May 7, 2024 • 21 mins
During this episode of Tank Talk, we sit with Graham Wood from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to discuss Alaska's spill prevention and response strategies, most notably the revamped 485 Drill Program. Graham explains the updated regulations that took effect on February 5, 2023, and how it brings clarity to spill response exercises, making them more effective. We explore the specifics of compliance and examine the differences and similarities between ADEC's approach and national programs. We learn how the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) creates structured and scalable exercises and the challenges that enforcement brings. Hear how to navigate the new regulations that are tailored to meet Alaska's unique environmental landscape.
Episode Transcription
Additional Resources:
ADEC Oil Discharge Prevention and Contingency Plan Regulations Update
ODPCP Regulation Implementation Tools & Resources
Spill Response Exercise Schedule
intro/outro created with GarageBand
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Shannon Oelkers (00:00):
Good morning.
Welcome to Tank Talk.
This is Shannon, and today Ihave a special guest.
I have Graham Wood, the ProgramManager from the Prevention,
Preparedness and ResponseProgram from the Alaska
Department of EnvironmentalConservation.
And, Graham, I've invited youto the podcast today to talk
about the 485 J Program.
Welcome.
Graham Wood (00:19):
Thanks, Shannon.
Thanks for having me.
It's a pleasure to be on hereto talk about our prevention
regulations.
Shannon Oelkers (00:24):
Thanks for having me it's a pleasure to be
on here and to talk about ourprevention regulations.
So, Graham, could you introduceyourself and maybe talk a
little bit about what led you tobecome Program Manager?
Graham Wood (00:31):
Sure, like most Alaskans, I wasn't born here.
I found my way here by theCoast Guard.
I arrived here in February 1998.
I was a bit miffed that I washere and wound up staying Like
most Alaskans.
It kind of just grows on you ina unique way.
(00:55):
I got out of the Coast Guard in2005 and needed a job, and my
last four years in the CoastGuard I was stationed at what
was then Marine Safety OfficeAnchorage what's now called
Sector Anchorage, and I wasthere kind of on an out of rate
billet.
I was doing a job that wasn'tin my rating, doing a lot of the
work that the MSTs do the FRPreviews, facility inspections,
(01:16):
things of that nature and turnedout I really enjoyed that work.
So when I got out of the CoastGuard I started looking for work
in that arena and wound up inthe old industry preparedness
program reviewing contingencyplans and doing inspections
there Throughout the years.
You know I just worked my waythrough the system and wound up
being the program manager.
(01:36):
Then the first couple of yearsof the prevention preparedness
response program becoming athing.
For those that don't know, myprogram used to be two separate
programs.
We had an Industry PreparednessProgram which did all the
Contingency Plan reviews anddrills and exercises, financial
responsibility.
And then we had another programthat did just spill prevention
(01:57):
and response or just spillresponse, I should say.
They also did what's now ourarea and Regional Planning, but
back then was the sub-areaContingency Plans and the
unified plan.
So we brought all that togetherunder one program and I've been
leading that since 2016.
I took a short hiatus to DNRfor about a year and I'm back in
this role.
Shannon Oelkers (02:17):
Yeah, I'm so glad to see you back in that
role.
Your background is a huge assetto ADEC.
Thank you so, Graham, I reallyappreciate you being here,
because I would really like toexplore the 485 Drill Program
with you so that our listeners,many of whom are responsible for
implementing this 485 DrillProgram, can kind of hear
(02:37):
straight from ADEC what thatprogram is looking like and what
some of the outcomes are thatwe're all trying to meet.
And one of the first things I'dlike to ask you to do is kind
of briefly go over the 485 DrillProgram and the referenced
drill and exercise guidancedocument.
Graham Wood (02:55):
Sure.
So I think the first thing is,you know, the exercise guidance
document is incorporated byreference.
That's a new change, and we seta minimum number of exercises,
one to be required, a minimum ofevery five years.
As you're aware, Shannon plansare on a five-year cycle.
You know, there's somemethodologies laid out in that
(03:16):
guidance document that must befollowed, as well as set a bar.
Finally and there's lots ofcompanies that need to be
brought up to that bar Insteadof doing the same number of
companies every few years,everyone has to do an exercise
now.
Shannon Oelkers (03:31):
So previously in the regulation it was a
little gray.
There was a lot of room forindividual interpretation.
It sounds like the 485 DrillPrograms are moving some of that
gray area.
Could you talk a little bitabout that?
Graham Wood (03:44):
Sure, I think there was some ambiguity in the
previous version of 485.
You could do one, could do two,depending on the outcome, and
this removes that.
And really you know if this isfollowed correctly by both the
regulated community and my teamhere at ADEC.
There should be no faileddrills, because we're giving
people a script on how to dothem and ADEC is involved in the
(04:06):
planning from the start.
Shannon Oelkers (04:08):
And that script is the drill and exercise
guidance document, and you guysdid something a little different
this time you adopted it byreference.
You want to talk about whatthat means.
Graham Wood (04:17):
Sure, really, the biggest thing that means is that
we can't just make a change, wecan't just change something
arbitrarily to our benefitwithout it going out to public
comment.
So if we do make a change, theregulatory community, the users
of that document on the oilindustry end, will have a say in
that.
Shannon Oelkers (04:35):
So it's essentially by adopting it or
referencing it in theregulations.
If you wanted to make a changeto that guidance document, you'd
have to undergo public commentperiod and it would be treated
just like a regulatory change.
Graham Wood (04:47):
Yes, okay, and I will say that's my understanding
.
So I will fact check that andlet you know.
Shannon Oelkers (04:52):
Yes, and I would like to take this
opportunity to also say thatneither Graham and I are lawyers
, and lawyers are very different, but my understanding of how
adoption by reference workslines up with what you're
thinking too, Graham.
But yes, if, if somethingdifferent occurs, we will post
it to this episode later.
So, Graham, when did thisregulation come into effect?
Graham Wood (05:15):
It came into effect February 5th 2023.
And really, this was thebrainchild of our Article 4
update, which was, you know, acouple of years in the making.
This was part of that bigeffort to overhaul our
contingency plan regulations.
Yes, there was a lot of yearsin the making.
This was part of that bigeffort to overhaul our
Contingency Plan regulations.
Shannon Oelkers (05:29):
Yes, there was a lot of changes that went into
effect on that February date,but this one in particular sort
of changes the landscape fordrills.
I wanted to talk about theoutcomes of this program because
I think that's going to be mostuseful to our listeners.
So, setting the stage, we nowhave this new guidance document
and regulatory 485 section thatwe need to meet.
(05:52):
Graham, within this guidancedocument, if you're somebody
sitting at a desk tasked withproviding a compliant 485 Drill
Program for your company, Ithink some of the things that
would be important to take intoconsideration would be the
outcomes.
Right, like what outcomes thisguidance document lists and
there's four of them, sort ofguiding principles.
(06:14):
Can we talk through each one ofthose and maybe go a little
more in depth?
Graham Wood (06:18):
So the guiding principles or outcomes, as
you're calling them, that we'retalking about, these guiding
principles were kind of draftedor kind of.
They were drafted in, you know,2014-15, mainly when we were
building the PPR program or, forthose that don't know, the
Prevention, Preparedness,Response Program, and they
really were the principles onhow we wanted the program to
function, and so it made a lotof sense to put these in the 485
(06:43):
Exercise document as well,because you know they're not
really regulation or they're notregulations.
They're more of like a way toguide yourself through this
program and what the intent ofthe program is.
Shannon Oelkers (06:56):
So what are those four intentions?
Can you share that with us?
Let's start at the top.
Graham Wood (07:00):
So there's more than four in the book, but I
mean the four that I think thatwe really want to talk about
here are improving currentlevels of response readiness,
encouraging innovation andimprovement, maintaining
consistency in responsecapability statewide with an
emphasis on statewide andverifying compliance with
statutes and regulations.
Shannon Oelkers (07:19):
So one of the outcomes or guiding principles
that you mentioned, Graham, wasimproving current levels of
response readiness.
So if I'm sitting in a seattrying to make my 485 Program
meet that outcome, what are somesuggestions that you have for
improving that level of responsereadiness like?
What does that look like fromthe State perspective?
Graham Wood (07:39):
First and foremost.
You'll hear me say thisthroughout this conversation.
If you have questions aboutanything in this guidance, call
me or a member of my team andwe'll walk you through it.
That said, improving currentlevels of readiness, response
readiness you know, I think ofthat as a company who has never
had to do one of these before orhasn't done one in many, many
years.
You know they have a level ofresponse readiness through
(08:01):
themselves or through a responsecontractor of some way, and I
would think that improvingcurrent levels of response
readiness would mean planning adrill with ADEC that strengthens
the relationship between thatcompany and their contractor,
builds knowledge within theirown what I'll call response
(08:23):
workforce, which we all know arethe day-to-day workers who get
responsibilities as what I'llcall collateral duty, whether
they want it or not.
Shannon Oelkers (08:29):
Anybody on the spill team internally?
Graham Wood (08:31):
Yes, yeah, to build that knowledge within those
folks.
And, you know, design a drillso people can be successful.
That's what I think response,improving that response,
readiness looks like.
Shannon Oelkers (08:41):
I think, as somebody who's worked in the
industry for 20 years, thecurrent level of employee
turnover and some of theretirement the graying of the
fleet has now turned into theretiring of the fleet.
I think this is especiallywell-timed for that, because
there's a lot of people that arenew to positions where maybe 10
years ago, we had people thathave been doing this for 20
years, 30 years in those samepositions.
(09:03):
Okay, so, starting where you'reat and building knowledge,
building experience,strengthening relationships with
your response action contractor, that sounds doable.
What about encouraginginnovation and improvement?
Because that was one of theother outcomes that we were
looking at.
Graham Wood (09:20):
Well, if you look at the exercise guidance
document, it lists many kinds ofoperational exercises there.
Operational-based exercises,excuse me, building and
improving and innovating.
I mean again, if you're acompany who hasn't done one of
these in a long time, it's kindof like running a marathon.
You're not just going to go outthere and do it, you need to
train for it, you need to thinkabout how that's going to work
(09:44):
and whatnot.
And again, call ADEC.
Let's plan a drill and as wework through these drills, we
want to see improvement,especially, and if you have
something that could innovate,something in the environmental
unit or something in theplanning section or a different
piece of equipment, we want totalk about that.
Shannon Oelkers (10:00):
Correct me if I'm wrong too, but maybe
innovation and trying differentresponse, different sections of
the response, not just doing thesame boom pole over and over
again, but exercising allcomponents of the program.
Correct?
Graham Wood (10:13):
And the guidance document is built to make that
really not a factor, becauseacross the board, across the
entire regulated community, wesaw a lot of the same drills
over and, over and over againand that's just a fact, a factor
of not having a guidancedocument like this that lays out
clearer framework.
Shannon Oelkers (10:30):
So, Graham, you also mentioned consistency in
response capability statewide.
We work statewide and I knowwhat you mean by this, but could
we talk about what consistencystatewide is going to look like
prior to this?
Graham Wood (10:44):
regulation update being a thing, there was a lot
of emphasis on drills on theNorth Slope in Cook Inlet and
Prince William Sound, forobvious reasons, yeah, high-risk
areas right.
Shannon Oelkers (10:54):
Lots of oil transfers, high volume ep makes
sense.
Graham Wood (10:58):
But what consistency statewide looks like
is, you know, Shannon, you haveclients that do business not
only in Anchorage but in, youknow, Adak, or somewhere out on
the chain or on the AlaskaPeninsula, or in Kodiak or in
Southeast, and we want theirdrills to be run the same, while
the scenario may not be thesame and the people may not be
the same.
You know, not only is it theintent of ICS, but it's the
(11:19):
intent of this program to dothings the same across the board
of ICS, but it's the intent ofthis program to do things the
same across the board and couldyou talk a little bit about the
same, because I do think some ofour clients their knee-jerk
reaction is oh no, I can't dowhat Alyeska does, I don't have
resources and people.
Shannon Oelkers (11:35):
But I don't think that's the same that the
state is talking about.
It is not the same.
Graham Wood (11:37):
You are right, that's not the same.
The same is.
You know we're going to workthrough building a scenario the
same way we're going to expectsimilar outcomes.
The Alyeska serves outcome isnot going to be the same as for
a small operator in Sitka.
Shannon Oelkers (11:49):
It's just so it'll be scaled to the size of
facility, the number of peoplethat you have, and it is based
on your C-Plan right, your ODPCP.
Graham Wood (11:59):
So if the operational-based exercise needs
to be based on the approvedContingency Plan.
Shannon Oelkers (12:04):
Okay.
So when we say consistency andresponse capability, it's how
the response is run, how thedata is communicated and
documented and how the trainingand skills building occurs.
Is that fair to say?
Graham Wood (12:19):
Yes.
Shannon Oelkers (12:20):
Okay, all right .
And then this last piece, and Iwill ask this but verifying
compliance with statutes andregulations, what are the
state's thoughts on that kind ofoutcome?
Graham Wood (12:32):
So our intent with this program is not to show up,
have a company fail and thenfind them.
I want to be very clear aboutthat, you know.
Yes, this is a requirement.
Yes, a company could not do agreat job, but, from my
perspective, early in thisprogram, we want compliance
through assistance and we needto make sure that companies that
(12:55):
haven't done these exercises ina long time, or even companies
that are currently doing them Imean, we're all human beings, we
just need to be there, asthat's part of why we want to be
involved in the planning.
So there's no surprises foranyone.
Shannon Oelkers (13:08):
I like that, and and I in our experience as a
firm the state has definitelybeen showing up and having that
helping hand attitude and, youknow, encouraging people to
improve rather than nailingsomeone for not being ready, so
I definitely appreciate thatpiece of it.
So another question that wehave pretty frequently is why
(13:31):
did ADEC enact this program whenNPREP was already in place?
And for those of you who don'tknow, NPREP is the National
Preparedness for ResponseExercise Program, and almost
everybody who transfers oil overwater has to meet this NPREP
guidance.
(13:52):
It's typically through theCoast Guard, and it does have a
drill component.
It's a little more limited thanthis 485 guidance, though, so
why the 485 if NPREP's alreadyin place?
Graham Wood (14:02):
Sure.
So I can tell you that when wewere looking at making this
change we looked at many options.
HC wasn't even on the originallist of options.
It was given to us by a sectionof the regulated community to
look at and we did that and itturns out there's a lot of
similarities with HC and ICScommon language, common use of
terms et cetera.
But really the the main reasonwe didn't use NPREP I mean, and
(14:27):
it was on the original list ofideas was it doesn't meet our
statutory or regulatoryrequirements.
It's a federal program, as youmentioned.
But our exercise guidance andnew regulations in 485 have a
demonstrative requirement Idon't like the word
demonstrative, I'm going to saydemonstrative and the plan
(14:48):
holders can demonstrate thatthey can achieve a ADEC response
planning standard requirements.
NPREP is way more loose thanthat and that's why there's not
a connection between the two.
It doesn't mean that as long aswe're brought into the planning
, a plan holder can't combine anend prep and a ADEC exercise
and check both boxes at the sametime.
Shannon Oelkers (15:08):
So let me summarize and make sure I
understand this correctly.
So the prep program wasdesigned to show compliance with
the SPCC, or spill prevention,control and countermeasures plan
, or maybe the facility responseplan that we see from the EPA
and the Coast Guard.
However, the state of AlaskaOil Discharge Prevention and
Contingency Plan, or ODPCP, hasdifferent requirements.
(15:32):
So the state looked at the PREPprogram, but you mentioned
HSEEP or the Homeland SecurityExercise and Evaluation Program.
What about HSEEP?
Attracted the state enough toinclude it in the guidance Like
could you talk through the HSEEPdecision-making?
Graham Wood (15:50):
Well, I mean, as I previously mentioned, HSEEP was
pointed out to us by a sectionof the regulated community and
when we started looking at it,the evaluation part of that was
a critical reason of why weadopted that, not the only
reason.
Another big reason was it'sscalable, so it fits big large
(16:11):
crude oil transportationcompanies as well as a small
operator in the Southeast of theAlaska Peninsula storing
refined products.
Everyone can use that tool andwhen you base, you know you
talked about in our previousquestion about you know the
guiding principles and you knowimproving response readiness
statewide and things of thatnature.
You can use that evaluationtool and as we do drills and
(16:34):
plan drills with these planholders throughout their plan
cycles, these drills shouldbecome more robust, thus
improving response capabilitystatewide and you know building
that innovation and things thatwithin your response team.
Shannon Oelkers (16:45):
So now we've got this program in place, I
wanted to ask you about anychallenges that the state of
Alaska has in implementing thisprogram, because it's a big bite
, graham.
There's a lot in there.
Graham Wood (16:57):
It is a big bite.
I'd say our biggest challengeis, you know, balancing that
with our current workload.
We're no different than anyother company.
When we also put newregulations out that require us
to do things like assist withplanning and exercise, there's a
workload that comes with that.
So we're sympathetic to theregulated community that this is
a bit of a more of a workload.
(17:18):
That said, whether you're alarge crude oil transportation
company or you are a smalloperator and have one facility
that stores the minimum to beregulated by ADEC, contact us
early to plan an exercise,because that will reduce the
workload tremendously on bothsides.
Shannon Oelkers (17:36):
So, related to my last question, I want to ask
sort of the inverse of that iswhat can, what can see plan
holders do to be proactive aboutimplementing this plan?
Graham Wood (17:45):
proactive is just that is, you know, be the
squeaky wheel not getting a billfor calling us about asking
about drills and exercises.
So we didn't call.
We encourage plan holders topick up the phone and call email
, schedule a meeting, do what ittakes.
We will be happy to give youthe information.
We want every plan holder inthis state to be successful with
this program.
Shannon Oelkers (18:03):
All right.
I find that really encouragingand that has been our experience
as well on the consulting side.
Graham, thank you so much forwalking us through the 485
regulations and the Drill andExercise guidance, and I really
appreciate your thoughts on thestate side of what we are both
going to have to do together asfar as the industry and the
(18:24):
state.
I was wondering if you couldprovide us with a list of
resources that you could pointour listeners to and we've
talked about a few of them, butI thought a list at the end
might be really helpful.
Graham Wood (18:35):
Absolutely so.
There's lots of resources outthere.
First and foremost is the drilland exercise guidance document
itself.
Give that a read and I'm surethere'll be questions.
There's many resources as wellas some frequently asked
questions on our ODPCPregulation implementation
resources webpage as well asthere's also an exercise
(18:56):
scheduler.
The scheduler is the intent.
So not only does ADEC know whenwe're doing drills, but also as
companies are scheduling drills.
They're not scheduling on topof one another, so we all have
the appropriate manpowerresources to meet our goals.
Shannon Oelkers (19:13):
Can I ask a question related to that
scheduler, Graham?
Because everybody who has a Clan has a five-year window at
this point, right, right, andyou had mentioned being
proactive and calling the stateearly.
I imagine, as we get closer tothe five-year renewal dates,
that that schedule is going tobecome more and more limited and
less and less flexible.
Graham Wood (19:31):
Yeah, and we're trying like crazy to avoid that
if possible, which is why we'reencouraging plan holders to
start having conversations withus sooner than later.
Especially a plan holder whohas not done a drill in a long
time.
Give us a call, let's talkabout scheduling.
Let's talk about the thingsthat need to be planned and
planned for well ahead of time,so that even if you're doing an
(19:54):
operational-based ICS drill or asmall equipment deployment,
that may be a bigger hurdle to acompany that hasn't done it in
a long time.
So let's get that on the booksand start planning it.
So there's no surprises, nohigh hurdles for anyone.
Shannon Oelkers (20:06):
Okay, so there's a scheduler.
Let's make sure, if you areresponsible for a 485 Drill at
your company, that you checkthat scheduler.
That'll give you an idea of theavailability of the state
around your internal schedule.
Graham Wood (20:19):
That'll give you an idea of the availability of the
state around your internalschedule.
Okay, and then you know.
Next to last resource is reachout to program staff,
specifically about questionsabout the 485 drill regulation.
You can reach out to DianeMunson or Elva House.
We also have an email address,to submit questions about those
(20:40):
regulations or any other of our4 or Article one regulations
you might have questions about.
Shoot us an email there.
And then, last but not least,is the exercise lessons learned
as well.
After a drill is completed anda plan holder gets a letter
saying you know, thank you,you've done the drill.
You know.
Here's your letter that saysyou've crossed the finish line.
(21:01):
The lessons learned are goingto be captured and posted on our
website as well, and we'vegotten a lot of positive
feedback about that.
Shannon Oelkers (21:09):
Oh, that is interesting.
Okay, so everything Graham justlisted, we will make sure to
include a link and we'll includethat email as well in our show
notes.
Graham, I so appreciate yourtime today.
I really appreciate you talkingus through that and I think
this is going to make the 485drill program a little easier
for our listeners to navigate,and I appreciate the resources
(21:30):
that you just listed because Ithink that's going to be
critical to them understandingand being successful at this 485
drill program.
Graham Wood (21:36):
Thanks for the opportunity to get the word out.
Thank you.
Shannon Oelkers (21:38):
Yeah, absolutely.
Good morning.
Welcome to Tank Talk.
This is Shannon, and today Ihave a special guest.
I have Graham Wood, the ProgramManager from the Prevention,
Preparedness and ResponseProgram from the Alaska
Department of EnvironmentalConservation.
And, Graham, I've invited youto the podcast today to talk
about the 485 J Program.
Welcome.
Graham Wood (00:19):
Thanks, Shannon.
Thanks for having me.
It's a pleasure to be on hereto talk about our prevention
regulations.
Shannon Oelkers (00:24):
Thanks for having me it's a pleasure to be
on here and to talk about ourprevention regulations.
So, Graham, could you introduceyourself and maybe talk a
little bit about what led you tobecome Program Manager?
Graham Wood (00:31):
Sure, like most Alaskans, I wasn't born here.
I found my way here by theCoast Guard.
I arrived here in February 1998.
I was a bit miffed that I washere and wound up staying Like
most Alaskans.
It kind of just grows on you ina unique way.
(00:55):
I got out of the Coast Guard in2005 and needed a job, and my
last four years in the CoastGuard I was stationed at what
was then Marine Safety OfficeAnchorage what's now called
Sector Anchorage, and I wasthere kind of on an out of rate
billet.
I was doing a job that wasn'tin my rating, doing a lot of the
work that the MSTs do the FRPreviews, facility inspections,
(01:16):
things of that nature and turnedout I really enjoyed that work.
So when I got out of the CoastGuard I started looking for work
in that arena and wound up inthe old industry preparedness
program reviewing contingencyplans and doing inspections
there Throughout the years.
You know I just worked my waythrough the system and wound up
being the program manager.
(01:36):
Then the first couple of yearsof the prevention preparedness
response program becoming athing.
For those that don't know, myprogram used to be two separate
programs.
We had an Industry PreparednessProgram which did all the
Contingency Plan reviews anddrills and exercises, financial
responsibility.
And then we had another programthat did just spill prevention
(01:57):
and response or just spillresponse, I should say.
They also did what's now ourarea and Regional Planning, but
back then was the sub-areaContingency Plans and the
unified plan.
So we brought all that togetherunder one program and I've been
leading that since 2016.
I took a short hiatus to DNRfor about a year and I'm back in
this role.
Shannon Oelkers (02:17):
Yeah, I'm so glad to see you back in that
role.
Your background is a huge assetto ADEC.
Thank you so, Graham, I reallyappreciate you being here,
because I would really like toexplore the 485 Drill Program
with you so that our listeners,many of whom are responsible for
implementing this 485 DrillProgram, can kind of hear
(02:37):
straight from ADEC what thatprogram is looking like and what
some of the outcomes are thatwe're all trying to meet.
And one of the first things I'dlike to ask you to do is kind
of briefly go over the 485 DrillProgram and the referenced
drill and exercise guidancedocument.
Graham Wood (02:55):
Sure.
So I think the first thing is,you know, the exercise guidance
document is incorporated byreference.
That's a new change, and we seta minimum number of exercises,
one to be required, a minimum ofevery five years.
As you're aware, Shannon plansare on a five-year cycle.
You know, there's somemethodologies laid out in that
(03:16):
guidance document that must befollowed, as well as set a bar.
Finally and there's lots ofcompanies that need to be
brought up to that bar Insteadof doing the same number of
companies every few years,everyone has to do an exercise
now.
Shannon Oelkers (03:31):
So previously in the regulation it was a
little gray.
There was a lot of room forindividual interpretation.
It sounds like the 485 DrillPrograms are moving some of that
gray area.
Could you talk a little bitabout that?
Graham Wood (03:44):
Sure, I think there was some ambiguity in the
previous version of 485.
You could do one, could do two,depending on the outcome, and
this removes that.
And really you know if this isfollowed correctly by both the
regulated community and my teamhere at ADEC.
There should be no faileddrills, because we're giving
people a script on how to dothem and ADEC is involved in the
(04:06):
planning from the start.
Shannon Oelkers (04:08):
And that script is the drill and exercise
guidance document, and you guysdid something a little different
this time you adopted it byreference.
You want to talk about whatthat means.
Graham Wood (04:17):
Sure, really, the biggest thing that means is that
we can't just make a change, wecan't just change something
arbitrarily to our benefitwithout it going out to public
comment.
So if we do make a change, theregulatory community, the users
of that document on the oilindustry end, will have a say in
that.
Shannon Oelkers (04:35):
So it's essentially by adopting it or
referencing it in theregulations.
If you wanted to make a changeto that guidance document, you'd
have to undergo public commentperiod and it would be treated
just like a regulatory change.
Graham Wood (04:47):
Yes, okay, and I will say that's my understanding
.
So I will fact check that andlet you know.
Shannon Oelkers (04:52):
Yes, and I would like to take this
opportunity to also say thatneither Graham and I are lawyers
, and lawyers are very different, but my understanding of how
adoption by reference workslines up with what you're
thinking too, Graham.
But yes, if, if somethingdifferent occurs, we will post
it to this episode later.
So, Graham, when did thisregulation come into effect?
Graham Wood (05:15):
It came into effect February 5th 2023.
And really, this was thebrainchild of our Article 4
update, which was, you know, acouple of years in the making.
This was part of that bigeffort to overhaul our
contingency plan regulations.
Yes, there was a lot of yearsin the making.
This was part of that bigeffort to overhaul our
Contingency Plan regulations.
Shannon Oelkers (05:29):
Yes, there was a lot of changes that went into
effect on that February date,but this one in particular sort
of changes the landscape fordrills.
I wanted to talk about theoutcomes of this program because
I think that's going to be mostuseful to our listeners.
So, setting the stage, we nowhave this new guidance document
and regulatory 485 section thatwe need to meet.
(05:52):
Graham, within this guidancedocument, if you're somebody
sitting at a desk tasked withproviding a compliant 485 Drill
Program for your company, Ithink some of the things that
would be important to take intoconsideration would be the
outcomes.
Right, like what outcomes thisguidance document lists and
there's four of them, sort ofguiding principles.
(06:14):
Can we talk through each one ofthose and maybe go a little
more in depth?
Graham Wood (06:18):
So the guiding principles or outcomes, as
you're calling them, that we'retalking about, these guiding
principles were kind of draftedor kind of.
They were drafted in, you know,2014-15, mainly when we were
building the PPR program or, forthose that don't know, the
Prevention, Preparedness,Response Program, and they
really were the principles onhow we wanted the program to
function, and so it made a lotof sense to put these in the 485
(06:43):
Exercise document as well,because you know they're not
really regulation or they're notregulations.
They're more of like a way toguide yourself through this
program and what the intent ofthe program is.
Shannon Oelkers (06:56):
So what are those four intentions?
Can you share that with us?
Let's start at the top.
Graham Wood (07:00):
So there's more than four in the book, but I
mean the four that I think thatwe really want to talk about
here are improving currentlevels of response readiness,
encouraging innovation andimprovement, maintaining
consistency in responsecapability statewide with an
emphasis on statewide andverifying compliance with
statutes and regulations.
Shannon Oelkers (07:19):
So one of the outcomes or guiding principles
that you mentioned, Graham, wasimproving current levels of
response readiness.
So if I'm sitting in a seattrying to make my 485 Program
meet that outcome, what are somesuggestions that you have for
improving that level of responsereadiness like?
What does that look like fromthe State perspective?
Graham Wood (07:39):
First and foremost.
You'll hear me say thisthroughout this conversation.
If you have questions aboutanything in this guidance, call
me or a member of my team andwe'll walk you through it.
That said, improving currentlevels of readiness, response
readiness you know, I think ofthat as a company who has never
had to do one of these before orhasn't done one in many, many
years.
You know they have a level ofresponse readiness through
(08:01):
themselves or through a responsecontractor of some way, and I
would think that improvingcurrent levels of response
readiness would mean planning adrill with ADEC that strengthens
the relationship between thatcompany and their contractor,
builds knowledge within theirown what I'll call response
(08:23):
workforce, which we all know arethe day-to-day workers who get
responsibilities as what I'llcall collateral duty, whether
they want it or not.
Shannon Oelkers (08:29):
Anybody on the spill team internally?
Graham Wood (08:31):
Yes, yeah, to build that knowledge within those
folks.
And, you know, design a drillso people can be successful.
That's what I think response,improving that response,
readiness looks like.
Shannon Oelkers (08:41):
I think, as somebody who's worked in the
industry for 20 years, thecurrent level of employee
turnover and some of theretirement the graying of the
fleet has now turned into theretiring of the fleet.
I think this is especiallywell-timed for that, because
there's a lot of people that arenew to positions where maybe 10
years ago, we had people thathave been doing this for 20
years, 30 years in those samepositions.
(09:03):
Okay, so, starting where you'reat and building knowledge,
building experience,strengthening relationships with
your response action contractor, that sounds doable.
What about encouraginginnovation and improvement?
Because that was one of theother outcomes that we were
looking at.
Graham Wood (09:20):
Well, if you look at the exercise guidance
document, it lists many kinds ofoperational exercises there.
Operational-based exercises,excuse me, building and
improving and innovating.
I mean again, if you're acompany who hasn't done one of
these in a long time, it's kindof like running a marathon.
You're not just going to go outthere and do it, you need to
train for it, you need to thinkabout how that's going to work
(09:44):
and whatnot.
And again, call ADEC.
Let's plan a drill and as wework through these drills, we
want to see improvement,especially, and if you have
something that could innovate,something in the environmental
unit or something in theplanning section or a different
piece of equipment, we want totalk about that.
Shannon Oelkers (10:00):
Correct me if I'm wrong too, but maybe
innovation and trying differentresponse, different sections of
the response, not just doing thesame boom pole over and over
again, but exercising allcomponents of the program.
Correct?
Graham Wood (10:13):
And the guidance document is built to make that
really not a factor, becauseacross the board, across the
entire regulated community, wesaw a lot of the same drills
over and, over and over againand that's just a fact, a factor
of not having a guidancedocument like this that lays out
clearer framework.
Shannon Oelkers (10:30):
So, Graham, you also mentioned consistency in
response capability statewide.
We work statewide and I knowwhat you mean by this, but could
we talk about what consistencystatewide is going to look like
prior to this?
Graham Wood (10:44):
regulation update being a thing, there was a lot
of emphasis on drills on theNorth Slope in Cook Inlet and
Prince William Sound, forobvious reasons, yeah, high-risk
areas right.
Shannon Oelkers (10:54):
Lots of oil transfers, high volume ep makes
sense.
Graham Wood (10:58):
But what consistency statewide looks like
is, you know, Shannon, you haveclients that do business not
only in Anchorage but in, youknow, Adak, or somewhere out on
the chain or on the AlaskaPeninsula, or in Kodiak or in
Southeast, and we want theirdrills to be run the same, while
the scenario may not be thesame and the people may not be
the same.
You know, not only is it theintent of ICS, but it's the
(11:19):
intent of this program to dothings the same across the board
of ICS, but it's the intent ofthis program to do things the
same across the board and couldyou talk a little bit about the
same, because I do think some ofour clients their knee-jerk
reaction is oh no, I can't dowhat Alyeska does, I don't have
resources and people.
Shannon Oelkers (11:35):
But I don't think that's the same that the
state is talking about.
It is not the same.
Graham Wood (11:37):
You are right, that's not the same.
The same is.
You know we're going to workthrough building a scenario the
same way we're going to expectsimilar outcomes.
The Alyeska serves outcome isnot going to be the same as for
a small operator in Sitka.
Shannon Oelkers (11:49):
It's just so it'll be scaled to the size of
facility, the number of peoplethat you have, and it is based
on your C-Plan right, your ODPCP.
Graham Wood (11:59):
So if the operational-based exercise needs
to be based on the approvedContingency Plan.
Shannon Oelkers (12:04):
Okay.
So when we say consistency andresponse capability, it's how
the response is run, how thedata is communicated and
documented and how the trainingand skills building occurs.
Is that fair to say?
Graham Wood (12:19):
Yes.
Shannon Oelkers (12:20):
Okay, all right .
And then this last piece, and Iwill ask this but verifying
compliance with statutes andregulations, what are the
state's thoughts on that kind ofoutcome?
Graham Wood (12:32):
So our intent with this program is not to show up,
have a company fail and thenfind them.
I want to be very clear aboutthat, you know.
Yes, this is a requirement.
Yes, a company could not do agreat job, but, from my
perspective, early in thisprogram, we want compliance
through assistance and we needto make sure that companies that
(12:55):
haven't done these exercises ina long time, or even companies
that are currently doing them Imean, we're all human beings, we
just need to be there, asthat's part of why we want to be
involved in the planning.
So there's no surprises foranyone.
Shannon Oelkers (13:08):
I like that, and and I in our experience as a
firm the state has definitelybeen showing up and having that
helping hand attitude and, youknow, encouraging people to
improve rather than nailingsomeone for not being ready, so
I definitely appreciate thatpiece of it.
So another question that wehave pretty frequently is why
(13:31):
did ADEC enact this program whenNPREP was already in place?
And for those of you who don'tknow, NPREP is the National
Preparedness for ResponseExercise Program, and almost
everybody who transfers oil overwater has to meet this NPREP
guidance.
(13:52):
It's typically through theCoast Guard, and it does have a
drill component.
It's a little more limited thanthis 485 guidance, though, so
why the 485 if NPREP's alreadyin place?
Graham Wood (14:02):
Sure.
So I can tell you that when wewere looking at making this
change we looked at many options.
HC wasn't even on the originallist of options.
It was given to us by a sectionof the regulated community to
look at and we did that and itturns out there's a lot of
similarities with HC and ICScommon language, common use of
terms et cetera.
But really the the main reasonwe didn't use NPREP I mean, and
(14:27):
it was on the original list ofideas was it doesn't meet our
statutory or regulatoryrequirements.
It's a federal program, as youmentioned.
But our exercise guidance andnew regulations in 485 have a
demonstrative requirement Idon't like the word
demonstrative, I'm going to saydemonstrative and the plan
(14:48):
holders can demonstrate thatthey can achieve a ADEC response
planning standard requirements.
NPREP is way more loose thanthat and that's why there's not
a connection between the two.
It doesn't mean that as long aswe're brought into the planning
, a plan holder can't combine anend prep and a ADEC exercise
and check both boxes at the sametime.
Shannon Oelkers (15:08):
So let me summarize and make sure I
understand this correctly.
So the prep program wasdesigned to show compliance with
the SPCC, or spill prevention,control and countermeasures plan
, or maybe the facility responseplan that we see from the EPA
and the Coast Guard.
However, the state of AlaskaOil Discharge Prevention and
Contingency Plan, or ODPCP, hasdifferent requirements.
(15:32):
So the state looked at the PREPprogram, but you mentioned
HSEEP or the Homeland SecurityExercise and Evaluation Program.
What about HSEEP?
Attracted the state enough toinclude it in the guidance Like
could you talk through the HSEEPdecision-making?
Graham Wood (15:50):
Well, I mean, as I previously mentioned, HSEEP was
pointed out to us by a sectionof the regulated community and
when we started looking at it,the evaluation part of that was
a critical reason of why weadopted that, not the only
reason.
Another big reason was it'sscalable, so it fits big large
(16:11):
crude oil transportationcompanies as well as a small
operator in the Southeast of theAlaska Peninsula storing
refined products.
Everyone can use that tool andwhen you base, you know you
talked about in our previousquestion about you know the
guiding principles and you knowimproving response readiness
statewide and things of thatnature.
You can use that evaluationtool and as we do drills and
(16:34):
plan drills with these planholders throughout their plan
cycles, these drills shouldbecome more robust, thus
improving response capabilitystatewide and you know building
that innovation and things thatwithin your response team.
Shannon Oelkers (16:45):
So now we've got this program in place, I
wanted to ask you about anychallenges that the state of
Alaska has in implementing thisprogram, because it's a big bite
, graham.
There's a lot in there.
Graham Wood (16:57):
It is a big bite.
I'd say our biggest challengeis, you know, balancing that
with our current workload.
We're no different than anyother company.
When we also put newregulations out that require us
to do things like assist withplanning and exercise, there's a
workload that comes with that.
So we're sympathetic to theregulated community that this is
a bit of a more of a workload.
(17:18):
That said, whether you're alarge crude oil transportation
company or you are a smalloperator and have one facility
that stores the minimum to beregulated by ADEC, contact us
early to plan an exercise,because that will reduce the
workload tremendously on bothsides.
Shannon Oelkers (17:36):
So, related to my last question, I want to ask
sort of the inverse of that iswhat can, what can see plan
holders do to be proactive aboutimplementing this plan?
Graham Wood (17:45):
proactive is just that is, you know, be the
squeaky wheel not getting a billfor calling us about asking
about drills and exercises.
So we didn't call.
We encourage plan holders topick up the phone and call email
, schedule a meeting, do what ittakes.
We will be happy to give youthe information.
We want every plan holder inthis state to be successful with
this program.
Shannon Oelkers (18:03):
All right.
I find that really encouragingand that has been our experience
as well on the consulting side.
Graham, thank you so much forwalking us through the 485
regulations and the Drill andExercise guidance, and I really
appreciate your thoughts on thestate side of what we are both
going to have to do together asfar as the industry and the
(18:24):
state.
I was wondering if you couldprovide us with a list of
resources that you could pointour listeners to and we've
talked about a few of them, butI thought a list at the end
might be really helpful.
Graham Wood (18:35):
Absolutely so.
There's lots of resources outthere.
First and foremost is the drilland exercise guidance document
itself.
Give that a read and I'm surethere'll be questions.
There's many resources as wellas some frequently asked
questions on our ODPCPregulation implementation
resources webpage as well asthere's also an exercise
(18:56):
scheduler.
The scheduler is the intent.
So not only does ADEC know whenwe're doing drills, but also as
companies are scheduling drills.
They're not scheduling on topof one another, so we all have
the appropriate manpowerresources to meet our goals.
Shannon Oelkers (19:13):
Can I ask a question related to that
scheduler, Graham?
Because everybody who has a Clan has a five-year window at
this point, right, right, andyou had mentioned being
proactive and calling the stateearly.
I imagine, as we get closer tothe five-year renewal dates,
that that schedule is going tobecome more and more limited and
less and less flexible.
Graham Wood (19:31):
Yeah, and we're trying like crazy to avoid that
if possible, which is why we'reencouraging plan holders to
start having conversations withus sooner than later.
Especially a plan holder whohas not done a drill in a long
time.
Give us a call, let's talkabout scheduling.
Let's talk about the thingsthat need to be planned and
planned for well ahead of time,so that even if you're doing an
(19:54):
operational-based ICS drill or asmall equipment deployment,
that may be a bigger hurdle to acompany that hasn't done it in
a long time.
So let's get that on the booksand start planning it.
So there's no surprises, nohigh hurdles for anyone.
Shannon Oelkers (20:06):
Okay, so there's a scheduler.
Let's make sure, if you areresponsible for a 485 Drill at
your company, that you checkthat scheduler.
That'll give you an idea of theavailability of the state
around your internal schedule.
Graham Wood (20:19):
That'll give you an idea of the availability of the
state around your internalschedule.
Okay, and then you know.
Next to last resource is reachout to program staff,
specifically about questionsabout the 485 drill regulation.
You can reach out to DianeMunson or Elva House.
We also have an email address,to submit questions about those
(20:40):
regulations or any other of our4 or Article one regulations
you might have questions about.
Shoot us an email there.
And then, last but not least,is the exercise lessons learned
as well.
After a drill is completed anda plan holder gets a letter
saying you know, thank you,you've done the drill.
You know.
Here's your letter that saysyou've crossed the finish line.
(21:01):
The lessons learned are goingto be captured and posted on our
website as well, and we'vegotten a lot of positive
feedback about that.
Shannon Oelkers (21:09):
Oh, that is interesting.
Okay, so everything Graham justlisted, we will make sure to
include a link and we'll includethat email as well in our show
notes.
Graham, I so appreciate yourtime today.
I really appreciate you talkingus through that and I think
this is going to make the 485drill program a little easier
for our listeners to navigate,and I appreciate the resources
(21:30):
that you just listed because Ithink that's going to be
critical to them understandingand being successful at this 485
drill program.
Graham Wood (21:36):
Thanks for the opportunity to get the word out.
Thank you.
Shannon Oelkers (21:38):
Yeah, absolutely.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Intentionally Disturbing
Join me on this podcast as I navigate the murky waters of human behavior, current events, and personal anecdotes through in-depth interviews with incredible people—all served with a generous helping of sarcasm and satire. After years as a forensic and clinical psychologist, I offer a unique interview style and a low tolerance for bullshit, quickly steering conversations toward depth and darkness. I honor the seriousness while also appreciating wit. I’m your guide through the twisted labyrinth of the human psyche, armed with dark humor and biting wit.