IncidentNews Home  >>  Incident  >>  Entry

T/V Exxon Valdez

The Exxon Valdez oil spill aroused more media and public interest (both national and
international) than any other spill in U.S. history.  Alaska is considered by many to be a
pristine environment that includes many species of elsewhere endangered wildlife.  \\In an
effort to absorb and use input from the multitude of groups concerned with the effects of
the spill, the Interagency Shoreline Cleanup Committees (ISCC) were formed to monitor
beach cleanup progress.  The ISCCs focused on identifying strategic resource planning
needs and consisted of representatives from Exxon, environmental groups, private
landowners, native groups and state and Federal agencies.  There were ISCCs formed in
Homer, Kodiak, Seward and Valdez.\\Concern over oil related wildlife mortality was intense
during the spill.  The grounding occurred at the beginning of the bird migration season.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife service estimated that mortalities directly related to the
spill range from 350,000 to 390,000 birds, especially common and thick-billed murres,
assorted sea ducks, bald eagles, and pigeon guillemots, 3,500 to 5,500 sea otters and 200
harbor seals.  In addition, killer whales may have been affected by the spill as their
numbers in the area declined shortly after the spill.  Of the 1,630 birds (over 36,000
dead birds were collected) and 357 Sea Otters that were trapped and treated by the
International Bird Rescue Research Center (IBRRC)-run facilities (established in Homer,
Kodiak, Seward and Valdez in response to this spill), the total survival rate was 50.7 per
cent for birds, and 62 per cent for sea otters.  These survival rates are considered very
good for oil impacted animals.\\Unlike birds, sea otters had to be anesthetized to be
washed which increases the risk to the animal, and increases the cost of rehabilitation.
The Sea Otter rehabilitation program was complex, with a total of 29 veterinarians, and 9
veterinarian technicians scheduled to provide 24 hour care.  The resulting cost of the sea
otter rehabilitation program was at least $51,000 per Sea Otter.  The highest percentages
of sea otter fatalities (60 per cent) were recorded in the first three weeks of the
spill.\\Due to the magnitude and remote location of the spill it was necessary to bring
significant additional resources (equipment and personnel) to Alaska to respond to the
spill.  Most of the response equipment brought to Alaska early on in the spill had to be
delivered by air.  Since the Valdez airport could not handle aircraft larger than a DC-6
or a C-130, most large air cargo shipments went to Anchorage and were transferred to
smaller planes.  In addition, many of the facilities (such as barge hotels for personnel)
and equipment (such as hot water beach washing barges) was designed specifically for this
spill.\\Most of the affected shorelines were inaccessible by land.  Most of the cleanup
operations were conducted from vessels.  Initially, fishing boats and other available
craft were used to house personnel.  Later, a state ferry, Navy transport ships, camps
established on deck barges, and a self-contained semi-submersible derrick barge was used
for berthing.\\Besides other logistical problems with assembling and organizing a large
work force in a short time, the majority of the personnel involved in the cleanup effort
had to be trained for their jobs as well as receive formal safety training.\\There were
commercial fisheries closings as a result of the spill and great concern over the
potential negative effect on hatcheries.   The Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC) canceled the 1989 black cod season in Prince William Sound, banned
fishing for Pacific herring and cut short the shrimp season as a result of the spill.  It
was determined in 1989 that at least 87 per cent of the herring spawning grounds in Prince
William Sound were heavily oiled.\\In the winter of 1989/1990 and again in 1990/1991 the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) conducted monitoring programs to
determine the extent of the natural removal of oil over the winter, and identify treatment
issues to be addressed in the coming cleanup seasons.  These studies determined that
removal of surface oil between September 1989 to February 1990, for exposed shorelines,
was about 90 per cent; for sheltered shorelines and those with intermittent energy, the
removal rates were 70 per cent.  For sub-surface oil, the removal rate was approximately
55 per cent, though this varied with the depth of the sub-surface oil impacts.\\Concern by
Alaskan residents, in particular native villages, over the possible contamination of
subsistence foods, led NOAA to conduct research addressing specific issues of subsistence
food safety.  In general, no quick method existed to quantitatively assess food safety,
but the overall guideline was that if the food had no visible oiling or had no oily smell
it was probably safe for consumption.\\The results of the NOAA study indicated that in
general, the aromatic contaminant level in fish, varied little between affected areas and
the unaffected reference site (Angoon, in southeast Alaska).  The level of aromatic
contamination in mollusks was higher than normal (tissue levels exceeded 100 ppb) in the
areas of Windy Bay, Kodiak, Chenega Bay, and Old Harbor, with the highest levels occurring
in samples taken from Windy Bay and Kodiak.  Mollusk samples taken in other areas affected
by the oil spill were generally comparable in levels of aromatic contaminants to samples
taken from the reference site.\\At the time of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, there were no
national guidelines established to indicate the levels of aromatic contaminants acceptable
in food.  Results from the subsistence studies indicated that higher levels of
carcinogenic aromatic hydrocarbons were found in smoked fish, than in the unsmoked fish
samples obtained after the Exxon Valdez spill.