144 



been made as yet, and, in any event, this small vessel is not designed for open water 

 recovery operations. It does appear to be a significant advance in state of the art 

 machinery capable of working in high currents encountered in relatively protected 

 waters. 



Quite candidly, I must say that I don not believe there now exists an in place 

 capability to effectively respond to a major oil or hazardous substance spill on the 

 OCS or Fisheries conservation zone. It will take some time before this situation 

 improves. 



Sincerely, 



J. B. Hayes, 

 Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, 



Commandant. 



Questions of Mr. Studds and Answers 



Question 1. In the past, the Coast Guard has suffered from a lack of barging 

 capability to carry spilled oil to disposal sites. Has this deficiency been corrected? 



Answer. We have found that ocean service barges and suitable support vessels 

 exist in too few numbers in most areas to permit the establishment of local standby 

 contracts. Also operators are reluctant to interrupt existing contracts with regular 

 employers to provide vessels on short notice. To help fill the gap when a barge is 

 not immediately available to carry spilled oil to disposal sites, we have procured 11 

 portable rubber bladders ranging in size from 10,000 to 240,000 gallons. In addition, 

 offshore drilling operators are being required to address the need for tank vessels or 

 portable storage containers for the recovered oil/water mixture in their contingency 

 planning. 



Question 2. Could you provide a full inventory of containment and clean up 

 equipment and its location which is currently available for use by the Coast Guard? 



Answer. The Coast Guard utilizes all available resources, including those from 

 commercial contractors when possible, for cleaning up pollution incidents. We 

 assume however, that your question refers to the quantity of Coast Guard equip- 

 ment available for open water use when the required resource is not available in 

 the commercial sector. 



In the area of offshore open water recovery and containment, the Coast Guard 

 presently has 19 skimming barriers (612-ft. each) of the type we used at the Cam- 

 peche Well site and 4 skimming barrier pumping systems. The inventory includes 

 16 Adapts which are high capacity pumping units used to offload bulk liquid cargo 

 from a stricken vessel, 2 viscous oil pumping systems and 11 portable storage 

 bladders, ranging in size from 10,000 to 240,000 gallon capacity. We also own 2 large 

 rotating disk skimmers though they are not designed for truly open water use. 



This equipment is located at our strike team locations on the Atlantic, Gulf, and 

 Pacific coasts with the mix varying according to National and International needs 

 and maintenance requirements. We are presently budgeted to increase our inven- 

 tory skimming of barriers to 26 by 1982. These we plan to store at suitable high risk 

 areas. 



Question 3. Given the Coast Guard's inability to fulfill all of its inspection require- 

 ments under the OCSLAA due to a shortage of personnel, what sort of inspection 

 program for offshore drilling rigs is planned for Georges Bank? 



Answer. Because of resource limitations the Coast Guard is emphasizing inspec- 

 tions of mobile offshore drilling units and manned platforms, and omitting required 

 inspections of unmanned units. The units that will engage in exploratory drilling on 

 Georges Bank will be mobile offshore drilling units and will all be inspected. 

 Inspections are generally conducted prior to the start of drilling operations and as 

 necessary thereafter. The Coast Guard has established a Marine Safety Detachment 

 at Hyannis, Massachusetts staffed with four personnel to perform this function. 

 This detachment is colocated with the U.S. Geological Survey Office in Hyannis. 



Department of Transportation, 



U.S. Coast Guard, 

 Washington, D.C., October 15, 1980. 



Hon. Edwin B. Forsythe, and Hon. Joel Pritchard, 

 House of Representatives, 

 Washington, D.C. 



Dear Mr. Forsythe and Mr. Pritchard: Thank you for your letter of September 

 15, 1980, forwarding additional questions for the record on the testimony of Captain 

 Charles Corbett, Chief, Marine Environmental Response Division, who appeared 



