Transcripts For CSPAN3 Alaskan Oil Spill 20240713

Ill is up rise, either pie. Ill summarize it. I am here to product response to the oil spill and designed with the efforts to deal with the consequences. Before i do this, however, i want to express sincere regret as to what happened on behalf of all the employees of exxon and certainly on behalf of myself i really cant tell you how say we are sympathetic and particularly those in alaska and the Prince William sound area and thats where the difficulty is creating a great deal of problems for those people. As weve by, and we will continue doing all we can can in spilling up the and theyve already been this uponment in the area, and high the skies make it a particularly different problem. A few comments about the spill to put it in perspective and its been changed many times. The spill is 240,000 barrels that occurred early on march 24. We have other factual information. The weather was clear. The ship had no known mechanical difficulty. A change was requested because of ice and the outgoing schanel. T the captain subsequently left the bridge and it showed the captains alcohol level was set up by the limits established by the coast guard. Thats clear. There are still many Unanswered Questions as to what occurred during this period of time. Were conducting, of course, not one, but many investigations within the company and the National Transportation safety board and coast guard, there are other state investigations that are also under way and were participating in all of those, the, the for the face, and the seconding seconding priorities and the damaged tanker had approximately 1 Million Barrels of crude on it and certainly trying to immediately mitigate the impact of the spill on the environment and the people of alaska. And major mobilization began immediately and by now involves as the secretary said many hundreds of people, a thousand people and a lot boats and i wont go into all of those details. Currently, were receiving support from a large number of organizations and we have experts, academics and so forth. Under contract and we have 200 exxon experts and consultants attempting to mitigate the part of this. And we have the communities of Prince William sound. A claims office that was staffed by 30 people and its open and adequate funds are placed in accounts and local banks. Those funds are available to provide immediate, advanced payments to those requiring monetary support while claims are being reviewed as process. Our intention is to provide settlements. As of snoon tuesday we had removed, and we had it all out of the ship as im sure most of you read in this mornings paper that the ship was successfully refloated and its now in a in an area next to the island where we will do temporary repairs and when thats completed well take the ship into dry dock and repair it permanently. A couple of more comments. For now it is too early to assess the longterm environmental damage. Assessment studies are under way and i mentioned a number of them are being made and others and noaa and we are also having a number done ourselves. We cannot judge how long recovery will take in Prince William sound, but i can assure you that since march 24th, we will continue to do so until the job is done. We are continuing to cooperate fully to establish the facts as to what happened. More importantly, we want to help in any way we can to explain what might be done to reduce the chances of such an incident happening again. I can assure you that action are under way with the exxon revised policies and procedures in the light of this accident to preclude what happened from happening again unless theres a different set of circumstances. It would not happen again, has exxon learned, mr. Rawle, not to have such an immense vessel, the length of three football fields and it takes a couple of miles to turn course, to risk that for one pilot and not have a copilot . Right now if i went out on three or four other exxon super tankers this morning . Would i find one pilot, master pilot . No, sir. The Prince William sound areas is unusual that most of the three mates, plus the captains are licensed to pilot the ship in many areas and Prince William sound as has been said many times this morning has the state pilot that takes it to a certain point and then the then you hear me. I know. I r ill pry to in this case the pilot was also the captain and obvious le, we have no knowledge of how he was impaired. I think its automobile its possible to have two mates on the bridge to do what needs to be done when you have ice in one channel and a great deal of ice. Im not trying to make excuses on this, but there are ways to do that if, in fact, as you suggested in earlier conversation with secretary skinner that if one had a heart attack or something it seemed ridiculous. Time parenthe master could h said bring another made up and when the skipper was on the bridge there were four people. There was a lookout on one of the wings and there was a person who was in charge and the captain and there was a third mate ask it was his ship and also the man that was steering the vessel. So that was the situation. When he went down as i understood it he could have sent up another mate and then legally responsive. Whether or not that ship would have hit the reef i would expect he had a lot of chance getting through there. Ive had difficulty understanding this accident myself. Thats the first lesson we learned this morning about the copilot that was equipped because the person, the squall phied masters phied qualified masters of vessels as was required and you didnt have any knowledge and then you see in the law that you should have known. Isnt it the record that the driver of the vessel had three convictions of driving under the influence of alcohol . In other words, he had an alcohol problem . Man, i would be scared to death if i was in the boardroom and i was on the board and you said you had the fellow running up with that expensive cargo and if i was only 3 years old, i would say were grinding them up at kings bay or kings point up in lil and. I can give you youve got incident, and we have some themselves in regarding drugs and alcohol and negotiating those and we can impose that in certain instances and weve imposed it. Want before this bill, but weve got it in the policy and were going to do it. If we take lawsuits on it well take the lawsuits on it. I would have felt bet per wed taken a lawsuit in this kind of thing and we went to court and lost it rather than the situation we find ourselves in now. Senator, theres more to this alcohol question than you are probable aware of. Let me clarify further. We didnt know about the dwis and id never heard about this man until two weeks ago. Im not looking for any sympathy, by the way. He came in as i understand it ands it a number of years ago, however how are to put him back on a ship at at an operate are rating level. Pfs a bad judgement and any in any event i wanted it make that cle i appreciate that. The third meet now, you find no culpability there, i take it because while you fired the master, you now have Corporate Counsel representing the third meet, is that right . When you find yourself in this kind of a situation and im not too expert in these answers, but ive asked these same questions. In the case of the captain initially, we told him to get his own counsel. This was before we knew that the alcohol situation would show up and by the way, that was tested and showed up as you may recall until several days later, but we knew when the ship went aground and he wasnt on the beach we obviously had a conflict between the corporate interest probably between the corporate interest and the individual interest. And say you get your own counsel and there was circumstances, in the case of the third meat its sort of in the same phase. There has been, to my knowledge, no testimony taken under oath because the National Transportation safety board is still developing the hearing times, but everyones been interviewed by those individuals, by the coast guard, by exxon and so forg, but we have to let this thing get into that menu, i think. On the response, you said that the first phase response and the first was for aliasco and the next one was exxon and you responded immediately inferring that perhaps it wasnt a prompt by an Immediate Response . Well, im sure you heard this before and there are a number of contingency plan. One of of them was the aliaaska and the one had to be in plane before he spot up. It was revised several times since and then the shippers were separated out of the pipeline and they had to have a still con tefrjy evensy plan. . When i said the first part was ali per se in phase one one, the numbers will say it this morning. There has always been recognition that if you had a tanker spill in Prince William sound and you mentioned a probable case and nobody mentioned it was probable and it would be this large, but there has been a rather modest writeup in the contingency plan for that that recognized the possibility of a 200,000 barrel spill which is the same ballpark as what were talking about here. There are certain times as to when you mobilize resources from other ports from around the world and in our case we bring them from europe, florida and other places an important part of that contingency plan, anything that large required in effect had approved by the federal agencies, the epa and the state of alaska agencies involved recognize that you had to program. Ly disperse a disperson and in this case, 9527 would have been the proper dispursement. A team left houston. The man mentioned earlier today, mr. Rossi was sent with a member of our associates. We had Response Teams in the west coast, the east coast and anyone that could be of support in recent under continue condition tract and all these people con vooned and the Management Team was deal and it was the 27 there on on sally, because not that decisions would be made, but the plant involved a number of people to be involved in the Decision Making process. Senator stephens, i have a lot of other question, but i want to yield to you. Well, thank you very much. Mr. Rawl, i know what you say and we certainly dont imply anything personal in our feelings, but my my problem dealing with this now is the problem of the multiblissist plans. Its my understanding that aliasca did have a contingency plan. There is a Regional Response team plan. There was a Prince William sound company plan. Would you do us a favor of asking your people to give us a copy of each one of those since the beginning of the pipeline shipments out of valdez . I believe you have to i have to get them anyway for the lawsuit. You want them to each member of the committee or just send it to the counsel, i guess. I am pleased to tell the committee. Bill steve sensephens is a frie mine. Weve related. He talks about that one, and he said exxon would accept total responsibility for this. You have made a similar statement here now, but after mr. Stephens left alaska, your Legal Department indicated that as far as the liability to the customers that exxon would rely on an act of god theory. Is that correct . When mr. Stephens made his statement and the president of exxon usa which is operating in this country. Theyre talking about the impact of the spill in alaska because you start getting into something downstream with that, and i assume you talk about customers and things of this sort of nature. You can roll around the world and there is no end to it. It was interpreting alaska as being a Second Thought of exxon and it left significant doubt in the mind of alaskans to the extent that the exxon any National Company would accept the statement of liable they mr. Stephens made. Oh. And many of us are lawyers. Youre the president of the company, but your lawyers are liable to any to court and say after all that was not a legal obligation. It was a statement of policy and were now defending against these suits and what is the policy of exxon with regard to any expense that develops as a result of the spill . Obviously, ive said again here this morning and its noen tension of mine to stay in this the best we can do and also to pay those people in your state that have been damaged by this spiel and there are a variety of damages and when you talk about suits, weve got suits and im not a lawyer, and the fact that there are a lot of these suits that are legitimate suits and theyll have to go to court. As i shaerd the problem who biffs in town. They wont have to stay there, right. The suspect, is that what put the sba and the federal Emergency Management agency out there to get temporary assistance which if there are claims that can be presented that your company will pay, and they get that assistance to repay it and meanwhile, there are a lot of people in the earthquake, and people not even in the area of the earthquake have severe financial losses as a result of it. Thats going on right now, but i think some of its going down into saths aeattle and i just w make sure from the point of view of the company that that was raised to customers has no relationship to the events that took place in my state. Now i have a map that was made when i was up here and we drew these things on there, and it showed the four hatchery areas and that was the exxon valdez on the reef, and it was my understanding that the obligations to remain to have a pilot onboard basically came down to about this line and the third mate was qualified to handle the entrance, but he was not qualified to pilot this vessel above that line. Its also my understanding that the captain was the only person onboard after the pilot got on as the ship came through of the valdes narrows and the captain was the only person onboard qualified to run the ship. Is that your understanding . Our understanding is the captain was the only man onboard licensed as a pilot to run the ship. Thats different as to yien is on it is my understanding that a third mate was not able to run past that. Im not trying to pin you down. Frankly, i cant im having trouble even seeing the map, but i know where blithe wreath is and where the channel goes. Unfortunately, its blie wreath like captain bly. It is my understanding that the captain was required to get a passby the island and the reef and he did not do that. We just learned this morning as a result of diss closure yesterd disclosure that the captain and as the pilot left and the tug left it and that the third offic counter man the computer. Is that your understanding . No, sir, it is not. As a result of interviews with the third officer that he turned that computer off and it was not at the time that he hit the rocks on automatic pilot and im just telling you what he has said. Ive taken too much time this morning and its my understanding that the visits in cordova that the cordova people who built the hatcheries and those were not federal and they were built by the people in the cordova area to enhance the production of salmon in the area and they felt compelled and did go and acquire the boom and started the protection of those hatcheries because the exxon group would not move to, in their opinion, quickly enough to start the protection. There should have been federalization. Have you talked to your people as to why some of the offers of assistance that were made were refused . For instance, the Interdepartmental Team and the federal and state team went to valdez, stayed there two days and it was rejected and its a crisis Management Team financed by the taxpayers. It did work out a contingency plan to protect the resurrection bay and the Fjords National Park. Secondly, im told the soviets came in and made an offer, the swedes mrft, that have dealt with oil spills in the past and your coordinator refused this testimony. Is is that a company pol sigh . Were you involved by that . Second, a lot of ask were willing to accept the russian offer. Is that ship able to be allowed. Were accepting all of the help and have been trying to accept the help. The norwegian offer that had been made early in the spill was really, they wanted to have, as i understand it, the number of people had four observers come and look and as far as im concerned and know there was approved and there was no offer of help. They want to observe, they want to observe it. There was a french offer about be onner is vance. The germans also contacted me. The germans. Now theres a question of offers of help and people just want to see how to deal with a large soap kell, so the words are different and the inent and cordova. Its my understanding that were using beam their about thes and you try to that were not dealing with beaches that look like miami beach or someone else out there and these are very difficult conditions and thats why its such a pristine area and it is so trajic and why it has the wild life it has. We also have concerns and were getting thousands of volunteers from our own people in the u. S. And around the world that want to come help. Were getting thousands of letters and telephone calls from people all over the country saying we want to go and help, but one of the only good things i can say about this thing is that so far no one was killed in this operation and im sure there have been minor injuries and as you know, senator, you have a 15foot tide in Prince William sound which is unusual in the u. S. Anyway and you have to go up in maine, and we may have senator from maine, fundishing y or beach if and somebody better be there with a boat. Its been slow in cleaning up the beaches. It will be slow cleaning up the beaches and the beaches of france that were cleaned up were Pretty Simple kind of a clean up compared to what were facing, but well get it done. Im sorry you cant see this. I have a oceaning on roofer thatty and he told me you have to view the Prince William sound of producing 25 more fresh water annually than the Mississippi River and it goes southwest ward with what we call the last coastal current, and as the water exits, the Prince William sound its basically fresh water. Most people think theyre dealing with saline water and he has tried to make an input on these plans and an input on the plans now from the recovery of this. I gave his name to the people and i was there on friday. I begged people to talk to the people had knowledge of what was predictable were not consulted and that has left a great feeling with alaskans. This man is to us, you know, the key man for this area. This incident team, one of the first things they did when they got over to stewart was to contact him for the plans dealing with the keen eye Fjords National Park and resurrection bay. I think anybody thats looked at those plans will tell you theyre absolutely perfect. They set the priorities and they said how much bloom would be necessary in each area and they determined the areas that had the greatest sensitivity and the first area was an area that was the responsibility of the city of steward. That was the number one salmonproducing stream in the area and it had to be protected first and they said you had to have and the people came forward and said okay, well pay for it, but we cant move it and we had to scurry around and find people to protect it, but what im telling you is they were over there in valdez. They were over there on sunday, monday and tuesday. This was interdepartmental, and they were asking each day to be heard and they were told they were not needed. If you want to know why we feel so strongly that there should have been a federal presence thats it. Your people said we dont need you. I was with the National Guard general an eskimo in sterile, a gentleman in his own right and he flew me down there and offered his assistance and said we dont need your help. Mr. Rawl you have a Wonderful Company that is the pride of this country, but in this instance, we feel you let us down and ive got to say it, and ill say it anyway. Thank you. Senator gordon . Senator stephens asked you about what he considered him to be a backing away from our agreement to assume responsibility when you said youd treat it as an act of god and any claims by your customers, your response to him was that did not limit your responsibility to alaskans impacted by this spill. Senator stephens quite properly pointed out that there were people outside of alaska who were impacted by this and many of the fishermen who regularly fish in Prince William sound are from the state of washington and from the state of oregon. Would you limit your liability and only the people who are voting residents of alaska or does it extend to everyone whose livelihood is impacted by this spill . Senator, you can understand how sitting here, you know, i presume youre a lawyer and im not, and you have to hear the specifics on this. If youre a fisherman in your home state thats been going to alaska over the summer and fishing and so forth and you know it has records to show that, presumably he would be damaged and im sure he has access to counsel because there are plenty of counsel around that have spent plenty of time looking at this thing. I cannot accept, though, liability and ad infiniteum, and they have to be taken care of in this regard. Were doing what we can do now. Weve been very busy trying to get the ship off the rocks. Its now, thank god, over where hopefully we can tax it appropriate and get it to a dry dock. By the way, the senator from oregon is not here now, but he made a speech this morning about putting that ship in oregon and talking about the bar and so forth and he said thats what exxon wanted to do and exxon had a question about where there was a dry dock and taking the ship that size and it was important. That got translated somewhat in the press and so forth, i guess. There are other places in the far east and im not saying where the ships going, but the governor of oregon has you get communicated with the paper. I cant really say that this is what he actually hes indicated he questions whether he wants a new state and we didnt make a decision as to where he would go, and i want to make the record clear on that. Ive tried to answer your question, but its very difficult to me you are not attempting right now to make a distinction and say that your only responsibility would be for the affected residents of alaska, but when you Start Talking about customers no, but thats the basis that senator stephens used and you referred to, and thats an entirely different thing. Okay. I take it that the parent Exxon Corporation some time ago made a decision that it was wise corporate policy for it to hone its own shipping line and to ship alaskan oil in vessels owned by a company or by a subsidiary . Well we use charter ships and i dont know how many were using in alaskan trade, but in International Trade we had two and exxon had 71 ships worldwide and roughly, maybe off a ship or two. 19 of them in this country and we dont use chartered ships. This ship is owned by a wholly owned subsidiary. Can you give me, the chairman of the corporation, or maybe work it back up. Who was the captain vurp visor and who was his supervisor. When you get to the lower levels i lose track and when the captain has a supervisor, or when that supervisor is between also reports to a manager on the west coast of the u. S. There are also other people who tell the captain what to do in terms of scheduling and these captains work a few weeks on and a few weeks off and not precise on the time, but then that individual on the west coast who was in port in venetia, california, near the San Francisco area. He would presume someone we call an Operations Manager and as a president of the Exxon Shipping Company who reports to the Senior Vice President of exxon usa who reports to the visa company. We had manicured committees in new york. And i dont know how many levels that is, and i want very earnestly to make a suggestion to you, mr. Rawl. Whatever the success of exxon in the past it now has the dubious distinction of having caused one of the most severe and perhaps the most severe man made disaster and environmental disaster in our history. We are constantly comparing ourselves in this country, sometimes unfavorably and sometimes i may say unfairly with the japanese, but as i understand their corporate structure, when Something Like this happens, everyone takes responsibility from the individual who was directly in cause to the ceo and everyone offers his resignation at that point so that a new team can take over and restore the credibility of the corporation. I suggest the disaster that your company has caused calls for that response. Im very happy to hear your comment on it, but that expresses my opinion on that disaster. I appreciate that that expesexpe expresses your opinion and a lot of the japanese killed themselves also and i refuse to do that. Im not asking for that. But the resignation is in order. I dont think so. Senator carey . I think not withstanding everybodys anger and frustration and so forth and there isnt any real way to excuse what happened, but i dont think we gained a great deal by posturing up here at this point and somehow doing other than to say youre recognized and i would say most people in the country appreciated the forthrightness with which you tried to accept responsibility and be involved in the cleanup and accept the cost thereof. There are obviously some questions, though and these things have a way of ameliorating as time goes on and commitments can become dissipated and other things tend to get in the way and more will be clamoring from one end of the country to the other. Let me try and see, then, if i can get a full understanding because not withstanding the press reports and i dont know how accurate and extensive are. As to what you see now, what have you declared as your full responsibility now . For instance, to what extent in the reparation process do federal and state agencies, has a process been put in place now to assess the cost to the federal government which you intend to reimburse. What is the extent of the reimbursement . I dont really know, senator, what the extent that is and whether well reimburse the federal government. Well have to look into that. That has not been our instant concern. Let me give you an example the committee has been thirsty to encourage noaa to do considerably more on Global Warming and the impact on o zone and ecosystem and so forth. Much of their resource will have to be diverted and come in here to find out what the impact of oil which settles on the bottom is going to be on microorganisms and life systems and so forth. Will it be your intention to redress that additional cost . Ill look at everything and thats all i can say. When you get this big advertisement and these newspapers which apologizes and says well cover the full cost and make it good. I mean, to what extent have you thought that out . What does making good mean . How long will fishermen continue to be compensated for the loss of lively hood . The first thing we have to find out is what is the size of this environmental disaster . There have been a number of environmental disasters around the world and some others likely is a lot more oil than that that did not have lasting effects and we pay the u. S. Government, a good part of the delay, in my view, the early days in the delay and from the time we were ready to spray detergent which was part of the approved plan and it was a detergent that has been approved by the epa. It was a detergent approved by the state of california, and 12 countries around the world. We had it available and we had aircraft and were ready to spray and it was tested and it was in the plan for a long time and this size spill, we couldnt get an approval from saturday morning when we requested approval on friday. We couldnt get approval on saturday and by 6 35 on sunday evening and by then the weather had gotten bad and so forth. Now weve got some Government Agency involved in that. And its the responsibility and as a lawyer, my ears are ringing with damages and when you start pointing who is at fault, you say the ship went aground and we had a plan and we werent able to start the plan. As a lawyer, that may be what youre hearing. What im telling you is that in good conscience were going to try to fix, and when you Start Talking about compensating the u. S. Government, every one of us compensates the u. S. Government all of the time. This company pays a lot of taxes every year and on alaskan crude oil. The pay 20 want to get that shipping done for which we are part honors. Then we go to other cooperatives that we belong to worldwide, the insurance is very complex, there are a number of other questions and so forth. Have you personally spoken to mr. Cousins to determine it . Now i have not. Are you aware of what he says . Yes i am. What is now cousins is a third mate. Thats correct. What is exxons policy when a captain is incapacitated and no other licensed or authorized personnel or on board . I frankly dont know precisely with that policy is. Is there a policy . Im sure there is. But you are not aware of . It i have asked a lot of questions but i missed that one. To your knowledge, did mr. Cousins ask in conformance with Company Policy bys assuming command of the ship under that situation . I dont know the policy but i doubt it, i really dont know the policy. And notwithstanding you are currently representing, your lawyers are representing it . We are representing him until, as you, say or i thought you said you are a lawyer, obviously everybody has a right to representation and if hes not really at fault here, temporarily but you have made no determination based on this conversation. I didnt have that conversation, one of our lawyers to. I understand but from what has been reported to you, you have made no determination as to whether he acted in conformance with Company Policy. I dont know. Is the valdez equipped to maintain communications with exxon headquarters during transit . You talk about exxon headquarters, we talk about an office in new york where i work, they presumably have radio equipment that can communicate with various points where we have people that stay in touch with the ships, but i dont know precisely what equipment, they have had no trouble communicating. Other situations in the past that you are aware of where an unlicensed person has taken control of one of the ships . Not that i am aware of. Can you give us some idea of the impact of this reduction from the north slope on crude oil supplies in the lower 48 states in terms of gasoline prices and supply . Well it has had some impact and at times it has been substantial and of course, every time someone, possibly the governor of alaska says we are going to shut down a pipeline or an open pipeline, but while market is very volatile these days, the World Oil Market is volatile, every time in opec minister changes the market goes up and down, there is a situation relatively with gasoline in the country since last, year demand is up as you know, and there have been some refinery turnarounds. Now, there is more product moving to the west coast, we have moved a lot from the gulf to the west coast, we are trying to get it out there. But the crude price went down yesterday, for intermediate, pricing that was predicated on the back, the ship was off the rock, then they Start Talking about something, i dont know, its tight but manageable on the west coast, now that ship is out of the way, if you can operate the ship in and out with whatever kind of regulations transpire, you can relieve the anxiety, sort of the psychological thing with the gasoline as im sure you know. You dont even need it and wont be concerned. Obviously you heard the many people who had said, this was never supposed to happen. All guarantees and plans were in place. But once again, the human seemed to have found a way that defies the ads. Is there a lesson that you would draw from this in terms of our future efforts with respect to Oil Exploration me . Obviously there are a couple of situations that we have looked at and have taken steps on. In terms of Oil Exploration, i think we need it in this country. I think it is as you know, we are importing 30 plus percent of the oil we consume. We have a balance of payments problem that we have. Some of which exxon doesnt own, thank god, but when we are not working on it but im really getting at is when you look at all of the circumstances now. The summary seemed to be very disturbing. You have a pilot that may have gotten off before the ship was it a point that it sort of. Then i have not heard that before. Im just saying its an allegation in the air you have a ship that changed course. A captain incapacitated you have a coast guard they didnt have positive control. Working people. It seems like murphys law, seems like there was a complacency, in a very risky process, where major guarantees were given to citizens. Not just in alaska who are most profoundly affected. But across this country in this process. Would you say that that is fair to say . There is a real complacency. The plan for cleanup was not adequate. Even if the plan worked according to the way that it was supposed to work. It wasnt enough, the ship was far in excess in terms of capacity. And so forth. It seems like i heard sam skinner say earlier, there is no magic solution. I think we are looking for just basics that avoid a kind of negligence. I think you have used the word guarantee a number of times, i think it was clearly stated all the time that there was no guarantees. I am not talking about guarantees im talking about the elimination of some of the fundamental risk levels. It seems to me there was a complacency. Its fair to say that when you get into large spills, you are not guaranteed anything, but you make every effort to avoid them. Like the airplane crashes or whatever else happens. But that is what you can do. What you are saying there is that there is a higher expectancy to get into a large spill. There is not a high or expectancy. I have said that. The equipment is stateoftheart. This isnt an old steamer we are talking about is 125dollar ship. Its not state of the art somebodys trying to turn the wheel, there should be an alarm bell that goes off. We will have to find out what the facts are. The man says that he turned that automatic pilot off. But certainly if you turn the wheel. Hes an experienced person. Hes running ships in the ocean. I suppose you can tell whether you are getting out. You can tell whether thats having some effect on it. If you havent touched the right but in you run into something. Why he got out of that channel, i have no knowledge of that, i just cant tell you i. Every effort to find it out some. Thank you. He is an experienced he did not get permission to take over. I dont really know that senator, i just dont know how that works, frankly. I assume not because i have not heard that. Do you know whether or not they have radio contact . I dont know whether at that particular point in time. I know they had radio contact with the coast. I know if he had said that the coast guard, i want to take, over or the captain wants me to take, over they would say you are not a licensed pilot im just presuming, thats a good answer because the requirements the master pilot is very precise very strange. And the testimony has been declared. There is only one license. Certainly exxon is not containing. Absolutely not. Someone asked about the policy you dont have to say you dont know, you do know the policy. But of course, there could be a circumstance like you said earlier where somebody has a heart attack can i partnership, or whatever it is wouldnt be likely. No, you cannot just tell him to run itself. The captain just felt that. There is the pilots for exxon right now. You do not have a policy. We have a circumstance that i mentioned earlier. Its my understanding the Coast Guard Office to take over in those types of circumstances. We have a number of officers that could have been on the bridge, or could be on the bridge that circumstance. But you are getting me into i dont want to get into what i know. Im very inexperience on the whole question. They had a heart attack, it was a policy of acts on. That it should just run itself. Because it leaves unlicensed, because you didnt have any license to take over. We have people that could run the ship. We know this was going to get run into the rocks. I just said that as i understand it, i have a lawyer who could tell me again without saying it properly that you could have two officers on the dark along with the homes then in addition without the catchment there if you want to quiz me on the coast guard you have the wrong witness you only find out. We all know the rules of the road of the coast guard. Thats the master of the pilot. No more than one on that ship at that time. If its appropriate, we will have more in the future. If its appropriate, when asked if you had learned anything. You could at least learn that. Its not adequate and we ought to have that. Im not sure senator, but this master has indicated that he was under the influence of alcohol sometime after this. But he had he been piloting the ship himself. He was a licensed pilot, its very possible we could have the same circumstance. We are speculating what wouldve happened. But the license doesnt necessarily make anybody affected when they are piling an airplane or a ship. But you brought up a good question. What its not your contention but the vessel should have been controlled by coast guard radar. At the collision the collided with a rock, my contention is all i know about it is the weather was clear, there was ice out there. Im not asking about the weather conditions its pretty obvious that this was going to happen excuse me i am asking. You whether the coast guard shouldve have control over any circumstances. I think obviously we will be pleased the coast guard would be pleased. To get back in the channel or something. It save a lot of money, thats a hypothetical. What is the actual policy, you think it was a responsibility to continue the coverage of that vessel. I cannot comment on that. I dont know what your obligations are what is your reaction i think if you think that is following that and by that is that correct . I think we have done a great job of keeping the ship off the rocks. That was no mean feat i think thats great in terms of the cleanup, its dimension and times a high tide, were chasing the oil were doing what we can, and we are going to use all of the Resources Available but some of the stuff that we talked about before is moving fast we are now starting to clean up instead of float some point. But i think were doing a good job so youre last suggestion that you take over the coast guard takes over the project. I think we will just have to look at that. I know we are both going to look at it, what if somebody has a real instant here for this the facts are of a hunch that we will have to keep doing what the senator said to do. Part of the delay as what i mentioned early on in this, but we have a lot of help in getting started. You have kept the sun has is ready to testify. I understand when i was gone there is one thing. When i was in i asked about the disbursement. I asked if there was an exercise last summer of the contingency plan and i asked of this particular dispersion had been used and certified as a result of that run through of the contingency plan. And i was told it had not. That this disbursement that your company tried to use this time had never been approved before by the coast guard or by the fisheries people did you know that . I did not know that. I know that this had been approved in terms of understanding and was contested many times its been approved in california. Understand it had not been tested there and approved for that. Those conditions but are there. Let me tell you this is not toxic. The toxicity is a little magnitude less than the top city of crude oil. So if they were concerned about the toxicity weather than whether it performed well or not. The toxicity is not a problem. If we are going to spray it and it did not perform well, in terms of mitigating this. Which is dead. It should have been earlier than that. But that would have been more expensive for us. I was told it is only effective on fresh oil. Once the oil is not fresh is not dispersed. Its less effective when oils not fresh. But we are talking about fresh oil. This is still spreading. Originally on saturday we had a quarter mile basically. And then it grew and when the wind came up it really got down there. We have an opportunity to mitigate that considerably. After that a lot of it vaporized, 40 of the oil it went out vaporized. But then we have the gunk we now have. The committee appreciates this. The thank you sir. The committee is indebted to you for to impair since appearances. We do appreciate it we have had secretary go into some detail and if they decided anything you are the man in charge we gladly except your statement in this entirety if you can give it and its entirety, highlight as you wish we have two other very important witnesses. Mister chairman, i think i would like to go immediately to these questions. Very good, go right ahead if you want to answer questions let me ask this with respect to the license and the master pilot of a vessel as i understand in the original application you did a background on the original application, is that correct . The original application for the license is somewhat more complete than a renewal and in that original the requirement could report any drug use or convictions of serious crimes in those types of things, the renewal is less obvious but there is a renewal to a port of the last five years. Of those convictions of the last five years it least perhaps we have learned that scott has been a leader on random drug tests and alcohol, and has diminished its returns remarkably. And we have congratulated the guard on that. Accomplishment now with the respect to the latency. What do you think it with respect to that now transmitting that policy to. A system is basically, a license he must report in his application. In this case the master did not report on his application the convictions he had had for driving while under the influence, that was absent from his application. We have 25,000 complications a year that we process. It is impossible with the current level of computerization and manning to do a background check on every application. The system is, that if there is abuse on the, the master is responsible for reporting that abuse to the coast guard and then we would then pursue against the license against the officer involved, in this case the master himself was abusing a nobody reported. Is there a backup requirement if the master himself is the one under the influence . Yes there is. What is that . The chief made and the chief engineer have a responsibility to take over the operation of the ship if they feel the master is incapacitated. But they were asleep . They may have been asleep at the time of the coalition, but i doubt if they were asleep at the time that the vessel off the dock, and whether they knew the condition of the master will be developed in the investigation. So i did go down to the third mate and he was not licensed. The third mate did not have a first class pilots license for that particular area. That area requires from hitch and brooke on, a firstclass pilots license. It allows that license to be fulfilled by a ships officer up to rocky point, where the normal state pilot gets aboard, a federal pilot. That vessel was in an area that required piloted by a ships master, he was the only one who had that piloted edge. The third meet was qualified to operate the vessel but did not have piloted for the area, and should not have been on it for himself. On this particular color point, have you considered requiring a coal pilot, or was this just on this particular vessel and do they regularly have at least two licensed people, when its put to see whats bad weather and ive heard of a good pilot getting csec as a dog and it seems like they would give up the vessel and Everything Else. What about a coal pilot or what is the policy there . We ought to perhaps examine, and well, whether more than one officer on a ship ought to have first class piloted for that particular area, of fort william sound. I understand that estate pilot and a u. S. Pilot and a federal pilot is required in the narrows. I would assume that that means that in the narrows, which you go up, you have to have a state pilot, with the state pilot license as well as an officer on the vessel with pilotage. But beyond, where the collision occurred, there is only the requirement of the coast guard saying you could not have gone out there, lets assume there wasnt an accident that particular evening and you found just the captain aboard and lets forget about the alcohol. You wouldnt have arrested the captain, are charged with anything because he was the only one licensed. No, but we would have charged him if he was the only one licensed and he wasnt on the bridge, he would have been in serious trouble. Has license wouldve been in jeopardy at that point. Right. The question is should we require two officers with pilotage on these long voyages four pilotage for a veteran broke on in. And super tankers let me go to that question for the double hall of a vessel might require the chemical and the natural gas and everything required for safety, its been a that this would not have seen this particular oil spell. Well have to see what the damage was, its probable that it was deep enough in that vessel, the Double Bottom to not have helped. That is very probable, we wont know until we get it in dry dock. Then the question is whether we go back to smaller tankers, rather than the 240,000 barrels, go back to the 74,000 barrels tankers that we used to have, because we just cant afford this kind of catastrophe, for the environment, the fishers, it is such a Precious Resource that on the safety side, its like out on the highway we wouldnt allow, i know my truck or friends like to have tandem trucks, others would like to have three tandems, you can get by them and you cant pass them, so as a policy matter we say you can have three tandems, maybe as a policy for the supertanker it has shown us and we are trying to attest that they could not have had sufficient equipment to avoid this fell in any real market degree, that it would have continued to spell, i thought if theyve got another promptly they maybe could have prevented it but i am confused in my mind, what is your comment with respect for both . Namely, the smaller tanker on the one hand and the capacity and the responsibility, both i last year we had about 2000 tanker passages in that straight. Those are with 240,000 barrel tankers, lets go to a smaller tanker, half that size. We have to have that size tankers, as of 2000 passengers we will have 4000 hostages. I dont know what the trade offices between the greater risk of twice the number of passages and alaska risk of only having half the oil award in case you do get in trouble. There is a tradeoff there and it will have to be looked at. As far as the response, let me say this. The plan provided for a five hour response. That was not met. And it is my view, in any spill, that the sooner you get there and you get the boom around the spell, the better off you are. I would have been delighted had we had that thing bloomed in five hours but we didnt. We didnt get the boom there and it took ten or 12 hours. And it takes a while to bloom it and shortly thereafter a wind came up, a 70 not winded and blue everything also a. I wouldve been much better pleased with a better response, whether it would have made a great deal of difference is problematic and i can say that in a general way. Mister chairman i do at this historical meeting going on in the senate, ive heard of it and i would like to see the cost he said and for us for this hearing if you and, i do want to speak to the coast guard about establishing a vessel control system like we have in the puget sound, i have the correspondents and this requires that we take firm action to make sure that this will be in control. As we have an interest a system in puget sound. Another question, mister chairman i have to go make that speech. I will be over there to but i will be requiring right now. It is and you embarrass me. Present pro tem says im to make a speech, are you going to make a speech . It may be the best speech i make. But you and i. You go and make the speech senator murkowski. Senator murkowski has been very understanding of the committee policy, really raises an issue with other senators on the floor im gonna show that i can ask the question right to the point. What is your reaction to the governor of alaskas request that the coast guard take over the project up there from exxon . The governor and i are not very far apart on this, we dont want to federalize this bill, we dont want to take the responsibility for funding this bill, it is going about a billion dollars a day, and we have about three or 4 Million Dollars left in the 3 11 k fund, i dont know what i would do on the fourth day if we federalized it. The governor has asked me that. What he has suggested as more control by the coast guard, more direction, mark items, and i am pretty much in consonants with that, and that is what is happening there, yesterday and today, at the discussion between exxon and ourselves about the coast guard stopping more into the direction of guidance of the cleanup. We are organized for that, we are a pyramid organization, a military organization, exxon is a business and we are ready to do an operational thing that they are having a little trouble of doing in my view. That means we need to step further into it without federalizing it, without removing liability, without us funding it, but with more guidance and direction. Im reading from governor coopers letter, due to the unique form of responsibilities and familiarity with the alaskan coastline, we believe the coast guard is uniquely suited to coordinate the response. Thats not if you get for a lower dont get furlough, thats whether you really coordinate the responses the governor of alaska has requested. Do you agree with that . Yes we are going to do much mark ordination and guidance that we have up to now but we dont want to federalize it, not yet. I am trying to find at the difference in my mind between federalizing and you taking prime coordination responsibility. Federalizing means we take all for all control of the direction, we take over the contracting, and we give runner orders to everybody up their. That means i need about 30 Contracting Officers up there to contract through every fishing boat, every fishermen, every company, everybody who is working for us. Coordinate it means that we allow exxon to continue to fund it, to keep their checkbook open, to the contracting with the cleanup people, and we basically direct and guide exxon and where we want to cleanup, where we want the scammers, we want the boom, where we want to beach cleaners, that kind of thing. And we will perhaps bring in some other federal forces at the same time. And what do you mean by yet . When you get the other federal forces in . Why would i propose to do this . We are doing it as we said here, as we are transferring that guidance and direction more to the coast guard, discussing that with exxon and that is privy to what has happened since this morning. So the coast guard is responding affirmative to the governors request as you see it . Yes we were doing it at the time he requested it, we have been talking to the governor all along and with exxon about doing this, the conversation happened this morning about moving into their Operations Center and taking over some of the operational guys. A new emergency legislation is necessary. No sir, at least if it were, i think the president would request it, as you know i was in the oval office what the president and with mr. Riley and others yesterday discussing some of these same matters with the alaskan delegation. With respect to radar guidance it is not the coast guards possession, or responsibility that that chip at the time would be built beyond radar guidance is it . No we dont you radar control in the way that faa does control in any waters, any place. What we do is we have, its an Advisory Service and we tell the vessel what vessels are liable to meet and those other things that complicate their passage, now involves we do more than we do any place else, we forbid traffic except oneway traffic through the narrows, and we track that vessel in the narrows, we plotted every three minutes while it is inside, once it gets out of the narrows, the shorter rocky point, we kick plotting and at that point it is at sea they discharge their state product, they go out to sea with the officer on board. Is your effort arrested or restriction anyway by budgetary constraints . Well, no i dont think it was, but i think its only fair for me to and how about in the future because you have a sympathetic committee that is proud of you and the guard and i dont want, invite to have a suspicion now, you said you only have 3 million in funds over at the secretary of transportation, and it seems like it couldve been a hesitancy because it was only 3 million there and they didnt want to assume the responsibility for 100 to 200 Million Dollars project but only 3 million sitting in the fond. That is very true, that front has never been much more and 15 million, something in there, it is now at three, i would be more comfortable with it a ten or 12, we may take a look at that an oscar committees to take a look at it, but as far as the operation of our traffic service, the only effect on that, and i dont think its a serious what we are looking at in the 1988 budget cut, that the coast guard took, we removed seven people from the valleys traffic surface and reduced the watch from two on watched a one on watch. It was taking the budget cut initially that we were taken from areas that were released where the need was least and our feeling was that we could remove a watch standard from there, we did that. If i were to make that decision this morning i would maybe have a different decision. I dont think it had an effect in this action. Is there anything you need from the congress . Im sorry sir . Its anything you need from the congress . Although, the president s budget is coming up, its what i said i can live with, but in 1988 i closed to Vessel Traffic Service says, one in new york harbour, im glad this but wasnt in new york rubber because i would be asking, why did you close the Vessel Traffic Service and new york harbour . I close to. One in new york are burned when a new orleans, two of the biggest ports in the United States, because of the budget cut. So when you ask me what do i need . I need the president s budget, but the president s budget does not envision reopening those two Vessel Traffic Service says, and so i had to reduce valdez. What did the committee of Congress Learned . Lets say you are both there and two weeks have passed and in reflection what should we have learned with respect to this particular collision disaster . Let me talk first broadly in terms of the support the coast guard gets from congress. We have always had trouble getting a reasonable budget within this government that includes United States congress, we have come up here year after year with a budget that is austere and we normally leave this area with a budget less than an austere budget. So i think that every time we close a coast guard station, may close a lifeboat, station, vessel traffic surface, we assume more rose for the American People for accidents. I dont believe this accident is the responsibility of having close something, but you asked what the congress can do . I think the congress ought to support the coast guard in the appropriations area. This authorization has been wonderful to us, im talking about the appropriations area, used to support the coast guard than they normally do. What have we learned environmentally and maritime lee about this particular incident . For one thing i am not export enough to ask the question that stephen is getting at but it seems like may it was cut back, that requirement, several years ago. We had hinchinbrook on require state pilot. The only vessels that were required where foreign vessels to take on a state pilot in hinchinbrook, we had an injury of pilots starting to get a board in that rough weather in hinchinbrook, but there were only nine vessels that were farm vessels in the system. I think what we should have learned and what we have learned and there will be more lessons coming out of the investigation is not in this day and age we have got to tighten up the application requirements and the background i people coming in for a licenses, we have to have a better feel for a man who comes in and falsifys as is the case here an application by not putting on convictions that he is hot for drunk driving. People could come in and falsified drug use with the application and i think they will. I dont think people will write down drug use on an application for a license. And they will avoid writing down dwi and we have to get behind these people and see the application. No one on the audience would want to fly home this afternoon on a commercial flight that had only one pilot. They wouldnt want to get on that plane, we are not talking about people just getting drunk, just normal things can occur to an individual, heart attacks or other things and with a vessel as long as three football fields, 125 million gallons of fuel aboard and Everything Else it seems rather puny a nonsensical to have one master aboard a ship and i guess in some instances here and in many instances a chicago all the way to saudi arabia or the persian golf sale in the high seas but i just cant understand that particular let me comment on that. Every vessel of that size doesnt have a pilot an echo pilot as an aircraft would have, it has a pilot, a master mate, a second mate and a third mate. So it has at least four officers that are completely qualified to run that fastball. What it doesnt have as more than one officer required that house pilotage for the particular area theyre coming into whether its new york harbor or amsterdam or Prince Williams town. To require two people on the vessel that all have pilotage for each area they come into would be an added requirement. I dont object to that, we ought to look at it. But dont think that they dont have somebody who is qualified to run that ship, they have four people. And for that third mate who is a qualified officer, has passed the examinations, who has had a lot of trips in the valleys, to a run that ship up on the beach and something awful happen on the bridge, some kind of a loss of continuity of something that we dont know yet, there is no reason that that third mate wasnt completely competent around the ship and the area that he was. He had the competence, he didnt have the license in the master should be on the bridge, those were false, but we dont have someone who is a bumbling idiot on the bridge we have someone who is licensed untrained. Yes sorry we can see it was a clear night, he almost ran over the buoy to get on the rock. Thats what i was thinking because i was thinking youre calm and has already been made public that it was a ten mile wide channel there and my boy michael couldve run the boat over there. That played a lot better outside the beltway than inside the beltway storm trying to get rid of that comment. As you said in your memo the governor of alaska called federal regulation section 300, up you will take over immediately the coronation of the project without asking. The governor has asked that the disaster have of federal input outside of the clean water act and that isnt my responsibility. He is asked what senator stevens was talking about to open up the Small Business Administration Funds and some other Association Funds that the senator says no i may be wrong. He has not asked to federalize the spell. What he is asked us for the coast guard to take more of a directive action in the spell, im in confidence with him and we are talking about that right now. With exxon, on scene in alaska. And if its necessary i will go up their myself and take that up the way it ought to be. I think the governor has been more specific, he refers to that section of federal regulation section 300, and that gives a specific authority to call on the nation. As other clean water . Act will the government has asked for that once and backed away from, it its not my understanding that he is asked for it again this morning, hes asked for it. We have the, letter we can give you a copy of the letter. Whats the date on . It april 5th. Ive gotten an 8 00 last night. You have better mail service than i have within d. C. Yes sir. Well we will get this letter to. You yes sir. When you say at the law, of alaskan oil can only move in u. S. Flagged vessels and then you say that so many vessels have gone to valdez. Yes there are nine form vessels on the train, all of them terminate at st. Roy, it has a u. S. Refinery, but not u. S. Territory. Let me again say that i am not prepared to federalize the spell in the legal sense of the word because in the 3 11 k find it would make me responsible to find it and i only have two or 3 Million Dollars to spend at the end of the day. I want to do something short of federalization, and we will resume the responsibility of overseeing guidance and direction for exxon and doing this. It will take a lot more control than we have now but we want to stop short of federalization it might legally cause exxon to close their check books to fisherman and everybody else, i dont to do, that on the government wants to either. I have to have a copy of the letter. You will have a chance to clarify. Is there anything you wish to add to your testimony here this morning, we do appreciate you coming over. No i want to say this one other thing though that i dont feel that i am at odds with l. G. Rawl, im concerned hes putting too much emphasis on the timing of the disbursements, until much emphasis on what could have been how disbursements been put in the water. The federal coordinator and state people made in my opinion, the right decision, which was dont last the distress go in the water unless they will be effective, and their view they would not have been effective because there was not enough wave action to mix it up and the spill, and the were not enough just versions on hand a point. We had so much oil in the water, and they had a few tens of thousands of dispursions, it would have been a drop in the bucket, they made the right decision, and then when the wind did come up it blew everything away and there wasnt any chance for them. As far readiness i understand that the boom had a puncture in it. Im very disappointed that they werent able to execute their plan, its not a federal planner coast guard plan, it is a plan that is arrive by the state of alaska before they will permit them to come in there, it was a revved up by those two parties, its a plan they should have been able to execute for a number of reasons they werent. I think anytime you are timed late at a spell then you are in major trouble. Every hour you are late, multiplies the problem. I should have been there within five hours and werent. Very good, we appreciate it very much your parents here before the committee, and now finally we have a panel, that we have a panel of doctor evans, secretary of commerce, and mr. Steve robinson the Deputy Director of fisheries and Wildlife Service. We kind of had from the very beginning that stated me. inaudible mr. Earns, mr. Robinson, we do appreciate you being here, we apologize but you can see weve tried to move along as quickly as possible. Youre statements, both, will be included in the record in their entirety and you can highlight it with the committee you can give the statement in fall or highlight it. Dr. Evans. Thank you mister chairman, because the seriousness of what we are discussing here i have brought doctor who is the head of our group that deals with Hazardous Material and his team is the team that has been working on this oil spill for about 11 hours after it had happen, i also have Legal Counsel with me, mr. Campbell who is here since i am not a lawyer and a lot of people were saying they were lawyers and using that as an excuse, i am not a lawyer, that is why i brought one with me. I can say you are very proud of that. What i would like to do mister chairman, as to go through a lot of the testimony and read it because i think it is important, but i will highlight it, i will drop some of the material out. By april 2nd, the oil from the spell, the 11 million gallons has spread throughout an area of more than 800 square miles. Approximately one third of the total service. Prevailing currents and winds move the oil in a southwesterly direction through the strait through the open waters into the gulf of alaska. The rocky shores have been very heavily oiled. The oiled has affected the coastline of the peninsula where it could impact biologically insane in areas such as resurrection bay, and national parks. The economy of the area that we are talking about is based on Natural Resources and includes one commercial fishing which we have heard a great deal about. Prince Williams Town supports commercial fishing for salmon, herring as well as small officially can crab, shrimp, halibut. These commercial fisheries are Noble Resources that each year are worth over 100 Million Dollars for that community. Recreation, the relative sensibility of the anchorage, major Population Center of alaska makes it a favorite of local and visiting recreation assets and use it either individually or an organized tours for fishing, sightseeing, kayaking and camping. There is also a number of cruise ships that come into the area. But we dont even have the idea of what Economic Impact it is going to have on that. There is insistent fishing and hunting, logging, oil transportation, port saudis located is the southern terminus of the trans alaskan python, perhaps most devastating was the timing of the spell, as the harsh alaskan winter turned in spring, and irreplaceable resorts of Prince William sound are the most in jeopardy, it is a time when we have a lot of liable fish, fish are coming in for the purpose of spawning and this is a vulnerable time for them. For example migrating herring are funneling into the sound and would be available for harvest. Spill occurred days before the scheduled opening which had to be canceled. This means not only lost jobs and income but also lost export value to the United States. But more valuable even though the hearing is the salmon fresh, all five species of salmon supported by Prince William sound and its river. Adult fish will be affected when they return to the sound the spring and summer, some salmon are ready to enter the sanctuaries that are damage from the spill and will seek resources. This is the most vulnerable time over life cycle and theres a chance that many of these fish will not survive. The effects will be felt years down the road and these fish are unavailable as results for spawning and the loss will likely ripple far into the future. Effects of these Natural Resources and the human uses form the basis for the Damage Assessment work that will be undertaken for the coat trustee, in this case, now acts on behalf of the secretary of congress as a federal trustee for a Natural Resource and cultural marine areas. The secretary of the interior, secretary of agriculture and since it occurred in state waters, the state of alaska also have significant trustee efforts. Now was Damage Assessment authority is derived from the comprehensive Environmental Response and liability act, the clean water, act and also the Resource Management statutes that provide the legal, procedural framework for claiming against potentially responsible parties. Four losses resulting in injury to the Natural Resources caused by oil spill. Based on these legal authorities, he is four principal responsibilities during and after an oil spill. As a scientific support coordinator to the u. S. Coast guard, on scene tornado, specifically, noaa actually provides liaison between Natural Resource, chemical and other scientific experts and the on scene coordinator, models project trees of oil spills for future movements, assesses the nature, behavior of oil putins light chemical sampling analysis, identification of Toxic Properties and alteration the physical chemical characteristics under conditions, devices on safety precautions for response personnel and identifies areas biological importance requiring protection and helps coordinate inquiries from local state and federal agencies for scientific studies an Environmental Assessment and assess the on scene corner nature public efforts on scientific issues. As a member of the Regional Response team, know exists and federal recommendations to the on scene quarter, to the federal trustee for marine resources, now is identifying the resources and as housing losses associated with injuries to the resources and bringing claims to the responsible parties. As the nations monitoring agency, it measures long term ecological consequences. Currently we have 25 experts onside at the exxon valdez spell, including people from noaa, the National Fishery service, renewable, tory the office of aircraft operations, university of alaska c program. Their response experts have conducted extensive oversight of the spreading oil in coastal regions, to monitor the slick movement and to identify the infected area. The hazardous Response Team has more collective experience in moving oil spills than any other group in the world. That have occurred in the last 13 years. They have been involved in almost all of those, about 15 Years Experience and they have been involved and working on about 2000 oilspills including the argo merchant, and the i talk blowout. What did we learn from the kids watch was the spell on the coast of britain, for one it took some five years to get the study, now that we have the study and we put it in some libraries where what good does the study do . Let me respond to one other aspect of what you are saying, you said it was a Massive Oil Spill compared to what we are dealing with today. Pm just an order to be able to do was to news on the effect on salmon we are going to be able and have to be looking five years downstream because some of these pieces wont come back for at least five years, so if there are other long term talks affects that we dont know, i could be another five years beyond that. What about it doctor . Do you agree with that assessment . Certainly there are many things that will be done in a short run and are being done right now, in fact, to complete a long assessment on these damages it will take us anywhere between three to five years to see some of the longer term facts. Many short rana facts, the legal facts, are very visible right now, we are measuring those and we are documenting those, some of the signs will take longer. Why do we do after we documented all . Is that you had 15 Years Experience, im getting to the facts and realistic results, ive done all the studying, i got it all documented, and is that lead to any kind of legislation, change of policy, practices are what after 15 you experience, what have we learned . I would say the immediate purpose are doing the measurements of environmental effects is to be used and the Damage Assessment which means putting economic values on those of facts so we can file claims to recover some of those damages. That is the immediate purpose of doing science in the field, right now, and doing it in a timely way. What is the responsibility of noaa, or the government to file claims wednesday assessment is made . Once we have made the assessment, for all practical purposes what we will do is we will present a bill to exxon, for what the cost of the damages are. Is there any limit to that bill that you will give exxon . No sir, not that i know of. Is there limit the amount . Under the clean water act, if willful negligence a shown then there is no limitation to their liability. However, absent rainfall negligence, there is approximately an 8 Million Dollar cap on of the way that the statute is currently written. You have tried a case in alaska . No, well. Your honor we are working with the other trustees in the department of justice and then offered to put together Damage Assessment, to put a value on the resources loss an attempt to identify how best to restore those resources as closely as possible. Doctor, why do you say thought the other oil spill was minor compared to this one . I think when we refer back to some of the material in my testimony, this is a very, very special part of the world. Pure, its very heat bottom area, the wind can come up very rapidly as we saw on one day 50 mile an hour wind, it can be flat gone the next day, we have high tides moving in and out of the area, 15 foot, 20 foot tides, it is the difference between having something in a bottle, i think if you are looking at the difference between a quarter pound piece of dynamite is one thing if you throw it up and the middle of a field and little blowup where it has a lot of place for that energy to spread to, but if you do it in a closed area, it enhances the impact of it, i think thats what we have here, is that the oil has moved around, with all of the little cubby holes and various things that we have on the shoreline in this area, they are going to be places where we are having potential effect on fisheries that we may not even discovered for at least the next couple of years. What is the potential effect, if any, on others shores . As i understand, we cut across the north of arctic and North Pacific and could this reach pressure . No i dont believe so, the direction is going right now, it is going up to get into law and headed towards kodiak island, we will probably be, based on what kind of gets into, we could have it washing up on beaches all the way down to british columbia, but we understand the direction, although the accuracy of our forecasting of the direction is based on wind and currents, as best as we can give you is about 24 hours for the trajectory. I think on an overall basis, we can have a pretty good idea of where we are going to see things washed up. At this stage i think its pretty well side what the major wind current is and where it is going to be pushed, but as far as what we are concerned about right now as the immediate affects that its going to have in other places in alaska, kodiak as we said is a very large area as far as fisheries go, we have some kind signs, at least i have some concerns because of my fishery background that we may have a problem there and the pollack which is a multi billion dollar resource couldnt respond, and we dont know what the impact will be on that, so that is a little scary. But that is a possibility and we are tracking it very closely, do we have any idea of the direction that it is going up . Generally going westerly. Very good. Thank you mister chairman, i appreciate the opportunity to be here today, and i will talk a little bit about. Can you move that microphone. I will talk about the wildlife, the impact on the wildlife resources of that area. With me today are available in the audience is john martin whos in charge of the alaskan air time refuge. Theyve been impacted by the spell. Laura spell has had adverse and often fatal impacts on species, freshen Wildlife Service as management over migratory birds and sea otters, National Marine Fisheries Service has authority over other Marine Mammals and fisheries of that area, none the bird species or the alaskan population of sea otters i should add are listed as endangered. The scale of the spill impact does just now starting to become clear to us, our preliminary surveys have found 80 oil birds per 100 meters a beach on the islands in the path of this, and it is highly unlikely that most of those oil bags can be recovered and clean, although we are making every effort to do so. We anticipate that three to 5000 seabirds could be reclaimed, absent of being required that a large portion of the oil birds will not survive. We do not at this time have any estimates of the likely number of birds that may be killed by the spill and i think the next couple of weeks you will get better numbers on that figures. Bald eagles have been observed scavenging oil birds, though no doubt eagles have been found, the service believes that toxicity connected to oil soaked birds could kill bald eagles. There are approximately 750 bald eagles resident and the Prince William sound area, an Aerial Survey conducted after the spell counted 90,000 birds, half of which were in the area impacted by the spell. Aerial surveys are not expected to produce accurate total population, many birds and animals simply cant be seen in the oil. During this time of year, there is generally an accepted figure of about 300,000 buried residents in Prince Williams town, as doctor has mentioned, the migratory birds are coming in as we speak and lot another hundred thousand thought population. In addition over 100,000 birds nesting in more islands, an element of the maritime refuse to the southwest of the sound, and the first strings of oil have already reached those islands. The total sea otter population is estimated a ten to 12,000 and the heaviest concentration, about half of those is located in the southeastern part of the sound and this represents the highest concentration of honors, its not been affected, the eastern, population by the spill yacht, approximately half of the auto population is likely to be impacted by the spell, if this bill should change direction as it goes into the southeastern area, the situation would worsen dramatically for the otter, fish and Wildlife Service presently how 24 people committed to monitoring garden on a rescue activities, we have two children boats and 16 people low kick while honors and bring them to the cleaning facility operated by exxon involves. We are operating constant Aerial Service to monitor the movement of oil and its relationship to see britain auger population in these aircraft are also on the alert for oiled waters under capture. Under wind and tide forecast the leading edge of the spell as i said before could reach kodiak islands this weekend, Service Personnel and others from the national Response Team are identifying and prioritizing those areas that could be protected and the islands. Two Service Vessels are being movednto the area to support the damage which consists of primarily bird surveys, mammal surveys, sea otters, to determine how many of those critters have been affected and how many have been affected adversely. The assessment of the National Resource damage as part of the Environmental Response act is being initiated, thats what our people are doing now, they are in the process of picking up the oil and injured wildlife, they are also making counts to use in the future to gain compensation. That concludes my prepared statements mister chairman, id be glad to try to answer any questions you might have. Chairman, on april 4th i received a prediction ethel trajectory of the exxon saudis Prince Williams town almost fell from doctor, ive senator various teams that are working on this, but i think its very important to examine what he says. You take a couple minutes to read it but i think it is timely. He says it will exit the sounds reminded you straight paul the coast to the west southwest, it enters Alaska Coastal current, a relatively swift, low serenity flow that is driven by fresh on a run off and wins, the corners usually five to ten miles wide with surface kinds of about 0. 7 five knots plus or minus two tenths of a not at this time of the year. It might best be thought of as a river running along the coast. Oil should remain in this flow in a very coherent manner with little spreading across the shelf. The entrance of the oil into local base will depend on local winds with offshore winds of course, favoring no transport onshore. Easterly winds will accelerate along shore transport of the oil and will cause the oil to wash up on the exposed beaches. The oil patch or patches should be at the mouth of the cook inlet within six days, 90 that is april 4th he was talking, and six to ten days it will probably be a series of patches extending from Prince Williams town to cook in light, once again the amount of oil and train will be depending on local winds that time of arrival, roughly half of the oil at the entrance will enter. The remainder will travel south toward the westward shore of kodiak island, here the coastal current becomes less intense and cross shelf mixing of the oil will take place. There is some unknown action of oil entering that will continue down the illusion island chain. Here the coastal current is not as intense, but as broad diffuse flow as opposed to the narrow coastal flow. Some unknown portion of the oil, whatever portion remains in the water column, should begin to go through the pass in june our july, that is the past that the crystal bay fish growth here in crystal bay. The upper water layers of the area should be flushes are we saw the deep waters might not be flushed until fall, on the deepwater renewal takes place. The coastal flow increases in the fall up to 3. 5 knots due to the annual precipitation cycle and the shed rapidly transport the oil out of the sound to the west. His predictions then interpret, means that the oil should be in cook in light sometime between april tons and 16th, should arrive at kodiak sometime between april 14 and 21, and it will be in a no pass sometime in june, where the possibility of renewal of all of this money oil has gone into the deepwater column is discouraged from the sound due to the fall runoff which is intense, if youve ever seen that precipitation cycle it is intense in the september october time. Now gentlemen, what do you think should be done with regard to the areas beyond the damage today . We havent had damage yet in cook in light, we havent had damage yet in kodiak, we havent had damage along the coast of the illusion island chain coast, and particularly we havent had any damage in the past yet. Do any of you have any knowledge of any in times of anywhere in the world to try to change the flow of this oil as it strikes out and its long tendrils of oil being wind driven and current driven up there . Senator no, im not aware of any. One of the things we are very interested in is the information that you presented from the doctor, we are not familiar with that but we will check with him, we certainly are very interested in the information he has. One of the things we have been doing is that our models, interestingly enough, seem to agree very closely with the description that you just gave and one of the things that we have been doing is trying to get our teens, in fact some of our members as you were mentioning, are getting out ahead of some of these and were using it in order to make samples and make testing in the area for the damage as. I know that doesnt mitigate what the oil is going to do in that area, but i think there are people in the places to try to put booms up in various areas and to do whatever we possibly can, to try to see if we can keep it out of the sensitive areas, but other than that i think we are not experienced in mitigating at. The thing that bothers me about the current control of the actions to be taken to prevent further harm, is that they are all related to damage control, they are not related to prevention. Some of them are i guess, the blooms are a preventative concept, but for instance, i was told in one area, that hey have been dropped on the beaches from the air before it hit the beaches and as the oil came in, it hit the hay, and it was rigged up where cleanup or burned later. I was asked if that was being considered for a mosque and i was told no. I asked about the use of drift net, whether anyone had thought of putting one of the 40 mile drive nuts out there and slinging across the current, and weighted down pretty heavily and try to put an observable blooms behind it and lets see if it can pick up some of the slick as it moved towards kodiak, and remove the bombs as they get oil soaked and put new ones in. I was told no, that has never been tried, we are not going to experiment. Are you gentlemen going to experiment at all on this gets out and the open areas, they are certainly beyond Prince Williams town now, and you have the capability of anyone i know so far to come up with a suggestion . While there be experimentation at all . Let me refer to dr. Ehler, he is more familiar with the program, im not aware of any experimentation but im in favor of a evident cruises or knowledge any way in how to deal with that, so i dont know, we may have programs going, but i will let doctor ehler address that. I think those alternatives that senator stevens identified to my knowledge or not being tried now. On the other hand, there are teams of people up there as you know, who are running over virtually every possibility of mitigating the effects of this particular spell. I just on how the information about what is being considered right now but i would suspect that all of those kinds of alternatives and run over and some detail will be evaluated. I monitored the pantry bay and ireland, it was a refineries bill and a protective thing to protect the beaches was used there and very successfully. Thats what i was told, and i was told we have no market for hey this year, solid there, no one has even asked. And the drift nets that you are responsible for bringing the men when the legislation of this committee started in, several of them have been brought in, air piled up someone, no one has even thought about trying to sling them at their and trying to some good, they are very harmful as we all know to fish but we can try. Mister chairman, there has been a complete unwillingness to try to experiment because of some reason that somebody says if they try and it doesnt succeed, who is going to pay the bell, and secondly, will it increase the damages to exxon are well they object . That is why we want the coast guard in control up there, i cant understand, but even then, i dont think the coast guard really is thinking in terms of experimentation yet. I have to tell you, i wish we could get a plane and fly this whole committee up there and let them see what is going to happen to kodiak. I think if anyone went up as i didnt see what i saw they would come back as matt as i am, i am mad because no one is thinking of trying to stop this thing. You have good rains, the group that is involved here, you know the area like i do, there is no reason to accept the inevitable, being that this is going to destroy kodiak fisheries, it will go through the chain and the pass and the bristol bay salmon run. Its not acceptable. We have to try, even if we fail. I dont know how to get you going, is that money . I was told yesterday, all you have to do is ask exxon and within foreseeable limits you couldnt dream of money is available. They know they have horrendous liability if this gets to kodiak, just horrendous. You can name them, the things are over there bell. Can grab, whole new fleets over there now. Half of our soul now is coming out of the North Pacific. Bottom finish, the home of the bottom fish, it was so sensitive to the problems we were developing there. I think we could safely say that this is the largest producing area officials in the world today that was healthy until march 24th, and people seem to just accept the inevitable that we just cant stop it. Somehow, we have got to get an attitude that we are going to try to stop it. I would hope that you would help us, get some control. These sea fences for instance that i have heard about, have you heard of the sea fences . Yes, sir i heard of this morning. I was here when they were talking about it, a 42 inch broom. Im told that nobody has them on stop, they stop them as a matter of national preparedness, they are stocked over there, and they offered to sun some over here. Id have to see five days on the way this afternoon if you can find them, and try them. What about the doctor, hes an expert on Hazardous Materials, is there something more that we can be daring from your point of expertise, it seems like there could be some more preventative measures being taken. I think there is always more that can be done, i think the point that has to be made is that there is tremendous uncertainty about what is actually going to happen, and where this oil is going to go and where it is going to wind up. Nothing is inevitable, there is a great deal of unknowns others back to where the spell is moving, where in the water column it will be, what affects it will have on moving resources in this area and the areas further west. Everybody, everybody has to be somewhere and this oil has to be somewhere, or at least the next four or five months, do you agree with that . Absolutely. Trying to do something about it. No question about, that i think there are a lot of people on the scene who are trying to do something about containing that oil in the first place, following in predicting where it is going to go, and minimizing the effects that it has. Do you know anybody who has attempted to change the direction of that, in terms of the open spell as it is moving down to the alaska coast. No there is no one to my knowledge. I dont know if anyones even attempted to try to change the flow. Again, i agree. There is no one. If they have, theyve done a good job of trying to bloom off specific areas. People have done a really good job of dot. With an instant Response Team and what they try to do in terms of protecting resurrection crate, the national park, and now moving in to protect the home or area, i hope you do move it over there, when we look further to kodiak. All of that is on the basis of how do we protect the beaches when it gets there . I dont know, maybe we have to take all of the air folks from the coast hes part of the state and turn them around a lot of oil south. Maybe they would be worried about it would squeeze so, but they are not worried about when its going. North its going towards the greatest salmon running fishery run in the world today. Probably, youve been up there, here is a salmon fisherman. Lets not darren clarks point there. Now, can get down. Theyre all weekend on this hearing. Well, as always you gentlemen have been very obliging, the record will stay open, book questions by the committee here, we appreciate the testimony here now, and i hope you appreciate the concern that we do have in working with you, and dont let the budget hold you up, i want to know about that immediately, i want to thank senator murkowski for sticking with us as well as senator stevens, the committee is and racist and we call a chair. Thank you very much mister chairman. And after the hearing president george w. Bush and several cabinet members of the briefing on the governments response, taking questions from reporters, then defense secretary dick cheney, transportation secretary Samuel Skinner and epa administrator william riley. I have a statement im glad to take a few questions and referred to our experts here. But virtually every american is familiar with the tragic environmental disaster in alaskan waters and more than 10 million gallons of oil happens filled with deadly results for wildlife and hardship for local citizens. We all share the sorrow and co