Chevron refuses to do oil-spill exercise

When state officials sprung a surprise oil-spill drill on oil-giant Chevron last week, they got the one response they never expected: No thanks.

Chevron, which ferries millions of gallons of petroleum to and from terminals on the Columbia River, refused to conduct an exercise designed to demonstrate the company's readiness to respond to oil spills.

"The company said no," said Jay Manning, head of the state Department of Ecology. "We've been doing this for seven years. We've never had a company refuse to participate."

Manning and other officials vow to seek a law allowing them to fine oil companies or bar them from operating in Washington if they refuse to participate in drills.

Chevron spokesman Jeff Moore said the dispute was merely a misunderstanding, and the company feared the drill might be unsafe. But Manning and others said the explanation doesn't jibe with how Chevron actually responded.

"We talked to a variety of people within the company, and we were given a variety of reasons," Manning said. "We were given other reasons — that they were stretched really thin because of the holidays, that they had staff out because people were feeling ill."

At issue is what the state requires of the oil companies that carry more than 15 billion gallons of fuel to and from Puget Sound or the Columbia River each year — and how effectively the state can enforce those rules.

Chevron, BP, ConocoPhillips and other oil handlers have to have up-to-date plans on how to respond to spills.

The state also regularly conducts drills — ranging from random paperwork checks to unannounced fake spills in which companies go through all the steps they would in an emergency. There are as many as 300 simple drills a year. This year, the state held a half-dozen of the complex drills.

Companies are typically cooperative — even enthusiastic, said Linda Pilkey-Jarvis, spills coordinator for the state Ecology Department, because they are "testing a system they've spent a lot of money keeping in place."

But last Thursday, Pilkey-Jarvis called Chevron headquarters in San Ramon, Calif., to ask the company to respond to an imagined accident in which a Chevron diesel tanker supposedly ran aground west of Astoria, Ore.

Before she had explained what she expected, Chevron said no, stating it needed days or weeks to communicate with its local contractor about safety, Pilkey-Jarvis said.

"We're more than willing to participate in drills, but we feel very strongly that they're not worth getting people hurt," Chevron spokesman Jeff Moore said.

Pilkey-Jarvis said Chevron had been warned in September that a surprise drill was coming before the end of the year.

Regardless, the state has little recourse. Under current law, it can fine a company or revoke its right to operate in Washington if oil-spill plans are incomplete, but not if a company won't participate in a spill drill. Ecology officials said they plan to ask the Legislature next spring to change that.

Meanwhile, though, Chevron and the state have agreed to conduct another surprise drill in coming weeks.

Craig Welch: 206-464-2093 or cwelch@seattletimes.com