PRESTAGING VERSUS MOBILITY OF RESPONSE EQUIPMENT INVENTORIES

Abstract

ABSTRACT One of the many valuable aspects of Area Contingency Plans (ACPs) in the US is the identification of environmentally sensitive sites. Over recent years the natural evolution of the area planning process has commonly involved development of site specific response strategies for protection of these environmentally sensitive locations. Whether called Geographic Response Plans (GRPs), Site Specific Response Strategies (SSRS), or Geographic Response Strategies (GRSs) these plans typically identify the equipment and personnel needed to accomplish the prescribed strategies. Once strategies are developed, there is incentive to prestage equipment near the identified site to maximize the ability to implement the strategy identified in the plan. Regulatory agencies are now exerting additional pressure by requiring oil spill removal organizations (OSROs) to exercise these strategies on an annual or triennial basis. This pressure results in multiple competing OSROs prestaging similar or identical response inventories at or near the same sites. As a result, a growing percentage of the response equipment on the U.S. West Coast is now prestaged in duplicate or triplicate small stockpiles throughout coastal areas. Many of these prestaged packages are very site specific and include permanent mooring sites or equipment. This equipment is now configured to effectively protect a specific site. It may no longer be as flexible or as easily used under different conditions or at other locations. As a greater percentage of the equipment inventory becomes prestaged, what does this mean in terms of overall response mobility? Has the mobility of equipment or cascading of response equipment been affected? The combination of multiple OSROs, the increasing number of protection strategies, and the need to regularly exercise these strategies is resulting is an decreasingly mobile equipment inventory. At what point does this affect the tactical planning process? Is there a way to optimize preplanning and still achieve equipment flexibility?