Page 12: of Maritime Reporter Magazine (June 2020)

Government Update clear that the consultancy was actually working for and appar- response process and procedures best serve the national in- ently taking direction from the fnancial guarantor, despite the terests. Contrary of Coast Guard policy, the ITT mandated

Coast Guard policy on this issue. Utilizing a non-disclosure use of a fxed-price contract. The ITT process needlessly agreement, the consultancy established a wall between the delayed the response effort, particularly where, as here, the

SMFF salvage resource provider listed in the owner’s pre- listed SMFF resource provider had capability to immediately approved Vessel Response Plan (VRP) and the USCG Federal undertake whatever measures the FOSC approved.

On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC), destroying the transparency The Coast Guard then allowed the hiring of another SMFF and candid exchange of opinions that are vital to Unifed service provider, one who agreed to undertake the wreck re-

Command (UC) process during a complex response effort. moval in the manner favored by the consultant. This was

Such an arrangement has seldom, if ever, been utilized in an done even though that methodology would allow hundreds active spill response under OPA 90 and certainly not to limit of the automobiles on board (each with fuel and lubricants the access of the listed SMFF resource provider to the FOSC. inside) to fall into the water during that wreck removal.

The consultancy then was allowed to issue an Invitation Once the alternate SMFF service provider was selected by to Tender (ITT) for the wreck removal while the GOLDEN the consultancy on behalf of the responsible party and the

RAY still had onboard a large quantity of petroleum present- fnancial guarantor, and even before a contract and funding ing an imminent and substantial threat to the public health agreement were executed, the consultancy terminated the and welfare or the environment. An ITT is the equivalent of contract with the VRP-approved SMFF service provider de- a government agency’s Request for Proposals (RFP). This spite not having obtained FOSC approval. Thus, there was again is highly unusual during an active response where time another extended period of relative inactivity in the response is of the essence and where the FOSC, in accordance with the process while the alternate SMFF service provider brought on

Congressional mandate of OPA 90, has the full authority and scene its personnel, equipment, and sub-contractors. access to the necessary fnancial resources to order whatever The GOLDEN RAY response project, although still unfn-

THE GOLDEN RAY response project, although still unfnished, provides a stark example of how easily the US spill response program can get off track.

U.S. Coast Guard photo by Brian McCrum 12 Maritime Reporter & Engineering News • June 2020