scholarly journals The Interagency Shoreline Cleanup Committee: A Cooperative Approach to Shoreline Cleanup—the Exxon Valdez Spill

1991 ◽  
Vol 1991 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-191
Author(s):  
John R. Knorr ◽  
Nancy Lethcoe ◽  
Andy Teal ◽  
Sharon Christopherson ◽  
John Whitney
Keyword(s):  
Gulf Of Alaska ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Commercial Fishing ◽  
Environmental Groups ◽  
Exxon Valdez ◽  
Cooperative Effort ◽  
Contingency Plan ◽  
Organizational Challenges ◽  
Cooperative Approach ◽  
Department Of Environmental Conservation

ABSTRACT Following the spill of 11 million gallons of North Slope crude oil by the Exxon Valdez in Alaska on March 24, 1989, a major cooperative effort to plan for the cleanup of Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska shorelines was undertaken in Valdez, Alaska. All aspects of the spill response—the lightering of oil remaining on the stricken tanker, the containment of free-floating oil, and the unknown miles of remote shoreline to be cleaned up—were much larger than anything in American experience. The event provided unprecedented organizational challenges in shoreline cleanup planning and execution. The scope of the shoreline cleanup and the extended cleanup time anticipated, due to geography, weather, logistics, and other factors, required an organization not specifically identified in the National Contingency Plan or the Alaska regional contingency plan. The Interagency Shoreline Cleanup Committee—an interdisciplinary, interagency cleanup planning group—evolved in Valdez concurrently with the larger response organization implemented under existing contingency plans. As a day-to-day working group serving the needs of the federal on-scene coordinator, it included Exxon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, federal and state land and resource management agencies, Alaska natives, and commercial fishing and environmental groups. The planning model that evolved was refined and streamlined in early 1990 and carried through the remaining cleanup seasons.

SHORELINE OIL FROM EXXON VALDEZ: CHANGE FROM 1991 TO 19931

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 972-973
Author(s):  
James C. Gibeaut ◽  
Ernest Piper
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Prince William Sound ◽  
Percent Reduction ◽  
Exxon Valdez ◽  
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill ◽  
Manual Removal ◽  
Oil Residue ◽  
Department Of Environmental Conservation ◽  
Visual Properties

ABSTRACT During summer of 1993, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation surveyed 45 sites in Prince William Sound that were oiled by the March 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. The data describe the oil's visual properties and extent. Comparisons provide estimates of oil reduction since 1991. From 1991 to 1993, an estimated 50 percent reduction in the amount of asphalt, surface oil residue, and mousse was largely caused by manual removal and raking. Subsurface oil reduced by about 65 percent. Sites mechanically tilled or from which oiled sediment was removed improved the most, but natural reduction was still greater than 50 percent.

A HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF OIL DISPERSANT GUIDELINES FOR ALASKA

1987 ◽  
Vol 1987 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-191
Author(s):  
Michael A. Conway
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
Control Method ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Inlet Section ◽  
Private Industry ◽  
Cooperative Effort ◽  
Oil Dispersant ◽  
Spill Control ◽  
Department Of Environmental Conservation

ABSTRACT The Oil Dispersant Guidelines for Alaska, Cook Inlet Section, were implemented on August 6, 1986, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Coast Guard, and Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation signed a Memorandum of Agreement. State and federal agencies, private industry, commercial fishermen, and environmentalists had to work together toward this achievement. Without this cooperative effort, there would be no planning for effective dispersant use in Alaska as a spill control method.

ALASKA NEARSHORE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 1035-1036
Author(s):  
Larry Dietrick ◽  
Geoff Harben ◽  
Mark Burger
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Gulf Of Alaska ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Coastal Communities ◽  
Southeast Alaska ◽  
Local Resources ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Department Of Environmental Conservation ◽  
Response Capability

ABSTRACT The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) was appropriated $1.2 million to design and conduct nearshore demonstration (NSD) projects in the Gulf of Alaska and southeast Alaska. The objective of these projects was to demonstrate response equipment positioned in coastal communities using local resources and local vessels of opportunity to contain and recover oil from orphan spills or spills that have escaped primary containment efforts. Depending on the coastal communities involved, the vessels of opportunity may be seiners, trollers, gill-netters, crabbers, or tenders. The NSD project successfully served as a prototype for the development of a statewide nearshore coastal oil spill response capability.

Shoreline Surveys at the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: The State of Alaska Response

1991 ◽  
Vol 1991 (1) ◽  
pp. 519-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erich Gundlach ◽  
Eugene A. Pavia ◽  
Clay Robinson ◽  
James C. Gibeaut
Keyword(s):  
Surface Coverage ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
The State ◽  
Exxon Valdez ◽  
Database Queries ◽  
Linear Extent ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Department Of Environmental Conservation ◽  
Oil Penetration ◽  
Oil Thickness

ABSTRACT The state of Alaska needs information on the shoreline impacts of the Exxon Valdez incident to determine the linear extent of affected shoreline and the degree of oil penetration into the beach versus surface coverage, to assist the shoreline treatment effort, and to monitor oil persistence. Three principal methods were used to obtain data. Low-altitude helicopter surveys were made repeatedly during the first months of the incident to define shoreline impacts as heavy, moderate, light, and “no observed oiling.” A total of 140 ground stations in Prince William Sound, and over 60 stations in the Kenai and Kodiak areas, were set up to make specific measurements of surface coverage, oil penetration, and oil thickness along a topographic profile. An extensive (more than 1,400 km) walking survey was mounted after the 1989 treatment season to determine the extent of oil remaining and to guide the 1990 cleanup effort. More than 160 km of shoreline remained moderately to heavily oiled in the three regions at the end of 1989. Collected data were entered into the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation geographic information system to enable map production, database queries, and report creation. On an as-needed basis, data derived from these surveys were presented to the state on-scene coordinator, other state and federal agencies, and the cleanup operation.

Initial State of Alaska Response to the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill

1991 ◽  
Vol 1991 (1) ◽  
pp. 321-323
Author(s):  
Randolph Bayliss ◽  
John H. Janssen ◽  
Albert Kegler ◽  
Marshal Kendziorek ◽  
Daniel Lawn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
National Guard ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
The State ◽  
Exxon Valdez ◽  
Air National Guard ◽  
Initial State ◽  
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill ◽  
Salmon Fry ◽  
Department Of Environmental Conservation

ABSTRACT The first weeks of the Exxon Valdez oil spill were critical to the defense of state resources. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) implemented the state spill response plan upon notification in the early hours of March 24, 1989. A local ADEC representative boarded the vessel within three and one-half hours of grounding. Experienced ADEC spill response staff, other state agencies, and two cleanup contract firms were notified that morning and were arriving through the first day. The Governor of Alaska and the Commissioner of ADEC surveyed the wreck that same day. Within 33 hours, ADEC had 30 persons on site. The state notification procedure and plan functioned effectively. Key roles undertaken initially by the state were aerial and computer spill tracking; liaison with fishing groups and local villages; and protection of sensitive habitats, especially salmon hatcheries. Notably, ADEC worked with the Cordova District Fishermen United (CDFU) to defend a critical salmon hatchery directly in the path of the spreading oil. Using the Alaska Air National Guard, two Alaska state ferries, and fishing boats, CDFU volunteers, local Chenega villagers, ADEC staff, and contractors used miles of boom to defend the hatchery. The hatchery was spared from oiling just as millions of salmon fry were released.

BIOLOGICAL CONDITIONS OF SHORELINES FOLLOWING THE EXXON VALDEZ SPILL1

1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 (1) ◽  
pp. 287-292
Author(s):  
Sam W. Stoker ◽  
Jerry M. Neff ◽  
Thomas R. Schroeder ◽  
Deborah M. McCormick
Keyword(s):  
Marine Mammals ◽  
Gulf Of Alaska ◽  
Prince William Sound ◽  
Residual Oil ◽  
Exxon Valdez ◽  
Biological Communities ◽  
Upper Intertidal ◽  
Abundance And Diversity ◽  
Environmentally Sound ◽  
Almost All

ABSTRACT Following the Exxon Valdez oil spill of March 24, 1989, in Prince William Sound, Alaska, Exxon conducted a comprehensive shoreline survey program in cooperation with federal and state authorities. Objectives of surveys during the spring and summer of 1989 were to assess the distribution and magnitude of oiling, to evaluate impacts of the oil on key shoreline biological communities, and to identify ecological and archaeological resources requiring special care during the massive cleanup effort that followed. Similar shoreline surveys were performed during the springs of 1990, 1991, and 1992 on all shorelines in Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska suspected of having residual oil. These subsequent surveys were conducted to provide information on the distribution and amounts of residual shoreline oil and to assess the condition of intertidal biological communities in order to make environmentally sound decisions regarding the need for additional cleanup. The following report is based primarily on survey results from Prince William Sound, where most of the heavy shoreline oiling occurred. Although not strictly quantitative, the shoreline surveys provide an unprecedented, broad base of professional observations covering the entire spill-affected area from 1989 through 1992 by which to evaluate spill impacts and recovery. Shoreline surveys documented that the extent of shoreline oiling declined substantially from 1989 to 1992. In 1989, oil was found on about 16 percent of the 3,000 miles of shoreline in Prince William Sound; by the spring of 1991, oil was found on only about 2 percent of the shoreline; and by May of 1992, on only 0.2 percent. In all years, most of this oil was located in the biologically least productive upper intertidal and supratidal zones. In both 1991 and 1992, small, isolated pockets of subsurface oil were found on some boulder/cobble beaches. Most of these deposits were also located in the upper intertidal and were usually buried beneath clean sediments. In almost all cases, the condition of intertidal biological communities improved correspondingly from 1989 to 1992. By the spring of 1991, recovery appeared to be well under way on virtually all previously oiled shores, with species composition, abundance, and diversity levels usually comparable to those of nearby shores that were not oiled in 1989. Recruitment of intertidal plants and animals was observed as early as the summer of 1989, and increasingly through 1991 and 1992. Recruitment was evident even in areas with remnant deposits of surface and subsurface oil, indicating that toxicity levels of the oil had declined substantially and that, in most cases, the residual oil no longer interfered with biological recovery. Observations of birds and marine mammals on or near shorelines surveyed during 1991 and 1992 confirmed that species present before the spill were still present and were feeding and reproducing in areas affected by oil in 1989. In most cases, observed densities were comparable to those recorded prior to the spill, and to those found in similar unaffected areas.

Alaskan North Slope Legacy Wells: Case Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 697-710
Author(s):  
Jessica Starsman ◽  
Ashley Adamczak ◽  
Tom DeRuyter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Navy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Diesel Oil ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Current Status ◽  
United States Geological Survey ◽  
Bureau Of Land Management ◽  
Department Of Environmental Conservation ◽  
Alaskan North Slope

ABSTRACT Various State of Alaska agencies, including the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC), are currently investigating 136 legacy wells within the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A) and surrounding lands. These legacy wells were drilled between 1944 and 1981 by federal agencies, including the United States Navy and United States Geological Survey, to explore oil reserve potential and to develop drilling techniques for Alaska's arctic. In 2004, 2010 and 2013 the Bureau of Land Management released preliminary studies describing potential environmental risks at each site. Many wells include historic reserve pits, flare pits, crude and diesel oil releases, and discarded solid waste. Tundra damage and potential residual contamination are of great concern. Due to their remote locations, information on the current status of waste is limited. Regulatory agencies are developing a cleanup plan that is appropriate for their remote, Arctic environment.

scholarly journals Two-Volume Contingency Plans in Alaska Provide Focused Information for Responders & Regulators

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 299651
Author(s):  
Lydia Miner ◽  
Robert Klieforth ◽  
Eppie Hogan
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Regulatory Compliance ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Specific Response ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Contingency Plans ◽  
Volume Response ◽  
Department Of Environmental Conservation

Oil discharge prevention and contingency plans (ODPCPs) have been required under Alaska statutes and regulations for oil exploration, production, storage, and transportation facilities since 1992. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) has prepared and submitted their North Slope ODPCPs (Milne Point, Endicott, Greater Prudhoe Bay, and Northstar) as a single volume for each facility under these requirements. However, in 2011, when the four plans were renewed, BPXA elected to present their ODPCPs in two volumes for each facility. The purpose of this organizational change from one to two volumes was to focus information in each volume; the first volume is a stand-alone Emergency Action Plan for spill responders, dedicated to spill response planning and preparedness, and the second volume is dedicated to spill prevention requirements and procedures. The 2-volume edition allows BPXA's plan writers, operators, and regulators to concentrate on specific response or prevention topics and regulatory compliance. The 2-volume plan is easier to use and revise through the amendment process. This approach is allowed under Alaska regulations and was embraced by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Federal regulators (Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Coast Guard, and US Department of Transportation) have reviewed and approved the 2-volume response plans as well. According to regulators, with such large ODPCPs, the effort to maintain publication efficiency during public review creates a potential risk of confusion or lack of sufficient detail, which may lead to comments that focus on form or style, rather than content. Working with two volumes circumvented this potential problem. Due to the size and lengthy history of the facilities, an comprehensive Alaska regulations governing the contents of ODPCPs, two volumes allowed BPXA to include all of the necessary information for the plans without creating a storage or ergonomic problem for the reviewers. Regular users of the ODPCPs at the BPXA facilities have found that working with a smaller, more focused volume is more efficient.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document