Crude Awakenings
September 7, 2000 --
Could an Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Happen in Southern California?
Shortly after midnight on March 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez ran aground
on Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska, spilling almost eleven
million gallons of crude oil. It was the largest oil tanker spill
in United States history.
Following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill both the oil industry and the
federal and California state government were awakened to the destruction
of oil spills. Since that time we have discovered that complacency
has overshadowed post-Valdez stringency and is endangering our marine
environment. In 1992 – using a model developed by the Department
of the Interior it was predicted that there was a 94% likelihood
of an Exxon Valdez type oil spill in southern California waters sometime
within the next 30 years. In 1998, 704 tank vessels called on the
Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach, carrying approximately 5.5 million
barrels of oil through the area (302,500,000 gallons of oil). Each
of these tankers can carry between 55,000 and 33 million gallons
of oil – up to triple the amount that was spilled by the Exxon
Valdez.
If the Exxon Valdez had spilled its crude oil in southern California
coastal waters, the oil spilled could cover the beaches from the
initial spill area to hundreds of miles south of the Mexican border
or an area that would stretch along the entire California coastline.
(In the Valdez spill, oil reached shorelines 600 miles southwest
of Bligh Reef). Could an Exxon Valdez type of spill happen in southern
California? After looking at the level of oil spill prevention and
response in California we have concluded that we are in fact minutes
from Doomsday on the Doomsday Oil Spill clock. Overlapping jurisdictions
and inadequate agency resources among the state agencies and a lack
of commitment in terms of money and research by private industry
to plan for and responds to oil spills are jeopardizing our ocean
resources.
Our investigation into spill prevention and response in California
exposed several "Risks" on the part of the government,
including insufficient staffing of the Marine Facilities Division
of the State Lands Commission, limitations to the Vessel Tracking
Service, pipeline safety, frequency of response drills/method used
for response drills and lapses in regulating Navy vessels. On the
part of the oil industry the following risks were uncovered: a lack
of pre-booming at the Chevron El Segundo Marine Terminal, oil terminal/refinery
worker safety and the continual use of single hull tankers. A glaring
example of both agency and industry irresponsibility is the Chevron
El Segundo Marine Oil Terminal. Here ships carrying Valdez size loads
of oil conduct oil transfers without many of the reasonable safeguards
required up and down the state.
Yet another unsettling area of concern that is revealed is a lack
of planning by coastal cities. In spite of the 1990 Huntington Beach
American Trader Oil Spill and the Valdez spill, none of the cities
located on the Santa Monica Bay have a clear plan in place to deal
with an oil spill disaster. Huntington Beach city officials expressed
that had they had a plan in place in preparation for the massive
spill the cleanup and beach closures would have been significantly
mitigated.
The report makes several recommendations that, if implemented, will
move use further away from the current hour of danger into one of
safety. Most significant is the need for a firm commitment from both
the oil industry and governmental agencies. Those who profit from
the transportation of oil through our waters must be held accountable.
The oil industry must be mandated to use simple, proven and affordable
technologies and to invest into the research and development of improved
spill response technologies. This includes increasing their investment
into Vessel Tracking Systems and Automated Identification Systems.
The state must require that pre-booming be required for all offshore
oil terminals. The state should appoint a single lead agency to oversee
spill prevention and response in California. The Governor should
appoint a commission to review these jurisdictions and make recommendations
for combining them under the authority of one agency. The U.S. Coast
Guard should require that spill response plans should be prepared
by each coastal county and city.
The California Lempert-Keane-Seastrand Act Oil Pollution Act of
1990 directs that the administrator provide for both "Best Achievable
Protection" and "Best Achievable Technology". This
report reveals that currently, neither of these mandates are being
realized in the Santa Monica Bay.
> Click Here
to Download Complete Report in PDF
> Return to Previous Page
|
