THE 50-MILE BALLAST-OIL DUMPING PROHIBITED ZONE
OFF ALASKA, RECONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF
AVAILABLE DATA GLEANED FROM SIGNIFICANT INCIDENTS
tLEAl
FEDERAL WATER
QUALITY
ADMINISTRATION
NORTHWEST REGION
PACIFIC NORTHWEST
WATER LABORATORY
C 0 R V A L I I S, OREGON
-------
THE 50-MILE BALLAST-OIL DUMPING PROHIBITED ZONE
OFF ALASKA RECONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF
AVAILABLE DATA GLEANED FROM SIGNIFICANT INCIDENTS
Prepared by
M. H. Feldman
Chief, Chemical and Biological Oceanography Branch
National Coastal Pollution Research Program
Working Paper #77
United States Department of the Interior
Federal Water Quality Administration, Northwest Region
Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory
200 Southwest Thirty-fifth Street
Corvallis, Oregon 97330
October 1970
-------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
In its assigned function as the Nation's
principal natural resource agency, the
Department of the Interior bears a special
obligation to assure that our expendable
resources are conserved, that renewable
resources are managed to produce optimum
yields, and that all resources contribute
their full measure to the progress, pros-
perity, and security of America, now and
in the future.
-------
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION 1
INCIDENTS AND INFORMATION GLEANED 3
Santa Barbara (Southern California) 3
Sea birds 4
Intertidal and nearshore communities 4
Offshore and benthic communities 5
Marine mammals 6
Torrey Canyon Aftermath (England and France) ... 6
Cook Inlet (Alaska). . 7
San Juan (Puerto Rico, semi-tropical) 8
Buzzards Bay (Massachusetts) 9
INFORMATION DEFICIENCIES . . . 13
DISCUSSION 17
Temperate, Tropical, and Arctic Zone
Ecological Stress 17
Dispersants and Alaskan Ambient 18
BIBLIOGRAPHY 23
11
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Current Flow Patterns Off Alaska 11
iii
-------
INTRODUCTION
This paper on the 50-mile ballast dumping prohibited
zone consists of four sections: (1) Simplified statements
of biological and chemical knowledge and understanding of
petroleum pollution in the Alaskan environment based on
what may be considered as having been learned, or at least
inferred, from observation and experience in spill areas
combined with such scientific data as was available;
(2) abbreviated statements of information deficiencies
for analysis of the Alaskan situation; (3) discussion of
the 50-mile prohibited zone; and (4) references utilized.
-------
INCIDENTS AND INFORMATION GLEANED
Santa Barbara (Southern California)
In the well publicized Santa Barbara oil pollution in-
cident commencing January 1969, a detailed and well documented
biological and ecological survey was conducted by various
groups and the results compiled (Battelle, 1969).
One noteworthy observation from the point of view of
analysis of an oil dumping prohibited zone was recorded:
"A weather bureau meteorologist estimated that downwind
oil slick drift ranged from 10-20% of surface wind velocity,
and stated, ...'instances of skin layer shear were noted with
surface oil moving rapidly past nearly stationary free floating
debris suspended less than half an inch below the water surface.1
The above is in contrast with the experience 1n the Torrey
Canyon incident during which the oil movement averaged 3.3-
3.4% of the wind velocity."
The complication here 1s obvious that kind of petroleum,
prevailing temperature, and density, and other current, off-
shore versus channel and high seas movement, have not been
identified for purposes of their comparison. However, it is
well to consider what the situation would be should significant
differences in average wind induced movement occur.
-------
It was fortunate that the area in question had been the
subject of extensive marine flora and fauna studies so that
when studies of the four basic areas of petroleum release
consequences:
(1) Sea birds
(2) Intertidal and nearshore communities
(3) Offshore and benthic communities
(4) Marine manmals
were carried out, before and after comparisons were possible,
even though their specific applicability to Alaskan waters
may be moot.
Sea birds
Considerable data were amassed on the sea bird consequences;
the important observation was the extrapolation (p. 12.8) from the
bird handling requirements noted at Santa Barbara (1000 birds
treated) to Torrey Canyon (5800 birds treated) to the facilities
for handling and treating birds-, that would be required should a
major release occur in Cook Inlet in May or September. The
estimate made was 100,000!
Intertidal and nearshore communities
Based on periodic, before and after observations it was
concluded that no significant acute effects on intertidal
organisms were observed at any of the ten stations surveyed.
-------
After some months some possible effects may have begun
to manifest themselves (apparent degradation of fauna; in-
crease in flora) which were interpreted as possible long-term
effects of the oil's toxicity. This seems a rather short
period over which to encounter long term effects. No fates
or mechanisms were considered. ;
One observer who had previously observed the Torrey Canyon
and the Ocean Eagle effects of crude petroleum spills was
quoted to the effect that lack of intertidal effects was
attributable to the use of only limited amounts of dispersant
chemicals and because crude oil itself was not highly toxic
to the macrofauna and flora observed.
Later observations of intertidal organisms indicated
that except in a few still badly polluted areas the species
examined were reproducing normally.
Offshore and benthic communities.
Studies were made of pelagic fish eggs and larvae,
phytoplankton and zooplankton, spawning, and hydrographic
conditions: Nutrient concentrations, dissolved oxygen, light
transmittance.
No changes were observed in the presence or absence of
anchovy larvae and eggs and of some other fish species, and
phytoplankton and zooplankton did not seem adversely affected.
-------
there were no observed detrimental effects on fauna, benthic
organisms, and pelagic fishes, though mysid shrimp may have
suffered transient decrease.
Marine mammals
While much was written, early on, about the doomed
mammals, of which many had oil coatings, no significant
damage was observed in these species (seals, whales). They
cleansed themselves, apparently with no damage, but hair seals
in Alaska were reported by seal hunters to have suffered from
oil in their coats following the Kodiak incident. This is
documented below.
Torrey Canyon Aftermath (England and France)
Detergents utilized by the British with some prior
screening* for their chemical, physical, biological behavior
were held to have been extremely damaging biologically, and
also, not very useful in dispersing the oil.
Birds were the most vulnerable of surface species; seals
and other marine mammals do not appear to have been directly
* The French local officials required eager salesmen to obtain
clearances from local university workers based on biological
screening for their proposed dispersants and beach cleaning
materials. This example of prudent French bourgeois character
is better understood, perhaps in terms of the advantage of a
few more days of make ready time over their English cognates.
-------
damaged either here or in the Santa Barbara case. Moreover,
no apparent plankton damage occurred. No data were obtained
on shellfish on the French coast as these areas were not
invaded by oil (Smith, 1967).
However, observations, approximately 19 months later,
of rocky shores (Biglane, 1968) showed limpets grazing on
rock faces, cleansing the oil stains. Where the rocks had
been cleansed by use of detergent, algae were prevalent but
rock mollusca species had disappeared and not yet repopulated.
A particular marine worm, WeAeZi, useful as bait, was
much more plentiful than before; it might be speculated that
this change in species dominance was indicative of a pollutional
stress effect, but it is based on the recollections of "the
oldest inhabitants."
It was estimated by workers at the Marine Biologique a
Roscoff that the Torrey Canyon effect on Brittany flora and
fauna was destruction of the order of 10 percent of the bio-
mass, but was now, 19 months later, about up to count, except
for some decapod species about wiped out.
Cook Inlet (Alaska)
Cook Inlet, like Santa Barbara channel, is subject to long-
term seep and short-term acute accidental input of petroleum
-------
from production facilities. A detailed analysis of the local
situation within Cook Inlet from the point of view of input
and biological and physical removal (Kinney, 1970) shows
that while the accidental input of Alaskan petroleum is quite
substantial (between.equal to and twice the long term average
seepage input of 10,000 gallons per year), degradation through
the naturally occurring inoculum plus the very turbulent
tidal situation is adequate to take care of the total annual
input.
Rates of ultimate removal give estimated removal times
of the order of a few months (2-10 months) and are principally
biological, though tidal removal is significant. No estimate
was made of the steady state inventory and compartmentalization.
No ultimate pelagic damage was noted, though this is an im-
portant fishery with many species.
San Juan (Puerto Rico, semi-tropical)
The Eagle was the source of 30,000 tons of Venezuelan
crude deposited off San Juan. It was reported in the Wall
Street Journal that "an official of the Interior Department's
FWPCA says that ideally, action should be taken within the first
10-12 hours, before volatile parts of the crude evaporate,
leaving a tar-like residue." This is probably a misquote or
8
-------
at least an oversimplification of the remarks. The Torrey
Canyon aftermath indicated that only rapid evaporation of the
more volatile, more poisonous fractions (presumably mostly
aromatic and presumably also more soluble) prevented an even
greater biological catastrophe. It would seem at least equally
justifiable to allow volatile fraction evaporation to proceed
prior to addition of large amounts of additional chemical
reagents in attempts to disperse the entire crude. Further-
more, our experience with successful handling of major spills
is severely limited and there is no backup of basic research
information available so that no specification of the ideal
method and timing of various proposed procedures to handle the
oil may be considered reliable at this time (May 1970).
Buzzards Bay (Massachusetts)
A barge carrying 14,000 barrels #2 diesel fuel went aground
off Chappaquoint Point (Oil & Hazardous Material, 1970). Number
2 fuel oil is a fairly light fraction of petroleum and for a
first approximation we may take it as resembling the early volatile
fractions of crude (no specific original crude was specified)
which are, generally speaking, more volatile, more soluble, and
contain more toxic components. Estimates were that 4,000 barrels
were lost with onshore winds keeping it concentrated in the
-------
harbor and estuary. We cannot conclude the results observed
were entirely due to the chemical nature of the oil because
the longer term concentration in closed areas by onshore winds
complicates the situation.
The initial (first day) biological results were catas-
trophic, but what is worse is that oil has been detected in
sediments at depth and preliminary indications are that the
oil is causing the death of bottom organisms.
The natural oil content of surface layers in the ocean
has been evaluated at a number of locations (Garrett, 1967).
Large fractions of the oils which are ubiquitous on the sur-
face and to 30 m. depth are of probable petroleum origin; it
may be concluded that long term low level concentrations of
petroleum products are prevalent in surface ocean and near-
shore waters.
The basic chemical, temperature, wind and wave, and
current data are available for the Northeast Pacific (Dodimead,
1968), and see also Figure 1, but detailed rates and mechanisms
and fates have not been established for processes involving
petroleum in the world ocean.
10
-------
• ^ . * \
*• - • -^ — —
•-»--••* /«. — -
-v- ---^-- •
N^
Figure 1: Current Flow Patterns off Alaska ^
(after Percy Wlckett, Nanalmo)
-------
INFORMATION DEFICIENCIES
The treatment of oils and other hazardous materials in
the marine environment is not a well developed branch of know-
ledge. Most references to "oil" pollution indicate to this
author that the "oily" character of the petroleum material
is its overriding characterization quality; that is most
superficial in terms of chemical behavior, and in fact is
an extension of the original meaning of the word oil.* Be
that as it may, it is essential that we recognize in any
pollution incident involving petroleum, significant chemical,
physical, and biological differences are to be anticipated.
The water quality standards to be maintained are not
based on detailed knowledge of fates and mechanisms. (Water
Quality Criteria, 1968).
Furthermore, the procedures available are, at best,
emergency use only (Oil & Hazardous Materials, 1968) and do
not purport to solve the ecological problems of oil in the
marine environment.
"It is apparent that our knowledge of the physiological
effects of various components of crude petroleum and of the
factors that determine plant and animal growth and affect
tolerances of marine species is deficient." (Galtsoff, 1968)
*Such extension leads to the embarrassment that we use the word
oil for a tar or pitch substance that is obviously no oleum!
-------
Since there are great differences in chemical composition
of petroleums, it is essential to know, if intelligent action
is desired, the petroleum composition9 the physical and chemical
environmental conditions prevailings the biota in the area, and
their probable response to the petroleum, and to the clean-up
methods chosen from a list of methods available. All of this
information is not only lacking in any organized manner, but
due to the extreme emergency conditions prevailing during
large spills, no previously reasoned experimental program has
been mounted.* For example, it is possible that when DO fcfis-
solved oxygen) and available nitrogen nutrient are high, oil
degradation rates will be high (given the requisite inoculum).
But such detailed nutrient mechanisms are not well established
and the coastal waters data seem non-existent.
A research proposal (Andresen, 1966) to identify and
quantify all sources of petroleum pollution in Alaska takes
on a new urgency at this time. It would have been useful
to have had this material on hand prior to establishment of
a prohibited zone distance.
*The usual descriptive biological observation - the number
of tarred birds was estimated at 86,000 and some seals were
alleged by seal hunters to have had their pelts ruined -
would not seem very useful for long-term solution of marine
petroleum pollution. Reference to - within the memory of
the oldest inhabitants - may be quantitative with regard to
their age group but not necessarily to their observations.
14
-------
A more recent research proposal (Wagner, 1970), detailed
in its approach to some specific chemical and biological oceano-
graphic background and basic data essential to understanding
responses to petroleum pollution, is now worth review and
selection of some items for investigation, not only in Cook
Inlet, but especially for all Alaskan coastal areas subject
to petroleum pollution, viz: North Slope Coast, Valdez,
Archipelago, Kodiak Island, Bristol Bay.
It would seem useful to coordinate the above two research
projects. The probable areas of importance and the baseline
evaluation should then ultimately be followed up for estima-
tion of long-term response, fate and mechanisms, as a minimum
recommendation.
Furthermore, it should be noted that a number of south-
eastern Alaskan bays, harbors, and coves were evaluated for
prevailing conditions prior to July 1966. (Oceanographic, 1966;
Silver Bay, 1957). At this time, a review of these areas for
long term petroleum fates and mechanisms seems desirable.
A minor amount of information is available on needs for
research and correctional work related to petroleum pollution
control in southwestern Alaska (Alaska Water Laboratory, 1967).
15
-------
DISCUSSION
Temperate, Tropical, and Arctic Zone Ecological Stress
One obviously important aspect of the combined biological
and chemical effects of petroleum pollution considered as an
ecological stress in Alaska is the great temperature difference
as compared to temperate zones. Most of the available infor-
mation seems addressed to temperate zones.
It has been recognized that the homeostatic resources
of the tropical biota are less than those of temperate zone
biota and that pollutional stress on these biota results in
greater effects in the tropics. The question naturally arises,
then, are ecological stresses of petroleum pollution expected
to be more or less damaging in cold water areas than in temper-
ate zone waters?
I believe, based on greater specialization of species,
less favorable living conditions (as indicated by fewer species)
that cold water species are, like tropical species, living
further out on the limb of possible existence. If so, I would
conclude more damaging situations as a result of pollution.
This analysis is speculative at best.
17
-------
Bispersants and Alaskan Ambient
The kinds of crude concerned and their possible differ-
ences in biological effects have been mentioned above. It is
probable that similar questions will arise in the chemical
sense. For example, Kuwait crude left some very recalcitrant
chunks of tar and was easily distinguishable from Alaskan
crudes. But, the toxicity, efficiency, and general physical
chemistry of dispersants will be related to not only their
own chemical identity, but also to that of the crude on which
they are operant and on the marine environment prevailing
there. Dispersants are frequently surfactants. The proper-
ties of surfactants in a marine environment, the micelle structure
and windrow formation, interaction of hydrophobic and hydro-
phyllic substances with sometimes both in one molecule, the
surface monolayers of oil materials and gas transmission
dynamics, and the effects of all these on productivity and
the resident biota are not immediate questions related to a
prohibited zone evaluation. But they are important long term
questions which must not only be investigated if solutions
are sought to marine environment pollution problems, but
which must also be kept in mind by the executive formulating
agreements on prohibited zone lines.
18
-------
Furthermore, it is easily conceivable that a dispersant,
nontoxic and efficient in temperate zones will be far less
useful in Alaskan waters.
So, in the face of many questions as yet unanswered, we
conclude that the empirical approach to petroleum discharges
in Alaskan waters seems indicated. There is certainly "oil"
washed up on shore although we are assured no ballast slops
or other discharges are made within the 50-mile zone.
The prevailing currents and the Alaskan gyre system
are well documented (Figure 1). The fact that these materials
do float in and that many birds die seems incontrovertible.
But if the lighter fractions or the aromatic fractions have
been previously dispersed by evaporation and solution - that
is if the prohibited zone is far enough out to ensure enough
time under any conditions of wind and current, the worst part
of the problem may still be in existence at sea.
Because of variable time and temperature relations and
heat transfer and solution rates, it is not practical to
compute a theoretical time-line. Any ballast slops mixture
can easily be handled at the dock. It is probable that
on-board centrifugal separators are technically feasible.
It is difficult, therefore, to justify a line closer than one
which would certainly prevent concentration into the Alaskan
19
-------
shore system. Pending research and development which allows
for contingencies and problems and ecological protection no
rational case can be made for a rule other than that empirical
observation of a line beyond which concentration into the
Alaskan system does not occur.
The analogy to the Mediterranean petrol dumping problem
is marked. The 1954 convention considered a 50-mile and a
100-mile discharge zone. But this is not meaningful in a
land locked sea. The competitive mechanisms and fates of the
oil
1. to shore
2. sink to benthic degradation by solution and dispersion
3. evaporation
ensure that a reasonable fraction will certainly pollute the
near coastal waters and the beaches! (Girotti, 1968)
Most Alaskan commerce will near the end of its transport
run close to Alaska and we must conclude that all of their
dump will, as in the Mediterranean, go into the same three
competitive mechanisms:
20
-------
1. to shore via windrow and slick movement
2. sinking, solution, and dispersion - 50%*
3. evaporation - 20%*
Unfortunately, as we have noted above, no meaningful
rate measurements on these mechanisms are available, no
evidence is at hand of long-term cold water ecological
disturbances attributable to fates and mechanisms of
petroleum in various environments (this information is not
available for temperate waters, either, it may be noted).
(Blumer, M.) (Feldman, M. H., 1970).
An early study of seepage sources (California, 1959)
concluded that the deposition of oil substances on a given
beach may be expected to vary greatly from point to point
on any given day and to vary greatly from day to day.
Since these observations were of a nearby beach system
subject to a fairly uniform seepage, it may be concluded
that for oily substances commuting in from repetitious, but
random, dumping at sea, at greater distances and in a more
complex tide, and current, and archipelago system, these
depositions will be even more random from day to day and from
place to place. This prediction is in excellent agreement
with observed "bird counts" on Kodiak beaches where observations
ranging from 1 to 175 birds per mile of beach were made.
^Hypothetical computations based on Torrey Canyon experience.
21
-------
The estimates of damage based on dead birds counted on
short stretches of long archipelago coast lines must be
considered approximate only (Morris, 1970).
The important observation here is that petroleum
products apparently dumped at distances greater than 50
miles are still washing up into nearby shore waters and
beaches in quantities sufficient to do considerable damage
in a variety of economic and aesthetic and environmental
considerations (Nickel, 1970).
22
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alaska Water Laboratory Staff, "Immediate Pollution Control
Needs in Alaska," USDI/FWPCA, April 1967.
Andresen, M. J., "Pollution and Contamination of Alaskan Waters
by the Petroleum Industry," A proposal to FWPCA, January
1966.
Battelle Northwest Laboratory, "Review of the Santa Barbara
Channel Oil Incident." A report to USDI/FWPCA, July
1969.
Biglane, K. E., "International Aspects of Oil Pollution
Control." Rev. Nov. 19, 1968. USD1/FWQA, Washington,
D. C.
Blumer, Max, "Interaction Between Marine Organisms and Oil
Pollution." Research in process.
California State Water Pollution Control Board. I. "Quantity
of Oily Substances on Beaches and in Nearshore Waters."
II. "Characterization of Coastal Oil Pollution by Sub-
marine Seeps." Sacramento, California 1959.
Dodimead, A. J., "Temperature and Salinities of the N.E.
Pacific Ocean During 1965 and 1966." Fisheries Research
Board of Canada. TR #54, 1968.
Feldman, M. H., "Trace Materials in Wastes Disposed to Coastal
Waters." USDI/FWPCA, July 1970.
Galtsoff, Paul S., Science. 162. 1377, 1968.
Garrett, W. D., "The Organic Composition of the Ocean Surface."
Deep Sea Research, 14, 221, 1967.
Girotti, R., "Problems of Sea Pollution in the Mediterranean
and Fuel Oil Supply and Storage in European Waters."
Conference on Oil Pollution of the Sea. Rome 1968.
Hickel, W. J., "Introduction to the Summary Report of the
Kodiak Oil Pollution Incident." USDI/FWPCA, May 1970.
------- |