholder coordination and group meetings, requests for grant applications, electronic public outreach (website, ).
from potential oil spills
Equipment
and Training

13. Port Orchard Marina Fire

14. Privateer Grounding

15. Questions for Washington?