New Tanker Study Says Tug Escorts Unnecessary

[LdyGuique]

A new study has been released that was commissioned for a review on whether the new double-hulled tankers need tug escorts through the Puget Sound -- since this report is likely to be used as the basis for Alaskan waters, and the news article quotes Alaskan issues extensively, it is a headsup.

<snip>

Some say ConocoPhillips and BP want a reward for their investment in modern ships. That would be a reduction in operating costs, a savings on the $20,000 to $30,000 estimated cost now of a tug escort per trip in Washington waters.

"It reduces cost, so it is worth looking into," said Anil Mathur, president and chief executive of the Alaska Tanker Co. "But first things first. We have to make sure we don't raise the risk level."

Mathur said oil shippers met earlier this year to finance a new study on Prince William Sound tug escorts to be done with the Coast Guard and the state. He promised an objective study.

"I think if they fund a study like that, we're toast," said Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory Board Executive Director John Devens, an opponent of reducing escorts. "It'll be their experts and their opinions."

Coast Guard Capt. Jack Davin, head of Alaska's marine safety, warned the citizens' board: "What the regulators and the shippers come up with may not be acceptable if this board feels the only thing acceptable is the status quo."

At a March 11 meeting of the Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory Council in Anchorage, Alaska, ConocoPhillips Valdez representative Kristina O'Connor treaded lightly after an Alaska pipeline executive suggested reducing Prince William Sound tug escorts. Council members reacted with deep skepticism and Devens said, "This is a big one. The board is willing to go to the mat."

<snip>


Environmentalists on the panel -- Bruce Wishart and Naki Stevens of People for Puget Sound -- asked Ecology to study "human factors" -- i.e., crew behavior -- as a hazard to be considered before escorts are lifted, as well as the reliability of the equipment. Neel said Ecology didn't have the money to do a human factors study. An Alaska study that included human factors cost $2 million, he said.

Consulting engineer David Gray's draft recommended keeping the tug escort system as is. Neel told him to reconsider.
Ironically, at about the time the environmentalists were proposing a human factors study, ConocoPhillips tanker fleet general manager Antonio Valdes was meeting in Houston with company union representatives to discuss numerous complaints about manpower shortages and serious behavior problems aboard the company's brand new ships, according to documents obtained by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

"He feels that our culture at Polar Tankers is geared towards cutting corners, jeopardizing safety issues and ignoring company and regulatory policies if we think it will increase the efficiency of our operations, and he's completely opposed to that," wrote officers' union chairman, Mike McDonnell, in a July 24, 2004, update to his membership.

The Ecology study ended oddly.

At its heart, the study asked this question: "Would a double-hulled, double-engine, double-steering tanker sailing without an escort ... be just as protected from a spill as a single-engine, double-hulled tanker sailing with an escort?"

On Dec. 8, Glosten consulting engineer David Gray presented the steering committee with a draft report that answered the question: "No." Keep the escort system as is.

Neel told him to reconsider. He suggested Gray look again at the sentinel tug idea first presented to Ecology by ConocoPhillips Ferndale refinery port manager Jeffrey Shaw. Shaw did not reply to requests for an interview.

Three weeks later, the published report included a recommendation saying the answer to the question was "yes" for northern Washington tanker lanes with a sentinel tug, including Ferndale. Everywhere else, no.

<snip>
Source: Seattle Intelligencer