Oil spill problem First report of the President's Office on oil spills

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Coastal Zone
Information eo
0
Center

--------------------------------
fin
C&I

IV,
FIRST REPORT
OF. THE
PRESIDENt'S PA
NE LON,OIL SPILLS

GC
'1080 U,'5.,EXECUTIVE'OFF ICE
_OF,THE PRESIDENT,
U52
-Office of Sc ce nd Technology .4e
iena
1969
A

I DG
C
108 0
U52
96 9

(Ij

Contents

Page

List of Panel Members i

Summary of Findings and Recommendations iii

The Oil Spill Problem 1
Introduction Property of CSC Library 1
Oil Spills 3

Combatting a Large Oil Spill
Anatomy of a Program U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA 6
Oil Spill Surveillance COSTAL SERVICES CENTER 6
Techniques 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE 6
Prediction CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413 7 Sampling and Identificatio 1 7

Sampling and Identification

Containment, Removal and Disposal 8
Containment 8
Recovery 9
Open Sea Removal 9
Cleanup 10 Oil and Environmental Effects 11
Oil and Environment Effects 11
Restoration 11
Information 12
Dispersants 12
Toxicity of Oil 13
Assessment of Biotic Effects 14
Ecological Research 14
Organization Requirements 15
Federal 15
Regional and State 16
International 17
Industry 17
Need for a National Overview 17

Avoiding Oil Spills 19
Transport by Tanker - Prevention of Oil Spills 19
Offshore Oil Development and Environmental
Hazards 21
Property of CSC Library
Bibliography 24

Acknowledgments 25

SANTA BARBARA OIL SPILL PANEL

Chairman:
Dr. John C. Calhoun, Jr.
Vice President,
Texas A&M University
College Station, Texas

Dr. Norman,H. Brooks
Professor of, Civil Engineering
California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, California

Dr. John P. Craven
Chief Scientist, Special Projects Of fic e
Navy Department
Washington, D. C.

Dr. William Drury
Director of Research
Massachusetts Audubon Society
South Lincoln, Massachusetts

Mr. Morris Ettinger
Dow Chemical Company
Midland, Michigan

Dr. Galen E. Jones
Professor of Microbiology and
Director, Jackson Estuarine Laboratory
University of New Hampshire
Durham, New Hampshire

Dr. Gordon J. F. MacDonald
Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Affairs
University of California Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara, California

Dr. Jack E. McKee
Professor of Environmental Health Engineering
California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, California

Dr. Henry W. Menard
Institute of Marine Resources
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
La Jolla, California

Dr., William Nierenberg
Director
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
La Jolla, California

Dr. Carl H. Oppenheimer
Director
Oceanographic Institute
Florida State University
Tallahassee, Florida

Dr. LuigiProvasoli
Haskins Laboratories
New York, N. Y.

Mr. Carl H. Savit
Vice President, Research and Development
Western Geophysical Company of America
Houston, Texas

Dr. William Walton
Geological Research Director
Pan American Petroleum Corporation
Tulsa, Oklahoma

Staff:

Dr. John S. Steinhart Office of Science and Technology
Mr. Howard H. Eckles - Office of Science and Technology
Dr. David A. Adams - Marine Science Council Staff

Advisers:

Mr. Kenneth Biglane - Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
Dr. Quentin Bone - Plymouth Laboratories, Plymouth, England
Daniel B. Charter, Jr. Commander - U.S. Coast Guard
William E. Lehr, Commander - U. S. Coast Guard
Mr. Ross McClintock - Fluor Corporation
Dr. William T. Pecora - Director, U. S. Geological Survey
Mr. Leo McReynolds National Petroleum Council

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Although oil spills cannot be eliminated entirely, step can be
taken to reduce the probability that they will occur.. Steps can also
be taken to prepare for oil spills so. that the damage and deleterious
effects are reduced. Despite the lessons learned from the Torrey
Canyon, Santa Barbara and other spills, the nation.is not doing
enough in either of these areas. (Page 4)

2. The United States does not have at this time sufficient.technical
-or operational capability to cope satisfactorily with a. large @scale oil
spill in the marine environment. A research, development and
deployment program to monitor and control massive spills should be
implemented to advise the public of the probability and predictahili-ty
of oil spills and of the existence and effectiveness of standby cleanup
capabilities.: (Page 6)

3. Responsibility for developing technology on oil spills should be
vested in a single federal authority, with mandates to stimulate private
industry involvement and to work coordinately with local governments.
The authority responsible for developing an oil spill technology should
also undertake the jobs of forecasting the probable incidences of oil
spill events. and arranging for deployment of emergency equipment
accordingly. (Page 15)

4. Similarly, there is need to assign to a single agency the opera-
tional responsibility for dealing with an oil spill. The current con-
tingency plan should be revised and implemented and it should provide
for a fund upon which the commander of an oil spill team can draw
for meeting the costs of operations to control an oil spill. '(Page'15)

5. In all oil spill events, the contingency plan should also provide
for assembling, separate from the operations team to combat the
spill, a group of ecologists, environmental scientists, engineers,
economists, and others with expertise in the area concerned, to
advise the operations team and to recommend actions'for appropri at
studies and analyses to assess the effects of the spill. (Page 14)

6. There is no clear ]Rolicy for determining when the public interest
in an oil spill should preempt private interests. Jurisdictional
responsibilities and liability for damage are not clearly defined.
A review of legislative and administrative practices in these areas
is recommended. (Page i6)

- iv-

7. There is -need -for a quasi- independent advisory group on oil
pollution to provide an overview of this subject for the benefit of the
President, the Congress, and the public at large. We recommend
that an Advisory Board on Oil Pollution and Hazardous Fluids be
established to advise the President and the National InteragencX
Committee with respect to. policies, prog .ramsY and plans relative
to the prevention or mitigation of pollution from the trans portation,
processing and utilization of oily substances and other hazardous
fluids. (Page 17)

8. Coastal areas of potentially high environmental risks relative to
oil tanker shipping lanes and terminals should be identified. Steps
should be taken immediately to negotiate international agreements
providing firm reaulatory control of shipping lanes used for trans-
-portation of oil and hazardous materials.' (Page 20)

9. Within the federal agencies an authority and responsibility should
be clearly identified and delegated for: (Page 20)

(a) Design specification and inspections of ships, barges and
port facilities with respect to overall size, compartments,
loading equipment, navigational equipment and ship control,
and pollution control equipment.

(b) Monitoring and regulating ship movement in the territorial
waters of the United States.

(d) Monitoring major spillage incidents with chronological
estimates of oil contamination, and informing:the operational
agency responsiblefor cleanup.

10. Along many coastal regions the production of oil and gas is one
of the most valuab 'le industrial activities for direct economic return.
Nevertheless in certain areas of great population density and high
recreation and aesthetic value it is essential that: oil well operations

be conducted under stringent. regulations and su-pervisi on usink, the
most up.@to-date technology in order to minimize the possibility o
oil leakage;and any oil companies holding offshore leases be -required
to show their capability for control, containment and removal of.
spilled oil from the sea to the responsible agencies. (Page 21).

11. Because of.variable oceanographic characteristics and differing
beneficial uses of the ocean, the potential consequences or environ-
mental degradation in case of well leakage are highly variable.
Therefore, some situations require higher standards of operation
and supervision than others. if special problems are encountered.
then. special regulations and procedures may be required. .(Page ZZ..)

THE OIL SPILL PROBLEM

"In utilizing and conserving the natural resources of
the Nation, the one characteristic more essential than
any other is foresight. Unfortunately. foresight is not
usually characteristic of.a young and vigorous people,
and it is obviously not a marked characteristic of us
in the United States.
Theodore Roosevelt.

Introduction

A new technology can seldom be developed in modern times unless
someone is given specific responsibility and is funded at a level.com-
mensurate with doing the job. This question arises in particular with
respect to the absence of a technology for handling oil spills. Although
the nation has been alerted by such incidences as the Torrey Canyon
wreck, and although a. contingency plan has been formulated, the nation
still does not have an adequate oil spill technology and has not yet pro-
vided the means for bringing an adequate technology into being.

In the history of civilization the development of new technology
amply demonstrates that contributions are required both from the
public and-private. sector. An individual can support his own patent
development and can found a new company, but this is far from creating
all the components that. enter into the emergence of a technological
system. The principal contribution which the public sector can provide
is an atmosphere of interest in, acceptance for, and belief in the
worthwhileness of developing the technology. Although such a public
posture is necessary, it is not sufficient. Needed also, is a clear
identification of responsibility for a public agency to do those things
that are needed to see that the technology is developed even though
actual implementation may be placed in private hands.

Adequate public funds must, be provided, and these funds must
be commensurate with the job that is to be done. Placing a man on
the moon is a job which could not have been funded in the tens of
millions of dollars. Although the development of a technology for
handling oil spills in the open ocean is not the same order of magni-
.tude as developing a technology to place a man on the moon or to
build a nuclear energy system, the principle is the same.

An additional principle concerns the timing and the means of-
preparing to combat the undesirable effects which will accompany
the development of any technology or resource. It is time that our
Nation anticipated that undesirable effects will sooner or later arise
from all seIgments of progress. We have generally ignored or
underestimated the possible attendant hazards except in those instances
where the hazard to human life was high.

It is to be expected that the increased use -of the shoreline and
the offshore zone. will produce undesirable effects which will give
rise to argument, damage to property or life, and to encroachment
on environmental quality. The use.of our marine resources has
advanced, without equivalent attention being given to areas of possible
.conflict or to planning for the. interactions that might occur. - In short,
we have followed our usual practice of deferring these considerations
until we are'in trouble. In particular, the development of offshore
oil leases has been looked upon only as a resource production activity.
There have been no serious questions raised about counter effects
which might have been set in motion by this development.

It has. been taken for granted, as a general public view, that all
new resource and technological developments will be for the good.
If we raise any question at all, it is that we expect those in charge of
operations to take care of undesirableaspects associated with develop-
ment.

In the case of offshore oil environment, it is necessary to look
at the technological developments that are taking place, to inventory
the present situation, to assess the probability of.undesirable changesP
and to lay out courses of action to keep environmental quality at
the highest possible level.

The development of the offshore drilling industry over the past
20 -years has proceeded in an. orderly and "as the technology develops"
basis. This development has taken place under both state and federal
regulatory agencies on both state and federal -offshore leases. The
development of these resources has been profitable not only to the
state and federal governments but has proved up. considerable quant ities
of oil and gas reserves for the future needs of our country. The stan,
dards set for the construction and emplacement of the facilities to develop
these reserves generally have proven to be adequate. Statistics show

that the incidence of accident and pollution from offshore drilling has
been amazingly small. Most. of the standards and.controls foi- the
development of offshore resources have been adequate. The pace
of offshore exploration has. indicated, however, that standards. and
controls should bereviewed by everyone involved before additional
offshore exploration proceeds. It is obvious that the federal, state and
local governments and the industries must work more closely in the
development of our offshore resources.and in the preservation of our
coastal environments. Also, it should be incumbent upon everyone
involved to better inform the public as to the desirability and/or
necessity of developing offshore resources in an orderly,, safe,. and.
technologically feasible manner.

Oil Spill

Oil spills are usually accidents. As with all accidents, theyare
caused by human error and/or the use of a faulty technological system.
Because human error is involved, the number of accidents'is somewhat
proportional to numbers of people involved in oil handling and to the
increasing complexity of the systems involved. The number of
accidents is dependent on the philosophy and outlook of the public and
on the practices which it is willing to accept.

Accidents, and in particular oil spills, also result from poor or
imprope.r practices in the design of equipment, the state of technolo g-
ical advance.- or the design of operations for handling oil. To the
degree that such systems are improperly engineered or are not
designed for safety, accidents will be more probable.

The method for handling oil spills depends largely on the fact
that oil and water do not readily mix. Although there. are a few other
situations in which this'non-mixing characteristic contributes to the
handling of accidents, they are riot very common.- Therefore, it can
be* considered that the technol ogy for handling oil spills is not similar
to other, larger technological activities except that it may be related
to other operations' carried on within the marine evnrionment.

Thus oil spills should be approached as rather unique problems.
as far as technological requirements are concerned., but they may
be considered from a broader sense with respect to generalities of
accidents, organizational details for handling accidents, and philo-
sophical views of the public.

There are two general questions to be addressed. The first is
how to keep the number of accidents to a minimum. This requires
prediction and prevention. The second is how to take care of
accidents which happen despite our best preventive efforts. As a
part of these two general questions, it is necessary to consider the
state of knowledge about oil spill events and about the operations
from which they evolve. Although precautionary measures, con-
tinued education of workers, improved organizational procedures, and
advances in technology will reduce the number of accidents, oil spills
cannot be eliminated entirely.

The spills that.are of great conce,rn.now are those of extremely
large volume. Large is, of cours'e, a relative term. The Torrey
Canyon spill was about 30 million gallons; the Ocean Eagle spill was
about 3 million gallons; the Santa Barbara Channel spill was between
one and three million gallons.

At least two different technologies are.involved in the prevention
and control of massive oil spills. One of these is the technology of
marine transportation. The other is the technology for drilling and
producing oil. Neither of these technologies, however, is presently
adequate to prevent or contain an oil spill once it has occurred or
for clean-up operations after an accident. The technology for control
and clean-up involves ocean engineering, coastal or beach engineering,
ecological considerations and a variety of other subjects.

During the research and development period and particularly
before funding massive deployment of cleanup equipment, a cost
analysis review should be conducted. A cost comparison should be
maintained between the deployment of only minimal containment and
disposal facilities with concomitant clean-up of each spill by present
methods and the deployment of highly effective containment and dis-
pos-al facilities. In other words, we should consider the possibility
.that effective containment and disposal may turn out to be vastly more
costly than the cleanup of the few uncontrolled spills occurring after
an intensive prevention and policing program.

Alternatives available to lessen the frequency and magnitude of
oil spills do not include the complete abandonment of oil tankers or
the total elimination of offshore oil operations. It is appropriate,

however, to examine the development, application and eff ect of con-
trols and restrictions applying to these operations. It is appro-
priate also to examine how decisions should be made with respe.ctto
obtaining a balance between the need.to develop a specific resource--
oil-- and the need.to protect the environment from undesirable accidents
or side effects that may result.

In a sense, the oil spill problem joins the larger set of environ-
mental problems facing society today. Some of the elements of the
oil spill question raise more general questions of resource use,
economics and allocation, of alternative or conflicting resource use,
of developing technology for pollution control, of environmental quality
standards, and of joint state-federal operations.

COMBATTING A LARGE OIL SPILL

Anatomy of a Progra

The United States has neither the technical nor the operational
capability to cope satisfactorily with a large-scale petroleum spill
in.the marine environment. The technology does not exist to prevent
virtually all of the oil in a massive spill from being deposited on
shore.

If a major program directed toward prevention of shore damage
were to be initiated today, deployment of an adequate protective
system might, reasonably be expected within five years.

Therefore we urgently recommend that:

1. A research, development,- and deployment program to
control massive spills be funded and implemented immediately.

2. . Operational shore cleanup capability be authorized and
funded.

3. An information program be implemented to inform the public
of the probability and predi ctability of oil pollution and of the
existence and effectiveness of standby clean-up capabilities..

Detailed program needs to execute these recommendations include
the following elements:

Oil- Spill Surveillance is required for warnings, damage control,
estimation of the extent of damage, assessment of the effectiveness of
control methods and for research and development on oil clean-up.
Fortunately there is considerable airborne technology available
which may be adaptable to surveillance of oil slicks.

Techniques.

1) Optical-visual and photographic- observations are of value
when conditions permit. They define limits of the slicks
because of the disappearance of color when the thickness
becomes lesg than the wavelength of light. This thickness
is normally found to be the thickness of a surface oil film
on the open ocean.

2) Ultraviolet imaging techniques are available.. and tests
conducted on the Santa Barbara spill indicate that they are
useful. The wavelengths near 0. 35 microns. showed extent
of oil very clearly in this case.

3) Particularly promising is the airborne use of both active
and passive radar. The first method is very sensitive to the
change of wave slope that occurs because of the influence of
oil. . The second is sensitive to temperature changes. Both
could possibly be calibrated for oil thickness. These methods
should be particularly valuable because they are operable
under essentially all weather conditions. This method also
gives data on local winds and seas.

4) Infrared images were not useful in Santa Barbara, but a
more thorough test is needed.

While considerable experience has accumulated with these
techniques and while much of it pertains to definition of oil slicks,
there is no operational system available which can be deployed to
obtain the precise data that are required for effective monitoring
of oil slicks. We therefore recommend a mission-oriented R&D
program aimed at developing a combination of perfected techniques
that can be used by an operating team to monitor the spread of spilled
oil, estimate the quantities involved, and confirm predictions developed
from weather and current data.

Prediction. A very important adjunct of the surveillance program
is the ability to predict the movement of slicks. This is a combined
physical oceanographic and meteorological problem. Programs to
integrate oceanographic and meteorolog ical data and predict the move-
ment of spilled oil should be developed.

Sampling and Identification. Information is available on techniques
for identification of types of oil by chemical methods for us e in deter-
mining the sources of spilled oil and the changes in its properties with
time. These techniques can be applied directly to oil spill identifica-
tion.

Containment, Removal and Disposal.

The Panel's views on containment, recovery, removal and
clean-up of spilled oil are based on the assumption that deployment
and use of equipment require mobility and adaptability to local
equipment and ships. Readiness for rapid deployment is an
important consideration.

Containment. Containment materials and equipment should be
easily transportable and stockpiled in strategic locations. Contain-
ment should be accomplished close to the source, and must be
integrated with a recovery capability to remove oil as fast as it
accumulates in the containment system.

1. Booms can be designed to be effective at sea for
a variety of wind, wave and current conditions. Booms should
be designed that can be deployed and handled by ships readily
available. Booms should be designed for use under open sea
conditions with 8-12 ft. Wave heights. Boom systems must also
be strong enough for towing and deployment at sea. Research
is needed to meet such conditions. Booms of lesser capability
should be constructed and deployed as soon as possible especially
for use in quieter waters of harbors and estuaries.

2. Research on air curtains should be considered but at a lower
prior'ity because the method appears less promising than mechanical
booms'. This technique should be pursued for use in confined or
semi-confined areas. .

3. Chemical containing and collecting methods including. gelling
agents, foaming agents and absorbents should be the subject
of research with a high priority. Agents should be developed that
can be stored or generated aboard ship for emergency use.

4. Important in the overall objectives is research on the ability
to transfer oil from stricken tankers. Equipment such as large
rubber or plastic containers to transfer oil from ships and air
transportable, high volume pumps should be developed and con-
sidered as mandatory to ship or be available at critical
locations.

5. Underwater methods to collect o il from subsea leaks should
be developed. Rising bubbles of oil may be collected more easily
by inverted funnel devices than by booms at-the surface. Under-
water collectors could be deployed over sunken tankers, or on
the sea floor where natural or manmade leaks are causing
pollution.

.Recovery.- Recovery of oil from a spill should be commenced
promptly in conjunction with containment. Recovery of crude oil or
crude oil mixed with water.removes a pollutant from the sea and
salvages a product of possible economic value.

Assuming barges or tanks or rubber-plastic containers are avail-
able for receipt of oil, skimming and pumping. techniques should be
developed which are adaptable to generally available ships.

1. First priority should be given to high volume pumping of oil
from the surface of the sea followed by rapid separation of the oil
from the mixture, returning water to the ocean.. Centrifugal methods
or gravity separation are considered most promising.

2. Further research is needed to fi nd or develop absorbent
materials which may be applied to the sea surface to contain spills
and permit recovery of oil. Materials which are hydrophobic, absorb
oil, have capilary action, are lightweight, and permit rapid oil extrac-
tion should be investigated to be used as surface sponge s.dire ctly and
as material.s for boom construction. Absorbent materials of this type
will probably be most applicable to intermediate size oil spills. Large
blocks ("sponges") of this type of absorbant material may retain as
much as 5 to 10 times their dry weight as oil, permit recovery of oil
into a vessel, and immediate reuse of the material as an absorbent.

Open Sea Removal. If containment and recovery cannot be accom-
plished at the site of the spills other removal techniques should be
considered.

1. A promising technique of removal of oil is sinking it
by adsorbing it on fine granular material like chalk or sand. The
kinds and extent of damage to bottom-dwelling organisms must be
known before widespread application of sinking methods. Long term
ecological effects.must be considered. Readily available and economi-
cal sinking agents should be considered and given priority for research.
Abundant substances such as soil or sea bottom materials should be
considered. Soil can be broadcast by spreaders and bottom sands or

muds can be dredged up near the polluted area and sprayed on the slick.
In areas where no valuable bottom organisms exist these methods could
be tested immediately. Sinking methods should hold the oil. at the bot-
tom long enough to.be biologically degraded.

2. Straw has proved successful but research on other absorbents
such as foams, plastic capillaries, or other floating. substances that
can be widely broadcast and recovered (either on the water or along
the shore) should be emphasized. Many such substances already
available should be evaluated. New substances should be designed
and fabricated. Effective methods of application should be developed
concurrently.

3. An alternative clean-up method not yet explored would be use
of absorbent particles which, unlike chalk, will not sink but remain
suspended in a layer between 5-20 meters depth. This method would
avoid contamination of beaches and bottoms by maintaining the oil
in a zone rich in oxygen - a condition favoring bacterial degradation.
Light and highly porous materials might serve the purpose especially
if made hydrophobic.

4. Past efforts to burn oil spilled at sea have been ineffective.
It is possible that techniques can be developed to assure combustion
when oil is thinly spread on water.

5.. The use of detergents and other emulsifiers to disperse oil
in the marine environment is open to serious question. Dispersants
do not remove the oil from the sea, and there is no evidence, at
present, that bacterial degradation of the oil is accelerated. Deter-
gents have. often been demonstrated to cause more damage than oil
alone because of additional toxicity to marine organisms, while
not accomplishing effective and lasting dispersal. Detergents should
be used only in local areas, in small quantities, under the authority
of responsible state and local officials.

Clean-up. Floating absorbents inevitably will collect on and
litter beaches. It is necessary to harvest and dispose of this material
it is sometimes highly inflammable. If not removed
promptly it will also be ad-mixed with beach sands.

Research is recommended to develop high temperature incinerators
to burn all organic matter from oil soaked.sand. Such incinerators
should be easily transportable to polluted areas, use readily available
fuel, be of high enough temperaturesto burn the organic matter without
air pollution, and allow sand to be returned to the beach.

It might be possible to design a travelling high- tempe ratur e burner
that could clean sand. in place. Such a machine would, or course,
remove o rdinary beach litter.

Oil and Environmental Effects.

The complete effects on the environment of spilled oil are not
sufficiently well known and further detailed studies are badly needed.
Effects on birds, larger wildlife, and natural beauty are easy to
observe, but effects on unobtrusive animals, microorganisms, and
the net effects on the food chain and the ecological habitats of marine
wildlife are poorly known. Direct and indirect effelcts on plants are
similarly poorly known. Some of the knowledge of toxicity and
ecological effects of oil are summarized below.

Restoration. Following pollution by oil the need to restore aesthetic
values and recreation facilities of the environment often conflicts with
theneedto minimize damage to living organisms from the toxicity of
oil solubilizers and detergents. Both needs being important, actions
taken should be- a compromise guided by priorities. The cleaning of
a marina may be more advisable than pr'otection of fishing within the
harbor; the cleanliness of a beach less important than protection of
living organism even of minor economic value.

1. Until better means can be found for cleansing beaches, sea-
water and rocks, the use of detergents should be limited to essential
localized areas and they should be applied carefully to avoid accumu-
lation of toxicity. Recolonization of damaged areas will be speedier
if planned adjacent areas are left untreated and can therefore reseed
the flora and fauna of the treated areas. The extent of damage varies
according to the severity of pollution and the relative sensitivity of
the organisms: somewill be, killed, others may proliferate from
lack of competition.

2. The restoration of normal biota may take a few weeks to
several years. It depends largely on the nature of the environment
such as currents, flushing and nutrient. turnover and on. the type of
organisms, such as the length of their life cycle, their abilities to
migrate, to compete and reproduce.

Forecasting the extent of damage and time.for recolonization
is difficult because of the complexity of events, the variety of environ-
ments and biota, and especially because of a lack of information on.
the sensitivity of many species to oil and their competitive abilities
during recolonization. Extensive research is needed to determine
oil sensitivity of many organisms and to provide a more reliable
index of damage from oil pollution than direct measurements of oil
quantity, distribution or thickness.

3. It is also important to recognize that localized oil spills,
perhaps even major ones, though impressive at the onset, rarely
damage the environment permanently. On the contrary a widespread,
low intensity, persistent leakage of pollutants is likely to make pro-
found changes in the biota and the food web.

4. Local residents affected by oil spills are particularly sensitive to
infringement on the aesthetic and the recreational use of their environ-
ment. Because of the pressures exerted by local communities to have
a thorough clean up, involving the use of detergents, it is.recommended
that the Department of Interior carry out an active public information
program to explain what is being done and why, and what the dangers
are of certain practices.

Dispersants. It is well known from the Torrey Canyon incident
that the toxicity of many detergents and other emulsifiers increases
with effectiveness since effective dispersion depends upon solvents
which are highly toxic. Other biodegradable emulsifiers are less
toxic but still inhibit.several algae at concentrations of 5-30 ppm.

The use of emulsifiers and detergents can be justified only if they
are employed well out from the littoral zone and if local currents
send the emulsifier-oil mixture further out to the open ocean. The use

13 -

of detergents on beaches, littoral zones and harbors is more
dangerous because, in making ail miscible with water, the oil will
spread into the sand, and penetrate crevices, and the suspend. Ied
emulsion will coat the body and gills of marine animals - surfaces
which untreated oil would not "wet". Also, if the emulsion particles
are small enough, they may be ingeste d and be harmful to some
filter feeding invertebrates such as oysters and clams.

Search for effective, less toxic or harmless emulsifiers is
highly recommended because they are needed in many clean-up
operations.

Toxicity of Oil. We know too little about toxicity of crude oils
and their long range effect on the biota. Toxicity of natural oil
depends upon the quantity of volatile aromatics (generally 1- 2 % by
volume is a toxic concentration) and of phenolic compounds, especially
naphthalenic acids (present in lower concentrations but toxic at 10 parts
per million). Since crude and fuel oils vary widely in their components,
each type should be analyzed chemically and bioassayed for toxicity
to living plants, bacteria, and animals.

Fresh oil, depending on its content in phenolics and aromatics,
may be injurious to the biota at 0. 01 - 1% and toxic at 0. 05 - 51/o by
volume. However, the toxicity of fresh oils declines rapidly in the
first few days after a spill since the aromatics are volatile and the
phenolics, being water soluble, may become diluted well below toxicity.
Disappearance of toxicity of fresh oils is favored by winds, rough seas,
spreading in thin layers on large volumes of water and by insolation.
After disappearance or dilution of the toxicants, oil seems to be non-
toxic in pelagic waters and does not seem to affect oxygen transfer sub-
stantially, even in layers 1/2 inch thick. However, oil is deleterious,
even lethal, if it coats furred or feathered animals. Cleaning up of
birds is ineffective because treated birds at present rarely survive.

Present data are derived mostly from observations on accidental
oil spills; thus we lack accurate information on the biota before
and after the spills. The Torrey Canyon observations, because of the
large use of dispersants, furnished.valuable data on the effect on the
biota of combined oil and dispersants but these observations do not
provide data on the effect of oil alone.

14-

A good study of the effect of a fuel oil spill followed the stranding
of the Tampic Maru in Baj a, California. The entrance of the small
,shallow cove (90, 000 square feet) was 3/4 blocked by the ship; thus
the exchange of cove water with the open sea was severely reduced.
The cove was.subjected at shipwreck to an initial spill of 20, 000 barrels
of dark diesel oil and to further spillage of the remaining cargo (40,-000
barrels) which occurred sporadically during 8 months. Diesel oil is
more toxic than most crude oil. Large animal mortalities ensued,
resulting in over development of sea weeds. After nine months many
animals had reappeared. Reestablishment of most of the biotic
community occurred in Z-4 years after the catastrophe despite the
fact that the waters were also polluted by the metallic debris resulting
from complete disintegration of the ship 9 months after the wreck.

Assessment of Biotic Effects. Improved laboratory bioassays
are necessary for determining the toxicity to marine organisms of
various crude and fuel oils, of dispersants, and the mixture of oil and
dispersants. These should be commenced now on plants and animals
that can readily be held in the laboratory. As our cultivation techniques
improve the assays should be done on the more sensitive species.

A final assessment of the effects of oils and dispersants should
be done in natural environments suited for comparative experiments.
Monitoring of these experiments should be followed at least for one
year to detect long range effects. Studies on the fate of oil which
accumulates on the bottom after sinking with chalk or other materials
are needed.

Ecological Research. We recommend that a plan for initiating
and coordinating ecological research following oil spills be established
as part of each Regional Response Team being organized under the
National Contingency Plan. Centralization and organization in a
Federal Agency or large university should serveto cover applicable
avenues of research that appear important. Planning for and identify-
ing a group of experts prepared to respond quickly will increase the
chances that the important information will be gathered. A centralized
organization in the government or a large university should be responsible
for arranging for publication of individual reports and syntheses, thus
putting the problem, its solution and its prevention into perspective.

- 15

Organizational Requirements.!

Federal. Thete are a number of federal agencies with. defined
responsibilities in connection with oil pollution control. Amongst'
these are the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and
Geological Survey in the Department of Interior, Office of Emergency
Planning, the U. S., Coast Guard and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The Joint Department of Interior- Department of Transportation report
to the President of February 1968 points out the ne'e d for further actions
and responsibilities for control of oil and other hazardous substances.
A National Contingency Plan for combatting spills of oil and hazardous
materials has been promulgated and regional plans are being developed.
Legislation pending before Congress would strengthen the federal role
in the prevention and control of pollution by oil. Despite the actions
now underway the Panel concludes that the., ronstitlited authorities
cannot exert full effectiveness in the control of oil pollution
incidents or an imminent pollution incident. The following legislative,
administrative and resource allocations are recommi@nded:

(1) The Federal Agencies should be provided legal authority to
exert jurisdiction and control over a pollution incident and to preempt
operational responsibility from the party responsible for the pollution
incident when the public interest is threatened. This capability should
be independent of any determination of which party or parties are
legally responsible for control of the pollution source.

(2) Adequate funds sh ould be immediately available for use by
the on-scent commander-to carry out his responsibilities for contain-
ment, control, and cleanup of oil spills.

(3) The right-s, duties, and limits of liability of the party or
parties having responsibility for the pollution source and of the appro-
priate public agencies require legislative definition.to assure that

(a) the least careful operator will be forced to raise his
operations to a level generally deemed prudent,. and
(b) redress be provided to the injured party or parties even
at the level of national disaster.

(4) Enforcement mechanisms under existing or new legislation
require improvement to insure that violators are subject to either
civil or criminal action as appropriate (e. g. the Panel has been led
to believe that no successful actions for pollution violations have
ever been prosecuted under the oil pollution act of 1924 as amended.

(5) A national oil and hazardous materials information and data
center should be maintained to assist contingency planning, to aid in
identification of sources of equipment, material and expert as'sistance
on a rapid response time to combat pollution accidents.

(6) Operational hardware should be acquired and operational units
trained and manned to a level which will provide a national capability
to contain, control,, and cleanup spilled oil and other hazardous fluids
regardless of size and location.

Regional and State. Through the National Interagency Committee
there are,in preparation regional plans which identify Regional
Operational Centers and Regional Response Teams. In recognition
of joint federal-state jurisdiction which may be in effect at a source
of pollution and the right and responsibility of the States to prepare
independent plans and capabilities, -- it is the recommendation of
the.Panel

1. (a) that regional contingency plans be expeditiously completed
and field tested;

(b) that these plans provide mechanisms for inclusion of local
and regional expert advice at an early stage of an operation;

(c) that these plans provide mechanisms for receipt and dis-
semination of public information and evaluation of proposals
for assistance; and

(d) that these plans incorporate regional environmental and
ecological factors (e.g. ice, tidal anomalies, seismic
activity, wildlife sanctuaries) as significant elements
of contingency planning.

2. In view of the uncertainty and the nature and type of future
incidents, an early identification and clarification of possible conflicts
between federal and state statutes and regulations should be undertaken.

- 17

International. In some instances (e.g. the Great Lakes) an oil
spill may affect another country besides the United States. Thus
international agreements should be negotiated, especially with
Canada and Mexico, for control of pollution incidents.

'Industry. In recognition of the prime responsibility of indust ry
to prevent pollution incidents and its right to limit its liability by
taking independent action in the event of an incident and recognizing
the existence, of industry expertise and hardware capability, the
Panel recommends

(1) that the formation of industry association committees,
research organizations and development capabilities be
encouraged and that mechanisms be provided for coordination
with government activities,

(2) that mechanisms be provided forinsuring that the advice of
other interested parties such as holders of riparian rights,
conservationists and other interested and effected. citizenry be
made available to the National Interagency Committee at a level
comparable to the advice which is received from industry,

(3) that legislation be provided (if necessary) to insure that
industry will furnish sufficient details on a pollution incident
or impending incident and the environmental and physical factors
associated therewith in a timely rrianner to the appropriate
authority,

(4) that the sharing of pollution control research, development
and equipments by industry be encouraged and that appropriate
legislative relief be provided if such sharing is at present
prohibited by law.

Need for National Overview. As stated, responsibilities arising
from oil pollution of the environment reside in several federal agencies
(i. e., USGS, USCG, FWPCA, Corps of Engineers). Moreover, oil
pollution.is also a primary concern of industrial associations such as
the American Petroleum Institute and the Western Oil and Gas Associa-
tion, shipping associations, pipeline groups, etc. In addition, many
state, local, and indeperdent agencies are involved in the complex

subject of oil utilization. Although the relevant federal agencies have
formed a National Interagency Committee on oil pollution to effect
liaison and coordination, this is an "in-h ouse" group without repre-
sentation from industry, local or state government, or the general
public. There appears to be need for a quas i- independent advisory
group on oil pollution toprovide an overview of this subject for the
benefit of the President, the Congre'ss, and the public at large.

We recommend, therefore, that a National Advisory Board on
Oil and Hazardous Fluids be established to report periodically to
the President and to advise the National Interagency Committee
with respect to policies, programs., and plans relative to the pre-
vention or mitigation of pollution from transportation, processing
and utilization of oily substances and other hazardous fluids.

This Board should comprise 12 to 15 members who are not
fulltime Federal employees. They should be selected from industry,
universities, private practice, and possibly from state or local
government. They should embrace professional disciplines such as
.marine and petroleum engineering, oceanography, environmental
engineering, public health, chemistry, ecology, economics and law.
It is expected that the Board would meet frequently to review the
policies, practices, and plans for all agencies that interface on the
oil pollution problem. The Board should not attempt to certify, approve,
or reject each individual operation, but instead it should be concerned
with broad policy for standards, control mechanisms, supervision,
inspection, monitoring, safeguards, emergency plans and other pro-
cesses related to potential releases of deleterious fluids into the
environment.

AVOIDING OIL SPILLS

Every day the vast quantities of oil which must crass the shores
of the United States provide the potential for a massive oil spill.
VVhether this oil reaches our shores in tankers or is pipe'd in from
offshore producing facilities affects only.the details of possible
spills. The hazard is present in either case but the potential size
of one spill is many times greater in the tanker case. Tankers.
carrying 30 million gallons now unload at our ports. Announced
plans call of 150 million gallon tanker.s.

The anticipated hazard of major oil spills in the ocean environ-
ment from offshore oil producing operations is very real also, but
of a lower frequency in the. past than from tanker operations. The
hazard is present from accidents in drilling and producing operations
and from severe environmental conditions imposed by weather, ice,
and possible earth movements.

Transport by Tanker - Prevention of Oil Spills.

Industry and responsible government agencies have been working
for years on national and international levels to prevent pollution by
oil from ships at sea. The Panel's review noted particularly agree-
ments reached through the International Maritime Consultive Organ-
ization and the studies and plans now underway on such subjects as
shipment of hazardous materials, navigation, safety and ship design.
A careful analysis has been made by the Department of Transportation
on the technical requirements for design and ship movement to reduce
the potential for spills of hazardous fluids. This is described in the
joint report of the Department of Interior and Department of Trans-
portation on Oil Pollution.

Despite the foregoing actions it is the view of the Panel that in
order to reduce the potential for pollution, adequate controls still
do not exist on the design, manning, operation, regulation, inspection
and legal liabilities of tankers and other conveyances for the transfer
of oil and hazardous fluids on the'high seas, on coastal waters sub-
ject to international jurisdiction and on internal waterways. In particular
the following examples are noted:

- 20

(1) The design of tankers may not in general be optimum for
the containment of oil following collision or other accidents at sea,
@nor for emergency off-loading on the high seas.

(2) Under international law sovereign powers cannot interfere
with or preempt normal salvage operations in order to minimize
pollution hazards.

(3) Under current international law sovereign powers may not
direct the coa.stal approach of distressed ships with the, potential of
creating a pollution hazard until the vessel enters the contiguous
zone or territorial sea of the affected nation.

In view of the foregoing and in recognition of the increased
potential hazard from massive oil spills that can result from accidents
involving tankers, the Panel recommends:
0

(1) That the United States, in its present and future representations
and negotiations and in positions taken with international organizations
such as IMCO and conferences on the Law of the Sea, give new stress
and priority to the prevention of pollution in.all recommendations
involving ship design, navigation, safety, training, and general
operations of tankers on the high seas.

(2) That the U. S. Coast Guard in its ship inspection and certifica-
tion program and in its future research and involvements in tanker
design and operations give added attention to prevention of massive
oil spills. This might include expanded studies on the sizes of tankers,
the number and arrangements of tanks, the development of emergency
equipment, and other items from the point of view of oil containment
as well as safety of operations.

(3) That further study be made on designation of sea lanes for
control of tanker routing and that steps be taken to develop and.
implement a U. S. plan for avoidance of hazardous or unique areas
by tankers carrying oil and other hazardous substances. Every
effort should be made to make use of designated sea lanes mandatory
rather than at the option of the tanker Captain.

- 21

(4) That an analysis be made of existing law and of pending
.legislation with the aim of granting sufficient authority to appro-
,priate federal agencies to take control of and assume liability for
a pollution event when it is evident that there is a threat to public
interest.

(5) That standards for operation of supertankers in U. S. waters
and ports be developed and that such standards of operation be
implemented through international agreement.

(6) That training programs for all maritime crews be improved
to reduce, human error as a major cause of pollution accidents and
that future curricula of the U. S. Merchant Marine Academy include
instruction in ways to prevent pollution by oil.

(7) That procedures for handling fuel oil and oily wastes of all
ships be reviewed and modified as reqIuired to reduce the hazards
of spills.

Offshore Oil Development and Environmental Hazards.

Part II of the Panel report on development of offshore resources
presents policy issues on oil operations. However, some observations
and findings pertinent to offshore oil are offered in this part of the
report.

Submerged lands of the Outer Continental Shelf off the United States
are leased to industry on a competitive basis by the Secretary of the
Interior for development of oil, gas, sulfur, and other minerals.
Lease sales are usually held following nominations of tracts by industry
or upon the Department's motion which follows known industry interest
in resources. Under delegation of authority from the Secretary, leases
are issued by the Bureau of Land Management. Exploration and te.ch-
nical operations of drilling and production are authorized and supervised
by the Geological Survey.

Offshore oil platforms are operated under regulations issued by
the U. S. Coast Guard to promote personnel safety and reduce hazards
to navigation., The placement of platforms to prevent obstruction to

- 22

navigation on the outer continental shelf is reviewed and authorized
by the Secretary of the Army through the Corps of Engineers.
Authority for the foregoing stems from the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act, (public law 212, 83 Congress). Under this Act the
Secretary of the Interior holds the prime responsibility on behalf
of the Federal Government for safety of engineering practices,
prevention of pollution, and management of offshore operations to
reduce interference with other interests.

Development of resources under offshore submerged lands has
depended largely on industry. initiative. Geological and geophysical
explorations have been carried out by industry over periods of many
years before new areas were opened for lease. For example, the
first explorations offshore in the Santa Barbara Channel commenced
in 1945. In recent years geophysical, seismic and environmental
data have been collected by industry in the Gulf of Alaska and along
the Atlantic Coast of the U.S. in long range programs to discover
new reserves of petroleum. Lease of tracts within fields already
under development depends upon information obtained from drilling
in adjacent areas. Because lease sales are competitive, information
and data on the geologic nature of possible oil-beating formations
are held proprietary by industry and are not usually available to
government until their use is of no further value in an economic sense.

From the point of view of geologic structure and oil-well tech-
nology, there are few (if any) coastal oil fields that are especially
more hazardous than others at the well-sites. Nevertheless oil
fields differ in their problems and requirements. The vertical
sequence of rocks and their characteristics and structural conditions
of the continental shelves of North America are known.only by inference
and extrapolation before drilling. These uncertainties, which should
control drilling practices, will not permit intelligent predrilling
evaluation of specific areas or structures with regard to the special
problems they present. However, because of variable oceanographic
characteristics and differing beneficial uses of the ocean, the
potential consequences of environmental degradation in case of well
leakage are highly variable. Therefore.. some situations require much
higher standards of operation and supervision than others in order to
preserve the environmental qualities at desired levels.

In recognition of this the Panel therefore reconu-nends that:

1. Oil well operations be conducted under stringent regulations
and supervision using the. most. Up-to-date technology in order
to, minimize the possibility of leakage.

Z. Particular attention should be given to the experience and
training of drilling supervisors in offshore drilling to as'sure
that a qualified, experienced expert is present on site during
all operations.

3. Any oil companies.holding offshore leases berequired-to
show their capability.for control, containment and removal of
spilled oil from the sea in the, vicinity of. any leak to the
responsible agencies.

.4. In view. of the complex and sometimes uncertain jurisdictions
covering pipelines which cross international, jurisdictions and
the joint responsibility for regulation by Federal and State,
Agencies a study should be made of the status of pipelines to
clarify regulatory responsibility and to achieve improved pollution
control in installation and operation.

24 -

Bibliography

"Oil Spillage Study Literature Search and Critical Evaluation for
Selection of Promising Techniques to. Control and Prevent Damage.
Battelle Memorial Institute, Richland, Washington, November 1967.
Distributed by Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical
Information, U. S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, Virginia
Z2151. Contains an extensive bibliography.

"Oil Pollution - A Report on Pollution of the Nation's Waters by
Oil and Other Hazardous Substances. 1.1 A Report to the President
by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Transportation
February 1968, 31 pp. Contains a selected bibl.iography.

Smith, J. E. "Torrey Canyon Pollution and Marine Life" A Report,
by the Plymouth Laboratory of the Marine Biological Association
of the United Kingdom. 1968, 196 pp. Cambridge University Press.
Contains a selected bibliography of European literature.

McKee, Jack E. "Oily Substances and their Effects on the
Beneficial Uses of Water" State of California Water Pollution
Control Board Publication 16, Sacramento, California 1956, 71 pp.
Contains a comprehensive bibliography of earlier work.

Acknowledgements

The Panel wishes to express its appreciation to the several
organizations and many individuals -,,@ho contributed extensively to
this study on oil spills. We are especially indebted to the Depart-
ment of Transportation, U. S. @ Coast Guard for furnishing expert
advice and for special airplane flights on which the Panel Members
viewed the spread of oil slicks over the Santa Barbara Channel.
The Department of the Interior through the Geological Survey and
the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration rendered
valuable assistance in meetings and furnished valuable data and
information relative to pollution control and offshore oil operations.
We are indebted also to the National Petroleum Council for special
analyses on oil production and for reports on industry cooperation.
We are indebted to officials from the State of California and to
members of the faculty of University California Santa Barbara for
presenting their views to the Panel.

The Panel was greatly impressed by the number of State,
Federal and industry activities that, were underway to combat pollu-
tion by oil at the time its own studies were commenced. The exis-
tence of this extensive work made it possible to draw upon a large
body of information and thus facilitate completion of the task in
a relatively short period of time.

For sale by the superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printh-ig Office
Washington, D.C. 20402 - Mce 35 cents. GPO 88 2- 0 5 2

CMAL
OIER
ROO

DATE DUE

'v-

PRINTED IN U.S.A.
GAYLORD No. 2333
7--7

MEMO 1,t
3 6661

v
9651