team introduction

Team Introduction

• Nuka Research and Planning Group, LLC.

• Pearson Consulting, LLC.

• Baldwin and Butler

• Cape International

• Moran Environmental Recovery

• Moran Towing

• Northern Economics

• The Glosten Associates

Recent Vessel Traffic Figures

Future Vessel Traffic

Vessel Traffic Update

• Year Westbound Eastbound• 2007 3581 890• 2008 3274 957• 2009 2886 1088• 2011 3178 1355

Recent Vessel Traffic

• Two potential sources of additional traffic have emerged since Phase A was completed:– Proposed Canadian natural gas and crude

oil pipelines to the Pacific Coast– Alaska OCS and oil shale development

Anticipated Vessel Traffic

Liquefied Natural Gas

• Kitimat LNG Venture (Apache, EOG Resources, Encana)

• Canada LNG (Shell Canada, Mitsubishi, PetroChina, Korea Gas) (Kitimat)

• BG Group and Spectra Energy (Prince Rupert)

• ExxonMobil and Imperial Oil• First 3 are 6.9 bcfd; 2.5 ships per day-900

ships per year

• Kinder Morgan to expand their pipeline from Alberta to Vancouver– Would result in an additional 240 tankers

per year carrying crude oil

• Enbridge to build new pipeline to Kitimat– Approximately 180 to 190 tankers

carrying crude oil per year

Crude Oil Pipeline Proposals

• Potential to displace Canadian crude, which presently moves by pipeline to Washington State refineries.

• These refineries were built to process ANS crude and are more profitable with ANS crude than Canadian crude.

• The Canadian crude would then be exported to Asia resulting in about 60 additional tankers per year

Alaska OCS and Oil Shale

Developing an Integrated Response System for the Aleutians

Task 1 & 2 Work Plan

Scope

An Integrated Response System/Organization for the Aleutians•Emergency Towing•Salvage/Marine Firefighting•Open Water Response•Nearshore Response•Operating Organization

Vision

Analyze all available marine response services for the Aleutians. Determine which services will can be most effective and then develop a plan for a response system that will provide an suite of response capabilities optimized for the Aleutians. Our measure of success will be that the plan is adopted and implemented.

Goal

Prevent/minimize future environmental harm to the people and natural resources of the Aleutians Subarea by developing an integrated response system that will:•Provide an optimum set of response services•Be congruent with State/Federal regulations•Be cost effective•Be feasible and practical•Supported and accepted by marine industry

Objectives

1) Provide an Analysis of:• Emergency Towing• Salvage and Marine Firefighting• Oil Spill Response

– Open Water Response– Nearshore Response

• Management Organizations

Objectives

2) Describe an Optimal Response System considering operating environment, logistics, cost, and benefits. Provide a plan that will be a blueprint of an organization that can implement this optimized system.

Work Plan

• Regulatory Resource Requirements Analysissetting a benchmark to build toward

• Response Gap Analysisevaluate how often a service may be delivered

• Emergency Towing Analysis

• Salvage and Marine Firefighting Analysis

• Oil Spill Response Analysis

• Management System Analysis

Work Plan

• Describe Optimal Response System

• Conduct a Benefit Cost Analysis on this System

• Draft Report

• Review

• Final Report

• Integrate into the Subarea Plan

Assumptions

• The Non-tank Vessel Regulations will be adopted and provide a driver for those vessel to participate in a response organization

• The regulated marine industry will support a reasonable and effect response capability in the Aleutians

• The system will have to be phased in over time• The system will serve the Aleutians, but will

support and be supported by other areas• The Subarea Committee may embody this plan

in the SCP

Regulatory Resource Analysis

• Compile the applicable State/Federal regulations

• Without considering Alternate Compliance, estimate the resources necessary to provide the services necessary to comply with these regulations for:– 600,000 bbl Crude Oil Tanker

– 68,000 GT Containership >4,500 TEU

• Estimate the capital and operating costs to provide these services

• Use these costs as the design benchmark for planning a response system for the Aleutians

Response Gap Analysis

• Response Gap is the percentage of time that a particular service can be utilized

• Hind cast technique to evaluate how often a particular service can be effectively used

• Buoy database for winds, sea state, temperature

• Airport database for visibility

• Determine the limitations for a particular service and see how often these services were exceed in the past

Observation Locations

Emergency Towing Vessels

• Results from Phase A– 6 locations and 16 scenarios


• Results from Phase A– Five Risk Reduction Options

• Dedicated towing vessel(s)• Non-dedicated towing vessel(s)• Seasonal towing vessel(s)• Vessels of opportunity• Some combination of the above


• Tug Operating environment– Candidate ships from transit study– 16 scenarios from Phase A– Weather conditions from environmental

study– Number of tugs from location study



• Propose Tug Mission Requirements– Limited to emergency towing– Bollard pull/HP– Seakeeping abilities– Size, crew, equipment


• Tug Location Study– Use Phase A

scenarios (6 locations)– Identify potential home ports– Identify required infrastructure improvements– Determine required distances and speeds– Input for number of tugs required

• Tug options– Vessels of opportunity– Best available technology world wide– Best available technology in the US– Optimal design for the Aleutians (high

speed)



• Vessel(s) of opportunity– Representative available vessels– Enumerate specifications/capabilities– Time/ability to hand off their tows– Location in the Aleutians– Time periods in the Aleutians– Capability gap analysis


• Best available technology evaluation– Evaluate both world wide and Jones Act

vessels– Enumerate specs and capabilities

• Speed/range/bollard pull/crew

– Number Required – Cost to procure design– Cost to modify design to

US standards (foreign design)

• Best available technology (cont.)– Cost to modify for Aleutian Service– Cost to construct vessel in US– Cost to charter vessel (Jones Act vessel)– Operating costs

• Dedicated vessel• Non-dedicated vessel• Seasonal dedicated vessel

– Capability Gap Analysis


• High Speed ETV design– Meet mission requirements with higher

speed to reduce number of vessels– Proposed speed

• 30-40 knots

– Propulsion study• Diesel/gas turbines• Propellers/water jets• High speed AND bollard pull


• High Speed ETV design (cont.)– Seakeeping Options

• Length• Bow design• Roll reduction methods

– Proposed Range • 700-950 Nautical miles in 24 hrs

– Winch options• Weight vs. capabilities


• High Speed ETV design evaluation– Number Required (assumed to be one)– Cost/time to design– Cost to construct vessel in US– Operating costs

• Dedicated vessel• Non-dedicated vessel• Seasonal dedicated vessel

– Capability Gap Analysis


?

Salvage Analysis

• In coordination with the regulatory resource requirement analysis and as a result of the Phase A recommendations - - Analyze the four USCG approved

Salvage Contractors ability to service the Aleutian Islands and to meet increased planning requirements

Salvage Analysis

• Review the need of any additional equipment / services to be stationed in the Aleutians and if so, the requirements and recommended location of same

Oil Spill Response Analysis

• Planning Vs. Performance- “Resourcing” to meet full planning

standards (current) is not likely feasible

- Resource bolstering at some level is needed

- Other external factors and “gap analyses” are critical


Planned Approach for Resource Requirements- Regulatory Analysis - Consider offshore vs. near shore

environments• Salvage & Firefighting: likely “point of

spear” in offshore scenarios

- Consider alternative methods & technologies


- Evaluate Effectiveness through Response Gap Analysis

- Feasibility – is it practical & sustainable?• Logistics, economics


• Other Considerations:- Research completed to date vs. new

assumptions- Understand trade-offs between

supplemental resources vs. cascading (performance vs. planning & regulatory implications)


• Other Considerations:- Impact of on-going USCG/BSSE/EPA

work groups•Effective Daily Recovery Capacity

(EDRC)•Response Resource Inventory (RRI)•Equipment Surge •Subpart J of the National

Contingency Plan

Management System Analysis

• Evaluation of existing OSRO models– Utilize survey with standard

questions•business form•membership, subscription etc. for

coverage•general rate structures•governance


• Identification of model based on services provided [some / all ]– OSRO services

– SMFF services

– WSMC / SERVS – 72 hour initial response role

– Planning – preparedness over time


• Consideration of cost allocation options based on profile of covered fleet– Vessel type [ NTV, TV, other]

– Vessel size

– Fuel / cargo type


• Consideration of business form to manage resources– Acquire resources

– Contract for resources

– Utilize mix based on type of resources required

Optimal Response System

• Considering the following factors for each service, we will develop a description of what we feel is the optimal mix of response services:– Response Gap - % time the service can be

employed

– Cost

– Effective Risk Reduction

Optimal Response System

• We will also describe the best form of organization to manage the service

• The combined costs of the organization will be no more than the amount determined in the regulatory analysis.

• BCA is a process for comparing the benefits and costs of a proposed action or project over a specified period of time to determine if it is feasible on its own and/or to determine its feasibility relative to other alternatives.

Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA)

• Numerous federal agencies have defined how information in evaluated under BCA.– We propose to follow the Office of

Management and Budget and Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for our BCA.

Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA)

• We will conduct BCA on the recommended or optimized package of tactics developed by the team.

• Following the initial BCA, we can look at inputs to determine the relative benefits of individual tactics.

• This feedback will help to optimize the tactics employed and increase the benefit/cost ratio or net benefit.

Benefit Cost Analysis

• CEA is another form of economic analysis that can be applied when benefits are difficult to quantify.

• CEA can provide the cost per unit of benefit for different alternatives as a way to determine the most efficient alternative.

• CEA could be employed to evaluate the cost per barrel of oil not spilled, for example, for each alternative or group of alternatives.

Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA)

• Sensitivity analysis evaluates the change in outcomes resulting from changes in input values or assumptions. It can be used to evaluate the effect of uncertainty for both benefits and costs.

Sensitivity Analysis

• Sensitivity analysis can be applied to both BCA and CEA, and can include the analysis of factors such as:– Vessel traffic growth rates– Accidents rate– Spill frequency and size– Price of crude oil– Capital cost of rescue tugs and other

infrastructure– Discount rate– Other factors identified by the team


• Some additional ways we could apply sensitivity analysis would include:– Evaluating the degree of compliance,

measured as the percentage of time vessels would participate in the program versus spend the extra time and fuel costs to avoid the area.

– Evaluating the effect of uncertainty in variables considered in the response gap analysis.

• We will conduct our sensitivity analysis using @RISK, a software add-in for Microsoft Excel.


Task Schedule

2012 2013 2014

Regulatory Analysis X

Response Gap Data X

Towing Analysis X X X

Salvage Analysis X X X

Spill Response Analysis X X X

Management System Analysis X X X

Optimal Response System X

Benefit Cost Analysis X X X

Draft Report X X

Final Report X

team introduction

Documents