14 rpm. The grass recovery continued to increase with a larger water content at higher to. One possible reason is that all devices with vanes have geometirc similarity and may generate turbulence that limits oil recovery and encourages water pickup at identical rotational speeds. Figures 7, 8, and 9 show the model devices used to obtain the data shown in Fig. 6. Also, static tests with the 5-ft disc showed negligible sensitivity to heel angles up to 40 deg as shown in Fig. 10. Similar tests with the varied models also showed no heel sensitivity. The predicted increase with viscosity was not evident in tests although recovery did increase by as much as a factor of 5. Figure 11 shows these test results, and a rough empirical curve. Several experimental factors that could account for the discrepancy include: insufficient oil in the calm pool, choked flow at the vane inlets, choked flow at the wipers, and choked flow through the shaft. Further testing is being conducted to better define the sensitivity of viscosity since this is the single most important oil parameter that affects the recovery device operation. Recovery effectiveness theoretically varies with the square root of the viscosity and typical viscosities range from 1 to 104 cSt for light fuel oils to heavy residuals. The 2.0 H 1.5 S s z 1.0 0. I I I O 10-INCH-DIAMETER DEVICE, PARAFIN - v = 5. 86 CST D iO-INCH-DIAMETER DEVICE, DIESEL - i> = 5. 65 CST + 10-INCH-DIAMETER DEVICE, WATER ONLY - v = 1.0 CSr: A 5-FOOT-DIAMETER DISC, DIESEL - v = 5. 5 CST D 3-FOOT-DIAMETER DISC, DIESEL - v = 6.0 CST k 24-INCH-DIAMETER DISC, DIESEL - v = 6.0 CST O 24-INCH-DIAMETER DISC, PARAFIN CRUDE - v = 5.9 CST X 11-INCH-DIAMETER DEVICE, JP-5 - " = 0.7 CST I I i I I I I I I I I I - DISC ROTATIONAL SPEED (RPM) Figure 6: Normalized Test Data for the 10-in. and 24-In. Device and the Single Disc as a Function of Disc Rotational Speed
-------
  344  PHYSICAL REMOVAL .
 influence  of surface  temperature, T,  on  the recovery
 effectiveness should only be related to  the manner in which
 viscosity affects recovery effectiveness so that
                     where
                     ,K/T
                             where v
,K/T
(13)
     The  importance  of  surface  tension  to  recovery
 efficiency (percent net oil to gross recovered material) can
 be  deduced  from static testing of seasoned oily discs in
             Figure 7: The 10-In. Diameter Model
 water free of an oil  slick. Figure 6 shows at the selected
 12-rpm  rotational  speed  that  water pickup  using an oily
 (hydrophobic) disc was only 13 percent of theoretical for a
 hydrophillic disc. It  is assumed this degradation is due to
 surface  tension.  Taking both  this surface tension effect
 and that of the water viscosity  into account, the water
 pickup  rate would be 6 percent of  that  for  diesel  oil.
 However, when oil is present, the outside of the oil layer
 moves at  a lower velocity  than the  disc; thence, water
 pickup is still lower.  Measured static test values of recovery
 efficiency with fresh  diesel exceeded 99 percent. With wet
 oils and  paraffinic crude under forward way  and in waves,
 this degrades and water  entrains as free droplets on the
 surface  of  the  disc. Under  way and with  waves,  the
 submerged  oil layer  on  the discs is   affected and
 irregularities allow additional  water to  become attached.
 The  performance  under  these   conditions  is  discussed
 subsequently.
    When the oil is carried to the wiper, it flows in a layer
of thickness, 5, down to the shaft at a  mean velocity u1, by
gravity action and into a trough of width, w. The flow rate
into the shaft, Q = u'5w, and
                     from boundary layer theory.

                         The maximum flow rate occurs when 5 equals half the
                     gap between the discs. For a device with a 2-in. disc spacing
                     and a 6-in. through width, the maximum flow rate of oil
                     with kinematic  viscosity, v, in cSt to the hollow shaft per
                     disc is
                                                                           n _   25.7 x 1CP
                                                                           Q	gpm
                                                                        (15)
                        Comparison of Eq. (9) for the  flow intake limitation
                    with Eq.  (15) for the flow down the wiper shows similar
                    results. Botj equations are quite approximate for estimating
                    flow "choking" conditions but when the more conservative
                    Eq. (9) is used with Fig. 1 1, the recovery rate as a function
                    of viscosity can be estimated.  The recovery  rate for low oil
                    viscosities is given by  Eq. (12). With v = 6 cSt, CL> = 12 rpm,
                    and R  = 4 ft, the predicted recovery rate is about 10 gpm
                    per disc.  When  this  rate  is combined  with  the  Fig.  11
                    empirical  curve, rather than  the Eq.  (12) Q  
-------
                                                                            LOCKHEED RECOVERY DEVICE    345
               O FORWARD WAY TEST

                I NO FORWARD WAY
                                                   100

                                            OIL VISCOSITY. cSt

                                   Figure 11: Oil Recovery Rate as a Function of Viscosity
                                                                                 1000
                                                                                                              10000
    Viscosity and specific gravity  of oils  are  generally
related. The higher the  specific gravity, the more viscous
the oil is. For v = 750 cSt, a typical specific gravity is 0.95.
Figure 2 shows  that  in a static pool at least 3 in. of oil is
required to achieve maximum recovery.

    When the recovery subsystem is moving at a forward
way, u, with respect to the stationary oil pool of thickness,
h0, the oil flow rate to a device of width, W, is
                     Q = u h0 w
(16)
    However, the recovery rate as predicted by Eq. (12) is
also  modified by  the  forward  speed.  Experiments,
conducted with the  1/4-scale  device  (24-in.-diameter)
shown in Fig. 13, showed that when the speed is increased
from  zero up  to  a  critical  value  the recovery  rate is
approximately equal to either the recovery potential from
Eq. (12) or the encounter rate from Eq. (16), whichever is
less. The critical  speed  can  be scaled with the densimetric
Froude number, F =  u^/gAr;  and, the  critical Froude
number was found to be 0.53.
    For speeds greater than the critical speed, the recovery
rate  for  a  given  thickness  declines. The reasons for  the
decline are probably some combination of flow under the
device  (drainage) and a breakdown of the mechanism by
which the oil adheres  to the disc. The results of tests with
the 1/4-scale device and the experimental test conditions
and  their  full-scale equivalents  are noted  on  Fig.  13.
Experiments show  that for  a  constant forward way  above
the critical speed, the recovery rate is proportional to the
thickness of oil, as shown in Fig. 14. This graph implies that
the ratio of oil recovered to oil encountered is constant.
    Using these criteria, the oil recovery rate is assumed to
increase with thickness until the  capacity  of the device is
exceeded, at which  time the recovery rate is computed and

-------
 346   PHYSICAL REMOVAL . .  .
 adjusted  by  an appropriate  recovery  (water  content)
 efficiency, rjw,  that depends on forward way and which has
 been experimentally  determined as shown in   Figure  15.
 The recovery efficiency and oil bypass are both related to
 the depth of the captured pool of oil in front of the device.
 The Froude number equation relates oil  depth and water
 velocity  with  the  drum radius as the  characteristic
 dimension. The scaling law implies that for larger drums the
 captive oil pool depth increases for a given forward way and
 more  oil  is  ingested  into the device  and recovered. By
 Froude  scaling  the forward way and assuming that the ratio
 of oil recovered to oil encountered is constant,  a method
 was generated to scale the 1 /4-scale model data for recovery
 effectiveness and efficiency as shown in  Figs. 13 and 15,
 respectively. The derivation of the method is given in Ref. 1
 and the results are
                  Q = min
                                                    (17)
 where
       C    =  recovery drum length
       Qmod = m°del recovery rate shown in Fig. 16
                    RECOVERY RATE PER DISC (GPM)
       I.
                       ^3:
Figure 12: Recover}  Rate of the Proposed Prototype for Different
Oil Viscosities
    The predicted recovery rate based on Eq. (17) with low
viscosity oil (v = 6 cSt) for an 8-ft-diameter by 10-ft-long
device with a 2-in. disc spacing in calm water  is shown in
Fig. 16 as a function of forward way and oil thickness. The
buildup for thin slicks is a composite of the Fig. 2 spreading
rate and the physical encounter  rate, whichever is  greatest
until  the recovery device capability is reached. The scaled
data for the  1/4-scale device is the basis for the predicted
curve. The scaled data from the  1/9-scale model lie slightly
below the prediction,  but generally confirm  the  scaling
method.
    Figure  16  also  shows  that up  to  2  kts. for  slick
thicknesses less than 0.3 in., less oil is encountered than can
be recovered. At speeds greater than 2 kts, the recovery rate
declines only gradually with increased forward way.

    The Froude number equation states that  the amount of
oil bypass under the device due to drainage increases as the
specific gravity  increases. Measurements were  made  with
emulsified diesel of specific gravity between  0.93 and  0.°-7
and with clean oil of 0.87 s.g. Thus, the fractional density,
A decreased  roughly 75  percent. However, the viscosity
increased by  105. The  experimental effect  under forward
way was inconclusive with regard to specific gravity since
the recovery  rate with the  highly emulsified  diesel was
sometimes   fivefold  that  of clean diesel.  It  has been
speculated  that Froude Number scaling  of dimensions and
speed for a given oil may still be valid even  though it  can
not be demonstrated  with different oils. The reason is that
the large increase in  recovery due to viscosity increases the
throughflow  of  oil   and probably  affects  the  drainage
criteria  which takes  no account of throughflow.  In any
event,  it appeared that  specific  gravity is a second-order
effect compared to viscosity.

    The  analysis  assumes that oil flow under the device is
principally caused by the drum acting as a flow obstruction
and the data support  this contention. Tests at high drum
rotational speeds  show an absence of a visible bow wave in
front  of  the drum, and it appears that all of the oil flows
into the  drum. However, the pickup  mechanism does not
work  efficiently (large amounts  of  water are collected) as
can be seen in Figs. 13 and 15.

    The  addition of  waves to both calm water and while
under way  results in  a degradation in recovery effectiveness
and efficiency. Tests plotted on Figs. 13 and  15  showed
that this degradation could not be described in terms of
some  time  averaged  change in immersion depth, and that
the  recovery   rate  in  waves  is dependent   upon  both
amplitude and forward way. The experimental data  suggest
that either the oscillation motion somehow prohibits the oil
from entering the drum or the film attachment mechanism
breaks down. Estimations of the breakdown have not been
made  since the  physical processes governing  the  pickup
failure are not known. Visual observations noted that as the
drum descended  into the water as  a  result  of  the heaving
motion,  the surging  action pushes the oil that was at the

-------
                                                                        LOCKHEED RECOVERY DEVICE
                                                 347
face  of the drum downward where it can pass under the
drum. A picture of this is shown in Fig. 17. Because of the
complex nature of the flow field in the presence of waves,
the  degradation of  performance with waves  is obtained
from experimental data.

    The ratio of recovery rate in waves to that in no waves.
Qw/Ou- can be obtained  from Fig. 13. The speed and wave
height  can  be  Froude-scaled  and   the  degradation  in
recovery effectiveness for the proposed prototype can  be
scaled. The degradation is shown in Fig. 1 8 as a function of
wave height for different  forward way speeds. The recovery
efficiency  is shown in Fig. 15.

    The   results  shown in  Fig.  18  are based upon
experimental  data  conducted  in  the  Lockheed  Ring
Channel shown in Fig. 19. The  results in Fig.  16 can  be
multiplied by the degradation shown in Fig. 18 to predict
prototype  recovery in waves while under way.
    The test procedure  used to generate the experimental
data for wave degradation consisted of sinuosoidally driving
the recovery  device  at  the  prescribed  amplitude  and
frequency. The test conditions depended upon the response
characteristics of the recovery device mounted in catamaran
hulls pictured in Fig.  20 and 21 and measured on 1/9-scale
model  tests in the Lockheed tow and wave tank. The tesl
results  from photographic  data were analyzed over a range
of  wave frequencies  and length. The Pierson-Moskowitz
energy  spectrum  for  a  random  sea was  applied and  the
result is shown in Fig.  22.
    The tests  conducted  in the  Lockheed Ring Channel
only approximated the motion of the drum. Also, the data
presented in Fig. 13 are over a narrow wave period range
and the sensitivity of recovery effectiveness with period is
not known. Future work will  eliminate  this problem by
measuring recovery rate with a working model of the device
while   the model is  being towed in regular and random
waves through  the range of interest.
          10
 NET OIL
RECOVERY
RATE
(GPM)
WAVES
AMPLITUDE
± 1"
± 2"
± 2-1/2"
± 3-1/2"
* 4-1/2"
± 5"
j ! 	 | . 	 j 	 Tr*h«f>H^
	 3 	
:::::::::::: -\

24-INCH DIA DEVICE
PERIOD CODE DIESEL OIL
3.QSEC 1/4 SHADED FILM THICKNESS
3.0 SEC 1/4 SHADED VISCOSITY = 5 1
3.0 SEC 1/4 SHADED DRUM ROTATIONAL
3.0 SEC 1/2 SHADED _
2. 6 SEC 3/4 SHADED O = 4.5 RPMl
2.0 SEC FULL SHADED A = 7.0
i •' ii" in D = 9.5 _)
O= 12 RPM
3- r+~-"T 0= 18RPM

= .04 IN.
O 8cSt
SPEED
NORMALIZED
TO 12 RPM
	 	 ^ 	
HI::
^.
^±| ::::: \. 0
~~I~~ 	 III IJ-LJ-L
                                                 FOKWAJtt) WAY - (ITS)
                               Figure  13: Recovery'  Rate of the 1/4-Scale Device With Forward
                               Way With and Without The Presence of Waves

-------
348   PHYSICAL REMOVAL
                             s
                             0,
                             g
                             K
                             H
                             X
                             w
                             C   4
                             O
0
O
I
9
                                       OIL TYPE -DIESEL,  ;• = 6 CST

                                       DRUM ROTATIONAL SPEED = 10 RPM

                                       ADVANCE RATE = 2.7-2.8 FT/SEC
                                                      
-------
                                          LOCKHEED RECOVERY DEVICE     349
                          234
                      FORWARD WAY (KNOTS)
Figure 16: Full-scale Predicted Oil Recovery Rate vs. Forward Way
for Law Viscosity Oil
Figure  17: Extremes of Wave Heaving for Device Under Forward
Way at 17 rpm

-------
   350   PHYSICAL REMOVAL .
                                                  Figure 17 (Continued)
        NOTE: THE FULL SCALE SPEEDS IN KNOTS IDENTIFY
             EACH CURVE.WAVE PERIOD = 5 SECONDS AVERAGE
                         WAVE HEIGHT (FT)

Figure  18: Oil  Recovery Rate in the  Presence of Waves as  a
Function of Heave Amplitude  of the Drum for  Different Tow
Speeds
                                                                     Figure 19: Lockheed Ring Channel and Model Carriage

-------
                                                                     LOCKHEED RECOVERY DEVICE        351
                                                               Figure 21: Model With Minimum Waterline Height
         Figure  19 (Continued)
                                                                       PERCENT OF TIMF. WATER HEIGHT IS GREATER THAN HW
                                                                              «0        50       10       1     0.1  0.01
                                                             0.01  0.1     1
                                                                          PERCENT OF TIME WATER HEIGHT IS LESS THAN H
                                                         Figure  22:  Water Height  at  Bo\v  and  Stern  -  Frequency  of
                                                         Occurrence in 1-Foot Significant Wave Height Seas at Tow Speed of
                                                         5 knots
                                                                           CONTAINMENT BOOM
                                                                                                             STORAGE BAGS
                                                                     Figure 23: Sketch of Deployed System
Figure 20: Model With Maximum Waterline Height

-------
352   PHYSICAL  REMOVAI	
              OIL RECOVERY DEVICE
              AIR EXHAUST
              SNORKEL
                                         LOA	
                                         BEAM	
                                         HEIGHT.
                                         DRAFT_
                                         DISPLACEMENT.
                       OPERATING
                    -36FT-10IN.
                    .21 FT-101/2IN.
                    _12 FT-5 IN.
                    -2FT-11 IN.
                    . 22,400LB
                     (FULL LOAD)
 SIDE VIEW

AIR INTAKE-
                                               FRONT VIEW
                                                                      -AIR INLET
                                                                       HULL CENTER SECTION
                                                               Figure 24: Concept Arrangement of Oil Recovery System

-------
                                                     LOCKHEED RECOVERY DEVICE    353
   2500 i—
   2000
o
   1500
B
O
e
PS
w
PS
   1000
500
                      NOTE:  OIL POOL DEPTH ASSUMED TO BE AT LEAST 4 IN.
                             UNDER ALL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS:
             ARBITRARY
             PUMP CAPACITY	
                 RECOVERY RATE IN
                 CALM WATER,
                 NO CURRENT
     TRANSFER
     PUMP LIMIT

      CHOKING CONDITION
                                  RECOVERY RATE IN
                               	 SEA STATE 4, 2 KT
                                  CURRENT
              10
       No. 1 &
       No. 2
       FUEL
       OIL
                              100                  1000
                             VISCOSITY (CENTISTOKES)
             CRUDE OILS, T > 28°
                  No. 3 & No. 4 FUEL OILS,  T > 28*F
               10,000

No. 5 & No. 6 FUEL OILS,
T > 50" F	^
 MEDIUM -TO -HEAVY
 EMULSIONS
                                Figure 25: Recovery Effectiveness

-------
354    PHYSICAL REMOVAL . .
                                Figure 9: 24-In. Device Under Way at 17 rpm, No Waves

-------
                                                      LOCKHEED RECOVERY DEVICE    355

1
Q - Oil Recovery Rate


























































































»























































3











































































































































































































































































































































































;i
0













































































































































xperimental a~
f both sidqs




































































































































































































































































































































































1
































vt




















"y
































ji


































































































































•age





























































































































































































































































































































































































































Q(40) 4-

































































































































2


































































1-.5














1.-C












































































































3'f — ^'





























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Wiped Side
of Disc

















































































































































\









































)













































































































































































































s








a
c






















































^






^






/










































































^




f





















































A
If





















































>
K

































f
/
'





























































>-

^f
f


















































^
"'F
i*/




^





















^
i

























^







s



















'}
>






































































































































i i i
DISC"




















































































































































































































































w*












































































1
-30
-20
1O           0           TO

   - Heel  Angle - degrees
                                                                20
30
             Figure 10: Experimental Oil Recovery Rate of One Side of a 60-In.
             Diameter Disc as a Function of Heel Angle

-------
 356  PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
Operational Capabilities
    The operational capabilities of a full-scale 8-ft-diameter
by 10-ft-long system can be determined from the foregoing
analysis. Figure 23 shows a sketch of the recovery system in
use with  a containment boom. The  containment boom
concentrates the oil into a stagnant pool where it must flow
toward the oil recovery.system. The flow rate is gravity and
inertia-limited,  as  shown  in  Fig.  2  for different
specific-gravity oils. The required pool thickness is between
1 and 4 in. for current speeds up to 2 kts, depending upon
the oil specific gravity and sea state. Using Eq.  (2)  to
calculate the thickness variation as a function of distance
from the  boom apex, assuming  there is  1 ft of oil in the
thickest part of the pool,  shows  that 3 in.  of 0.95
specific-gravity oil are available  at about 30 ft from the
boom apex in a 2-kt current. In a 1-kt current,  the oil will
reach out  120 ft. For oils with a lower specific gravity
(lower viscosity), the required  thickness to achieve the
predicted  recovery  rate  decreases according  to  Fig. 2.
Likewise, 4 in. of oil is available SO ft from the boom apex
tor O.57-specitic-gravity oil in  a 2-kt current. In a 1-kt
current, the oil will reach out 200 ft. For oils with a higher
specific gravity  (high  viscosity), the required thickness
remains at about 3 in., because the predicted recovery rate
decreases and less oil is needed to feed the device.
    Since both the recovery system and the containment
boom will  be  loosely moored  to have an essential quick
heave response to steep waves, they will also be subject to
reasonably  large  lateral  excursions.  Assuming they are
structurally and dynamically independent of  each other, 20
to  45 feet of  sea room seems a practical requirement
depending on sea state. Eventually, the barrier may fail to
hold a sufficient quantity of high-specific-gravity oil  in  a
current. Of course, these conditions are somewhat relaxed
at lower current speeds because the quantity of oil varies
inversely  with the square of the current speed. Likewise, "
the  containment boom  and recovery system  could  be
moved in the current to reduce the relative speed.
     The effect of current  on recovery  effectiveness and
efficiency  was  not directly  tested.  It  was assumed
conservative to equate the effect of current with  the test
results from  moving  the  device through  the  water. If
sufficient oil is presented to the device, the recovery rate of
low  viscosity oil is  about 500 gpm for current speeds
between 0 and 2 kts. For high viscosity oils, Fig. 12 shows
the increase and the imposition of choking. The assumed
full-scale  system would have 50 discs so its performance
would be  50-fold  that  of Fig. 12.  A  concept  general
arrangement of a full-scale system is shown in Fig. 24.
     The   oil  recovery  system's  net  oil  (and  natural
emulsion) recovery rate capability is shown  in Fig. 25 as  a
function of viscosity. Viscosity  is the most important oil
property  that  affects performance  of  the  recovery
subsystem.  In a  similar, but not directly related  sense,
specific gravity is the  most important  ofl  property that
affects containment boom performance. The graph in Fig.
 25  shows  most  of  the  other  limitations  on  system
 performance.  The  bottom of left-hand band shows  the
 variation in performance due to combined severe Sea State
 4 and 2-kt current. The right-hand limit shows the effect of
 viscous choking at both the disc-vane entrance passages and
 the  internal wipers. It should be recalled that this limit is
 not absolute.
     Between  these  limits  there  is  a  cutoff  due  to  the
 arbitrary  sizing of  the  oil transfer pump  and its prime
 mover engine. By following the pump capacity curve to the
 lower  viscosity region, it can be seen that  in heavy seas,
 when  recovery efficiency  drops, the  recovery rate  also
 drops and the pump may be operated at down to 1 /6 of its
 rated capacity to minimize its tendency to emulsify. Within
 these limits, the recovery efficiency exceeds 75  percent.
     Also shown in Fig. 25 is the viscosity for typical oils.
 Within the selected recovery device rotational speed range,
 the type of oil recovered does not appear to influence the
 recovery rate. It was assumed that the containment boom
 provides  sufficient oil  to  naturally  flow by  the
 gravity-inertia mechanism to the recovery system at a rate
 that supports the recovery capability. For specific gravities
 up to  0.99, a 4-in. thickness is  sufficient to feed at  the
 shown rates. A lesser quantity, down to 1/2 in. is required
 with specific gravities down to 0.85  when following  the
 curve from the peak point all of the way to the left. If the
 device  is presented free oil in a current, the  oil depth only
 needs to be 1/2 in. to allow the  recovery system to reach
 maximum capacity without regard  to specific  gravity. For
 thinner layers of oil down to 0.01 in., the recovery device
 retains  its  effectiveness at  a  constant  rate  that  is
 proportional to the oil encounter rate.
 REFERENCES
    1.  B.  Bruch,  K.R.  Maxwell,  and  H.G.  Ulbrich,
 "Engineering Concept Evaluation Program for High Seas Oil
Spill Recovery,"  ORD, Report  No.  71403-A-004, Dec.
 1970.
    2. J.A. Fay, 'The  Spread of Oil Slicks on a Calm Sea,"
p. 53 in Oil on the Sea, DP. Hoult, ed. Plenum Press, N.Y.,
 1969.

    3. DP. Hoult,  "Containment and Collection Devices
 for Oil Slicks," Oil on  the Sea, DP. Hoult, ed. Plenum
 Press, New York, N.Y., 1969, pp 65-80
     4. DP. Hoult, "Containment of Oil Spills by Physical
 and Air Barriers,"  Paper  No. 176, Third  Joint  Meeting
 Institute  de  Ingenieros Quimicos  De Puerto Rico  and
 American Institute of Chemical Engineers, San Juan, Puerto
 Rico, May 17-20,1970.
     5. R.A. Cochran, W.T. Jones, and JP. Oxenham,  "A
 Feasibility Study  of the Use  of the  Oleophilic Belt  Oil
 Scrubber,"  USCG  Final  Report  (Contract
 DOT-CG-00593-A), Oct 1970.

-------
                THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  TEST  PROCEDURES
                   FOR  THE ASSESSMENT  OF  EFFICIENCY
                                  IN   BEACH  CLEANING
                                               P. G. Jeffery
                                          Warren Spring Laboratory
                                      Department of Trade and Industry
                                              United Kingdom
ABSTRACT
   A bewildering variety of materials has been suggested for
the removal of spilt oil from beaches, rocks and shore-line
structures. These vary considerably in composition, toxic-
ity, efficiency and cost. Early laboratory test procedures
developed in 1961, were concerned only with efficiency in
cleaning and were demonstrably non-reproducible. Since
that date considerable efforts have been made to refine the
procedures in use, and to introduce new tests closely allied
to the beach cleaning process.

   A co-operative exercise, undertaken in con/unction with
the maljor oil companies of the United Kingdom demon-
strated the degree of agreement between laboratories  that
could be expected from such standardized test procedures.
Recent developments in this field at Warren Spring Labora-
tory, and the procedure at present used for the assessment
of  these materials for beach cleaning in the United
Kingdom are described.


INTRODUCTION
   There is no completely adequate procedure that can be
used to assess the overall efficiency of materials proposed
for beach cleaning. This stems partly  from the variation in
character of beaches, and partly from the wide variety of
conditions  (e.g., slope, drainage,  tidal action,  intertidal
scouring  etc.) existing on beaches for which cleaning is
necessary, and  fow which the test procedure  must be
designed to simulate.

   Tests  involving  the  laying down of oiled  strips on
beaches are seldom satisfactory, in that such experiments
are not repeatable from one tide to the next, and cannot be
equated to experiments made on  other beaches or under
different conditions. In practice this leads to the impossibil-
ity of making fair comparison between one experiment and
the succeeding one and hence between one material and
another.

   It has also proved difficult to reproduce laboratory tests
but in practice a fair assessment of any new material
suggested  for  beach  cleaning  can be made using  the
laboratory test procedures developed, provided that they
are backed by  general experience in the use of laboratory
evaluation of such materials. This background experience is
essential to enable  a differentiation to be made between
measured properties that are relevant to the requirement,
and those that are not.

   This paper has been written not only to summarize the
work that has lead  up to the present new test procedure,
but also  to  describe  some of the work  undertaken to
evaluate other possible test procedures. It is hoped that the
paper will prevent  other  workers  in  this  field from
following blind alleys which were  found during the course
of the work.
The Preliminary Work
   The development  of  full scale  procedures  for  the
cleaning of the beaches of the United Kingdom started in
1961. In  the  early stages,  it was  realized  that some
laboratory method would be required for comparing  one
dispersing material with another.  The first test methods
developed closely followed the large-scale practice that was
then being developed, namely, the elution of oil  from a
section of a shingle beach. The oil chosen for this purpose
was a heavy fuel oil, Bunker C, with a Redwood viscosity of
about 4,000. This oil was selected as being a reasonably
uniform, readily available commercial product frequently
spilt and  representing something rather more difficult to
clean than the  lighter crudes, but a good deal easier than
the tarry lumps which were not acted upon at all by the
                                                   357

-------
358   PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
 dispersants. It proved to be a convenient oil  to  handle
 gravimetrically. The  first determinations  were made by
 weighing the  residue  remaining after oil which had been
 eluted from the  shingle beach section with sea water was
 recovered by  solvent extraction  using  benzene. The oil
 fraction  remaining  on  the beach  section was similarly
 recovered by  solvent extraction  using  benzene. The oil
 fraction  remaining  on  the beach  section was similarly
 recovered using benzene, the solvent being removed and the
 oil  weighed.  Unfortunately  it was  not possible  to  get
 reproducible results from this simple test  procedure. This
 was shown to be due in some measure to the difficulties of
 eluting  the oil from the heterogeneous  shingle bed. In
 particular it was realized that variation in size and shape of
 the inter-particle space was resulting in erratic hold-up.
 Other points noted in these initial studies were the need for
 uniform wetting of the bed with salt water and the need for
 greater uniformity in the method of treating the deposited
 oil with solvent emulsifier.
 The Cleaning of Flat Surfaces
   At  this stage it was considered vital to re-examine the
 fundamental premise behind the test (i.e., that the proce-
 dure used should be a scaled-down version of large-scale
 practice) to try to find an alternative method that would be
 more reproducible, yet at the same time give results directly
 applicable to beach-cleaning practice.

   It was argued that since many beaches are composed of
 or contain quite large pebbles, a useful test procedure could
 be one based upon the cleaning of a single test pebble, or its
 equivalent,  in the laboratory. A number of test surfaces
 were therefore examined, including  concrete, tile, bricks of
 various porosities, various metal surfaces, sand-blasted glass
 plates and natural pebbles of several kinds. Each  surface
 was oiled, sprayed with solvent emulsifier and then washed
 down with sea water.

   In general it was found that the surfaces were  of two
 kinds, those that were cleaned far  too  easily to give any
 measure of the cleaning efficiency  of the  emulsifier, and
 those  including all surfaces of high porosity, that proved
 impossible to clean. An added  difficulty was the virtual
 impossibility of measuring  the quantities of solvent/emulsi-
 fier .mixture used, particularly in relation to coverage of
 the oiled plates or surfaces.

   This type of test procedure was therefore abandoned for
 beach  cleaners, although subsequent work using a porous
 plate has since led to the development of a suitable test
 method for gels and pastes which are  designed to clean oil
 and tar products from road surfaces, concrete and brick-
 work.
The "Model Beach" Test
   This is the test procedure that has been in continuous
use since 1967, and is described in some detail by Beynon
at the Joint Symposium organized in 1969 by the American
Petroleum Institute and the then Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration.

   In this procedure, the earlier shingle beach was replaced
by a  uniform  bed of cleaned,  Ballotini  glass  spheres
approximately equating to coarse sand in particle size. This
provided a uniform bed with a slightly dished surface which
could be wetted with sea water, have standard amounts of a
bunker oil  and of solvent/emulsifier  added to it, and then
be eluted with sea water. The efficiency of cleaning was
measured by recovering both the oil eluted from the model
beach  and that remaining in the test  bed, for a number of
oil/emulsifier ratios.

   For the determination  of oil, the recovered fractions
were  diluted  to volume  in  a halocarbon  solvent and
measured spectrophotometrically.  This in itself is not a
simple process as turbidities  sometimes develop in  the
chloroform solutions, vitiating the measurement.  Chloro-
form solutions of oil must not be exposed to sunlight, nor
for prolonged  periods to strong  daylight.  Even  so,  the
combined totals for oil in the two  samples usually  exceeds
the original  oil added by a  small amount. This in itself is
not of importance, as this small amount is well within  the
variations experienced  in using this method. Some of this
excessive total is due to the color of the dispersant mixture
under test.

   In  the hands of a skilled operator,  this test procedure
gives results that are reproducible to  ±20 per cent. Graphs
of typical results are shown in  Figure 1, together with brief
comments  by  way of interpretation.  It  is only with
difficulty that  these results can be used  to compare two
dissimilar materials quantitatively,  but they can easily and
simply to interpreted visually by a straightforward compari-
son with those materials known to  be effective as beach
cleaners.
     30
  i
      10
     1        I        '
A.  POOR BEACH  CLEANER,
   UNABLE TO PENETRATE  OIL
B.  GOOD BEACH  CLEANER
C  EXCELLENT BEACH  CLEANER,
   HIGH N AROMATIC  SOLV
                        1=5             2:5
                 RATIO OF BEACH CLEANER TO OIL

       Figure 1: Results From "Model Beach" Test
                                           3:5

-------
                                                                    ...EFFICIENCY IN BEACH CLEANING  359
   Unfortunately this test procedure gives erratic results in
unskilled hands, and this is exemplified by the remarks of
Beynon concerning  an inter-laboratory co-operative test
program. A total of six laboratories were asked to use this
procedure  for  assessing the  beach cleaning  efficiency  of
seven commercially  available dispersants.  The  results he
quotes for a second co-operative  test program  show that
this model beach test procedure is unsuited as it stands for
standarization.  All that can reasonably be claimed from this
exercise is that dispersants known  to  be  poor for beach
cleaning  were  shown  to  be  poor at cleaning the model
beach, while  conversely, dispersants which were good for
beach cleaning also cleaned the model beach.

   However no  two laboratories ranked  the seven materials
in the same order, and one laboratory rated a particularly
poor cleaner  higher than another laboratory  rated a good
one.

Developments of the "Model Beach" Test
   As a preliminary exercise  toward the development of a
modified test procedure, an examination was made of the
likely causes of variation of results from one laboratory and
another. Particular attention was paid to the spectrophoto-
metric method  of measurement, as considerable differences
in technique were discovered  between the  co-operating
analysts. However these differences were, on  examination,
not found  to be capable of explaining the vast differences
in the results that had earlier been obtained.

   The following observations, explaining  the  differences
noted in the  laboratory and believed to be responsible for
the lack  of repeatability within a single laboratory, were
finally selected  as  explaining  the  major  part  of the
inter-laboratory variation:

   (a) the bunker oil used in this test does not spread over
      the  glass beads  in a uniform manner. The spread is
      greater on some occasions than on others, and there
      is variation in the depth of penetration of the beads.

   (b)  the  solvent/emulsifier  mixture does not 'react' with
      the oil on the glass beads in a uniform manner. It is
      to  be expected that  different  emulsifiers would
      behave  differently, but on  occasions  the  same
      emulsifier  follows  a  different  pattern.  To  some
      extent this is a result of (a) above,  but in addition
      the rate  of adsorption of the emulsifier  into the bead
      bed is sometimes so rapid that a part of it escapes
      contact with the oil.

   (c) owing to channelling within the bead column, some
      of the water  used is  not effective  in leaching the
      emulsified oil. With some emulsifiers, the dilution of
      the  oil with the contained  solvent enables globules
       of unemulsified  oil to be eluted mechanically. To
       avoid  these differences, that could give rise to  a
      considerable  variation of  results,  a  number  of
       changes  were  introduced. The test bed of glass beads
      was  reduced considerably in diameter, and length-
      ened  somewhat  to give a  narrow longish  column.
      The bead diameter was reduced considerably. These
      two changes between them restricted the amount of
      channelling through the beads, gave a better control
      over the flow rate of fluid through the column, and
      prevented the mechanical elution  of globules of
      diluted (as distinct from emulsified) oil.

         Other changes introduced included the use of
      glass beads  previously  treated with oil, and the use
      of methanol to elute water, salt and emulsifier from
      the column, prior to eluting the oil with halocarbon
      solvent.

         These changes gave  a  new procedure which at
      least within my own laboratory proved to be a great
      deal more reproducible than the earlier ones. Unfor-
      tunately the behavior of solvent/emulsifier mixtures
      in the test has since been  shown to bear no relation
      to the behavior of the solvent/emulsifier mixture in
      large-scale beach cleaning. For many materials, the
      test gave a  measure of the amount of emulsifying
      constituent  present (i.e., the surface active material)
      and no indication at all of the penetrating power of
      the solvent fraction, nor of the ability of the solvent
      to make available the emulsifying constituent.
Recent Developments
   In these developments, attempts have been made in the
test procedure  to approximate more closely to conditions
prevailing on a  beach. The use of pre-treated oily beads has
been  retained,  but they are no longer supported in a glass
column. A larger  volume  of  beads  is  taken  and  the
solvent/emulsifier mixture added  using a syringe with a
hypodermic needle. After allowing the test bed to stand for
a fixed period of time,  a known volume of sea water is
added,  and the beaker and contents are  transferred to a
shaking table which is set in motion at such a speed that the
glass beads are  gently agitated, but are not actually swirled
around the beaker.

   In this  action the oil is liberated and emulsified. The
aqueous phase containing the emulsified oil is decanted and
the oil  recovered by halocarbon extraction. Oil remaining
on the  surface  of the beads is recovered by washing with
chloroform. Both samples of oil are examined spectro-
photometrically in the usual way.
   The advantages claimed for this procedure are as
follows:
   (a) as the oil  is present in a thin surface layer
      only, it cannot be detached mechanically in
      the form of large droplets;
   (b) the solvent itself has a diluting effect in the
      test procedure, which parallels that obtained
      in practice; and

-------
 360   PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
    (c) the motion of the shaking table simulates the
       wave  aciton that takes place on  natural
       beaches.

    This test procedure is still under evaluation, but prelimi-
 nary results  are  encouraging. Whether  they remain  as
 encouraging  when the test is  in the hands of operators
 unskilled in this kind of testwork remains to be seen.
 APPENDIX I
 A Beach Cleaning Efficiency Test for
   Solvent Emulsifiers and
   Other Detergent Materials

   In this test procedure, a measured volume of dispersant
 is spread on to an oiled "beach" of glass balls. Sea water is
 added, and the "beach" gently agitated for 15 minutes. The
 oil  that is removed from the "beach," and also  that
 remaining on  the glass beads, is determined spectrophoto-
 metrically.

 MATERIALS REQUIRED
 Apparatus
   Syringe pipettes, 2-ml and 10-ml capacity.
   BaJlotini solid glass spheres, 16-25 mesh.
   Spectrophotometer, with 0.5 cm cells.
   Separating funnels, 250-ml.
   Beakers, 250-ml and 600-ml.
  Measuring cylinder, 100-ml.
   Clock glass, 5-cm diameter, with a  15-cm  glass  rod
      cemented to the concave surface.
   Volumetric flasks, 100-ml.
  Hotplate
   Filter funnel, 15-cm.
   Filter papers, Whatman No. 1,9-cm.
   Shaking table, a shaking table capable of imparting a
      rotating  motion of up  to  120 r.p.m. to a deck
      modified to hold up to 10 250-ml beakers.
 Reagents
   CMoroform
   Sea water, synthetic sea water prepared from "Sea Water
      Corrosion Test Tablets".
   Test oil, topped Kuwait crude oil.

 PROCEDURE
   Switch on the  shaking table  and set to a speed of about
 120 r.pjn.

  Weigh 500 g of Ballotini solid glass spheres into a 600-ml
beaker and, using a syringe pipette, add exactly 10 ml of
topped  crude  ofl. Stir  the beads  thoroughly to obtain
complete mixing and uniformly coated beads.

  Transfer 50 g of the oiled beads to a 250-ml beaker,  and,
using the clock galss with the glass rod cemented to it, press
down on the beads to give a slightly concave surface.
  Using the smaller of the two syringe pipettes, add 0.2 ml
of the beach cleaner under test. A fine  needle should be
used to ensure an even distribution of solvent/emulsifier
mixture over the concave surface of the test bed. Allow the
cleaner to soak into the bed for 15 minutes, then add 100
ml  of sea water by gently pouring down the side of the
beaker so as not to disturb the beads. Place the  beaker on
the shaking table and shake for 15 minutes. The table speed
should be adjusted to impart a  swirling motion  to the sea
water and a gentle agitation to the glass beads.

   Remove the beaker from the  table and decant the liquid
fraction into a 250-ml separating funnel. Wash  the beads
with two 25-ml portions of sea water, adding the washings
to the liquid fraction in the separating funnel.

   Extract the oil from the aqueous/emulsifier oil fraction
by  shaking with  five  15-ml portions of chloroform, col-
lecting the chloroform extracts in  a  100-ml  volumetric
flask. Dilute  the chloroform  solution  to  volume  and
determine the oil content by spectrophotometric measure-
ment at 580 run in the usual way (Note 1).

   Rine the oiled beads remaining in the beaker with suc-
cessive small  portions  of chloroform and  collect  the
combined organic solution in a 100-ml volumetric flask,
also for spectrophotometric measurement at 580 nm in the
usual way (Note 2).
   Using a calibration graph, calculate the oil removed from
the "beach" as a percentage of total oil recovered (Note 3),
and plot  these values against  the ratio  of oil to beach
cleaner (Note 4).

CALIBRATION
   Using a syringe pipette, measure  three 0.8 ml volumes of
topped crude oil into three separate beakers. Dissolve each
portion  of ofl in  chloroform, transfer to separate  100-ml
volumetric flasks and dilute each to the mark. Measure the
absorbance at 580 mm and calculate a factor for converting
absorbance readings to volumes of oil. Take an  average of
the three factors obtained.

TIMING
   A totla  of five tests in one series can be undertaken
concurrently. The time taken is approximately 2% hours.

NOTES
   1. The chloroform solution  should be perfectly clear
     and remain so.  If  clouding occurs this may be
     removed by filtration through a small filter paper, or
     by  gentle boiling for a few minutes, allowing to cool
     and diluting once again to volume.
  2. The amount of oil remaining  on the "beach" cannot
     be  calculated by differences, as the amount of oil
     taken varies slightly from one test to the next.
  3. This ratio  technique is necessary  as  some beach
     cleaners at present available have appreciable optical
     densities at 580 nm, leading  to apparently high
     recoveries of oil.
  4. Suitable  ratios of oil  to beach  cleaner are 5:1, 5:2,
     5:3,5:4 and 5:5.

-------
                      INVESTIGATION  OF  THE  USE  OF  A

                      VORTEX  FLOW  TO  SEPARATE  OIL

                        FROM  AN  OIL-WATER  MIXTURE
                                    Arthur E. Mensing and Richard C. Stoeffler,
                                      United Aircraft Research Laboratories
                                           East Hartford, Connecticut
ABSTRACT
    The use of a  continuous-flow  vortex separator as a
component of an oil spill clean-up system was investigated.
Tangential injection of the oil-water mixture into the
vortex tube produces buoyant forces which accelerate the
lighter oil to the vortex axis. The cleansed water and the
core containing the oil are exhausted through exit ports in
opposite end walls of the vortex tube. The cleansed water
would be returned  to the sea and the core flow containing
the oil would be stored.
    Tests of laboratory-scale model vortex separators were
made using oil-water mixtures having inlet oil-to-total-flow
ratios between 0.002 and 0.3 and for a variety of geometric
and flow conditions. The tests were made using four types
of oil (napthene-base crude, paraffin-base crude, dieseland
No. 6 heating fuel) having viscosities between 3 and 4250
cps (measured at 75 F)  and specific gravities between 0.83
and 0.97. The results showed that  separator performance
may be optimized by  proper control of the oil exhaust
flow.   Under  optimum conditions, approximately  90
percent of the injected  oil was separated and captured, and
the captured flow contained approximately 90 percent oil.
    Studies were also  made to determine  the sizes and
weights  of components for full-scale vortex separators,
including the necessary pumps and prime movers.

INTRODUCTION
    An  oil-water separator which  operates on-line and
processes large  volume  flow rates of an oil-water mixture
may be a required component in many oil-spill clean-up
systems. The use of a confined vortex flow appears to be a
desirable separation method  because  it  provides  large
relative  radial   accelerations between  two components
having  differing  specific gravities.  Thus, the  oil is
accelerated radially inward at a greater rate than the water
and  is  concentrated  at  the center where  it  can be
conveniently removed.  A  vortex  separator  is  simple,
requires no rotation of a large mass (such as a centrifuge),
and can handle large flow rates in a relatively small volume.
However, a  pressure drop exists across the vortex, and a
pump must  be  provided to increase the pressure  of the
incoming oil-water mixture.
    The objectives of this  study were:  (1) to conduct
small-scale laboratory tests to evaluate feasibility and (2) to
define the components that are required for  a full-scale
separator. The tests included investigation of some of the
effects of geometry, oil properties, and oil and water  flow
rates on performance, i.e., (1) the fraction of the incoming
oil that  is separated and removed from the separator (the
separator effectiveness) and (2) the oil fraction of the fluid
withdrawn through the oil exit (the separator efficiency). It
is desirable not only to remove most of the oil injected into
the separator, but  also to remove this oil in a relatively
water-free  condition to minimize the oil storage volume
required.

VORTEX THEORY
    The radial acceleration of fluid in a vortex is balanced
by the radial pressure gradient. In a vortex containing small
amounts of oil, the radial pressure gradient is determined
by the radial acceleration of the water; thus, there is a net
force on the  lighter oil accelerating the oil particles radially
inward. The  radial acceleration difference between the oil
and the water is
            pw-Po
                                                (1)
*This program was  supported  in  part  undei  Contract  DOT-
CG-00546-A with  U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters,  Washing
ton,  D.C.,   20591.
                                                    361

-------
  362   PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
 The radial variation of the acceleration difference is shown
 in Fig. 1 (oil specific gravity of 0.9). Curves are presented
 for two  different vortex radii (0.417 ft and 5.0 ft), and for
 several values  of the tangential velocity, V * j, at the
 peripheral wall.
     The pressure drop across the vortex can be calculated
 by integrating the radial mometum equation:
                                   2
                r      -   g       r                (2)

 For a vortex in which W is inversely proportioned to r,
 integration of Eq. (2) between the  peripheral wall of the
 vortex,  r,, and the  radius of the exit port, re, gives the
 pressure difference across the vortex,  AP:
           (2)
           AP =
                                      -1
                                                   (3)
                     g
 Calculations using Eq. (3) were performed with n/re = 5.0
 and the results are presented in Fig. 2. The pressure drop
 across the vortex is independent of the vortex diameter, but
 is dependent on  the tangential velocity at the peripheral
 wall. Figures 1 and 2 indicate that large radial accelerations
 of the oil particles can be obtained with pressure drops
 across the vortex generally less than 1.5 atm.
 TEST EQUIPMENT
     The laboratory model tests were conducted using three
 different separators: lO-in.-dia by 29.25-in.-long, 10-in.-dia
 by 15-in.-long, and 54n.-dia by 15-in.-long. The flow system
 employed is shown schematically in Fig. 3. The oil is stored
 in an  80-gal pressure vessel and flows through a throttling
 valve  and  a  flowmeter  prior to being injected into the
 incoming water stream. The oil and water are well mixed
 before being injected into the separator. The outflow from
 the separator (both ofl and water) enters a 1000-gal storage
 tank  where  the  oil-water  mixture is  quiescent  for
 approximately 12 hours, permitting the oil and water to
 separate. The water is then drained from the bottom of the
 tank.
     Four types of oil  were  employed: a napthene-base
 crude  oil, a paraffin-base crude ofl, a No. 6 fuel ofl and a
 diesel  fuel. These were chosen to provide a range of specific
 gravities and  viscosities (see  Table I for the  measured
 properties). The maximum ofl flow rate possible with the
 system shown in Fig. 3  was approximately  5 gpm. Thus,
 maximum  inlet ofl concentrations of 12 and 30 percent
 could  be obtained in  the lO-in.-dia and 5-in.-dia separators,
 respectively.
    A sketch of the separator is shown in Fig.  4.  The
oil-water mixture  was injected  in a tangential direction
through a series of ducts located near the periphery of one
end  wall.  The  injection configuration in the  lO-in.-dia
separator  consisted  of  six  0.88-in.-ID  ducts and four
0.38-in.ID ducts in the 5-in.-dia separator. The water was
withdrawn through a part at the center of the opposite end
wall.  The  exit  port  diameter  was  20 percent  of the
separator diameter. A core plate with a diameter half that
of the exit port was located on the vortex centerline at the
water exhaust end (see Fig. 4). The core plate provides a
space for the storage of separated ofl within the vortex and
prevents the oil from being swept out with the exhausting
water. The oil was removed through a small duct located at
the center  of the  end  wall containing the injectors. A
photograph of the separator  is shown in Fig. 5 operating
with an inlet  oil concentration of approximately 2 percent.
The dark region in the center of the vortex is the ofl core.
    100

     50

     20

      10
•c
m     5


|     2
<     1
_j
5   0.5
z
III
I   0.2

£   0.1

 •0.05

5 0.02

" 0.01

 0.005

 0.002
  0.001
                                                                                                LINE
                                              V"
                                             0.417
                                    	5.0
          -   \
                 0.2     0.4    0.6     0.8
                   RADIUS RATIO, r/r,
                                                   1.0
Figure  1. Radial Acceleration Difference Between Oil and Water

-------
                                                                      THE USE OF A VORTEX FLOW...    363
8   100
O« 50
   u.  10
   °
        0
£5   2
°
      0.2

       0.1
          0    2     4     6     8     10   12
             TANGENTIAL  VELOCITY  AT
           PERIPHERAL WALL, V«,-FT/SEC
        Figure  2. Pressure Difference Across Vortex
                                           Test Procedures
                                               The  primary  purposes of  the vortex  oil-water
                                           separation experiments were  to determine the  separator
                                           effectiveness (i.e., the fraction of incoming oil that could be
                                           captured and  removed through the  oil exhaust duct) and
                                           the  separator efficiency (i.e.,  that fraction of  the flow
                                           removed through the oil exhaust duct that was  oil). The
                                           test procedures were: (1) the water and oil flow rates were
                                           set to provide a given  incoming oil-water mixture; (2)  the
                                           flow into the storage tank was throttled to maintain a given
                                           pressure at the vortex centerline; (3) when  steady-state
                                           conditions existed, a sample of the flow exhausting from oil
                                           exhaust duct was taken; (4) both the volume of the sample
                                           (sample sizes ranged, from approximately 100 ml to 1000
                                           ml)  and the time to take the sample were measured; (5)  the
                                           samples were allowed to remain quiescent until the oil and
                                           water in the sample had separated. The oil fraction of  the
                                           sample  was measured  and  the  separator efficiency was
                                           determined. The volume  of the oil  in the sample and  the
                                           time required  to collect the sample were used to determine
                                           the  flow rate  of the captured oil. The effectiveness of  the
                                           separator was determined from the ratio of the captured oil
                                           flow rate to  the  flow rate of the incoming oil. Several
                                           checks were made on the specific gravity of the captured oil
                                           to insure that no water was emulsified in the captured  oil.
FROM WATER
   MAIN
             H.OW-
             METER
       Oil
       FLOW
       METER
-u
                                       FROM ^CYLINDER    RESULTS OF VORTEX SEPARATOR TESTS
                        I  SO GAL OIL
                        I STORAGE TANK
            d
 VORTEX
 SEPARATOR
                        h— OIL EXHAUST
WATER EXHAUST
                                        TO DRAIN

   Figure  3. Schematic of Piping System for Vortex Separator
                  OIL EXHAUST DUCT-
     -EXHAUST DUCT


         END WALL INJECTORS -

        SECTION A-A
                      SECTION B-B
     Figure 4. Vortex Separator With End-Wall Injection
    Tests were conducted with the three different oil-water
separators over a wide range of conditions to determine the
variations of the separator effectiveness and the separator
efficiency with inlet oil-to-total-flow ratio.  It is desirable
that both the separator effectiveness, Es, and the separator
efficiency,  r?s  ,  be  close  to  one.  If the  separator
effectiveness  was  1.0, all  the incoming oil  would  be
recovered and  only water would be exhausted. If the
separator  efficiency  was  1.0,  only pure  oil would  be
exhausted through  the oil exhaust port. It is also desirable
that Es and  TJS  be insensitive to the inlet oil-to-total-flow
ratio, Oi, since it appears unlikely  that Oi will be constant
in the flow supplied to the separator.

Results of lO-in.-dia Vortex Separator Tests
    Tests of the lO-in.-dia by 29.25-in.-long separator were
conducted using each of four different types of oil listed in
Table I. The injected water  flow rate  was maintained
constant at 48 gpm, the pressure at the vortex center was 7
psig, the pressure drop across the vortex was approximately
3 psi, and the injection velocity of the oil-water mixture
was 4.3 ft/sec. The oil was removed through a 0.19-in.-dia
port in the end wall containing  the injectors,  and the
pressure in the oil exit duct was  atmospheric. Tests were
conducted  throughout a range of inlet oil-to-total-flow
ratios, Oj, from approximately 0.002 to 0.12.
    The  variation of the  separator effectiveness, Es, with
inlet oil-to-total-flow ratio is shown in Fig. 6(a). In the tests
conducted with the No. 6 fuel oil, napthene-base crude oil,
and the diesel oil,  samples collected from the oil exhaust
duct  consisted of water and  whatever type  of oil was

-------
  364  PHYSICAL REMOVAL .
 injected. In tests with the paraffin-base crude oil,the sample
 consisted  of water, oil, and  a third substance  (mostly
 paraffin) having a specific gravity of 0.95. There appeared
 to be a small amount of oil trapped within the paraffin. The
 paraffin was  not  included  as  oil  captured  in  results
 presented  in  Fig. 6(a) because the fraction of oil being
 converted  to this fluid was not known. The results  for the
 paraffin-base crude then are conservative.
      Figure  5. Photograph of Vortex Separator in Operation
     In the range of inlet oil-to-total-flow ratios between
 0.002  and  0.02, visual  observation  indicated a  small
 instability in the oil core. For this range of Oj, the oil core
 diameter increases as Oj increases until the oil core reaches
 the approximate diameter of the core plate. The instability
 appears to be associated with a very small oil core and may
 account for the reduced and somewhat erratic behavior of
 the  separator  effectiveness within  this  range  of  Oj.
 (Operation of this particular separator with Oj less than
 approximately 0.02 is undersirable because of low values of
 separator efficiency.)  For  this  configuration, separator
 effectiveness  reached a maximum value of approximately
 0.80 with Oj equal  to approximately  0.02. Increasing Oj
 beyond 0.02  resulted in a decrease in effectiveness because
 more oil  was injected  into  the  separator than could be
 exhausted through the  oil exhaust port. Increasing  the
 pressure or  increasing the  area of the oil exhaust port is
 necessary if the  effectiveness is  to  be increased at larger
 values of Oj.
     The variation of the separator  efficiency,  TJS,  with
 inlet  oil-to-total-flow  ratio  is  shown  in Fig. 6(b).  The
 efficiency  increases  rapidly  as  Oj   is increased  to
 approximately 0.02. At larger values of Oj, the efficiency
 remains nearly constant or  increased very  slightly. For this
 particular configuration, the  efficiency  at values  of Oj
greater   than  0.02  was  about   0.8  (higher  for   the
napthene-base  crude) and has reached the maximum value
for the g^en geometry.
SYMBOL
D
A
o
0
TYPE OF Oil
DIESEL
CRUDE-
PARAFFIN BASE
CRUDE-
NAPHTHENE BASE
NO. 6 FUEL OIL
                                                             (a) SEPARATOR EFFECTIVENESS
                                                                 J 1.05-
                                                                            0.02   0.04  0.06   0.08   0.10   0.12
                                                            (b) SEPARATOR EFFICIENCY
           0    0.02   0.04  0.06   0.08    0.10  012
              INLET OIL-TO-TOTAUFLOW  RATIO,  O;

Figure  6. Performance  of  10-Inch-Diameter Separator  for Four
Types of Oil

    The  data presented in Fig.  6 indicate  that,  for the
particular  geometry  tested,  the  maximum  values  of
separator effectiveness and efficiency would be obtained
under test conditions  in which  Oj was approximately  equal
to 0.02. For Oj greater than 0.02, the oil removal rate is less
than the  incoming oil flow rate, thus  causing the separator
efficiency to remain nearly constant  and the effectiveness
to decrease. Conversely, at  values of Oj less than 0.02  most
of the inlet oil  is captured (the separator effectiveness is
large), but a substantial amount of water is captured with
the oil (a low efficiency). Neither oil viscosity nor the oil
speicifc gravity  had  much  effect  on the separator
performance.
    Performance data  were also obtained at various inlet
water flow rates  (Qw = 31,48,and 96 gpm). For these tests
the napthene-base crude  oil was used. The pressure drops
across  the vortex were approximately 2, 3, and 13 psi for
flow  rates  of 31, 48,  and 96  gpm,  respectively. The
variations of the separator effectiveness and efficiency with
inlet-oil-to-total-flow ratio  are  presented  in Fig.  7. The
optimum separator  performance when operated at  both 31
gpm and 48 gpm are  comparable  - the effectiveness and
efficiencies are greater than approximately 0.85. However,

-------
                                                                     THE USE OF A VORTEX FLOW ...
                                                 365
the value of Oj at which the optimum performance occurs
is  different for the  two  flow rates. If the data were
presented with ofl flow'rate as the abscissa instead of inlet
oil-to-total-flow ratio, the  optimum  performance  would
occur at approximately the same value.
    The  data  in  Fig.  7  indicate  that  the  separator
effectiveness for a water flow rate of 96 gpm was less than
at 31 and 48 gpm. As the water flow rate is increased, the
residence time  of the flow within the vortex separator is
decreased and less time is available for the ofl to be driven
to the core (an average residence time can be defined as the
separator volume divided by the volumetric flow rate, Qw).
The decreased residence time may explain the decrease in
separator  effectiveness  at  Qw = 96 gpm. The average
residence time for flow in the separator is 20,12, and 6 sec
for Qw = 31,48, and 96 gpm, respectively.

    Performance  data were also  obtained with different
separator  lengths.  The 104n.-dia  separator was used  with
lengths of 29.25  in.  and 15 in.  The oil (naphthene-base
crude) was  again  exhausted through a 0.19-in.-dia exhaust
duct  in the  injector  end  wall.  Water flow  rate  was
maintained constant at 48 gpm. As  shown in Fig. 8(a), the
maximum value of effectiveness was greater for the 15-in.
length than for the 29.25-in. length. Efficiency (Fig. 8(b))
was relatively unaffected by length.
    Optimum  performance  appears to depend on  the
amount of oil that  can be  exhausted through  the  oil
exhaust port. Thus, a separator must incorporate a control
to provide  best  operation  under varying  inlet
oil-to-total-flow ratios. This  control may be achieved by
varying the area of the oil exhaust port. Preliminary tests
have  been  conducted using the  lO-in.-dia by  15-in.4ong
separator in which the oil exhaust port area was decreased
by positioning a  conical centerbody in the exhaust port.
Reducing  the area by 16 percent increased both separator
effectiveness and efficiency when Oj was 0.015. Similarly,
further reduction in the oil exhaust port area to 64 percent
of its original value increased the  separator performance at
Oj of 0.01. Thus,  a  variable-area oil exhaust port could
provide  optimum  separator  performance  throughout a
range of inlet oil-to-total-flow ratios.
     Other tests were made with the lO-in.-dia  separator to
investigate the effects of certain changes in geometry. Some
were  made with  injection through a  slot  along  the
peripheral  wall in place of the end-wall injectors. In other
tests,  no core  plate was used.  Data obtained  using a slot
injector  resulted  in  little or  no  improvement  in  the
separator performance. However,  removal of the core plate
drastically reduced the performance of the separator and
made it impossible to obtain efficiencies greater than about
 15 percent.

 5-in.-dia Vortex Separator Tests
     Tests which were impractical in the lO-in.-dia separator
 were conducted using the 5-in.-dia by 15-in.-long separator.
 In one series of tests, performance was determined at inlet
 oil-to-total-flow ratios up  to 0.3. In other tests, the effect
of external motions (such  as  might be caused by ship
motions) on performance was determined.
    Separator  performance  data  obtained  with inlet
oil-to-total-flow ratios  up  to  approximately  0.3  are
presented in Fig. 9. These tests were run with a water flow
rate  of 7  gpm  and with the  naphthene-base crude  oil.
Several different oil exhaust  port areas were used, as noted
in Fig. 9. The benefits of a  variables-area oil exhaust port
are apparent in Fig. 9.
    This separator  was  also tested  in  an unsteady force
field generated by manually shaking the separator in  the
vertical plane (the axis of the separator was horizontal). It
was estimated that the acceleration fluctuated between-0.5
g to plus 2.5 g's at approximately 4 Hz. Test data indicated
that  shaking  the   separator resulted  in a  decrease  in
performance of approximately 10 percent.
SYMBOL
A
0
D
WATER FLOW
RATE, GPM
31
48
96
(a) SEPARATOR EFFECTIVENESS
                 0.02   0.04   0.06   0.08  0.10
 (b) SEPARATOR EFFICIENCY
  uj t  O 9
  "*"
                 0.02    0.04  0.06   0.08
                INLET OIL-TO-TOTAL-FLOW
                           RATIO, Oj
 Figure  7. Performance of 10-Inch-Diameter Separator for Three
 Water Flow Rates

-------
  366  PHYSICAL REMOVAL...
SYMBOL
a
o
LENGTH.
L-IN.
29.25
IS
           (a) SEPARATOR EFFECTIVENESS
 Si U
„,- i.o

M  ° 8
Z  0.6
ui
    0.4
    0.2
      0
                 O.02   0.04  0.06   0.08    0.10
            (b) SEPARATOR EFFICIENCY
                 0.02   0.04  0.06   0.08  0.10

                INLET OIL-TO-TOTAUFLOW
                          RATIO, O;

 Figure  8. Performance of 10-Inch-Diameter Separator for Two
 Vortex Tube Lenghts
    Data obtained from  tests using the model vortex
 separator have shown: (a) the viscosity of the oil has little
 or no effect on the separator performance, (2) an average
 residence time of approximately 10  sec is required to
 obtain good separator performance for ofls having specific
 gravities between  0.83  and 0.97, (3) a variable-area ofl
 exhaust port is required to optimize separator performance
 over  a- range  of  inlet  ofl-to-total-flow  ratios, (4)  good
 separator performance  has  been  obtained  for  inlet
 oil-to-total-flow ratios between  0.002 and 0.3, and (5) the
 effect of external  accelerations on the performance of a
 vortes separator is small.

 Design  Characteristics  of a  Full-Scale Vortex
 Separator  System

    The application of a  vortex separator requires, in
 addition to the separator  itself,  a pump to increase the
 pressure of the oil-water mixture and a prime mover for the
pump. A systems analysis was undertaken to determine the
operating characteristics and weights  of full-scale vortex
separator systems having flow capabilities from 1000 to
100,000 gpm.

Characteristics of Pumps
    A pump is required which will provide a head rise of
approximately 50 ft of water without emulsifying the oil in
the oil-water  mixture. Discussions with manufacturers of
large-volume-flow-rate pumps  indicated  that  centrifugal
pumps may induce excessive turbulence that could emulsify
the oil-water mixture. However, three other types of pumps
might be used with full-scale separators:  propeller, mixed
flow, and vertical turbine pumps. The vertical turbine pump
is capable of attaining the highest head rise per stage for a
given flow rate and the propeller pump exhibits the lowest
head rise per stage. However, emulsification of the oil-water
mixture is most  likely to be encountered with the vertical
turbine pumps. The pumps investigated in this study were
off-the-shelf items and,  with few exceptions, the  prime
movers for these pumps were electric motors. The  pump
power requirements for several flow rates are listed in Table
II.

Weight of Vortex Separator System
    The  estimated weight  of  a  system,  including the
separator  itself,  the  pump and its prime  mover, were
determined for flow rates from 1000 gpm to 100,000 gpm.
For these studies the length-to-diameter ratio and average
                                                                      ITTT««111 JMTT
                              I IN.
                         0.125 IN.
                         0.250 IN.
         (a) SEPARATOR EFFECTIVENESS
         i.Ol 0.02   0.05  0.10   0.2
                                                                                                0.5   1.0
         (b) SEPARATOR EFFICIENCY
      1.0
      0.6
M

-------
                                                                      THE USE OF A VORTEX FLOW ...    367
residence time of flow in the separator were 3 and 10 sec,
respectively. The separator was assumed to be fabricated
from commercially available steel. The variation with flow
rate of the weight of the entire system is shown in Fig. 10.
Curves are presented for the combined weight of the pump
and prime mover, the combined weight of the pump, prime
mover and dry vortex separator, and the total weight of the
system including the water that would be contained in the
vortex separator. Also included in Fig. 10 are the weights of
a system which  may be  realized if advanced components
were used. In this design, the vortex pressure drop would be
reduced from  50 ft  of water to approximately  20 ft of
water (this may be possible  if a  diffuser is used  at  the
separator exhaust to recover most of the swirl component
of the  exhaust velocity). Also, the vortex separator would
be constructed of reinforced^iberglass rather than steel. A
substantial .weight  savings of  the  separator  system is
evident.
         CONCLUSIONS:
             Results of this study have shown that a,confined vortex
         flow can be used to separate oil from an oil-water mixture.
         Values of  separator effectiveness equal to or greater than
         0.9 were  obtained with  separator efficiencies equal  to
         approximately 0.9. Vortex separator systems which process
         large volume  flow rates of an  oil-water mixture  are not
         prohibitively large; the average fluid residence time within
         the vortex separator is about 10 sec. However, additional
         development work on the vortex separator is needed. This
         work includes the development of an oil exhaust port area
         control and an oil exhaust sensor to provide good separator
         performance   throughout  large variations  of inlet oil
         concentration.  In addition,  it   may  be  desirable  to
         incorporate a vortex diffuser to recover a portion of the
         total pressure  drop across the vortex and thus minimize the
         size  and  weight  of  the  pump  required.  Additional
                             Table 1: Properties of Oils Used in Vortex Separator Tests
                    Type of Oil


                  Naphthene-Base Crude
                  Paraffin-Base Crude
                  Diesel Fuel
                  No. 6 Fuel
Specific Gravity
 @ 75 deg  F

     0.90
     0.83'
     0.84
     0.97
                                                                               Viscosity @ 75 deg F
cps
79
3.2
3.0
4250
SUS
360
40
37
20,000
   10
                    FLOW RATE,GPM
         Figure 10. Weight of Vortex Separator System
                                                           investigations are also required to further optimize the
                                                           performance of  the  vortex  separator  with respect to the
                                                           injection velocity of the inlet flow.
                                                            Table 2: Pump Power Requirements for 50 Ft. Head Rise

                                                            Flow Rate (gpm)                 Power (hp)
                                                               1,000
                                                               2,500
                                                               5,000
                                                              10,000
                                                              25,000
                                                              50,000
                                                             100,000
                                             15
                                             38
                                             75
                                            150
                                            380
                                            750
                                          1,500
         List of Symbols

         ar j     Radial acceleration difference, ft/sec2
         D      Diameter of vortex separator, in, or ft
         Es      Separator Effectiveness
         g       Acceleration of gravity, g = 32.2 ft/sec2
         L      Length of vortex separator, in.
         Oi      Inlet oil-to-total-flow ratio, dimensionless
         P       Pressure in vortex,

-------
368   PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
       Water flow rate, gpm
       Radius, ft
       Radius of vortex separator, ft
       Water exit radius, ft
       Tangential velocity in vortex, ft/sec
Po
pw
AP
Tangential velocity at periphery of vortex, ft/sec
Separator efficiency
Density of oil, slugs/ft-*
Density of water, slugs/ft3
Pressure difference across vortex, lb/ft2 or ft of water

-------
                    "DYNAMIC   KEEL"  OIL  CONTAINMENT

                                                SYSTEM
                                                 Frank March
                                              Ocean Systems, Inc.
ABSTRACT
    Ocean Systems, Inc., under contract to the U.S. Coast
Guard, has developed an oil containment system for use on
the high seas. The system is designed to contain oil in 4-5
foot seas in combination with 20 mile per hour winds and
ft 7-1  knot currents in a nominal water depth of 200 feet
and up to 30 miles from shore.
    The barrier design is based on the use of flexible poly-
urethane foam, with  a "dynamic keel" that imparts high
static and dynamic  stability.  The  barrier consists of a
non-water-absorbing foam package that provides buoyancy
and a surface barrier, and a water-absorbing foam package
that provides a submerged barrier and serves as a "dynamic
keel" The two packages are connected into an integral unit
that can be compressed to approximately 20% of the origi-
nal volume for storage and transportation. The  memory or
resiliency of the foam material causes the barrier to resume
its original shape  and size after the packaging restraints are
released. It should be noted that no compressors, pumps
and other mechanical  support equipment are required.
    Results of analytical studies and model testing are pre-
sented which indicate  the effectiveness of the system.
 INTRODUCTION
   • Ocean Systems, Incorporated has developed a unique
 oil containment system for use on the high seas for the U.S.
 Coast Guard,  under Contract DOT-CG-00, 489-A during
 the period  of  December  1969 to  June 1970. This paper
 describes the results of analysis, testing and design of that
 system.  In. performing this work Ocean Systems, Inc. was
 assisted  by Union Carbide  Corp. Chemicals and Plastics Div.
 (material testing) and by the All-American Engineering Co.
 (air deployment).
 System Objectives
    The principal objective of the containment system is to
 quickly  confine thick films of oil in waves up to five feet
 high in combination with 20 mile per hour winds and 2
 knot currents*, in a nominal water depth of 200 feet, and
 up to  30 miles from shore.  In addition, the system must
 maintain its physical integrity, though not performing as an
, effective containment device, in seas of 20 feet, winds of 60
 miles per hour and currents of 3 knots. To quickly contain
 an oil spill, the system must be capable of being deployed
 in four hours.
    Other  salient development requirements have  included
 compatibility with existing Coast Guard ships, boats and
 aircraft;  air deployment capability;  high reliability; low
 maintenance requirements; and the ability to survive in the
 aforementioned environment for a period of several weeks.

 Design Concept
    The barrier concept is based on the use of flexible
 polyurethane foam, with a  "dynamic keel" that imparts
 high static and dynamic stability. The barrier consists of a
 non-water-absorbing foam package  that provides a sub-
 merged barrier and serves as a "dynamic keel". The two
 packages are connected into an integral unit that can be
 compressed to approximately 20% of the original volume
 for storage and transportation. The memory or resiliency of
 the foam material causes the barrier to resume its original
 shape  and  size after the packaging restraints are released. It
 should be  noted that  no compressors, pumps and other
 mechanical support equipment are required. Sketches of
 the barrier are shown in Figure 1.
    The barrier  system, as developed,  consists  of four
 sub-systems:
     1.  Barrier Subsystem
    2.  Mooring Subsystem
    3.  Package Subsystem
    4.  Deployment/Retrieval Subsystem
    A brief discussion of each of these subsystems  follows.

 *Since  completion of this work in June 1970 the U.S. Coast Guard
 has lowered its containment objectives to approximately a 1 knot
 current. This has resulted in some barrier design changes which have
 not been included in this paper.
                                                     369

-------
 370  PHYSICAL REMOVAL ..
            URETHANE ELASTOMER COATING


          POLYETHEH FOAM - -
    ELASTOMER LAYER
  END FITTING
                                  1 CONNECTOR

               Figure 1:    Barrier Schematic


 Barrier Subsystem
     The  unique  feature  of the barrier subsystem  is the
 achievement of stability and buoyancy by utilizing readily
 available seawater and air, combined with the use of stored
 potential energy  (plastic  "memory")  in the compressed
 foam. Although the "dynamic keel" is essentially weightless
 in water, the large displaced  volume of the trapped water
 and the large  waterplane  area  provide excellent sea con-
 formance characteristics.  The stored  energy in the  com-
 pressed foam is  similar to spring compression,  and has a
 long shelf  life which  requires  little  or  no  maintenance.
 These features eliminate the  need for ballast weights and
 power sources, and  simplify the logistics of air transporta-
 tion  and delivery, and on-site  operations. The barrier  is
 modular, each module being  17 feet in length, and can be
 assembled to contain oil slicks of a wide range of sizes. The
 above-water portion extends  2  feet above the water level,
 and the below-water section  extends  4 feet below  water.
 Seals prevent  seepage  between modules, and connectors
 provide the structural  requirements to keep the barriers to-
 gether.  A Dacron strength belt  is located in the center of
 pressure of the bottom section  of the barrier and provides
 the  strength required to maintain the barrier's structural
 integrity under high sea state conditions.  The strength belt
 of the barrier is designed with an ultimate strength in excess
 of 200,000 Ibs.
     The upper section is sealed  for buoyancy and acts as a
surface  barrier. The foam for the upper section is covered
with  a urethane elastomer skin  which has been especially
chosen for its resistance to oil, and for  its excellent strength
and  abrasion resistant  properties.
     The  sealed upper section has  a  specially  designed  air
 valve which allows air to enter while preventing the entry of
 water. This allows the upper and lower sections to both be
 compressed for transportation.
           Figure
Lt Weight Barrier Under Tow
Mooring Subsystem
    The primary mooring subsystem in the early phases of
deployment of the barrier consists of two ships attached
to  the  ends of  the  barrier, which  maintain  the  barrier
in  a  parabolic configuration with respect  to the  slick.
(See  Figure  2).  If  current speeds  are  excessive,  the
barrier may be allowed to drift to some  extent  with the
current, i.e., the  barrier moves  with  a velocity relative to
the oil slick that is smaller than  the current velocity. Use of
this "active" mooring system permits rapid deployment of
the barrier in such a way that  it will be effective and can
still be  deployed in four hours. In later phases of deploy-
ment, a specially designed passive  mooring system can be
used. This system consists of a polyethylene foam cylinder
upon which is wound an appropriate length of mooring line
together with an anchor. This system  is modular and can 'oe
attached  at any  of the convenient  barrier  mooring loca-
tions. The spring  constant of the  mooring lines  has been
specifically  designed  to minimize  dynamic  forces  on the
barrier and  enhance the barrier's oil containment capabil-
ity.

Package  Subsystem
    The package subsystem consists of a lightweight struc-
tural box which is capable of  containing approximately 500
feet  of  oil  containment  barrier. The  box  is  !6  feet
long,  8  feet wide, and  6 feet high. These  dimensions have
been  chosen so that two boxes can  fit within the cargo
compartment ofanHC-130B  aircraft. The containers have a
special aluminum skid which is  compatible with a rail-type
aerial delivery system. The container package itself provides

-------
                                                                               "DYNAMIC KEEL" SYSTEM    371
the constraints for the barrier  so  that  when  these  con-
straints are released, the barrier unfolds and automatically
self-deploys. The aluminum skid acts as anchor for the bar-
rier string upon initial deployment.  Figure 3 shows an art-
ist's concept  of aerial delivery and  automatic deployment
of the barrier package.

Deployment/Retrieval Subsystem
    The  deployment/retrieval subsystem consists of  the
parachutes, rigging and release mechanisms required to air
deploy the oil containment barrier. The parachutes used are
a small  extraction chute and four  large  G-ll.  100 ft. di-
ameter main parachutes. The rail-package interfaces within
the  plane are  an  additional  portion  of  the  deploy-
ment/retrieval subsystem.

Description of Research Undertaken
Introduction
    A comprehensive  series  of studies,  tests and designs
were completed during this program. Work included studies
and tests to assess the hydrodynamic response of the barrier
in waves  and currents;  to determine the  environmental
properties of previously selected materials; to  assess the
strength capabilities of the barrier; to test the structural and
operational properties  of the mooring sub-system; to  test
the package  sub-system; ami further operational tests (in-
cluding an air drop test) to assess the deployment capability
of the barrier. A detailed description  of the test program
follows.

Current Tests wjth Oil
Introduction
    When water flows past a boom-type barrier a low pres-
sure region is formed about the  bottom edge of the boom.
This low  pressure region is caused by the difference be-
tween the relatively high  velocity of the water as it flows
under  the barrier, and the relatively  low velocity of the
water near the surface. Under certain conditions oil from an
oil film or slick located above this low pressure region will
drain into the low pressure region and will be swept  under
the barrier. The conditions that must be met for drainage to
occur are certain combinations  of  water velocity, oil den-
sity, and depth of barrier below the  oil/water interface.
    Previous  work  shows  that near-boom  drainage  or
run-under is a gravity phenomenon and the  point where
drainage will occur can be approximately represented by a
dimensionless number.  The  dimensionless number that  is
used in connection with the drainage phenomenon is called
the densimetric Froude number (NpRjj*) and includes the
combinations of parameters mentioned above.
    The objective  of these tests  was  to investigate the
phenomenon of run-under or drainage, and to determine if
there  was any   relationship  between the  cross-sectional
shape of a barrier and run-under.
    Models of five  cross-sectional  shapes (See  Figure 4)
were tested and their performance compared on the basis of
densimetric Froude numbers.
                                             far
       Figure 3:    Aerial Delivery of Lt Weight System
                   EACH MODEL 2' LONG
             	          	TYPE  I
                                            .  TYPE  U
                                              TYPE  HE
                                       	TYPE
                                            .  TYPE 1C
               Figure 4:

                   V
                          Model X-Sections
  TRD
             LS Pw - Po
                   Pw
V = Free stream velocity
L = Depth of barrier below slick
g =  Gravity constant
pw = Density of water
po= Density of Oil
Apparatus and Procedure

 -  The tests were conducted in a 2'x2' closed-circuit cur-
 rent channel specifically designed and constructed for these
 tests. Currents up to 1.5 ft/sec,  were produced by an educ-
 tor; water level was controlled, and oil leakage prevented by
 a weir located in one corner of  the channel. Two adjacent

-------
 372   PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
four foot long acrylic windows were located on one side of
the channel.

    Several methods of measuring current velocities were
employed, (including a flow meter that  quickly  became
fouled with oil) but only one  proved satisfactory. This
method  consisted of measuring the time required for neu-
trally buoyant particles  to travel a measured distance.

     The oils used  in the test were either  No. 5 diesel fuel
(S.G. = .92) or No. 2 Diesel fuel (S.G. = .87).

     All  tests were performed using the  following proce-
dure:
 1. Model placed in channel.
 2. Tank flooded, water level in channel adjusted and
 eductor adjusted to produce weak current.
 3. Oil poured on water surface upstream of model,
 water temperature, oil type and quantity recorded.
 4. Current velocity increased in increments and the
 following measurements  taken at the center of the
 channel with each increase of velocity:
   —Current velocity
   -Slick length
   —Slick thickness at model
   —Depth of model below slick
 5. Current velocity further increased until run-under
 occurred and above measurements repeated.
 6. Current velocity decreased and Steps 4 and 5 re-
 peated until sufficient amount of data was recorded.
  1.5-
6 1.0-
                   .50
                       V
                     LgP.-Po
                                   1.00
                                                  1.50
      Figure 5:
              D  S.G. > .92 (NO. 5 FUEL OIL)
              V S.G. • .87 (NO. Z FUEL OIL)
              © OIL/WATER BUBBLE


             Run-Under Points for Five Bairjpr Cross
             Sections Tested
 Results

     The results of these tests are illustrated by  Figures  5
 and 6. Figure 5 includes points for all five cross sectional
 shapes tested. The  points  without circles represent points
 where  there was clearly visible run-under consisting of bub-
 bles and/or thin streams of ofl. The points with circles re-
 present points where the run-under consisted of water-filled
 ofl  bubbles. The straight  line represents the division be-
 tween  ofl  bubble  run-under and  water-filled  ofl bubble
 run-under for Shpae No. V. The slope of this line is a densi-
 metric Froude number.  The  range of slopes for equivalent
 lines for the other four cross-sectional shapes was small; the
 values range from 1.00 to 1.25.

     Figure  2.3 is  a  comparison between experimentally
 measured volumes and theoretically predicted volumes for
 measured lengths of oil slicks. All of the measured volumes
 were obtained from  test data  for  two  tests  randomly
 selected.
.6-
 J  -4
 O
         MEASURED VOL.
                     — j
          7
          L
             THEORE«ALVOL.»BESTF,T-
               LINEAR REGRESSION
                                  TESTN
-------
                                                                                "DYNAMIC KEEL" SYSTEM   373
Discussion of Results
    It can be seen from Figure 5 that although the Froude
number at run-under  varies with  density/viscosity,  it is
above 1.0 for all cases where the run-under consisted of oil
bubbles.  Although it is not certain, it appeared that the
water-filled oil bubbles had a very thin skin of oil. If this is
true then the positions of the water-filled oil bubbles as
plotted on  Figure  5  would  be  misleading  since  the
value	  assumes  that the bubbles are solid oil.
      Lg Pw - Po
          Pw

The water-filled oil bubbles  cannot be considered reliable
evidence; also, the oil contained in these bubbles is minimal
and contributes little to total oil leakage.

    The experimental results were compared to theoretical
predictions,  and  in general  the  values of NpRD  at
run-under, in regions  tested, agree quite favorably  with
those predicted in the analysis.

     There did not appear to be any significant  differences
 in performance  among  the five cross sections tested.  If
 there  is any difference  in  performance  that is shape de-
 pendent, it was not determinable within  the accuracy and
 scope   of the tests performed. The cross-sectional shape
 selected (Shape V) was based on factors other than its abil-
 ity to prevent oil run-under in currents. The  depth of the
 selected barrier shape was, of course, based on performance
 requirements in currents.

     The experimental  values in Figure 6 agree quite well
 with theoretical  predictions. This  indicates that the ana-
 lytical solution is valid and  can be used  for projecting oil
 pile-up for prototype barriers.
Conclusions


 1. Run-under or drainage appears to be independent
 of the cross-sectional shape of a barrier.
and damping coefficients; model testing in waves including
regular and irregular waves, shallow water waves and various
model configurations. All of these tests were performed at
Ocean Systems, Inc. Reston facility using a specially de-
signed wave tank.
Static Stability Tests
    Static  stability tests  were  conducted with models of
two  different cross-sectional shapes.  Because  these  tests
were conducted prior to the selection of the final cross-sec-
tional shape, the final shape was not tested; however, the
experimental data from the shapes tested supported the
analytical approach  employed  for  determining static sta-
bility. The results of these tests indicated that the barrier
had a large positive stability throughout its whole roll range
due to the mass of the entrapped water.

Determination of Added Mass and Damping
Coefficients
    Values for  the  added mass and damping coefficients
were  needed in  order to determine the theoretical response
of the barrier in waves and to scale model results up to full
scale  conditions.
    These coefficients  were determined by recording the
free oscillation  of a barrier model when deflected and re-
leased. A 1/4 scale model of the barrier was placed laterally
in the wave tank in  front of the acrylic window, displaced
downward, and then released. The resulting oscillations
were photographically recorded and the results analyzed.

    The heave natural period of the  1/4 scale model was
scaled up to  give a heave period for the full scale prototype
barrier  of 1.8  sec.,  which  is  well below the significant
period of exciting ocean waves.
    For a wave period of 5.5 sec., which corresponds to the
significant period of waves under  maximum effectiveness
conditions, the value for added mass was found to be .37.
This  value agrees quite well with analytically determined
values for the added mass.
    The experimentally determined damping  coefficient
was determined to be approximately  0.21, again-in good
agreement with theoretical values.
2. The point (current velocity) where run-under will
occur, for a specified barrier depth, oil slick depth,
and oil density, is predictable using the analytical ex-
pressions developed in the course of the program.
Determination of Barrier Sea Response

Introduction
     Barrier sea response was determined in three basic test
 phases: static stability tests; determination of added mass
Wave Testing-General

     The objective of the wave  tests was to determine the
dynamic  response  for  scale  models of the  contianment
barrier. The tests were conducted in a wave tank located in
the Ocean Systems, Inc. Reston, Va. facility. A total of 160
individual wave tests were performed, including models of
two different scales, and a variety of wave conditions.

  Wave Tank

     Because many of the tests required the use of various
types of contaminating oil and Ocean Systems wanted easy
access to the tank for  performance of a large number of

-------
374   PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
       MOMTIW MOOUCTS
       MDOCU (O
       StUDDRWl.
                                                                                       MAKINC PLTWOOO
                                                            o
                                                            z
                                                               o'-
                                                Figure 7:    Wave Tank
 tests, a tank was designed and constructed at the Ocean
 Systems, Inc.'s Reston facility.
     The tank as constructed is shown in Figure 7. The
 wavemaker  is capable of  producing regular  waves  with
 heights in excess of one foot with periods ranging from 0.5
 to 3.5 sec.
     Three wave absorbers  are installed in the end of the
 tank; they dampen out about 95% of the wave energy for
 waves with periods less than 2 seconds.
 Scale Models
     The dimensions of models used in the wave tests were
 geometrically scaled from  the prototype. Models of two
 different scales,  1/8 and 1/4, were used in the tests. The
 upper section of the 1/4 scale model consisted of poly ether
 foam coated with urethane elastomer; its lower section of
 reticulated polyester foam 100 cells/inch. The bending stiff-
 ness of .the 1/4 scale model was not scaled from the proto-
 type; since this model was only tested with the longitudinal
 axis parallel  to the wave fronts this parameter  was not im-
 portant.
     Two types of 1/8 scale models were constructed: one
 had a silicone (RTV-116) coated top section, the other a
 polyethylene film covered top section; both had reticulated
 polyester foam bottoms.
     The bending stiffness of the models was slightly (al-           '
 though  not  significantly) higher than that desired as de-
 termined by scaling laws; however, the difference was ac-
counted for  in the computer program used to make  theo-
retical predictions for model motion. It was not necessary        Figure 8:
to scale the  drainage rate for the keel since drainage rate
                                                             -100*
                                                                                                THEORETICAL
                                                                                 2               3
                                                                                     CO (RAO/SEC)

                                                                               O g SCALE MODEL TEST

                                                                               V$ SCALE MODEL TEST

                                                                          Heave Response Operator & Heave Phase Angle
                                                                          Vs Wave Frequency1 for Prototype

-------
                                                                               "DYNAMIC KEEL" SYSTEM    375
  -50*
< -IOO--
<
I
  -150*
  1-50
UJ
0.
o
ui 1.00
V)
z
o
a.
10
u
°= .50
           O
                            THEORETICAL
                     O
                o
               o
                         CO (RAD/SEC)
                    O Q SCALE MODEL TEST

                    V 5 SCALE MODEL TFST
   Figure 9:
Sway Response Operator & Sway Phase Angle
Vs Wave Frequency for Prototype
was slow compared to wave  frequencies for both models
and prototype.
Testing Procedures
    The model  to be tested was placed in the wave tank in
front of the acrylic window and moored with elastic bands
having a calibrated spring constant. The spring  constant of
the elastic bands was scaled down from prototype mooring
lines.
    The wave maker was turned on, a wave  of  constant
period and height produced, and motions of the barrier, and
wave profile were photographically recorded with a  movie
camera.
Data Reduction
    The  films  of barrier motion were projected onto a
screen with a grid using a Photo-Optical Data  Analyzer to
analyze the motions.
    The heave and sway motions for each wave were divi-
ded by the wave height to determine the response operator.
Trie phase  angle between trough or crest of the wave and
minimum or maximum heave and sway records  was also
determined. It should be noted that when the  peak  of the
motion occurs before the crest of the wave the phase angle
is negative, and when it occurs after, the phase angle is
positive. This notation is consistent with the output of the
theoretical computer programs.
                                                                      i.oo
                                                             HEAVE
                                                               a
                                                             PITCH
                                                           RESPONSE
                                                           OPERATORS   .50
                                                                       .25
                                                                             4       6
                                                                          UKRAD/SEC)
                                                                                       O  HEAVE

                                                                                       A  PITCH
                                                                         ±SCALE

                                                                         TENSION = 20 LBS
   Figure 10:  Heave and Pitch Response Under 20 Lb Tension

    The  mean values and standard  deviations  were cal-
culated for the response operators and phase angles. These
values were then plotted versus wave frequency and com-
pared to the output of the theoretical computer programs
for the models.

Regular Wave Testing—Models Parallel to Wavefront

    These  tests  were conducted with both 1/8 and 1/4
scale models in waves corresponding to full scale periods of
1.86 or 5.88 sec. and full scale heights up to 6 ft. The heave
and sway results for these tests, scaled up to prototype, are
shown on Figures 8 & 9. Also shown are the theoretical
response operators and phase angles as computed by linear
theory.  (See Task 3.1.3 in the Appendix).
    It can be seen that the heave phase angle is in good
agreement with theory while the heave response operator is
not. The disagreement in heave response is  thought to be
primarily due to the assumption of linearity  in the theory.
The model tests results indicate that the heave response-of
the barrier is much better (with respect to surface conform-
ance) than predicted by theory.
    The sway phase angle is in good agreement with theory
as are the sway response results for the 1/8 scale tests. The
disagreement between the 1/4  scale siway  response  and
theory is thought  to  be caused  by transport velocities as-
sociated  with the wave  maker  when  producing low fre-
quency  waves.  It can be  seen that  the  agreement with

-------
  376  PHYSICAL REMOVAL...
theory for sway response becomes better for the higher
frequency waves.

Models in Tension Test- Regular Waves

     These tests were conducted with a string of 1/8 scale
models moored perpendicular  to  the  wave  fronts. The
models were tested in waves with full scale periods from 3.1
to  8.4 seconds and with full scale tensions of 0-15,000 Ib.

     The barrier models were maintained  under constant
tension by mooring one end of the model string, and on the
other end attaching a line that ran over a sheave and had a
free-hanging weight attached.
     Tests were conducted with tensions of 0,10,20 and 30
Ibs. in the model string. The heave and pitch response op-
erators for model motion were  calculated for all tests and
were compared to output from a theoretical computer pro-
gram. The agreement was fairly good and any discrepancies
are  thought to be associated with modeling problems. Fig-
ure 10 shows the results of one test series.

Other Wave Tests
     Other tests  were also run of the  1/8  scale models
arranged in a ring (in both regular and irregular waves) and
of the 1/4 scale  barrier models in shallow  water waves.
Space does not permit a discussion of these results.

Conclusions
 1.  With due  allowances  for the problems in model
testing, experimental results show that linear theory
predicts phase angles reliably but fails to predict re-
sponse operators  (particularly  heave)  at high fre-
quencies and large wave amplitudes.
2. In the frequency range where  the maximum energy
of the sea spectrum is concentrated, linear theory pre-
dicts barrier motions with fair accuracy.
3.  In general, the barrier conforms more  closely to
the sea surface over a wider range of frequencies than
predicted by linear theory.
Wave Tests with Oil
     Regular wave  tests  were conducted  on  1/8 and  1/4
scale models of the prototpye barrier to determine the per-
formance of the barrier in containing oil slicks. The models
were tested in regular waves with full scale periods ranging
from 1.9 to 8.9 sec. and full scale heights up to 4.8 ft. The
oil slicks in the tests had full scale thicknesses up to 3.5 ft.
     The 1/8 scale  model used in these tests was the same
model  used in previously mentioned tests. Only a few tests
were conducted  with this model  because of testing pro-
blems.
     After  the  1/8 scale tests had been completed a
single  1/4  scale model  was used.  A polyethylene curtain
(See Figure 11)  suspended by elastic bands was hung in
front of the model with its ends attached to the ends of the
model. Thus, a closed fence that was  transparent to waves
was formed in front of the model. The polyethylene curtain
permitted a slick of significant depth in front of the model '
                                4- SCALE BARRIER
                                      ELASTIC BANDS
 WAVES
                  -POLYETHYLENE SHEET
:LASTIC MOORING
   LINES
         Figure 11:  1/4 Scale Oil Containment Test.
and  did not noticeably  affect the motion of the barrier
model.  Calibrated elastic bands were used  to moor the
model.
    Eleven tests were conducted using the 1/8 scale model
ring and No. 2 fuel' oil; forty-three were conducted using
the  1/4 scale model and No. 5 fuel oil. Mean values for
wave heights and periods were measured for each test along
with  measurements of slick depth. The results of the tests
were tabulated and the datum points plotted on graphs in
various forms in an effort to obtain conclusive and quanti-
tative data concerning oil leakage.
     It was  suspected that a primary cause of oil  leakage
would be differential velocities between the  barrier  and
water particles. The results of the tests did indicate that oil
leakage rates were higher  at higher predicted differential
velocities although there was much  scatter in the data. It is
believed that the  actual  differential velocities  in the wave
tank were larger than those calculated for the barrier mo-
tions. These  larger velocities were  probably caused  by
seiches and transport velocities in  the tank. (These same
problems caused irregularities in the sway data.) Possibly, if
the  differential particle velocities  in the tank had  been
measured with a flow meter, the results would have been
more indicative of what was occurring.
     The results of the tests did indicate that for full scale
waves with periods greater  than about  3 sec. very little
leakage would occur for slick depths less than one-half the
barrier depth. For full  scale waves with periods less than
about 3 sec. the wave height had to be large (> 2 ft.) for
leakage to occur, and then the leakage was mostly in the
form of splash over the top of the barrier.;

Towing Tests
   Two separate  series  of towing tests were conducted
on  models  of the barrier:  the first were  to determine
longitudinal  towing  forces  required for long strings of
barrier modules in calm water and in waves; the second, to
determine dynamic  forces  induced in the  barrier when
towed or moored in the deployed (parabolic) configuration.
    All testing was performed at Hydronautics Ship Model
Basin, Laurel, Maryland. The main towing tank is 310 feet
long, 25 feet wide and  11  feet 8 inches deep. The wave

-------
                                                                              'DYNAMIC KEEL" SYSTEM    377
                           Figure 12:   1 /12 Scale Model Te st
making apparatus is capable  of producing regular waves of
20 inch height and  irregular (sea spectrum)  waves of 14
inch significant height. Both digital and analog records were
obtained for the tests.

Model String Tests
    A  16 ft. long 1/8  scale cross-section model was towed
longitudinally at three velocities in calm water and at one
velocity in irregular waves. Tests in irregular waves were run
for two nominal values of significant wave height.
    Drag forces were measured with a force gauge mounted
on the towing carriage, electronically  integrated over time,
and recorded in  digital form along with the  carriage velo-
city. Sea spectrum waves with the correct significant height
were produced automatically by the wave maker.
    Typical scaled  forces required for towing 100 ft. of
prototype barrier at 4 knots are:  400 Ibs. in calm water;
600 Ibs. in 3.8 ft. waves; and 700 Ibs. for 7.7 ft. waves.

Deployed Barrier Model Tests
    These tests  were  conducted on a 1/12 scale model of
 1,000  ft. of prototype barrier. The intent of the test was to
find dynamic forces induced in the barrier by waves when
 the barrier  is being towed or moored parabolically  in a
 current.
- Hydronautics, Inc. Ship Model Basin
       These forces were  simulated by  towing the model  in
   the test channel at prototype velocities up to 3 knots and in
   irregular waves up to 14 in. (14 ft.  full scale) significant
   height.  The  ends of the barrier model were  attached  at
   points on opposite sides of the towing carriage so that the
   model assumed a parabolic shape when towed. Forces and
   wave parameters were measured  and recorded  using the
   same methods as in the previously described test. A photog-
   raph of the test apparatus is shown in  Figure 12.

       Digital records  with integrated force values were ob-
   tained for 2 and 3  knot prototype tow velocities in calm
   water. Analog  records for each test were reduced to  obtain
   significant wave  heights and  forces  for  tows  in  irregular
   waves. The significant forces determined for the wave tests
   were compared to the forces recorded for static (i.e., calm
   water) conditions to  obtain a "dynamic factor." The signi-
   ficant  "dynamic  factor" was  determined to be  approxi-
   mately  1.5-1.6 for 20 ft. significant waves in velocities up
   to  3  knots.  The  maximum possible "dynamic factor" will
   be  3.1-3.3 times the static value.

        It is  recommended from the results of the test that the
    prototype barrier be capable  of sustaining  approximately
    3.5 times the steady state value of tension caused by cur-
    rents or towing speeds.

-------
 378  PHYSICAL REMOVAL
Other Tests
    A number of other tests were conducted in the course
of the program which cannot be described in detail because
of space limitations. A listing and brief summary of these
tests is given below however:

1. Material Tests  - The  following  parameters  were
  tested:  tensile strength, tear strength,  delamination
  resistance,  oil  degradation,  recovery  from  com-
  pression, and abrasion resistance. All chosen materials
  were determined to be suitable for the application.


2. Seal Between Modules Test - The  oil  holding  capa-
  bility and  flexibility of the seal were determined to
   be satisfactory.

3. Absorption Rate Tests - It was determined that the
   dynamic keel of a  full scale model would become
   completely saturated with water in 4 minutes.

4. Drainage Rate Tests - It was determined that 75% of
  the water in the keel would drain out in 8 minutes if
  the keel were completely removed from the water, as
  in recovery operations.
 5. Air  Valve  Tests - The  selected air valve design was
   determined to be capable of inflating the barrier with
   air only, even  if the barrier  were temporarily sub-
   merged in waves.

 6. Packaging  Tests - It was determined that the barrier
   could be compressed to less than  20% of its original
   volume without damage and then  returned to its ini-
   tial configuration. See Figure 13.


 7. Air Drop Test  - The drop and deployment sequence
   of the barrier was verified to be acceptable. See Fig-
   ure 14.
 8. Mooring Buoy  Test - These tests  determined that  a
   mooring unit with  1000 ft. of line can  be laid in  5
   minutes. See Figure  15.


 °. Structural Tests - Structural Tests of the barrier units,
   barrier connector,  and  mooring  buoy units  verified
   the structural integrity of the system.
10. Oil Removal Tests - Tests  indicated that oil can be
   removed from the foam keel without adversely affect-
   ing barrier characteristics.
                                   Figure 13:   Packaging Operation - 1/2 Scale Mode!

-------
                                                  "DYNAMIC KEEL" SYSTEM  379

                                                                                 I
             Figure 14:  Air Drop Test - 1/2 Scale Model
„ ...
                    F
                                                                » r*v^
             Figure 15:  Mooring Line Being Unspooled from Buoy

-------
 380   PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
CONCLUSION                                             beginning of this paper. This conclusion assumes, of
      It was  determined after substantial studies and          course, that the system is deployed in the optimum
   testing that, within its working range, the described          mode,  such  as  "drifting"  under  high  current
   oil containment system is* fully capable of meeting or          conditions. In summary a unique and effective high
   surpassing all  its design  objectives discussed in the          seas oil containment system has been  demonstrated..

-------
                        PNEUMATIC  BARRIERS  FOR  OIL
                  CONTAINMENT  UNDER  WIND,  WAVE,
                           AND  CURRENT  CONDITIONS
                                             David R. Basco
                                      Department of Civil Engineering
                                          Texas A &M University
ABSTRACT
    An experimental laboratory study of the pneumatic
barrier has recently been  completed at  Texas A&M
University (sponsored by the U. S. Coast Guard). Both the
fluid mechanics of air-bubble generated currents and their
effectiveness  for containing oil under wind,  wave, and
current loadings were investigated.
    The  bubble-generated  current has  been found  to
provide an effective  means of containing oil on water.
However, under strong currents (2 knots) or breaking wave
conditions, large quantities  of air are required and the
substantial increase  in power  requirements which results
may prove the system uneconomical for some applications.
    Consequently, use of the pneumatic barrier to prevent
oil spreading on water is recommended for protected areas
with low (below 1.0 knot) currents.

INTRODUCTION

    For Phase I of the U.S.  Coast Guard's Oil Spill
Containment  Program, Wilson  Industries, Inc. of Houston,
Texas was awarded one of three "Concept Development"
contracts   for a heavy  duty  containment  system. The
research effort was  subsequently subcontracted to Texas
A&M University, College Station. This paper presents the
essential laboratory  results of that study for the unique
application of a pneumatic system to contain oil.
Mechanism for Containment
    An air bubble released below the surface of a liquid
such as water  will rise to the surface because its buoyant
force is greater than the combination of fluid drag on the
bubble and its weight. As the bubble rises it drags water
along with it creating an upward flow. At the free surface
the air bubble is dissipated. However, the upward liquid
momentum is deflected and causes a surface current. If a
number of  small  bubbles  continuously  flow from  a
submerged duct, a steady surface current can be used to
oppose the potential spreading energy of  oil of a  given
depth. When equilibrium is established the oil is essentially
contained by the bubble generated current. This forms the
basis of the air or pneumatic barrier for oil containment.
One objective of  the  research  was to  determine the
relationship  between  the  quantity  and  manner of air
bubbles released  and the  kinematics of  the generated
surface flows.
    Oil flowing over water is a complex phenomena. Being
lighter than water, gravity forces "drive" the oil to "seek"
its own uniform level above the water surface. In a system
open  to the  atmosphere, the driving force  is solely the
hydrostatic pressure head of the oil. Thus, a thick layer of
oil will have a greater tendency to spread than the same oil
of smaller depth.
    Once  the flow commences the  gravity forces which
originated the motion soon give way and are dominated by
viscous shear at the interface so that the viscous forces
govern the dynamics of the motion. Spreading decreases the
oil thickness.
    At some further point when the oil becomes of "film"
thickness,  surface tension forces become dominant and this
phenomena  determines the  manner  in  which further
spreading take place. Superimposed wind and wave forces
add considerable complexity to the situation.
    Fortunately, under  equilibrium  conditions that must
prevail during oil containment the oil behind the barrier is
essentially stationary so that the retarding viscous forces
and surface tension forces are  not present or very  weak.
Hence, analysis of the problem reduces to the case where
the ratio of gravity forces to  inertia forces  describe the
                                                   381

-------
 382  PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
behavior. And, since two liquids of differing densities are
involved, the ratio  of  the two forces is characteristically
described by the densimetric Froude number, FD, i.e.,
P  _  gravity forces
       inertia forces
                  _  V
                              gLApA
                                             0)
                                    pw
 where:
    FD  =  densimetric Froude number, dimensionless
    V  =  =  characteristic reference velocity
    g    =  gravity constant
    L    =  characteristic reference length
    Ap  =  pw . PO = mass density difference
    Po   =  mass density of oil
    pw  =  mass density of water
 Eqn.  (1) becomes, if SG0 is the  oil specific gravity,
                                                    (2)
 For  oil  spill  containment by pneumatic barrier,  the
 maximum surface velocity generated by the bubbles, Umax
 can be used as reference. The characteristic reference length
 is naturally the mean oil depth contained, h. Consequently,
          u
            max
gh(l-SG0)
                                                    (3)
 It is apparent that for a given oil, as the driving force, h
 increases, the spreading tendency (velocity) increases and
 for  equilibrium  to be maintained a  "retarding"  force
 primarily composed of the kinetic energy  in the bubble
 generated current must also be increased. To be determined
 therefore, is the  critical ratio of Umax/'l|   gh (1  - SGO)
 the crucial  point when failure occurs or begins to occur.
 Letting « be a coefficient equal to (Fjj) critical at failure,
 Equation (3) can be written
         U,
           max
       gh(l-SG0)
                                            (4)
     The second purpose of this research was to determine
 the  critical failure value of  «  under stagnant water, wave
 and  current  conditions. The  method  of  solution  was
 essentially  experimental   since the  bubble  generated
 velocities retarding the oil are not completely understood,
 particularly when oil is present in significant depths  near
 the  barrier. It was  anticipated that a. would be  a  true
 constant independent of the scale of the laboratory tests.


Kinematics of  Pneumatic System
     The use of a bubble induced surface current for wave
attenuation has been proposed for many years. Fortunately
therefore, a  number of laboratory  scale  and  prototype
studies are  available  in  the literature  regarding the
kinematics of the pneumatic system. A list of the more
important publications appears as Table 1. The geometrical
variables of interest are also shown in Table 1 and defined
in Fig. 1 and where they first appear in this paper.

Surface Currents
    Taylor1 used an analogy between the hot air flow from
a heat source and the vertical current induced by the air
bubbles. He found theoretically  that the vertical current,
Vjnax (Fig. 1) is related to the unit discharge rate of air, q
by the following relationship

where:
                                                          j i «., SPACES
                                                          IT5  PER FOOT
                    n
                                                                                     Q. m j  _ AIR FLOW/RATE"
                                                                                     W I q " PER UNIT WIDTH
                                         ORIRCE
                                        • DIAMETER
                                         , MANIFOLD
                                          DIAMETER
                                                                                          MANIFOLD
                                                                                          PRESSURE
       SECTION A-A


   Figure 1: Definitions of Geometric, Fluid and Flow Variables
   g  = the gravity constant
   K  = an experimentally determined constant
The constant K was found to be about 1.9 from the hot air
analogy tests.  If no  energy  loss occurs when  the flow
momentum  changes  to the  horizontal  direction at the
surface then the theoretical  surface velocity as determined
by Taylor becomes
   Umax   =  l-9(gq)l/3   (Theoretical)              (6)
    Since 1955, many experiments have been performed in
the laboratory and at  prototype scale to  determine the
constant in Eqn. (5). Those  felt to be most significant have
been  plotted   as  Fig.  2  which also includes  Taylor's
theoretical result.  Although   the  general trend of  all
experiments was similar, a wide variation  in K values were
obtained. Possible reasons for these variations are:
    1. Inconsistent location where Umax  is experimentally
determined.
    2. Failure  of  all  investigators  to  correct  test  air
flowrates to standard temperatures and pressures.

-------
                                                 PHYSICAL REMOVAL
383
     GRAPH  OF  AIR  DISCHARGE  VERSUS
     MAXIMUM  SURFACE VELOCITY
0002 —
0.001
   01
                                                      40  5O 6O 70 8O9OK)
                 . MAXIMUM  SURFACE  VELOCITY. FT/SEC
     Figure 2: Air Discharge Versus Maximum Surface Velocity Previous Research

-------
 384  PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
     3.  Differences  in  orifice  size  and  number,  i.e.,
variations in bubble size produced.
     4.  Scale effects possibly due to the depth of manifold
pipe submergence.
     5.  Boundary effects of bottom and sides.
     6.  Experimental error.
     Fig.  3 illustrates the  experimental results of Umax
plotted against  q for four differnt water depths tested in
four different flumes in this  study. In all tests Umax was
measured  at  x/H about 0.5 with 1/16-in. diameter holes
spaced 24 per  foot. The  trends in all cases followed the
theoretical slope and the  constant K appeared to increase
slightly with water depth. The  one exception was in the
wide (5 foot) flume when there appeared to be very little
change of Umax with increased manifold depth, H. Further
tests at depths of 25 to 30 ft and in wide flumes are needed
to clarify this result.
     Under identical  test conditions the size of the orifice
nozzles in the manifold pipe were varied. A slight increase
in the constant K with a smaller orifice resulted. In many
cases, however, experimental error  was larger than the
apparent differences noted.
     In stagnant water the results plotted in Fig. 3 for Umax
versus q indicate a constant,  K of about 1.5 which is close
to that reported by Bulson (1)* (10). Little change  in
performance was noted with variation in orifice size which
is  also  reported  by  Bulson  (1).  The  flow boundary
exhibited  no  effects for  the  limited  range of tests
performed. The manifold pressures were found to increase
as hole size diminished.
    I.O
    ae

    0.6


    Q4
    02
 .«£
 ' ft

    01
   a oe

   006
FUME  COMPARISONS
 q - »» - Umo«
 V 0.5

 *' fc
                      06  OB 1.0
                                           4O  GO  BO K>O
                          Umax (ft/sec.)
   Figure 3: Effect of Water Depth on Maximum Surface Velocity

Velocity Profile Generated
    All previous research efforts essentially found that the
generated current developed a linear profile  with depth.
'Numbers in parenthesis refer to those authors listed jn Table 1.
                                                             i.OO
                                                 0.90
                                                                              TWO  FEET WIDE
                                                                                WAVE  CHANNEL
                                                                             •  RUN NO.
                                                                             O RUN NO.
                                                                             •  RUN NO.
                                                                             O RUN NO.
                                                                              Q RUN NO.
                                                                             ARUM NO.
                                                                              A RUN NO.
                                                                              VRUN NO.
                                         U
                                        TJmox

                                       I (TEST  NO. I)
                                       2 (TEST  NO. Z)
                                       3 (TEST  NO. 2)
                                       4 (TEST NO. 3)
                                       5 (TEST NO. 3)
                                       6  (TEST NO. 3)
                                       2  (TEST NO. 4)
                                       3  (TEST NO. 4)
                                                                              T « 2.0 feet
                                                                              STAGNANT CONDITIONS
                                                        01
                                                                          Umox
     Figure 4: Dimensionless Velocity Profile with Depth
Taylor suggested that the distance, b from the surface to
the point where the generated current was zero would be
approximately 0.28H. Sjoberg and Verner (9) and others
(5) (14) (4) suggested 0.25H.
    Besides the  measurement of Umax at x/H equal to 0.5,
for many tests a depth velocity profile was also established
for this  study.  The measured profile was approximately
linear  and  the  depth  of  velocity  reversal, b  was
approximately equal to one-quarter of the manifold depth,
H. Fig. 4 summarizes the results of many tests at different
air  flowrates, water depths  and manifold depths on  a
dimensionless basis.  These  results  were consistent with
those previously report (5) (4) (14) for profiles measured at
x/H about 0.5
Decay of Surface Currents Under
Stagnant Conditions

    Many measurements were also taken to determine  the
reduction  of Umax as  the  distance from the bubble
eruption  increased. The decay was essentially linear with
maximum surface currents found near x/H about 0.5. To
facilitate a dimensionless plot, Umax at x equal to zero was
established by extrapolation of each graphical plot of the
results.  The  ratio of the surface velocity  Umax to that

-------
                                                                               PNEUMATIC BARRIERS...   385
                                                                            TWO  FOOT  WIDE  CHANNEL
                                                                      O  TEST  NO. I     RUN  NO.  2   H/T = 10
                                                                      A

                                                                      D
                                                                      V
                                                                      O
                                                                      X
                TEST NO. I

                TEST NO. I
                TEST NO. I

                TEST NO. 7
                TEST NO. 7
RUN

RUN
RUN

RUN
RUN
NQ

NO.
NO.

NO.
NO.
3

4
5
I
2
 1.0

 10
 1.0

0.5
0.5
  Umax
(Umax)Xs0o.6
                                 STAGNANT
                             Umax
                           (Umax)x=0
        -  vs  -   —
                                      Figure 5: Dimensionless Surface Velocity Profile
 extrapolated value  at x equal to zero plotted against x/H
 for a number of tests is presented as Fig. 5. Although some
 scatter existed, the solid line roughly indicates the trend of
 the results. If Umax at x/H equal to 0.5 is sued as reference
 the trend is indicated by the dashed line of Fig. 5. The
 manifold location with respect to the floor boundary did
 not appear to be of importance.
    Previous  investigations also established  that  the
 horizontal surface  velocity  decreased with  increased
 distance from the manifold certainline. Due to the eruption
 of  air bubbles  the  maximum Umax  usually occurred
 between 0.3H and 0.6H (1) (5) (15).

 Effect of Steady Channel  Flow
 on Bubble Current
    A  steady, uniform, open, channel flow added to the
 bubble current has been found to shift the bubble pattern.
 Consequently, instead of the  center of bubble eruption
 occurring directly above the submerged pipe, it occurs some
 distance downstream.
    It  was  postulated that the individual velocity profiles
 of open channel flow and bubble-generated current could
 be  linearly  superimposed  together.   If  this  theoretical
 supposition  could  be experimentally proven, then the
resulting combined velocity profile could be theoretically
estimated for any combination of channel flow and bubble
current.
    Since the stagnant bubble  current was  symmetrical
about  the  centerline  of bubble  eruption,  it  was
hypothesized that the channel flow would decrease the
upstream bubble generated  current  and  increase  the
downstream current by similar amounts. Thus the upstream
decrease would be the critical case for oil containment and
of most interest for this application.
    Experimental tests were  performed in an 18-in wide
flume  with  water  depths  of around   7.5  feet.  In  one
representative  case  an air flowrate  of  0.436 cofs/ft  was
added in the flume which would normally create a Umax of
4.1   ft/sec  under stagnant  conditions. Velocity profile
measurements were then taken at five locations upstream of
the  shifted bubble eruption. The characteristic linear depth
profile was still  present and  the resulting surface current
generated, U'max still decayed  with distance  from the
centerline of eruption. This  test was carried out with a
mean velocity of 1,78 ft/sec present in the open channel.
    With the aid of Figs. 3 and 5 the theoretical stagnant
bubble generated profiles were estimated at each location
of interest and plotted as the triangular profiles in Fig. 6.

-------
 386  PHYSICAL REMOVAL...
 THEORY    -VS-  EXPERIMENT
                                                  BUBBLES
T7




x.-? o fMt ^t— 	

Theory—" .T'Vi .
tMpflnniQni '
|— umox-aes 1



b'«l07fl
^


b.H/4-IBfl'

     Figure 6: Current Plus Bubble-Generated Velocity Profiles


 For this theoretical study b was estimated  as 0.2SH  or
 about 1.88 ft for all cases, Next, the opposing mean flow,
 Vm of about 1.78 ft/sec was superimposed at all locations.
 The resulting theoretical, surface current, U'max and depth
 to zero  velocity, b' are  indicated as the  solid line with
 direction arrows in Fig. 6.
     The experimentally  measured velocities  have been
 added to Fig.  6 for comparison. There appeared to  be
 excellent agreement between theory and experiment for all
 surface velocities of interest. Even the difficult estimation
 of b' showed  fair  correlation with  the  experimentally
 determined  values  being  consistently  greater  than  b'
 theoretical. Similar results were experienced  for other  air
 flowrates in the 18-in flume and for shallower water tests in
 a  2-ft  wide channel. It was tentatively concluded that the
 principle of  linear  superposition  could  be  applied  to
 combine stagnant Umax and a uniform channel velocity.
    Consequently, the initial objective of the research was
felt  to  be  completed in that the  kinematics  of  the
air-generated currents had  been reasonably  well established
from the laboratory scale experiments.
 Oil Containment

 Stagnant Water Conditions
     Use of pneumatically developed currents to contain oil
 is  a relatively  new  idea and consequently no  published
 research work is available. However, an unpublished report
 by  Sjoberg and Verner2  was  obtained  from Chalmers
 University in Sweden which cited references indicating that
 the critical constant, a at failure (Eqn. 4) was between 1.0
 and  1.4.  Their  own  tests  gave  an  a  equal to  1.2,
 "... which is required to stop leakage of oil through the
 barrier."
     Initial laboratory tests were conducted in  a two-foot
 wide channel with 2  ft of water depth, T and the manifold
 located near the bottom, H so that H/T was about 1.0. With
 a constant  surface current Umax, being generated, the oil
 depth  contained,  was  gradually  increased until failure
 occurred. The ^fgh (1) — SGO) value at failure was then
 computed and  plotted  against Umax- Fig-  7 presents  the
 results.
                                                              4.0 r
                                                              3.5
                                                              3.0 -
  25

Umax

  ZO



  1.5



  1.0



  0.5
            STAGNANT TESTS

          Unai-vs-slghd-SGo)'

           h» ofl thickness when failure occurs
             determined when barrier fails
             either by substantial 08
             passing through or over tap
             of bubble eruption.
     TESTED BY
FLUME   H/T  SG   INVESTIGATOR
                TAMU
                TAMU
       OS  085   TAMU
       10  085   TAMU
           i-    CHALMERS U
                                       10  089
                                       O5  0.89
                                       0.5
           0.5
                   1.0
                                  2.0
                                          Z.5
                                                  3.0
             Figure 7: Stagnant Water Test Results

     Next, the manifold was raised off the floor so that H/T
 equalled  0.5.  The  results  are  plotted in Fig.  7 for two
 different specific  gravity  oils. In  all  cases  the  critical
    coefficients were found to lie in the 1.0 to 1.2 range.
     Finally, stagnant  water  tests were  performed  in an
 18-in wide flume with T  about 7.7 feet to check failure in
 the higher  Umax range.  These results  plotted  on  Fig. 7
 confirm those results previously obtained. In these tests it
 was found that as the oil depth h approached the current

-------
                                                                                 PNEUMATIC BARRIERS...  337
depth,  b  significantly  greater  surface  velocities  were
required  to prevent  failure.  Since b depended on the
manifold depth or water depth in  the channel this "scale
effect" was greatly influenced by the shallow water in the
laboratory flumes.

    Four  experimentally determined  data  points  taken
from the Chalmers University tests by Sjoberg and Verner
(9) are  also shown in  Fig. 7 for  comparison. Excellent
agreement  was  obtained. Consequently  a  critical  oc
coefficient  of 1.2 was recommended for preliminary design
under stagnant conditions.
    Failure was  considered to occur  when  masses of oil
droplets  began to  pass through the  barrier below the
surfaces or  when masses of oil overtopped the barrier.

Channel Current Effects
    To   test  the  principle  of  linear superposition  of
velocities previously discussed, the  18-in wide flume was
used with 7.7 ft of water and a mean uniform flow velocity,
Vm  of 1.78 ft/sec. A constant bubble generated velocity
was  introduced  and  the effects of the added   channel
current  tested by adding oil and  noting  the mean  oil
thickness at failure. If the superposition principle should
hold under these conditions  then  a plot of the effective
surface velocity, U'max(Umax minus V^) versus ^ gh (1-SGO)
should also result in  a  critical a coefficient of  1.2 near
failure. Fig. 8  presents the results which generally indicate
that this is precisely  what happened.  Unfortunately, time
was  unavailable to   completely  verify  these   results
particularly at small  values of Umax-    	
    Failure depths were recorded when masses of oil began
to overtop  the air bubble eruptions and move downstream.
Significantly, it was also  observed that prior to this type of
failure, a number of oil  droplets were entrained near the
head region  of  the  contained  oil  volumes,  swept
downstream by the current and passedthrough the deflected
bubble region. This slow rate of oil loss was investigated
independently  and entrainment of oil drops found to begin
when the mean  current velocity was  about 1.6 ft/sec or
greater.  Further  investigation  into  the entrainment  effect
was not possible due  to limited time  available for  study.
Additional  research is recommended to include the effects
of interfacial  tension  and  viscosity  on the  minimum
entrainment velocity  for  oil  droplet formation  at the
headwave.

Wave Effects
    With the  addition of  uniform  waves against the  air
barrier,  two distinct  regions  of failure  were  noted  by
Sjoberg and Verner (9).  In one region the waves were such
that  they were practically  unaltered  by  the  bubble
generated  current  against  them. These  waves were
characteristically long period swells with low values of
steepness and  the oil  bobbed  up and  down on the water.
Sjoberg  and Verner obtained  a values greater than 1.2
with this type of waves present and attributed the slight
increase  to "... the pumping effect of the  waves,  which
press the oil front against the barrier."
                                                               2.0 r
    1.6 -
   1.4
    \2
   1.0
   0.8
   0.6
   0.4
   0.2
18-INCH WIDE FLUME
 CURRENT TESTS

Umox-vs-Jgh(l-SGo)'

 H=7.6ft
 T=7.7ft
 d-Vl6in

 Vm= 1.78 ft/sec

Umox from Fig. 6
 (See Task 080200)

 • - h at failure when
     masses of oil begin
     top overtop barrier
                  0.4
                                       1.0
                                             1.2
                         0.6    0.8
                         Vgh(l-SGo)'

     Figure 8: Effect of Channel Current on Containment

    The other, more critical case was characterized by
waves of high steepness ratio which broke against the front
of  the  bubble  barrier when moving  against  an  adverse
current created by the  bubbles  (principle  of pneumatic
wave  breaker). The  potential  energy  in  the wave is
transferred to kinetic  energy  and a significantly increased
surface velocity, U^x is needed to contain the oil.
    Tests by Sjoberg and Verner indicated tha the critical
constant, a  increased to about 2.7 when the waves broke
at the  barrier.  They  also  indicated  that  the coefficient
depended on the depth and profile of the generated current
and the steepness of the oncoming wave train.
    For the Coast Guard Project, prototype waves had to
be scaled to  model sizes for  the laboratory  tests. A wide
range  of wave  conditions  could be specified  and time
limitations prevented  testing  all combinations. Therefore,
the significant wave characteristics  (10 ft height, 6  sec
period,  etc.)  were chosen  as most representative  for
laboratory tests in the two-foot wide wave channel available
at a 25:1 scale ratio.
    Although some secondary  harmonics  existed in  the
laboratory channel the uniform wave used was essentially
of a scaled size  and period  very close to  that required.
Model surface  velocities generated were  near  1.0 ft/sec
which scaled-up to about 5.0 ft/sec in the prototype.
    As noted above, the required U^x to contain oil was
also considered to depend on the height, H and length, L of
the waves striking  the barrier, i.e., on the wave steepness

-------
 388   PHYSICAL REMOVAL
H/L.  Waves of large steepness ratio approaching breaking
conditions were found to impose additional forces on the
barrier.

    In a theoretical analysis of a deep water wave entering
an adverse, uniform current, Unna3 suggested that  when
the adverse current, U, was about 25 percent of the wave
celerity, Cj, the deep water wave would be fully attenuated
by the adverse current (hydraulic breakwater). Wave theory
states that waves break when  the steepness, H/L exceeds
0.14 in deep water.
    Dick and  Brebner (14) combined these results and
determined the effects  of a uniform, adverse current to aid
in breaking waves. Fig. 9 reproduces the combined effects
and shows at what U/C]  ratios breaking occurs for varying
wave  steepness.
    The significant wave conditions used in this study fell
far from the area where breaking occurs, consequently the
large  swells characteristic of the  significant design waves
were  felt to probably have little or no "pumping" effects
on the pneumatic containment device.

    Of primary interest for the laboratory tests was the
case with oil located on the side from which waves were
generated so that the waves possibly moved the oil against
the barrier. Fig. 10 presents the results in the  same Umax
versus Vgh 0 - SG
-------
                                                                               PNEUMATIC BARRIERS...   389
                   MODEL   WAVES
                 I'25  SCALE  RATIO
                Umm - vs -  /gh (l-SGo
          WAVES
                      Umox
    2.0

    L8

    L6

    14


    12

 Umax 1.0

    0.8

    0.6

    0.4

    0.2
        0 NO FAILURE

        • SMALL OEOPLETS
          OF OIL CAUGHT
          AND SWEPT THRU
          BARRIER
DURING TESTS WAVE GENERATOR
STOPPED AND STAGNANT CONDITIONS
NOTED  TO BE CLOSER TO FAILURE
THAN WHEN WAVES  PRESENT.
         _J	I   I	I
       Figure 10: Effect of Model Waves on Containment

If the manifold is  assumed to be 25  ft below the water
surface and  1/2 an atmosphere is  provided internally to
force the air through the orifices an H of 42 ft of water can
be used  for estimation purposes. Also, K equal to 1.5 in
Eqn. (6)  will enable the unit volumetric flowrate, q to be
related to the surface current produced. Fig. 11  presents
the resulting horsepowers per foot for Umax from 0 to 10.0
ft/sec. Deeper manifold pipe location, pipe  friction losses
and higher manifold pressures would all tend to increase the
hp/ft  values shown. Orifice  discharge coefficients other
than the 1.0 values  assumed would also increase the power
requirements.

   As Fig. 11 demonstrates,  the horsepower required to
generate  surface  currents  increases approximately at a
three-fold  rate. It  is therefore apparent that if breaking
waves are present which "pump" the  oil past the barrier
(as  3.0) or  if strong  currents are  encountered which
reduce the effective bubble current and cause entrainment,
the excessive power requirements required to generate the
necessarily large surface currents to contain oil make the
pneumatic system uneconomical to  operate. The sea state
conditions required by the Coast Guard for their proposed
"heavy-duty" oil containment system were adverse enough
to make the pneumatic system for  containment of large,
deep  ocean oil  spills  uneconomical.  However,  the
pneumatic system is still an effective and economic means
for containing oil  in  areas  where strong  currents and
breaking waves  are not  encountered.  Its  use  is
recommended for protected coastal areas, harbors, docks,
oil unloading facilities, and possibly  even to encircle  oil
drilling platforms in some  instances. Permanently installed
out of sight and without interference to  surface traffic, it
                              15

                            514
                            O
                            "•13
                            a.
                            it! 12
                           I10
                           29
                           ui
                           CO
                           cc
Q
_l

L_
6


4
                               Q
        ASSUMPTIONS

       -I.UMAX   s 1.
        2. DEPTH  = 2 8 FT.
       -3.MANIFOLD  PRESSURE
          HEAD   *  17 FT.
        4. NO  FRICTION
        5. ORIFICE COEFF = 1.0
        •.NO  COMPRESSIBILITY/
          EFFECTS
                             i     .    t     i     i    I
      01234   5   6   7   8   9   10
               UMAX     FT/SEC
Figure  11:  Approximate Horsepower  Variation with Surface
Velocity
can offer positive protection against the spreading of oil (or
other surface pollutants) to undesirable areas.
    Two foreign installations are known to the writer. In
Antwerp Harbor (Belgium) three pneumatic barriers (each
575  ft long) have been installed across the docks of the
Societe  Industrielle Beige des Petrol (oil  refinery). Their
purpose  is  to  prevent oil  spillage during  loading  and
unloading operations from spreading into the harbor (9). In
1968 the Yacimientos Petroleum Co. installed a pneumatic
oil containment system in the La Plata Harbor (Argentina)
to stop  floating petroleum from  reaching  commercial and
public beaches in the area.5
                           CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
                               Based on the limited scale and range of the laboratory
                           tests  discussed  above  the  following conclusions  and
                           recommendations are tentatively drawn.
                               1.  The continual release  of air below water creates a
                           surface current of water near the surface.
                               2.  The  magnitude  of the current  at  the surface
                           decreases approximately  linearly with distance from the
                           submerged pipe. It is a maximum at a distance of around
                           0.3 to 0.6 pipe depths from the pipe.

-------
NO.
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14

TITLE
CURRENTS PRODUCED BY
AN AIR CURRENT IN DEEP
WATER
EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES OF
PNEUMATIC AND HYDRAULIC
BREAKWATERS
PNEUMATIC WAVE ATTENU-
ATION FULL SCALE TANK
TESTS
PNEUMATIC AND SIMILAR
BREAKWATERS (MODEL EXPER
USING SURFACE CURRENTS)
REDUCTION OF SALT WATER
INTRUSION THROUGH LOCKS
BY PNEUMATIC BARRIERS
BREAKING UP WAVES BY
AIR INJECTION
FIRST TESTS ETC. JAPAN-
ESE PNEUMATIC
BREAKWATER (U)
SECOND TESTS ETC. JA-
PANESE PNEUMATIC BREAK-
WATER (ffl)
ATLAS COPCO CO.
(CHALMERS UNIV - SWEDEN)
LARGE SCALE BUBBLE BREAK
WATER EXPERIMENTS-FELTHAM
PNEUMATIC BREAKWATER
WAVE EXTINCTION BY
PNEUMATIC BREAKWATER
MOBILE BREAKWATER STUDIES
LABORATORY STUDIES OF
PNEUMATIC BREAKWATERS
NOTE ' 1. (UNDER ONE ATMOS.
AUTHOR h*"™"
P S. BULSON
(SOUTHAMPTON)
STRAUB. BOWERS
TARAPORE
U. S. ARMY
TRANSPORTATION
RESEARCH COMM.
J. T. EVANS
DOCKS 8 INLAND
W W STA.
G. ABRAHAM a
P v. d. BURGH
J. 8 SCHUF
M. KURIHARA
(1955)
M. KURIHARA
(1955-56)
MR. VERNER
P S. BULSON
J. A. CHARLTON
A A. DMITRIEV
T VBONCHKOVSKAW
A.V. TEPLOV
J. H. CARR
T. M. DICK a
A. BREBNER

DOCK a HARBOR
AUTH. MAY 1961
SA.F T. R. NO. 23
AUG. 1959
TREC. T R. 60-26
DEC. I960
DOCK a HARBOR
AUTH DEC. 1955
DELFT HYD. LAB
PUB NO. 28
AUG. 1962
TRANS. WES. 1943
OCT. 1940
U. of CALIF TRANS.
AUG. 1958
U.ot CALIF TRANS.
NOV 1956
1969
DOCK a HARBOR
AUTH. OCT. 1963
BRITISH HYDRO.
RESEARCH ASS.
FEB. 1961
£.RWAVE RESEARCH
LAB. TECH. REPORT
04-10 APR. 1961
C.I.T. REPORT N-642
DEC. 1950
QUEEN'S UNI. C. E.
RESEARH REPORT
NO. 12 JULY I960

LABORATORY
OR PROTOTYPE
PROTOTYPE
LABORATORY
PROTOTYPE
LABORATORY
PROTOTYPE
LABORATORY
PROTOTYPE
PROTOTYPE
PROTOTYPE
PROTOTYPE
PROTOTYPE
LABORATORY
LABORATORY
LABORATORY
LABORATORY

H
(PIPE
DEPTH.
as. ir
25.5,34
1.0
4.5
0 TO 16
1 NTER.
3
16.5.246
310
0.73 TO U
262 TO
31.6
53.5
30 t
6,12
23'-8"B01
34
3.75 -5.0
0.8
1.1
2.75

D
(PIPE
DIAMETER,
INCHES)
6


3

H5/J6
1 I.D.
3
5
6
6
6
2
1/4 H
3/8
3/4
21/32 ID

d
(ORIFICE
DIAMETER
INCHES}
1/16, 1/8
1/4,3/6

1/8,3/6,1/4
1/4 START
11/32
1/16
1/32 H
3/64 H
1/16 (-)
5/64*1/16
M
Imm*
0.0394"«
3/64
3/8
1/4
/8, 3/8, 1/4
/I6, 1/6,1/4
1/12 (-)
0.0135
0.040
3/32

S
(ORIFICE
SPACING
/FEET)


5.1
26
37
38
30
II
15
12
2
3
2T03
4
28
12
32
24

N
(NUMBER
OF PIPE
*1ANFOLDS
USUALLY
ONE AT
A TIME

4OI2"CEN
SINGLE a
DOUBLE
ONE

ONE
ONE
ONE

ONE AT
A TIME
5 AT 15"
1 TO 9
ONE
I TO 5
ONE

Q1
(FLOWRATE
CFS/FT)
0.05
TO 1.71

.04-0.22
0.033 TO
0.78 SIN.
0.167
MAX.
[0.3 - 05)

0053 TO
0.19
0.04 TO
0.19

0.95, 1.05,
116
133 MAX.
0,14 -.5

0.001
0.03
O.I

Vr
DISCHARGE
PRESSURE)



0 TO 70.
Sptl
1422 p»ig
-57p$lg
MAX.
7 ATMOS.
AP*
2 ATMOS.
DIFF •
1/4 ATMOS


40p»i7itX)»





T
(DEPTH
OF TANK,
FEET)
6 BELOW
DATUM
1.25
6
PIPE ON
BOTTOM
IT VARIED
4
APPROX
H
I.I
50 TO
65
55

25
40
5
0.8

2.75

W
(CHANNEL
WIDTH.
FEET)
100-
150
2.0
9.0
15.0
4.0
46-83
2.4
OPEN
SEA
100 PIPE
THREE
DIMEN-
SIONAL

48
100
1.8
0.5
8
10

Table 1: Literature Survey

-------
                                                                            PNEUMATIC BARRIERS .  . .
                                                                                                          391
    3.  The velocity  generated by  the  bubbles decreases
approximately linearly with water depth and is a maximum
at the surface. The velocity reverses (current is zero) at a
distance below the surface which is about  one-quarter of
the pipe depth.
    4.  The  maximum  surface  current  generated  is
proportional to the unit air flowrate raised to the one-third
power. The  constant  of  proportionality  is strongly
dependent  on  depth  of manifold  pipe and practically
independent of manifold hole size.
    5.  The following relationship was recommended  for
preliminary estimation purposes Umax = 1.5 (gq)l/3.
    6.  The principle of linear  superposition  applied  to
combine stagnant  Umax and  channel flow velocities was
found to hold.
    7.  The critical failure coefficent  a  for  stagnant water
and with currents was about 1.2.  The wave  conditions,
steepness, etc. influenced the a factor considerably.
    8.  More studies  are needed to verify  the apparent
entrainment of  oil droplets  by  currents with velocities
greater than 1.6 ft/sec.
    9.  It is recommended that complete verification of the
above  preliminary  results be  made  under  prototype
conditions.
    Use of the pneumatic barrier to prevent oil spreading
on water is recommended for protected areas with low
(below  1.0  knot) currents.
REFERENCES
ITaylor, Geoffrey, 1955; "The Action of a Surface Current
Used as a Breakwater", Proceedings,  Royal Society of
London  Ser.  A,  231, 1955.
2Sjoberg, A., and Verner, B., "Pneumatic Barriers Against
the  Spreading of  Oil  on Water",  unpublished report of
Chalmers University, Gothenburg  and  Atlas  Copco  AB,
Stockholm, Sweden, 1969.
3Unna, P. J.  H., "Waves and Tidal  Streams", Nature, Vol.
149, Feb. 1942,p. 219.
4Sorensen,  R. M., "Wind   Set-Up  of Oil  Slicks",  ASCE
Transportation  Engineering Conference,  Boston,
Massachusetts, July 13-16,1970.
SBulletin Hydraulic Research 1966  and  1967,  IAHR, Vol.
20, Dec. 1968, p. 43.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
    The  study was sponsored by Wilson Industries, Inc.,
under contract with  the U. S. Coast Guard. Dr. John B.
Herbich, Head, Coastal and  Ocean Engineering Division of
the  Department  of  Civil  Engineering was the project
director. The  writer  is especially  indebted  to graduate
students, C. McClenan and W. Son  and  to co-operative
student  D.  Stockard  for  their  determination  of  the
experimental values.
     The project was administered by Dr. C.H. Samson, Jr.,
Head of the  Civil Engineering  Department and Mr.  H.
Whitmore of the Texas Engineering Experiment Station.

-------
                       THEORETICAL  AND  EXPERIMENTAL
                              EVALUATION   OF  OIL  SPILL
                                    CONTROL  DEVICES1
                              Wilbur Marks, GuntherR. Geiss and Julius Hirshman
                                       Poseidon Scientific Corporation
 ABSTRACT

   This paper describes the first phases of a program aimed
 at providing a means for evaluation of existing oil contain-
 ment devices (booms, barriers, etc.) and for improving basic
 design through  variation of geometric and physical param-
 eters. A  mathematical/computer model is  derived that
 describes  the behavior (forces and  motions) of a spill-
 control device in given environmental conditions of wind,
 current, and waves, and specified deployment configura-
 tion.  The results  of evaluating  14 booms  in  terms  of
 probability  of  mechanical  (structural)  and spill-control
 failure are discussed in general terms as are the results of
 model-tank tests aimed at obtaining  data for comparative
 evaluation of booms and for validating and improving the
 analytical model. A more  definitive statement of results
 awaits the  completion  of at-sea experiments  and data
 analysis which are presently being carried out.
 INTRODUCTION
   The problem of combatting accidental oil  spills is most
 vexing because  it doesn't permit a unique and universal
 solution.  Instead, one must consider a spectrum of solu-
 tions that hopefully  overlap to cover the entire problem
 range. Of particular interest, as a potential remedy, is the
 oil containment barrier or  "boom." Such a device merits
 close attention  because it, of all proposed remedies, in no
 way  endangers  or even alters  the  environment.  As a
 mechanical system, the boom is introduced at the air-sea
 interface where it hopefully acts to concentrate  oil and is
ultimately removed presumably  with no evidence of its
presence remaining.
  The original  concept of an oil containment boom was
deceptively simple  in that  the only  requirements were a

The  work reported here was carried out by  Poseidon Scientific
 Corporation,  Hauppaiige, New York,  under contract to  the
 American Petroleum Institute.
vertical wall with means of flotation and a way to hold it
fast against the spread of oil. This first generation boom
failed utterly to achieve  the goal of imprisoning the spill
but, in its naivete, it functioned beautifully to define the
essence of the problem and to  specify important charac-
teristics of the solution.
   In  stagnant water there is no  problem whatsoever; logs,
for example, will do nicely to prevent the spread of oil.
However, when the surface is in motion and there is mass
transport, such as is the case when wind and/or current are
present, then the dynamics of flow around and about the
barrier is cause  for more than a little concern. If, in
addition to surface  flow  of oil (or apart from it), there is
oscillatory motion  due to waves, then the spectrum of
possible structural failure is enlarged adding to the concern
for oil escaping over the top or underneath the boom.
   The first generation of oil containment booms led to the
first round of serious study of booms which, together with
some  practical experience  in using booms in real pills,
revealed some truisms about the oil containment problem.
It is unlikely that any one boom will be maximally effective
in all environmental  conditions.  The  relative,  motion
between the oil and the bom is a very important factor in
containment. High seas pose the  greatest threat to contain-
ment operations.
   Further boom development evolved from practical ex-
perience, some  intuition and, in a few cases, a bit of naval
architectural design. To accelerate solution of the problem
and to provide some realistic engineering answers, programs
such  as the  one  reported here  were initiated by various
concerned organizations.

   The purpose of this program is to provide a means  for
evaluating oil containment devices and for improving boom
performance through basic design variation. The procedure
adopted to  achieve  these objectives required development
of a  mathematical/computer model of forces and motions
                                                   393

-------
394 PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
experienced by a boom, with  given  characteristics and
deployment configuration, when it is exposed  to wind,
current, and waves. This model was then used to evaluate
existing oil containment devices and in  the selection  of
booms  for scale-model  testing.  Scale-model  tests were
subsequently carried out  in ship model  towing tanks  to
determine mechanical and structural characteristics and oil
containment efficiency of selected booms. Data  from the
model tests will be used to improve the predictive quality
of  the  analytical  model. Finally, sea tests will provide
additional  input to analytical model improvement and
critical performance evaluation.
   As the model is successively improved,  its  potential as a
design/analysis  tool for use in prescribing boom charac-
teristics as  a  function  of mission  requirements is cor-
respondingly enhanced.
   As  of  this  writing,  a "first-cut" of the  model  is
completed  as  are  scale model tank tests of mechanical
behavior, structural integrity and oil containment efficien-
cy. These aspects of the program will be described herein  as
will some  general results of a preliminary nature. A more
detailed exposition of the results of this  program will be
prepared upon completion of all experimentation and data
analysis.

1HE ANALYTICAL MODEL
   The  analytical  model  was developed to meet  these
specific objectives:

   1)  Accurately model  the  majority of devices  under
consideration, in all likely deployment configurations, and
under all environmental conditions,

   2)  Produce an efficient computer program that  would
calculate the probability  of structural and  spill control
failure for each device,  as a function  of deployment
configuration and environmental conditions.

   As  a  prerequisite  to development of the analytical
model, basic data on containment booms were solicited by
questionnaire to the manufacturers and distributors of SO
devices. The results thus obtained and subsequent personal
contacts produced responses on a total of 26 devices. These
responses ranged from complete engineering drawings to
somewhat vague descriptions of design characteristics. In no
case were  hydrodynamic or structural data  available. To
simplify the subsequent analysis and evaluation, the follow-
ing five categories of generic devices, based on  physical
characteristics, were created:

    I - Continuous  devices with  continuous  flotation,
         e.g., inflatable devices.

    II — Continuous devices with discrete flotation, e.g.,
         fabric devices with attached individual floats.

  Ill  -  Discrete devices with discrete flotation, e.g., the
         "Navy" boom.

  IV  -  "Low tension" devices, i.e., devices in which the
        main  tension  member  is physically separated
         from the device.
    V —  Hybrid devices, i.e.,  devices  that  embody ad-
          ditional forms of spill control  (filtration, bubble
          barriers, and absorbents, etc.) in their design.
   Formulation of the model to approximate boom be-
 havior is predicated on the following assumptions: 1) the
 devices may be represented  by a chain  of rigid segments
 interconnected by flexible couplings; 2) the motion of the
 rigid  segments may  be described  by linear ship motion
 theory; 3) the entire device behaves linearly, i.e., the overall
 behavior is  the sum of the effects due to each individual
 cause; 4) the most significant motions are roll, pitch, and
 heave; and 5) containment effectiveness can be  represented
 by a  device's motion with respect  to the water  (i.e.,
 submergence and emergence).
   The first assumption reduces the describing equations to
 a set of ordinary differential  equations thereby simplifying
 the analysis; the second enables the use of a solid body of
 hydrodynamic theory for the development of these equa-
 tions.  Assumption  three simplifies the computation most
 significantly by permitting use of harmonic response theory
 and  spectral  analysis while  recognizing  that the current
 state of the art does not warrant a more complex model.
 The  fourth  assumption reduces the  complexity of the
 model by  ignoring three degrees of freedom. The three
 motions that are retained are directly related to reducing
 the device's effective  draft and freeboard  and resulting spill
 control effectiveness. The last assumption emphasizes the
 naive  state  of our  understanding of the behavior of two
 fluids dynamically interacting with a barrier. The net result
 of these assumptions is a model  capable of describing the
 devices in categories I and II by approximation, the devices
 in category III directly, and the devices in categories IV and
V partially.
   The comparative evaluation of devices for selection of
 candidates   for  model  towing   tank  tests  is  based on
 computational experiments involving a variation  of boom
 configurations and  environmental inputs.  The results are
 developed into a rank ordering of device effectiveness based
 first  on structural integrity and secondly on spill control
efficiency.  Clearly a  device  that fails to survive in given
wind/waves/current is of no spill-control  value under those
environmental conditions.
   The spill control  device  model is validated by com-
 parison of  its predicted  behavior  with  measurements of
 scale-model behavior in a towing tank and measurements of
 full scale device behavior at sea. The experimental measure-
 ments  include motions, tow-line tension, deployment con-
 figuration and oil containment effectiveness. In  addition,
 qualitative  observations   are  made   on   emergence-
 subemergence, oil behavior, and  device handling qualities.
 THE MODEL
   The model of oil spill control device motions and forces
 is composed of a steady state part and a dynamic part. The
 steady  state part describes  the  forces,  deployment  con-
 figuration,  and device attitude in the absence of waves; the
 dynamic part describes the dynamic forces and motions in
 response to a prescribed  sea state. The assumption  of
 linearity permits addition of the separate  contribution of
 the steady state and dynamic parts.

-------
                                                                       EVALUATION OF CONTROL DEVICES   395
                                        I 1NE
 ©VEND

© y MIDH
                                                                             NUMBER OF SEGMENTS (FIRST BEGINS
                                                                              ATP)
                                                                             SEGMENT LENGTH
                                                                             X COORDINATE OF END POINT
                                                                             Y COORDINATE OF END POINT
                                                                             Y COORDINATE AT X END/2
                                                                           7 WIND FACTOR
                                                                              (CAUSING EFFECTIVE CURRENT)
                                                                           B DRAG FACTOR
                                                                              (FOR TANGENTIAL DRAG)
                                                                              N
                                                                                 \
                                                                                  \
                                                                                     \
                                                                                      \
                                                                                        \
                                                                                          \
                                                                                           \
                                                                                             \
                                                                                                  \
                 X END/2
                                                       XENDfS)
                                             Figure 1: Configuration Data
    Based on  the  analogy to a towed  neutrally  buoyant
  cable, the boom configuration is assumed  to be parabolic
  (Figure  1). This eliminates complex calculations of con-
  figuration which are unwarranted since the desired quanti-
  ties, heel angle (rotation of the plane of the  device from the
  normal to the water surface)  and  tension, are relatively
  insensitive to configuration.
    The calculation of steady state  forces is based on the
  assumption that the effects of wind, wind induced current,
  sea current and towing velocity are additive. In fact, the
  latter three are added vectorially to produce a net effective
  current used in calculating current  forces (Figure 2). The
    This .configuration is chosen to be
       y =
                                       (i)
  where
            4YMIDH ' YEND
                   END
      C2 =
2Y
   END
                      4Y
                        MIDH
                 X'
                   END
                              are
  A list of Notation that describes the symbols in the equations is
  found at the end of the text.
                                               defined  in Figure  I.2  Note  that  the  device may lie
                                               anywhere on the parabolic arc thus allowing a wide variety
                                               of configurations. The  input  parameters are selected by
                                               experience and verified  by comparing the calculated total
                                               force normal  to each rigid segment with  the  calculated
                                               component of tension normal to that segment.
                                               segments are  assumed to be small enough to be without
                                               curvature and flat plate viscous drag formulas are used. The
                                               components  of drag force normal  and tangential  to  a
                                               particular segment (number j) are given by
                                                                                                             (4)
                                               and
                                                                                                             (5)
respectively, where  Ci  is the drag coefficient  (taken as
2.0), A is the area projected to the fluid flow, p is the mass
density of  the  fluid (air or water),  U is the fluid speed
relative to the device, "yy is the angle between the segment /
and the relative fluid velocity, and V is an experimentally
determined coefficient taken as 0.02. These  forces are

-------
396   PHYSICAL REMOVAL
 calculated for the wind and the net effective water current
 separately.
The heel angle 0 is given by the relation

                          a
                   sn
                           WG
(6)
                              M
 where Affl is the applied moment, W is the segment weight
 and C   is the metacentric height given by
+ G • B
                                                   (7)
 where I^wp) is the moment of inertia of the waterplane
 area about its longitudinal axis, G and B are the distances of
 the center  of gravity and center of buoyancy  below the
 waterline,  and a is  the  segment displaced-volume. This
 formulation ignores resistance to heel due to ring stiffness
 induced by the curved deployment.
   The moment^/  is
                                      cos
(8)
            YfljTj/1) - X(l)Tyfl) -
                                                                                      X(n+l)Ty(n+l)  = -M
                       + T
                                                                              yfl) =  0
                                                                                   (10)
         where n+1 is the last joint,  !*„ Tv are the x and  y
                                       •*   y
         components of tension, F  and F  are the components of
                                 •*       y
         the vector sum of forces on the segments, and similarly, M
         is the net moment on the device. The  tension components
         at any  joint  are calculated from those at the preceding
         joint, i.e.,
             + 1) = Tjn - FP(i) sin 5(j) + pP(j) cos Sfj)
        Tyfj +1) = TJj) + Ft>(j) cos S(f) + FP(f) sin 6(j)
                          Jv             1


        T(j + 1)  = (T2(j +1) + T2(j +1))1/2
                                                                                                              (11)
                                                           where PP and F? are the forces equilibrated by tension, i.e.,
 where Fi", and F~~ are the normal components of wind and
        J\      N
 current force, d is the draft, h is the freeboard, and e is the
 distance of the  structural center below the waterline.  The
 cosine term accounts for the reduction of projected  area
 due to heeling. Thus, by combining Eqs. (6) and (8), heel is
 determined by
   tan  =
                         WG
                            'M
(9)
 In the case of devices with little freeboard or effective sail
 area, e.g., a cylindrical float and a flexible skirt, the heel of
 only the "skirt is calculated, and thus Gj^ is calculated for

 the  skirt only and F^ is set to zero in Eqs. (8) and (9).
                    N
 However, the flexibility  of the skirt is not accounted for,
 i.e.,  ballooning of the skirt is not considered.

   The calculation  of static  tension  is based  on three
 equations of equilibrium and the requirement that the ratio
 of tension components  at joint  1 (the left  end point of
 segments n in Figure 1 .)  be equal to the slope of the curve
 at that point, i.e.,
         - Tyfn+1)  = Fx
   Ty(l)-Ty(n+l) = Fy
                                                                  =
                                   pP = (FC+FW)
                                    T     N  N
                                 + TFWsin2
                                     N
                                                                                                          (12)
                                The parameter T takes the value 1 for a flexible skirt and
                                the  value 0  for  a rigid skirt  and 8(j) is the angle of the
                                segment with the X axis.

                                   This completes the description of the steady state part
                                of the model which is relatively simple and computationally
                                efficient.  The inputs to this  part  of the  model are: the
                                wind, current and towing velocities, the device parameters,
                                and  the configuration parameters. The outputs are:  the
                                tension at  each joint, the heel angle of each segment, and
                                the check  force at each  segment for checking  the chosen
                                configuration input parameters.

                                  The dynamic  part of the model describes the device
                                response to regular and irregular waves and depends on the
                                calculations of the steady state  part. The assumptions made
                                here are: 1) yaw, surge and sway motions are negligible; 2)
                                tension variations due to waves are negligibly small com-
                                pared to  the  static  tension;  3)  the rigid  segments  are
                                uniform in the longitudinal direction; 4) the segment length
                                (or  sum  of  segment lengths  for  very  closely  coupled
                                segments) is much larger than the transverse dimensions; 5)
                                the  transverse dimension is  smaller than the  smallest
                                wavelength; 6) roll is uncoupled  from sway and yaw; 7)
                                oblique waves can be  effectively decomposed into head  and
                                beam  waves;  and 8)  small angle  approximations are  ap-

-------
                                                                      EVALUATION OF CONTROL DEVICES 397
plicable.  The assumptions 3) through 8)  are the normal
assumptions of linear ship motion theory. Assumption 1) is
made to  simplify the model and 2) is made to maintain
linearity.

   The dynamic portion of the  model  is too lengthy to
detail here so only some of the salient features of the pitch
and heave portion will be described. The roll portion of the
model follows essentially a parallel development.

   The pitch, 6, and heave, z of segment / in response to a
sinusoidal wave  of amplitude a and radian frequency oo are
given by
        j) + B'z(j) + Cz(i) =
                                                 (13)
where  V(j) and M(j)  are  the  vertical  shear  force  and
moment at joint /, F(j) and M(j) are the complex driving
force and moment on segment / due to a wave of frequency
to, the real part of the solution is understood throughout,
and a dot or double dot above a quantity indicates first and
second time  derivatives respectively. The coefficients are
related to  the rigid segment length, a, water line width, b,
two dimensional added mass, m, and damping, n, by
A' = ma,  B' = na,C' =

n _  "W5   F _ "a3 r'
D-iT>E-^2' G
the driving force, F, and moment, M, are given by
                                      a^

F(j) = ae'ksdfpwgb - u?m  + iun] I    f1
                                  J  dL
                                                 (14)
      dx
M(j) = -ae'^p^fe - co2™ + /con/  I
xe  1 dx  (15)
                                    -a
                                    2
where a is the wave amplitude, k is the wave number (—£•)•
                                                c*r
ki = k cos fy' and /?• is the angle between the sea and the
                   normal to the segment /, s is the sectional area coefficient, b
                   is the sectional beam, and d is the sectional draft.

                     The solution of the system of Eqs. (13) is implemented
                   by  the use of state vectors and matrix algebra.  The state
                   vectors Rfj)  are defined at each joint / of a segment or
                   coupling and have components:  ^-vertical displacement,
                   0-pitch angle, F-vertical shear, and M-moment. This for-
                   mulation readily permits differences in orientation  to the
                   sea between  segments,  different end conditions (fixed to
                   barge, tow line, etc.), various forms of segment couplings
                   (See Figure 3 for typical model), the inclusion of different
                   segments (moorings, barges, skimmers, etc.) and  only part
                   of a  device  to be examined. The state vector R defined
                   above obeys
                                                                          R(j+D =  URfj
                                                                    (16)
                   where  only  end forces are considered  and a matrix {/.-
                   relates one end of a specific segment or coupling to the
                   other. By adding a unit component to the state vectotR(j),
                   create  R(j),  thus including the distributed loads (wave
                   forcing terms) i.e.,
                            U-  W, .
                                                                     (17)
                   Eq. (17) is  derived from the system of Eq. (13) for  the
                   rigid or first order equations describing the coupling, where
                   the quantities are complex and  vector W- contains  the

                   forcing terms F" and M"'. By repeated multiplication by
                   Up which varies with segment number,3 one  relates the
                   state variables at one end  of the device to those at  the
                   other, i.e.,
                           R(n) =  Un....  UjR(l) = PRfl)
                                                                                                            (18)
                                                           Two of the four state variables are specified at each end of
                                                           the device according to the physical constraints at the ends;
                                                           that puts Eq. (18) into the form of a two-point boundary
                                                           value problem that must be solved for the remaining four
                                                           state variables. This can be done by partitioning,  but for
                                                           long booms numerical problems arise so a more sophisticat-
                                                           ed technique  is used. That then completes the determina-
                                                           tion of the response of the end points to a sinusoidal wave.
                                                           The response of any other point in the chain is obtained by
                                                           using Eq. (17) repeatedly.

                                                             By  dividing the amplitude of a given response by the
                                                           wave amplitude, a, the unit sinusoidal response (Response
                                                           Amplitude Operator) is obtained for that wave frequency
                                                           CO. By repeating the entire process at many frequencies oo
                    One can either consider both rigid segments and couplings as
                    segments or define a segment as a rigid segment plus one flexible
                    coupling. (See Figure 3).

-------
 398  PHYSICAL REMOVAL . .
 the pitch and  heave RAO's, H^iu) and
 obtained for each segment.
                                                  are     COMPUTATIONAL EVALUATION OF DEVICES
   The response of a  particular variable to an irregular
 unidirectional  sea  is then  given in terms  of its power
 spectrum $ e.g.,
where
             is the Pierson-Moskowitz wave spectrum
          O.OOSlg2      I -33-56h  1
             _5     exp\—T-
            Ur          \   CO
                                   0
(20)
 corresponding to the specified sea state with significant
 wave height hj /j. Then, for example, the probability that
 the heave amplitude, qjj), at joint/ exceeds magnitude Q is
 given by

                                                 (21)
 where
                                                 (22)
 and to£, o^ are the limits of the frequency band in which
 significant  motion occurs. By similarly deriving the RAO
 for heave relative to the water surface, Eq. (21) will yield
 the probability of emergence and submergence when Q is
 the freeboard and draft, respectively. Similarly, by relating
 the stress in  a given structural member to the forces and
 moments the probability of failure  of that member  is
 derived by setting Q equal to the limiting stress.

   To sum up, the model described above has the following
 important features: 1) calculation of statistics of forces and
 motions  for  oil spill control devices in  an irregular sea
 including probability of structural and elementary spill
 control failure; 2) analysis of both continuous and discrete
 devices in arbitrary deployment configurations and environ-
 mental conditions; 3) ability to  readily represent parts of
 devices or combinations of devices; and 4) computational
 efficiency largely as a result  of the simplicity of the steady
 state portion of the model. The model does not account for
 interaction of the device with oil on the water (i.e., the
 fluid mechanics), devices based on other than mechanical
 obstruction  of oil  spread,  or devices that are relatively
wide. Future research  will  expand the model  in  these
directions.
   Of the 26 devices for which data were received 14 were
analyzed using the model described herein. Twelve devices
were eliminated because of lack of design data, or similarity
to other devices, or inability of the math model to describe
the system. The numerical calculations were carried out for
a moderate environment comprising a state 3 sea (signifi-
cant wave height 2.9 feet), 13  knot wind and 0.6  knot
current. The deployment configuration was symmetric, i.e.,
U-shaped, and the waves, wind, and current were directed"
along the line of  symmetry of the configuration. The
following general results are noted:

   1) Eight  of the devices  exhibited heel angles greater
than 30°. These were largely in Categories I and II.
   2) Three  devices were found  to have excessive motion
relative  to the sea surface, i.e., poor  following charac-
teristics.
                                                                     TOW SPEED (7)
                                                                     AND DIRECTION ©
                                                                        WIND SPEED © AND DIRECTION  ®


                                                                           CURRENT SPEED © AND 0 DIRECTION

                                                                                     SEA  DIRECTION ©


                                                                                S      SIGNIFICANT    _
                                                                                       WAVE  HEIGHT (T)
                                                          O.O3W+C+T « EC.  EFFECTIVE CURRENT

                                                               WHERE T« TOW VELOCITY

                                                                            Figure 2: Seaway Data

-------
                                                                     EVALUATION OF CONTROL DEVICES   399
   3) One device exhibited a static stress above its estimat-
ed safe stress.

   4) Three devices  showed a high probability of failure
due to dynamic loads.

   The  wide variety  of behavior exhibited within a given
category does not permit generalizations to be made on the
performance of devices within generic categories. The only
specific comment that can be  made  is that excessive heel
angles were primarily observed  in devices  with flexible
skirts. This may be due to treating them as relatively rigid
skirts (e.g., no allownace for ballooning) and the lack of
ring stiffness effects in the model.

   The work reported here comprises an initial attempt to
mathematically describe spill control device behavior. It is
expected  that the model will  ultimately be improved by
added mathematical sophistication and by incorporation of
data developed via model  tests and sea trials.
THE MODEL TANK EXPERIMENTS

Mechanical Behavior
   and Structural Integrity

  Motion and force studies on a number of booms were
carried out  in the ship model towing tank of the Webb
Institute of Naval Architecture. The tank is 100 feet long, 8
feet wide and 5 feet deep. There is a wavemaker at one end
and a beach at the other. A towing carriage is used to pull
the model through the water.  In these experiments, towed
motion  of the barrier  device through  the  water  may be
viewed either as  its motion or the flow of a current or a
combination of both those vectors. Five different booms
were tested; three at a scale  ratio of 1:5, one at 1:6  and one
at 1:9.  Physical  scaling of the  booms was a particularly
difficult problem, because the laws that were applied were
not fully  developed for this particular  use. Indeed, some
models  could  not be properly  scaled,  so not all  of the
generic  classes were tested.  The scale  used was  often
determined  by the  physical characteristics  of available
modeling  materials which explains the  difference  in scale
ratios for different models.

   During the  tests, a variety of towing speeds were used to
simulate a range  of current up  to 4 knots. Regular waves
with  variable  heights were used  to obtain response am-
plitude  operators (RAO) and some  tests in irregular wave
systems were  also run. The models  were  deployed in
different orientations to the waves  and current.

   The  measurement system  was  primarily photo-optical,
because scaling  prohibited  attachment  of measurement
devices to the booms. The photo-optical system was used to
record motions.  In addition, force  gages in  the mooring
lines  recorded towing  forces. Waves were  recorded with
both  stationary and moving  (on  the tow  carriage) wave
wires. Towing speed is accurately calculated by means of
relay-activated precision timing  over  measured  courses.
Figure 4 shows the test system used in these experiments.
                                              WATER LINE-
                                                                                 d- DRAFT

                                                                                 h- FREEBOARD

                                                                                 e- WATER LINE TO CABLE
                                                                                    DISTANCE
                                                                                 a- RIGID SEGMENT LENGTH

                                                                                 s- FLEXIBLE SEGMENT LENGTH

                                                                                 H'-RESTORING FORCE

                                                                                 H*- RESTORING MOMENT
                                           Figure 3: Structural Data - Appropriate to Single Section of "Navy Boom'

-------
400  PHYSICAL REMOVAL .
   Over a two-week period,  approximately 400 tests were
carried  out  under  systematically  varied conditions  of
current, waves, and deployment configuration. The data are
now being analyzed, but the following general observations
are believed to apply:
     Different booms  within  the same  generic  category
     exhibited  wide variations  in  behavior while  some
     booms  in different  categories  behaved equally well.
     This  appears to  result primarily  from  engineering
     design practice.
   2.  Loose skirts have little effect on performance even at
      moderate tow speeds (currents). On the other hand,
      fabric devices do exhibit rigidity due to ring stiffness.
      Therefore, ring stiffness and ballooning are important
      factors in boom design and may not  be ignored as
      was done in the development of the analytical model.
   3.  Booms with low  beam/draft  ratios (fabric  booms
      particularly) are prone to exhibit planning and poor
      stability in moderate to high currents.
   4.  The  effect   of  sway  becomes  important  in  longer
      period waves.
Figure 4: Layout of  Model  Tank Testing System for  Studying
Forces and Motions (1. Model Test Tank; 2. Tank Wall; Direction of
Tow, Current and Waves in Opposite Direction; 4.  Towing and
Instrumentation Carriage; 5. Model  of  Oil Spill  Control Device;
Water-Level  Orthogonal Super  8-MM  Movie Camera; 7. Overhead
3S-MM Still Camera; 8. Force Transducer; 9. Moving Wave Wire; 10.
Data Cards and Frame Counters; 11.  Oscillograph Recorder for
Waves, Forces,  and  Test Parameters; 12. Oscilloscope — Camera
Synchronism Check.)

-------
                                                                        EVALUATION OF CONTROL DEVICES  401
   5. Nonlinear  effects were   observed,  particularly  at
      higher currents and steeper waves. It is not clear how
      important this is in prediction of boom behavior, but
      the matter must be reconciled.
OIL CONTAINMENT EFFICIENCY

   This  phase of testing was carried out in the Davidson
Laboratory  towing tank  (300' x  12'  x 5') of  Stevens
Institute of Technology.

   The  oil-containment  experimental  system  (Figure  5)
comprised of the following elements:

   a)  The oil metering system that pumped  oil into  the
water at a constant rate at prescribed times.

   b)  The boom  tow-system that  simulated the combina-
tion of towing and current and measured the resultant force
in the tow line.
   c) The  camera  system along with  the  tow-force  and
wave  recorders  comprised  the entire data  acquisition
system.  There  were  4  cameras  in   the  system:  1)  a
wide-angle super-8  movie camera to record action on  the
surface, 2) a 16-mm movie camera mounted on a 90°-view
periscope to film underwater action, 3) a hand held super 8
movie camera to film operational aspects and special angles,
and  4) a motor-driven 35-mm still camera to record  boom
shape and oil flow.

   d) The  weir towed  behind the boom  to  capture  and
hold oil that might elude the boom.

   e) Two  blowers used  to  "wind-sweep"  the  tank to
concentrate oil for cleanup purposes.

   f)  A recording oscillograph to record  boom tensions.

   g) Two underwater curtains that were raised at the  end
of each  run  to trap the  test boom  and the  oil it is
containing.
 Figure 5: Layout of Test System for Oil Containment Experiments
 (1. Test  Tank; 2. Test Boom; 3. Test Oil; 4. Oil Applicator; 5. "Y"
 Valve for Controlling Oil Flow; 6. Oil Makeup Tank; 7. Metering
 Pump with Controlled  Speed Motor; 8. Oil Collection Wier; 9.
 Escaped  Oil; 10. Super 8-MM Still Camera for Overhead Viewing;
12. 16-MM Movie Camera for Underwater Viewing; 13. Underwater
"90°" Periscope  with Mirror; 14. Synchronized Clocks (one in
Underwater  Housing);   15.  Oscillograph  Recorder;  16.  Force
Transducer; 17. Oil Cleanup Fans.)

-------
 402  PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
   A total of 22 tests were run; each test required from one
 to three hours of preparation. The same five booms were
 tested in a variety of currents and waves. Oil samples were
 taken for chemical analysis. Preliminary examination of the
 data reveals that new information concerning  boom be-
 havior has been obtained. Some unverified observations are:

   1) The results of Wicks describing the behavior of oil
 flow near a barrier  in  a  current appear to be generally
 supported by the test series run in current alone,

   2) Sway, ring stiffness, and planing (diving)  appear to
 be important factors in oil loss in waves and current,

   3) Each different type of boom failed for a different
 reason in the wave tests.

   4) A boom that successfully held oil most of the time in
 a relatively high sea state and current failed upon inter-
 action with an exceptionally large wave.

   5) The importance of the oil's characteristics was clearly
 demonstrated when, under identical current conditions, the
 boom contained No. 2 fuel oil and the industrial lube oils
 effectively while it failed utterly to contain No. 4  oil.
 SUMMARY

   Perhaps the most important result to emanate from this
 and other  like  studies is a reassessment of  technical
 objectives. For example, it was recognized, even before this
 work was undertaken,  that  if the oil is  propelled in a
 current of sufficient magnitude no conventional boom can
 hold it. Now, it is seen that as booms are used to control or
 divert  oil, rather than  contain,  there is a limit to the
 amount  of oil that can be handled  under specific con-
 ditions. The tendency is to consider booms in combination
 with removal devices for maximum effectiveness.

   New  ideas for boom configurations are beginning to
 proliferate. The  reason is obvious; no single boom can
 effectively function in  all  environmental conditions. The
 tests reported here have shown that different designs solve
 different  problems. Of  the five  booms that were model-
 tested,  almost all  failed for different reasons. However,
 when cost-effectiveness and ease of handling are included as
 criteria, some of the poorer performers may be considered
 to  be  more attractive  than  the  better performers for a
 specific mission.

   There is beginning to appear a more realistic acknowl-
edgment of the scope of the problem. At the  ends of the
spectrum of understanding are stagnant water and high seas.
In the former, virtually any remedy will  suffice; in the
latter,  there  is no  known  remedy.  In between reside the
bulk of realistic environmental conditions and it is here that
solutions should be and are being sought.
   Once  it is established  that booms will  continue  to be
useful and that ultimately  a "family" of booms for all
occasions should be  developed,  then the importance of
mathematical modeling and tank experimentation begin to
emerge. There is no more efficient way (time and cost) to
examine  booms  and  to evaluate  design  changes  than
through  mathematical  modeling provided, of course, the
model is representative  of the real  physical world  it
purports to  describe.  The   model  tank is  an excellent
medium  for validating predictions of the analytical model
and  for  proving performance. The same applies to  at-sea
testing where final designs  receive their baptism  of fire.
What is  probably  needed for the long haul is a standard
model tank and at-sea test facility and procedure so that all
prospective booms can receive uniform evaluation.
LIST OF SYMBOLS
-  area projected to the fluid flow

—  added mass coefficient in heave equation

—  rigid segment length

~  a statistic of sea spectrum


—  distance of the center of buoyancy below the
   waterline

—  damping coefficient in heave equation

-  waterline width, sectional beam


—  restoring force coefficient in heave equation

-  drag coefficient (taken as 2.0)

~  constant in configuration equation

-  constant in configuration equation


-  added moment of inertia coefficient in pitch
   equation

—  draft, sectional draft
E       — damping coefficient in pitch equation

E i • i    — "energy" of spectrum for variable q(j)
A

A'

a

a j /?


B


B1

b


C'

CA
D

-------
                                                                      EVALUATION OF CONTROL DEVICES  403
G'
          distance  of the structural  center  below the
          waterline
complex driving force on segment/

normal component of current force

normal  component  of force equilibrated  by
tension

tangential component  of force equilibrated by
tension

normal component of wind force

normal force on segment /

tangential force on segment/

x component  of vector sum of forces on the
segments

y component  of vector sum of forces on the
segments


distance  of the  center  of gravity below the
waterline

restoring coefficient in pitch equation

metacentric height

gravitational acceleration


heave Response Amplitude Operator

pitch Response Amplitude Operator

freeboard

significant wave height

pitch moment of inertia

moment of inertia of  the  water plane  area
about its longitudinal axis
                                                         M
                                                         M
                                                         m

                                                         n

                                                         n+1

                                                         P


                                                         Q
        — index used for segment or joint number
                                                         T

                                                         7L
                                                         T
                                                          y
                                                         u
                                                         ui
— wave number

- apparent wave number due to oblique sea


- mass of rigid segment

- applied moment

— complex driving moment on segment /

- moment at joint/

— two dimensional added mass

— damping factor

- last joint

— matrix that relates motions and loads at one
   end of boom to those at the other end

_ parameter of probability distribution

— vertical displacement component of state vector
   RfiJ

— heave amplitude at joint/


— state vectors  defined  at  each joint  / of a
   segment  or coupling with components, q, 6, V
   and M.

— state vector Rfj) plus a unit component


- sectional area coefficient


— tension

— x component of tension

— y component of tension

— time


— fluid speed relative to the device

- a matrix relating motions and loads at  one end
   of a specific segment or coupling to those at its
   other end

-------
 404  PHYSICAL REMOVAL . .  .
V

V(i)


w
Wl
XEND
  vertical shear component of state vector R(j)

  vertical shear force at joint/


  segment weight

  part of U- containing forcing  terms Ffj) and
— coordinate in waterplane

- input quantity (defined in Fig. 1)


— coordinate in waterplane

- input quantity (defined in Fig. 1)

— input quantity (defined in Fig. 1)


— heave motion of a segment


— amplitude of a sinusoidal wave

— angle between sea and the normal to segment/

- angle between the  segment / and the relative
   fluid velocity
P

Pw

T
                                                          CO
—  pitch  angle, pitch angle component of state
   vector/ty/;

—  experimentally determined coefficient (taken as
   0.02)

—  mass density of the fluid (air or water)

—  mass density of water

—  coefficient (takes the  value of 1 for a flexible
   skirt and 0 for a rigid skirt)

-  power spectrum of the response of a particular
   variable  to an irregular unidirectional sea

—  power spectrum of variable q(j)

—  Pierson-Moskowitz sea spectrum

—  heel angle

_  radian frequency of a sinusoidal wave

_  limits  of the  frequency  band in  which  sig-
   nificant  motion occurs

—  segment displacement volume

     d
                                                                       dt
                                                                           -, derivative with respect to time
Sfj}     — angle of the segment / with the X axis

-------
                 STUDY  OF  EQUIPMENT  AND METHODS
                   FOR  REMOVING  OR  DISPERSING  OIL
                                 FROM  OPEN  WATERS
                                         C.H. Henager, P.C. Walkup,
                                        J.R. Blacklaw and J.D. Smith
                                       Pacific Northwest Laboratories,
                                          Batelle Memorial Institute
                                            Richldnd, Washington
ABSTRACT
    A  cost effectiveness  analysis  was  performed for
 equipment,  materials and  techniques applicable to the
 removal or dispersal of spilled oil from U.S. Navy oilers and
 gasoline tankers on open waters.  Effectiveness parameters
 included  oil product types (JP-5, Distillate  Fule, Navy
 Special and Bunker C), a range of spill locations (3 and 12
 miles from shore) and varying spill sizes (2,700 gal, 270,000
 gal, and 6,750,000 gal).  Criteria for evaluation of systems
 under  the  above  parameter situations, formulated for
 presently available equipment and  materials,  included:
 completeness of oil removal; rate of removal; hazard and
 pollution; use in limited access areas; sensitivity to expected
 environmental factors; sensitivity to temperature extremes;
 toxicity  to marine  life; and system  availability.  Cost
 effectiveness  was determined using the 3 spill  sizes  and
 checked for spill frequency sensitivity, The three most cost
 effective systems for the range of spill sizes were found to
 be  burning,  dispersing,  and mechanical  skimming.
 Considering system applicability  to avrious products  and
 the requirements of rate of removal for massive  spills, the
 most practical  universal system  with  a  favorable cost
 effectiveness  ratio  was  found to be dispersing. This is
followed  by dispersing phis  a containment boom. Burning
 agents applied directly to the spill were judged  to be the
 third best system based  on  its favorable cost effectiveness
 but  limited applicability to  oil types and  permissible
 burning circumstances.

INTRODUCTION
    A variety of equipment,  materials, and techniques have
been used to remove spilled petroleum products from open
waters. The range of credible spill situations and petroleum
products with high potential involvement suggests that no
single system is likely to be completely effective. This study
was  performed  to  identify  and  describe the  most
cost-effective available systems consisting of present or new
combinations   of existing  equipment,  materials,  and
techniques. It  was also  intended  to identify  present
deficiencies and recommend  specific  measures for future
employment by the Navy to combat spills on open waters
in close proximity to  valued resources. Consideration of
costs,  effectiveness, speed, hazards,  ecological  effects,
environmental  and geographic  factors, and other
constraints are included. The  study focuses on the major
petroleum products in current use by  the Navy or planned
for future use. These products are Bunker C, Navy Special,
JP-5 and Distillate Fuel. This study was performed under
contract N62399-70-C-0008 to the U. S. Navy. The Naval
Civil Engineering Laboratory at Port Hueneme, California,
was the contracting agency and the Supervisor of Salvage,
Naval Ship Systems Command was the sponsoring agency.

    A rational decision-making methodology developed for
a  prior  studyO)  was employed  for choosing  among
alternative countermeasures  against  petroleum  product
spills from Naval oilers and  gasoline tankers. The study
encompassed detailed analysis of the  effects and behavior
of spilled oil, state-of-art study of available materials and
methods, and detailed review  of representative spills. This
presentation will be confined  to the effectiveness analysis
and its results.
    The principal  ingredient  of the decision-making
methodology is an effectiveness analysis.
                                                   405

-------
  406   PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
 EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
     Analysis of the effectiveness of systems for removal of
 petroleum  product   spills  from open  water  surfaces
 requires assessment of operational aspects under a range of
 conditions.  These   conditions are  parameters whose
 extremes  are  the  boundaries  for  the  assessment.
 "Effectiveness"  is not  quantifiable  unless  specific
 characteristics  which  contribute to or detract from the
 overall effectiveness are considered. The identification of
 such characteristics, criteria for judging them, and a rational
 plan for combining them into overall effectiveness follow.

 Effectiveness Parameters
     Effectiveness analysis  involves  assessment  of  each
 candidate  system with respect to all effectiveness criteria
 over a range of conditions. These conditions may properly
 be  called  "parameters." They  are  the expected
 characteristics of  spill  incidents, the geographic  and
 physical characteristics of spill sites, and the environmental
 conditions at spill sites. The parameters developed here are
 hypothetical and it is believed that they represent a realistic
 open sea situation. Representative ranges for these aspects
 were derived  from  available historical information and
 descriptive  materials. The  parameters selected  for  this
 study, and the rationale for their development, are given in
 the following paragraphs.

 Size of Spill
     The size of spills from Navy oilers and gasoline tankers
 can  range  from minor fuel handling incidents involving a
 few hundred gallons  to  a major incident where several
 compartments or a complete vessel are Involved.
     For purposes of this  study, incidents were classified
 into three representative size ranges:  2,700 gallons (10
 tons), 270,000 gallons (1,000 tons), and 6,750,000 gallons
 (25,000 tons). These spill sizes represent: either (1) minor
 damage or personnel error, (2) the rupture of a large tank
 or several small tanks, or (3) the catastrophic loss of the
 total oil capacity of a Naval Oiler.

 Location of Spills
     The proximity of a maritime casualty to valuable shore
 and  near-shore resources can have considerable significance.
 The spreading and influence of wind and waves can put the
 oil into a beach in a short time if the incident is close to
 land. The time available for spill cleanup is a direct function
 of  the spill  location and  local  hydrographic  and
 meteorologic environment. Most spillage of significant size
 is a result of collision, groundings or adverse weather. The
 probability of each of these cases is enhanced the closer the
 vessel is to land. Two locations were chosen for use in this
 analysis: three  miles  from shore and  twelve miles from
 shore.  Mid-ocean spills were not chosen for study cases
 because the spreading and dispersal of oil spills by wind and
 waves  take place so  rapidly that by the time  clean-up
 equipment would arrive at a mid-ocean spill, it would be
impractical if not impossible  to locate and treat the widely
spread oil slicks.
Frequency of Spillages
    The frequency of spillage is important because of the
effect  of  frequency  upon  system  properties, i.e.,
maintenance,  maneuverability, and  fixed versus  variable
costs. Clean-up costs per gallon of spillage will be quite high
if a very few spills are encountered.
    Spill frequencies of the incidents described previously
can only be implied. The maritime casualty record of U. S.
registered vessels worldwide  and foreign vessels in U. S.
waters for 1966 and 1967(2) were usedto approximate spill
frequencies.
    These  data suggest  that,  with approximately forty
oilers and gasoline tankers worldwide, ten 270,000 gallon
spills and one  6,750,000 gallon spill might be expected per
year,  exclusive  of war-time  casualties.  The  number  of
minor, or 2,700 gallon spills, is not  estimated, there being
no data  on  which to base  an estimate.  However,  the
frequency of the small  spills has been considered in the cost
analysis by varying the frequency to determine the effect.


Effectiveness Criteria
    The criteria for the effectiveness measurement should
minimize the subjective judgment which must be employed.
Rather  than  attempt to  finely rank  each system with
respect to  the  criteria, which would inject  undesirable
subjective judgment into  the  analysis, we have chosen to
establish  the  individual  criteria  in  terms  of  minimal
performance requirements. Each system is then given a
numerical index which reflects whether it exceeds, meets,
or  fails to meet each of  the  criteria.  The  sum  of these
indices, for all  combinations of parameters, then reflects
the overall relative effectiveness of a particular system
    The effectiveness  criteria employed  in  this study  are
listed  in  Table 1. The  rationale-  for  their development
follows:
        Table  1.  Effectiveness Criteria
Operational Aspect
 Completeness of
 Removal
Rate of Removal
Does Not Increase
Pollution 01 Hazard
Completeness of Removal Essentially
complete removal in consideration of
environmental,  geographic,  and
hydrographic parameters.

Recovery at a rate such that removal
from surface  waters is complete
before a slick contacts valued shore
resources. Includes deployability and
mobility considerations.

Must not produce a situation having a
higher  pollution hazard  or  lower
safety potential than  the
contaminating petroleum product
alone. Primarily  applicable  to
chemical  or  chemomechanical
methods.

-------
                                                                                EQUIPMENT AND METHODS
                                                                                                                407
Applicability to
Limited Access Areas
Sensitivity to Natural
Phenomena or Floating
Debris
Toxicity to Marine Life
Availability
Sensitivity to
Temperature
Must  be  capable  of  operation
adjacent to ship  salvage and shallow
water  areas which may limit access.
Judgment based  on maneuverability
and size.
Must be capable of operating under
the anticipated sea, wind and current
conditions  prevailing  at spill scenes
90%  of the  time.  Must not  be
rendered  inoperable  by  minor
floating  debris or, where applicable,
by water-in-oil emulsions.
Will not contaminate fisheries  and
other  commercially or recreationally
significant  marine  life  to cause
mortality,  condemnation of  fish
products, or flavor degradation.
Will be  available for application at
least  95%  of  the  time  in
consideration  of  reliability,
repairability,  and  level of  skill
required of candidate systems.2
Must  be capable Qof operating at
temperatures of  40°F, i.e., must not
be rendered  inoperable   by
temperatures in  the 40-50 F range.
Completeness of Oil Removal

    Any  system  worthy of  consideration  must  be
theoretically capable of at least 90% complete removal of
the spilled product from the water surface. Some systems,
especially mechanical ones, can not be expected to do this
under adverse  combinations of environmental, geographic,
or hydrographic parameters considered in this study.

    Each system was  evaluated for  the combinations of
parameters involved in this study, by considering its design
features  which detract  from  or  contribute to  the
completeness of petroleum  product  removal. Those which
are capable of providing 90% or greater removal were given
an index of (+2) and those which have severe limitations in
this regard (less than  50%) were given an  index of (0).
Those which appear theoretically capable of 90% removal
performance,  but are undemonstrated for the  particular
combination of parameters involved, were given an index of
+1.

Rate of Removal
    A  measure  of  the effectiveness  of  an  oil  spill
countermeasure is its  ability  to contain  or remove  the
spilled material before it damages vulnerable property or
marine  life. Removal  must  be  effected  before a slick
becomes so thin that it is untreatable or unrecoverable.
    Where the wind  conditions are calm and currents are
not significant, the ra'te of movement of the edge of a slick
will  be  controlled  by  the spreading  rate. No directly
applicable  quantitative data  on  spreading rates for  the
materials of concern (JP-5 , Navy Special, Bunker C, and
Distillate Fuel) have been  found. However, the work of
Blokker  and Berridge, et al(3,4) provides some basis for
estimation of rates of oil slick spreading. Calculated slick
characteristics based on these works are shown in Table 2.
The Blokker equation can be stated as,
                                                                                K(dw-d0)
                                    where
              D =
                                            iw,d0
                                                V,
                                                  o
                                                  t  =
                                                 DO  =
                                                  K  =
slick diameter, meters
density of water and oil, respectively
volume of oil, cubic meters
time after spillage, minutes
slick diameter at t=0
a constant depending on the oil.
                                        The density of Bunker C can be greater than that of sea
                                    water; therefore, Bunker C  will have little tendency  to
                                    spread. In  addition,  the pour point of Bunker  C will
                                    usually be above the temperature of the sea water. This will
                                    further inhibit spreading. Bunker C will not be expected to
                                    spread to less than 2 cm thickness.
                           Table  2.   Theoretical  Slick Dimensions  After Spill
                                2.700 gal Spill
                                   270,000 gal  Spill
                                                                                         6,750,000  gal Spill
 JP.-5 and
 Distillate
 Fuel
 Navy
 Special
  Bunker  C
Time After
Spill
1 !iin.
10 Min.
1 Hr.
2 Hr.
5 Hr.
10 Kr.
1 Min.
10 flin.
1 Kr.
2 Hr.
5 Hr.
10 Hr.
Thickness
(In. x 10-2)
79
3.64
1.01
.65
.35
.22
79
6.15
1.74
1.09
0.60
0,38
Area
(Ft.2 x 106)
.004
.11
.394
.62
1.14
1.82
.004
.065
.23
.366
.668
1.06
Thickness
(In. x 10-2)
79
16.9
4.8
3.0
1.63
1.03
79
28.7
8.25
5.18
2.79
1.72
Area
(Ft.2 x 106)
0.4
2.35
8.24
13.2
24.3
38.5
0.4
1.38
4.8
7.65
14.2
22.4
Thickness
(In. x 10~2)
79
37.5
13.4
8.6
4.72
2.38
79
51.5
21.6
14.3
7.92
5.23
Area
(Ft.2 x 106)
10.0
26.4
73.9
115.0
210
416
10.0
19.2
45.8
69.4
125
189
                 10 Hr.
                                79
                                                .004
                                                              79
                                                                              0.4
                                                                                           79
                                                                                                          10.0

-------
408    PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
    Values of K for the petroleum products of interest in
this study have not been determined. However, Blokker has
determined this constant for several refined products, some
of which resemble JP-5, Navy Special, and Distillate Fuel.
The  JP-5  and  Distillate Fuel have similar  densities and
viscosities and closely correspond to Blokker's gas oil (Sp.
Gr. = 0.83,11 = 4.3 cP at 20°C). Navy Special is similar  to
the lubricating oil tested (Sp. Gr.=0.90,/i=490cP at 20°C).
The values of K, for these materials, were 15,000 min'1 and
9,800 min-1, respectively, and were used herein.
    According to Berridge, the thickness of a  slick, after
the lapse of a full day, tends to approach the  same value
(0.0008 to 0.0012 in. in their reported tests) for a group of
oils covering a wide range of properties. It is probable that
the JP-5, Distillate Fuel, and Navy Special would all exhibit
this characteristic.
    The  required recovery rate,  within   the  previous
context, revolves  about the  ability of a system to treat a
given water  surface area within a specified time  span.
Effectiveness  criterion  is  best expressed for  rapidly
spreading materials as area treated per unit time. For slowly
spreading materials such as Bunker C, the required recovery
rate is best expressed as volume treated per unit time.
    For all treatment methods, deployment speed becomes
an important consideration for rapidly spreading oil slicks.
    For spills on the open sea, effective treatment could
only be undertaken during daylight hours. For such cases, it
is arbitrarily assumed that at least eight hours of daylight
would be available for countermeasure activities in the vast
majority of cases.
    For some postulated spill cases, onshore currents and
winds may become controlling.
    It follows from the above  discussion  that  different
quantitative  recovery  rates  are  required  for  each
combination of parameters. For purposes of this study, and
on the  basis of the above reasoning, criteria were  selected
for various combinations of parameters. These are shown in
Table 3.
    These  detailed criteria apply to systems  which do not
utilize containment devices to prevent spreading movement
of the offending material.
    For  purposes  of comparing various systems, the
following indices were utilized in the total effectiveness:

          Rate of Removal                    Index
     System exceeds criteria                     +2
     System meets criteria                       +1
     System fails to meet criteria by 1 order
        of magnitude                           0
     System fails to meet criteria by 2 or
        more orders of magnitude

The purpose of the (-1) rating is to assist in identifying
systems which may  score well on other items but which,
because of inability to effect cleanup within the required
time span, could not be considered as practical systems.
Effect of Method on Pollution and Hazard
    Generally, mechanical methods of spill treatment do
not cause  adverse effects. An exception to this would be
mechanical systems which involve containment by booms or
corrals when employed  on  spills of JP-5. Prevention of
spreading of this flammable material, by gathering it in such
containment,  might  be  undesirable because  of  the
associated fire hazard. Fire hazards may be minimized by
the application of dispersant.
    Chemical  methods  must be carefully  considered
because of the  possibility  that the  chemical may  be
hazardous  to personnel. Certain  types of sorbents may
create visibility hazards  or ingestion hazards to personnel
from dusty conditions. The possibility of dispersed or sunk
materials   reappearing  at  a  later time   must also  be
considered.
    The indices applied were as follows:

        Effect                              Index
   Reduces Pollution or Hazard                +1
   No Effect on Pollution or Hazard            0.5
   Increases Pollution or Hazard        ,        0
Applicability to Areas Having Limited Access
    Many  cases  of  oil  spillage  may  result from the
grounding of a vessel on a reef of protuberance. In these
cases, rescue and recovery operations as well as oil spillage
abatement  procedures may  be impaired.  Shallow water
areas  may  also  influence  the  operation  of  certain
mechanical devices. In the open sea environment, this effect
will  not be pronounced as when near reef  and shoaling
areas. The  Maritime Casualty Record  reflects  that many
casualties are due to groundings. This was the  case with the
GENERAL COLOCOTRONIS, the  TORREY  CANYON,
the OCEAN EAGLE, and the Tanker R. C. STONER. The
R.C. STONER grounded near the harbor entrance to Wake
Island, September 6,1967.
    Consideration  of  this  aspect,  in the  effectiveness
analysis, consists of  evaluating  each  component  of all
hypothetical and actual systems in terms:
   •  Access requirements in terms of water surface area
  :   and depth of planes perpendicular to water surface
      needed for effective mobility.
   •  Maneuverability of system in terms of turning radius
      and reversibility. Stability if floating or fixed objects
      are struck during movement.
     Each  system  was  individually  evaluated  for  the
 parametric  situations involving the  characteristics
 mentioned above. Indices were assigned for each system as
 follows:

-------
                                                                               EQUIPMENT AND METHODS   409
                Table 3.  Minimum Speed of Application Criterion  for Governing Parameters.
                   Parameter
     Location of Spill

    Readily accessible open  sea
    areas when environmental
    conditions are moderately
    severe; (assume wind  20  mph
    towards shore and spill  3
    mi.  offshore).
    Readily accessible open  sea
    areas  when environmental
    conditions are moderately
    severe; (assume wind  20  mph
    towards shore and spill
    12 mi. offshore).
Petroleum
 Product

JP-5 and
Distillate
Fuel

Navy
Special
                                   Bunker C
JP-5 and
Distillate
Fuel

Navy
                                   Bunker C
Spill Size
 Gallons

 2,700
 270,000
 6,750,000

 2,700
 270,000
 6,750,000

 2,700
 270,000
 6,750,000

 2,700
 270,000
 6,750,000

 2,700
 270,000
 6,750,000

 2,700
 270,000
 6,750,000
 Minimum Oil
Treatment  Rate

 5,860 Ft2/Min
 124,000 Ft2/Min
 1,882,000 Ft2/Min

 3,400 Ft2/Min
 75,800 Ft2/Min
 842,000 Ft2/Min

 15 Gal/Min
 1,540 Gal/Min
 40,000 Gal/Min

 3,560 Ft2/Min
 82,300 Ft2/Min
 1,010,000 Ft2/Min

 2,150 Ft2/Min
 47,500 Ft2/Min
 280,000 Ft2/Min

 4 Gal/Min
 380 Gal/Min
 9,650 Gal/Min
          Basis

Recovery  or  dispersing before
oil reaches  shore.  One hour
for deployment (equipment  on
the scene) and slick movement
at 4% of  wind velocity.
Recovery or  dispersing before
oil reaches  shore.  Four hours
for deployment (equipment on
the scene) and slick movement
at 4% of wind  velocity assumed.
Applicability to Limited Access Areas
Exceeds Needs
Meets Needs
Does Not Meet Needs
            Index
            +1.0
            +0.5
             0
Sensitivity to Natural Phenomena or Floating Debris
    Many mechanical  systems  are  suceptible to stalling
from pluggage  or blockage  by  floating debris. Design
features such as screens, strainers,  and baffles may enable a
system to effectively handle such floating debris.
    Systems employing rotating drums or endless belts of
sorptive  material are vulnerable to damage and stalling if
rigid debris  of  irregular shape  is  picked up at the water
surface.
    The  sensitivity of a system to  water, wave and wind
conditions is a  significant  performance factor. While  it is
unlikely  that spillage  cleanup would  be  of priority concern
during severe storm conditions, effective systems must be
usable during conditions more severe than"calm." It seems
appropriate for  purposes of this report to select conditions
which would prevail during the vast  majority of the time -
applicable for as much as 90% of the  time.
    A study of worldwide weather established that  the
significant wave height for 90% probability varies from 1.0
to 13.0  ft.  For the  purpose of this study the significant
wave height,  worldwide, during  spill  countermeasure
operations was taken  as an average  of these samplings which
is 5.0 ft. By similar  reasoning,  the  significant wind speed
was taken as 20 mph.
               The indices applied to this aspect of countermeasure
           effectiveness are as follows:

                Effect                                     Index
           Not affected by 5.0 ft. waves, 20 mph winds, or
              debris                                        +2
           Slightly affected by 5.0 ft waves, 20 mph
              winds, or debris                                 1.0
           Rendered inoperable by 5.0 ft waves, 20 mph
              winds, or debris                                 0

           Toxicity to Marine Life
               Most chemicals dispersants are toxic to marine  life.
           Toxicity thresholds  range from approximately 5 ppm to
           10,000 ppm for presently used  commercial materials.(5)
           The actual  effect of using a  specific dispersant in a given
           situation  is dependent  on  the marine  life  present, the
           diffusion characteristics at the spill locale, the effectiveness
           of tidal flushing, the application  rate,  and  the  physical
           characteristics of the spill material. Standards regulating the
           use of dispersants  range- from  "unlimited"  to  "none
           permitted."  FWQA rules employed  during the  Santa
           Barbara incident permitted chemical dispersants to be used
           at ^ 1 mile off shore at concentrations equivalent to 5 ppm
           in the top three feet of water.
               The amount of chemicals required for emulsification
           are  generally two  to  three  times  the manufacturer's
           recommendations - mostly due to the variance  between
           field application and laboratory testing. A typical chemical
           dispersant must be used in the ratio  1:5 for effective use. It

-------
  410   PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
 was  concluded  that chemical  dispersants cannot  be
 effectively used within 1  mile of shore without exceeding
 most toxicity limits. In deep water, dispersants could be
 used more freely without known  or measured  adverse
 effects on marine life.
     The applicability of chemical methods will depend on
 the  circumstances of the specific spill situation and  is
 exemplified as follows:
      Toxicity                                   Index
 Systems allowing no toxic residuals                 +2
 Systems or spill situations allowing residuals
   but not in excess of 5 ppm in top 3 ft
   (when 1 mile or less from shore) or residuals
   > ppm in top 3 ft but greater than 1 mile
   from shore                                    +1
 Systems or spill situations allowing residuals >
   5 ppm in top 3 ft (< 1 mile from shore) or
   affecting benthic organisms adversely             0


 Availability
     An effective system for removal of oil pollutants from
 the  surface of open waters must be available for use when
 needed. Many of  the systems  to be studied  have been
 extensively  used and corresponding historical data are
 available. Other  systems  have  not been used enough to
 provide a sound basis for judging these aspects. In the latter
 instances, the  systems were analyzed on the basis of the
 experience  with  components  involved,  or  similar
 components, to derive estimates of availability probability.
      Availability                           Index
   Systems available ^ 95% of the time         +2
   Systems available 50-95% of the time         +1
   Systems available < 50% of the time          0


 Sensitivity to Temperature
     Systems for use in open  sea conditions  should be
 effective  over the  range of temperatures  encountered in
 diverse  geographic  locations.  Systems employing sorbents
 or suction devices may be expected to be adversely affected
 on thicker oils such as Navy  Special and Bunker C at low
 temperatures. The  action of chemical dispersants  is also
 slowed by  low temperatures.  The  mean  sea  surface
 temperature in most areas of potential spillage is between
 40°F and 80°F. It is appropriate that the systems should be
 expected  to function in temperatures down  to  at least
 40°F. The indices  applied for  this criterion were derived
 from the above reasoning and are:
       Sensitivity to Temperature
Index
 •These systems have 12 or more negative points (fails to meet rate
of removal requirements by 2 orders of magnitude) indicating ser -
ious inability of available equipment or methods to meet rate of
removal requirements. They were judged  impractical to consider
at the present time.
    Not affected by temperatures of 40-50°F     +1
    Slightly affected by temperatures of
       40-50°F                                  0.5
    Rendered inoperable by temperatures of
       40-50°F                                  0
 EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION
    The performance criteria and parameters which define
the range of spill situations have been combined to form a
matrix, Figure  1, to enable a  comparative effectiveness
analysis of potential systems. A  separate worksheet is used
for each postulated system; the sum of the index points for
that system then is a comparative measure of the ability of
that system to meet all of the criteria.
    These  systems are  synthesized using state-of-the-art
equipment, and are evaluated on known present capability.
    The comparisons of all systems indicate that thirteen
systems are  superior (over  90 points). Of these, one
(biological degradation) was judged impractical because of
inability to meet requirements for rate of  removal by
several  orders  of magnitude.  The  potential systems  in
descending order of effectiveness are:
      1. Chemical dispersants applied directly to the spill
(229)
      2. Chemical dispersants plus containment (151)
      3. Advancing gravity skimmer or weir (133)
      4. Gellants/conveyor(self-propelled)(l32)
      5. Gellants/conveyor plus containment (124)
      6. Chemical burning  agents  applied directly  to  the
spfll(120)
    *7. Enhanced degradation  (addition  of bacteria,
enzymes, etc.) (120)
      8. Chemical burning agents plus containment (114)
      9. Advancing  gravity  skimmer or weir  plus
containment (109)
    10. Sorbents/conveyor (self-propelled) (107)
    11. Endless belt on water surface (portable) (106)
    12. Sorbents/suction device  plus containment (93)
    13. Sorbents/conveyor plus containment (91)
    14. Endless belt on water  surface plus containment
(87)
   * 15. Suction devices (portable) (87)
    16.  Sorbents/portable suction devices (83)
    17. Sinking agents applied directly to slick (82)
    18. Sinking agents plus containment (76)
   *19. Rotating drums (self-propelled) (66)
   *20. Rotating drums plus containment (66)
   *21. Suction devices (portable) plus containment (63)

-------
                                                                               EQUIPMENT AND METHODS   411
    Containment  generally  does  not  improve  the
effectiveness of  these  systems. This  is because presently
available booms are not reliable or effective for open water
use. Dependence on a boom tends to make the system less
effective, i.e., oil escapes and equipment to treat oil outside
the boom  is  not  available or  planned for. The principal
deficiency  of most- mechanical  systems  is  inability  to
function effectively in 5-foot waves and 20 mph winds.

    It should also be recognized that in some cases the
criteria can vary with the parameters, or parameters  and
criteria can be dependent on each other. An example is that
much more relative speed is required for a large spill close
to shore than for a small spill under similar conditions.
    The parameters  can  also have  different meanings
depending  on the type of system. For a chemical system,
wave action aids in dispersing, while in a mechanical system
the wave action is a hindrance.
    Other   notes  of  this  type, developed   during  the
effectiveness  compilation,  are  given  in the following
paragraphs.

Completeness of Removal

     Chemical Systems -  Implies that the oil is essentially
completely dispersed from the  water  surface  and does not
reappear at a later time. This means that where water-in-oil
emulsions may form, as with Bunker C, or wave agitation is
insufficient, chemicals do  not  necessarily do  a complete
job, as they may reappear.

    Chemomechanical  and Mechanical Systems - Implies
that  the system removes  the oil from the water surface
before it spreads or drifts out of range. Therefore, these
systems  must  operate more rapidly on  spills of lighter
products. Also, the system must be capable of removing the
oil accumulated around obstructions or booms. This  is not
the same as operating in limited access areas. For example,
rotating  drums have little or no ability to draw heavy or
very light oils from the surrounding area and, therefore, will
not do an  essentially complete job. More importantly, the
system must be capable of operating under the environment
conditions.  Rotating  drums  and  suction  devices,  for
example, will  be severely hampered by wave action in open
sea conditions and the completeness of removal would be
expected to be very low.
Rate of Removal
Hazard and Pollution
    Includes water surface pollution to waterfowl, facilities
and  private boats  (i.e., damage  to recreation  such as
swimming),  fire danger, air pollution, navigational danger
and possible equipment damage from dusty conditions.
    If a chemical  dispersant reappears  some  time  after
treatment the pollution can be great.
    Sinking agents which release the oil at a later time are
similarly ineffective.

System Use in Limited Access
    Ability  to  maneuver, chase windrows of oil and  work
close  to a  ship. Also  ability  to pick up accumulated oil
behind  a  containment  boom and  operability  in shallow
water for mechanical systems.

Sensitivity to Environmental Factors
    Is the system itself sensitive to waves, etc., or does its
capability for retrieval decrease? For this evaluation, it was
considered that systems using containment booms available
today would be penalized because the  booms  themselves
would be subject to frequent overtoppings in 5-foot waves
or could be expected to come apart or  tip over. This has
been the case to date with  virtually every boom which has
been  subjected  to  open  sea  conditions. Model  tests by
Hydronautics Inc.(6) provide  further evidence  to support
the ineffectiveness of booms in open sea conditions. The
tests indicated  that in sea  state 5,  which encompasses an
average  wave height of 5  to 7.9 feet, conventional booms
would be overtopped frequently.

Toxicity
    Applies only to chemicals. Excludes water fowl. The
conclusions  drawn  in   the  report,  the TORREY
CANYON(7) and othersC8*9), that the offshore spraying of
detergents in deep water has no significant toxic or  other
deleterious  effect on offshore or  inshore fishing  were
applied  to  spills up to 270,000 gallons.  However, for the
6,750,000 gallon spill, large amounts of  dispersants would
be required, much of which would likely be close to shore.
For this case, the  chances  of exceeding 5 ppm near  shore
would be great.

Availability
    Any self-propelled system must  be  penalized in this
respect because the propulsion unit is bound to break  down
or require periodic maintenance. Portable gear is superior
because it can use available vessels.
    Speed often is an essential factor in completeness, i.e.,
the slick will spread too thin if it can't be recovered in time.
A system which fails to function because the film thickness
is too thin (as for burning where the film must be 0.03
inches thick or more) or which could not remove  a slick
before  it  reached  the  shore  (as  for  enhanced
biodegradation) would be severely penalized.
COST ANALYSIS
    The life cycle costs of the twelve systems which scored
most  effectively  over  the full range of parameters were
derived for the  purpose of generating  comparative cost
effectiveness indices.

-------
412  PHYSICAL REMOVAL . . .
   SYSTEM:
       Size
Parameters
  Products
                                                                    Criteria
Location
1   3 Miles
From Shore
   I  2700 gal  A JP-5
  II  270,000   B Distillate
           gal  C Navy Special  2   12 Miles
 III  6,750,000 D Bunker c      From Shore
           gal



1,1




















FA 	 Tl
L_2
P
l_2
P
L_2
P
L l_2
FA P
1.2
B P
L.2
P
l_2
D P
L L2
FA P
l_2
B P
L.2
c P
l_2
D P
LD L2







































































































































































































































1







1
                                                                       TOTAL
                                Figure 1: Effectiveness Analysis Worksheet.

-------
                                                                                EQUIPMENT AND METHODS   413
    Systems  that  had severe limitations in accomplishing
the  oil  removal or dispersal were not  evaluated.  Thus
biological degrading was not evaluated because a spill would
reach  shore  before any  appreciable  removal  could be
effected.
    Several systems have common cost data, such as hourly
labor charges. The hourly charge rates were derived from
either commerical rental rates or the cost of new equipment
depreciated over its expected life. Some equipment charges
such as booms were prorated per spill rather than on an
hourly rate, based on  procurement costs depreciated over
the  expected  life. Maintenance  costs were calculated on
accepted  chemical  industry  rates  for  equipment in
moderate  to  severe  corrosive  environment  (10% of
acquisition cost/year for mechanical  equipment, 5% of
acquisition cost/year for booms).

IDENTIFICATION OF MOST COST
EFFECTIVE SYSTEMS
    The cost analysis showed that the cost per gallon to
treat oil varies with the spill size and frequency. The cases
and parameters used  are believed  to represent the  most
probable situations where  oil spills of 2,700, 270,000 and
6,750,000 gallon  sizes would require clean-up  activity to
prevent  oil  contamination of resources. Cost data were
combined with the effectiveness indices by dividing the
cost/gallon of oil  treated for each spill size and system by
the effectiveness index for each spill size and system. These
are shown in Tables 4, 5, 6 and 7. The  system having the
lowest cost/effectiveness ratio is the most favorable. For
the small  spills,  the  cost effectiveness  is  frequency
dependent and  the choice of system then depends on the
number of spills of the small size which require treatment.
    There are several practical matters to  consider  in the
selection of  these systems. One of these is that presently
available booms have not been  shown  to be  effective in
open sea conditions. Parting  of the  boom, frequent
overtopping  in 5 foot waves, capsizing and oil carryunder in
currents or towing conditions exceeding 1 to  1-1/2 knots
are the principal deficiences.
    Thus, a  system using  a  containment boom cannot be
considered practically effective if reliance is placed on the
boom. Nevertheless it was assumed that a boom designed
for open  seas could function for a limited time, though
inefficiently, to slow the spread of oil or gather and thicken
it  for  skimming   or  burning operations.  Another
consideration is that burning agents could only be evaluated
for contained Navy Special or Bunker C and uncontained
Bunker  C.  This  is because the  other  products,  JP-5,
Distillate  Fuel  and uncontained  Navy  Special spread or
disperse and evaporate so rapidly that they would likely be
too thin for  burning agents by the  time equipment arrived.
(A 270,000 gallon spill of JP-5 or Distillate Fuel spreads to
less than the critical thickness for burning agents in about
two hours; for a 2,700 gallon spill it  is a little over 10
minutes.) A  third  consideration is that if burning agents are
applied to oil that is surrounding or escaping from a vessle,
it will pose  a  serious threat to the vessel itself. Smoke
pollution near population centers is also an objectionable
aspect of burning.
    Thus the decision to use burning agents is dependent
on location of the spill, type of oil and safety of the ship or
other valuable property.  For these reasons, burning does
not represent a practical universal system even though its
cost effectiveness for certain oils is favorable.
    Based  on the  effectiveness analysis,  the  most cost
effective system for removing or dispersing oil from open
waters are:
    (1) Chemical burning agents applied to Bunker C prior
to emulsification or to Navy Special when the slick is thick
enough  for  burning.  This method would be restricted to
areas away from the ship and other valuable property and
to  areas where  the  smoke would not  be considered a
pollution problem. As pointed out previously, this system is
not a practical universal system because of the  restrictions
on  oil type, thickness, emulsification, and location. This
system  would be improved if seaworthy fireproof booms
were available to contain oil in thick layers for burning.
    (2) Chemical dispersants applied directly to the slick
where the spill is one mile or more from shore. This system
appears to be the optimum choice for a universal system at
the present time. The effectiveness of this system would be
improved if seaworthy booms were  available  to prevent
spread of oil.
    (3)  Advancing  skimmers  or  weirs  for  small and
intermediate spills, 2,700 to 270,000 gallons. Such a system
was used to  collect up  to 25  barrels/day (about  1,000
gals/day) during the Santa Barbara Channel incident.
    Large  offshore  workboats  or  similar  craft could be
equipped with detachable skimmer booms on each side
with associated pumps to collect up to 50 barrels/day each.
For major  spills in  the  6,750,000 gallon category,  the
recovery rate is insufficient unless  large numbers of vessels
are used; e.g., to clean up  6,750,000 gallons  in 5 days
would  require  about  600  vessels recovering at  2,000
gals/day.
    Considering  the  restraints  listed  previously,  it is
concluded  that  the  most practical universal  system for
treating  oil spills  on  open water is  chemical dispersants
applied directly to the slick. Where feasible, a containment
boom   designed  for  open  seas  application  should  be
deployed.  Even  though it  may  eventually  fail  or be
ineffective,  it  will  slow the spread of oil  for a period of
time. The  oil which escapes  may  still  be  treated by
dispersants.   Where regulations prohibit  the  use  of
dispersants,  burning (where  feasible),  or  mechanical
removal by skimmer devices should be employed.


REFERENCES


     1.  P.C. Walkup, et al.  "Study  of Equipment  and
Methods for Removing Oil from Harbor Waters," Report
No. CR.70.001  by BatteUe-Northwest for the U.S.  Navy.
August 1969.
     2. "A Report on Pollution of the Nation's Water by Oil
and Other Hazardous Substance," by the Secretary  of the

-------
414    PHYSICAL REMOVAL
Interior and the Secretary of Transportation, p. 7, February
1968.
    3. S.A. Berridge, R.A. Dean, R.G. Fallows and A. Fish.
"The Properties of Persistent Oils at Sea," /. Inst. Petrol.,
Vol. 54, No. 539. November 1968.
    4.  P.C. Blokker. "Spreading  and  Evaporation  of
Petroleum Products on Water," Paper presented to the
Fourth International  Harbor Conference, Antwerp.  June
22-27,1964.
    5. A. Oda. "A Report on the Laboratory Evaluation of
Five Chemical Additives Used for the Removal of Oil Slicks
on  Water,"  Paper  No. 2019, Ontario Water Resources
Commission, August 1968.
    6.W.T. Lindemath, et al. "Analysis of Model Tests to
determine Forces and Motions of an Oil Retention Boom,"
technical note 948-1, a Report for the U.S. Coast Guard by
Hydronautics, Inc., January 1970.
    7. The TORREY CANYON, Report of the Committee
of Scientists on the Scientific and Technological Aspects of
the TORREY CANYON Disaster, London: H.M.S.O., 1967.

    8. A.C.  Simpson. 'The TORREY CANYON  Disaster
and Fisheries," Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food,
Fisheries Laboratory, Burnham on Crouch, Essex, February
1968.
    9. UP. Holdworth. "Control of Accidental Oil Spillage
at Sea,"  Proceedings  of the  Institute of the Institute of
Petroleum Summer Meeting, Brighton, 1968.

-------
                   THE  RECOVERY  OF   OIL  FROM  WATER

                              WITH  MAGNETIC   LIQUIDS
                                           R. Kaiser and G. Miskolczy
                                      Systems Division, A VCO Corporation
                                                      and
                        R.A. Curtis                             C.K. Colton
                     Purdue University              Massachusetts Institute of Technology
 ABSTRACT
   A  novel  method  of oil-water  separation has  been
 developed which utilizes magnetism to separate  the two.
 phases. In this method,  a ferro-fluid miscible with one of
 the phases, usually the oU phase, is added to the mixture. A
 femfluid  is  a stable magnetically responsive colloidal
 dispersion of superparamagnetic particles.  Adding a ferro-
 fluid to a miscible liquid renders the mixture magnetically
 responsive. Thus, when an oU-soluble, water-insoluble ferro-
 fluid is added to an oil-water mixture, magnetic properties
 are conferred to the oU phase alone. When the mixture is
 passed through a suitable device in which a magnetic field is
 generated, a selective magnetic body force is exerted on the
 oU which is retained  within the device while the  water
 passes through.

   This  method  has  been  applied  to  the problems of
 removing oil from the surface  of the  ocean and to the
 separation of oil in water emulsions. In  this  paper, the
 principles of removing oU from water by magnetic means
 are discussed. Based on these principles, the different types
 of equipment required to separate  an  oil-water emulsion
 and to remove an oil spill from the surface of the ocean are
 considered. Preliminary results  and economic projections
 are then presented.
INTRODUCTION
  Magnetic techniques  are  commonly  used to separate
solid materials, such as iron ore, from a solid mixture or a
liquid  phase. However, magnetic  forces have  not  been
previously  applied to the  separation of mixtures of two
immiscible  liquids because most common liquids exhibit a
weak and insignificant magnetic response. In this paper,
new methods for separation  of oil-water  mixtures are
described. These techniques involve 1) conferring a signifi-
cant magnetic response to one phase of the mixture and 2)
exerting a selective body force  on that  phase within an
appropriately designed separation device.

   As  previously  reported  (1),  the  proper  addition of
colloidal particles of a ferromagnetic solid to a liquid results
in a mixture that has unique physical characteristics. These
materials, known as ferrofluids, combine a strong magnetic
response  with  regular  liquid state  properties that  are
retained even  in a magnetic field. Addition of a ferrofluid
to a miscible  liquid renders the  entire phase magnetically
responsive. Significant magnetic properties can be given to a
specific component of a mixture of immiscible liquids by
adding a ferrofluid which is miscible with that phase alone.
In  particular,  addition  of an oil-soluble, water-insoluble
ferrofluid to an oil-water mixture selectively confers mag-
netic properties to the oil  phase. Oil-water separation is
then accomplished by passing the  treated mixture through a
magnetic  field  generated  within  a  suitable  device. A
selective magnetic body force is exerted on the oil which is
thus retained within the device while water passes through
unhindered. This results in very rapid and selective separa-
tion of the liquid phases, even when one of the phases is
present as a thin surface film or as a fine, stable emulsion.

   In the following sections of this paper, the requirements
imposed upon ferrofluids for oil-water separation and the
parameters influencing magnetic liquid-liquid separation are
first discussed. Two applications of magnetic liquid separa-
tion are then described. These  are the harvesting of a thin
oil slick from  the surface of the  ocean and the essentially
complete  removal  of  emulsified oil  from  tanker ballast
water.

Description  of  Ferrofluids
   Ferrofluids  are stable  colloidal  dispersions of single
domain  ferromagnetic particles that do  not settle  under
gravity or in the presence of a strong magnetic  field. The
                                                      415

-------
416    PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
magnetic response of a ferrofluid is a result of the coupling
of individual magnetic particles with a substantial volume
of the surrounding carrier liquids. Coupling is facilitated by
the presence of a stabilizing agent which can adsorb on the
surface of the  particle and also be  solvated  by  the
surrounding carrier liquid. Consequently, in the presence of
an  applied magnetic  field, the force experienced by each
particle in the direction of the magnetic gradient is also
transmitted to the bulk liquid phase, even at high dilution
ratios. The stabilizing agent serves two other functions:
     a) By  proper choice of stabilizing agent, magnetic
properties can be selectively conferred to a wide range of
liquids which include water, hydrocarbons,  and fluorocar-
bons;
     b) The  solvated  "sheath" is  also  responsible  for  the
stability of the suspension.  The particles in suspension do
not flocculate in a magnetic field because their size is small
enough (about 100A)  for thermal agitation  (Brownian
motion) to exert a  significant dispersive  influence. The
solvated sheath provides short  range  repulsion between
particles.  If  this were  not  accomplished, interparticle
attractive  forces of molecular and magnetic origin would
rapidly lead  to  particle agglomeration  and gross phase
separation.

   The particular ferrofluids  that can  be used  for  oil
recovery application require certain physical and chemical
attributes which are listed in TABLE I. Ferrofluids suitable
for oil recovery  applications,  for example, consist of a

                        TABLE 1

A.    Miscible with a wide  range of petroleum products,
      ranging from light oils to heavy residual fuel oils.
B.    Less dense than sea water.
C.    Insoluble in water.
D.    Do not spread on water.
E.    High magnetic susceptibility.
F.    Low viscosity for ease of application.
G.    Non-toxic and safe to handle.
H.    High flash point.
I.    Must not be a serious pollutant.

colloidal suspension of magnetic iron oxide (either Fe304
or oFejOa) in a light, saturated hydrocarbon oil. They are
thus soluble in oil and insoluble in water. These oil-control
ferrofluids are formulated in  such a way that they have
carefully controlled  spreading characteristics. In most in-
stances, it is desirable for the ferrofluid to have a negative
spreading coefficient against water. This results in minimal
surface activity and eliminates undesirable side effects such
as uncontrolled oil emulsification.

   The magnetic  properties of  ferrofluids  can best  be
described  by  considering the  particles in a ferrofluid to
behave as an assembly of non-interacting magnets (2). In
the absence of a magnetic field, they are randomly oriented
and the ferrofluid has no net moment. In a magnetic field,
the  magnetization  of   a  ferrofluid,  M,  increases  with
increasing field until a  saturation value is  reached. Under
these conditions, the particle moments are aligned in the
direction of the applied field, and the saturation magnetiza-
tion of the ferrofluid, Ms, is given by
                       Ms = eM*                    (1)

where 6 is the volumetric concentration of magnetic colloid
and M* is  the  effective domain magnetization  of the
colloidal particles.  For oil  spill applications, magnetite
concentration, and hence ferrofluid magnetization, is lim-
ited by the  operational requirements that the ferrofluid
should not  sink  in  sea  water. Ferrofluid  density, Pp,  is
expressed as:
                  Pp = ep + pL (1 -e)               (2)

where
   p = density of the magnetic particles, g/cm^
   PL = density of the carried liquid, g/cm2


For a limiting value of Pp =  1.03 g/cm3  (density of sea
water), e =  0.07  for a  kerosene-based (p£ =  0.80 g/cm3)
magnetite (p = 4.Sglcm3) ferrofluid. Such a ferrofluid has
a saturation magnetization from 200 to 300 gauss.

   Typically  the viscosity of ferrofluids is low, i.e., 10 cp at
30°C  for  a  300 gauss  ferrofluid. There  is,  furthermore,
surprisingly little influence of shear rate and magnetic field
on the viscosity (3).

Use of Magnetic Body Forces
To Separate and Control Liquid Phases
   When a ferrofluid is placed in a magnetic field, there
results an induced magnetization within the ferrofluids. If,
in addition,  there is a gradient of the magnetic field, then
there is also a net force  on the ferrofluid. The magnitude  of
the force per unit volume of fluid is  proportional to the
induced magnetization and to the applied field gradient:

                  IM= J_ MVH                (3)
                   F   47T
Approxpiately  designed  magnetic field gradients may be
imposed on a magnetized oil-water mixture in a number of
ways. The mixture may be made to flow in the fringe field
region outside the gap of a magnet (Figure la), in the gap
of a magnet with appropriately shaped pole pieces (Figure
Ib), or in a chamber in which ferromagnetic objects  are
placed to locally alter the field distribution (Figure Ic). By
appropriate device design, the force exerted on a ferrofluid-
oil  mixture at local points within  the device may be made
as high as  103 to 106 times that exerted  by  gravity. This
force accelerates the  ferrofluid toward the zone of maxi-
mum field where it then behaves as though it is restrained
by  a magnetic pressure, PM, which  can be  expressed as
(4,5):

-------
                                                                   RECOVERY WITH MAGNETIC LIQUIDS    417
                          H MdH
                            ~4JT
                                                             la) IN FRINGE FIELD OF MAGNET GAP

                                                                          -GRADIENT FRINGE FIELD
For high fields in which M = Ms,
   The pressures required to dislodge a 100 gauss ferrofluid
from  the  gap of typical hand magnet (H = 2000 oe), a
saturated iron-gapped electromagnet (H = 20,000 oe), and a
super-conducting magnet (H= 100,000 oe) are 0.23 psi, 2.3
psi, and 11.6 psi respectively. These numbers indicate that
it is possible to generate reasonable magnetic pressures, of
the order  of 1  psi,  with standard  electromagnets and
relatively dilute ferrofluids.

Generalized Process Description
   The magnetic oil-water separation process consists of the
following principal steps:
   1)  Rendering the oil phase magnetic by mixing it with
an  oil-based  ferrofluid,  preferably before it comes into
contact with water.
   2) Passing magnetized oil-water mixture in the  vicinity
of a magnetic field source, which results in the  capture of
the oil phase while allowing water to flow by unhindered.
   3)  Removing the  magnetized  oil  from the magnetic
collection device.
   4)  Storing the recovered oil.

   While  the  overall process  is conceptually the same, the
equipment and procedure required for each operation will
vary with the nature  of the specific separation problem.
This is exemplified by the two examples discussed in the
following  sections,  the harvesting of an oil  slick  and the
removal of emulsified oil from ballast water.

Magnetic Oil Spill Harvesting
Background
   Oil  spills  continue  to pose  a constant threat to the
environment. In spite  of the increasing public pressure to
develop improved  oil  slick control methods,  none of the
existing systems developed  to date  are fully satisfactory.
Tables II  and III  list  the  specifications of  what  would
constitute an effective  oil spill harvesting system (6): These
specifications are dictated by the  following considerations:
   1.  An oil slick is essentially a discontinuous layer of ofl
floating on the  surface  of the  sea.  This  film  spreads
spontaneously and rapidly becomes a thin film,  less than 1
mm thick, of extended surface area.
   2.  The composition of an oil slick is a dynamic variable.
At  time of collection, the  oil slick is often a very viscous
fraction of the  initial spill, altered  by exposure to the
environment. The oil will often contain significant amounts
of emulsified water ("chocolate mousse").
   3.  The size of an oil spill  is variable. Some of the better
publicized  incidents involved spills  that contained many
thousands of barrels of oil.
                                                                                               FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL
                                                                                                   VOIDS
                                                           10 IN MAGNET GAP PARTIALLY Fl LLED WITH FERROMAGNETIC OBJECTS


                                                          Figure  1: Generation of Magnetic Field Gradients
                                                            4. Major oil spills, especially in off-shore waters, usually
                                                         occur under adverse environmental conditions.
                                                            5. It is not possible to predict the future occurrences of
                                                         a specific oil spill.
                                                            The principal  drawback  common to many harvesting
                                                          systems which attempt to contain or physically remove the
                                                          oil from the water surface is the lack of selective action on
                                                          the oil film itself. In such cases, any attempt to collect the
                                                          oil will also result in the collection of a much larger amount
                                                          of water, which then must  be removed. The  quantity of
                                                          water  collected, which can exceed the amount of oil picked
                                                          by a few orders of magnitude, determines  the collection
                                                          capacity of the  harvesting system. The exceptions  are
                                                          processes based on  adsorption on oleophilic substrates or
                                                          percolation  of oil through selective barriers (7) which have
                                                          the drawbacks of limited capacity.  Severe materials han-
                                                          dling  problems are  associated with the distribution and
                                                          recovery of sorbents. The objection also applies to use, as
                                                          oil sorbent,  of polystyrene  foam beads coated with iron
                                                          which can be collected with a magnet (8).

                                                          Process Concept
                                                            A conceptual flow diagram  of a generalized  magnetic oil
                                                          spill harvesting system  is presented in  Figure  2. Magnetic
                                                          properties are first imparted  to the floating oil by addition
                                                          of an oil-soluble, water-insoluble, oil-recovery ferrofluid.
                                                          The surface layer of water with the treated oil slick is then
                                                          channeled into the vicinity of the gap of a magnet where  a
                                                          selective magnetic body force is applied to the oil, drawing
                                                          it from the  water into the gap. The gap of the magnet also
                                                          acts  as an accumulator from which the water-free oil can

-------
  418    PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
           FlOW DIAGRAM FOR MAGNETIC OIL SPILL REMOVAL SYS1EM
 Figure 2: Flow Diagram for Magnetic Oil Spil Removal System
 then be withdrawn with standard pumps and transferred to
 suitable storage containers.
 Experimental Demonstration
   A series of simulated oil spill recovery tests were carried
 out to  determine the effects of various factors on  the
 efficiency of separation. These factors included oil type,
 water characteristics (e.g.,  fresh water versus  sea water),
 mixing of  oil and ferrofluid, oil magnetization, magnetic
 field configuration, and flow conditions.

   The largest of these recovery tests were carried out in a
 200  gallon, 57  inch diameter test tank, filled with tap
 water.  The magnetic field source  consisted of a water-
 cooled cofl whose overall dimensions were: o.d. = 6 inches,
 i.d. = 1  inch, length = 3 inches. A maximum field of 2000
 oe was generated in the pp. The cofl was placed horizon-
 tally in the water with its axis at the water line. A suction
 tube was mounted in the center of the cofl with its inlet
 just above  the water level. This tube was connected to a
 vacuum pump to remove ofl which was magnetically drawn
 into the cofl.

   A demonstrative test is pictured in Figure 3. Approxi-
 mately 500 ml of No. 6 fuel  ofl  (density = 0.965 dcm*,
 viscosity =  2000 cp at 30°O was mixed with the 100 ml of
 oil-based ferrofluid (Avco  No. 1111) with a saturation
 magnetization of 100 gauss. The resulting mixture, which
 had a  saturation magnetization of about 16 gauss,  was
 poured on the water surface in the test tank. As shown in
 Figure 3a, it formed an irregular slick  about 30 mils thick,
 VA. ft wide and  3 ft long. Initially the closest edge of this
 slick was about 1 ft from the throat of the cofl (which was
 near the edge of the tank). At this distance, the cofl  had
 only a slight effect on the slick. However, once the edge
 drifted to within about 5 in. of the cofl, the ofl was quickly
 drawn into it (Figure 3b). Within about  20 seconds after
 that the entire slick collected in  the  vicinity of the  cofl.
 Therafter the vacuum pump was turned on and the ofl was
 drawn through the suction tube into  a receptacle (Figure
 3c).  Essentially  all  of the floating magnetized ofl  was
 collected (some adhered to the side of the tank). A small
 amount of ofl was left as a transparent film on the water
about 10 microns thick.
   In addition to the  quasi-static  tests, such  as  the  one
described above, model tests were performed under condi-
tions more representative of the environment of an opera-
tional system. The disruptive forces generated by open sea
conditions could not be obtained in this tank. Therefore,
the  test conditions  were chosen such  that both  the
disruptive forces caused by the motion of the water and the
magnetic capture  forces acting  on  the oil  were smaller in
magnitude than would be operative in a full scale system.
   In these tests, a 27 inch diameter center ring was placed
in the tank, creating a  15 inch wide annular channel. Water
was  pumped around the channel at a surface velocity of
about 5 cm/sec (0.1 knot). In a typical test, Number 6 ofl
was  poured onto the  surface of the water and allowed to
form a  discontinuous, elongated slick less than  0.5  mm
thick. Ferrofluid 1111 was sprayed into the ofl and allowed
to mix, forming an oil-ferrofluid mixture  with an average
saturation  magnetization of  about 20 gauss.  When  the
electromagnet was activated, the magnetic ofl was collected
in the gap  of the magnet and then pumped into a remote
container. Ultimately,  about 97 per cent of the oil floating
in the channel was removed with about an  equal volume of
water. However, of the ofl recovered the first 70 per cent
was collected without the entrainment of free water.

   These tests demonstrated the feasibility of separating a
thin slick of ofl from water with magnetic forces. Magnet-
ized ofl is drawn into  the  gap  of even the relatively weak
magnet  used. This ofl accummulates in the gap, to  the
exclusion of air and water. Once the gap is filled with ofl,
an aspirator intake placed in the magnet gap will draw only
ofl.  Significantly  unproved results are expected with  full
scale systems which would use more powerful magnets.

Development of an Operational System
   An  integrated magnetic ofl spill harvesting system is
basically a  sea-going  magnet  with  auxiliary equipment
required to add ferrofluid to the ofl slick, and with transfer
and  storage facilities for the collected ofl. The possible ways
of utilizing a magnetic ofl spill recovery process are limited
only by the operational requirements (Tables II  and  III)
and  the laws of magnetism and fluid mechanics. Any source
of magnetic field produces a field  distribution, the magni-
tude of which decreases rapidly with distance from  the
source. As a consequence, the magnetic forces produced in
a magnetizable substance (the treated ofl), although large in
the vicinity of the field source,  decay rapidly with distance
from the source.  For significant forces to  be brought into
play, the ofl must be  close to the magnet. Given the large
area  of an ofl slick, this is best accomplished by moving the
magnet through the slick.

   According to Equation (5),  there is a restraining pres-
sure, PM, exerted on a magnetic fluid (ferrofluid and ofl) in
the gap of a magnet,  approximately equal to the product
4°  £, where Mo is the fluid magnetization and Hg is the
field in  the gap. For efficient operation of the collector,
this magnetic pressure must exceed the  sum of the pressures

-------
         RECOVERY WITH MAGNETIC LIQUIDS     419
Figure 3: Photographs of Experimental Magnetic Oil Spill Collection
System.

Figure 3a:  In absence of a magnetic field, a thin slick of No. 6 Fuel
oil previously  treated by addition  of  an oil base ferrofluid. floats
freely on water in a 2 meter pool. The oil contains 19t magnetite by
volume.

Figure 3b:  The electromagnet is turned on. The oil is diawn into the
gap of the  magnet by the fringe field. The oil is concentrated in the
annular gap where the field is 2000 oe.

Figure 3c:  Oil is separated from  the gap into a receiving bottle
outside the pool. Since  the entrance of the suction pipe is placed in
the gap above the water line  there is no carry-off water as would
occur in standard skimming systems.
which  tend  to dislodge  the  oil  from  the  gap.  These
pressures are  1) the stagnation pressure due to the relative
velocity,  V, between the collector and the oil slick (VipK2,
P *  1 glcrn3); and 2) the hydrostatic head, pgh,  of water
above the magnet gap, e.g., from waves impinging on the
collector, where h is  the instantaneous peak difference in
water level between the magnet gap and the surrounding sea
surface. The  conditions  which must be  met  to prevent
magnetized oil  from being dislodged from the  gap due to
these pressures can be expressed as follows:
MoHg
 4?r
                             + pgh
(6)

-------
 420   PHYSICAL REMOVAL .
                       TABLE 2

 A.    Rapid oil recovery rate
 B.    Complete removal of oil from the water surface
 C.    Minimum amounts of water entering each unit process
 D.    Minimum  influence of water motion and  waves on
       collection  efficiency
 E.    Minimum amount of auxiliary eqipment
 F.    Reject  floating solids  of a size which will interfere
       with the efficiency of or damage the  recovery system
 G.    High mobility and maneuverability
 H.    Compatibility with marine life
 I.     Reasonable first cost
 J.     Low operating expense
 K.    Minimum maintenance requirements
 L.    Maximum ease and speed of repairs
 M.    Readily available replacement parts
 N.    System independent of physical properties of oil.
                       TABLE 3
 ENVIRONMENTAL
   CONDITIONS
      Wave Height
      Wind Velocity
      Current Velocity

 OPERATIONAL
  REQUIREMENTS
 Slick Thickness
 Oil Collection Rate
 Water Content of
  Collected Oil
 Residual Oil in
   Effluent Water
Types of Oil
Protected
 Waters


  2ft.
 20mph
  6 Knot
                                              Open
                                             Waters
     5ft.
    30mph
     2 Knot
< 1.5 mm      < 1.5 mm
3000gal/hr.    10,000 gal/hr.
<10mg/l
Light Diesel-
Heavy Asphalt
<10mg/l
Light Diesel-
Bunker C
                  iron. The magnetic pressure corresponding to these limits is
                  approximately 0.5  atm (7  psi).  This  is equal to  the
                  stagnation pressure of a 20 knot current or the hydraulic
                  head of 15  ft of water. With the rapid development of
                  economical superconducting magnets, capable  of generating
                  fields larger by one order of magnitude, a limiting magnetic
                  pressure of 5 atmospheres may be feasible in the future.
                    Under operational conditions, lower magnetic pressures
                  will  be obtained, if only because the ferrofluid is diluted
                  with the  oil to  be  removed. Since  the ferrofluid  is a
                  consumable additive, logistic  and economic considerations
                  make it desirable  to use the minimum amount of ferrofluid
                  necessary to achieve efficient harvesting especially for large
                  spills at sea. The implications of the above are:
                    1. The  strongest  possible  magnet should be used  as a
                  collector.
                    2. The  amount of ferrofluid required to achieve com-
                  plete harvesting will  depend on the operating environment.

                  • Many configurations for  a magnetic  collection system
                  are conceivable because a magnetic field  can be oriented in
                  any  desired direction and can also be deployed either at the
                  waterUne or underneath the surface. Two examples of inte-
                  grated magnetic harvesting systems  are presented,  the first,
                 more suitable for small spills in  protected   waters,  the
                 second for  large spills in the open sea. In addition to these
                 representative integrated  designs, a magnetic  oil collector
                 could be used as a sub-system of existing collection systems
                 in order to augment the oil collection capacity and improve
                 their efficiency.
TO COLLECTION PUMPS
                                                                         WATER OUTLET
                                                           Figure 4: Cross-Section of Magnetic Oil Collector
   It  is  useful to consider the limiting capabilities of a-
magnetic collection system in terms of equivalent velocity
and wave height.  The maximum magnetization of an oil
slick will be  that of undiluted ferrofluid whose density is
equal  to that  of sea  water.  As discussed in  a  previous
section, such  a ferrofluid will  have  a magnetization as
high as 300 gauss. The maximum gap field economically
obtainable  with current  state-of-the-art designs is 20,000
oe, this limit being imposed by the magnetic saturation of
                                  The first example (shown in Figure 4) is  a collector
                                magnet floated on twin  pontoons, and propelled through
                                the  oil slick by  an  auxiliary vessel. The pontoons are
                                designed to keep  the collection gap in close proximity to
                                the water surface. A permanent magnet is presented in the
                                sketch for purposes of simplicity. However, in practice, an
                                electromagnet would  be  used.  Flexible suction  pipes lead
                                from the  collection  pp to  an oil  pump, which  can  be
                                mounted  on the  magnet. Flexible discharge  pipes lead

-------
                                                                      RECOVERY WITH MAGNETIC LIQUIDS   421
 either to a  tank on board  the  propelling vessel or to an
 auxiliary barge.

    As the magnetic  collector traverses a previously  mag-
 netized oil slick  at a velocity, V, there will be a diversion of
 the lower layers  of water underneath the magnet while the
 surface  layer  of oil  and water approach the  gap. The
 magnetic oil is captured by the magnetic field and collects
 on the pole  faces. Any water which initially passes through
 the gap is unaffected by the field and is discharged from the
 bottom  and sides of the collector. The oil  collected at the
 pole  faces accumulates until it fills the gap; the water flow
 subsequently by-passing the  completely filled  gap. The
 magnetic pressure  restrains the oil against kinetic head of
 flowing  liquid.  Once  the gap is filled,  water-free oil  is
 continuously removed from  the gap by applying suction
 from the oil  pump.

    Under the action  of waves and the bobbing motion of
 the collector in the sea, the  magnet gap will oscillate about
 the water line. When the gap lies above the water line, oil is
 Figure 5: Oil Spill Harvester (Cross-section)

 dammed up against the lower part of the leading edge of
 the collector with  water  flowing under the harvester. This
 water  flow tends to drag the  dammed oil  with it due to
 viscous drag of  the  water on the oil. The oil is retained
 against the drag forces by the fringe field of the magnet
 which tends to draw this oil into the gap. Although  this
 magnetic force is lower than that  experienced  by the oil in
 the gap, the dislodging force is also lower and the magnetic
 forces resist the tendency  for oil  to  pass underneath the
 magnet.

   When the  magnet gap  is below the surface,  .the oil
 delivered to the magnetic  collector will tend to dam up
 against the upper leading edge of the magnet.  The leakage
 field  around  the sides  of the magnet will  enhance  the
 viscous drag forces and the oil will be rapidly drawn into
 the gap. This reduces the tendency for the oil to splash over
the top of the magnet. The most critical condition exists
when there is an instantaneous change in the  level of  the
water outside  the collector and no  change in  the level of
water inside the magnet, as would occur with an impinging
wave. This  results in dislodged pressure proportional to the
difference  in hydrostatic head, h. This hydrastatic  head
across  the gap will be primarily a function of the ability of
 the collector to follow wave induced variations at the ocean
                                                             Figure 6: Oil Spill Harvester (Plan View)
surface.  If  the frequency  of the waves  is less  than  the
natural bobbing frequency of the collector, then it will be
able to respond to these relatively slow variations of surface
height and  will remain  at  the  ocean surface. Waves with
amplitudes greater than 1 ft have frequencies of less than V4
sec (9). The bobbing frequency,/j, of the collector is given
here by the following equation:
                   fb =
                          -
                        27T
(7)
where g is the acceleration of gravity and dl is the effective
draft of the collector. If d1 < 3 ft then/j > VL sec.

   By continuity, the volumetric flow rate of oil collected,
Qo, is related to the velocity of the magnet relative to the
oil by the following equation:
                     Qo  =  VtL                   (8)

where  t is  the thickness of  the  oil slick  and L  is  the
collection length.

Substituting for V in expression (6) results in the following
expression:
                           Qo
           MoHg    1
            4?r      2
                           Lt
                                     pgh
(9)
To  meet  the  specifications for protected waters listed in
Table III (Qo  = 3000 gals/hr., wave height = 2 ft), assuming
that Hg =  20000 oe, L = 6 ft, and that h     = 1 ft,  the
minimum oil slick magnetization required for capture is 30
gauss. An oil slick with a  magnetization of 50 gauss would

-------
 422 ,  PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
 be captured even if the collector were subjected to the full
 height of the waves. At this collection rate, the harvester
 would move through the slick at 3 knots.

    The size of the magnet is principally determined by the
 gap field, assumed to be 20,000 oe, and the volume of the
 gap.  The volume  of the gap should be larger  than  the
 volume of ofl collected in the period of time /j,/2 in order
 to prevent water from entering into the suction pipes. For
 Qo = 3000 gals/hr and fj, =  0.5  sec, this minimum gap
 volume is SO in3. Since it was assumed that the magnet has
 a collection length of 6 ft (72 in.) the magnet would have a
 gap volume of 72 hi3 with only a one inch square gap. This
 arrangement will require a magnet  with an overall volume
 of approximately 30 ft3 (2 ft high  x 2.5 deep x 6 ft long).
 It would weigh approximately  10000 Ibs, and require a
 flotation equivalent to  the  displacement  of 150 ft3 of
 water.

    A promising variation of this magnet configuration is a
 "magnetic ofl broom" (TM) presently under development.
 This is a smaller, lighter and thus more maneuverable device
 capable of being handled by one  man from a small boat. It
 is  designed to clean up oil spills which occur at docking
 facilities due to the accidental spillage of small quantities of
 oil. This  device for example  would be able to operate in
 presently inaccessable areas such as underneath piers, or
 around wooden or concrete pilings.

    A promising prototype design for high rate collection in
 open waters is a unique T-shaped vessel, as shown in Figures
 5 and  6. This "spill harvester" has an oil counter gap in the
 bottom of the hull in the broad leading edge of the vessel.
 In this configuration, the magnetic collector is held in
 continuous contact with the magnetic ofl which is forced to
 go underneath the hull of the vessel.  The previously
 magnetized ofl, which has a nominal magnetization of 50
 gauss is drawn into the collection gap, the region of highest
 magnetic  field. As in the floating collector of the previous
 example,  a conventional pumping system can withdraw the
 ofl and send it along to a storage  container in the ship's
 hold.

   The hydraulic head, which naturally occurs at the gap,
 can flood the magnet gap and water can be drawn into the
 pumping/storage system, if there  are lapses in the ofl film,
 or if the ofl is removed too rapidly  from the gap. To offset
 this, a small, sealed air chamber  is  located directly above
 the gap which provides a slight over pressure (about 0.4 psi) •
 at the  upper ofl surface. This pressure, which is ordinarily
 offset  by  the magnetic pressure developed in the ferrofluid-
 oil mixture, wfll keep water from the ofl suction ports.

   The magnetic collector of the proposed system is made
up  of 10 electromagnet modules joined together. Each
magnet module has pole pieces shaped to provide a 20,000
oersted magnetic field across a 3 cm pp, and each contains
suction tubes  which carry the  oil from  the gap to  a
self-priming pump.  The  magnets  are  mounted  in  the
 non-magnetized aluminum hull (nominally 9 inches below
 the water surface) and extend the width of the 20-foot hull.
 The power necessary to  drive  the magnet is 28.8 KW per
 module or about 288 KW total. Power is provided by a 300
 KW generator.

    The  basic system would contain four modules  which
 could be carried on deck of a mother ship, or disassembled
 for air transport in a large cargo plane. The system could be
 deployed at the ofl  spill site either as a towed  unit or a
 self-propelled craft. The system provides for intermediate
 storage  of recovered ofl and has provisions for ofl transfer
 to supporting vessels. It is an integrated system designed to
 operate  at up to 6 knots. This  corresponds to a harvesting
 rate of  16 acres per  hour. Assuming an ofl thickness of 1
 mm, this is equivalent to 12,500 gallons per hour.

   The ferrofluid, which is added to the ofl slick, must float
 on water. This ferrofluid is a relatively dilute suspension of
 magnetite (7 vol%) in a  light  ofl. In order to minimize
 storage and logistic problems associated with responding to
 ofl spills, which may occur anywhere and at any  time,
 storage  and  shipment of  a  concentrated ferrofluid is
 envisioned.  This  concentrate  is  a ferrofluid with  the
 minimum amount  of diluent   liquid  needed  to obtain
 reasonable flow  properties. It is also a much denser liquid.
 This concentrated ferrofluid would contain four  times as
 much  magnetite and would be  twice  as  dense as  the
 operational fluid. It would be diluted, at the site of the spill
 or the nearest port, with a locally available diluent, which
 could be kerosene, No. 2 Fuel Ofl, or even ofl recovered
 from the spill.


   The best method of adding ferrofluid to the oil  spill is at
 the source, such as a well head or a grounded tanker. When
 this is not feasible, the ferrofluid, then,  is best dispensed
 from a second boat proceeding  the harvester. It could also
 be dispensed from an aircraft or helicopter in case of a large
 spill at sea, or by a portable spraying unit in case  of a very
 small spill.

   In a  typical  case,  the  ferrofluid is added to  the slick
 metering it into a set of high speed water streams, similar to
 the stream of a  fire nozzle which would provide relatively
 uniform  coverage of the slick. These water jets enhance the
 mixing of the ferrofluid  with  the ofl. Further mixing is
 obtained by  allowing a certain  distance  between  the
 spraying boat and the harvester. Typically, one minute is
 considered to be sufficient  time to obtain the degree of
 mixing  of the  ofl and ferrofluid  required for  efficient
 harvesting. The mixing time is a strong function of sea state
 and viscosity of the ofl; the one minute criterion is based on
 the time needed  to provide good mixing in a low viscosity
 ofl in a  sea-state. With the high viscosity  oils, the mixing
 need not be as thorough since the consistency of the ofl has
 been found to result in favorable side effect In this case,
 the magnetic fractions of a slick drag the ferrofluid free
parts with them into the collector.

-------
                                                                     RECOVERY WITH MAGNETIC LIQUIDS   423
   The nominal quantity of feirofluid that is added is one
gallon of 300 gauss  ferrofluid to five  gallons of oil. This
corresponds to the addition of one gallon of concentrated
ferrofluid to 20 gallons of oil. Since the thickness of the
slick and  sea state  are  not constant, the  flow rate  of
ferrofluid  will be controlled  by  the efficiency of  the
harvester under operating conditions, i.e., the detection of
significant quantities  of oil downstream of the magnet.

   Less  ferrofluid will be required  with  lower collection
rates and in lower sea state. In some instances, where the oil
spill can be used as a diluent, as in the case of a low density
oil, it  is  possible  to recycle the  ferrofluid.  A regular
ferrofluid would be  used to begin the clean-up operation.
However, after the initial clean-up had begun, the recovered
oil (saturation magnetization of about 50 gauss) could be
mixed with ferrofluid concentrate to achieve the 200-300
gauss saturation magnetization of ferrofluid and be recycled
to recover the remainder of the slick.

   The principal advantage offered by the magnetic oil spill
harvesting process described above is its ability to collect a
thin slick of oil at an acceptable rate with little entrainment
of water.  The ability to exert a  positive, selective body
force on the oil, at a finite distance away from the magnet,
makes essentially total removal of the oil feasible.

   The potential of ecological damage is minimal with this
process  since  the   additive is removed  with oil.  Any
ferrofluid  left in the water does not  constitute a serious
pollutant inasmuch  as  the  carrier  is  volatile enough to
evaporate  in  time.   Ferrofluids have been prepared with
biodegradable stabilizing  agents. The magnetic particles are
the only true residue and will form traces of a harmless
inorganic addition to the silt on the  ocean, lake or river
bottom.

   Since ferrofluids are  liquid, they can be easily handled
and dispensed, lending to mechanization of the operation.
Minimal on-site labor will be required. The recovered oil
can often  be used  as fuel  or reprocessed in a refinery.
Furthermore,  a relatively small amount of magnetic mate-
rial is required to obtain oil removal.  It  should be noted
that the cost  of the raw materials for a ferrofluid are less
than 10«/lb. All these factors result in projected recovery
costs  of between $0.25 and $1.00 per gallon  of oil
recovered, depending on the particulars of the slick, for a
fully operational system. These costs are significantly lower
than current, less effective systems.

Magnetic Separation of Oil-Water Emulsions
Background
   The water  borne  commercial fleets are powered almost
exclusively by ofl, and perhaps one vessel in five is also
engaged in transporting it. A major source of oil pollution
of the seas occurs as a result of the  deballasting of vessels,
the cleaning of ofl tanks and the  pumping of bilge water
which collects in the  below decks areas of vessels and which
usually becomes mixed with these waste  oils. According to
a recent survey (10), normal maritime traffic accounts for
about  50%  of the  direct oil losses in the world's waters.
This oil is usually discharged as a dilute emulsion of fine oil
droplets (less than 10/u diameter)  in water. Many  major
tanker operators are  applying improved operational meth-
ods, such as the  load  on top procedure and  installing
mechanical shipboard oil-water separators. Even with these
methods, however,  if the oil  is  suspended as a  stable
emulsion, it  is  not  presently  feasible  to have a  water
effluent  that meets  present international standards (less
than 100 mg oil/liter),  much  less  some of the stringent
standards that are expected in the future (less than  10 mg
oil/liter). The principles of magnetic liquid separation used
to harvest a  thin oil slick, are also applicable to the problem
of  separating stable  oil  in water  emulsions.  As will  be
discussed, essentially  total removal of oil is obtained with
the addition of only small amounts of ferrofluid  to the oil
phase, even  at high volumetric flow rates of the emulsion
through a suitable magnetic separator.

Separation Principle
   In this novel magnetic process for oil/water separation, a
ferrofluid miscible with  one of the phases, usually the oil
phase,  is added  to. the mixture.  Thus, when  an  oil
soluble/water insoluble ferrofluid is added to an oil/water
mixture, magnetic properties are conferred to the oil phase
alone.  When  the  emulsion is  passed through a bed  of
magnetic material in which a magnetic field is generated, a
selective magnetic  body force is exerted  on the oil. The oil
is  thus retained within the device  while the water  passes
through. This has proven to  be a very effective way of
separating  even very fine, non-coalescable oil  in  water
emulsions. It has been possible to obtain reductions in oil
concentration of  three  to four orders of magnitude in
residence times of the order of 10 seconds.

   A typical  feed would be an emulsion of crude oil in
water  which contained 1% to 5% oil, present  as  stable
droplets with a volume mean particle diameter of 4 micron.
Even the addition of 0.1% magnetite  colloid to  the  oil
results in its essentially total removal (less than  10 ppm oil)
from the  water.  A  typical  bed  for  these applications
consists of fine powders or screens of a ferromagnetic metal
such as iron, cobalt or 400 series  stainless steel  in  the
presence of an externally applied field of 1000 to 5000 oe.
hi  comparison, centrifuging this  emulsion in a standard
2000 g  laboratory centrifuge for 2 hours results in little
separation since the  density of the oil is close to  that of
water. In this instance, based on  a  residence  time of 10
seconds, the magnetic separation can be considered as  the
static  equivalent  of 1,000,000  g  centrifuge.  A  small
hand-held demonstration unit is shown in Figure 7.
Experiments
   The  separation of suspended oil  from water is being
studied in  a  laboratory  magnetic  oil-water  separation
system  which  consists  of a separation cell  filled  with
magnetic packing placed in an appropriate magnetic field

-------
  424    PHYSICAL REMOVAL.
 Figure 7: Demonstration  of Magnetic  Liquid  Separation.
 An 1% emulsion of magnetic crude oil (magnetization of 10
 gauss) is shown in Tube 2. The emulsion is passed through a
 small magnetic  separator cell, placed in the gap  of the hand
 magnet. The clear effluent (< 10 ppm oil) is shown in Tube
 1. Tube 3 contains distilled water for comparison.

 source, and the necessary  reservoirs, pumps, flowmeters,
 gages and collection system, as shown in  Figure 8.

    The results  of some typical tests being performed are
 presented here. A stable non-coalesable  emulsion of kero-
 sene in water, stabilized by the addition of Tween 80 (Atlas
 Chemical Co.),  was prepared in a high speed blender.  This
 kerosene  had a magnetization of  10 gauss.  As shown in
 Figure 9, all the droplets in suspension were smaller than 10
 microns  and had no tendency  to coalesce, based  on
 sequential particle size measurements taken over a 25 hour
 time span. The emulsion was pumped through a packed bed
 of ferromagnetic powder,  placed in the gap of an electro-
 magnet, at  different flow  rates.  The effluent water was
 collected  sequentially. The oil concentration of the consec-
 utive samples was measured by gas chromatography, gener-
 ating breakthrough curves  typical of adsorption processes.
                                                              99.9
                                                              99.8
    2

    1

   0.5

   0.2
   0.1
  0.05

                                                                                                     I   I  I  I  I  I I
                    DROPLET DIAMETER Id) cm < 10
Figure 8: Schematic of Experimental Arrangement
Figure  9:  Droplet  Size  Distribution  for  Standard Tween 80
Stabilized Kerosene Emulsions.

These curves are presented in Figure 10. In this figure, the
oil concentration of the effluent from the column is plotted
against the ratio of the cumulative volume of the oil feed to
the bed void volume.  This ratio is directly proportional to
time since inlet oil concentration and feed rate were kept
constant. Note  that before breakthrough, the oil content of
the effluent is 3 to  4  orders of magnitude smaller than the
oil content of the feed emulsion.  The scatter in the data is
due  to  the  fact  that 10 ppm approached the limit of
resolution of  the  analytical method. Note also  that the
volumetric flow rate is high, ranging from over 60 to 300
bed volumes/hr.

   After saturation was  obtained, the magnetic field was
turned off and concentrated oil in the bed was released into
the exit stream by the  incoming emulsion. The first flush
samples were  concentrated oil  in  water emulsions that
contained from 20% to  over 70% of oil on a volume basis.
The oil concentration of the outlet then decayed with time
until the outlet concentration of oil was  equal  to  the oil
concentration  of  the inlet  emulsion.  This  occured  by
passing less than five bed void volumes of feed emulsion.

Oil Removal from Tanker Ballast Water
   The  magnetic  separation technique  appears to  have
application  to a  wide  variety  of separation  problems
encountered  by the  petroleum industry, including  both

-------
                                                                        RECOVERY WITH MAGNETIC LIQUIDS     425
       g
       s
       I
       3
       o
       O 10"

       u
BED VOLUME 13
FLUID MAG. 10
3
»""
                       0.1         0.10
                           OIL VOLUME THROUGH BED
                             BED VOID VOLUME
Figure 10: Magnetic Oil Removal with a Nor.-Coalescable Emulsion.
             EMPTY TANK
         WITH OIL COATED WALLS
NOMINAL OIL CONTENT = 0.17. OF TANK CAPACITY
marine  and industrially-based oil  emulsions,  where initial
access to  the  two immiscible phases  is available  before
emulsion  formation. An obvious  example  is oil removal
from  emulsions formed during "load on top" procedures
for cleaning tanker  holds as well as  from  ballast water
emulsions formed within tanker holds when this procedure
is not used.

   As  an  example,  consider  oil-water  separation  from
tanker  ballast  water emulsions  (See  Figure  11).  After
unloading, the  oil clinging to the sides of a  hold is sprayed
with jets  of ferrofluid. The hold  is then  cleaned  and/or
filled  as in normal operation. During transit (or at port), the
resulting emulsion (typically  one per cent oil) is processed
through one of two units operating in parallel  similar to the
magnetic  device  described  above.  Extensive bench-scale
testing  shows  that the water effluent  will  meet or better
existing and proposed  standards (less  than 100 ppm oil).
After a period of time, depending upon device  size, flow
rate and ferrofluid-oil ratio, the device  will  "saturate" and
the flow  is diverted  to  the second unit. At this point, the
                                                       FERROFLUID STORAGE
                    MIXING SPRAY NOZZLE
            MAGNETIZATION OF RESIDUAL
            OIL IN TANK BY MIXING WITH
                  FERROFLUID
                                                                     LEGEND
                                                                    XO  -  OPEN VALVE
                                                                    Xc  -  CLOSED VALVE
                                                                    Q   -  ON BOARD OIL TRANSFER PUMP
       BALLASTING OF TANK WITH SEA WATER
        FORMATION OF OIL-WATER EMULSION
                                                  SEA WATER
                                                                     MAGNETIC SEPARATORS
                                                                   BED  A             BED  B
                                                                 ON STREAM       REGENERATING
                                                                     I	T	
                                                                     i
                                   SEA WATER FOR BACK FLUSH
                                                                                              (TO CLEAN TANK OR DISCHARGE)
             DE-OILING OF BALLAST WATER
                                                                                 SLOP TANK
                                                                                 FOR CONCENTRATED
                                                                                 OIL/WATER EMULSION
                         Figure 11:  Process Description for Magnetic  De-Oiling of Ballast! Water.

-------
426    PHYSICAL REMOVAL ...
ballast water emulsions encountered with crude and fuel
oils; hence, it represents an overly conservative estimate.)

   Total capital cost, including auxiliary pumps and instru-
mentation for a fully automated unit is estimated to be less
than $100,000. Ferrofluid will be required in the ratio of 1
part to  ISO parts oil. At a projected price  of $1.00 per
gallon, a total operating cost will be less than one cent per
gallon of  oil processed.  This is  significantly less than
prevailing price of crude oil which is SB/barrel or roughly
 7« per gallon. Theoretical and experimental studies show
that, to a good approximation,
                  emulsion flow rate _
                  ferrofluid-oil ratio
= constant
if all other variables are fixed. Hence, the same device could
operate at 500 gpm with a 1:30 ferrofluid-oil ratio at an
operating cost of 3<  per  gallon of  oil.  The  optimum
device is "regenerated" by shutting off the magnetic field.
The effluent removed during this operation will contain up
to 50-80% oil as well as other particulates such as wax,
sand,  etc. This concentrated emulsion  is stored in a small
slop tank. It may also be reprocessed in a smaller device or
easily broken  by conventional means. The device is now
ready for the next cycle.

  Projected system economics for a 100 gpm system are
based upon laboratory bench-scale experiments with a fine,
highly stable emulsion containing a volume-mean diameter
of about  4.5 microns. The following estimates are based
upon  virtually absolute removal of all droplets larger than
about 1.5 microns. (Note that this is significantly finer than
operating conditions  would depend upon an economic
trade-off between larger equipment (greater throughput)
                       with lower ferrofluid usage and smaller equipment (hence
                       lower capital cost) with greater ferrofluid usage and higher
                       operating cost.

                          It is useful  to  compare the projected costs of the two
                       magnetic separation processes described above. These are
                       essentially parallel systems which  consider the removal of
                       oil from water before contact with the ocean, and after
                       contact  with the  ocean. This comparison exemplifies the
                       well worn saying, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound
                       of cure."
 REFERENCES
   1. Kaiser, R., and G. Miskolczy, I.E.E.E. Trans. Mag-
netics, MAG-6, (No. 3), 694 (Sept. 1970).
   2. Kaiser, R., and G. Miskolczy, J. Applied Physics, 41,
 1064 (1970).
   3. Rosenweig, R.E., R.  Kaiser and G.  Miskolczy, /.
Colloid Interface Science, 29,680(1969).
   4. Neuringer,  J.,  and  R.E. Rosensweig,  Physics of
Fluids, 27,1927 (1964).
   5. Rosensweig, R.E., A/.A/4./., 4,1751 (1966).
   6. U.S.EJ.A., W.Q.O.,  "Oil Recovery System  Using
Sorbent  Material" (RTP) WA  71-531, Washingon, D.C.
20242, Nov. 18,1970.
   7. Graham,  DJ., Johnson, R.L.,  and  Bhuta,  P.G., as
reported in Product Engineering, p. 49, March 1,1971.
   8. Turbeville, J.E., as reported in Offshore Technology,
August 1970.
   9. Wiegel, R.L., "Oceanographical  Engineering", p. 205,
Prentice-Hall, Inc., New York, 1964.
   10.  Anon., "Man's Impact on the Global Environment",
p. 267, The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1970.

-------
PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
          Chairman: P. Roedet
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric
             Administration

       Co-Chainnan:  R. T. Dewling
      Environmental Protection Agency

-------
                   SOME  EFFECTS   OF  OIL  POLLUTION  IN
                    AAILFORD  HAVEN,  UNITED  KINGDOM
                                                 E. B. Cowell
                                   Field Studies Council, Orielton Field Centre
ABSTRACT

  Research on the biological effects of oil pollution and
detergent cleaning operations within the port of Mttford
Haven  is  described.  Observations  made  on  accidental
pillages, experimental field spillages and laboratory investi-
gations confirm that both salt marsh communities and
rocky shores do normally recover from oil pollution acci-
dents  but that shore  cleaning with emulsifiers  can  do
serious damage if misused, although recovery follows. The
effects of some new emulsifiers which are up to 1000X less
toxic are discussed.
  Chronic pollution damage from refinery discharges has
been identified both in Milford Haven and elsewhere, but it
has  been shown that these effects are eliminated if the
outfall pipes  are located offshore in locations of good
dispersion and currents.
  Long term surveys reveal  no widespread long term
damage to the Fauna and Flora of Milford Haven attribut-
able to the development of the oil port.

INTRODUCTION

  Britain has few ports capable of handling super tankers.
Milford Haven, even though it lay in the heart of the newly
formed Pembrokeshire National Park filled  the  require-
ments so well  that in 1960 two major oil companies opened
marine terminals there: one serves its  own refinery and the
other  receives and  stores crude  oil  for transmission to
IJandarcy refinery near Swansea by a 63 mile pipeline. By
1970 the Haven had become Britain's largest oil port, with
a total of 40  million tons handled annually. Two further
references have been built each with its own terminal and
the building of a fourth refinery has just begun. Tankers of
more than 200,000 tons can be accepted in the port.
   The development of Milford Haven as an oil port has
resulted in fairly frequent  spillages of oil. Spillage  fre-
quency is likely to rise as the port expands although the
spillage  rate per ton handled has in  fact fallen as time
proceeds (Dudley 1970).
             1966         .0002%
             1967         .0014%
             1968         .0002%
             1969         .0001%

   The present anti-pollution organization of Milford Haven
is extremely  efficient but several spillages  do reach  the
shores each year. Smaller spills are kept off the shores by a
unique system. The oil companies and the Milford Haven
Conservancy Board (the harbour authority) jointly operate
a launch equipped with spray booms and tanks of emulsi-
fier (dispersant). This craft goes into operation as soon as a
slick is sighted, dispersing the oil efficiently  and economi-
cally. In the event of large spillages up to five launches can
be brought into action and  recently a large tug boat has
been used  equipped with spray booms and towing the 'five
barred' gate  arrangement designed by the Ministry  of
Technology, Warren Springs Laboratory. This equipment is
used to agitate the treated water in the wake of the ship.
An average of 2,500 gallons of emulsifier are used within
the port each month, the responsibility for oil spillages is
argued out after the  event  and if the culprit cannot be
found, the cost of the cleaning operation is shared.
   Until late 1970 the emulsifier used was the highly toxic
B.P.  1002, or its equivalents. Recently  only the newly B.P.
1100 has been used which is almost a 1000X less toxic  to
most littoral animals (Crapp 1970).
   This paper reports  work done by the research team  of
the Field  Studies Council Oil Pollution Research Unit,
Orielton, Pembroke, South Wales, to determine the biologi-
                                                    429

-------
 430   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
  cal and ecological effects of the pollution of Milford Haven
  by oil and the consequences of the cleaning operations that
  are used. The research has been divided into three sections.
  The first under J. M. Baker is on the effects of oil pollution
  and shore  cleaning on salt-marsh communities, the second
  by G. B. Crapp is on  the effects on rocky shores, while the
  thud under S. M. Ottway is on the effects of oils on rock
  pools. I have been responsible for some of the  direct
  research and for its general direction.


 THE EFFECTS OF  SINGLE OIL
       SPILLAGES ON SALT MARSHES

    In Britain, salt marsh communities colonise the mudflats
 of sheltered shores and tidal estuaries between Mean High
 Water  Neap tide levels  (MHWN)  and Mean  High Water
 Spring (MHWS). These marshes are the feeding grounds of
 wild  fowl,  waders  and swans and  are  vital for  the
 maintenance  and recovery from  oil  pollution of the
 populations of many bird species. They are also involved in
 the energy flow systems of related offshore mudflats and
 in  maintaining estuarine production (Odum & Smalley
 19S9,  Odum 1961, Teal  1962).  Salt  marshes are  also
 economically important  since they stabilise and raise the ,
 levels  of mudflats and  make land available for sea defence
 and land reclammation (Allen 1930, Ranwell 1967).

 METHODS

   Observations following oil spills were made at Milford
 Haven, S. W. Wales, by Cowell 1969, Baker 1970, Cowell &
 Baker 1969, and experimental simulated oil pollution has
 been done by spraying at different times of year. Experi-
 mental emulsifier cleaning has also been tried. Salt marsh
 turves kept in an unheated greenhouse have been used for
 comparing the effects of different oil fractions and volumes
 and emulsifiers. Changes in vegetation were studied by
 cover  estimations using a points frame (Tiver & Crocker
 1949)  while  productivity  measurements as dry weight;
 population  counts  and infra red photography  were  also
 used.

 RESULTS

   Oil adheres firmly to the plants and very little is washed
 off  during  successive  tides. Under oil films,  leaves may
 remain green initially but eventually yellow and die. Plants,
 however, recover by  producing new shoots, a few of which
 can usually be seen within 3 weeks of pollution unless large
 quantities of oil have soaked into the plant bases and soil.
 Seedlings and annuals rarely recover  directly.  In the long
 term, however, recovery  from crude oil spillages has been
 observed many times. (Buck & Harrison 1967, Ranwell
 1968, Smith 1968, Stebbings 1968, Cowell & Baker 1969).
 The evidence from  observations of  both accidental and
 experimental spillages is  that marshes  recover well  from
 single oil spillages. A badly oiled marsh at Bentlass on the
Pembroke River  which was severely  damaged  after the
Chryssi P.  Goulandris  tanker  accident  in  1967 (Cowell
 1969) was virtually completely recovered two years later
 (Cowell & Baker 1969).
   Experimental work has shown that oil toxicity varies
 widely with the type of oil spilled, being higher where the
 aromatic  content  is high especially the fractions boiling
 below 149°C (Ottway 1970).
   Damage to salt marsh plants from crude oil also varies
 with season, being less severe in winter spillages than in
 spillages occurring in spring and early summer.

 SINGLE SPILLAGES ON ROCKY SHORES

   The effects of spillages on the intertidal zone of rocky
 shores were investigated experimentally using simulated
 spillages in the field and by following the changes occurring
 in the aftermath of accidental  spillages. Recordings taken
 were comprehensive and included those made using the
 Crisp and Southward Abundance scale (1958), the modifi-
 cation of  this  by  Ballantine  (1961) and  counts and
 measurements of length size frequency distributions in the
 case of Patella spp. (Limpets) and Balanus and Chthamalus
 spp. (Barnacles) Crapp 1969, Crapp 1970.
   The field trials snowed that most littoral species are
 resistant  to toxic oils, even when spilt at intervals of one
 month. Some littoral gastropod snails,  notably Littorina
 neritoides L., L. saxatilis and L. obtusata, are affected by
 thicker oils. These are all small  species and a thick layer of
 oil on the shell effectively increases the volume and mass of
 the animal. When this occurrs wave action is more likely to
 dislodge it from the rock.
   Laboratory experiments on  the toxicity  of oils per-
 formed by Ottway (1970) revealed wide variation in the
 toxicities of different oils and oil fractions using standard-
 ised tests described by Crapp (1970) and Ottway (1970).
 High mortalities recorded in the laboratory were not found
 under  field conditions due  to the  evaporation of many
 toxic low boiling aromatics and the  dilution of those
 fractions which pass into solution. Work on the toxicity of
 soluble fractions is continuing but so far only low toxicities
 are recorded from solutions  made under  simulated  field
 conditions using vented containers.

CHRONIC POLLUSION AND
     SUCCESSIVE SPILLAGES

   Cowell  (1970)  has described two  possible forms  of
chronic oil pollution. Firstly, that resulting from successive
spillages occurring at a frequency greater than that allowing
complete recovery,  and secondly that  resulting from the
continuous discharge of low levels of oil in effluents such as
those from refinery outfalls, ballast water treatment plants,
etc.

 Successive Spillages
   On salt marshes  successive  spillages were studied by
 Baker (1970). Plots sited on  three different types of salt
 marsh community  were set up both at Bentlass,  Milford
 Haven and marshes  on the Gower Estuary  (Glamorgan-
 shire). Points frame  recording and  productivity measure-
 ments have shown that recovery from up to four successive

-------
                                                                              EFFECTS IN MILFORD HAVEN   431
75 — O^3
20 - ' ' H\T 1
15 - o o"
10 - A 71
, \ i
5~ \ A
0 - y OO-O
20 - °
^U „

"~ o T I
10 - 'Tkr ox
-5- 4 T/l
2 A I
0 °~ T 5~-°0/i
D- 20 - i T
^
§ !n~ lA\
I/*
S 5- 9\ P
X ''
«- 0 — T o— oc>'^
0; '
o- 20 - 
-------
432   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
   The oldest outfall  in  Milford Haven is  sited within  a
 small bay and discharges from an outfall on the shore at the
 level of E.L.W.S. tides. When this sheltered bay was first
 examined  in  1969 it was  surprising to  find  that  the
 dominant intertidal species was the  exposed shore  species
 of brown seaweed Fucus vesiculosus.  From  the bay's
 position  a limpet/barnacle  dominated shore had been
 expected   with  the  sheltered  shore  brown  seaweed
 Ascophyllum nodosum as the dominant algae.
   Early records showed that this shore had originally been
 a limpet/barnacle dominated shore.  To study the changes
 six transects were established up to 450 meters on either
 side  of the  outfall.  It  was found that several species
 occurred in reduced numbers or were absent, especially L.
 saxatilis negiecta Littorina neritoides, Monodonta lineata
 and  Gibbula  umbilicalis. The  populations  of limpets,
 especially Patella vulgata and the barnacles Balanus bala-
 noides and Chthamaius  stellatus were also considerably
 reduced on transects 3 and 4. The severely depleted fauna
 and flora took the form of a pollution  gradient (Crapp
 1970).
   A second outfall investigated is at a jettyhead and has
 been operating for  six years and effluent is pumped along
 the jetty. The outfall  opens at M.L.W.S.  and is  operated
 while  the  tide is ebbing. No biological  changes  in the
 intertidal  zone were found that could be attributed to the
 outfall water.
   Further investigations were  done  by  tracing water
 movements throughout the tidal cycle, and  by measuring
 dispersion  and dilution using  a salinometer. For water
 movement investigations floats with almost negative buoy-
 ancy were designed equipped with marker flags. These were
 dropped at the  outfalls in groups of ten at regular time
 intervals and their positions plotted at varying stages of the
 tide.
   It was found that at the outfall discharging into a bay at
 the  shoreline, surface  currents away from the outfall are
 slow, except in the  early stages of ebb and flood tides and
 that at some stages, but especially at slack water, some of
 the effluent was circulated back to the shore.
   At the outfall  on the jettyhead, surface currents did not
 transport  the  effluents back to the shore  for considerable
 distances (up to % mile or more).
   Observations were also made on dilutions of the effluent
 by measurements of salinity changes using direct readings
 taken on  a salinity temperature bridge (National Institute
 of Oceanography  Pattern).  The salinity of the area is
 normally  32°/oo of salt while  that of the effluent was
 14°/oo. At the shoreline  the influence of the effluent was
 detectable but no  salinities were lower than 27°/oo. At
 most regions just offshore the salinities were 30" /oo. These
 salinities were found at low water but as the tide rose the
 influence of the effluent decreased.
   It was concluded that with effluents containing oil levels
 of 20-25 ppm of oil biological damage only occurs if the
 effluents are discharged at the shoreline in areas of poor
 tidal  dispersion, but that effluents discharged offshore at
jettyheads in areas  of  good dispersion produce no measur-
 able biological change  (Baker 1970, Cowell 1970, Crapp
 1970).
   It is interesting to note that as a consequence of these
findings the  West Wales River Board  is  lowering  the
permissible  maximum  levels  of oil discharge into Milford
Haven from refinery effluents to 25 ppm and all  future
installations must discharge at the jettyhead  over the deep
water channels.


EFFECTS OF SHORE CLEANING WITH EMULSIFIERS

   Among others the following emulsifiers have been tested
both in the laboratory and the field. B.P. 1002 (a solvent
emulsifier commonly used for cleaning oil),  test blends X
(low aromatic content) and Y (high aromatic content) and
B.P. 1100.

                Puccinellia/Festuca  turf
        100  -i  A-A-
 c
 o
 "o

 en
TJ
O
    0)
    E
TJ
V

CJ
E
         60  -
        50  -
        AC   -
         20  -
 TJ  —

     O>
     ~    0
                                        Solvent A
                                        B P  1002
                                    O   Test  blend X
                                    •   Test  blend v
                     T   I   |    1   I   I   i    I   I

               0     20    40     60    80    100 %

               Emulsifier  concentration
          Effects of emulsifiers and a solvent on PuccinellialFestuca turf.
     Puccinellia maritime!

     1  week otter treatment
                                    PU?.*- '.r>^*'°_rn9ri*'ma
                                    3 weeks after treatment
100 -
80 -
60 -
40 -
20 -
0 -
100 -i
80 -
60 -
40 -
20 -
o -i
0-8 	 0
8
/ B R 1100
3"
1 1 1 1 i
o-o 	 o
c

0 O.S. 10239
00
>
1 I i 1 1
100 -i o--p 	 o
80 4 / '
I O
60 i /
40 4 / B R '002
20 -I/
p «
u
oo
1 1 1 1 1
0 20 40 60 83 TOO •/.
                                   100
                                   BO
                                   CO
                                   40
                                   20
                                    0


                                   100
                                   eo
                                   60
                                   40
                                   20
                                            B.R 1100
        Emulsifior cone.

                  Effects of emulsifiers on Puednellia turf.


              Figure 3: (After Baker 1970)
                                           D.S. 10239
                                                I
                                          0-0-'. -  j
                                           E.P.  1002
                                        0 20 « 60 80 K» "k
                                        Efr.-jlsifier cone .

-------
                                                                            EFFECTS IN MILFORD HAVEN
                                                                                                              433
SALT MARSHES

   On  salt  marsh  plants small  differences have  been
observed between the toxicities of these  materials. In all
cases  concentrations  below  10%  were not  permanently
damaging and concentrations above 50% killed them. The
toxicity to salt marsh plants depends upon dilution rather
than the absolute  amount of emulsifier, e.g.,  10 ml of
undiluted emulsifier kills  a salt marsh  turf 30 cm x 40 cm
but the same  amount of emulsifier has no visible effect if
applied as 100ml of  1% solution. In tests with B.P. 1002
and its solvent A260  the  solvent alone proved as toxic as
the whole emulsifier.  Any hydrocarbon solvent is liable to
penetrate into  plants  through  lipophilic surfaces  and
penetration is crucial  in determining toxicity. Once inside
the plant it may dissolve in cell membranes and cause loss
of cell sap. There is a relationship between toxicity to salt
marsh  plants and dilution. Penetration  of undiluted emulsi-
fiers may be as rapid as 20 seconds but the  time is greater in
more aqueous solutions, see Figure 3.

ROCKY SHORES

   The chief ways of  cleaning oil from shores are mechani-
cal removal and washing with solvent emulsifiers. Until
recently most emulsifiers available were highly toxic. Most
of our research  has  been done with B.P. 1002.  In the
laboratory these were applied to test species in the manner
described by Perkins (1968) and Crapp  (1970). The animals
were  exposed to high concentrations of detergent  for 1
hour  and this was followed by a recovery period in clean
sea water. Susceptibility varied both  between species and
within species at varying times of the year. See Figure 4. In
general the intertidal gastropods were more susceptible in
winter shore cleaning than in  summer,  e.g., the topshell
Monodonta lineata, a southern warm water species, is most
resistant to  detergent treatment in  the warmer summer
months. However, the dog whelk Nucella lapilhis, a species
which extends into Arctic waters has a greater resistance in
December than in July or October, Figure 5.
   These  figures  have been compared with observations
made  following a spillage  in Milford Haven in November
1968 and with the results of field experiments set up  to list
the effects of detergent treatment.
   The spillage was one of crude oil that  went ashore at
Hazelbeach, Milford Haven, a shore which had already been
polluted and cleaned in January 1967. (Nelson-Smith 1968
a, b). Nelson-Smith recorded that although many organisms
were  killed, enough grazing animals survived to prevent an
algal flush from covering the shore. Detergent treatment in
1968 was light but the shore had not fully recovered from
an  earlier spillage.  Three weeks  after  the  cleaning  the
number of gastropods was drastically reduced but increased
again  by January  1969. Crapp (1970)  believes that  the
animals on the shore behaved in the same way as those in
the laboratory.  Exposure  to emulsifier  was followed by
retraction into the shell following which the animals were
rolled by water hosing and wave action into deep crevices
      -.MAR     APR    . MAT    JU;:i:   JULY     AUO    SEPT    OCT    NOV    DEC     JAh     FEb"   MAR    APR    MAY    JUNE

     Seasonal variations in mortalities recorded in Monodonta lineata following exposure to various concentrations of BP 1002 for one hr.
                                             Figure 4a: (From Crapp 1970)

-------
 434   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
                               9000 10000    90000 COOOO   3300001000000

                                            [from OUff. 19701
   Figure 4b: Resistance of Various Intertidal Species to BP 1002
 or into the sublittoral zone. Two months later these animals
 had recovered and regained their normal position on the
 shore. The most susceptible animal proved to be the limpet
 Patella vulgata which was reduced from 150 per m2 to 21
 per m2. The  numbers continued to  decline during the
 spring and by the time that young were recorded in June
 1969 the  density had dropped to 5 per m2. This density
 was insufficient to prevent an algal flush from developing.
 During the spring the shore was covered by a growth of the
 green  alga Enteromorpha and this was  replaced in the
 summer by Fucus vesfculosus. The covering of the shore by
 Fucus has altered its character completely and the number
 of barnacles subsequently declined. This will presumably be
 followed by a decline in the  numbers  of  the  carnivore
 Nucella lapfllus which  feeds  on barnacles. The  same
 sequences of events  were recorded on detergent treated
 experimental plots and following the Torrey Canyon and
 Fina Norvege spillages.
         > UNEMM
                            NUCELLA UtPWlJS
Figure 5: Resistance of Two Intertidal Specks to BP 1002 at
Different Times of Year.
    All these shores resemble the experimental strip at Port
 Erin, Isle of Man, described by Jones (1948) and South-
 ward (1964)  where limpets were removed intentionally.
 The evidence  suggests that recovery from damage by B.P.
 1002 is a normal successional process and if this is so a time
 scale of 10-15 years  can be  expected before  normal
 situations are reached.
    Work on BJ*. 1100 has shown this new emulsifier to be
 almost  1000X less toxic than B.P. 1002. This is a marked
 improvement  but  the  material  still has  some toxicity
 particularly to  the dominant species Patella vulgata and
Mytttus edulis. We predict that if B.P. 1100 were misused on
 the scale which occurred after the Torrey Canyon disaster
 then the populations of these species would be markedly
 affected.  This  would  of course  result in  community
 repercussions similar to those observed with light treatment
 with BJ. 1002.
   We  are  convinced that salt marsh communities should
 never be treated with detergents but that rocky shores can
 be  cleaned with minimal damage provided that the new low
 toxicity materials such as B J>. 1100 are used in moderation.
 Floating oil slicks  are best dealt with  before they come
 ashore even if the more  toxic dispersants are used since
 toxicity is related to dilution.
MONITORING BIOLOGICAL CHANGE
     IN MILFORD HAVEN

   Long term changes in the  fauna and flora of Milford
Haven  as a result of the oil industry operations are being
recorded using 32 monitoring  transects around the shores
of the  port. Recording is done using the modified Crisp &
Southward scale  described by Crapp  (1970).  Recording
began  before  the oil  port was established, (Nelson-Smith
1964,  Moyse & Nelson-Smith  1963, Nelson-Smith 1967a,
Arnold 1959).
   These surveys reveal no long term changes in the flora
and  fauna of Milford Haven that are  attributable to the
development   and  operation  of  the  oil  terminals  and
refineries. The only exceptions to this being damage to two
repeatedly  cleaned recreational beaches and to damage
within  the immediate vicinity  of one refinery outfall pipe
discharging water with an oil content of approximately 25
ppm.
   This result is very  encouraging if one consideres that
.0001% of the 40  million tons handled is lost into the
harbour and that these losses are treated with emulsifying
agents  which  until recently have been of very toxic nature.
The  port also has the  addition  of 1,680 barrels of oil from
refinery discharge sources. We conclude that even with the
established toxicity of crude and other oils and the toxicity
of detergent materials the damage to intertidal fauna and
flora is minimal when most oil spillages  are treated while
still  afloat ensuring that dilution to that below toxic levels
can take place.
   This work  was supported by grants from the Jubilee
Fund of the Institute  of Petroleum, and the World Wildlife
Fund-Torrey Canyon Appeal. The  work is registered as

-------
                                                                         EFFECTS IN MlLFORD HAVEN    435
 part of the International Biological Programme Section No.
 UK/PM/5.
REFERENCES

    1. ALLEN, H. H. 193QSpartina townsendii, a valuable
grass  for reclammation  of tidal mud-flats. 2 Experience in
New Zealand. N.Z. JLAgric. 40:189-96.
    2. ARNOLD, D. C. 1959 Report of work undertaken
during tenure of a Research Fellowship in marine biology at
Swansea 1958-59. Development Commission, pp. 71 (type-
scripts) 1954.
    3. BAKER,  J. M.  1970  The effects of a single oil
spillage; in The ecological effects of oil pollution on littoral
communities. Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st 1970,
ed. E. B. Cowell, Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
    4. BAKER,  J. M.  1970  Successive spillages; in the
ecological effects  of oil pollution on littoral communities.
Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st 1970, ed. E. B. Cowell,
Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
    5. BAKER,  J. M.  1970  The effects of a single oil
spillage, in The ecological effects of oil pollution on littoral
communities. Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st 1970,
ed. E. B. Cowell, Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
    6. BAKER,  J. M.  1970  Refinery  Effluent; in  The
ecological effects  of oil pollution on littoral communities.
Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st 1970, ed. E. B. Cowell,
Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
    7. BAKER, J. M. 1970 Oil and salt  marsh soil; in The
ecological effects  of oil pollution on littoral communities.
Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st 1970, ed. E. B. Cowell,
Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
    8. BAKER, J. M. 1970 Comparative toxicities of oils,
oil fractions and emulsifiers; in The ecological effects of oil
pollution on littoral communities. Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st
& Dec. 1st  1970, ed. E. B. Cowell, Inst. of Pet. London (in
press).
    9. BALLANTINE, W. J.  1961 A biologically-defined
exposure scale for the  comparative  description of rocky^
shores, Field Stud. 1(3)1-19.
   10. BUCK, W., & HARRISON, J. 1967 Some prolonged
effects of oil pollution on the  Medway estuary. Ann. Rep.
Wildfowl Ass. 32-33.
   11. COWELL, E. B. 1969 The effects of oil pollution on
salt marsh  communities in Pembrokeshire and Cornwall.
J.appl.Ecol. 6:133-42.
   12. COWELL,  E. B. 1970 Chronic oil pollution caused
by refinery effluent water. Water Pollution by Oil Ed. P.
Hepple, Inst. Pet. London. Appendix p.380-381.
   13. COWELL, E. B., & BAKER, J. M. 1969 Recovery of
a salt marsh in Pembrokeshire, S. W. Wales from pollution
by crude oil. Biol. Conserv. 1:291-5.
   14. COWELL,  E. B., BAKER, J.  M. & CRAPP, G. B.
1970 The biological effects of oil pollution and oil littoral
communities, including  salt  marshes.   Paper  No. E.ll,
F.A.O. Technical Conference on marine pollution and its
effects on living resources and fishing,  Rome  Italy, Dec.
1970
   15. CRAPP, G. B. 1970 'The biological consequences of
emulsifier cleaning' in The ecological effects of oil pollution
on littoral communities. Proc.  of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec.
1st 1970, ed. E. B. Cowell, Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
   16. CRAPP, G. B. 1970 The biological effects of marine
oil pollution  and shore  cleansing. Annual Report, Field
Studies Council, Oil Pollution Research Unit 1969.
   17. CRAPP, G. B. 1970 'Laboratory experiments with
emulsifiers'; in The ecological effects of oil pollution on
littoral communities. Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st
 1970, ed. E. B. Cowell, Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
   18. CRAPP, G. B. 1970 'Chronic oil pollution'; in The
ecological effects of oil pollution on littoral communities.
Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st 1970, ed. E. B. Cowell,
Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
   19. CRAPP, G. B. 1970 'Monitoring the rocky shore'; in
The ecological effects of oil  pollution on littoral com-
munities. Proc. of. symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st 1970, ed. E.
B. Cowell, Inst. of Pet. London, (in press).
   20. CRAPP, G.  B.  1970  Chapter 2 -  the biological
effects of marine oil pollution and shore cleansing. Ph.D.
Thesis, University of Wales.
   21. CRISP, D. J.,  &  SOUTHWARD, A. J. 1958 The
distribution  of intertidal organisms along the coasts of the
English Channel. J.mar.biol.Assoc.UJC. 37,157-208.
   22. DUDLEY, G. 1970 Oil pollution in a major oil port:
the incidence, behaviour,  and treatment of oil spills, in The
Ecological effects of oil pollution on littoral communities.
Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st & Dec. 1st 1970, ed. E. B. Cowell,
hist, of Pet. London (in press).
   23. JONES, N. S. 1948 Observations and experiments
on the biology of Petella vulgata at Port St. Mary, Isle of
Man. Proc. Lpool.biol.Soc. 55:60-77.
   24. MOYSE, J. & NELSON-SMITH, A. 1963 Zonation
of  animals  and  plants on  rocky shores  around  Dale,
Pembrokeshire, Field Stud. 1(5)1-31.
   25. NELSON-SMITH,  A.  1968a  The  effects  of oil
pollution and emulsifier  cleansing on shore life in south-
west Britain. J.appl.Ecol. 5:97-107.
  26. NELSON-SMITH,  A.   1968b  Biological   conse-
quences of oil pollution and shore cleansing. Field Stud. 2
suppl. 73-8.
   27. NELSON-SMITH,  A.  1967a  Marine  biology  of
Milford Haven: the distribution  of littoral animals and
plants. Field Stud. 2 pp. 407-434.
   28. ODUM, E. P. 1961  The role  of tidal  marshes in
estuarine production. N.Y. St. Conserv. June-July 1961.
   29. ODUM, E. P., & SMALLEY, A. E. 1959 Compari-
son of population energy flow of a herbivorous and deposit
feeding invertebrate  on  a  salt marsh ecosystem.  Proc.
Nath.Acad.Sci. U.S.A. 45:617-22.
   30.  OTTWAY, S. M. 1970 'The comparative toxicities
of crude  oils'; in The ecological effects of oil pollution on
littoral communities. Proc. of symp. Nov. 31st  & Dec.  1st
1970, ed. E. B. Cowell, Inst. of Pet. London (in press).
   31.  PERKINS, E. J.  1968 The toxicity of oil emulsifiers
to some inshore fauna. Field Stud. 2 suppl. 81-90, ed. J. D.
Carthy&D.R. Arthur.

-------
436   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
   32. RANWELL, D. S. 1967 World resources ofSpartina
townsendii  and  economic use  of Spartina marshland.
Jappl.Ecol. 4
-------
                THE  INFLUENCE  OF  OIL AND  DETERGENTS
                           ON  RECOLONIZATION  IN  THE
                               UPPER  INTERTIDAL  ZONE
                                                Dale Straughan
                                           Allan Hancock Foundation
                                         University of Southern California
 ABSTRACT
    Recolonization  of asbestos  fouling plates  treated
 variously with oil and detergents is dependent on the season
 of the year. The presence of oil favors C. fissus settlement
 but retards algal settlement.

 INTRODUCTION
    Following the 1969 oil  spill  in the Santa Barbara
 Channel, most of the oil accumulated in the upper sections
 of .the intertidal zone. Nicholson and Cimberg (1971) noted
 this increasing dosage of oil on the substrate from low tide
 to high tide on their transect at East Cabrillo Beach. They
 report that the highest intertidal  mortality occurred due
 apparently to smothering of the small barnacle Chthamalus
fissus. Neushal (1970) and the California Department  of
 Fish and Game (1969) reported similar findings.
    The  policy  in  the  United  States  is  not  to use
 dispersants to treat  oil at  sea or  on the beaches except
 under special circumstances such as an acute  fire hazard.
 Hence mechanical methods  were used to  remove oil along
 Santa Barbara beaches. The most common method was to
 soak up  the oil with  straw and then remove the oily straw.
 This gives rise to two problems—what to do with oily straw
 and how to  remove all the oily straw from between the
 crevices  of rocks. The latter is a virtually impossible  task.
 This oily straw remains in inaccessible areas over two years
 after the spill! Oil that was not cleaned from rocks in 1969
 is also still present.
    Nicholson and Cimberg  (1971) first noted  Chthamalus
fissus  settlement on oil originating  from the January 1969
 oil spill  in November, 1969. This barnacle settled both on
 oil and   the  oil-straw mixture.  However, there is an
importance difference. Oil forms a hard substrate while the
 oil-straw mixture forms  a  crumbly substrate which  is
 eroded  away by the sea. When the oil-straw mixture  is
 eroded away, organisms including C. fissus that had settled
 on this mixture, are also eroded away. This causes a further
 delay in the complete recolonization of the area. Hence, it
 is very important in the recovery of an area, that if straw is
 added to oil, all of the oil-straw mixture is removed.
    In some areas, it is impossible to guarantee complete
 removal of this oil-straw mixture. Under conditions such as
 these, it may be desirable to use a detergent to clean up the
 oil. While  this may cause  a higher initial mortality among
 intertidal organisms due to the use of detergents,  a faster
 recolonization and recovery rate in the area could outwiegh
 the initial  loss. This paper presents the first in a series of
 experiments designed to investigate problems of recovery in
 the upper intertidal  zone after an oil spill. Data on the
 effects of oil, and oil and dispersants on recolonization are
 presented. Part of the present controversy over detergent
 use involves the pros and cons of water base and petroleum
 base detergent. In this study three water based and two
 petroleum based  products were used. BP 1002 was used
 after the "Torrey Canyon"  disaster and is  used  here to
 provide some baseline for comparison with otherr work.
Materials and Methods
    Asbestos plates with one surface grooved or pitted and
the other surface flat with only a slight roughness  in
texture, were used for all experiments. All plates, with one
exception, were gray in color. The plates were suspended in
a series of five frames under the jetty at the Santa Catalina
Marine Laboratory. The ridged or grooved surface of all
plates faced the shoreline.  Asbestos plates were chosen as
                                                   437

-------
 438
PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
 they  provided the  best  artificial  substrate  which was
 capable of absorbing oil in a way similar to the surface of
 rocks.
     Santa Barbara crude oil from the Dos Cuadras Offshore
 basin was used in all oil experiments. Five detergents A -
 BP1100, B -  BP1002, C - Poly-complex All, D - Corexit
 7664, E - Corexit 8666 were used. Polycomplex A 11 and
 Corexit 7664 (C and D)  were both  used in the  Santa
 Barbara Chanel after the 1969 oil spill (Straughan, 1971a).
 Tom Gaines (1970) reported that the detergents used after
 the Santa Barbara oil spill were ineffective at sea. BP1100
 (A) is a new product of low toxicity and is the only one of
 the products recommended by the manufacturer for use on
 shore. Corexit 8666 (E) is a water  based product with a
 similar toxicity level to the petroleum based BP1100 (A).
     Two types of experiments were conducted:
         1. the effects of oil alone
         2. The effects of oil and detergents.
 Plates in (1) were 80x100 mm and in (2) they were 80x120
 mm.
     1. The effects of oil. Half of each plate was soaked in
 oil for a  known  period and dried  outside for 24 hours
 before being submerged. In all  except one experiment, the
 experimental portions were soaked in oil for 48 hours.  In
 one experiment some experimental surfaces were soaked in
 oil 1, 2 and 6  days to compare effects of different amounts
 of oil on colonization.
     2. The effects of detergents and oil. The lower half of
 each plate was treated as in the "oil alone" experiments,
 and the right vertical half was scrubbed with detergent. This
 means each plate had four types of surfaces,  the upper
 section  was all unofled but half of it was treated with
 detergent  and half not treated with detergent, while the
 lower section  was oiled and half of it was treated with
 detergents and half not treated  with detergents.
     Detergents were applied within an hour of  surfaces
 being covered by the  rising tide in accordance with one
 (BP) manufacturers  instructions. All instructions of the
 application of detergents mentioned that oil and detergent
 should be  well mixed. To simulate this mixing the detergent
 was applied with  a small brush. It has since been suggested
 that  application with a spray would  be a better simulation.
                                                 two days is given in Table 2. No Chthamalus settlement was
                                                 recorded on these plates between the end of July and the
                                                 beginning of January. This is  not  due to an insufficient
                                                 period of submergence because  these sets of plates with no
                                                 Chthamalus settlement were  submerged 65 and 170 days
                                                 respectively while a plate  submerged between April and
                                                 June bore a Chthamalus settlement  within 73 days. Hence
                                                 this may be regarded as a seasonal effect. There was some
                                                 algal cover on all control plates. There was no algae on the
                                                 oiled plate examined after 65 days while on all other dates
                                                 there was less  algae on the  oiled plates than on the control
                                                 plates.
                                                     The algal abundance  and  density of Chthamalus  on
                                                 controls and on fouling plates soaked in oil for  1,2, and 6
                                                 days respectively is given in Table 3. There was an inverse
                                                 relationship  between  the number of Chthamalus  present
                                                 and algal cover  on the fouling  plates. With one exception
                                                 there is a  direct relationship between the density  of
                                                 Chthamalus settlement and number  of days the surface was
                                                 soaked  in  oil and  an inverse relationship between the
                                                 percentage  of algal  cover  and the number of days the
                                                 surface  was soaked in oil. There was no visible oil, no algae
                                                 and a very high density of Chthamalus, on this plate.
                                                     Black oil was visible  on all  oiled plates examined after
                                                 65  and  73 days, but not on plates examined after 255 and
                                                 335 days.
                                                Effects of Oil and Detergents
                                                    These experiments were commenced July 23,1970 and
                                                the results presented in Table 4 describe the condition of
                                                these folding surfaces on January 8, 1971. No Chthamalus
                                                had  settled on these surfaces by this date. On both oiled
                                                and  unoiled  surfaces  in  this  experiment  there  is  no
                                                difference between areas treated by detergent and those not
                                                treated  by detergent. However, there is consistently more
                                                algal  growth  on unoiled  than  on oiled surfaces.  Oiled
                                                surfaces treated with detergents in series A and E bore no
                                                algal growth at all.
                                                    While  black oil was visible  on  all oiled surfaces on
                                                January 8, 1971, plates B,  C, D had a few apparently clean
                                                areas.
 Results
 Effects of Ofl
     Oil  came ashore at Santa Catalina Island in the New
 Year of 1970. On July 23,  1970 counts were made of C.
fissus on adjacent oiled and unofled upper horizontal and
vertical surfaces on rocks shaded by the jetty at the Santa
Catalina  Island  Marine  Laboratory.  In  general,  the
Chthamalus population was denser on the oiled than on the
unoiled surfaces (Table 1).

    The algal abundance and density of Chthamalus on
controls  and on fouling plates previously soaked in oil for
                                                Table 1. Comparison of Density of C. fissus on Oiled and
                                                Unoiled Rock Surfaces. Areas are of Equal Size and Same
                                                Surface Angle.
                                                   Area
                                                  (sq.m)
                                                   100
                                                   250
                                                   900
                                                  1000
                                                   150
                                                   400
                                                   400
        Density of C ftssus
Oiled Surface    Unoiled Surface
   0.25
   0.2
   0.77
   0.03
   0.2
   0.135
   0.2
0.3
0.105
0.44
0.015
0.066
0.075
0.125

-------
                                                                      THE INFLUENCE OF Oil	
                                                                                                         439
                             Table 2. Number of C. fissus and Algal Cover on Oiled and
                             Unofled Surfaces
   Date

July 29, 1969
-Oct. 2, 1969
No. days

   65

  225

  335

   73

  170
                                           Algal
                                     Unofled  Oiled
 July 29, 1969
 -April 10,1970
 July 29, 1969
 -June 29, 1970
 April 17, 1970
 -June 29, 1970
 July 23, 1970
-Jan 8, 1971
  -No algae; + thin layer of algae in hollows only;
   'rH- thick layer of algae on hollows and ridges
                                  C. fissus
                              Unofled   Oiled
                                  1

                                  0

                                83

                                22

                                  0
                                                                         Months Submerged
                                                                   JFMAMJJASOND
                                                                  0

                                                                 67

                                                                126

                                                                 53

                                                                  0
                                                         thin layer of algae on hollows and ridges;
Table 3.  Number of C. fissus and algal cover on unofled
plates and plates soaked in oil 1,2, and 6 days. Plates were
submerged April 17 to June 29,1970.
                        Algae         C fissus
     Unofled             -H-            22
     Oiled 1 day
     Oiled 2 days
     Oiled 6 days
-H-
 +
 +
 +
                                35, 240
                                53,56
                                127,150
     +  thin layer of algae on part of the plate;
    ++  thin layer of algae on all the plate

Discussion
    The  results of  the  experiments provide  data which
support  the ideas that the rate of recovery is dependent on
the season of the year when the spill occurs. One initially
surprising result is that settlement of CTztfza/amMS was more
abundant  on  oiled  than  unofled  surfaces.  After   any
components toxic to settling Chthamalus are lost, this may
be explained  by either one of or both of the following
reasons.  Most fouling organisms including all barnacles that
have been  studied,  settle more  abundantly on  a black
surface  than  a  light surface. Hence settlement could be
more abundant on  a black  oiled asbestos surface than a
light unofled asbestos surface.  There is also  an inverse
relationship between algal cover and density of Chthamalus.
The ofl inhibits algal growth on an area leaving it available
for Chthamalus settlement. This means that a layer of ofl in
an upper intertidal area could change the community in an
area from one dominated by small algal species grazed on
by species such as Littorna  to a community dominated by
the barnacle Chthamalus.
    Data on the effects of ofl and detergents showed that
the presence  or absence of ofl on a surface was more
important than treatment with detergent. While these tests
were not efficiency tests for detergents, it should be noted
                                                  that there was less ofl visible on plates B, C, D, than on the
                                                  other plates and  that these were the only plates that bore
                                                  algal growth on the oiled surfaces. However, no difference
                                                  was detected between surfaces treated and untreated with
                                                  detergents. One can only assume that even though care was
                                                  taken to only  apply  detergent to half the  surface of  the
                                                  plate, splash and  washing by the  tides spread the detergent
                                                  over the whole plate. These experiments must be repeated
                                                  ensuring that no detergent reaches the control areas.
                                                     The data presented here suggests that leaving an oiled
                                                  surface  untreated in  upper  intertidal areas in the  Santa
                                                  Barbara  Channel favors  recolonization  by  a Chthamalus
                                                  dominated  community  while removal  of  the ofl would
                                                  favor recolonization  by  an algal -  herbivore dominated
                                                  community. Under normal conditions, in the absence of oil,
                                                  there is a continuing flux between these communities. If an
                                                  algal dominated community is heavily grazed or damaged
                                                  by sand abrasion during a storm, it may be replaced by
                                                  either another algal dominated community or a Chthamalus
                                                  dominated community depending which  organisms  are
                                                  settling when the substrate is exposed. The reverse is also
                                                  true.
                                                     These experiments were conducted on relatively small
                                                  isolated  asbestos surfaces.  The  communities formed  on
                                                  these surfaces  are  limited  by  the size,  isolation, and
                                                  composition  of  the  substrate.   These  communities  are
                                                  probably less complex than the type of community that
                                                  would normally be established on the orcky shores. Further
                                                  work is required  to establish the relationship between  the
                                                  data obtained on experimental surfaces and conditions on
                                                  the natural substrate.

                                                  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
                                                     The research was partially  supported  by  a  grant
                                                  (GH-89) from  the  National  Sea  Grant  Program, U.S.
                                                  Department of Commerce to the University of Southern
                                                  California. I wish to particularly thank Dr. Russell Zimmer,

-------
 440    PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
                             Table 4. Algal cover 170 days after fouling plates treated
                             with oH and detergents on July 23,1970.
                     BP 1100
                     BP 1002
                     Polycomplex All
                     Corexit  7664
                     Corexit  8666
                                            No 09
                                       Detergent No Detergent
                                    Oil
                               Detergent No Detergent
                     - no algae; J
                     and ridges;
thin layer algae in hollows only; ++ thin layer algae on hollows
 thick layer of algae on hollows and ridges;
Resident Director of the Santa Catalina Marine Laboratory
and Larry Loeper for their assistance. I also wish to thank
the following: Union Oil of California for supplying the oil;
British Petroleum for  supplying BP1100 and BP1002;Esso
Research and Engineering Company for supplying Corexit
7664 and  Corexit  8666;  and  Guardian Chemical
Corporation for supplying Polycomplex All.
REFERENCES
    California Department of Fish and Game (1969). Santa
Barbara oil leak. California Department of Fish and Game
Interim Report, December 15,1969.
                           Gaines, T.H. (1970) Pollution control at a major oil
                       spill. Paper presented at the International Conference on
                       Water Pollution Research, San Francisco, July, 1970.
                           Neushal,   M.  (1970)  Effects of  Pollution  on
                       Populations of  Intertidal  and Subtidal Organisms. Paper
                       presented at Santa Barbara Oil Symposium, Santa Barbara,
                       December 17,1970.
                           Nicholson, N.L. and Cimberg, R.L. (1971) The Santa
                       Barbara oil spills of 1969, a post-spill survey of the rocky
                       intertidal. In Biological and Oceanographical Survey of the
                       Santa Barbara Channel Oil Spill, 1969-70: 325400. Publ.
                       Allan Hancock Foundation.
                           Straughan, D. (1971)  Introduction. In Biological and
                       Oceanographical Survey of the Santa Barbara Channel Oil
                       Spill, 1969-70: 1-10. Pub. Allan Hancock Foundation.

-------
                   SOURCES AND  BIODEGRADATION  OF
                       CARCINOGENIC  HYDROCARBONS
                                             Claude E. ZoBell
                                           Scripps Institution of
                                              Oceanography
                                      University of California, San Diego,
                                               LaJolla, Calif.
ABSTRACT
    Carcinogenic  hydrocarbons (CHC) are widely
distributed in air, soil, marine mud, water, oils (vegetable as
well as  mineral), and other  materials. Most  organisms
appear to contain little or no CHC, but from 1 to more
than 1,000 w?/kg has been detected in certain plants and
animals.  A  major source of CHC is  the combustion or
pyrolysis of carbonaceous materials, including fossil fuels,
organic refuse, forest fires, etc. Airborne, liquid, or solid
pollutants tend to find their way into soU, streams, lakes,
and the  sea. Pertinent to the problem of oil spills is the
quantity of CHC contributed by such spills as compared
with  that from aerial  transport,  terrestrial drainage,
biosynthesis of CHC, and other sources.
    Evidence is presented for the synthesis of carcinogenic
hydrocarbons by various species of bacteria, algae, and
higher plants.  Although some may be retained by their
tissues,  a good  many  animals metabolize  various
carcinogenic hydrocarbons and excrete  the  oxidation
products. In most aquatic environments as well as in moist
aerobic soil, bacteria bring about the degradation of CHC.

INTRODUCTION
    Carcinogenic hydrocarbons,  including 3,4-benzpyfene,
various benzanthracenes,  and  other  polycyclic  or
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)  appear to be
widely distributed in the sea as  well as in river water and
soil. The PAH content of marine plankton, seaweeds, fish,
shellfish, and several other classes of invertebrates ranges
from nil in most specimens to more than 500 Mg/kg in a
few. Up  to 3,000 ug/kg of PAH has been found in certain
marine  mud  samples  from  coastal  waters.  Certain
investigators have attributed the PAH content of aquatic
organisms  and bottom deposits  to  oil  spills,  but
biosynthesis, aerial transport, and terrestrial drainage seem
to be the principal sources of carcinogenic hydrocarbons in
aquatic environments.

What are Carcinogenic Hydrocarbons?
    Most of the so-called carcinogenic hydrocarbons are
complex polycyclic compounds consisting of from four to
seven unsaturated benzene-ring structures. The capacity of
such  compounds to  induce  cancer has been tested in
susceptible experimental  animals by various investigators.
1,19,20,22,37,92 Among the thousands of closely related
hydrocarbons which have been tested for carcinogenicity,
only a few have exhibited any tendency to induce cancer.
Whether these  potentially carcinogenic compounds induce
cancer depends upon the  diet, sex, species, strain, age, and
treatment  of the experimental animals. Dosage, mode of
administration and  repetitive  application influence
results.42 In several species the latent period may  range
from a few days to several years.
    According  to Heidelberger,38 the following are  the
most  active carcinogenic  hydrocarbons, listed in order of
decreasing potency:
    20-Methylcholanthrene
    9,10-Dimethyl-l ,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene
    9,10-Dimethyl-l ,2-benzanthracene
    3,4-Benzpyrene;  also  called  Benzo-3,4-pyrene,
      Benzo(a)pyrene or BaP
    1,2-Benzanthracene
    10-Methyl-l ,2-benzanthracene
    1,2,5,6-Dibenzanthracene
Several other polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons exhibit
some carcinogenic activity, but hundreds of closely ralated
hydrocarbons are inactive. The significance of structure
may  be  illustrated  by pointing out  that whereas
                                                  441

-------
  442  PHYSICAL REMOVAL  .
                                                               20-Melhyl cholamtiren*
   1,2,5,6-Dibenzanthracene
1,2,3,4-Dibenzanthracene
     3,4-Benzpyrene
    1,2-Benzpyrene
 Figure 1. Hydrocarbons on Left are Active Carcinogens Whereas
 those on Right are Inactive. The Anthracene and Pyrene Nuclei are
 Stippled.
                                                                                                  3,4.9, IQ-Dibenzpyre'
                                                             300 400 420  460WO 5W3 380 400 42O  46C  50C SW 380
                                                                                  W*VEIWTH (mm
                           Figure  2.  Fluorescent Curves  of  Some Common Carcinogenic
                           Hydrocarbons (after Thomas et a/. 97
 1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene (Figure 1) is a potent carcinogen,
 1,2,3,4-dibenzanthracene  is  carcinogenically inactive.83
* Similarly, whereas  3,4-benzpyrene  is  a  highly  potent
 carcinogen,  1,2-benzpyrene  is  inactive  (Figure  1).  For
 further information  on the chemical  structure and potency
 of  carcinogenic  hydrocarbons  see   the
 References. 1,23,25,36,92

 Analytical Methods
     The  kind  and quantity  of PAH occurring in various
 materials  was  determined by extracting  samples  with
 spectroscopic   grade    ether,  chloroform,  or  heptane.
 Appropriately diluted or concentrated (by distillation) 5-A/l
 aliquots were applied to acetylated strip paper. From 40 to
 80% acetic acid  was  used to  give  different degrees of
 separation.  After  4 to  24  hours  development,   the
' fluorescent emissions  were  measured  with a  Beckman
 Model  DU spectrophotometer  having  a  photomultiplier
 attachment, using U-V irradiations.24,97
     Figure 2 shows fluorescent curves for  six different
 carcinogenic hydrocarbons. Note that each curve has three
 peaks or energy maxima.

 Occurrence of Carcinogenic  Hydrocarbons in Nature
     Relatively little  is known  about the natural occurrence
 of carcinogenic hydrocarbons.  For  the  most  part   the
 concentrations are very low,  generally  much too low to
 induce  cancer  except  when  animals were  subjected to
 continuous and prolonged exposure to various tars, greases,
 oils,  soots, and certain other combustion products.  Only
after the  carcinogenic compounds  were  identified  and
chromatographic  techniques  (mainly  gas or  paper
 chiomatography)  were  perfected has it been practical to
look for such compounds in air, water, soil, plants, animals,
vegetable oils, mineral oils, and other materials.
                               Attention has been  focussed mainly  on looking for
                           3,4-benzpyrene and  certain benz- or dibenz-anthracenes,
                           because these  highly potent carcinogens seem  to be quite
                           widely distributed  in nature as well as in many man-made
                           products.The latter include smoked fish.45 smoked meat,81
                           cooked  sausages,26  charred  meat,45,51  internal
                           combustion  engine  exhaust ,39,100 tobacco
                           smoke,27,43,101 and urban air.69,86,87,97

                               PAH Content  of Mineral Oils.  Samples of crude oil
                           from the Persian Gulf, Libya, and Venezula were found by
                           Graf and Winter32 to contain 400. 1,320, and 1,600 jug/kg
                           respectively of 3,4-benzpyrene  (BaP). The BaP  content of
                           unused motor oil  was  26 Mg/kg as compared  with  5,800
                           Mg/kg  BaP in the motor oil after being used in an engine for
                           about  1,400 miles.
                               BaP  as well  as a  variety  of  1,2-benzanthracenes,
                           1,2-benzphenanthrene  (chrysene),  diphenylmethane
                           (fluorene), phenanthrene, and dibenzthiophene have been
                           demonstrated in Kuwait crude oil. 18,67  The PAH content
                           of catalytically cracked  oils has been  reported41  to be
                           appreciably  higher  in  fractions  boiling  above  670  F
                           (354°C) than in the crude stocks. Napthenic or asphalt-base
                           oils generally have much greater carcinogenic potency than
                           paraffin types.5,67
                               The total PAH of crude oils  is rarely as much as 0.1%,
                           of which  only a small fraction consists of carcinogenic
                           hydrocarbons, but  pyrolysis  may result  in   substantial
                           increases in the PAH content.2,94
                               PAH Content of Vegetable Oils  and Plants. The PAH
                           content of unrefined vegetable oils ranges from less than 10
                           to  more  than  3,000  jug/kg.3,35  Slowly  filtering  the
                           vegetable oils through activated charcoal removes most of
                           the PAH.  Table  1  shows  the quantities of 3,4-benzpyrene
                           found in 63 unrefined samples of 9 different vegetable oils.

-------
                                                                          CARCINOGENIC HYDROCARBONS   443
                 Table 1: 3,4 - Benzpyrene
         Content of Crude Vegetable Oils (Mg/kg)35
 Kind of Oil
Lowest
Highest
Average
Coconut 1 '
Sunflower i
Palm kernel
Rapseed
Peanut
Soybean
Unseed
Cottonseed
Palm (
7.9
5.1
.3
.3
.3
.5
.3
.0
).6
48.4
15.3
6.0
4.0
2.7
1.9
1.5
2.2
2.4
43.7
10.6
4.1
2.8
1.9
1.7
1.4
1.4
1.2
    Binet  and Mallet4 demonstrated  the  occurrence  of
3,4-benzpyrene  in forest  soil and associated vegetable
materials in amounts as follows:
           Forest Soil
           Hypnum moss
           Polyporus fungus
           Climbing ivy
           Various mosses
             4 to 8 Mg/kg
             3 to 46   "
             6 to 7    "
             9 to 85   "
             9 to 19   "
Fallen oak leaves were found by Mallet^ to contain up to
300 Mg/kg of 3,4-benzpyrene. At first Mallet and associates
interpreted this as indicative of aerial pollution of plants by
PAH, but  more  recent observations  summarized  in a
following section of this paper suggest that many kinds of
plants synthesize PAH.
    Mallet and Priou^l reported finding up to 350 Mg/kg of
3,4-benzpyrene in seaweeds and  grasses harvested  from
Saint-Malo Bay,  France. Seaweeds and  grasses harvested
from Clipperton  Lagoon, where there has been relatively
little pollution, contained  an average of 440 Mg/kg of
3,4-benzpyrene.71 Both values are reported on a dry-weight
basis.
    Investigations52,53,59,60,62,71,77 in widely scattered
regions have  demonstrated the presence of from 2 to more
than 1,000 Mg/kg of 3,4-benzpyrenein numerous samplesof
marine  plankton   consisting  predominatly  of
phy to plank ton. The highest concentrations of BaP seem to
occur in plankton samples collected from polluted waters.
    BaP Content  of Marine  Mud and Animals. A large
variety of marine animals (see Table 2) have been shown to
contain  appreciable quantities  of 3,4-benzpyrene. There
appears to be some correlation between the BaP content of
animals and the pollution of water or bottom deposits, but
certain animals collected off the west coast  of Greenland
and from  Clipperton Lagoon (regions of little pollution)
contained about as much BaP as  the same classes of animals
collected from badly polluted regions.
    Piccinetti77 detected BaP in only 35 individual animals
out of 276  individuals  representing  53 different species
collected along the Adriatic  coast. BaP was found in a
higher  percentage of plankton feeders  than in higher
trophic level feeders like fish.
    The BaP  content of marine  animals  appears to be
correlated with the productivity of the water in which they
live and the  degree  of  terrestrial pollution. In general,
animals living on or in badly polluted bottoms have a higher
BaP content than actively swimming pelagic species. Up to
5,000  jug/kg  BaP  has been  reported  in  mud samples
collected  from highly  productive  waters subject  to
terrestrial pollution  (see  Table 3). The PAH content of
marine  bottom deposits  is believed to be derived largely
from  terrestrial pollution, including  land drainage and
rainfall,  and  partly from  the biosynthesis of PAH  by
bacterial and algal growth in the sea.10. 11,44, 73, 74
    Sea water from  which  plankton and other participate
materials have been  removed by filtration or centrifugation
generally  contains   no detectable  PAH.  The particulate
materials removed from  sea water in certain regions may
contain appreciable quantities of BaP and other PAH. The
particulate material was not removed from the Clipperton
Lagoon water samples which were reported7^ to contain
from 34 to 40Mg/kg BaP.  The BaP content of various plants
and animals living in the lagoon water ranged from 7.5 to
536 ug/kg.
    PAH Content of Terrestrial Streams, Lakes, and Soil.
Unfiltered  water samples from Lake  Constance and the
Rhine  River were found7  to  contain 25  different  PAH,
including  3,4-benzpyrene  (BaP),  3,4-benzfluoranthene,
10,11-benzfluoranthene,  11,12-benzfluoranthene,
1,12-benzperylene,  and  1,2-benzanthracene.8  Suspended
solid  matter recovered from Lake Constance and  Rhine
River water was found to contain around  10 Mg/kg PAH.
Borneff  and Fisher^ calculated that  Rhine River water
carried  around 0.075 mg of carcinogenic PAH  per  cubic
meter. Such carcinogens  could be removed from water by
passage through activated charcoal but not by chlorination.
    From 10 to 8,500 Mg/kg of BaP has been reported5^ to
occur  in  sediments  from  the  Seine River. Assuming an
average load of 25 grams of such suspended solids per cubic
meter  of water, the  Seine would be carrying from 0.25 to
214 Mg of BaP per cubic  meter. An apprecialbe part of the
PAH  content  is believed  to  be  derived  from  soil and
atmospheric precipitation. Biosynthesis in the water and oil
pollution of the water are believed to be of secondary
importance.
    The occurrence of from 2  to 1,300 Mg/kg of garden or
forest  soil  has  been  reported   by   various
investigators.6,34,55,58,90,104 jn old habitation areas near
Moscow, the concentration of BaP in  soil  was found by
Shabad^O to be two or three times higher than in new areas
closed to heavy traffic. From  10 to 550 times more BaP
was found in  soil in the  vicinity of intensive combustion
exhausts  than in  soil  removed from  any  kind  of
combustion:
    Soil Sampling region	BaP,
Intensive combustion exhausts                19,100
District of oil buildings                      346
Another district in Moscow                  268
District of new housing in Moscow             105
Suburban area of Moscow                   81
Farm  field near Moscow                     79
Protected water storage area                 nil

-------
444   PHYSICAL REMOVAL . . .
                       Table 2: Quantities of 3,4-Benzpyrene Detected in Marine Animals
                       (Values are expressed as //g/kg dry weight of animal tissue)*
      Kind of animals
Geographic location
BaP.ng/kg
                        Table 3:  Quantities of 3,4-Benzpyrene Detected in Bottom Deposits
      Material
                                  Geographic location
                                BaP, jug/kg
Reference
Oysters
n
Mussels
Holothurians
9*
Codfish and shellfish
Fish nad shellfish
Fish and crustaceans
Crustaceans
Isopod crustaceans
Various fishes
Invertebrates
Norfolk, Virginia
French coast
Toulon Roads, France
- Villefranche Bay, France
West coast of Greenland
99 19 99 9,
Saint-Malo Bay, France
Villefranche Bay, France
Arctic Oeean
Clipperton Lagoon
Adriatic Coast, Italy
9» 99 99
10 to 20
1 to 70
2 to 30
up to 2000
nil
16 to 60
3 to 125
nil to 400
nil to 230
up to 530
nil to 900
nil to 2200
17
57
33
49
60
60
61
63
54
70
77
77
                        Reference
Mud (42 stations)
Mud from pyster beds
Mud (17 stations)
Mud (8 stations)
Mud (12 stations)
Mud and sand
Calcareous deposits
Surface mud
Mud (21 8 samples)
Tyrrhenian Sea
French coast
Mediterranean coast
Villefranche Bay, France
French coast
Villefranche Bay, France
Franch coast
Italian coast
Adriatic coast
1 to 3000
90 to 2840
up to 1800
16 to 5000
nil to 1700
nil to 1700
8 to 59
nil to 2500
nil to 3400
12
33
48
50
57
75
64
89
77
                  Table 4. Quantities of PAH Resulting From Combustion of One Gallon
                  of Commercial Gasoline (calculated from data published by Hoffman and Wynder 40)
                         PAH
                                                        mg/gal
1 ,2,5,6-Dibenzanthracene
10,1 1-Benzfluoranthene
3,4-Benzpyrene
1 ,2-Benzanthracene
1 ,2-Benzphenanthrene
3,4-Benzfluoranthene
1,2-Benzpyrene
0.007
0.047
0.088
0.172
0.175
0.179
1.181
2.6
17.4
32.6
63.6
64.7
66.2
426.9

-------
                                                                         CARCINOGENIC HYDROCARBONS   445
     PAH Content  of Air  and  Combustion  Products.
 Appreciable  quantities of BaP and  certain  other
 carcinogenic  hydrocarbons occur  in  city
 air.27,39,46,69,86,91,96,100  Based on anajyses  Qf ^
 samples from several large cities, Falk and Kotin27 record
 the following mean  BaP contents, expressed as ug of BaP
 per 100 cubic meters of air under standard conditions:
              St. Louis
              London
              Cleveland
              Chicago
              Copenhagen
              Oslo
              Moscow
54.0
46.0
25.0
15.0
10.3
 0.8
 0.2
     The  pyrolysis  of various carbon  compounds is  the
 principal  source of PAH  in the air. From 0.007 to 130
 grams of  BaP is produced per ton of coal burned by various
 firing methods.96 Mostly less than 0.02 grams of BaP is
 liberated  into the air per ton of coal burned in modern
 stokers.

     From 0.165 to  570 jig of  BaP, plus appreciable
 quantities of other PAH, is produced per kg of organic
 refuse incinerated.96  Comparable quantities of PAH per
 unit  of vegetation  burned result  from forest, brush, and
 grass fires.

    Meaningful  amounts  of BaP  and  other  PAH are
 liberated  into  the air incidental  to the  war, normal
 degradation,  or incineration of  rubber tires.  The mean
 amount is in the neighborhood of 30 mg BaP per gram of
 rubber.28

    Highly variable amounts of PAH result from burning
 crude oil or products derived  therefrom.  The amount
 depends on the material and the method of its combustion.
 Burning fuel  oil in steam plants or for heating purposes
 results in  the liberation of from  0.05 to 50 grams of BaP
 per ton of oil.
    The exhaust resulting  from the combustion of a gallon
 of commercial gasoline in an internal combustion engine
 was found by Hoffmann and Wyndei-40 to yield an average
 of 2.8 grams  of aerosols containing  appreciable quantities
 of PAH. Some of the compounds which were identified are
 reported in Table 4. Somewhat smaller amounts of PAH
 were  produced when oil consumption was low. More than
 twice the amounts of PAH  recorded  in  Table 4 were
 produced  when oil consumption was  high.39  Burning  a
 gallon of fuel in diesel engine results in the liberation  of
 large amounts of PAH. 100
    BaP Content of Tobacco Smoke. The smoke from an
 average  size cigarette contains about 0.01 /ug of BaP and
 larger amounts of certain other carcinogens.27 Cigars and
 pipe tobacco also yield PAH in smoke as well as in tars.30
 Exclusive of  China, the worldwide  consumption of
 cigarettes in 1968 was  2,500 billion.95 Smoking this many
cigarettes is calculated to yield at least  25  kg of BaP plus
other  PAH. This  is approximately  the BaP content of
 25,000 tons of crude ofl, assuming its average BaP content
tobel,000/*g/kg.
 Biosynthesis of Carcinogenic Hydrocarbons
 PAH Synthesis by Bacteria.  Based on API Research
 Project 43A work on the part played by bacteria in the
 origin of oil, ZoBelll07 reported that anaerobic bacterial.
 synthesized  appreciable  quantities  of liquid  and  solid
 hydrocarbons.  Extracted from a 5-gallon culture was 1,640
 mg of oily material, 367 mg of which consisted mainly of
 PAH.
     Several  species  of bacteria have  been shown4*  to
 synthesize   3 ,4-b e nzpy re ne ,   3,4-  and
 10,11-benzfluoranthene,  and  1,2-benzanthracene  in
 glycerin-fructose  agar initially devoid  of hydrocarbons
 (Table 5). The PAH was synthesized intracellulary.
     The  anaerobic  bacterium Clostridium putride was
 reported^6,52,53,66 to assimilate  lipids associated  with
 dead plankton, forming from 120 to nearly 8,000 pig BaP
 per kg of plankton (dry  weight  basis).  The plankton
 contained  from nil to 127 jug BaP per kg. Under aerobic
 conditions, mixed cultures of bacteria destroyed the BaP,
 whereas under anaerobic conditions,  bacterial  growth
 resulted   in  an increase in the  BaP  content (Table
 6).52,53,66

     Clostridium putride was reported ^5to synthesize from
 20 to 42 ug BaP per kg of garden sofl at room temperature.
 Under similar  experimental  conditions, Escherichia coli
 produced from 22 to 50 ^g BaP per kg of soil enriched with
 fatty acids.gr
    Bacillus badius was observed?2 to synthesize 0.084 ug
 BaP and 0.3  ug of perylene (a weakly active carcinogenic
 PAH) per  liter of nutrient medium in 7  days of 36 °C.
 Somewhat  more of these two carcinogens were synthesized
 by Bacillus  badius in  nutrient  medium  enriched  with
 lycopene, 0-carotene, naphthalene  acetate, and vitamin

     Field observations in Clipperton Lagoon by Niaussat
 and associates 70,73,74 confirm the microbial synthesis of
 BaP under natural conditions in sea water and bottom
 deposits.

    PAH  Synthesis  by Algae and Higher Plants.  The
 freshwater alga  Chlorella vulgaris was shown by Borneff et
 al 10,11 to synthesize BaP  and  other  carcinogenic  PAH
 (Table  7).  Unequivocal  evidence for the biosynthesis of
 PAH was obtained by  demonstrating the conversion of
 Cl4-tagged acetate by algal cultures. Duplicating the results
 adds to the significance of the observations. The presence
 of  Cl4 in  the PAH  demonstrates that  the PAH  was
 synthesized from acetate by the algae and that it did not
 come from extraneous sources such as PAH in polluted air
 or culture medium. (The common  occurrence of PAH in
 air, especially in urban or laboratory air, often makes  it
 extremely difficult to assay various kinds of samples for
 minute quantities of PAH.)
    Wheat, rye, and lentil synthesize various PAH.31 These
grains were grown in nutrient  solutions prepared with high
purity chemicals which were tested for the absence of PAH.
After the seeds  had germinated and the plants had attained
a height of about 10 cm, they were examined for PAH by

-------
 446   PHYSICAL REMOVAL .
 spectrographic techniques. Compared to control media and
 non-germinated  seeds, the  BaP content in the plants had
 increased between 10- and 100-fold.
     BaP and certain other carcinogenic hydrocarbons have
 been detected in numerous plant species (see section  on
 PAH Content of Vegetable  Oils and Plants). This poses the
 pertinent question  whether such PAH content represents
 extraneous contamination or does it represent synthesis of
 PAH  by the plants and  bacteria.  Both  processes are
 probably widely operative. Before claiming that PAH found
 in  marine phytoplankton  or  other vegetation is due  to
 pollution, it must be established that the higher plants did
 not synthesize the PAH.

 Biodegradation of Carcinogenic Hydrocarbons
     PAH Metabolism by Animals.  There  is  voluminous
 literature on  the fate of PAH in experimental  animals,
 mostly mice, rats, rabbits, and dogs. In one of the earlier
 comprehensive reviews, YounglO*  cjtes  385 references
 bearing  on  the  animal metabolism  of  carbocyclic
 compounds, including several PAH. In a more recent article,'
 he 103 reviews 71 articles on the oxidation of PAH by rats
 and rabbits. Many animal species are known to metabolize
 BaP.13,14,15,42,68

     During  the  last decade,   improved chromatographic
 techniques have facilitated  the detection of carcinogenic
 PAH  and  their  metabolic products.  According  to
 Boyland,14 who has published nearly  200 papers  on this
 subject,  the  slightest change  in the molecule  of such
 substances as benzanthrenes, phenanthrenes, benzpyrenes,
 etc. usually renders  them non-carcinogenic. In other words,
 complete oxidation  or degradation of the carcinogen is not
 required for its  detoxification. Various  carboxylates,
 hydroxy compounds, quinones, and ethereal  sulfates are
 common  metabolic products  of PAH.  Ordinarily, such
 products are not carcinogenic  and they are excreted by
 animals  under favorable conditions.  Such products are
 usually more  susceptible to further oxidation  than the
 parent PAH.
     The conversion of BaP to  various oxidation products
 by  the action of benzpyrene hydroxylase in weanling rats
 has been reported by Conney et at 21 Most of the BaP fed
 with chow to  cockroaches was  excreted in feces.82 Part of
 the  BaP was metabolized within the cockroaches, because
 the  input of BaP exceeded the amount excreted plus that
 remaining in the tissues and gut.
     The annelid worm Tubifex was observed*^ to absorb
 BaP from polluted water. Although BaP accumulated in the
 worm's tissues in amounts as high as 52 fig/kg dry weight,
 some was metabolized by the  worms. The metabolism of
 various PAH  has been  demonstrated in a  number  of
 different invertebrate species. However, it has been difficult
 to  determine whether  the PAH was oxidized  by the
 invertebrates or by microorganisms occurring in the gut or
 growing on the integument.
    Mciorbial  Degradation  of  PAH.  Two  potent
carcinogenic  hydrocarbons,  1,2-benzanthracene and
 1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene,  as well  as naphthalene,
 anthracene, and phenanthrene were  shown by Sisler and
 ZoBell93 to be oxidized by large populations  of mixed
 cultures  of  marine  and  soil  bacteria. More  recent
 observations by  the author  and  his  associates,  using
 chromatographic techniques,  have  demonstrated  that
 PAH-degrading  microorganisms  commonly  occur  in
 polluted soil and water. The disappearance of as much as
 100 //g of BaP and certain other carcinogenic hydrocarbons
 per liter of medium  inoculated  with 10  ml  of polluted
 water  or mud  has been demonstrated after two to four
 weeks incubation at 25°C.
    Their own observations and some  of the extensive
 literature on the  microbial oxidation of naphthalene and
 related compounds  have  been reviewed  by  various
 investigators.40,47,84,85,98,99,105,106 The susceptibility
 of various PAH to microbial degradation is well established.
 Urgently needed is more information on the rates of such
 degradation where soil or water is subject to pollution with
 carcinogenic  hydrocarbons.  Also needed  is  more
 information on the  kinds  of microorganisms which  are
 involved in biodegradation reactions.
    Certain  bacteria  growing in  oil-polluted  soils were
 observed by Petrikevich et al. 76 to accumulate BaP in their
 cells.   At  least  part  of  the  BaP was metabolically
 transformed. From soil having a BaP content of between
 100 and 200 jug/kg Poglazova et ai?8 isolated 17 strains of
 bacteria, all  of which accumulated BaP in then- cells. When
 cultured in nutrient medium treated with about 200 Mg of
 BaP per liter, each of the 17 bacterial strains was found to
 degrade BaP in amounts ranging from 4 to 82%in 4 months
 at 28°C. Degrade means that the bacteria brought about
 changes in  the quasi-linear  spectra  of  fluorescence in
 n-octane. Within 8 days an average of about 40% of the BaP
was degraded. Table 8 shows the amounts of BaP degraded
by various bacteria growing  in nutrient medium.79 Mixed
 cultures of  soil bacteria growing in  medium containing
around 200 Mg BaP/kg were found79 to degrade an average
of 85% of the BaP within  two  months at 28°C.  '

 Table 5: Quantities of Carcinogenic Hydrocarbons (CHC)
      Synthesized per Kilogram of Bacterial biomass
            (from Knorr and Schenk44)
        Species
CHC
        Mycobacterium smegmatis   60
        Proteus vulgaris             56
        Escherichia coli (strain 1)   50
        Escherichia cilo (strain 2)   46
        Pseudomonas fluorescens    30
        Serratia marcescens         20
    Within the range of 20 to 500 jig/liter, the amount of
 BaP added to nutrient medium did not greatly influence the
 percentage  of  BaP degraded  by  Bacillus  megaterium
 growing  in nutrient medium.80 Some representative  data
 are summarized in Table 8.

-------
                                                     CARCINOGENIC HYDROCARBONS     447
               Table 6: Effects of Mixed Cultures of Bacteria on
               3,4-Benzpyrene (BaP) Content of Dead Plankton52,53
Sample
number
42
49
102
186
43
46
211
212
238
230
Incubation
condition
Aerobic
«
«
n
Anaerobic
»
9>
)»
«
»
Initial BaP
(Mg/kg)
127
49
88
trace
58
trace
trace
nil
nil
nil
BaP, j/g/kg
after 15 days
4.0
nil
0.3
nil
8000
120
160
180
210
1200
Table 7: Quantities of PAH Synthesized per Kilogram of Algal Biomass Formed From
Normal Acetate and C14 - tagged Acetate (from Borneff et al. 1°>1!)
PAH
3,4-Benzpyrene (BaP)
1 1 ,1 2-Benzfluorenthene
1 ,2,3-Indenopyrene
Benzo (ghi)perylene
3 ,4-Benzofluoranthene
1 ,2-Benzanthracene
Fluoranthene
Normal Acetate
0.7 Aig
1.4 "
1.8 "
2.2 "
3.9 "
7.8 "
58.0 "
C*4 tagged acetate
0.8 //g
1.5 "
1.7 "
2.3 "
4.2 "
6.5 "
62.0 "
        Table 8: Degradation of 3,4-Benzpyrene (BaP) by Bacteria in Nutrient
        Medium Incubated at 28°C (from Poglazova et al. 80)
Culture or strain
Mycobacterium lacticola 63
" DS
Mycobacterium flavum R^b
" Cj
Mycobacterium rubrum 843
" D2
Mycobacterium smegmatis
Bacillus megaterium mutant
PBK No. 5
PBKNo. 13
2/P
BaP in medium, /zg/leter
Initially After 4 days
280
280
280
280
280
280
280
280
200
200
200
188
237
200
145
241
128
180
170
160
166
190
Per cent
decrease
33
15
29
48
14
54
35
15
20
17
5

-------
 448
         PHYSICAL REMOVAL
     Bacteria  isolated  from  soil containing  appreciable
 quantities of BaP were found by Poglazova et ai°0 to be
 much more active in degrading BaP than the same or similar
 bacteria which had been cultivated for considerable time in
 the absence of BaP or related PAH. This is true of many
 kinds of hydrocarbon-oxidizing bacteria.105,106

 SUMMARY
     Various kinds of carcinogenic hydrocarbons (CHC),
 including 3,4-benzpyrene  and some  1,2-benzanthracenes,
 have been found  in coastal bottom deposits, plankton, and
 marine animals. Suspected sources of such CHC in the sea
 include  the aerial transport  of combustion  products,
 terrestrial drainage, synthesis of CHC by bacteria or higher
 plants, and pollution by oil or other materials.
     The CHC content of most samples of marine  mud,
 plankton, and animals  is less than 0.1 jug/kg (dry weight),
 but more  than  1,000 jug/kg has been found  in  a few
 specimens. Based on data obtained from the analysis of
 only a few samples, the CHC content of crude oils appears
 to  range from less than 100 to more than 1,000 #g/kg.
 Combustion or pryolysis of mineral oils, coal, and all kinds
 of organic materials tends to generate appreciable quantities
 of  CHC. Air in industrialized regions has been  shown to
 contain from 0.2  to 54 j*g 3,4-benzpyrene  (BaP) per m3.
 Smoke from the 2,500 billion cigarettes consumed annually
 on  a worldwide basis is calculated to account for as much
 BaP as the amount in 25,000 tons of crude oil, assuming
 the average BaP content of the latter to be 1,000 //g/kg.
     The BaP content of forest and garden  soils has been
 found to be from nil to 1,000 Mg/kg  (dry weight). Much
 higher concentrations of BaP have been reported in soil in
 regions of intensive combustion exhausts. Suspended solids
 filtered from river and  lake water in highly industrialized
 regions have been found to contain from 10 to 8,000 jig
 BaP/kg. This is equivalent to 25 to 214 ug BaP/m3 water.
    The average BaP content of certain unrefined vegetable
 oils ranges  from 1.2 to  43.7 jug/kg, coconut oil having the
 highest content.  Appreciable amounts of BaP and other
 CHC have also been detected in various species of bacteria,
 algae, and higher  plants. In many cases it is problematical
 whether the CHC  content is attributable  to pollution or to
 biosynthesis.
    Evidence is  presented for the synthesis .of BaP by
 certain bacteria, algae, and higher plants.
    The biodegradation of various CHC by bacteria is well
documented. Key references  are  also  given to the
voluminous literature on the metabolism of CHC by mice,
rats, rabbits, dogs,  and invertebrates.

REFERENCES

  1. G.  M. Badger,  "The Carcinogenic Hydrocarbons:
     Chemical Constitution and Carcinogenic Activity,"
     Brit. J. Cancer, 2,309-350 (1948).
  2. M.  A. Bestougeff, "Petroleum  Hydrocarbons,"  in
     Fundamental Aspects  of Petroleum Geochemistry, B.
     Nagy and U. Colombo (eds.), 77-108, Elsevier Pub.
     Co., New York (1967).
   3.  G.  Biernoth  and  H.  E.  Rost,  "Vorkommen
    polycyclischer, aromatischer  Kohlenwasserstoffe in
    Speiseolen und deren Entfernung," Arch. Hyg. Bakt.,
     152,238-250(1968).
  4. L.  Binet  and L.  Mallet, "Diffusion of Polybenzene
    Hydrocarbons  in  the   Living  Environment," Gaz.
    Hop., 135,1142, in French (1963).
   5.  E.  Bingham,  W. Horton, and R.  Tye,  "The
    Carcinogenic Potency of  Certain  Oils,"  Arch.
    Environmental Health. 10,449-551 (1965).
  6. M.  Blumer,  "Benzpyrene  in  Soil," Science, 134,
    474-175 (1961).
  7. J. Borneff, "Kanzerogene  Substanzen  im Wasser,"
    Miinchen. Med. Wschr.,  105,1237-1242(1963).
   8. J.  Borneff  and  R.  Fischer,  "Cancerogene (sic)
    Substanzen in Wasser und Boden, IX. Untersuchungen
    von  Filterschlamm   eines  Seewasserwerkes auf
    polyzyklische,  aromatische  Kohlenwasserstoffe,"
    Arch. Hyg. Bakt.,  146,183-197 (1963).
  9. J. Borneff and R. Fischer, "Kanzerogene Substanzen
    in Wasser und Boden. XII. Polyzyklische, aromatische
    Kohlenwasserstoffe  in  Oberfla'chenwasser,"  Arch.
    Hyg. Bakt., 146,572-585 (1963).
 10. J. Borneff, F. Selenka, H. Knute, and A. Maximos,
    "Experimental   Studies  on  the  Formation  of
    Polycyclic  Aromatic  Hydrocarbons  in  Plants,"
    Environmental Res., 2,22-29 (1968).
 11. J. Borneff, F. Selenka, H. Knute, and A. Maximos,
    "Die  Synthese von  3,4-Benzpyren und  anderen
    polyzyklischen, aromatischen Kohlenwasserstoffen in
    Pflanzen," Arch. Hyg. Bakt., 152, 279-282 (1968).
 12. J. Bourcart and L. Mallet, "Pollution Marine des Rives
    de la Region  Centrale  de la Tyrrhenienne (Baie  de
    Naples)  par les Hydrocarbures  Polybenzeniques  du
    Type  Benzo-3.4 pyrehe," Compt.  Rend. Acad. Sci
    Paris, 260,3729-3734 (1965).
 13.  E.  Boyland, "The  Biological  Significance  of
    Metabolism of Polycyclic  Compounds,"  Biochem.
    Soc. Symposia, No. 5,40-54  (1950).
 14. E. Boyland,  "Polycyclic Hydrocarbons," Brit. Med.
    Bull, 20,121-126(1964).
 15. E. Boyland and P. Sims, "Metabolism of Polycyclic
    Compounds.   24.  The  Metabolism  of
    Benz(a)anthracene,"  Biochem.  J., 91, 439-506
    (1964).
 16. J. Brisou, "Biosynthese du  3-4  Benzopyrene  et
    Anaerobiose," Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol, 163, 772-774
    (1969).
 17. H. J.  Chanmann and M. Kuratsune, "Determination
    of  Polycyclic Aromatic  Hydrocarbons in  Oysters
    Collected  in   Polluted  Water," Anal.  Chem.,  29,
    1312-1317(1957).
  18.   W.  Carruthers  and  A.   G.  Douglas,
    "1,2-Benzanthracene Derivatives in a Kuwait Mineral
    Oil," Nature, 192,256-257(1961).
 19. E. Clar, Polycyclic Hydrocarbons, 487 pp., Academic
    Press, New York (1964).
20. D. B. Clayson, Chemical Carcinogenesis, 467 pp.,
    Little, Brown & Co., Boston (1962).
21. A.  H. Conney, E.  C.  Miller  and J. A.  Miller,

-------
                                                                     CARCINOGENIC HYDROCARBONS  449
    "Substrate-induced Synthesis and Other Properties of
    Benzpyrene  Hydroxylase  in  Rat liver,"  /.  Biol
    Cftem., 228,753-766(1958).
22.  N.  H.  Cromwell,  "Chemical  Carcinogens,
    Carcinogenesis and Carcinostasis," Amer. Scientist,
    53,213-236(1965).
23.  P. Daudel and R. Daudel,  Chemical Carcinogenesis
    and  Molecular  Biology,     158 pp.,  Interscience
    Publishers,  New York (1966).
24.  L.  Dubois, A. Corkery, and J. L. Monkman, 'The
    Chromatography of Polycyclic Hydrocarbons," Int. J.
    Air Poll, 2, 236-252 (1960).
25.  R.  E.  Eckardt,  Industrial Carcinogens, 164  pp.,
    Grune, New York (1959).
26.  B.  Fabian,  "Kanzerogene  Substanzen  in Speisefett
    und-til. V. Untersuchungen  an  verschieden
    zubereiteten  Bratwilrsten," Arch.  Hyg. Bakt.,  152,
    251-254(1968).
27.  H. L. Falk and P. Kotin, "Chemistry, Host entry, and
    Metabolic  Fate  of  Carcinogens," Clin.  Pharm.
    Therapeutics, 4,88-103 (1963).
28.  H. L. Falk, P.E.  Steiner, S. Goldfein, A. Breslow, and
    R.  Hykes, "Carcinogenic Hydrocarbons and Related
    Compounds in Processed Rubber," Cancer Res., 11,
    318-326(1951).
29.  D.  T. Gibson, "Microbial  Degradation  of Aromatic
    Compounds," Science, 161,1093-1097(1968).
30.  E. Gil-av and J. Shabtai, "Precursors of Carcinogenic
    Hydrocarbons in Tobacco Smoke," Nature,  197,
    1065-1066(1963).
31.  W.  Graf and H. Diehl, "Uber den naturbedingten
    Normalpegel  kanzerogener, polycyclischer  Aromate
    und seine Ursache,"  Arch.  Hyg. Bakt.,  150, 49-59
    (1966).
32.  W.  Graf and C. Winter, "3^-Benzpyren im Erdol,"
    Arch. Hyg. Bakt., 152,289-293 (1968).
33.  J. Greffard and  J. Meury,  "Note sur la Pollution en
    Rade de Toulon par les Hydrocarbures Carcerigens,"
    Cah. Oceanogr., 19,457^68 (1967).
34.  G.  Grimmer, "Der Gehalt  polyzyklischer
    Kohlenwasserstoffe im Boden," Erdol u. Kohle, 8,
    578-583(1966).
35.  G. Grimmer and A. Hildebrandt, "Kohlenwasserstoffe
    in der Umgebung des Menschen. VI. Mitteilung: Der
    Gehalt  polycyclischer Kohlenwasserstoffe  in  rohen
    Pflanzenolen,"  Arch.  Hyg.  Bakt.,  152,  255-259
    (1968).
36.  A.  Haddow, "Chemical  Carcinogens and Their Mode
    of Action," Brit. Med. Bull, 14,79-92 (1958).
37.  J. L. Hartwell,  Survey  of Compounds Which  Have
    Been Tested for Carcinogenic Activity, 2nd ed., 583
    pp.,  National Cancer Institute, U.S.  Public Health
    Service, Washington, D.C. (1951).
38. C.  Heidelberger,  "Studies on  the Molecular
    Mechanism of Hydrocarbon Carcinogenesis,"  J.
    Cellular Comp. Physiol. SuppL, 64, 129-148 (1964).
39. D. Hoffmann, E. Theisz, and  E. L. Wynder, '^Studies
    on the Carcinogenicity  of Gasoline Exhaust," J. Air
    Pollution Control Assoc., 15,162-165 (1965).
40. D. Hoffmann and E. L. Wynder, "Chemical Analysis
    and  Carcinogenic Bioassays of  Organic  Particulate
    Pollution," in Air Pollution, A. C. Stern (ed.), Vol. 2,
    187-247, Academic Press, New York (1968).
41. A. W.  Horton, M. J. Burton, R.  Tye,  and E. L.
    Bingham,  "Composition Versus Carcinogenicity of
    Distillate Oils," Amer. Chem. Soc. Div. Petrol. Chem.,
    Preprints 8(4), C59-C65 (1963).
42. W. C.  Hueper and W.  D.  Conway,  Chemical
    Carcinogenesis and  Cancer,  744 pp., Charles C.
    Thomas, Springfield, 111. (1964).
43. R.  A.   W. Johnstone  and J.  R. Plimmer,  "The
    Chemical  Constituents of Tobacco  and  Tobacco
    Smoke," Chem. Revs., 59, 885-936 (1959).
44. M. Knorr  and D. Schenk,  "Zur Frage  der Synthese
    polyzyklischer Aromate durch Bakterien," Arch. Hyg.
    Bakt., 152,282-284(1968).
45. H.  F.   Kraybill,  "Carcinogenesis Associated  with
    Foods, Food  Additives, Food  Degradation Products,
    and  Related  Dietary  Factors,"  Clin.  Pharm.
    Therapeutics,  4,73-87 (1963).
46. M. Kuratsune  and  W.  C.  Hueper, "Polycyclic
     Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Coffee Soots,"  J- Nat.
     Cancer Inst., 20, 37-51 (1958).
47. E.  I.  Kvasnikov and I.  P.  Krivitsky,  "On the
    Distributionof Microorganisms Utilizing Aromatic
    Hydrocarbons of theBorislav Oil Deposit,"Mikrobiol.
    ' Zh., 30,291-295, in Ukranian (1968).    .   •
48. C. Lalou,  "Contribution a 1'Etude de la Pollution des
    Sediments de la Mediterranee Occidentale par les
    Benzo-pyrenes," Intern. Comm. Scient. Explor. Med.
    Sea, Rapports et Proces-verbaux des Reunions,  17,
    711-718(1963).
49. C. Lalou,  "Concentration des Benzo-3.4 Pyrenes par
    les  Holothuries  de la Region  de Villefranche et
    d'Antibes," in  Pollutions  Marines  par  les
    Microorganisms et les Produits Petrotters, Symposium
    de  Monaco  April  1964, Comm. Internat. Explor.
    Scient. Med. Sea, 363-366, Monaco (1965).
50. C. Lalou, L. Mallet, and M. Heros, "Sur la Repartition
    en Profondeur du Benzo-3.4 Pyrene dans une Garotte
    de la Baie de Villefranche-sur-Mer," Compt. Rend.
    Acad. Sci.  Paris, 255,145-147 (1962).
51. W.  Lijinsky  and P.  Shubik,  "Benzo(a)pyrene and
    Other Polynuclear Hydrocarbons in Charcoal-broiled
    Meat," Science, 145,53-55 (1964).
52. C. Lima-Zanghi,  "Bilan des Acides Gras du Plancton
    Marin  et Pollution par le Benzo-3,4  Pyrene,"
    Dissertation,  80  pp.,  Faculty of Sciences, University
    of Paris (1967).
53. C. Lima-Zanghi,  "Bilan des Acides Gras du Plancton
    Marin  et  Pollution par le  Benzo-3,4  Pyrene,"
    Cah.  Oceanogr., 20,203-216(1968).
54. L. Mallet, "Study of Pollution of the North Sea and
    Arctic  Ocean by Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons of the
    3,4-Benzpyrene Type," Bull. Acad. Nat. Med. (Paris),
    147,320-325, in French (1963).
55. L.  Mallet, "Pollution des Milieux Vitaux par les
    Hydrocarbures Polybenzeniques du Type Benzo 3-4

-------
450
PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
    Pyrene," Gaz. Hop., 136,803-808 (1964).
56. L.  Mallet, "Presence des Hydrocarbures du  Type
    Benzo-3.4 Pyrene dans les Sediments Sous-jacents au
    Lit de la  Seine en Aval de Paris," Bull Acad. Nat.
    Med. ( Paris), 149,656-661 (1965).
57. L. Mallet, "Pollutions Marines par  les Hydrocarbures
    Polycondenses du Type Benzo-3.4 Pyrene des COtes
    Nord et Quest de France. Leur Incidence sur le Mileu
    Biologique et en Particulier  sur le Plancton," Can.
    Oceandgr., 19,237-243 fl 967).
58. L.  Mallet and  M.  Heros,  "Pollution des Tenes
    Vegetables par les Hydrocarbures Polybenzeniques du
    Type Benzo-3.4  Pyrene," Compt.  Rend. Acad. ScL
    Paris, 254,958-960(1962).
59. L. Mallet and R. Lami, \Recherche sur la Pollution du
    Plancton par les Hydrocarbures Polybenzeniques du
    Type Benzo 3.4 Pyrene dans 1'Estuaire de la Ranee,"
    Compt. Rend. Soc. BioL, 158,2261-2262 (1964).

60. L. Mallet, L. V. Perdriau, and J. Perdriau, "Pollution
    par  les Hydrocarbures  Polybenzeniques  du  Type
    Benzo-3.4 Pyrene de la Region Occidentale de 1'Ocean
    Glacial  Arctique," Compt. Rend.  Acad. ScL Paris,
    256,3487-3489(1963).
61. L.  Mallet  and M.-L.  Priou,  "Sur  la Retention des
    Hydrocarbures Polybenzeniques du Type Benzo-3.4
    Pyrene par les Sediments, la  Faune et la Flore  de la
    Baie de Saint-Malo," Compt.  Rend. Acad. ScL Paris,
    Ser. D, 264,969-971 (1967).
62. L. Mallet and J. Sardou, "Recherche de la Presence de
    FHydrocarbure  Polybenzenique Benzo-3,4  Pyrene
    dans le Milieu Planctonique de la Region de la Baie de
    Vfllefranche (Alpes-Maritimes)," Compt. Rend. Acad.
    ScL Paris,  258,5264-5267 (1964).
63. L. Mallet and J. Sardou, "Recherche de la Presence de
    l'Hydrocarbure  Polybenzeinque  Benzo 3-4  Pyrene
    dans le Milieu Planctonique de la Region de la Baie de
    Villefranche,"  in  Pollutions  Marines par  les
    Microorganismes et  les  Produits Petroliers,
    Symposium de Monaco April 1964, Comm. Internal.
    Explor. Scient. Med. Sea, 331-334, Monaco (1965).
 64.   L.  Mallet  and  C.  Schneider,  "Presence
    d'Hydrocarbures Polybenzeniques duType Benzo-3.4
    Pyrene  dans  des  Niveaux  Geologiques  et
    Archeologiques," Compt. Rend. Acad. ScL Paris, 259,
    675-676(1964).
65. L. Mallet and M. Tissier, "BiosynthSse Experimentale
    des Hydrocarbures Polybenzeniques du Type Benzo
    3-4 Pyrene aux Depens des Torres de Forets," Compt
    Rend. Soc. BioL, 163,63-65 (1969).
66. L. Mallet, L. Zanghi, and J. Brisou, "Recherches sur
    les  Possibilites  de  Biosynthese  des Hydrocarbures
    Polybenzeniques du Type Benzo-3.4 Pyrene par un
    Clostridium putride en  Presence  des Lipides  du
    Plancton Marin," Compt. Rend. Acad. ScL Paris, Ser.
    D, 264,1534-1537 (1967).
67. Medical  Research Council, The Carcinogenic Action
    of Mineral Oils: A Chemical and Biological Study, Her
    Majesty's Stationery Office, 251 pp, London (1968).
68. J. A. Miller and E. C. Miller, "Metabolism of Drugs in
                                                     Relation to Carcinogenicity," Ann. N.Y. Acad. ScL,
                                                     123,125-140(1965).
                                                 69.  G. E. Moore  and M. Katz, "Polynuclear  Aromatic
                                                     Hydrocarbons in  the Particulates od Diesel Exhausts
                                                     in  Railway Tunnels and  in  the  Particulates of an
                                                     Urban Atmosphere,"  Int. J.  Air Poll,  2,  221-235
                                                     (1960).
                                                 70.  P.  Niaussat,  "Pollution,  par  Biosynthese  "in situ"
                                                     d'Hydrocarbures  Cance'rige'nes,  d'une  Biocoenose
                                                     Lagunaire.  Reproduction   "in  vitro" de  ce
                                                     Phenomene,"  Rev. Internat.  Oceanogr. Med.,  17,
                                                     87-98(1970).
                                                 71.  P.  Niaussat  and  C. Auger, "Mise  en Evidence et
                                                     Repartition du Benzo-3-4-Pyrene et du Perylene chez
                                                     Differents Organismes de la Biocoensoe Lagunaire de
                                                     Clipperton,"  Compt. Rend. Acad. ScL Paris, Ser. D,
                                                     270,2702-2705(1970).
                                                 72.  P.  Niaussat,  C. Auger,  and L. Mallet, "Apparition
                                                     Relative de Quantites d'Hydrocarbures Canc&rigenes
                                                     dans des  Cultures Pures  de  Bacillus  badius,  en
                                                     Fonction de la Presence, dans le  Milieu, de Certains
                                                     Composes  Chimiques," Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  ScL
                                                     Paris, Ser. D, 270, 1042-1045 (1970).
                                                 73.  P.  Niaussat, J.-P.  Ehrhardt,  and J. Ottenwalder,
                                                     "Presence de Benzo-3-4-pyrene  dans les Eaux Isolees
                                                     du Lagon  de  1*Atoll de Clipperton," Compt. Rend.
                                                     Acad. ScL Paris, Ser. D, 267,1772-1774 (1968).
                                                 74.  P.  Niaussat, L.  Mallet, and  J.  Ottenwaelder,
                                                     "Apparition  de  Benzo-3-4-pyrene  dans  Diverses
                                                     Souches de Phyto-plancton Marin Cultivees in vitro.
                                                     R8le Eventuel des  Bacteries  Associees," Compt.
                                                     Rend. Acad. ScL Paris, Serv.  D, 268, 1109-1112
                                                     (1969).
                                                 75.  J. Perdriau, "Pollution Marine par les Hydrocarbures
                                                     Cancerigenes-Type Benzo-3.4  Pyrene—Incidence
                                                     Biologiques ,"  Cah. Oceanogr.,  16, 125-138 (1964).
                                                 76.  S.  B. Petrikevich, G. Ye. Danil'tseva,  and M. N.
                                                     Miesel', "Accumulation and Chemical Transformation
                                                     of 3,4-Benzpyrene by Microorganisms," Dokl. BioL
                                                     ScL, 159,845-847(1964).
                                                 77.  C.  Piccinetti,  "Diffusione   dell'Idrocarburo
                                                     Cancerogeno Benzo  3-4  Pirene  nell'Alto  e Medio
                                                     Adriatico," Arch. Oceanogr.  Limnol, Suppl.,  15,
                                                     169-183(1967).
                                                 78.  M. N. Poglazova, G. E. Fedoseeva, A. J. Khesina, M.
                                                     N. Meissel,  and  L.  M.  Shabad, "Destruction of
                                                     Benzo(a)pyrene by Soil Bacteria," Life Sciences, 6,
                                                     1053-1062(1967).
                                                 79.  M. N. Poglazova, G. E. Fedoseeva, A. Ya. Khesina, M.
                                                     N. Meisel', and L. M. Shabad, "Further Investigations
                                                     on  the  Decomposition  of  Benz(a)pyrene  by  Soil
                                                     Bacteria," Dokl. BioL ScL, 172,649-651 (1967).
                                                 80.  M. N. Poglazova, G. E. Fedoseeva, A. Ya. Khesina, M.
                                                     N. Meisel', and L. M. Shabad, "The Oxidation of
                                                     Benz(a)pyrene  by  Microorganisms in  Relation to Its
                                                     Concentration in the Medium,"  DokL BioL  ScL, 179,
                                                     199-201 (1968).
                                                 81.  K. S. Rhee and  L. J. Bratzler. "Benzo(a)pvrene in
                                                     Smoked Meat Products," J. Food Ser., 35,  146-149.
                                                     (1970).

-------
                                                                        CARCINOGENIC HYDROCARBONS  451
82. R.H. Rigdon and J. Neal, "Absorption and Excretion
    of  Benzpyrene  in the  Cockroach (Periplaneta
    americana),"Experientia, 19, 474-477 (1963).
83. J. C. Roe, "Cancer Inducing Agents," Science J., 2,
    3842(1966).
84. M. H.  Rogoff, "Oxidation of Aromatic Compounds
    by Bacteria,"  Adv.  Appl.  MicrobioL, 3,  193-221
    (1961).
85. M. H.  Rogoff and I.  Wender,  "The Microbiology of
    Coal.  I.  Bacterial Oxidation  of  Phenanthrene," J.
    Bacterial., 73, 264-268 (1957).
86. E. Sawicki, W. Elbert, T. W. Stanley, T.  R. Hauser,
    and F. T. Fox, "The  Detection and Determination of
    Polynuclear  Hydrocarbons  in Urban Airborne
    Particulates. I. The Benzopyrene Fraction," Int. J.
    Air Poll, 2, 273-282 (1960).
87. E. Sawicki, S. P. McPherson, T. W. Stanley, J. Meeker,
    and W.  C.  Elbert,   "Quantitative Composition  of
    Urban  Atmosphere   in Terms of Polynuclear Aza
    Heterocyclic  Compounds  and  Aliphatic and
    Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons," Air  & Water
    Poll., 9, 515-524 (1965).
88. M.  Scaccini  Cicatelli, "Studio  dei  Fenomeni  di
    Accumulo  del Benzo 3-4 Pirene nell  'Organismo di
    Tubifex," Boll.  Pesca,  Piscicolture Idrobiol,  -20,
    245-250 (1965).
89. M.  Scaccini  Cicatelli,   "II  Benzo 3-4 Pirene,
    Idrocarburo  Cancerigeno  neH'Ambiente  Marino,"
    Arch. Zool. Ital, 51,747-774 (1966).
90. L. M.  Shabad, "On the Distribution and  the Fate of
    the  Carcinogenic  Hydrocarbon  Benz(a)pyrene (3,4
    Benzpyrene)  in  the Soil,"  Z.  Krebsforsch.,  70,
    204-210(1968).
91. L. M. Shabad and P.  R. Dikun, "On the Distribution,
    Circulation and Fate of Carcinogenic Hydrocarbons in
    Man's Environment," IX Intern.  Cancer  Congr.
    Abstracts, p. 1252, Tokyo (1966).
92. P. Shubik and K. L. Hartwell, Survey of Compounds
    Which  Have Been Tested for Carcinogenic Activity,
    Supplement 2, Publ. No.  149,  655  pp.,  National
    Cancer   Institute,   U.S.  Public  Health  Service,
    Washington, D.C. (1969).
93. F. D.  Sisler and C. E. ZoBell, "Microbial Utilization
    of  Carcinogenic   Hydrocarbons,"  Science, 106,
    521-522(1947).
 94.  G.  C.  Speers  and E.  V.  Whitehead,  "Crude
    Petroleum," in Organic Geochemistry: Methods and
    Results,  G. Eglinton and  M.T. J.  Murphy  (eds.),
    638-675, Springer-Verlag, New York (1969).
 95. Statistical Abstracts of the  United States, Abstracts,
    U.S. Dept. of Commerce (1970).
 96. A.  C. Stern (ed.), Air Pollution: Sources of Air
    Pollution and Their Control, 2nd ed., Vol. 3, 866 pp.,
    Academic Press, New York (1968).
 97. J. F. Thomas, B. D. Tebbesn, E. N.  Sanborn, and J.
    M.  Cripps,  "Fluorescent  Spectra of Aromatic
    Hydrocarbons  Found in Polluted Atmosphere," Int.
    J. Air Poll, 2,210-220 (1960).
 98.   V.  Treccani,  "Microbial  Degradation  of
    Aromatic  Hydrocarbons," Z.  Allg.  Mikrobiol,  5,
    Hydrocarbons,"  Prog. Indust.  Micorbiol,  4, 3-33
    (1962).
 99. V. Treccani, "Microbial Degradation of Aliphatic and
    332-341 (1965).
100. J. L. Varshavsky, L. M. Shabad, A. Ya. Khesina, S. S.
    Khitrovo, V. G. Chalabov,  and A. J. Phakholochik,
    "Quantitative  Determination  of the  Content  of
    Benz(a)pyrene in Exhaust Gases  of Diesel Engines,"
    Zh.  Prikl. Spektroskopii, 8,  105-110,  in  Russian
    (1965).

101. E.  L. Wynder and D. Hoffmann, "A Study of Air
    Pollution Carcinogenesis. III. Carcinogenic Activity of
    Gasoline Engine Exhaust Condensate,"  Cancer,  15,
     103-108(1962).
102.  L.  Young,  "The  Detoxication  of   Carbocyclic
     Compounds," Physiol Rev.,  19, 323-352 (1939).
103.  L.  Young,  "The  Oxidation  of  Polycyclic
     Hydrocarbons in the  Animal Body," Biochem, Soc.
    Symposia, No. 5, 27-39 (1950).

 104. J.  Zdrazil and  F. Picha, "The Occurrence of the
     Carcinogenic Compounds 3,4-Benzpyrene and Arsenic
     in the Soil," Neoplasma (Bratisl.), 13,49-55 (1966).
 105.  C.  E.  ZoBell,  "Action  of  Microorganisms  on
     Hydrocarbons," Bact. Rev.,  10, M9(1946).
 106. C.  E.  ZoBell,  "Assimilation  of Hydrocarbons  by
     Microorganisms,"  Adv.  Enzymol.,  10,  443-486
     (1950).
 107. C. E. ZoBell, "Microbiology of Oil," New Zealand
     Oceanogr. Inst. Mem. No. 3,3947 (1959).

-------
                        CLEANING AND  REHABILITATION
                                     OF  OILED  SEABIRDS
                                                 Goran Odham
                                              Goteborg University
                                                    Sweden
  Release of oil  from tankers is  a  constant threat to
seabirds, especially along seaboards or in inland seas. The
problem has recently been accentuated in the Baltic where
the sea traffic includes tankers of more than 100,000 tons.
A  collision  here  could exterminate  certain species  of
seabirds, and could affect other animals as well as marine
vegetation.

  The ability of the seabirds to spend a large part of their
lives on water is due to  their water-proof plumage. The
water-repellant property of  the plumage depends on the
textures of the feathers  and the presence of a water-proof-
ing wax that is produced  by the preen gland at the bird's
rear.

  Experience gained from the study of oil seabirds has
shown  that  oil impairs two important  qualities of  the
plumage: water repellency and heat insulation. After oiling,
the bird's ability to fly decreases or is  totally lost,  and
because water  repellency  of the plumage is lost, feeding
becomes  more difficult. The risk of poisoning by toxic
sulphur compounds in the  oil is  also very real. Post
mortems have shown that oil is frequently  present in the
digestive  tract, presumably  as a result  of preening. Oil
poisoning changes the natural bacterial flora, and is often
followed by fungal infections of the intestinal organs.

  When  detergents  are used to wash  oiled seabirds the
natural  feather wax is removed as  the solubility  and
emulsifying properties and the feather wax of the  contami-
nating  oil are almost identical. Due to the  importance of
wax in maintaining water repellency and heat insulation no
seabiid can be returned  to its natural environment  until the
wax has been replaced in one way or another.

  Investigations of the chemical composition of the wax
have been in progress at the Institute of Medical Biochemis-
try at the University of Goteborg for several years. The wax
producing gland is a paired organ at the rump of the bird.
The  gland  forms a small  protuberance  around the two
excretory openings. Around them are arranged two small
downy tufts which in the living bird are soaked with feather
wax. The secretion of the preen gland resembles that of the
sebacious glands in being of destructive type, i.e., the whole
cells of the glandular  epithelium are successively trans-
formed into secretion.

   Preen  gland wax of about  fifteen species of seabirds
belonging  mainly to  the  family of Anatidae  has been
investigated so far. The amount of secretion that could be
continuously collected from a bird varied from a few mg up
to 200 mg every  second day. Chemically,  the wax consists
of monoesters composed of longchain fatty alcohols and
fatty  acids. The  acids and alcohols often possess methyl
branches on  the carbon chains. Interestingly, different
species produce secretions  of differing chemical composi-
tion; the wax is utterly species-specific [cf. e.g. 1 ].

   As an example the chemical composition of the feather
wax of the common eider (Somateria mollissima) is shown
in Tables 1 and 2.2 Clearly, a very complex pattern of acids
and alcohols is at hand. If all combinations between acids
and alcohols exist the number of different wax molecule
structures exceeds 300.

   An even more complicated pattern of wax molecules is
found in the  preen gland secretion  of the guillemot (Una
aalge), a species which has been investigated at the request
of the Imperial Chemical Industries following the grounding
of the Torrey Canyon. Here, capillary gas chromatography
showed the presence of more than 100 fatty acid structures
(Figure 1) and about the  same number of  alcohols. Thus
the number of possible different wax structures exceeds
10,000.
                                                    453

-------
  454   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
 Figure 1. Gas Chromatogram of Methyl Esters of Fatly Acids from the Qufflemot. Golay Type R Capillary Column at 168°. Inset: Expanded
 Region of the Methyl Esters from n-Cg to n-C,2 at 160°.
    As mentioned, the preen gland produces on an average
  about 50 mg of wax per day, which compensates for the
  natural loss, and the  plumage usually contains a few grams
  of preen gland  wax.  It is obvious that it takes a very long
  time  for the bird to replace all the wax after cleaning. The
  species specificity and the very complex nature of the wax,
  as exemplified  above, makes it essential to use  a more
  simple composition, a unit wax, for replacement purposes.

    In  connection with an  accidental release of oil in the
 harbor of Goteborg attempts were made to clean 150 oiled
 swans with an emulsion of triolein in water. Synthetic "unit
 wax"  (Pur-Cellin oil, Dragoco, Holtzminden, Germany) was
 subsequently sprayed on  the plumage.  In practice the
 spraying technique was not  very  satisfactory; overdoses
 were given  resulting in a plumage with the same properties
 as the original oiled plumage.

    To   overcome this problem  a new  cleaning  agent,
 Larodan  121, with which  the waxing takes place during
 cleaning (a  method  similar  to  that  sometimes used in
 cleaning cars) was formulated3. The cleaning agent consists
 of  a crystalline dispersion of hydrophilic lipid crystals in
 water with the unit wax mentioned embedded in the crystal
 matrix. The  formation of the lipid crystal dispersion and its
 structure and properties will be described here.

   In  connection with a study of  the phase behavior of
aqueous glyceride systems and the structure of the various
liquid-crystalline  and  micellar  phases, a new structure of
 general type was described4 -. It is formed in the water-rich
 part  of the  phase diagram  (in the region about 50-100
 weight  per cent water)  at  a certain range of the hydro-
 philic-lipophilic  balance  (H.L.B.).  The  lipid in  question
 must thus be hydrophilic  enough  to interact with  water,
 but lipophilic enough not to give a micellar solution. If for
 example  a-hydroxy  fatty acids in excess  of water  are
 considered,  they give a micellar  solution at short  chain
 lengths and no interaction with water at very long chains,
 whereas the actual liquid-crystalline structure is formed at
 medium chain  lengths  (e.g. C12).  The  structure of this
 phase is concentric with bimolecular lipid layers alternating
 with  water layers. These particles dispersed in the  water
 medium are either spherical or cylindrical in shape. The
 lipid  layers separated by  water layers  expose the  polar
 groups toward the water, and the hydrocarbon chains  are in
 a liquid state.


   The particles exhibit strong birefringence when observed
in the polarizing microscope as shown  in  Figure 2. The
same  structure has earlier been observed in diluted water
dispersions of lecithins using electron microscopy.


   Lipid molecules of long-chain  type  crystallize in thin
 sheets parallel to  the bimolecular  layers, as  indicated  in
Figure 3. When  this  type of lipid is crystallized from the
melt or from nonpolar solvents in which they are soluble,
the dominating crystal surface is formed by the terminating
methyl  groups of  the hydrocarbon  chains.  This  gives the

-------
                                                                                  OILED SEABIRDS    455
 Figure  2.  A Liquid-Crystalline  Monoglyceride-Water  Dispersion
 Viewed in the Polarizing Microscope. The Structure Consists Mainly
 of Concentric Cylindrical Threads.
crystals hydrophobia properties (cf. Figure 3). If, however,
the  lipid crystals  are formed  in  the  liquid-crystalline
medium  described earlier, the  crystals appear to grow by
discrete layer units corresponding to the bimolecular layers
constituting  the  concentric particles. The crystallization
mechanique is illustrated in Figure 4. The polar end groups
will  thus be  exposed  on the  dominating surface, which
results in hydrophilic  properties of the crystals. As a
consequence of the hydrophilic properties it is possible to
        muuuuwuuuum
              tmnmmmmmi
              muuwwm
                                                                   uuuuuwuuuuuutu
                                                                     mmmmmmmmm
Figure 3. Fragment of a Lipid Crystal (each molecule is indicated by
the chain axis and the polar group only). Illustrating the Dominating
Surface Formed by the Methyl End Groups.
                                                       Figure  4. Schematic Illustration of the Proposed Crystallization
                                                       Mechanism from a Liquid-Crystalline  Dispersion, at which the
                                                       Dominating  Crystal Surfaces are  Formed  by  the Polar Groups.
obtain a dispersion of such crystals in as much as 90 weight
per cent water with a firm consistency. One application of
hydrophilic lipid  crystals is their use as an ointmentbase.5

   The formulated cleaning agent for oiled seabirds consists
of a dispersion of hydrophilic monolaurin cyrstals  in water,
and as the unit wax is present during the crystallization the
wax first forms microdroplets  in  the central part of the
liquid-crystalline  particles.  The  wax  droplets  seem  to
remain unchanged after the crystallization, the difference
being that they afterwards are surrounded by crystalline
monoglycerides  instead of the  flexible liquid-crystalline
lamellae. The hydrophilic monoglyceride crystal dispersion
has a good emulgating capability of oil. The crystals can
easily be split mechanically along  the methyl  end group
planes. The emulgating  properties are probably due to such
separation of  the layers constituting the crystals,  at which
hydrophobic surfaces are formed.  The idea  behind the
formulation is that the wax microdroplets are located in the
central part of the crystalline particles, and at cleaning the
layers will separate.

   In Larodan, the hydrophilic lipid is the 1-monoglyceride
of dodecanoic acid (chain length 12) and the synthetic wax
(Pur-Cellin oil) contains a methyl-branched C7 -acid linked
to rt-octadecanol-1. The wax is a common component of
cosmetic preparations (Larodan  127 refers to these chain-
lengths). The proportions of the three components, mono-
glyceride, wax and water, were adjusted on the  basis of
practical tests so  that the final product consisted of 20%
monoglyceride and 29c wax in water. The cleaning agent
thus consists of two lipid components of the same type as
those occurring naturally in seabirds.

   The cleaning agent was tested in the laboratory on ten
Peiping ducks contaminated with  Shell  talpa oil 30 to
which carbon powder  had  been  added. About  100 g of
contaminant was  used on each bird, and after 3 days they
were washed with the cleaning agent. Only one washing was
required to remove the  oil, and after 8-10 days the  birds
could swim.  Comparisons with  other  cleaning agents

-------
456   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
showed that with these the washing procedure was longer,
and the birds took longer to float.

   Larodan has been used on a large scale in Scandinavia,
for example in Gavle, Sweden, where about seventy-five
birds belonging to the family of Anatidae were successfully
cleaned and returned to their natural environment within a
fortnight.
Table 1:  Acids Found in the Preen Gland Wax ofSomateria
         moltissima.
Table 2: Alcohols Found in  the  Preen Gland Wax of
        Somateria molKsama.
           Structure
                                   Relative abundance
2,6-Dimethyloctanoic acid                  18.2
2D,4D,6D-Trimethyloctanoic acid            12.6
4.6-Dimethyloctanoic acid                   4.9
2,4-Dimethylnonanoic acid                   1.3
2D,4D,6D-Trimethyhionanoic acid           27.0
2,6-Dimethyldecanoic acid                   7.8
2,8-Dimethyldecanoic acid                   2.7
2D,4D,6D,8D-Tetramethyldecanoic acid        2.1
2,6,8-Trimethyldecanoic acid                 8.6
2,6-Dimethylundecanoic acid                 3.1
2D,4D,6D,8D-Tetramethylundecanoic acid     1.5
Unidentified material                        5.9

n-Hexanoic acid                             0.1
n-Heptanoic acid                            0.1
n-Octanoic acid                             1.4
R-Nananoic acid                             0.2
R-Decanoic acid                             2.1
R-Undecanoic acid                           0.1
R-Dodecanoic acid                           0.3
                                         100.0
          Structure

Straight chain alcohols
     n-Tetradecanol-1
     n-Pentadecanol-1
     n-Hexadecanol-1
     n-Heptadecanol-1
     H-Octadecanol-1
                                                         Branched alcohols
                                                              Branched C
                                                              Branched C
                                                              Branched C
                                                              Branched C
               15
               17
               17
               19
                                Relative abundance
  0.9
  0.5
 28.1
  1.7
 63.7
 94.9

  0.3
  2.1
  1.6
  S.I

100.0
                                                         REFERENCES

                                                           1. Odham, G., and Stenhagen, E., Ace. Chem. Res. 1971
                                                         In press.
                                                           2. Odham, G., Arkiv Kemi 27,263 (1961)
                                                           3. Larsson, K., and Odham, G., Marine Poll. Bull. 1,122
                                                         (1970)
                                                           4. Larsson, K., Z. phys. Chem. 56,173 (1967)
                                                           5. Larsson, K., English Patent No. 1174672 (1970)

-------
                     INITIAL  AGING  OF  FUEL  OIL  FILMS
                                       OF  SEA   WATER
                                    Craig L. Smith and William G. Maclntyre
                                       Virginia Institute of Marine Science
ABSTRACT
   The process of aging or weathering of nos. 2, 4, and 6
fuel oil  films on sea water has been  studied both  in
laboratory apparatus and at sea. Loss of oil components by
evaporation and dissolution was considered to be the main
mechanism of the initial weathering. The rates of evapora-
tion of  each oil type and  comparison of the relative
importance of evaporation and dissolution  are  reported.
During the initial weathering period, the rate of evaporative
loss of  weight  of a given  fuel oil was found to  be
proportional  to the percentage of volatile compounds (ie.
with  boiling points  less  than  27
-------
458   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
                                          EXHAUST
                                        DRY ICE, ACETONE
           Figure 1: Bubbler assembly foi oil film aging.

permitted  removal of  sea  water  for  analyses,  avoiding
contamination by the film.
   The cold trap contents, as well as the sea water aliquots
were extracted with several  portions of pentane, and the
extracts adjusted to a standard volume for gas chromato-
graphic  analysis.  A Perkin-Elmer Model 900 gas chroma-
tograph with  flame ionization  detectors  was fitted with
dual %" x 3' copper columns packed with 5% SE-30 on
80/100 mesh acid washed and sflanized Chromosorb W. The
temperature was programmed at the rate of 8° per minute
from SO-300°C. These  conditions  and  choice of column
were selected to provide the low resolution requirements of
the ASTM  Boiling Range Test by Gas Chromatography
(D2887-70T).  The chromatograms obtained, therefore, do
not show the  detail possible from  normal operation. The
chromatograms were quantified by  comparison  of peak
areas with those of hydrocarbon reference standards.

   A spill of 200 gallons of no. 2 fuel oil 15 miles off the
Virginia coast was sampled hourly from the time of release
until effective dissipation. Samples were scooped  from the
film  and  stored in foil-lined Mason jars at  Dry  Ice
temperatures until analysis. The air and water temperatures
during this study were almost constant, at about  5°C. The
wind and sea state at the time of release were very calm,
but increased to 18-20  knots with whitecaps and breaking
waves.  After 8 hours,  the  film could  no longer be
effectively sampled. Gas chromatograms of the raw oil
itself, or of a pentane extract were made for each sample.
   The  fuel oils used in this study had various origins and
somewhat  vague histories. The no.  2 oil was a straight  run
distillate derived from  various Texas  crudes, and had  a
boiling  range  of 170-370"C.  Its composition is defined
Table 1. About half of  this grade is in the volatile portion
with boiling point less  than 270°C. The nos. 4 and 6 fuel
oils  were  derived  from Venezuelan  crudes, and were
characterized by their supplier as mixtures of pure residual
oil with various refinery distillates, blended to an appro-
priate viscosity. Both these  oils had initial boiling points
around  170°C,  and actual  distillation showed no major
discontinuities in boiling point composition. The  aromatic
character  of  the  oils  was determined  by the  ASTM
                                                            Table 1:  Fuel Oil Composition

                                                                           Boiling Range (at 760mm)
  Fuel
  oa

  #2
  #4
  #6
                                                                      Below
                                                                      200°C
                 200-
                 270° C

                  45%
Above
270°C

 50%
 85%
 90%
Aromatic
Character

  42%
  45%
  29%
each, corresponding approximately to the 170-270° C boil-
ing range.

Results

   The rates of loss of volatiles from each grade of fuel oil
are compared graphically in Figure 2. The plots of all three
oils show the common feature of a high initial rate of loss
during the  first ten hours, which tapers off to a nearly
linear slope. How long this linear portion of the loss curves
will  be found has not  been  determined, but  it must
eventually flatten  out  as the reserve of volatiles in the oil
film is depleted. The change in boiling range composition
      14-
  hi
  oc
  o
  £L
  <
  hi
  U.
  O
  z
  hi
  O

  cc.
  hi
  Q.
      12-
10-
                  I
                 10
                   20
                 TIME  (hours)
Figure 2: Rates  of fuel  oil evaporation in bubbler  apparatus,
25'C., 2 liters/minute flow.

-------
                                                                              AGING OF FUEL OIL FILMS    459
with time of the trapped evaporate fractions of nos. 2, 4,
and 6  fuel oils is shown in Figure 3. The bottom and top
curves represent the initial and final boiling points of the
fraction, and the middle  curve defines the mean boiling
point of the fraction. The results from each of the three oils
were sufficiently similar to  permit the use of only one curve
for each of the three  oils. Differences  of any significance
were noted only in the first six hours. A broken portion of
each curve in that region demonstrates the general trend of
the three oils only. The boiling ranges were determined by
the  ASTM Boiling Range  Test by  Gas Chromatography.
Note that the initial and mean boiling point curves assume a
linear slope, while the final boiling point curve flattens out
«  300°.
o
o
a.
o
z
J  200°-
o

-------
460   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
   The amount of oil components found dissolved in the
sea water was found to be almost negligible when compared
to the amount evaporated for all three oils. There are prob-
ably several reasons for this result, but the limit of solubili-
ty does not appear to be a critical factor. Naphthalene, for
example, was found in concentrations some two orders of
magnitude smaller than its maximum calculated solubility.
It also appears from comparisons of gas chromatograms of
the oil before and after the weathering experiment that the
reserves of the possible water soluble components of the oil
film have not been exhausted. An experiment designed to
prove this is planned. The most  likely explanation is that
dissolution  of the water solubles is in direct competition
with  evaporation. This is borne out  by  the finding of
considerable quantities  of  aromatics  in  the evaporate
fractions, including those compounds which were identified
in  the  water extracts. These compounds  may either be
evaporated  directly  from  the  oil film, or they  may be
efficiently scrubbed  from the sea water by the air sweep
which was continuously bubbled through it. A recent paper •
on the subject1 shows that even aromatic hydrocarbons are
fairly readily partitioned  into  the  gas phase from an
aqueous solution.
   The gas chromatogram of the sea water extract from the
weathering experiment with no. 4 fuel oil is compared with
the gas chromatogram of a low boiling distillate fraction of
no. 4 fuel  oil in Figure 5.  The aromatic portion  of the
         #4  fuel oil
      aromatic  fraction
        #4  fuel oil
       aqueous extract
               200° C        240* C        280° C

   SIMULATED  BOILING  POINT  (ASTM D2887-70T)
Figure  5: Comparison of no.  4 fuel oil aromatic fraction, bp.
190-25CTC with no. 4 fuel on water solubles.
distillate fraction, separated by column chromatography on
silica gel,  is shown  to be quite similar. The  saturated
portion of the distillate fraction was entirely different in
character. The most  interesting  feature  of the  sea water
extract  is the  low  concentration  of  the low  boiling
 alkylbenzenes, which are thought to be  quite soluble in
 water. This again, may be a result of scrubbing by the air
 sweep.  The relatively  large amounts of these compounds
 which were found dissolved in sea water after equilibration
 with petroleum products in a recent report2 may be due to
 the fact that the authors permitted no equilibration of their
 system  with the atmosphere. In most natural environmental
 situations, an  oil film and the first  few feet of water
 beneath it are in  good contact with the atmosphere due to
 wave action. Therefore, the lower molecular  weight alkyl-
 benzenes  from an unconfined oil spill should be released to
 the  atmosphere  for  the  most  part, and would not be
 dissolved. The majority of the components of a fuel oil spill
 which do dissolve, then, will be  the less soluble but far less
 volatile high boiling aromatics.
   The assignment of the peaks in these chromatograms was
 made on the  basis of identical retention time with an
 authentic sample where possible, or by the mass spectrum
 of the  fraction  trapped from the gas  chromatograph
 effluent.  A more detailed study of the scrubbing pheno-
 menon is  planned when the gas chromatograph is set up for
 higher resolution.
   The study of the behaviour of an oil film at sea is limited
 to the periodic sampling of the  film itself, mainly because
 of the high dilution factors involved for the evaporated and
 dissolved  components. Figure 6  shows the rates of loss of
several representative normal paraffins from an unconfined
spill  of no. 2  fuel oil  at sea. The rates of loss of these
                 WIND  SPEED  (knots)
            I           10       15    18   18
    100-
        0      I      234567
                        TIME  (hours)
 Figure 6: Rate of loss of /t-paraffins from no. 2 fuel oil slick at sea.
 5*C.

-------
                                                                                AGING OF FUEL OIL FILMS   461
paraffins show a regular decrease as the carbon chain, and
boiling point increase. The rather sharp break observable in
the curves after about three hours is due to a major increase
in wind strength.  The  wind,  which was of  negligible
intensity at first, increased to a velocity of about 18 knots.
The  break  in the  curves corresponds  to the onset of
whitecapping  and breaking waves. Such wave action in-
creases the  surface  area of the film and  at the same time,
decreases film thickness. At sea, as well as in the laboratory
bubbler experiment, the  rate  of loss of compounds with
boiling points higher than 270° is  quite  small. Table 3
compares the percentages of  normal paraffins lost  from
films of no. 2 fuel oil at sea after about 6 hours with those
lost from no.  2 oil films in the laboratory bubbler after 40
hours. Despite the fact  that the weathering in the bubbler
apparatus was carried out at 20°C higher temperature and
for 7 times longer, losses from the film  at sea were much
larger. Rough calculations show that the bubbler experi-
ment would have to have  been continued in excess of 100
hours to  achieve comparable  weathering. This result is
believed to be due to the fact that at sea, air flow across the
film surface was several orders of magnitude  greater than
that  in the laboratory,  when  the wind velocity and total
surface area per unit volume of oil was considered.
   It was initially planned to  study  laboratory weathering
where the  air sweep was just passed over the oil film,
instead of being bubbled through. Preliminary experiments
showed that this resulted  in a slower rate of evaporation of
volatiles.  Because the evaporation rate  at sea  so greatly
exceeded that with bubbling,  weathering in the laboratory
in this non-turbulent mode should have even less relevance
to the processes in actual oil spills. Future experiments are
to be carried but at increased rates of weathering.

   In summary, we find that  the major  pathway of initial
weathering of  fuel  ofls  is  evaporative loss  of volatile
components.  The  volatile components  are those with  a
boiling point  less than  270° C. The  initial rates of loss of
Table 3:   Loss of n-Paraffins from #2 Fuel OU


              Percent of initial concentration lost
 Normal   After 6 hrs. at sea,           After 40 hrs. in
Paraffin    18 kn. wind, 5°C           bubbler, 2S°C
Decane
Hendecane
Dodecane
Tridecane
Tetradecane
Pentadecane
96.
85.-
58.-
44.:
 7.1
 5.'
80.7%
45.8%
19.7%
 5.5%
none
none
 these volatiles are proportional to the amount of volatile
 material present. The  oil viscosity doesn't seem to be an
 important factor. Large accelerations of weathering rates
 occur when  wind  strength  increases  to  the  onset of
 whitecaps and breaking waves. Even the relatively water-
 soluble low boiling  alkylbenzenes are readily evaporated,
 leaving the less  soluble higher boiling aromatics  as the
 major dissolved species.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

   We would like to thank the Federal Water Quality
 Administration for financial  support of this study, NASA
 Wallops  Island  for vessel support, and NASA Langely
 Research Center for use of their mass spectrometer.

 REFERENCES

   1) C. McAuliffe, Chen Tech., Jan. 1971, p. 46.
   2) D. B.  Boylan  and  B.  W. Tripp, Nature,  230,
 44(1971).

-------
                PHYSICAL  PROCESSES  IN  THE  SPREAD  OF
                            OIL  ON  A  WATER  SURFACE
                                                  James A. Fay
                                            Fluid Mechanics Laboratory
                                       Department of Mechanical Engineering
                                       Massachusetts Institute of Technology
                                             Cambridge, Massachusetts
 ABSTRACT
    Formulae are recommended for calculating the extent
 of the spread of oil slicks on water as a function of time.
 They are based on empirical measurements of spreading
 rates and analytical and theoretical studies of the physical
 processes which accelerate or retard the  spread of a film.
 Both one-dimensional and two-dimensional (axisymmetric)
 slicks are treated. Comparisons of the recommended formu-
 lae are made with the limited number of field observations,
 both for the rate of spread and the maximum slick size.

 INTRODUCTION
    This paper reviews our current understanding  of the
 physical processes which initially cause and ultimately ter-
 minate the spread of oil (or other immiscible fluids) on the
 surface of water. We are principally  concerned with the
 spread  of large volumes of oil,  such as might be encount-
 ered in spills from ships or oil wells, and which cannot be
 reproduced easily in a laboratory at full scale. Our approach
 is to consider  some simple cases of oil spread, which will
 not likely be duplicated precisely in practice, but for which
 a theoretical or semi-empirical  description can be found,
 especially through use of properly designed laboratory exp-
 eriments  which simulate full scale spreading phenomena.
 Based on this understanding, a  correlation of field observ-
 ations is  made as a test of the  suitability and accuracy of
 these predictions, and empirical formulae for  estimating
 spreading rates are recommended.
   The physically most  important assumption  underlying
our analysis, which is most likely to be violated in any real
incident of a spill, is the  absence of any effects of wind,
tidal currents and waves. We would expect that the drifting
motion caused by winds and tidal currents would simply be
superimposed  on the spreading  motion to be experienced
on  calm, stationary water, since these latter motions are
confined to a layer near the surface which is relatively thin
compared with that subject to wind friction effects or tidal
motion. It is more likely  that wind and tidal current will
produce relative shearing motion in the plane of the water
surface, deforming the shape of the spreading slick from
those simple shapes expected in calm water. Such distortion
is commonly observed, and is most likely to limit the useful-
ness of the spreading laws which we propose. These effects
are very difficult  to predict or even describe, and there is
little empirical evidence on which  to  base an estimate of
their importance.
    The first order effects of surface waves, on the other
hand, can be shown to be negligible. Because of their per-
iodic nature, waves produce oscillatory forces having zero
mean value and which therefore do  not affect the spreading
motion which proceeds on a much longer time scale than
the  usual wave periods.  Of course, there are non-linear
effects of waves which are probably not separately disting-
uishable  from  those  associated  with  winds and  tidal
currents, and are equally difficult to predict.
    The  use  of laboratory scale experiments to  establish
empirical spreading laws and to check theoretical predic-
tions has been discussed elsewhere!. We shall make  use of
such experimental evidence to provide the best estimate of
spreading rates, accepting the asserted validity of the scaling
of these experiments to full size. The basis of such scaling is
a well understood aspect of fluid mechanics, and will not be
further discussed here.
 *This research was supported by the U.S. Coast Guard under

 contract No. DOT-CG-01-381-A.
                                                     463

-------
464   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
     Accurate field observations of the spread of oil slicks
 are  very  rare. We have tried to include  all measurements
 which have been published, but in most cases we have been
 forced to assume  additional information, such as spreading
 coefficients, when comparing  these  observations with a
 theory. Given the inaccuracy  of  the observations, these
 assumptions are of no great significance,  but only serve to
 emphasize the scarcity and crudity of the observations. A
 major goal of our proposed  correlations is to permit  the
 comparison  with  future (and hopefully more accurate)
 observations.

 Spreading and Retarding Forces
     Although the force of  gravity acts downward, it causes
 a sidewise spreading motion of a floating oil film by creat-
 ing  an unbalanced pressure distribution in the pool of oil
 and the surrounding water. This force on an element of oil
 film acts  in the direction of decreasing film thickness and is
 proportional to the thickness, its gradient, and the differ-
 ence in density between oil and water. (See  Fig. 1.) As  the
 oil  film  spreads  and becomes thinner, the gravity  force
 diminishes.
     At the front edge of the  expanding slick an imbalance
 exists between the surface tension at the water-air interface
 and the sum of surface tensions at the oil-air and oil-water
 interfaces. Hie net difference, called the spreading coeffic-
 ient, is a force which acts at the edge of the film, pulling it
 outwards. This  spreading force does not  depend upon the
 film thickness as  does the  gravity force, and will not  de-
 crease as the oil film thins out (unless the chemical proper-
 ties  change through aging). Eventually the surface tension
 force will predominate as the spreading force.
     These spreading forces are counterbalanced by the
 inertia of the oil  film  and  of the thin boundary layer of
 water below it which is dragged along by friction (see Fig.
 1). The inertia of an element of the oil  layer decreasess with
 its thickness as time progresses and the  film spreads, but the
 inertia of the viscous layer of water below the oil increases
 with time as its thickness grows. Consequently, the viscous
 retardation will eventually  outweigh the inertial resistance
.of the oil layer itself.
            GRAVITY
        INERTIA
                                     SURFACE  TENSION
 &-J7T
T	
 FRICTION
          Fig. 1:  , The four forces which act on an oil film
                  (see list of symbol!).
     It is also informative to consider these effects from the
 point of an energy balance. A pool of oil floating on water
 possesses a greater potential evergy than the water  it dis-
 places,  in proportion to its thickness. As it spreads and its
 thickness decreases, there is a loss of potential energy. Also,
 as air/water surface is replaced  by an oil film, the surface
 energy per unit area (which has  the same physical value as
 the interfacial tension) is reduced  by an amount equal to
 the spreading coefficient.  Thus both surface  energy and
 potential  energy  are decreased  as  the slick spreads. This
 energy is converted either  into heat by viscous dissipation
 in the water beneath the slick or into the energy  of gravity
 surface waves which propagate away from the expanding oil
 pool. In other words,  each  spreading  force  is associated
 with  an energy-producing process and each retarding force
 with an energy-dissipating process.
    It is thus clear that the spread of an oil film will pass
 through several stages as time progresses, in each of which
 one  spreading force  will  be balanced  by one  retarding
 force.2 Although there are four such possible combinations,
 for large scale slicks only  three  regimes are important: (i)
 the gravity-inertia regime (called "inertial spread"), (ii) the
 gravity-viscous regime (called "viscous spread") and the sur-
 face  tension-viscous  regime  (called  "surface tension
 spread"). As time progresses, a large spill will pass through
 these  three regimes in succession. A very small spill (a few
liters, say) will almost from  the start behave as  a surface
 tension spread.
    The  spreading  laws for each regime  have been  deter-
 mined, to within an unknown constant, for each regime and
 for the. cases of  a one-dimensional and two-dimensional
(axisymmetric) slick1.2. These laws give  the linear extent
of the slick (length C or radius r) as a function of the time t
 since  the oil was  released at the origin of the spread, the
volume of the oil spill and the physical properties of the oil
and water. These spreading laws are given in Table  I, and
the undetermined proportionality coefficients are denoted
by the symbol k.
Evaluation of Spreading Laws
    The proportionality  constants  k can  be determined
from laboratory  experiments or from a suitable detailed
hydrodynamic theory of the spreading motion in each re-
gime. So far, only one-dimensional  spreading experiments
have been reported1-3, and there have been advanced con-
flicting theories1-4 for the inertial  spreading regime. We
suggest below (and in Table II) best values for these coeffi-
cients,  based upon published experimental data and our
own (unpublished) theoretical analysis and extrapolation of
the empirical data. We discuss below each entry separately.
    One-dimensional  inertial spread.  Here  we  use  the
experimental value of to; = 1.5 determined by Hoult and
Suchon1 (see Fig. 2). Their theoretical value  (kjj =  3) is
clearly  in  disagreement  with the experiments. An alter-
native theoretical solution has been given by Fannelop and
Waldmant, from  which kfo is found  to be 3/101/3 = 1.39.
We believe that  the correct  theoretical value  is 3/71/3 =

-------
                                                                                  PHYSICAL PROCESSES ...  465
 1.57, for reasons which we shall not elaborate on here. This
 latter theoretical estimate  is certainly  very close to the
 observed values in the laboratory experiments.
    One-dimensional viscous spread. The empirical value of
 lqv = 1.5 determined by Hoult and Suchon1 (see Fig. 2) is
 recommended.
    io2
  S 10'
    10
                -M.5(AgAt2)"3
               J	I	
      I0"z       10"'       I          10'
                       t/[A4/(Ag)iV]l/7
10'
I0a
    Fig. 2:  Experiments showing the transition from inertial
            to viscous spread, for a one-dimensional flow^. .
                                                             'l',o-2
                                                                 10
                                                                   -3

                               o  DODECANOL -I
                               D  OLEYL ALCOHOL
                               A  COTTONSEED  OIL
                               +  TRICRESYL PHOSPHATE
                                                                                         2,3 M/4
                        10*
                                     10'
  10°
    One-dimensional  surface  tension  spread.  The
 experiments of Garret and Barger5 (see Fig. 3) and Lee3
 (see Fig. 4) both support a value of kit =1-33.
    Two-dimensional (axisymmetric) inertial spread. Since
 there are no experimental results available, we recommend
 the theoretical value of k2i = 2/ (37r)l/4 = 1.14 as determ-
 ined by the same analysis leading to  the one-dimensional
 value quoted above, and which agreed closely with the cor-
 responding  experiments.  This  value   is  also given  by
 Fannelop and Waldman-4
    Two-dimensional viscous  spread.  Again,  no experi-
 ments have been reported.  A boundary layer theory  de-
 veloped by Hoult and Suchon1  possesses no unique solu-
 tions and hence yields no definite values for kiv or  k2v- It is
 our belief that the proper solution can only be determined
 theoretically by solving the complicated flow at the leading
 edge of the slick. However, we suggest that an estimate of
 k2y can be made in the following manner. If we select  the
 one-dimensional  theoretical  solution  which  leads to  the
 observed  value of kiv, and then hypothesize that the two
 dimensional solution  should  have the  same boundary
 values,  we  can then  determine the value of k2v from this
 latter solution. Our justification for such a procedure is  the
 supposition that  the flow near the leading edge of the slick
 is  the  same  for the  two-dimensional  as  for the one-
 dimensional case, and  that the dimensionless boundary
values of the theoretical solutions, which are determined by
 this flow, should also be identical. Using this procedure, we
have found the value shown in Table II.
    Two-dimensional surface tension spread. We have used
the same  piocedure  as  that  outlined in the preceding
paragraph  to estimate the  value of k2t, shown in  Table II,
                Fig. 3:   Measurements  of  spreading  velocity  versus slick
                         length  for one-dimensional surface tension spreading
                      Q experiments.^
                   10
                    107f
                           4x106
                                10
                                  ,7
6x10'
                   Fig. 4:   Lee's experiments^  on one-dimensional surface
                    tension spreading.  Solid line corresponds to k^ = 1.33.

-------
466   PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
since there are no  experiments available.  According to
Fay2, the  maximum observed spread in field observations
would correspond to k2t = 10//F = 5.7. While this is larger
than the corresponding value recommended in Table II, it is
most likely uncertain by a factor of two because  of the
difficulties of making observations and the imperfections of
the  field experiments. A  comparison of the  theoretical
spread area with observed values is shown in Fig. 5.
     .to
    10'
    I0e
    10'
    10
                   I            I
             2 xlO* TONS OIL (TORREY CANYON)
             80   BBL  OIL
             3O   BBL  OIL
  o
— o
110
9O
25
           BBL
           BBL
           BBL
     SANTA BARBARA
                       OIL/WATER
                       OIL/WATER
                       OIL/WATER
      I03
           10"
                 10°
                t (sec)
10"
                         Fig. 5:
 A comparison of the theoretical axisymmetric slick area (for surface
 tension spread) with observed values2.6. Solid line corresponds to
 the value of k2t shown in Table II and a spreading coefficient of 30
 dyne/cm.
 The Termination of Spreading
     It has already been noted that, after some time, slicks
 cease to spread2'7. In almost all cases, the final film thick-
 ness is much greater than that of a monomolecular layer7,
 being about Ifr2 to 10~3 cm. Fay2 has suggested that the
 cessation of spread is caused by the evaporation of some oil
 fractions which  reduces, the spreading coefficient to zero.
 His estimate of slick size for which this evaporation (limited
 by  diffusion through the oil layer) would be  appreciable,
 was an order of magnitude smaller than the observed values.
     We  propose  here a modified version of this theory. We
 believe that the  spreading coefficient is reduced by an in-
 crease in the wafer-oil interfacial tension brought about by
 the dissolving of oil fractions in the water layer underneath
 ttie oil film.  The volume of oil which can be  dissolved in
 this layer (per unit area of oil/water interface) would then
 be s(Dt)l/2\ where s is the solubility of the significant oil
 fractions in water. As a consequence, the previous estimate
 of Fay would be increased by a factor of s-3/8, or a factor
 of about ten for s = 10-3, a reasonable value.  As a conse-
 quence,  the maximum area A of the slick would become,
     A „
                         1/8
                                                       10
                                                        8
                                                     UJ
                                                     cc
                  o
                  o
                                                                1
                                                                        1
                                                         1
            0246

                    LOG VOLUME  (m3)

 Fig 6:
Maximum slick area as a function of volume. Eq. (2) compared with
observations taken from Ref. 7.
                                                    in which ka is an undetermined constant of order unity.
                                                        Because of  the  uncertainties in  s and a in  the field
                                                    observations, and the lack of laboratory data, it is proposed
                                                    that the maximum slick area be  related to the volume of
                                                    the spill by the dimensional formula,

                                                          A(m2)=!05 [V(m3)]3/4                      (2)

                                                    This is compared in Fig. 6 with field observations recently
                                                    summarized by Allen and Estes7. Equation (1) would have
                                                    the value given  by  Eq. (2) if o = 10 dyne/cm, D  = 10-5
                                                    cm2/sec, s = 10-3, and ka =  1.
                                                    NOMENCLATURE
                                                    A    Volume of oil per unit length normal to x

                                                    g    Acceleration of gravity
                                                    h    Thickness of oil film
                                                    k    Proportionality constant
                                                    C    Length of one-dimensional oil slick
                                                    r    Maximum radius of axisymmetric oil slick
                                                          solubility

                                                     t     Time since initiation of spread
                                                     u     Spreading velocity of oil film
                                                     V    Volume of oil in axisymmetric spread

-------
                                                                               PHYSICAL PROCESSES ...  467
x    Dimension in direction of one-dimensional spread
8    Thickness of viscous boundary layer in the water
     underneath the oil film
a    Spreading coefficient or interfacial tension (with
     subscript)

v    Kinematic viscosity of water
ir    Absolute viscosity of water
p    Density  of water
A    Ratio of density difference between water and oil
     to density of water
                     Subscripts
                     1    One-dimensional spread
                     2    Two-dimensional (axisymmetric) spread
                     S  Maximum area
                     i     Inertial spread
                     t    Surface tension spread
                     v    Viscous spread
                     ow   Oil/water
                     aw   Air/water
                     oa   Oil/air
                                     Table I: Spreading Laws for Oil Slicks
                                       One-dimensional
          Inertial

          Viscous

          Surface tension
£ = kji (AgAt2)l/3

« = kiv (*gA2t3/2/j;1/2)l/4

£ = kit (o2t3/p2.,)l/4
Axisymmetric

r = k2i (agVt2)l/4

r = k2v(AgV2t3/2/pl/2)l/6

r = k2t(a2t3/p2J,)l/4
   Table II: Spreading Law Coefficients
One-dimensional
Inertial
Viscous
Surface tension
ku = 1.5
lqv=1.5
ku = 1-33
Axisymmetric
1.14
1.45
2.30
REFERENCES
    1. Hoult, D.P., and Suchon, W., 'The spread of oil in a
channel," Fluid Mechanics Laboratory, Dept. of Mechanical
Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cam-
bridge, May 1970.
    2. Fay, J.A., "The spread of oil slicks on a calm sea,"
Oil on the Sea (ed. by D. Hoult), pp.  53-64, Plenum, New
York, 1969.
                         3.  Lee,  R.A.,  "A study of the surface tension con-
                     trolled  regime of oil spread," M.S. Thesis, Massachusetts
                     Institute  of  Technology, Cambridge,  Jan.  1971.
                         4. Fannelop, T.K., and Waldman, G.D., 'The dynamics
                     of oil slicks or creeping crude," Paper No. 71-14, Am. Inst.
                     of Aeronautics nad Astronautics, New York, Jan.  1971.
                         5. Garrett, W.D., and Barger, W.R., "Factors affecting
                     the use of monomolecular surface films to control oil pollu-
                     tion on water," Env. Sci. and Technology, 4, pp. 123-127,
                     Feb.1970.
                         6. Allen, A., Statement on Santa Barbara oil spill pre-
                     sented to U.S. Senate Interior  Subcommittee on Minerals,
                     Materials and Fuels, May 1969.
                         7.  Allen, A.A., and Estes, J.E., "Detection  and mea-
                     surement of oil films," Santa Barbara Oil Symposium, U. of
                     California, Santa Barbara, 1970 (to be published).

-------
                   THE  BEHAVIOR  OF   OIL  ON  WATER

                  DERIVED  FROM  AIRBORNE  INFRARED

                     AND  MICROWAVE  RADIOMETRIC

                                    MEASUREMENTS

                                            J.M. Kennedy
                                            TRW Systems
                                            Houston, Texas
                                                and
                                            E.G. Wermund
                                         Remote Sensing, Inc.
                                            Houston, Texas
INTRODUCTION
   The objectives  of  this  paper  are to describe some
physical properties  of oil  spills and to evaluate both
infrared  imagery  and  the  microwave  radiometry  for
tracking and calculating volumes of oil spilled.
   According  to  1969 estimates  by  the Federal Water
Quality  Administration, now  a  member  of  the
Environmental Protection Agency, 7,000 oil spills occur in
United States Waters annually. This number is based on
identifiable slicks^Jhe true  number may be considerably
larger. Assuming this number is relatively  accurate this
relates to about 20 identifiable spills per  day,  a large
number if random  distribution  is assumed. However, a
majority of these can be related to geographic locations
where oil production, shipping, storage and pipelining are
concentrated, i.e., the Houston-Galveston area. The basic
problem is not finding a sufficient number of spills to
analyze, but is one of identifying the source,how much.and
assignment of  a hazard priority.  The most economical
method of geographical surveillance for spills, identifying
sources and predicting terminal locations is by utilization of
airborne detection and monitoring systems.

BACKGROUND
   In 1966 a series of experiments was carried out which
showed  that  long wavelength   systems  (microwave)
penetrated fresh water ice and with proper analysis, ice
thickness  could  be  measured. These laboratory
measurements and  developed theory  were  extended  to
include oil on sea water in 1967. The basic data is shown in
Figure I,  where a bistatic microwave system was used to
show that two interface  reflections occur which produce
constructive  and  destructive  electromagnetic  radiation
values.  When reflection  from the air/oil interface are in
phase  with  the  reflection from the oil/water  interface
constructive signals are received. When these reflections are
out of phase destructive interference occurs  and  the
resultant  signal is reduced. These oscillations approach a
sine wave configuration  that can be associated with oil
thickness  on a  quarter  wave length  basis. With this
established relationship it should be possible to determine
oil thickness on water to a fraction of a wavelength, once
refraction factors  are determined.  However, notice in
Figure  1  there are points of ambiguity. That is, in two
pattern wave-lengths there are four oil thickness values that
produce the same values.  This problem can be overcome by
selecting instruments  with  the proper  observational
wavelength.  If the observational  wavelength is too long,
differential values between  open  water  and  oil
contaminated water  will be  too  small to detect  or  the
accuracy would be somewhat doubtful. If the observational
wavelength is too short the ambiguity problem is present.
According to  the Melpar  Report(l)  (1969) surface
dispersion is very  rapid and oil thickness  on heavily
contaminated water does not exceed 2 mm. Therefore, if
microwave systems with operating frequencies in  the order
of 20 mm are used, analysis of oil thickness is confined to
the first rise and straight line portion of the constructive
interference pattern.
                                                 469

-------
  470   PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
  w
  u
  S
0.4S7 cm
                                    T               T        t
                                  0.914cm         1.2cm oil  I.371cm
                                            Oil  Thickness  in  Centimeters

                              Figure 1: Voltage vs Oil Thickness on Sea Water (No.20 SAE Oil)
     Thermal infrared imagery systems have proven to be of
 great value in tracking oil spills and determining their areal
 distribution. The first extensive use of systems operating in
 the  thermal  infrared region (8 to 14 micron) occurred in
 conjunction  with  the infamous Santa Barbara incident. At
 that time there was a great deal of discussion and academic
 discourse on why the oil appeared as a cool anomaly against
 a  warm water background.  For the Santa Barbara spill,
 Lowe and Hasell(2) (1969) suggest that the cold appearing
 oil results from upwelling  colder water mixed with oil.
 Estes and GolombC3) (1970) agree that the cold signature
 of oil results from cold water mixing. They suggest that hot
 spots result where thick unmixed oil absorbs and re-emits
 greater heat.
     IR  images  in  the 8  to 14  microns regions   were
 obtained from three oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico during
 1970: the Main Pass Block 41 spill in March, the Chambers
 and  Kennedy spill off  Galveston  in May  and  the  South
 Timbalier Block 26 spill in December. Altitudes  of infrared
 scanning were from 2,000 to 35,000 feet. Times of data
 collection were from 0130 to 2030 hours  with sea states
varying from dead calm to 6  foot waves. Thermometric oil
temperatures varied  from ambient in the storage tanks of
the  Chambers  and Kennedy  platform,  to  production
temperature  at  the  Main Pass  Block  41  platform
                                                 (approximately 250°F), to oil heated by fire on the South
                                                 Timbalier  Block  26  platform.  In  every  case,  the  oil
                                                 appeared colder than the water except for a few very local
                                                 hot  spots. In  each  of these cases the 8  to  14  micron
                                                 signature  for oil remained cool  compared  to open water.
                                                 Therefore, it  is unlikely  that upwelling phenomenon  is
                                                 involved in all cases.
                                                     Two possible explanations appear reasonable. One, the
                                                 cold signature for oil on water is related to an evaporation
                                                 phenomenon. In this case evaporation of volatile elements
                                                 from fresh  oil is more  rapid  than   from  water and
                                                 evaporative cooling of the surface takes place. A difficulty
                                                 with this  theory is that evaporation must persist for days.
                                                 Our  data  show that oil  trapped for several days  against
                                                 convergence lines, the brackish-marine waters interface, still
                                                 appears cold relative to  sea water. A  second and more
                                                 acceptable explanation is  that  the  contrast  is due to  an
                                                 emissivity  phenomenon. Oil heated in the fire of the South
                                                 Timbalier Block 26 platform (Figure 2) remians cooler than
                                                 uncontaminated open  seawater. The primary reason is that
                                                 the emissivity of oil is less than that of seawater. This is also
                                                 compatible with the observation of  small hot spots  within
                                                 the oil spill area. The hot spots seem to appear where there
                                                 is  emulsified  foamy oil which behaves  like a diffraction
                                                 grating. This results in local high emissivity and resolves the

-------
                                                          BEHAVIOR OF Oil	   471
Table 1: Quantitative Determination of Oil by Multisensor Data Comparison
Fit 1 	
1300 Hrs.
3/11/70
Zone 1
Zone 2
Zone 3
Zone 4
Zone 5
Zone 6
Zone 7
Zone 8
Zone 9
Zone 10
Zone 11
TOTALS
Planl-
meter
area
(Sq.In.)
0.75
0.09
0.36
0.67
0.15
0.69
0.03
0.29
0.46
0.20
0.20
3.87
Conversion
Factor
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06
43.60xl06

Ground Area
(Sq. Ft.)
32.70 x 106
3.92 x 106
15.69 x 106
29.21 x 106
6.54 x 106
30.08 x 106
1.30 x 106
12.64 x 106
20.05 x 106
8.72 x 106
8.72 x 106
168.73 x 106
Micro-
wave
Temp.
(°K)
260
232
226
250
226
260
226
226
260
250
235

Estimated
Thickness
(mm » Ft)
l.B * .0059
0.8 * .0026
0.6 = .0020
1.4 = .0046
0.6 = .0020
1.8 = .0059
0.6 = .0020
0.6 = .0020
1.8 = .0059
1.4 = .0046
0.8 = .0026

Cubic Feet
of Oil
19.29 x 10*
1.01 x 10*
3.12 x 104
13.43 x 104
1.30 x 104
17.74 x 104
.26 x 104
2.52 x 104
11.82 x 104
4.01 x 104
2.26 x 104
76.76 x 104
Barrels of
oil
(1 barrel »
31.5 Gal.)
4.58 x 104
.23 x 104
.74 x 104
3.19 x 104
.30 x 104 •
4.21 x 104
.06 x 104
.59 x 104
2.80 x 104
.95 x 104
.53 x 104
18.18 x 104
 Table 2: Quantitative Determination of Oil by Multisensor Data Comparison
Fit * 	
1630 Hrs.
3/11/70
Zone 1
Zone 2
Zone 3
Zone 4
Zone 5
Zone 6
Zone 7
Zone 8
Zone 9
Zone 10

TOTALS
Plani-
meter
area
(Sq.In.)
.50
.05
.07
.26
.25
.10
.29
.325
.69
.095

2.630
Conversion
Factor
68.64xl06
68.64xl06
68.64xl06
68.64xl06
68.64xl06
68.64xl06
68.64xl06
68.64xl06
68.64xl06
68.64xl06


Ground Area
(Sq. Ft.)
34.32xl06
3.43xl06
4.80xl06
17.84xl06
17.16xl06
6.86xl06
19.90xl06
22.30xl06
47.36xl06
6.52xl06

180.49xl06
Micro-
wave
Temp.
(°K)
Not Avail
Not Avail
Not Avail
Not Avail
Not Aval 1
Not Avail
Not Avail
Not Avail
Not Avail
Not Avail


Estimated
Thickness
(mm * Ft)
1.8 * .0059
1.4 = .0046
0.6 = .0020
0.6 = .0020
1.4 = .0046
0.6 * .0020
1.8 = .0059
0.6 = .0020
1.4 = .0046
1.8 = .0059


Cubic Feet
of Oil
20.24 x 104
1.57 x 104
.96 x 104
3.49 x 104
7.89 x 104
1.37 x 104
11.74 x 104
4.46 x 104
21.78 x 104
3.84 x 104

77.34 x 104
Barrels of
oil
(1 barrel =•
31.5 Gal.)
4.80 x 104
.37 x 104
.22 x 104
.82 x 104
1.87 x 104
.32 x 104
2.78 x 104
1.05 x 104
5.17 x 104
.91 x 104

18.31 x 104

-------
472    PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
                                                                       0645  MILES
                                Figure 2: Shell Platform, Block 26s Timbaliei Area (12-9-70)
    Figure 3: The Location of the Main Pass. Block 41
 interested observations to an emissivity function. Another
 point of  interest is  that emissivity,  reflected  as infrared
 "coolness" or darker gray levels, appears to be a function of
 oil thickness. Thicker  oil  causes an apparent emissivity
 decrease appearing colder in  the  imagery. Thin oil allows
 some penetration of underlying water radiation and thus
 becomes a function of an oil/water combination. The exact
 relationship between oil thickness and infrared temperature
 has not  been quantified and indeed may be a  function of oil
 type.

    A number of other remote sensors such as ultraviolet
 and  multispectral photography have  proven valuable for
 documenting oil spills.  They are limited to daylight and
 relatively cloud free conditions. Solar  angle and amount of
 lighting  introduce  multiple  variables  into  reflectivity
 measurements that   are  difficult to  quantitize.  As our
 objective is to quantify oil spills, these methods will not be
 discussed.

    Two systems, infrared and microwave, have now been
 defined  which can effectively  operate  under  day/night and
relatively bad weather conditions. These two systems, when
operated in concert, can be  used  to locate, track and
determine the volume of oil  on sea surfaces. In cases of

-------
                                                                            BEHAVIOR OF OIL  .
                                                          473
                               8-14,u    IR    Image
                            Oil  Thickness  by  Zones
        13.7  GHZ   Microwave
                              (  10,000ft
Radiometric
   isoohrs
      Profile
3-11-70)
45'
                                                   Figure 4
flowing spills, such as the Gulf  of Mexico events, fair
estimates of flow rates and the effectiveness of clean up
operations can be  determined. Also, the temporal  image
(IR) pattern change .can be used to  forecast and hindcast
surface movements of spills.

Volumetric Calculations and
Flow Rate Determinations
   This  discussion  of volumetric  and  flow rate
determinations  is  primarily  concerned  with  technique.
While  the  derived  values are  of the  proper  order  of
magnitude there  may be some errors. The techniques used
are  simple  known  methods  of analysis  that  can  be
performed  rapidly  and   without highly   specialized
equipment.
   The Main Pass Block 41  oil spill which occurred in
March of 1970 is used as an example. This spill  (Figure  3),
about 110 miles southeast  of New Orleans,  threatened
several tens of miles of Louisiana coast line.

   An examination of several sets of images taken over a
period of fourteen  days shows that on the eleventh  of
March the ocean surface  currents  shifted in manner such
that the entire  spill  was displaced.  This  displacement
permitted  temporal  analysis  so   that  two  different
volumetric calculations could be compared.
   The  data  sets  utilized  consist   of  thermal  infrared
(8-14^) imagery  and a  microwave  radiometric (2.2mm)
profile obtained  at 1300 hours (local) from an altitude  of
           10,000 feet and  infrared imagery  obtained  from 35,000
           feet at 1630 hours (local). Microwave radiometric profiles
           from the 35,000 foot overflight could not be used because
           the resolution was too gross to be of value.
               Figure 4 is the data set obtained from 10,000 feet. The
           infrared gray levels associated with oil contamination were
           divided into three units;  dark gray for thick oil, medium
           gray for intermediate thickness and light gray for thin oil.
           These  divisions were  used to visually zone the spill into
           units. The actual ground area of each zone was determined
           using  a  model 62-0022 K & E  compensating  polar
           planimeter.  Each  zone was  measured four times and the
           average area  used.  The  cross  track scale  factor was
           determined  by using the  known angular scan  angle and
           radar altimeter  data. The  along track  scale factor for the
           imagery was determined by using doppler ground velocity
           data and time.  Scale factors for the  35,000  foot imagery
           were obtained by  using the ratio distances between fixed
           points (platforms)  discernible in both the  10,000 and
           35,000 foot imagery. Thus, if the scale factor of the 10,000
           foot  imagery  was  in error  the  same  error  would be
           translated to the 35,000 foot imagery and the determined
           area values are correct relative to each other.
              In Figure 4, which is a composite of infrared imagery.
           the microwave profile and visual infrared zoning, the three
           units of the data set are correlated on a point-to-point basis.
           The two white lines on the infrared image represent the
           microwave  radiometric ground track  and the small  white
           dots are microwave radiometric data points.

-------
 474    PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
    The logic and assumptions used to quantify the data are
as follows:
A.    From  the Melpar Report, it was assumed that oil
      thickness did not exceed two (2) millimeters.
B.    The infrared image density (gray level) is an indicator
      of oil  thickness. The darker areas are cooler because
      the thicker oil more completely masks the IR effects
      of the underlying water.
C.    Increases in microwave radiometric temperature of oil
      over that obtained from open ocean, is due to the
      presence of oil.  The increase has a linear relationship
      to oil thickness at microwave wave4ength utilized (22
      mm).
D.    Because the microwave radiometer resolution cell is
      large  (700 feet  in  diameter)  the  integrated
      temperature  value  is  due   to  the  statistical oil
      thickness  of  the  entire   cell   (automatic   data
      compression).
E.    By combining oil spill distribution from the IR with
      statistical   thickness  values obtained  from  the
      microwave system, volumetric values of total oil can
      be obtained.
F.    Differences  in  volumetric values  determined as a
      function  of  time, can  be used to  obtain a good
      estimate of flow rate.
G.    The sea state of the surrounding open water and that
      occupied by the oil spill are the same.
    From Figure 4, it was determined that the maximum
attained  microwave temperature was 270°K and the open
ocean  background  temperature  was  212°K  (all
temperatures are raw uncorrected values) a  difference of
58°K. This value was used to represent a thickness of two
(2) millimeters. The  average microwave  temperature  was
then  determined for each zone  and appropriate thickness
assigned. The conversion to quantitative values is shown in
Table 1.
     The same  procedure  was used for the 35,000  foot
imagery  (Figure 5).  In this case  no microwave data were
obtained. However, it was assumed that the thickness of the
infrared  zones did not change  appreciably and thickness
values determined  from the  10,000  foot data  were
appropriately assigned. The results of these calculations are
shown in Tables 1 and 2.
     Comparison of  the  determined  volumes  shows  a
differential  of 1300 barrels accumulated during the, three
and one hah0 hour period between data acquisition  sets.
This  is about 370 barrels per hour using the convention of
31.5  Imperial gallons per barrel. If the petroleum industry
convention of 42 gallons per barrel is used the flow rate is
292  barrels  per hour, which  seems to be  a  reasonable
quantity.
    It should be pointed out that the two data sets show
that the shift in surface currents caused the oil to deviate
about 170°  away from the confining barrages. This means
oil  "pick  up" was  minimal  between  images and  the
calculated flow rate more nearly correct.
    This  example  of using  remote  sensor  systems for
 calculating total oil in a spill and perhaps determining flow
 rate is for demonstrating a quantitative technique  rather
 than quantitizing the Chevron incident. The data presented
 are gross and  the  transfer  functions  between  data  sets
 contain some assumptions that may well be questioned.
 Small errors in planimetry can result in  significant errors in
 quantities of total ofl, However, even when potential errors
 are considered, the technique is valid" and the rapidity of
 data turn  around  (a matter of  hours) justifies further
 development.


Theoretical Surface Diffusion

    The  previous  empirical  calculations  show  some
 relations to research work performed by Murray, Smith and
 Son GO,  members of the  technical staff at the Coastal
 Studies Institute, Louisiana State University. They applied
 the  statistical  theory  of turbulence  developed by  G.I.
 Taylor in  1935, primarily for  one dimensional gaseous
 particle  spread, to ocean surface diffusion  of oil.  The
 primary reason for including their work  in this presentation
 is that the  developed theoretical models  are remarkably
 similar to the infrared images obtained on March  11th. Also
 the models strongly  indicate that  if  sufficient physical
 oceanographic data are acquired very good hindcasts  and
 forecasts can be made on slick movement.
    Murray,  et.  al.,  performed derivations  on Taylor's
 original formula to arrive at:
                 doy
 (V-2,1'2
                dx

 for short diffusion times, and

                doy2
2 V'2 Cy*
                dx
 for long surface diffusion times.

  where;

  ay   = variance of fluid particles around the source
   y -2 = square of turbulence intensity
  u    = horizontal mean flow of the transporting medium
  Cy*  = Langrangina eddy size

     A pictorial representation of this model is shown in
 Figure  6 and the resemblance  to  the  Block  41 spill
 configuration is quite apparent. They carried the derivation
 further by considering the spread of oil  on water from a
 point source as a two dimensional process in the X-Y plane
 with only horizontal motion. That is the  spread of oil and
 the  shape of the slick is controlled by surface phenomena
 only. This led to a shape factor which defines the ratio of
 slick width to dick length. The results of which are shown

-------
                          BEHAVIOR OF OIL .   475
  8-14ju  I  R  Image
                              MEDIUM THICK OIL
Oil  Thickness  by Zones
35,000ft.  1630hrs.  3-11-70
              Figure 5;

-------
476   PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
in Figure  7, where the slick configuration is theoretically
plotted as functions of time and surface current velocity.
Fortunately,  the comparative model, u=0.6  knots, is for
March llth, the same day that the actual infrared imagery
was  acquired.  The  comparison  of theoretical  slick
configuration  with  actual image configuration  is
remarkable.
    What  this all means is that if surface current data are
available IR imagery can be used to determine how long a
slick  has  been  present and  the source dkection can be
hindcast.  Of  course this  assumes a  point  source and
somewhat steady state  surface current, but at least good
attempts are being made to match  theoretical modeling
with actual slick configurations and these attempts appear
to be headed in the right direction.
 CONCLUSIONS
     The  utilization of thermal infrared  and microwave
 radiometric sensors, approached from a systems  analysis
 point of view, if of great value to operational programs for
 cleaning  up oil pollution  in  ocean  and coastal  water
 environments. In  addition these systems  can  be  used  to
increase the value and upgrade theoretical models so that
they more nearly match field observations. The preliminary
findings of this study point to fruitful areas  of directed
applications research and the techniques should be pursued
with vigor and proper governmental funding.
     There is a  great need  to  properly relate  theoretical
 models such as those developed by Murray, et al., to actual
 oil  spill  movements.  This  can be  accomplished  by
 correlating  temporal  acquired  imagery  with  surface
 oceanographic  data.  Once   the  true relations between
 physical surface  oceanography,  oil  spill configurations, and
 oil movements have been firmly established the need  for
 surface data will be greatly reduced. This  will ultimately
 result  in greatly reduced costs for  spill tracking, source
 identification,  terminal  destination determination  and
 determining the efficiency of clean-up operations.

 REFERENCES
     1. Melpar. (1969). Oil Tagging System Study Summary
 Report Contract No. 14-12-500 Federal Water Pollution
 Control Administration, Pages 1-3.
     2. Lowe, S.D.  and P.G.  Hasell, (1969), Multispectral
Sensing  of Oil  Pollution; Proc. 6th  International
Symposium on  Remote  Sensing  of  Environment, pages
 755^-765.
     3. Estes, I.E. and Bed  Golomb, (1970),  Monitoring
Environmental  Pollution; Journal  of Remote Sensing,
Volume 1, pages  8-13.
    4.  Murray,  S.P.,  Smith, W.G.,  and  Sonu,  C.J.
Oceanographic Observations and Theoretical Analysis of Oil
Slicks During the Chevron Spill, March,  1970. Technical
Report No. 87,  Coastal Studies Institute, Louisiana State
University.
                 Figure 6: Linear, Transitional, and Parabolic Diffusion Regimes Predicted by Taylor Theory

-------
                                = 3.5  houri
U-.6  knot
                                      louiiiono ilick


                                      March II, 1970
U = .S  knot
                                                           Ar.o=48.2  km'



                                                           1 = 22.2 hour.
 = .2 knot
                                             Ar»0=301  km


                                            . • 1 = 5.7 dgyi f
                          10
                                                      20  km
Theoretical  tllckn  K=4x)09 cm*/t*c

                     Q-IOOO  fabl/day
oa
m
x
>


0
73

a
-n
            Figure 7: Comparison of Observed Slick Against Theoretical Slicks, Illustrating Effect of Decreasing Velocity of Slick Size

-------
                A  DISCUSSION  OF  THE  FUTURE  OIL  SPILL
                                PROBLEM   IN  THE  ARCTIC
                                                LTJGJ.L. Glaeser
                                            Pollution Control Branch
                                           Applied Technology Division
                                        Office of Research and Development
                                            United States Coast Guard
 ABSTRACT

    Future oil production in Arctic regions will present the
 opportunity for oil pollution as a result of human error and
 equipment failures. In order to attain an insight into what
 may be expected, an assessment of the magnitude of future
 oil spillage is presented. In  addition,  factors affecting the
 fate and behavior of spilled oil are discussed based on the
 results of the U.S. Coast Guard's Arctic Oil Spill Test Pro-
 gram.
    The Coast Guard's program to contend with oil spills in
 the Arctic has one aspect unusual to  today's pollution re-
 search; it is investigating an area which has yet to surface as
 a major problem. Although this approach should ultimately
 prove to be wise, the researcher is initially faced with hav-
 ing to predict the nature of the problem so that  he can
 prepare a logical plan of attack. This presentation will
 therefore attempt to better define the causes and effects of
 the potential  arctic problem by presenting some of the
 existing information on the topic.

 Definition of the Future Problem
    One need only look at the potential reserves available
 for development to appreciate the possible oil pollution
 problem in the Arctic. In  addition to the well known fields
 at  Prudhoe Bay, two other areas show promise for develop-
 ment, the Mackenzie Basin and the Arctic Islands, both in
 Canada. 1 It has been estimated that the total  reserves in
 these  areas may  exceed 150 billion barrels.2 In order to
 bring  this oil  to market, it appears that three systems of
 transportation may be used, the Trans-Alaskan pipeline, a
 Mackenzie Valley pipeline,  and a system of icebreaking
 tankers.3 The use of tankers to bring oil from the Arctic
 Islands appears to be the most logical  approach since they
are well removed from the mainland. Industry has indicated
its commitment in this area by holding 177 million acres in
the Arctic Islands for possible future production of oil.4

    Although some information is available concerning the
extent of oil reserves in the Arctic, only previous statistics
can be used  to forecast the amount of pollutants which
may eventually enter  the environment. Probably the most
closely relatable area is Cook Inlet in Alaska. A study of oil
dissipation and biodegradation in Cook Inlet has estimated
the input  of petroleum hydrocarbons from accidental spills
and effluents to range annually from 10,000 to 17,000 bar-
rels, or approximately 0.03 percent of the oil produced and
handled in the area.5
    This figure  compares with Dr.  Max Blumer's estimate
that 0.10 percent  of  the oil transported over  the sea is
spilled.6

    It  is estimated that by  1975  oil production on  the
North Slope of Alaska will range from approximately 1 to
1.5 million barrels per day, and by  1980, 2 to 2.8 million
barrels per day.7 Therefore if only as little as .01  percent of
the oil produced is spilled, an average of 8400 gallons will
be discharged into the environment  on a  daily basis, or
approximately 1000 tons per year. This really represents a
minimum  figure as it accounts for only the North Slope. A
tanker  with only  one compartment damaged  could dis-
charge  as  much as 25,00 tons of oil into the environment
by itself.
    It is interesting to note that the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline
System is  designed to ultimately transport 2 million barrels
per day.8 Thus it can be seen that by  1980 it will be oper-
ating at capacity and other facilities for transport will be
required.
    The oil discharges in Cook Inlet result mainly from oil
production at fifteen offshore drilling platforms. A similar
                                                     479

-------
480   PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
situation should be expected off the North Slope, where
the State of Alaska has leased much acreage in the Beaufort
Sea.9 This is in  shallow water  semi-protected by a long
series of islands 2  to 12 miles north of the beach.10 How-
ever, the production hazards associated  with the environ-
mental  conditions are  hardly less than in Cook Inlet. The
shallow water and near absence of tides should  simplify oil
production in this area, but a large  number  of wells would
increase the  number of opportunities for accidents.11  It
should  be expected that  eventually production  will be
attempted in the  deeper  waters, where  drilling rigs and
associated pipelines will be subjected to the full impact of
the ice pack.12
     Great  hazards are also  associated with shipping.  Ice
pack forces can be severe enough to immobilize or damage
ice-breaking  tankers of present design. Should a tanker be
immobilized  in ice, it is possible that the  ship would be
grounded  by the moving ice pack.
     An examination of  36 major  spills in the past has
shown  that 75 percent of the spills were associated with
vessels, of which 90 percent  involved tankers and one half
were associated with groundings.13  Of the 36 major spills.
50 percent varied between 5,000 and 100,000 barrels, 70
percent were  over  5000 barrels,  and 15 percent were over
200,000 barrels. Thus we have an indication of the possible
hazards associated with the shipping of oil.

    Very  little information  is available concerning the ex-
tent to which  oil pollution in the Arctic may affect  the
ecological balance. It has been speculated that a spill of a
very large magnitude could  adversely affect plankton and
disrupt  the food chain.14 However,the most  damaging re-
sults are likely to be the direct effects on birds and  mam-
mals.1 5 It is estimated that several million birds and water-
foul migrate along the Beaufort  Seacoast and  depend on
ice-free  water for feeding. 16 These birds would  be harmed
by  contact with oil.  Polar bears and possibly  seals are also
vulnerable to harm as a result of exposure to oil.
The Fate and Behavior of Spilled Oil in the Arctic

    Oil which has been spilled on water is subject to several
important natural  processes:  dispersion (spreading), eva-
poration, solution, absorption, biodegradation, and  ultra-
violet oxidation. The relative effect  of each process will
vary somewhat with geographical location, and considerable
difference will be found between their effects in Arctic and
temperate regions.
                             Figure 1 - One of the two devices used to release oil over ice and water

-------
                                                                                PROBLEMS IN THE ARCTIC   481
    A better understanding of the most important of these
processes was gained as a result of the U.S. Coast Guard's
Arctic Oil Spill Test Program, which was conducted on an
ice floe in the Chukchi Sea in July  1970.1? As part of the
program,  a number of small oil spills were made to obtain
information  on the  spreading behavior of crude oil, its
interaction characteristics  with ice,  and its aging charac-
teristics in theArcticenvironment.
    Depending on the season and the kind of accident, oil
may spread on ice, under ice, on water, or in several modes
at once.  For this  reason,  experiments were designed to
quantify the spreading behavior of Prudhoe Bay  crude in all
three modes.

Spreading on Ice
    The  spreading  experiments  on  ice were  conducted
using two 55  gallon release tanks like the one shown in
Figure (1). In order to account for all the possible variables
in a future accidental spill, the parameters of volume, vis-
cosity, density, temperature, and release rate of the oil were
varied. The oil volume was varied by using one or two
release tanks, the oil density and viscosity by using diesel
oil or Prudhoe Bay crude, and the  release  rate  by varying
the size of the orifice through which the oil was released.
Spreading rates were measured by manually timing the lead-
ing edge  of  the  spilled oil as it  passed a series of stakes
planted in the ice.
    Both  the diesel and crude oils were found to spread
easily over the ice  surface, but were contained in a small
area by  the  natural surface irregularities. The  ice surface
was porous,  consisting of a layer  of recrystalized ice
approximately two  inches thick. This surface layer was
found to  absorb up to 25 percent of its volume in oil, but
did not prevent the oils from migrating through the layer
because of gravitational forces.
    It was planned to use the spills as a model test in order
to predict the behavior of larger spills, but the  ice surface
proved to be too rough and absorbent. However, relation-
ships were found in the data which  provide a better under-
standing of the spreading process.
    The viscosity of the Prudhoe Bay crude tested is  light
enough to allow it to spread easily under summertime arc-
tic conditions. Colder temperatures  in the winter, however,
will lower the viscosity of the crude sufficiently to cause it
to apparently freeze. At all times the natural roughness of
the ice surface will act to contain spilled oil.

Spreading on Water
    The nature of crude oil spreading on the water surface
was investigated in a manner similar to the investigation of
spreading  on ice. In this case the Prudhoe Bay Crude was
discharged into a 100  foot long  "U" shaped channel con-
structed on the surface  of a melt pond. A conventional oil
boom was used. The  progress of the oil front down the
length of the channel was manually timed.
    Only one run of the experiment provided usable  data.
The data are presented in Figure  (2). As can be seen in the
figure,  a  transition point was reached after which the oil
slick stopped spreading. The Prudhoe Bay crude reached
this  stable  configuration because  of its  surface tension
characteristics. It would not spread to a film thinner than
approximately 5mm. After the slick reached this thickness,
further movement was controlled only by the wind.
    The data  which were  taken during this experiment
compare favorably with theory developed for the spreading
of oil on warmer waters.18 This theory divides the spread-
ing process  into three successive regimes in which certain
forces  dominate.  The  first  regime  involves gravity  and
inertia]  forces, the  second, gravity and viscous forces, and
the third, viscous  and  surface tension  forces. The first
regime was not observed during the experiment because of
the release conditions. Figure (2) shows the theory for  the
second and  third regimes compared with  the data. Spread-
ing did   not take place in the third regime because  of  the
surface tension characteristics of the oil.
    The ice present in the  test area acted as a barrier to
hold back thin slicks blown against it by the wind. How-
ever, many of the leads in the ice were interconnected and
served as  downwind escape paths for some of the floating
oil.
 11.0
 o.i
                              EXPERIMENTAL DATA

                              PHASE TRANSITION
                                      SURFACE TENSION
                                         SPREADING
                          GRAVITY-VISCOUS SPREADING
    0 1
                             1.0
                 TIME/TRANSITION TIME
         Figure 2 - Nodimensionalized data for spreading
            of oil on water compared with theory.

 Spreading under Ice
     Spreading of Prudhoe Bay crude oil under ice was qual-
 itatively assessed by using divers to observe the process and
 take photographs. The oil was discharged below the ice by
 physically pumping it through a hole in the ice.
     As the specific gravity of the oil (approximately  .89)
 was not a great deal less than the water, it was not known
 to what extent the oil  would be dispersed by any turbu-
 lence present. The oil was observed in all cases to rise to the

-------
482    PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
underside of the ice and form in pockets, as is shown for 55
gallons of oil in Figure (3). Due to a general lack of turbu-
lence  in  the area, the  oil pockets  remained  essentially
unchanged over a 24 hour observation period.
     The behavior observed in this experiment can be gener-
alized somewhat further.^ Multi-year sea ice will in general
have a specific gravity of .85 as compared with  .91 for pure,
salt free ice. The sea ice is of a lower density  because of a
brine migration process which leaves the ice with a porous
structure.  In comparison with the sea ice, crude  oil will
almost always be more dense. The conclusion which may be
drawn, therefore, is that if given the opportunity, crude  oil
will flow under multi-year sea ice  because  of hydrostatic
considerations.
     Regardless  of the season, the temperature at  the under-
side of the ice  will be that of the freezing water.  At this
temperature, a  typical North Slope crude such as the one
tested will have a low enough viscosity to flow easily. Multi-
-year ice in general has a very rugged underside,  with pres-
sure ridges  extending vertically downward as much as 150
feet. These features will tend to severely restrict the flow of
a large volume of oil by trapping the oil or causing the  oil
to flow around the obstructions.
     Considerations  of  the  basic  forces involved  in  the
spreading of  oil under ice indicate that three time scales
exist for natural processes to take place.20 The first period
will last on the order of one hour, in which a stable pool of
oil establishes itself beneath  the ice. The next  period  in-
volves gradual dispersion of the oil  by any currents present,
and the third, a gradual dissipation by biological degrada-
tion and other  processes. For reasons later  presented, this
last time scale is probably extremely long.
 Characteristics of Aged Crude
     In order to either predict the fate and behavior of oil in
 the  Arctic or to develop methods to control it, an under-
 standing of the basic nature of aged oil is required. As part
 of the test program, samples were taken of Prudhoe Bay
 crude which was allowed to age on ice, on water, and under
 ice in the  actual environment. The samples were then sub-
 jected to physical and chemical analysis.
     The physical analysis consisted of measuring the den-
 sity, viscosity, and surface tension of the samples. As was
 expected,  the  oil exhibited an  increase in viscosity  with
 time, which is attributed chiefly to a loss of volatiles. Vis-
 cosities of the aged  samples are shown in  Figures (4) and
 (5).  The  specific gravity  of the oil  was correspondingly
 raised, as is shown in Figure (6). Air-oil interfacial surface
 tension exhibited little change after the first two days.
     A  chemical analysis of  the samples produced data  on
 the  boiling  point  distribution and  ratio of saturated  to
 aromatic hydrocarbons. The analysis  showed the oil to lose
 ail of its gasoline and lighter fractions in a period of less
 than five  days, the loss probably occurring within two or
 three days. Results of the ratio of saturated  to aromatic
hydrocarbons were inconclusive.
 Figure 3 - Crude Oil pocketing at the water -ice interface.
                                                             1000
Figure 4 - Viscosity of Prudhoe Bay crude oil aged on water.

-------
                                                                                 PROBLEMS IN THE ARCTIC   483
 1000
        345
                       10        20    30   40  50
                     TEMPERATURE (DEC C)
   Figure 5 - Viscosity of Pruhoe Bay crude oil aged on ice.
 1.00
 .98
 .96
i.94
s
s
:.92
 .90
 .86
                              o
                              A
                    A
                    G
O
A
                                O OIL A6ED ON ICE

                                A OIL AGED ON HATER
                            1,
    0   2
                  6    8    10
                    TIME (DAYS)
   14    16    18
 Figure 6 - Specific gravity of aged Prudhoe Bay crude oil.
      Although these observed trends will only occur under
 summertime arctic conditions, they most likely represent
 the case for which the greatest changes will take place. For
 example, the loss of volatiles is not expected to be as great
 in the winter because of the cold ambient temperatures on
 the ice surface.

 Biodegradation
      It was speculated prior to performing the test program
 that : summertime arctic  temperatures  may  allow the
 growth of organisms which could effectively degrade spilled
 oil.  As  a  result,  surface water samples were  taken and
 analyzed. Fungi were found which  were able  to utilize  a
 particular hydrocarbon  at  elevated  temperatures, and  a
 bacterium was found which showed growth at elevated tem-
 peratures and was able to disperse certain test  oils. No or-
 ganisms  were found which  were able to utilize or disperse
 oils at summertime arctic temperatures, although this does
 not preclude the presense  of such organisms.
     Biodegradation is not expected to be a significant fac-
 tor in the fate of oil trapped underneath an ice  field for
 several reasons.21 A great amount of oxygen is required to
 oxidize oil. It has been estimated that it requires all the
 oxygen in 320,000 gallons of sea water saturated with oxy-
 gen to oxidize one gallon of crude oil.22 \n addition, ice on
 the surface and salinity stratified water beneath the ice may
 inhibit a supply of oxygen to the oil. And finally, the oil
 will have a relatively small surface area due to pocketing at
 the ice-water interface.
     Biodegradation appears to be a significant factor in
 Cook^Inlet, where the ambient surface water temperatures
 are  5°C, as compared with 0°C north of  Pt. Barrow.23
 Surface turbulence  resulting from wind and current forces
 are common in the Cook  Inlet area and act  to disperse oil
 slicks. The dispersed oil is then more easily biodegraded.
 Surface  turbulence is not common  in the Beaufort and
 Chukchi  Seas. It  was concluded  that b'iodegradation  of
 Cook Inlet crude oil in Cook Inlet is essentially complete in
 one to two months.
 Interaction  with Ice
    An oil spill on the surface of an ice field will result in a
 greater than normal absorption of solar radiation and a re-
 sulting melting of ice.  The long term effect a dark layer of
 oil may  have on the delicate heat  budget of the Arctic is
 unknown, and therefore will require future research.
    A spill on the ice surface was investigated  during the
 test  program. Results  show that the two  major factors
 affecting  the heat exchange  at the oil spill were the radia-
 tion balance at the surface (both incoming and reflected)
 and  the heat utilized  in melting ice. The oil covered ice
 absorbed approximately 30 percent more radiation than the
 clean ice, and as a result  initially melted  ice at a rate of
approximately 2 cm/day greater than the clean ice.

Other Factors
    Solution and absorption into ice  are two  other factors
which may substantially affect the fate of spilled oil. Little

-------
484  PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
is known about these factors in the Arctic, although it is
expected that their time scales are equal to or greater than
that of evaporation. Ultraviolet oxidation is not expected
to be a large factor because of low winter light levels, insu-
lation'of oil by ice  cover, and low oil surface areas of
exposure.

    In addition to the fate and behavior studies conducted
during the Arctic Oil Spill Test  Program, several methods
for removing oil from the environment were tested. It was
found that the Prudhoe Bay crude contained enough vola-
tiles to allow a small spill to bum to a small residue without
the aid of any burning agents. It is now known to what
extent  this method would be effective  on a large spill.
Straw and  peat moss  were  found  to  act  as  effective
absorbants on  spilled Prudhoe  Bay crude, although  the
straw proved to be easier to use.
 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
     Based on the results of the test program, the relative
 importance of factors affecting the fate and behavior of
 spilled oil are better understood.
     If oil is spilled in the vicinity of pack ice, the spreading
 of oil will be restricted by the presence of the ice. Prudhoe
 Bay crude spilled on water will be moved by the wind, but
 may not spread out into thin films.
     Crude  oil spilled under summertime conditions  will
 become relatively more viscous and dense as it ages. If given
 the  opportunity, crude oil may spread below an ice field,
 where its, fate will be subject to solution, absorbtion into
 ice, and dissipation by  current. Biodegradation may not
 significantly affect the fate of spilled ofl.
     Oil spilled on  ah ice surface will provide  heat  to the
 environment by the absorption of solar radiation and will
 melt ice underneath itself at a relatively higher rate than sur-
 rounding ice.
     Although a better insight into the potential Arctic Oil
 Pollution problem has been achieved as a result of the U.S.
 Coast Guard's test program, further research is required to
 fully understand the behavior of ofl spilled in the Arctic.
 The Coast Guard will continue its research in this field,
 investigating such areas as the spreading of large volumes of
 oil in an ice field and the aging of oil under winter condi-
 tions. With this additional information we should be able to
 define the scope of the cleanup problem and then develop
 both methods and equipment to control future arctic oil
 spills.
 1. Sproule, John  C», "All Three Arctic Regions Will See
Intense Activity in Next 5 Years," Oil and Gas Journal,
April 20,1970, p.  118-119.
2. Ibid.

3. Ibid.

4. Underfill!, J.C., 'The Future of Oil and Gas Development
in the Canadian  North," in Slater, B, Arctic and Middle
North  Transportation, Arctic Institute of North  America,
Washington, D.C., 1969, p. 99-107.
5. Kinney, PJ., Button, D.K., and Schell, D.M., "Kinetics
of Dissipation and Biodegradation of Crude Oil in Alaska's
Cook Inlet,"  Proceedings, Joint Conference on Prevention
and  Control  of Oil Spills, American Petroleum Institute,
New York 1969, p. 333-340.
6. Blumer, M., "Oil Pollution of the Ocean," in Hoult, D.P.,
Oil on  the Sea, Plenum Press, New York, 1969, p. 65-80.
7. Report by the U.S. Cabinet Task Force on Oil Import
Control, The  Oil Import Question, U.S. Government Print-
ing Office, 1970, p. 235, 237.
8. 'The Impact of Prudhoemania," Oil and Gas Journal,
April 20, 1970, p. 146-156.
9. Brooks, J.W., "Environmental Influences of Oil and Gas
Development  with Reference to the Arctic Slope and Beau-
fort Sea", Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1970, p.
43.
ll./Wd.,p.44.
\2. Ibid., p. 43.
13. Gflmore, G.A., et al., "Systems Study of Oil Cleanup
Procedures," Final Report to American Petroleum Institute
by Dillingham Corp., 1970, Volume I, p. 7ff.
14. Brooks, op. cit., p. 47
1S.IWL, p. 48.
16. Ibid., p. 48.

17. Glaeser, J.L., and Vance, GP., "A Study of the Behav-
ior of Oil Spills in the Arctic," 1971, AD 717142, National
Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia.
18. Fay, J.A., 'The Spread of Oil Slicks on a Calm Sea," in
Hoult, D.P., (ed.),0/7 on the Sea, Plenum Press, New York,
1969, p. 53-63.
19. Hoult, DJ*.,  "Engineering Research on Oil Spills in the
Arctic", a proposal  submitted to the U.S. Coast Guard by
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, January 1971.
20. Ibid.

21. Ibid.
22. Blumer, M., Testimony before the Subcommittee on
Air and Water  Pollution, Senate Committee on Public
Works, Machias, Maine, September 9, 1970.
23. Kinney, op. cit.

-------
                      EFEECTS  OF  EXPOSURE  TO  OIL  ON
                               MYTILUS  CALIFORNIANUS
                          FROM  DIFFERENT  LOCALITIES
                                       Robert Kanter and Dale Straughan
                                          Allan Hancock Foundation,
                                        University of Southern California
                                                    and
                                               William N. Jessee
                                             Biology Department
                                           Humboldt State College
 ABSTRACT
    The results of the first two of a series of experiments in
 a study to determine if organisms exposed to natural oil
 seepage have a higher tolerance to a spUl of similar crude oil
 than organisms that have not been exposed to natural oil
 seepage are presented. Mytttus califomianus from different
 localities along the California Coast  were  exposed  to
 varying crude oil concentrations in the laboratory. The data
 shows a higher tolerance to oil in M. califomianus from a
 natural oil seep area than in M. califomianus from non-oil
 seep areas. There is also a different tolerance to oil between
 M. califomianus from different non-oil seep areas.
 INTRODUCTION
   The results of a recent study of the "after effects" of the
 1969 oil spill in the Santa Barbara Channel, indicate  that
 mortality among the fauna in the area was not as great as
 initially predicted.  The field data suggest that most of the
 mortality was due  to physical effects (e.g. smothering of
 Chthamalus fissus) and  not toxic  effects  of the oil
 (Nicholson and Cimberg, 1971).

   The Santa Barbara area has been long exposed to natural
 oil seepage and it is hypothesized that animals in this area
 have developed a greater tolerance  to Santa Barbara crude
 oil  than that possessed by animals that  have not been
 exposed to this natural seepage. This paper presents results
 of the first two of a  series of experiments to test  this
hypothesis.

   The experiments were conducted on the mussel, Mytilus
califomianus Conrad. This intertidal species is wide ranging
(Alaska to Baja, California) and survives well under labora-
tory conditions. It  is abundant on  the open coast both in
areas subjected  to  oil from natural seepage and in non-oil
seep areas.
 Materials and Methods
    In  the first  experiment  (28 June-7 July,  1970) all
 animals were maintained in unfiltered seawater at fluctua-
 ting room temperatures and in irregular light and dark
 periodicities. 60 M.  califomianus were collected from a
 rocky reef at Coal Oil Point (a natural oil seep area), and 40
 M. califomianus from a man made metal groin at East
 Cabrillo  (a non-oil seep  area).  Twenty specimens of a
 similar size range were placed  in each of five aquaria
 containing four liters of  liquid. That  is,  two aquaria
 contained animals from East Cabrillo and the other three
 aquaria contained animals from Coal Oil Point. One aquaria
 from each locality contained seawater only (the control),
 one aquaria from each locality  contained 40 ml oil plus
 seawater (1 x 104 p.pm. oil), and the fifth aquaria (Coal
 Oil Point only) contained 4 ml  oil plus seawater (1 x 103
 p.p.m. oil).

    Seawater and oil were changed daily at which time dead
 animals were removed and their shell length recorded. The
 experiment was terminated after 10 days.

    The second experiment (25 August-27 September 1970)
 was carried out in a constant environment chamber  where
 water  temperatures were maintained at 15±2°C* and there
 was a constant cycle of  14 hours of light and  10 hours
 darkness. Filtered seawater was used in this experiment. 80
 M. califomianus were collected from jetty piles at  Pismo
 Beach (a non-oil seep area), a rocky reef at Coal Oil Point (a
 natural oil seep area) and  a  rocky  shoreline at Big
 Fisherman's Cove, Santa Catalina Island (a non-oil seep
 area), respectively (all  localities are in southern California).
 As in the first experiment, animals from each locality were
 divided into groups of twenty of a similar size  range and
*On September 4 to 6, the refrigeration system broke down and
 temperatures rose to 20.0° and 20.S°C respectively.
                                                   485

-------
486     PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
maintained in aerated aquaria  containing four  liters of
liquid. One aquaria from each locality contained filtered
seawater only (the control), one aquaria from each locality
contained 400  ml of oil plus filtered seawater  (1 x 10s
p.p.m. oil), one aquaria from each locality contained 40 ml
of oil  plus  filtered seawater (1 x 104  p.pjn. oil),  one
aquaria  from each  locality  contained 4 ml  of oil plus
filtered seawater (1 x 103 p.p.m. oil). Oil and seawater were
changed at approximately 48 hour  intervals. Dead animals
were removed and their numbers and shell lengths recorded.

    The Santa Barbara crude oil that was used  in these
experiments came from offshore oil fields on the  Rincon
trend. The aquaria were 8 liter plastic  containers with
round corners to  facilitate easier removal of oil when  oil
was changed. Water was always placed in the aquaria first
and then oil was added so that the oil floated on the surface
of the water.  All mussels were well below the surface of the
water and did not come into direct contact with floating
oil.
                      RESULTS
    100

    80

    60

    40
   t
    20
                                        EAST CABRILLO
                                          —CONTROL
                                          -h103ppmOIL
              2   3   4    5    6    7    8   9   10
                        TIME IN DAYS
 Figure 1. Survival of M. cdifomiamu from East Cabrillo Beach
 (Experiment 1).

 EXPERIMENT 1 (FIGURE 1)
   No mortality was recorded in animals either from the
 control  or the two experimental aquaria (1 x 103  and
 1 x 104 p.pjn. ofl) from Coal Oil Point. Two of the control
 animals from East Cabrillo Beach died on the ninth day,
 while all animals from East Cabrillo Beach were dead by the
 ninth day when exposed to 1 x 103 p.pjn. ofl. These data
 suggest that M.  califomianus from East Cabrillo Beach (a
 non-oil seep area) are less tolerant to ofl than M. cali-
fomianus from Coal Ofl Point (an ofl seep area).

 EXPERIMENT 2 (FIGURE 2)
   While no  mortality was recorded in  the control  group
 from Catalina Island, there was a  50% mortality during the
 first two weeks in the control group from Pismo Beach, and
 seven animals died from the Coal Oil Point control group
 during the last 9 days of the experiment. More than 50%
mortality was recorded in all  experimental  groups from
Pismo Beach so   that a  50% mortality was  probably
associated  with  collection methods or laboratory  condi-
tions.  Reasons for the mortality among Coal  Oil Point
control animals are unknown particularly as lower mortali-
ties were recorded in all experimental groups at the end of
the experiment.
     100


 It M
 £?£ 40
     20
    100;.
 ft"
 ss 40
     20
                                    KEY TO FIGURES'
                                    - — C0»l OIL POUT
                                    —• PISMO BEACH
                                    — CATAUNA
         24  6   8  10  12 14  16  IB 20 22  24  2f 28 30  32  34
                        TIME III DAYS

                                                                0  2  4  6  8  10 12  14  16  18 20  22  24 26 28  30  32 34
                                                                                   TIME IN DAYS
 SI  40
 dlPi
     20
        24   6  1  10  12 14  IS  18 20 22  24  26 28 30  32  34
                        TIME IN OATS
                                                                   2  4  6  I  10 12  14  16  18 20  22  24 26  28  30  32 34
                                                                                   TIME IN DAYS
Figure 2. Survival of M. califomianus from Coal Oil Point, Pismo
Beach, Fisherman's Cove at Santa Catalina Island (Experiment 2).

   The general trends at all three localities were (1) animals
started to die earlier when exposed to high concentrations
of ofl than when exposed to low concentrations of oil; (2)
more animals died when exposed to high concentrations of
oil than when exposed to low concentrations  of oil. At all
experimental concentrations of ofl, mortality  was lower at
Coal OH Point than at  either  of the two  non-oil seep
localities. In all cases mortality was highest  among animals
from Pismo Beach. At concentrations of 1 x  103 p.p.m. and
1 x 104 p.p.m. animals from Santa Catalina  Island had a
mortality rate similar to that recorded among  animals from
Coal Oil Point. At concentrations of 1 x 10s p.p.m. animals
from Santa Catalina Island had a mortality rate similar to
those from Pismo Beach. This data indicates a difference in
tolerance to ofl at the  two lower concentrations, between
animals from two non-oil seep localities.

-------
                                                                                MYTILUS CALIFORNIANUS   487
  The constant production of new byssus threads was an
indication of normal healthy functioning animals in experi-
mental conditions.  The analysis of data to determine  if
mortality is related to size is incomplete.

                     Discussion

RELATIONSHIP TO FIELD CONDITIONS
  In these experiments animals were not exposed to tidal
cycles nor were they  exposed to the normal amount of
water  movement.  Coe and Fox (1962)  indicated that
normal growth was uneffected by either of these factors.
The animals were not fed in  either experiment.  Coe and
Fox (1942) found that they  could be  maintained in the
laboratory for up to four months before there was a
significant number of deaths due  to starvation. Hence one
could  probably  liken the  laboratory conditions to condi-
tions found in a rock pool which  never  drained at low tide
and which received a fresh dose of oil daily (experiment 1)
and at two  day  intervals  (experiment 2).  In the first
experiment, water  temperatures were above  that of sea-
water so that  the  temperature regime was similar to that
experienced at low tide while in the second experiment
water  temperatures were  similar  to those experienced  at
high tide.

  Santa Barbara crude oil is relatively insoluble in  seawater
(R.L. Kolpack, personal communication) so that while the
over all ratio of oil and water used in  one aquaria was 1
p.p.m. for example, most of the  oil was at the surface  of
the water and  the concentration of oil  in the  seawater
would actually have been  much less than this. No attempt
was made  to  prevent  the  aromatic  compounds  from
evaporating. Kolpack (personal communication)  found a
very low percentage of light aromatic compounds  in Santa
Barbara crude oil. Hence only a small fraction of the oil was
lost. This  fraction  would also be lost in  the event  of an oil
spill.
  It is impossible  to choose  sampling  areas in which the
only  difference is the exposure  or non-exposure of the
organisms to natural oil seepage. The areas chosen however,
are an attempt  to come as close  as possible  to this ideal.
Coal  Oil Point and East Cabrillo Beach  are localities a few
miles apart within the Santa Barbara Channel. The former is
a long low reef while the latter is a man made metal groin.
Apart from substrate differences, one would expect little
difference in the effects of other pollutants although East
Cabrillo is in Santa Barbara and may be more subjected to
the effects of sewage pollution. Pismo Beach is north of the
Santa  Barbara Channel in an  area of lower pollution and
where water temperatures are slightly lower. Santa Catalina
Island is situated south of the Santa Barbara Channel, 20
miles offshore from Los Angeles and appears to be outside
the influence of pollution originating in Los Angeles.

COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL DATA
  Seasonal changes must also be considered when exam-
ining this  data. Experiment 2 was not commenced until two
months after experiment  1. Crapp  (1971) found seasonal
changes in tolerance  of British marine  invertebrates to
detergents. Until seasonal tolerances have  been determined
as regards  to oil,  one should take into  account  seasonal
differences. Hence while data from different localities in
each experiment is comparable, data from experiment 1 is
not directly comparable with experiment 2  both through
the difference  in methods used  and  possible  seasonal
differences.

   Data from these experiments is not comparable to data
obtained using  standard  bioassay methods such  as those
proposed by Tarzwell (1969). In these standard methods,
oil and water are mixed on a shaker-no attempt was made
to mix oil and water in the present experiments.

   In  both experiments animals from Coal Oil Point (the oil
seep area) were  more tolerant to oil than those from the
non-oil seep localities. This strongly supports the hypothe-
sis advanced to explain low mortalities following the Santa
Barbara oil spill. However, it would be foolish to accept this
as  the  complete  explanation.  Nicholson  and  Cimberg
(1971) suggest that it is only species with a high tolerance
to'oil that occur in areas exposed  to natural oil  seepage.
This suggests a  preliminary selection which permits only
those species  with some tolerance to  oil  to  settle  and
survive in the oil  seep areas and that subsequent to this,
there  is a  further acclimation to the presence of oil. M.
califomianus does  not brood eggs but releases gametes into
the sea. Since developing eggs and larvae are distributed by
ocean  currents  there  is  no long  term  isolation of M.
califomianus at Coal Oil Point enabling inbred tolerances to
oil to develop.

   The lower tolerance of animals  at East Cabrillo beach
than at Coal Oil Point indicates that the factors  enabling
the  survival  of the   Coal Oil Point  animals  in these
experiments are not operative throughout the whole Santa
Barbara Channel.  This further supports  the  idea  that the
higher tolerance is due to acclimation in the presence of oil.
The data  presented support  the hypothesis  that M. cali-
fomianus  that are exposed to natural oil  seepage  are more
tolerant to oil than M. califomianus  that are not  exposed to
oil seepage.

   In experiment 2, there was also a difference in tolerance
to  oil  between  animals  collected at Pismo  Beach  and
animals collected at Santa Catalina  Island. The  reasons for
this are unknown. However, it does point to the  fact that
there may be more physiological variations between differ-
ent populations of the same  species than at present are
visualized.

                  CONCLUSIONS
   1.  Mortality  started  sooner  and was  greater when
animals were exposed to high concentrations of oil than
when animals were exposed to low concentrations of oil.
   2.  In each experiment mortality was lower in animals
from  natural  oil  seep localities than from non-oil seep
localities.

-------
488   PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
   3. There was some variation in tolerance to oil between
animals from different non-oil seep localities suggesting that
there  may be less physiological homogeneity  between a
species at different localities than at presently believed. This
difference could  be due  to either man made changes
including  pollution or  natural factors,  such as .range
extremes.
             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
   We wish to thank Union Oil of California and the Mobil
Oil Corporation for supplying oil used in these experiments.
The research was supported by a grant {GH-89) from the
National  Sea Grant Program, U.S.  Department of Com-
merce to the University of Southern California. We are also
grateful to Mr. William Walker at  the Marineland of the
Pacific for assistance he has given in obtaining clean filtered
seawater.
                  REFERENCES
Coe, W.R. and Fox, D.L. (1942). Biology of the California
   sea-mussel (Mytttus caKfomianus). 1. Influence of tem-
   perature, food supply, sex and age on the rate of growth.
   /. Exp. ZooL 90:1-30.
Crapp, G.B. (1970). Laboratory Experiments with Emulsi-
   fiers. Paper presented at a Symposium on the Ecological
   Effects of Oil Pollution on Littoral Communities at the
   Zoological Society of London. 1 December 1970: 29-46.

Nicholson, N.L. and  Cimberg, R.L. (1971).  The  Santa
   Barbara Oil Spills of 1969: A Post-Spill  Survey of the
   Rocky  Intertidal. In  Biological  and Oceanographical
   Survey   of  the  Santa   Barbara Channel  Oil  Spill
   1969-1970. Pub.  Man Hancock Foundation: 325-400.

Tarzwell, C.M.  (1969). Standard Methods for  the Deter-
   mination of  Relative Toxicity  of Oil Dispersants and
   Mixtures of  Dispersants and Various Oils  to Aquatic
   Organisms. Proceedings of Joint Conference on Presenta-
   tion and Control of Oil Spills Sponsored by API and
   FWPCA December 15-17,1969: 179-186.

FIGURES
Figure 1.  Survival of M.  caKfomianus from East Cabrillo
Beach (Experiment 1).
Figure 2. Survival of M. califomianus from Coal Oil Point,
Pismo Beach, Fisherman's Cove at Santa Catalina Island
(Experiment 2).

-------
                         THE  MOVEMENT  OF  OIL  SPILLS
                                             Henry G. Schwartzberg
                                        School of Engineering and Science
                                              New York University
 ABSTRACT
    The effects  of winds,  waves, and currents, and the
 physical properties of oil and water on the drift rates of oil
 spills were studied in tests carried out in a combined water
 basin  wind tunnel. On calm water, oil drifted at a fairly
 constant percentage of the wind  speed regardless  of the
 nature and spreading, tendencies of the oil, the spill size,
 and water temperature, depth, and salinity. Percent drift
 varied with wind tunnel height. Extrapolation to infinite
 height indicated that on calm open water wind drift  should
 be3.7%.
    Shallow water waves,  which produced no significant
 drift themselves, reduced wind drift. Analysis indicated that
 deep water waves produced by the wind should produce
 significant drift, complicating wind drift prediction, but the
 magnitude of the wind wave interaction effects is not yet
 known. Test wind drifts and current drifts were found not
 to be directly additive.
 Background
    To fight oil spills effectively we have to know the rate
 and direction of spill movement. This work, sponsored by
 the FWPCA and initiated at a time when such information
 was fragmentary and scattered, was designed to develop
 correlations for predicting spill movement. The same  events
 which stimulated this work triggered similar efforts on the
 part of others and there is, no doubt, some overlap between
 our results and theirs.
Equipment
    A combined water basin wind tunnel fitted with a wave
 machine and a current producing pumping system was set
up to  test the factors most likely to influence oil spill drift.
This set-up,  shown  in Figure  1, consisted  of  a  wind-tun-
nel-covered, 19-ft. long, 11.5-in. deep, 5-ft. wide test basin.
Two 19-ft. long,  12-in. wide, 11.5-in. deep return channels,
not under the wind tunnel, were installed, one on each side
of the basin and connected to  it at its upstream and  down-
stream ends. These channels provided a return route for the
wind induced surface flows, which were dead-ended at the
downstream end of the basin, and which otherwise would
have returned  as submerged currents affecting the  flow
structure and surface  slope in the basin. Preliminary wind
drift test results obtained without the return channels were
much more variable and non-reproducible than results ob-
tained  after installation of these channels.  The channels
were also fitted with variable-speed motor-driven propellers,
which  could  be used to create currents in the test basin
when required.

    The wind duct  was constructed of polyethylene film
supported  by slotted angle-iron frames, which could be
adjusted so as to vary the  duct height. Tests were carried
out at wind  tunnel heights ranging from 7 inches to 30
inches, most of them  at a standard height  of 22 inches. A
transition duct, fitted  with grids to provide a uniform velo-
city profile and eliminate fan  induced swirl, connected the
fan to the tunnel. Two fans were used: a 1/4 H.P., 12,000
SCFM free  discharge unit, and a 3 H.P., 30,000 SCFM free
discharge unit. The  wind  velocities were varied from 7
ft/sec to 27 ft/sec by the choice of fan used, by varying the
fan speed and duct height, and by the use  of inlet choking
grids. Wind speeds were measured by taking 9 or 15 point
traverses at the air discharge  from the tunnel  using a ro-
tating vane  anenometer. These velocities were corrected for
the slight change in flow cross sectional area over the water
and in the discharge opening.
    In the wind drift tests, oil was released near the upwind
end of the basin by lowering a retaining ring containing a
known amount of oil.  The time required for the oil to
traverse a fixed distance (usually six feet) in the middle of
the basin was measured  to the nearest 0.1 second. To avoid
end  effects, which were readily  apparent, drift rate  mea-
surements involving drift movement  over the first five feet
or the last five feet of the basins  length were not used.
                                                      459

-------
490    PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
  "UD
 Figure 1. Wind Tunnel Water Basin - F fan, T wind tunnel, B water
 basin, R return channels, G wind grid, D oil release dam, O oil
 supply reservoir, S adjustable angle-iron tunnel  supports, C current
 pumping motor driven  propellers, WP wave  paddle, WD wave
 machine drive.
 Usually ten runs were carried out for a given set of condi-
 tions. Tests were carried out for non-spreading and spread-
 ing oils, oils of different viscosity, different water depths,
 different spill sizes, different water temperatures, and using
 both clean  and dirty salt and fresh water.
 Results
     The results of these tests at  standard conditions (wind
 tunnel height, 22  in.; water depth 7.5 to  10.5  in.; 50 ml.
 spill volume; temperature  about 22°C) are presented in
 Figure 2, where the  percent  drift  (oil drift velocity/wind
 velocity) is plotted vs. wind velocity. To correct for the
 slight non-uniformity  in wind velocity profile, the percent
 drift and wind velocity are based on the wind velocity along
 the  tunnel's  center   line,  where the  oil drift  usually
 occurred.
     While  there is a  good deal of scatter  in the data, the
 average percent drift appears to  remain fairly constant as
 the velocity varies. For the forty tests (roughly 400 indi-
 vidual runs) plotted, the percent  drift averages 3.09%. The
 average relative  deviation is 6.2% (0.19 percent drift units)
 and the maximum relative  deviation is 19%. Some of this
 variation is no doubt due to the difficulty experienced in
 timing the movement  of spills which deformed, broke, and
 spread as they moved, but, based on the average drift varia-
 tion for the individual runs in  a given  test, part of the
 variation  between  tests  appears to  be  due  to other
 indeterminate causes. The variation due to experimentally
 controlled change  was  often  relatively  small when
 compared  to this random variation. For example, compared
 to the average standard percent drift of 3.09% the following
 average percent drift  values were obtained: highly viscous
 heavy paraffin oil, 3.11%; spills on low temperature water
 (i.e. water having a viscosity 1.4 times as great as that at
 22°C), 3.21%;  crude oil at wind velocities  below  18.5
 ft/sec, 3.08%; 100 and 200 ml. spills, 2.98%; spills on high-
 ly dirty water, 3.19%.

     The average percent drift for the tests at wind velo-
 cities below 18.5 ft/sec, where the small fan was used, was
 3.14%, while that for velocities above 19 ft/sec, where the
                                                              IX
                                                              a
                                                                                                            f
                                                                                                           ^f
             5        10        IS       20

              WIND SPEED   (FEET/SECOND)
                                                 25
Figure 2. Percent Drift (Drift Velocity  x 100/Wind Velocity) vs.
Wind Speed - O Light Paraffin Oil, A Heavy Paraffinn Oil. • Urania
Crude Oil,   High Speed Fan Run (underlined),"Salt Water Run
(overlined).
large fan was used was 2.98%. This may be indicative of a
true reduction  in percent drift as wind  velocity rises, or it
may be an  artifact due  to  the use of two different fans,
which provided somewhat different velocity profiles in the
two sets of  runs. As pointed out later, waves cause a reduc-
tion in  the percent wind drift, and the greater waviness
produced  by the higher velocity winds may have caused the
noted reduction  in  percent drift. In the salt water tests.
which were all carried out  at high  wind velocities, the av-
erage drift was 2.96%, which is virtually identical with the
fresh water  results for the same velocity  range.
    Paraffin oil, which forms lens-like  pools, was  used in
most tests at wind velocities below 18.5 ft/sec because the
sharper pool definition it provided permitted more accurate
timing and because it was easier to clean the pool after  its
use. At wind velocities above 18.5 ft/sec paraffin oil pools
broke up  badly and were difficult  to see, so that crude oil,
which was much more visible, was used exclusively. Because
of the large number of crude oil tests run  in the high velo-
city range,  and the probable  existence of a velocity or fan
dependent percent drift  effect, only the low velocity crude
oil  tests were used in the previously  cited comparison of the
percent drift for crude oil.
    Based on the evidence cited and tests using tetradecane
it appears that the percent drift is  not  strongly dependent
on the physical and  chemical  properties of  the  oil  and
water, at least not over  the  normal  range likely to be en-
countered.

Water  Depth Effects
     To determine whether  the above results were  app-
licable  in deep water a  series of tests  were carried out in
which the effective water depth was reduced by the inser-
tion of false bottoms  in the test basin.  This expedient was
used in place  of simply  lowering  the water level, because
lowering  the water level also produced a concurrent  var-

-------
                                                                                 MOVEMENT OF OIL SPILLS   491
 iation in wind height. Further, when the water level was
 reduced excessively, an air vortexwasscreated at the upwind
 end of the  basin. This vortex disturbed the wind velocity
 pattern, causing localized  reversals  in  drift and great  irr-
 egularity and reduction in the drift rate. In contrast, when
 false bottoms were used and the effective depth was re-
 duced to  as little as 3.5 in., normal reproducibility was.
 obtained, and the average percent drift was 3.14%. Because
 of the influence of submerged return currents, and based on
 the  work of other investigators1, it  is anticipated that the
 percent drift would decrease at water depths lower than 3.5
 in. The absnece of a  depth effect  over the range tested,
 however, should  indicate  that  these results are valid in
 deeper water.

 Wind Duct Height Effects
     When the wind height over the water was changed, the
 percent drift changed significantly. Compared to the 3.09%
 drift at the standard tunnel height of 22 in. (wind height 24
 in. due to water level depression), a 2.59% average drift was
 obtained at  a wind height of 15 in., and a 3.37% average
 drift on limited tests at a 34-in. wind height. Since we were
 interested  in wind drift on open water we sought to de-
 termine the  percent drift at infinite wind height. Extra-
 polation to infinite wind height was  done by assuming that
 the percent drift obeyed a relationship of the form:

      D = DO - B/Hn                                 (1)
 where Do  is the open  water percent drift, H is  the wind
 height, D the percent drift measured under a wind tunnel, n
 some suitable  exponent, and B  a constant. An empirical
 best  fit for such an equation can be obtained by plotting D
 vs. l/Hn for various values of n, until the value which yields
 the best straight line  is  found. The l/Hn = 0  intercept
 yields D0.
    It appeared likely  that the  duct height effect was due
 to the increased water surface slope generated by the  in-
 crease in air  pressure drop at low wind tunnel heights. This
 pressure drop depressed the water level at the upstream end
 of the basin. The drifting oil thus travelled up a slight slope
 which became progressively  steeper  as the duct height de-
 creased. For  rectangular ducts in the  air velocity  range
 tested the pressure gradients and hence the surface slopes
 are proportional to 1/Hl-l?:  hence  a  value of  1.17 was
 used  for n in Eq. 1. This yields a fairly good  straight line
 with  an intercept indicating that Do  is 3.7%. This value lies
 between the  3.4% average value reported by Smith2 for the
 Torrey Canyon spill, the 4.2% value reported by Tomczak3
 for the Gerd  Maersk  spill, and  the 4.0% average  value
 obtained by  averaging Stroop's4 open sea test data.  Since
 there is a great deal of scatter about  the average values for
 these sets of  data and the current and wave conditions are
not quantitatively  known, it  is  quite  possible  that this
apparent measure of agreement is in part accidental.

Shear Stress Analysis

   A  simple theory  provides  insight as to  the  drift
 mechanism. A somewhat idealized velocity profile for the
air water system is shown in Figure 3. The air moving at
O  1
UJ
                         AIR
                       WATER
             U<
UA
                      VELOCITY
            Figure 3. Wind and Water Velocity Profile

 velocity Ua exerts  a shear stress proportional to fa/>a(Ua -
 Us)2 on the  water surface, which drifts at a velocity Us.
 The bulk of the water can be regarded as moving backward
 at velocity Us relative to the surface. As a consequence the
 water exerts a shear stress proportional to fw/owUs2 which is
 equla to the air shear stress but oppositely directed. In
 these expressions fa and fw> andpwandpw are the friction
 factors and densities for  the air  and  water respectively.
 Equating the two stresses there is obtained:
                                                     (2)
The friction factors fa and fw for high Reynolds number flow
over a flat surface are correlated by expressions of the type:
     f=K(LUp/Ai)-1/7
     (3)
 Substituting appropriate values for p, U, and the viscosities
 jua and nw in Eq. 3, and then substituting Eq. 3 for fa and
 fw in Eq. 2,  there  is obtained after cancellation of the
 constant K and the flow length L and some rearrangement:
   O.OlDo =
 Upon substituting values for the densities and viscosities of
 air and water there  is obtained:
 0.01D0 = Us/Ua=0.0318

 The equivalent value for air and sea water is 0.0314.
     (5)

-------
492  PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
    In our tests the drift rates for small pieces of polyethy-
lene film floating on the water  surface  were consistently
10% lower  than the  drift rates  for  oil at the same test
conditions. Based on this 10% correction the polyethylene
marker percent drift for open water should be about 3.3%,
which is fairly close to the 3.18% predicted by Eq. 5. The
polyethylene marker may be indicative of the water surface
drift as opposed to the oil drift. It is interesting to note that
if the oil density is substituted in  place of the water density
in Eq. 4, while still retaining the water viscosity  value, a
percent  drift of 3.41% is predicted, which is substantially
closer to our experimentally based D0  value.
Drift and Spread Retardation
    The percent drift for wood chips decreased rapidly as
the thickness of the chip increased. Chips 3/32-in. thick
drifted at 85% of the oil drift velocity, and 3/16-in. thick
chips at 75% of the oil velocity. This suggests that the rapid
 decay of water velocity with depth shown in Figure 3 is
 correct. Based on this  observation it  appeared likely that
 drag  surfaces attached to an oil pool and penetrating only
 one to one and a half inches  down  into the water could
 significantly reduce oil drift rates. When a pool of oil was
 placed in the drag device shown in Figure 4,  the percent
 drift  was reduced to 1.5% and no  oil was lost. Other drag
 devices also slowed down oil drift, but were less effective in
 retaining the oil-which drifted at the normal rate once it
 escaped. Foamed plastic nets, which essentially consist of a
 multiplicity of surface enclosures  somewhat like  the ring
 part  of the device shown in  Figure  4, were  effective in
 preventing or minimizing the spreading  of oil spills while
 drifting  along with the  oil. Such  nets, which could be gen-
 erated at sea if desired, might be a useful method for retard-
 ing the spread of spills.
    It is interesting to note that  freely spreading oils could
 be converted into  lens form  by the addition of suitable
 surfactants  at the spill site. The original  lens broke up into
 smaller  lenses  as the spill drifted  under wind action, the
 breakup being  more severe the more  intense the  wind
 action. Despite this breakup, the small lenses persisted and
 spreading was retarded during downwind drift. Such lens
 induction may represent a useful technique for minimizing
 spill  spreading in instances when spill confinement is im-
 possible.

Wave Effects
    Wind drift rates were measured in the presence of 4-in.
high waves  having a one second period and roughly a 45-in.
wave length. In the absence of wind, these waves produced
negligibly small drift (0.01 ft/sec). In the presence of wind,
the waves, moving either with  or against the wind, reduced
the percent drift to 2.66% as compared to the  standard
3.09%. It is thus apparent that waves significantly  interfere
with direct  wind drift. It is believed that the drift reduction
occurs due to the presence of  a wind  shadow or vortex
induced drag-free or reversed-drag  zone on the lee side of
the wave crest.
    The wind-wave-drift interaction  is considerably  more
complicated than suggested by  our  experimental results.
                       6  I N.
                       1
 1/4 IN.  ROUND
 STYROFOAM
           I   IN.LONG
           WIRES
          Figure 4. Spill Drift Retarding Device

While shallow water waves usually cause negligible surface
drift, as in our tests, it is well known that deep water waves
cause significant drift. Stokes5 derived the following equa-
tion, which has been experimentally verified and which pre-
dicts the drift velocity Ud caused by simple deep water
waves:
Ud = 27TA2 co/A = (27r/X)3/2A2gl /2 = w3A2/g         (6)

where A is the  wave amplitude (half the wave height), co
the wave angular frequency,  X the wave length, and g is the
acceleration of gravity. The last two forms of this equation
arise out of the velocity, wave length, angular frequency
interdependence for deep water waves.
     Ocean waves have  a highly complex spectral composi-
tion, and therefore Eq. 6 is not directly applicable to them.
Chang6, has developed the following equation  which pre-
dicts Ud for waves of complex spectral composition:
        Ud =
                      g
S (c
(7)
 where S(co) gives the spectral distribution of wave energy as
 a function of co the angular wave frequencies making up the
 spectrum.  Since the  energy content of  a wave is propor-
 tional to A2 the  above integral effectively sums  up the
 Stokes  drift  for all the spectral components  of the wave
 field. The  validity  of Eq.  7 thus rests on the assumption
 that each frequency component of the wave spectrum simu-
 ltaneously  produces its own drift and that all these individ-
 ual drifts are additive.
     Chang tested Eq. 7 by measuring the surface drift pro-
 duced by artificially  generated random long crested waves
 in a deep water test  basin, and apparently obtained good

-------
                                                                                MOVEMENT OF OIL SPILLS   493
 agreement. However the wave spectrum tested was narrow
.(periods ranged from 0.25 to 1.25  seconds, with the great
 bulk of the wave energy being contained in the 0.4 to 0.8
 second range). Upon examining the drifts produced, it app-
 ears they could have been roughly predicted on the basis of
 substituting the average wave height and average wave fre- '
 quency in Eq. 6. It is therefore hard to tell whether Eq. 1,
 which takes into account the whole spectral composition,
 or Eq. 6 used with a  single effective wave height and a
 single  effective wave length or frequency should be used in
 predicting wave drift.
    For wind generated waves on the ocean, in contrast to
 the cited test basin work, the drift values predicted by these
 two different approaches are markedly different. For ex-
 ample, if wave drift estimates for fully developed wind
 waves are based on substituting in  Equation 6 the  average
 wave  amplitude and the  frequency where most  of the
 energy is concentrated for such fully developed  waves, the
 predicted drifts range from 0.04 knots for a 10  knot wind
 to 0.33 knots for a 50 knot wind. Based on wind speed this
 represents a 0.12% drift  at 10 knots  increasing almost
 linearly to 0.65% drift at 50 knots.  It is recognized that the
 above calculations have only qualitative significance at best,
 and   that  the above  combination  of  amplitude  and
 frequency may not be the most  valid  one to employ.
 However, these calculated results should serve for purposes
 of rough comparison.
    In contrast if one uses Eq.  7 by  substituting, for
 example, Pierson and Moskowitz'7 wave spectra correlation
 for fully developed wind generated waves
S(w) = 0.00405(g2/w5) exp (-0.74(g/Uaw)4)
(8)
for S(£o) in Eq. 7 and carries out the indicated integration,
one obtains:
Ud/Ua = 0.022
(9)
for all wind  speeds. That is the surface drift produced by
fully developed wind waves should be 2.2% of the wind
velocity. Not only  does this percent drift remain constant
but it is substantially greater than the drift predicted by Eq.
9 is added to the direct wind drift predicted on the basis of
our experiments, neglecting for the moment the retardation
of direct  wind drift caused  by waves,  the  predicted
combined drift would be 5.9% of the wind velocity—which
is much higher  than  has been noted in field observations.
Even taking  into  account wave induced  retardation of
direct wind drift, predicted combined percent drifts would
be of the order of 5.5%, which is  still much  too high.
Therefore  the use of Eq. 9 appears invalid, and the use of
Eq. 7, on which it is based, appears suspect.
   The wind-wave-drift interaction situation may be sum-
marized as follows. Winds induce direct wind drift, but at
the same time generate waves. These waves interfere with
and reduce direct wind drift, but at the same time give rise
to a  surface  drift themselves.  This wave  drift is a function
of the  spectral composition  of  the waves, but  the exact
functional form is debatable. Since  spectral composition
depends on preceding wind history, and existing wind speed
and fetch, it is anticipated that the percent drift for spills at
sea should be  a function of all these factors. There  is,
however, some  possibility that wave induced retardation of
direct  wind drift and the drift produced by  deep water
waves  are of the same order of magnitude and thus may
largely cancel each other so that appraent percent drift of-
ten appears to be fairly constant.

Combined Wind and Currents Drift
    Sixteen sets of tests were carried out in which floating
oil spills were subjected to  both wind and current action.
The currents, generated  by  motor driven propellers in the
return ducts, were  directed into the test  basin through a
smoothed venturi-like entrance port  so  as  to minimize
vortex formation. These currents were passed through a
series of grids near the upstream end of the test basin so as
to provide a uniform velocity  profile. Without these pre-
cautions  test  results were  extremely  variable and
non-reproducible. The use of  the grids, however, greatly
reduced the maximum current velocity that  could be gen-
erated by the propeller driven pumping system.
    In this series of tests the wind  drift was measured in
the absence of  currents, and the current drift  was measured
in the  absence of wind, and then the combined drift for the
same  pumping  conditions and wind speed was neasured.
The wind drifts tested ranged from 0.22 to 0.83 ft/sec, and
the current drifts from 0.15 to 0.37 ft/sec,  with one test
being carried out at a reversed current of 0.19  ft/sec.
    In all tests, including the one in which the current was
directed opposite to the wind, the apparent contribution of
the current to the combined drift was less than the current
drift in the absence of wind. This result was startling and
contrary to our expectation that  the wind and current
drifts would be simply additive or nearly so. The combined
drift Ut was roughly correlated by the equation:

Ut = Us + 0.56Uc                                   (10)
where  Us is the wind drift and Uc  the current drift. Al-
though the average deviation from this equation was only
6.4% and the maximum deviation 13.4%, the percent devia-
tions based on Uc- rather than  Ut are substantially higher,
averaging 37.5%. Eq. 10  is suspect, and can't be correct in
general since Ut must approach Uc  and not  0.56UC as Us
goes to zero. The available data, however, do not indicate
any trend toward  an increased coefficient  for Uc as Us
decreases.
    The cause  for the lack of additivity of wind and cur-
rent  drifts has  not  been determined. It is believed that it
might be due to the vertical velocity profile of the current
altering the shear stress that is developed in the waterr near
the air water interface,
    A more  detailed  description of  the  work reported
herein and additional work relating to  the extent of spread
and the rate of spreading of oil spills may be found in
report number 150-80-EPL 04/70 of the Water Pollution
Control Administration (now the Water Quality Office of
the Environmental Protection Administration).

-------
494  PHYSICAL - BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
REFERENCES:                                       Bureau of Standards, Dept. of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
    1. Hidy, G.M. and Plate, EJ.,/. of Fluid Mech., 26, p.     (1927).
651 (1966).                                                 5. Stokes, G.G., Trans. Camb. Phil. Soc.,  8, p. 441
    2. Smith, J.E. "Torrey Canyon" Pollution and Marine     (1847).
Life," Cambridge (1968).                                      6. Chang, M.S., /. ofGeophys. Research, 74, p.  1515,
    3. Tomczak, G., Ozeanographie, 10, p. (1964).            (1969).
-   4.  Stroop,  D.V.,  "Report on  Oil  Pollution  Ex-         7. Pierson,  WJ. and Moskowitz, L., / ofGeophys.
periments, Behavior of Fuel Oil on the Surface of the Sea"     Research, 69, p. 5181, (1964).

-------
 OIL SPILL CLEANUP
   Chairman: T. H. Gaines
Union Oil Company of California

 Co-Chairman: J. H. Weiland
        Texaco, Inc.

-------
                       AN  INTEGRATED  PROGRAM  FOR
                                    OIL  SPILL  CLEANUP
                                                    BY
                                        W. E. BETTS andH. I. FULLER
                                            Esso Research Centre,
                                            Abingdon, Berks, U.K.
                                                    and
                                                 H. JAGGER^
                                           Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd.,
                                                   London
 ABSTRACT
    This paper discusses the necessary requirements of an
 integrated program for dealing with oil spills on water. Such
 a program necessarily involves a designated administrative
 organization, sound contingency planning, pre-selection of
 equipment and materials to cover a range of techniques,
 and a recognition of the importance of flexibility so that
 the proper combination of techniques can be united into
 the optimum operation to meet the special circumstances
 of each individual spill.
    This philosophy is illustrated by a description of the
 administrative organization in  the United Kingdom  at
 central and local government level, by the contingency
 planning of one  of the major oil companies,  and by the
 different combinations of confinement, removal, and other
 techniques that have proved appropriate  in  Europe for
 water surfaces ranging from streams to seas.
    The paper emphasizes that  the optimum   cleanup
 operation for the unique conditions of each spill requires
preparedness, flexibility and an integration of appropriate
 techniques.

 Integrated Planning
  [_0il  spills will occur in the future no matter  how well
 disciplined the  oil  industry becomes, how  careful  its
 customers are in handling the products supplied to them, or
how stringent  are  the laws governing the  storage and
distribution of those products.  In most instances spills
require prompt  attention whether  they are at  sea—as a
result  of collision,  grounding  or  careless discharge  of
incompletely separated ballast water-or on land or on an
inland water surface. It follows therefore that detailed plans
must be drawn up to ensure that immediate action can be
taken wherever and whenever spills do occur. These plans
must be capable of covering all situations from the high seas
to  the  most remote  inland location. They must utilize
suitable existing resources as much as possible yet ensure
the  availability of specialized knowledge  and equipment
when  these  are required;] The  United Kingdom has
developed an integrated program which covers oil pollution
at sea in harbors and estuaries, on the beaches, and at any
inland location.  The program is fully integrated in that
central and local  government, the oil industry, and river and
harbor authorities have been involved in the planning and
will  each contribute  as  appropriate  in the  cleanup
operation.

OIL AT SEA

    In an earlier paper1, one  of the authors reviewed the
United Kingdom plans for dealing with beach pollution and
was  able at that  time to mention the role of the Board of
Trade under the Agreement for Cooperation in dealing with
North  Sea oil spills (the "Hamburg" Agreement).  More
details of those plans have been publicized^ since that date.
They provide for the setting up at thirty ports around the
British Isles of centres with equipment to disperse oil  slicks
and for the use at short notice of sea-going tugs (and, in
some areas, fishing patrol vessels) to employ the equipment.
Close liaison  between  the oil  industry, through the U.K.
Chamber of Shipping  (Tanker Section)  and  through the
Institute of Petroleum, with Board of Trade headquarters
and  with the nine  regional  officers responsible for the
program  in  their own geographical  areas ensures that
                                                    497

-------
498   OIL SPILL CLEANUP
industry expertise and materials are available and are fully
integrated into the overall contingency plans.
    Of course, individual  oil companies also have detailed
plans for  dealing with  marine  emergencies, and these
include possible oil spill incidents. Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd.
has had such a plan for some years. It has been tested on
several occasions in various parts of the world and found to
be effective. It provides for the immediate manning of a
command headquarters in the company's London offices
whenever  an appropriate distress  signal is received from a
tanker  anywhere   in  the  world.  According  to  the
information received, detailed plans can  then be actioned to
dispatch a field commander to take charge .locally of rescue,
salvage  and  (where  necessary) oil  cleanup  operations.
Detailed  lists  of salvage equipment and of salvage and
cleanup contractors are maintained, and duplicate "pocket
packs" of information appropriate to any location can be
taken out by the field force commander. In the case of the
UJC., detailed  records and  card  indexes are kept of all
Board of Trade and coastal local authorities and of nature
conservancy, fishery and other interests. The names of key
company personnel are also  available  to all  other major
U.K. oil companies  as well as to the central  and local
government    departments concerned.  Still  further
integration is provided within the  company in  that  the
resources of the marine emergency program are available to
the  refineries,  pipeline, and marketing functions to
supplement their  own plans. The full  marine program is
known to, and available for the  assistance of, any other
affiliate of Standard Oil Company  (New Jersey)-thus
providing a measure of worldwide integration.

HARBOR ESTUARIES AND BEACHES
    The  integration of industry  and local  government
resources is particularly evident in the cooperative programs
for dealing with oil spills  at  major oil ports. The Milford
Haven plans, in which the Conservancy Board carries out
cleanup    in  the harbor  and  subsequently bills  the
appropriate oil installation when a spill can be ascribed to
one company's operations, has been in  operation for some
years.3 The South Coast Early Warning System was set up
as a result of joint discussions between local government
and industry to ensure prompt reporting of oil slicks in the
busy shipping lanes of the English Channel/* A somewhat
similar plan has been introduced recently on the Humber
estuary—which is fast becoming  another major oil  port.
This is the result of joint industry/government discussions,
first at national level and more recently at local level.5 The
Thames  estuary  and  Clyde River (Glasgow) each  have
detailed  emergency  plans  as  the  result  of joint  river
authority/industry initiative.
    The beach pollution plan resulted from  the initiative
taken  by  the  Institute  of Petroleum  in 1966.
Recommendations made by a joint committee consisting of
representatives from central  and local government and the
institute were accepted by the then Minister of Housing &
Local  Government.  In consequence each coastal county
appointed  an Oil Pollution Officer responsible for preparing
detailed programs to deal with oil, to liaise with adjacent
counties,  with local  oil industry installations, and with
subordinate local authorities.  A  full exchange  between
government  and oil  companies  has  ensured that the
personnel from each have the  day and night telephone
numbers of members from the other partners, while field
exercises and demonstrations have  ensured a knowledge of
the equipment and procedures used in oil cleanup.

INLAND SPILLS

    Discussion  at  two recent  joint  conferences^,?
highlighted the concern of a number of people in the U.K.
that while plans  existed for  oil spills at sea and for oil
contamination  of beaches,  no  cooperative  integrated
program existed for inland spills. Individual oil companies
had made arrangements to handle incidents involving their
own facilities or  even those of customers associated with
them. These arrangements also have formed the basis for a
program   of mutual  assistance between  oil  companies
involved in pollution incidents.
    Except in  coastal counties, no  local authorities have
previously had any clear responsibility for oil pollution.
Although river authorities (river  authorities  in England
and Wales and | river  purification  boards in Scotland) had
responsibility for fresh water resources in  their respective
areas, action against oil pollution  was only organized in a
limited number of areas where abstraction for domestic
purposes is on a significant scale.
    Discussion of this situation by the joint Oil and Water
Industry  Working Group—set  up  on the initiative  of the
Institute  of Petroleum in 1964-has resulted in a proposal
that river  authorities should  be  responsible for detailed
programs for their respective areas. A subcommittee of the
working group, consisting of representatives from central
government, the river authorities  and the Institute  of
Petroleum, has drawn up recommendations on  these lines.
Oil spill  incidents are to be reported  direct  to the river
authority concerned by  owners of installations or others
who have established contacts with the authority. Members
of the public (and those in doubt  as to the whereabouts of
the  river authority)  are invited  to  use  normal  police
communication channels as for any other unusual incident.
.The river  authority in turn  will notify all downstream
interests  and  in  particular  water abstraction,  harbor
authorities, drainage and sewage bodies likely to be affected
by the incident.  River authorities will establish stocks  of
necessary equipment and  materials needed to deal  with
incidents and organize field exercises.
    In drawing up their plans the river authorities  will  be
invited to liaise with county and other local authorities and
with  local  oil company installations. In this  way  the
existing plans of coastal authorities and the oil companies
wfll be integrated with those of the river authorities and the
unnecessary  duplication  of  equipment   and  materials
avoided.
     Overall coordination within  H.M. Government by a
Minister  of State for the Environment ensures a  large
measure  of overall  integration for these  plans covering

-------
                                                                                  INTEGRATED PROGRAM    499
respectively the treatment of pollution at sea, in the various
major oil  ports,  on  the  beaches,  and  inland.  Full
cooperation between the oil industry and the various local
and central government departments in drawing up these
administrative plans has led to full discussions of practical
methods of oil spill cleanup**.
    These discussions revealed the limitations of individual
cleanup   methods and  highlighted the importance  of an
integrated approach. Subsequent sections of this paper deal
with the  concept  of integration as applied to the  physical
cleanup  of oil spills.
Integrated Clean-up
    The physical cleanup of oil spills on water surfaces is a
far from simple operation. The search for a single universal
method,  capable of dealing with all types of oil, in any
quantity  and  thickness and in all weather conditions, has
proved unsuccessful. In the course  of this  search, many
techniques have come to be branded as inadequate because
they cannot be effectively applied outside a limited range
of conditions.

LIMITATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL METHODS
    Booms will contain oil slicks, within certain limitations
of wind,  waves  and currents, but they  cannot go  on
collecting more  and more oil indefinitely. Many booms
have been strung across harbors and bays in an attempt  to
prevent oil being  washed ashore on the tide. These arrest
some oil,  but as more oil collects and the depth builds up
they inevitably fail.
    Suction nozzles work efficiently when used  on thick
oil, but  their operation is upset by  waves. When used on
thin  or patchy oil slicks, they collect a disproportionately
large amount of water, so that huge  storage and separation
facilities become necessary.
    Weir skimmers are intended to allow the surface layer
of oil to  flow by gravity into a container from which it can
be removed. They work admirably on thick oil,  provided
the waves and current are small.  However, like suction
nozzles, they also collect water in large quantities if the oil
is thin or the waves are large.
    The main problem with absorbents is the difficulty  of
distributing  them over  a  slick and  of  collecting and
removing  them from a large area of water surface. Unless
the  absorbent  is  reusable, large  amounts are required.
Typically three times the volume of oil spilled. This leads to
storage,  transportation  and disposal problems  and
considerable expense.
    Gelling agents present the same problems of contacting
the oil and removal of the gell as are posed by absorbents.
Sinking agents are only permissible in certain areas and are
expensive for use on thin slicks. Dispersants are prohibited
in many locations, whilst destruction by burning is only
possible  for  thick  oil slicks  in fireproof or expendable
surroundings.
    Each category of these cleanup methods has had  its
champions. Each has tended to be examined  in isolation.
Thus, there have been trials on booms, studies on skimmers,
and tests on absorbents.  Nevertheless, no  one method is
individually suited to all types, sizes, and circumstances of
oil spill. Effective- cleanup  of any particular spill can  be
obtained, however,  by using  a combination of  these
methods.'The ideal combination is one in which each part
complements and assists the other parts, in other words-an
integrated combination. The  practice  of  specializing  in
a certain category of cleanup methods has tended to divert
attention  from  the  much more  valuable integrated
approach.
                  Suction removal system
   Oil slick
      Oil _
     drum
                       W7T/
              Weights
               r*~i
                               f Fiied boom
                           Flow-
           Fixed booms
    Oil pumped from
    fixed-weir skimmer
    into tonk
Oil removed by
absorbents onto
plastic sheets
 Figure 1: Simple fixed-weir Skimmer Being Used with an Overflow
 Dam.

THE INTEGRATED APPROACH
     The philosophy  of integration  can be illustrated  by
examining the  interdependence of booms and floating
skimmers. A boom can be used to contain a certain amount
of oil, but  fails  if  the oil is allowed to build up; the
concentrated  oil layer must be continuously removed to
allow the boom to go on working satisfactorily. A floating
skimmer  operates best  on  a thick  oil layer in  calm
conditions. Used in conjunction, these two cleanup  devices
assist  each  other and form  an  effective  solution  in
circumstances where each would fail if  applied on its own.
The boom can be used to guide the collected oil to the
skimmer  and  so  avoid the necessity  of relocating the
skimmer as it clears oil from its immediate vicinity.
     Similarly,  the  spreading  and collection  problems
presented by  absorbents  are minimized if  their use  is
restricted to  oil confined by a boom. By limiting the use of
absorbents  to  slicks which  are  too  thin  for efficient
mechanical removal, the volume of absorbent required is
reduced,  thus  lowering  the  cost  and  simplifying the
transportation and disposal operations.

-------
 500   OIL SPILL CLEANUP
Figure 2: Boom Held in two smooth curves by Parachute-Type Moor-
ing SystemW.
     Thus,  an integrated  operation is one in  which
individual methods are combined in such a way that they
are mutually beneficial.  Moreover,  in an integrated
cleanup,  each part is operated so  as to  require  the
minimum total effort.  Nonintegrated combinations often
merely transfer the  problem from  one area to  another
where it may be-more  difficult to deal with; for example,
the  large-scale  use of absorbents on thick slicks  solves a
removal problem at the expense of a disposal problem.
     The many  possible  variations of location, waves, water
current,  amount  and type  of oil, etc,  make each spill '
unique. Even different parts of the same spill may warrant
different  treatments.  It  is  therefore  necessary  to  be
prepared with  a  range  of cleanup methods so that  the
optimum techniques can be selected for combination into
an integrated operation which is suited  to the particular
spill to  be dealt  with.  Given  this  flexibility of both
equipment  and  method  of use,  integrated  cleanup
operations can  be used under a wide variety of conditions,
both at sea and  on inland water surfaces.
   Flow
                                    Attlliory
          Oil pu«Hd from floating
           skimmer inM tank
Oil rtimwd by
Figure[3^AuxiliaiyBoom?and Bank|Sealing AnangementsjUsing Extra
Sections of Boom.
INTEGRATED CLEAN-UP OPERATIONS
    The basic  principle  of the integrated operation is to
recover as much oil as possible in a form in which it can
easily be disposed  of. This normally entails confinement
and mechanical recovery of the major portion of the spill
for subsequent re-refining  or from combustion in such a
way as to  minimize air pollution.  The remaining oil can
then  be attacked  with absorbents  and, after retrieval,
burned or disposed of in a safe area. In some circumstances,
dispersing or sinking may be the answer for oil  which
cannot be recovered mechanically; in severe sea conditions,
this may apply to all the oil.
    An integrated cleanup operation involves confinement,
removal, storage, transportation, and  disposal. The major
part  of the  operation, and  the most difficult,  is the
integration of confinement  and removal techniques so that
they retrieve oil and oil-soaked absorbents in a form which
minimizes other problems. It is on this aspect of integration
that the examples given later concentrate.
    The following sections describe, with practical details
where these appear not to be generally available elsewhere,
how integrated cleanup operations can be carried out on a
variety of water surfaces, from inland streams to estuaries
and the sea.

Streams
    Containment and  removal techniques require a calm
stretch of water to allow the oil to separate out onto the
surface. The basic techniques for oil removal are useless on
fast-flowing  shallow streams.  If suitable  quiescent
conditions do not occur naturally, a deep slow-moving area
of water can be created by using dams of sandbags, timber,
or earth. The oil thus contained can then be removed using
suction nozzles,skimmers,or absorbents as appropriate.
    If a dam is required, it  should  be suituated at an
accessible point where there are high banks. It must be well
keyed into the banks and buttressed to support the oil and
water pressure.
    Oil is retained by  an  underflow dam so long  as the
water level is kept below  the lip of the dam.  There are
several ways  of arranging this.  The water can be released
from  below the oil layer through pipes incorporated low
down during  the formation of  earth  or  sandbag dams.
Timber dams  can be constructed so that planks can be
moved up and down to form adjustable sluices.
    Small water flow rates  can be released by syphons or,
preferably, by pumps. Pumping has the advantage that the
water offtake can be positioned away from the base of the
dam and in the deepest  part of the water.  Consequently,
pumping is less  likely  to  disturb  the surface  layer and
entrain oil. It is also more controllable. The water  intake
should be fitted with a large strainer to prevent entrainment
of solids and also to reduce water turbulence.
    Care  is  needed  with  underflow  dams  to prevent
flooding upstream, to prevent the dam overflowing, and to
prevent oil escaping with the  released water. The  last is
caused  by   insufficient  rate of  oil removal and/or
insufficient depth for the rate at which the  water is being
released.
    The problems associated with the control of the water
release from underflow dams can be avoided  by using an
overflow dam. A  separate barrier across the pool arrests the
surface layer of oil  whilst   the water is released  by
overflowing the top of the dam. This arrangement can be
used  with larger water flow rates than  are practicable for
underflow dams and is less  prone to disruption by changes
in the water flow rates.

-------
                                                                                INTEGRATED PROGRAM     501
    A fixed boom, made from timber planks, provides a
convenient barrier for use with an overflow dam. This type
of boom requires a constant water level, low water flow
rate and a calm surface, which are just the conditions
provided by the overflow dam.
    The. fixed boom should be placed at an angle of about
45° across the waterway. This decreases the effective water
velocity beneath the barrier and also concentrates the oil at
the bank. Arrangements can therefore be made to bring the
oil to the bank  with  the better access. In addition, the
removal point should be located where the water current is
at a minimum.
    Whenever possible, an integrated cleanup system will
make use of local conditions to assist the operation. For
instance, the wind may tend to concentrate the oil against
one bank in preference to the other. Ah1 such factors should
be considered, in addition to  questions of  accessability,
when deciding to which bank to angle the boom.
    The necessary boom length will be approximately 1H
times the width of the watercourse. The ends of the planks
are buried in the banks  of the waterway to provide an
effective seal, and stakes are driven into the stream bed and
used as additional supports on the downstream side  of the
boom as required. Any protrusions on the upstream side of
the boom will cause pockets which trap the oil and also
form points at which  turbulence is likely to be set up at
high water flows. These should be avoided because they will
result in oil being drawn beneath the boom.
    As emergency  containment  arrangements  are  rarely
perfect, a series of dams or booms is usually required. The
majority of the ofl will be removed at the upstream ones,
while the downstream ones  are used to capture any  oil
which escapes.  Different  cleanup  methods are  usually
required  for  removing  the  different thicknesses  of  oil
behind the various booms.
    Oil  must be continually  removed  from  the angle
between the downstream end of the boom and the bank. It
is essential that a watertight seal between the boom and
bank is  maintained at this point. If mechanical removal
methods  are employed,  sufficient  water depth must  be
available.
    Mechanical  recovery processes inevitably entrain some
water with the oil. Transport requirements can be reduced
by employing, a temporary storage tank as a separator and
removing some of the collected water.
    Weir  skimmers  provide  the most generally suitable
means of recovering oil. They are generally slower than
suction nozzles but they collect a higher proportion of ofl
when used on thin oil slicks. Suction nozzles can be used
where the water depth  is insufficient for weir skimmers.
    Fixed-weir  skimmers  should  only be used  in quiet
waters  of constant depth. The  conditions provided  by
overflow dams  are thus ideal for a fixed-weir  skimmer.
Figure 1 illustrates a simple fixed-weir skimmer being used
in conjunction  with  an overflow dam. The  skimmer,
constructed from an open oil drum, is supported so that the
riiri is just below the surface. The suction  hose  inlet is
positioned near the top of the drum and weights are used as
an added precaution against the drum's floating. The dpjrn
can of course be cut down to suit shallower waters.
    The recovered oil and: water mixture is pumped into a
portable  storage tank which allows further  separation to
take place before the oil is transported away.
    Small quantities of ofl, in slicks which are too thin for
efficient  removal  by  skimmers, can conveniently be
removed  by absorbents. Thus, absorbents are used on the
minor amounts of oil escaping to downstream confinement
arrangements,  and also at the  upstream boom  after the
skimmers have reduced the oil to a thin layer.
    In use, the absorbent is thrown or spread out onto the
ofl  surface  so  that it collects as a mat or pile against the
boom. Some  stirring is  usually required to enable fresh
absorbent  to  be presented to the advancing  ofl. The
oil-saturated absorbent is then removed and renewed.
    Because the  ofl is confined  to  a small area by the
boom, spreading and retrieval of the absorbent is simplified.
    A wide   variety  of  materials  has  been  used  as
absorbents. The most popular, and the ones which have had
most  success,  are straw, polyurethane foam, and various
commerical powders. Foam and powder absorbents are
preferred for  light  oils. Straw is better  for picking up
viscous oils.
    On small streams contaminated with minor amounts of
ofl, a dam can  be constructed of straw bales. The intention
in this case is  not so much to raise the upstream waterlevel
but more to present a sufficient area of dam face to allow
the water  to   filer  through it. Most  of the ofl wfll be
absorbed   by  the straw.  Strawbale  dams  should  be
duplicated  and also be replaced before becoming saturated
with  ofl. Some ofl  release can  be  expected  when a straw
bale is removed from the water. To prevent its escape, and
also  to  prevent a sudden release  of water,  a   third
replacement dam should be constructed downstream before
removal of the upstream one.
    Thus,  containment and removal of ofl on stress may
well  require an  integrated  combination of overflow or
underflow  dams, fixed booms, skimmers, absorbents, and
strawbale dams.

Canals
    On  navigation  canals, and  similar  still or very slowly
moving waterways, the main movement of  ofl wfll  be by
wind action.  Under these conditions only  a  lightweight
boom is required  to  contain the  ofl  for removal  by
skimmers or absorbents.
    A  floating boom  of  the inflatable   type can  be
positioned  at an angle to the waterway to allow the wind to
concentrate the ofl  at one bank.
    The depth of the canal may make it difficult to set up
a fixed-weir skimmer. Floating-weir skimmers can be used
in  which the  weir is supported just  below the surface by
floats. The depth of rim immersion can be  adjusted, with
some difficulty, either by movement of the floats relative
to the weir or  by adding ballast to the floats.

-------
  502  OIL SPILL CLEANUP
     Absorbents are conveniently used to remove the thin
 oil slicks left after mechanical removal and for oil removal
 at secondary booms where these are employed.
     The relatively small amount of absorbent used in these
 operations can be burned  on site as a pile, or, with less
 smoke, in a simple incinerator.  Alternatively it can be
 transported to a safe dumping area.
     In this case, then, the confinement and removal part of
 the integrated operation involves floating booms, skimmers
 and absorbents, each assisting one another and each being
> applied in the most effective way.

 Rivers
     The same basic approach  of  confinement by booms,
 mechanical  removal by  skimmers,  and "polishing" with
 absorbents is applicable on rivers having a sufficiently calm
 area of water for separation of the oil and water phases.

     Transportability, lightness, and ease of positioning are
 essential requirements for an emergency floating boom, on
 most  inland waterways.  Flexible booms with inflatable
 buoyancy chambers are  suitable for this purpose.  Some
 lightweight .types, suitable for use on small slow rivers, are
 cheap enough to be regarded as disposable and this obviates
 any problems of cleaning them afterwards. Such booms are
 preferably stocked  in short lengths which can be joined
 together so that they can be applied to a variety of widths
 of waterway. Stronger versions are appropriate for wide
 rivers with water currents above Vi knot. Hence, flexibility
 is desirable in the selection of equipment stocks, so that the
 optimum boom for the particular circumstances of a spill
 can be used in the integrated cleanup operation.
     Work by Newman and Macbeth? has shown that both
 the design of booms and their method of use are important
 to their effectiveness.  In brief, the boom should have a
 smooth profile and be moored at frequent intervals from
 the bottom of the skirt or fin, using mooring ropes with a
 minimum length of 5 times the water depth.
     The selection of the site for a boom is governed by the
 same  conditions  as  were outlined for streams. In other
 words, a smooth undisturbed stretch of river is required,
 with good access, a low water velocity near the banks, and
 sufficient depth to operate oil removal equipment. The
 boom  should be  positioned  where the  current is at a
 minimum. It is more effective to boom at a wide slow
 position than a narrow fast stretch of water.
     The boom is best deployed in two smooth curves from
 the point of maximum velocity (usually the center  of the
 river) to  both banks; as  illustrated in Figure 2. This
 arrangement directs the surface flow of oil to the sides of
 the river where the current is slower. Of course, this double
 boom system requires oil to be removed from both banks.
     The faster the flow of water, the more the  boom
 should be angled. However, the more acute the angle the
 greater is the length of boom required. Fast rivers, above
 about 2 knots, require an unrealistic length of boom. The
 boom  should be a  minimum of  2 river-widths, and 3
 river-widths for currents above 1 knot. For water currents
 below % knot, one continuous boom can be employed at an
 angle from one bank to the other, so allowing oil removal
 operations to be confined to one bank.
    As  usual, the  inshore end of the boom must make an
 effective seal with the bank. This is usually easier to arrange
 under emergency conditions if flexible booms are used. A
 seal can often conveniently be formed by attaching an extra
 length of boom to the moored end and positioning  this
 along the bank upstream of the boom. The resulting pocket
 collects  the oil ready for removal.
    Oil  removal operations, particularly where absorbents
 are used, may cause some oil  to escape beneath the boom.
 This can be recaptured by a small addition boom deploying
 as  shown  in  Figure 3. Once again  the  bank  can  be
 protected, and an  effective seal ensured, by employing an
 extra length of boom along the bank. This  arrangement is
 also recommended for tidal conditions where the normal
 sealing methods are complicated by the rise and fall  of the
 boom. Booms which have joints which enable three sections
 to  be  connected  together at  the same  point are  an
 advantage in these situations.
    Oil  removal should be by skimmers or absorbents as
 appropriate to the thickness of oil collected.
    The operation of floating-weir skimmers is assisted and
 simplified by being located in the sheltered area near the
bank. This type of skimmer works satisfactorily in long
 swells but  collects large  amounts  of water when used in
choppy waves.
    The efficiency of a boom is improved by keeping the
 front  edge  of  the  oil  slick  at  a  distance. This  can
conveniently be achieved by floating a mat  of straw along
the upstream  edge of the boom.  Foam  chippings or a
powdered absorbent can then be used to absorb the oil at
the upstream edge of the straw mat.
   'Some  oil will always leak  under a  boom.  Major
amounts will escape if the oil has a high specified gravity or
the water flows faster than about 2 knots. When sufficient
boom is available, the complete layout should be duplicated
 downstream.
    On   fast  flowing rivers another  form of  integrated
 operation is appropriate.
    When river currents exceed about 2 knots, booms lose
their  effectiveness because the  oil is swept underneath
 them. In theory, this can be  overcome in  two ways: by
 setting  the  boom  at  a more  acute  angle, and/or by
 increasing the buoyancy of the oil. The first of these, as has
 already  been mentioned, may require an unrealistic length
 of boom. The second can be achieved by contacting the oil
 with  a   low  density  absorbent  so  that  the  resulting
 combination floats better than the oil alone.
    In use, the absorbent in the form of foam chips or a
 commercial powder is spread across the surface of the river,
 from the bank by means of air or water educators, or from
 a bridge. In the latter case the absorbent is tipped  into a
 hopper  which is connected  to  the water surface  by a
 flexible   chute. This arrangement prevents  the absorbent
 being blown away. The object is to continuously scatter

-------
                                                                                 INTEGRATED PROGRAM    503
 absorbent onto the passing ofl. However, this necessitates
 an excess of absorbent and hence is expensive.
     The oil-saturated absorbent  is diverted to the bank
 downstream by  a series of angled  booms. Large suction
 nozzles can be used for removing the absorbent but it must
 be  remembered  that  some mineral-based  powders  are
 abrasive to pumps.
     The use  of  absorbents  in this  way is inefficient and
 expensive.  In some circumstances, however, this solution
 may be the only alternative to allowing the oil to travel a
 considerable distance downstream before reaching a calm
 stretch of water on which other, more efficient, operations
 can be employed.
     On rivers,  therefore, integrated  operations involve
 booms, skimmers, and absorbents used in various ways
 depending upon the circumstances.

 Lakes
     Lakes  often  provide the  ideal  conditions of calm
 slow-moving water which allow the oil to be easily confined
 by booms  for removal by either  mechanical skimmers  or
 absorbents.
     Oil movement is mainly by wind action which will tend
 to concentrate it at one shore  or  in a bay. A light
 floating-boom can be deployed to hold the oil for removal
 in case the wind alters direction. Oil on a river flowing into a
 lake should be boomed as close to the entrance as possible.
 The  boom should be positioned on the lake at an angle  to
 the residual river current so as to direct the surface water to
 a slower  moving  area.  The boom  should  enclose the
 minimum area consistent with not exceeding a water flow
 rate under the boom of 0.3m/sec.
    Removal can be by nozzles, skimmers or absorbents as
 appropriate to the concentrated slick thickness.
    Booms can also be  used to "sweep" large surfaces  of
 still  water.  The essential requirement  for this operation is
 that  it  is done  VERY SLOWLY.  The boom should be
 moved  at  not more than  10  m/minute. Where  small
 quantities of oil are involved absorbent booms can be used
 to both sweep  and remove the ofl  in one operation.
 Polyurethane foam chips contained in  a netting tube make
 a very effective absorbent boom for low viscosity oils.
    Viscous oils can be absorbed by straw. A simple straw
 boom can be formed from bales linked together on a wire
 rope. The bales should have the normal binding replaced
 with metal strapping. Straw bale booms can be used as an
 alternative to impervious floating booms in currents  up  to
 about 0.3 m/sec. However, they will require replacement as
 they  become waterlogged or saturated with oil.
    Ice  on  pools  and lakes presents special difficulties for
 oil clean-up operations. Oil on a river entering a frozen lake
 generally goes beneath the ice layer.  Channels  can  be
 smashed in thin ice to install floating booms. Where thick
 ice is involved (above 10 cm) booms are best  maneuvered
 into a submerged position through holes cut in the ice or
from the clear area near an  inlet. Fence type booms are
unsuitable  for  operations beneath ice; a flexible circular
 flotation  chamber,  without  upward projections,  is
 preferred. In some circumstances it is easier to blow up an
 inflatable boom after deploying it.
    Holes can be cut in the ice upstream of the boom for
 recovering oil by skimmers. Floating ice tends to interfere
 with the operation of'weir skimmers  which  should  be
 protected by a wire netting grid.
    These examples again illustrate the flexibility, both in
 equipment  and method  of use, which is  desirable for
 effective integrated cleanup operations.

 Estuaries and the Sea
    The same basic  methods  of  confinement  and of
 recovering as  much ofl as possible by mechanical  means
 which  were  described for rivers  apply to estauries. Waves
 are usually  the  limiting  factor in cleanup  operations in
 estuaries, and even more so in the open sea.
    Heavy-tduty  booms  with  increased  freeboard  to
 prevent over-topping by waves will be appropriate. Where
 booms are towed by boats, the relative movement of boom
 and water should be kept low to minimise the risk of ofl
 being swept underneath the boom. To prevent it building
 up, the oil must be removed continuously.
    Where  permitted, dispersants  may  be  used  to
 contribute to a cleanup operation. Considerable success has
 been  achieved  by  using  dispersants when weather
 conditions  do  not  permit  confinement  and removal
 methods to  be used. The same waves which cause booms
 and  skimmers  to  fail  aid  the agitation  needed by
 dispersants.
    The best  results  are  obtained by  integrating  the
 spraying and  agitation into one  operation, such as that
 developed by the  UJC. Warren Spring Laboratories.10 In
 this system,  mixing is provided by surface breaker agitators
towed  by  the vessel  doing the spraying.  Dispersing is
applicable to both thin and thick ofl slicks and can be
carried out in most weather conditions. However, it should
only be used on large bodies of moving water and with the
permission of the relevant authorities.
    Sea  conditions undoubtedly  pose  the most difficult
circumstances for  ofl recovery.  Even  so, the integrated
approach is still applicable.


SUMMARY
    Effective  cleanup  encompasses  good administration,
sound contingency planning, and  appropriate selection of
methods and equipment,  combined into  an integrated
program.
    Action  becomes  most effective when  all  the
organizations  involved have  combined  their efforts  in
setting up appropriate action groups  and have made joint
contingency  plans which  allow for a flexible combination
of practical methods.
    The administrational  arrangements described in  this
paper  illustrate  what has  been achieved in  the United
Kingdom. These are not the only possible arrangements,

-------
504   OIL SPILL CLEANUP
nor are  the practical methods described the only ones for
cleanup   oil spills on water. These practical methods are,
however, operations which have  succeeded in practice,
which use simple equipment, and which minimise both the
total effort and the expense required. They achieve this
because they are integrated operations.
    Just as there is no single cleanup method, no  matter
how sophisticated, which  does not  benefit from being
combined into an  integrated operation,  so there  is no
individual body which cannot benefit from joint planning.
    The concept of integration  is applicable to all forms,
sizes and circumstances of oil  spill, not  only on water
surfaces but also on  the  soil, in subsoils  and  in
groundwaters. In administration and in practice, integration
provides the key to successful oil spill cleanup.
 REFERENCES
 (1) .H. Jagger.  API/FWPCA  "Joint  Conference on
 Prevention and Control of Oil Spills" New York, 15th-17th
 December 1969.
 (2) Board of Trade Supplement. September 9th 1970.
 (3) Appendix 5 )  Minutes of Evidence, Select Committee
on Science & Technology. HMSO  London, September
1967.
(4) Appendix 3)
(5) Lloyds List-February, 1971.
(6) Institute  of Water Pollution Control:  "Seminar  on
Water Pollution by Oil, Aviemore, Scotland, 4th-8th May,
1970",1971.
(7) Institute of Petroleum: Symposium on the Ecological
Effects of Oil Pollution on Littoral Communities, London,
30th November-lst December  1970.  J. Inst. Petrol. - in
press.
(8)  "Workshop on  Oil Spill  Clean-up"  Institute  of
Petroleum, London, 16th October  1970. J. Inst. Petrol.
Vol. 57, January  1971.

(9) Newman, D.  E., and Macbeth, N.I. "The Use of Booms
as Barriers to Oil Pollution in Tidal Estuaries and Sheltered
Waters." Institute of Water Pollution Control: "Seminar on
Water Pollution by Oil, Aviemore, Scotland 4th-8th May,
1970," 1971.
(10) "Instructions  for using  WSL  Dispersant  Spraying
Equipment"  Ministry  of Technology,  Warren  Spring
Laboratory, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, UK. 1970.

-------
             EVALUATION OF SELECTED  EARTHMOVING
               EQUIPMENT FOR  THE   RESTORATION OF
                        OIL-CONTAMINATED  BEACHES
                                    James D. Sartor and Carl R. Foget
                                         URS Research Company
                                          SanMateo, California
ABSTRACT

   Research studies were conducted to evaluate the use of
selected  earthmoving  equipment  in  oil-contaminated
beach-restoration operations and to determine the cost and
effectiveness of such equipment. Specifically, the objectives
were to:
       Determine  modifications  and cost  required to
       improve the capacity of selected equipment.
       Develop optimum operating procedures for each
       method.
       Determine, through field testing, the operating
       cost of each method evaluated.
   These objectives were  accomplished in  two phases.
Phase  I:  reviewed procedures  utilized  in  previous
beach-restoration operations, phis surveyed and evaluated
commercially  available  earthmoving  equipment.  Phase
II: conducted full-scale tests to demonstrate the restora-
tion procedures developed and to determine the efficiency
with  which  each procedure/equipment item  collects
oil-contaminated material The flexibility and performance
characteristics of the equipment were tested under a variety
of beach conditions.
   The oil removal effectiveness was greater than 98% for
att restoration procedures.  The highest effectiveness was
achieved using the motorized grader and motorized eleva-
ting scraper working in combination. The tracked front end
loaders  were  least  effective. On beaches possessing low
shear strength, flotation tires or steel-belted half-tracks on
the motorized grader and  a  non-self-propelled elevating
scraper  with  a  tracked prime mover should be  used.
Conveyor-screening systems can be effectively utilized to
had oil-contaminated material into trucks for transport to
disposal areas, separate oil-sand pellets from clean sand, and
partially separate oil-contaminated debris (Le., straw, kelp,
seaweed) from oil-contaminated sand.
    The  beach-restoration operations evaluated  in  this
study were  successfully  utilized in the restoration of
oil-contaminated beaches resulting from  the recent  San
Francisco Bay oil spill incident.
    This study was conducted in fulfillment of Contract
No. 14-12-811 between The Federal Water Quality Office,
and The URS Research Company.


INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

    An increasing hazard of contamination of the environ-
ment with oil has  accompanied the  worldwide growth of
the petroleum industry. Since 1954, some 8,000 offshore
wells have been drilled, with 8 resulting in oil blowouts and
17  in gas blowouts, the  recent  Santa Barbara Channel 1
blowout being the most serious. It has been predicted^  that
if offshore development continues to expand at the present
rate and the frequency of accidents remains the same,
3,000 to 5,000 wells will be drilled annually by 1980, and
we  can  expect to  have a major pollution incident every
year. Additionally, supertankers  of  the future will carry
much more oil than  that released by the rupture at Santa
Barbara  and by the grounding of the Torrey Canyon3  and
the more recent collision of the Oregon Standard  and
Arizona Standard in the San Francisco Bay.
    The problem of beach contamination becomes severe
in the case of large accidental oil releases at sea, such as  that
of the Torrey Canyon and Santa Barbara incidents. Com-
plete removal or  dispersal of the released oil at sea in these
incidents was not possible, and very  large oil slicks moved
                                                  505

-------
506  OIL SPILL CLEANUP
ashore,  coating entire beaches up to the high-tide mark.
Where oil absorbents, such as straw, had been broadcast on
the oil  slick at sea, as at Santa Barbara and in the San
Francisco Bay spill, the oil-soaked  absorbent  was  also
deposited on the beaches, rocky shores, and riprap.
    Once the  oil  comes ashore, serious  economic  and
ecological consequences may result. Oil contamination has
an obvious adverse effect on recreational uses of beaches.
Since in many situations complete removal or dispersal of
oil before it reaches the coast will be  impossible, effective
beach-restoration procedures are needed. In all major spills
to  date,  containment of the oil spill at  sea has  been
ineffective-resulting in oil-contamination of shorelines.
    Previous  restoration  methods have  used  excessive
amounts  of labor. The  choice of a  restoration method
depends upon the economical and recreational value of the
area and surface  conditions  and topography of the shore-
line. Although various types of earthmoving, construction,
and  agricultural  equipment  have  been  utilized  in
beach-restoration projects, the equipment does not appear to -
have been utilized either effectively or  efficiently, and little
has been done to mechanize or systematize beach cleanup
operations.
    URS Research Company personnel have had extensive
experience  in  the  development of  procedures  for  the
decontamination  of beach and land  areas  contaminated
with radioactive fallout 4-9 Although fallout does not have
the same  physical characteristics as oil-contaminated sand
and debris,  the requirements of complete removal of the
fallout particles from beach areas pose a similar problem,
ie., removal of a thin layer of surface.
    During  these previous studies, the processes involved
and means of improving the  performance of earthmoving
equipment were  investigated. Many of these findings are
applicable to the  use of similar equipment for utilization in
the cleanup of  oil-contaminated  beaches.  The possible
approaches to improving performance (and reducing cost)
of selected equipment include:
        Modifications to equipment,  such  as  addition of
        baffles, blade modifications, etc.
        Optimizing operational procedures, such as speed
        of operation, blade angles, depth of cut
        Changes in operational procedures, such as use of
        conveyor-screening  systems in combination with
       ' graders and scrapers
OBJECTIVES

    The objectives of this research study were to evaluate
the use of selected earthmoving equipment in  oil-contami-
nated beach-restoration operations and  to determine their
cost and  effectiveness in removing oil-contaminated sand
and debris. Specifically, the objectives included:
    (1) Determination of modifications and cost required
        to improve the capacity of the selected equipment
    (2) Development of optimum operating procedures for
        each method
    (3) Determination  of  the operating  cost, of each
        method evaluated through field testing.
SCOPE

    The method and equipment selected to restore a beach
contaminated  with oil will depend  upon  the  manner  in
which the oil  has been  deposited  onto the beach and the
type of beach contaminated. For the purpose of this study,
the principal effort was directed  towards  examining two
representative situations involving oil contamination:
    I. Beach material uniformly contaminated with a thin
       layer of oil up to the high-tide mark  and/or deposits
       of oil dispersed randomly  over the beach surface.
       Oil-deposit penetration is limited to approximately
       lin.
    II. Agglomerated  pellets  of  oil-sand  mixture  or
       oil-soaked material, such as  straw and beach debris,
       distributed randomly over the surface and/or mixed
       into the sand
    In  both  of  the stated  conditions  the   restoration
involves: (a) the physical pickup of the deposited oil,
oil-contaminated sand,  straw,  or other  debris;  (b) the
separation (in some cases) of the  oil-contaminated debris
from  clean, loose sand,  and (c)  the removal of the
oil-contaminated materials to a disposal site.

    The surface conditions and topography of the beach
contaminated with oil will dictate  the choice of equipment
to be utilized and the operating procedure  to be followed.
Surface conditions can  vary  from a smooth, hard, sandy
surface to rocky (shingled), irregular surfaces.  The topog-
raphy can range from long flat beaches to those that are
short, scalloped, steep and undulating. The principal effort
in this project was directed  towards the development  of
operating  procedures  and equipment  required  for the
restoration of sandy beaches.

METHOD OF APPROACH

    The objectives of  this  research study were accom-
plished in two phases, each comprised of several tasks as
follows:

Phase I

Task I

    Review existing  reports on recent oil-pollution inci-
dents and other available information to determine:
    (a) The magnitude of beach contamination (to esti-
        mate potential material-handling load)
    (b) Probable situations to be encountered  (i.e., uni-
        form or non-uniform oil contamination, types and
        amounts of debris, etc.)
    (c) Previous  methods  utilized   in  beach-restoration
        operations
    (d) The range of characteristics of beach sands (par-
        ticle  size, cohesiveness,  materials, occurrence of
        rock, etc.) and beaches (size, accessibility, etc.) of
        the United  States  that  may  be subject to  oil
        contamination.

-------
                                                                               EARTHMOVING EQUIPMENT
                                                                                                                507
 Task II

     Review equipment performance and develop prelimi-
 nary beach-restoration operations as follows:
     (a) Survey  commercially  available  equipment  and
        obtain  information  on  pertinent   performance
        characteristics.
     (b) Review and evaluate previously used beach-restora-
        tion methods and identify limitations of  equip-
        ment utilized.
     (c) Design candidate beach-restoration procedures and
        identify possible limitations of equipment.
     (d) Specify possible modifications to the equipment to
        increase effectiveness.

 Task III

     Conduct preliminary evaluation tests to determine:
     (a) Necessary modifications and cost of modifications
        to  motor-grader  blades and  motorized  scraper
        hoppers to minimize spillage
     (b) Effectiveness of various screening techniques for
        oil-contaminated beach material
     (c) Effectiveness of pretreatment methods to facilitate
        pickup of contaminated beach material.

 Phase II
 Task I
    Conduct full-scale field  tests to  evaluate the operating
 procedures and equipment modifications selected in Phase
 I. Performance criteria measured for each procedure and
 equipment combination evaluated included:
    (a) Efficiency with which  each  procedure/equipment
       collects or spills oil-contaminated material
    (b) The ratio of oil  to  inert material in the mixture
       collected
    (c) The cost per unit of oil  collected and unit of beach
       material handled
    (d) Capability of the equipment to  operate under  a
       variety of beach conditions
    (e) Performance  characteristics   at  various  speeds,
       blade angles, and depths of cut

Phase I Evaluation Tests

    Full-scale evaluation tests at three beach sites along the
San Mateo  County  (California) coastline, plus  laboratory
tests utilizing scaled mock-ups were conducted during Phase
I to determine:
    (a) Means of applying oil and oil-sand-straw  mixture to
       beach test areas
    (b) Performance information  for the various classes of
       equipment to be utilized in  the beach-restoration
       operations
    (c) Evaluation of conveyor-screening  techniques for
       the separation of  oil-straw-sand mixtures  from
       clean sand
    (d) Necessary modifications to equipment to enhance
        performance for beach-restoration operations
    On the basis of the analysis of previously used cleanup
methods, discussions with equipment manufacturers, and a
survey of commonly  available  earthmoving construction
and agricultural equipment, the following equipment  was
selected for evaluation in this study:
        Motorized graders
        Motorized elevating scrapers
        Front end loaders
        Conveyor-screening systems
       Figure 1; San Mateo County Coastline Test Sites

FULL-SCALE TESTS

    Full-scale tests to  evaluate the performance of selected
earthmoving equipment were conducted at three beach sites
along  the San Mateo  County coastline. The locations of
these beach sites are shown in Fig. 1. The  selection of the
test sites was made after considering the following factors:
(a) accessibility, (b) slope of beach, (c)  sand grain size
gradation, and (d)  typicality (of recreation-type beaches).
    For each site, the average slope of the beach  in the
intertidal zone was determined. Sand samples were taken at
various locations in both  the intertidal zone and  in the
backshore area to establish the grain size gradation and the
sand  classification  for  each  test  site.   The  grain  size
gradation was determined by a standard sieve  analysis, and
the sand classification followed that established by the U.S.
Department of Soil Conservation soil classification system.
    A detailed description of each of the three beach test
areas follows:
       Francis State Park Beach,  Half Moon Bay, Cali-
       fornia — can be classified as a spit and bay mouth
       bar type of beach and contains a coarse to medium
       sand  with  a  median grain size of 0.54 mm in the
       backshore  area and 0.45 mm in the tidal zone. The
       beach is loosely packed, has very soft footing, and
       a tidal zone slope of 6%.

-------
 508
OIL SPILL CLEANUP
        Tunitas Beach, south of Half Moon Bay  - is an
        excellent example of a pocket beach and contains
        a fine to very fine  type of sand with a median
        grain size of 0.25  mm in the backshore and 0.21
        mm in the tidal zone. The  beach is hard packed
        with very firm footing and  has a tidal zone slope
        of 3%.
        Half  Moon Bay  Harbor  Beach,  Princeton, Cali-
        fornia - is located behind the breakwater of the
        Half Moon Bay harbor  and can be classified as a
        spit and baymouth bar type  of beach. The sand on
        the  beach is  poorly graded,  varying from very
        coarse to very fine grain  size  and  has a median
        size of 0.82 mm in the  tidal zone. The beach has
        medium packed sand with medium to firm footing
        and a tidal zone slope of 3%.
    All three beaches are used  for recreational purposes.
The Francis State Park Beach and the Princeton Beach are
public beaches and offer ready access for heavy equipment.
Tunitas Beach, a private beach, is located at  the base of
steep  cliffs  and an access road had  to be constructed  by
widening an existing foot path. This was accomplished in 1
day's  time with a bulldozer. These three  beach test sites
provided a range of characteristics that are representative of
many beaches along the coastline  of the United States.
    Seventeen  series of tests were conducted utilizing a
motorized  grader,  motorized  scrapers,  and   front end
loaders, singly and  in combination. The equipment evalu-
ated included:
                                                       Front  End Loader -  International  Harvester  Model
                                                       175B, crawler tractor, 4-in-l bucket,  2-cu-yd capacity,
                                                       120hp
                                                       The choice of make and model of equipment evaluated
                                                   was determined only by equipment availability at  the time
                                                   of testing. These items, however, are representative of their
                                                   classes.
                                                       To improve the performance on sand, the motorized
                                                   grader was equipped with 23.5x25, 10-ply flotation tires on
                                                   all four driving wheels in place of the standard 13.00x24.
                                                   10-ply  tires.  The  motorized  elevating scraper was  also
                                                   equipped  with two optional features designed to  improve
                                                   operating performance on  sand. These  consisted of the
                                                   following;
                                                       (a) The installation of a high-speed, low-torque motor
                                                          cartridge kit to increase the elevator speed  approxi-
                                                          mately 20-29%.
                                                       (b) A transmission change consisting of a turbine and
                                                          drive  gear modification to reduce  the ground speed
                                                          from  a maximum  speed in first gear of 6 mph to
                                                          2.72  mph  and a  reduction  in second gear high
                                                          range from 24 mph to 16.6 mph.
                                                       The  operating  characteristics of  each piece of  equip-
                                                   ment in removing the surface layer of sand was determined
                                                   at each beach  test site under different beach conditions. In
                                                   several tests, oil was utilized in tidal zone areas, and in one
                                                   instance on the backshore area where  oil was applied to the
                                                   surface by spilling a container of water and oil over the test
                                                   site. In several tests the test area was covered with  straw or
                                                   a  test area  was selected that was covered with kelp  and
                                                   other debris.
         .  * V       _  -      -J  --
                                                •• ,.« ^
                Figure 2: Motorized Grader
   Motorized Grader  - (Fig. 2) Caterpillar Model  12,
   rubber tired, 12-ft blade, 115 hp
   Motorized Elevating Scraper - (Fig. 3) International
   Harvester Model E-200, rubber tired, 9-cu-yd capacity,
   135 hp, two-wheel drive
   Motorized Scraper  - (Fig. 4) Caterpillar Model  10,
   rubber  tired, 12-cu-yd  capacity,  120  hp, four-wheel
   drive
   Front End Loader  - Caterpillar Model 955,  crawler
   tractor, 4-in-l bucket, 1-3/4-cu-yd capacity, 115 hp
                                                              Figure 3: Motorized Elevating Scraper

                                                      The beach-restoration  procedures evaluated  for  each
                                                  piece of equipment and combination of equipment in the
                                                  Phase I tests are listed in Table 1. The basic test procedure
                                                  was to  operate the equipment on a 100-by 30-ft test area
                                                  and  to time and  photograph the operations and  obtain
                                                  appropriate  measurements, including width of cut, depth of
                                                  cut,  size of windrows and visual observations of effective-
                                                  ness  (i.e., amount of spillage).  Each piece  of candidate

-------
                                                                              EARTHMOVING EQUIPMENT    5Q9
 equipment was tested individually  to  determine its opera-
 ting characteristics and performance  in  removing  a  thin
 surface layer of sand under various beach conditions. The
 motorized grader was then operated in combination with
 the elevator scraper and the front end loader to determine
 the effectiveness of combined operations.
    During  both  the individual tests and the combined
 equipment tests, the various pieces of heavy  equipment
 were operated at different speeds, depths of cut, and blade
 angles to  determine  the optimum operating characteristics
 for equipment  performance  on a  sandy beach.  Finally,
 several tests were run to determine cycle time  (i.e., a
 complete  loading cycle, which includes  loading, hauling,
 dumping,  and return  to loading position). In some of these
 tests, longer test  areas were  used  to approximate actual
 conditions (e.g.,  the  scraper  will normally  operate  in one
 direction and continue loading until its capacity is  reached
 instead of making short, 100-ft passes).

               Figure 4: Motorized Scraper

A.
C.
D.

PROCEDURES
Surface layer of beach material
pushed into windrows by a motorized
grader for pickup and removal by a
motorized elevating scraper.
pushed into windrows by a motorized
grader for pickup by front end
loaders and removal bv trucks .
Surface layer of beach material
picked up by a front end loader
and removal by trucks .
Surface layer of beach material

EQl' I PMEST
Motorized Grader
Motorized Elevating Scraper
Front End Loader
Trucks
Front End Loader
Trucks
Motorized Elevating Scraper

    One measure of  efficiency is  the amount  of sand
removed during  a  beach-restoration operation. For each
operation, the volume  of sand (in cubic yards) removed per
acre  of beach cleaned was calculated from the data. The
results in Table 2 show that the smallest amount of material
per  acre  was  removed with  the  motorized  grader and
motorized   elevating  scraper   working  in   combination
(Restoration Procedure A, Table 1). The motorized eleva-
ting  scraper operating  alone  was the next best procedure.
The  most   inefficient   arrangement  utilized  a  front end
loader to scrape up and remove the material.
    The range of values given is based on several tests. An
important  parameter  in calculating  the total volume re-
moved is the depth of cut, and in each test an average depth
of cuty was measured. In some instances, due  to the bearing
surface of the test area and topography, it was difficult for
the operator to maintain a constant depth of cut.
    Another measure  of efficiency  is the rate (hr/acre)  at
which beach areas are  cleared.  Table 3 presents the rate  of
clearing for the various pieces of equipment  evaluated and
combinations of equipment.  The calculations are based on
these operations in which cycle times were taken.
    The values  given  for  each equipment  item and/or
combination of items  are based on  equipment performing
under optimum conditions (i.e., the  motorized elevating
scraper loading in first gear and hauling and returning from
the  dump  area  in second  gear:  the  motorized  grader
operating in second gear for both forward and reverse; and
the front end loader operating in first gear for scraping and
second gear for hauling and dumping).
     The calculated values are based on the  haul distances
given in Table 3 for each operation. Increasing or decreasing
VOLUME OF SAND REMOVED
(Cu yd acre of beach cleaned)



Motorized Grader and
Motorized Elevating
Scraper
Motorized Elevating
Scraper
Motorized Grader and
Front End Loader
Front End Loader
Loose Sand or
Backshore Area



130-145

300-400


800-1200
Firm Hard-
Packed Beach



70-100

200-250

300-325

Firm Beach With
Straw Applied @
100 Bales. Acre


180-200





                                                            Table  2:  Sand Removal  During  Various  Beach Restoration
                                                            Operations
                                                                                  CLEARANCE RATES
                                                                                     (hr/acre)
                                        HAUL DISTANCE (ft)
                                        TO DUMP (one way)
                                                             Motorized Grader and
                                                               Motorized Elevating
                                                               Scraper

                                                             Motorieed Elevating
                                                               Scraper

                                                             Motorized Grader and
                                                               Front End Loader
Table 1:  Beach Restoration Procedures Evaluated in Phase I Tests
 Table  3:  Acres  Cleared  and  Hauled by  Various  Types  and
 Combinations of Equipment

-------
 510     OIL SPILL CLEANUP
these distances would  increase  or  decrease  the  rates
accordingly. When a motorized grader is used in combina-
tion with a motorized elevating scraper or front end loader,
the  indicated  rates may  be increased  by  the  use of
additional  scrapers or  front end loaders. The motorized
grader is capable of producing windrows continuously, and
several motorized  elevating scrapers or front end loaders
can be utilized to pick up and remove the windrows.
     As indicated in  Table  3, the motorized grader/motor-
ized elevating scraper combination is the  most efficient for
an equivalent length of haul. The least efficient is the front
end loader, working singly.
     Tests  were also conducted on backshore tests areas.
On the Francis State Park Beach, where very loose dry sand
was encountered, the rubber-tired equipment ( motorized
grader and motorized elevating scraper) could not operate
efficiently  and in several  instances became  immobilized.
Only the crawler-mounted  front end loader could perform.
However,  as  indicated  in Table 2, the use of a  front end
loaders is very inefficient in terms of the volume of material
removed.
     Procedures for  minimizing the oil  contamination of
backshore areas should be  instituted at the first indication
of a possible shoreline pollution event. Under normal tide
conditions,  a berm or dike  at  the  high-tide mark can
prevent oil from contaminating backshore areas. However,
as in the case of Santa Barbara, heavy winter storms can
wash oil over dikes or breakwaters onto these areas.

Phase II Demonstration Tests

     Full-scale  demonstration  tests  were  conducted  to
evalute the restoration procedures and equipment modifica-
tions selected in the Phase I evaluation tests. Performance
criteria measured for each procedure/equipment evaluated
included:
     (a) Efficiency with which each procedure/equipment
        item collected or spilled oil-contaminated material.
     (b) Trie  ratio of oil to inert  material in the mixture
        collected.
     (c) The  cost per unit of oil collected and unit of beach
        material handled.
     (d) Capability  of  the  equipment to operate under a
        variety of beach conditions.
     (e) Performance characteristics at various speeds, blade
        angles, and depths  of cut.
RESTORATION PROCEDURES EVALUATED

    The  beach-restoration  procedures  recommended  for
full-scale testing in the Phase II demonstration tests, based
on the Phase I preliminary evaluation tests, include the use
of: (a) motorized graders; (b) motorized elevating scrapers;
(c) crawler  tractor-drawn elevating scraper; (d)  front end
loaders; and (e) conveyor-screening systems. A total of 20
tests  were conducted on test  areas exhibiting  the listed
beach conditions.  The  equipment items utilized included
those evaluated  previously in the Phase I tests, and  the
following additional equipment:
        Front  End Loader     International  Harvester.
        Model  H-80, rubber tired, 3-cu-yd capacity, 225
        hp
        Portable   Conveyor-Screening  Plant     Barber
        Greene, Model PS-70, 24-in. belt, 270 tons/hr
        Non-Self-Propelled  Elevating Scraper - Johnson
        Mfg.  Co., Model  80-C, rubber  tired,  8-cu-yd
        capacity
        Mulch Spreader - Finn Mulch Spreader, Model P.
        10 tons/hi
    As stated previously, the choice of make and model of
equipment  evaluated was determined only by  equipment
availability  at  time of testing and were representative of
their classes.
          Figure 5: Close-up of Oil Film on Test Area
   Figure 6: Straw Being Dispersed on Test Area by Straw Blower

-------
                                                                       EARTHMOVING EQUIPMENT    5||

•
    Figure 7: Oil-Sand Pellets Distributed Over Test Area
TEST CONDITIONS AND DATA COLLECTED

    The  restoration procedures were evaluated for five
beach conditions:
    (1) Tidal zone  -  contaminated with a thin  film of oil
        (Fig. 5)
    (2) Tidal  zone  -  contaminated  with an oil-straw
        mixture (Fig.  6)
    (3) Tidal  zone -- contaminated with  randomly  dis-
        persed, agglomerated oil-sand pellets (Fig. 7)
    (4) Backshore zone - contaminated with  a thin film
        of oil
    (5) Backshore  zone  — contaminated  with randomly
        dispersed, agglomerated oil-sand pellets
    The  following measurements and data were collected
for each test series conducted.

Pre-Test Conditions

    (a) Quantity of contamination agent dispersed  on test
        area
    (b) Total area contaminated
    (c) Average  depth of penetration of oil
Us!
SO.

A-l

*-]-!



LJ-1
t-1



1.-L

li-1

11- 1


('-•') t
HEACII ' J
COSUI -
T10N

1

1

1 ' '

1
1



1







LyL 1PMENT
EVALIATED


V. :.:..,,. EKvjt-
in- S. raptr

M«.lunzt-d EK-V3T-
int: Serai- r
Si rapiT
C :•_>*!, r Trjtljr
* i :h ti.iK- tracks
t l ont Eriii • •
Hubber tirn:
!»t; 3^ rapt-r
me S> TJpvr *1 lh

i nn St.- r a per *• i ih
• • : -•. i S 1 t-s

sami baffles
Mutori/rv
-------
512    OIL SPILL CLEANUP
TEST
NO.



E-2
(•)
BEACH DISTANCE
. CONDI- EQUIPMENT OIL CONTAHMTIOM ABBA CUT TIME VOLUME TO UNLOAD-
TION EVALUATED DISPERSED AREA COVERED CLEANED WIDTH DEPTH LENGTH OPERATION CYCLE REMOVED IMG AREA CONCENTS
• (K*l) <•» ft) (*q yd)  (in.) (ft) (Bin.aec) (cu yd) (ft)

MDtorlMtJ Kl««t- 35 10 Resultant »lndrow easily picked up by motorized
int 8crai»r .ith ' «l«v.ting .craper.
sand baffle*
Coaveyor-Sc reenlaa:
Syste*
•otorlKed Ilevat- 36 30 nated. Conveyor-screcnlnc system separates 75-80%
ing Scraper with ' of *triw plcked u* fro" "nd-
•tod baffle*
Straw Blower
CouT«yor-3c retninf
System
3 Motorized Elevat- 190 292O 445 20 1-1.5 2OO 26. 3O 26.30 34 1000 Very little spillage occurred. Straw on test
in*- Scraper area eliminate* pickup of oil on tires.
Straw Blover
Conveyor-Sc reeoiBf
Syatt*
Sec Table 4
                                     Table 5:  Full Scale Demonstration Tests - Data Summary
 1&91   COHOI-
 NO.   TIW
 SqUIPMEHT       OIL ttHTTAMlKAriOtl   AREA   	
 EVALUATED     DISPERSED AREA COVERED CLEANED WIDTH DEPTH LENGTH 	 __..
	
                                  DISTAKE
                            VOLUME  TO UKLQAD-
                            BmOVED 1HC ABEA
                            leu yd)   (ft)
 E-3    3    Ho tori zed Elevat-    190      2400       267   2O   1-1.5 120   23,15    23.15   13.5    800
                                             1ST   20   1-1.5  75   2,41    2,41
                                             H   !»..  2     50   7,31    7,31
                                                                                             bowl.  Conveyor-screening system very efficient
                                                                                             in separating oil-sand pellets frost clean sand.
 F-3    3    Motorized Elevat-    ISO
              luf Scraper •itit
              sand baffles

            Coaveyor-Sc recninc
            HotoriMd Elavat-
              tnc Scraper v&tb
              saod baffles

            CoBveyor-ScreeBtni
              Systea
 C-3    3    Motorized Grader    160

            Motorized Elcvat-
              iac Scraper vltb
              sand baffles

            CoRwyor-Screeatnx
              Syste.

 C-5    5    Motorized Grader    200

            Motorized Elevat-
              ing Scraper «itb
              saad baffles

            Conveyor-Screenlnf
              Systeai
20   1    100
              2,27

              4,45
              1,31

              3,25
                                                                       7,12     9     750     Utj
                                                                              noted in Test B-3.
                     4,M     3.5     BOO
    Sec Table 4
                                      Table 6: Removal of Oil-Sand Pellets - Data Summary
Equipment Operations

    (a)  Equipment  conditions — blade  angle, operating
         speed, depth of cut, elevator speed
    (b)  Size of windrows-length, width, depth
    (c)  Elapsed time for each pass
    (d)  Elapsed time for each loading cycle
    (e)  Volume of material in scraper bowl
    (Q  Elapsed time for each unloading cycle
    (g)  Distance to unloading area
    (h)  Total cycle time
    (i) Estimated amount of spillage
                  Post-Test Conditions

                      (a) Location  and  amount  of contamination agent
                          remaining on test area


                      (b) Location and amount of debris, kelp, etc., remain-
                          ing on test area

                      Still  photographs  and  motion pictures were  taken
                 before, during, and after each test series to document each
                 operation.

-------
                                                                             EARTHMOVING EQUIPMENT  5)3
^^•MH
TEST
NO.

A-l
A-l-1
Ol
D-l
E-l
F-l
F-4
G-l
G-4
H-l
H-4
(a)
(b)
BEACH
CONDI- „
TIONta)

1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
4
1
4
See Table
Based on
RESTORATION PROCEDURE MODIFICATIONS

Combination of Motorized Grader None
and Motorized Elevating Scraper
Combination of Motorized Grader None
and Motorized Elevating Scraper
Towed Elevating Scraper None
Combination of Motorized Grader None
and Front End Loader mounted on
rubber tired tractor
Motorized Elevating Scraper None
Motorized Elevating Scraper Sand Baffles
Motorized Elevating Scraper Sand Baffles
Combination of Motorized Grader Sand Baffle's
and Motorized Elevating Scraper
Combination of Motorized Grader -Sand Baffles
and Motorized Elevating Scraper
Combination of Motorized Grader 4-1 Bucket
and Front End Loader mounted on
crawler tractor
Combination of Motorized Grader 4-1 Bucket
and Front End Loader mounted on
crawler tractor
4
500— ft distance to unloading area
VOLUME
OF SAND
REMOVED RATE
(cu yd/ (hr/
acre) acre)
483 3.85
580 2.70
228 7.14
235 5.55
596 4.00
305 1.10
443 2.70
336 1.64
394
180 21.0
236 37,0
INITIAL
OIL
LOADING
(gal/
sq yd)
0.48
0.57
	
0.83
0.45
0.83
0.76
0.62
0.58
0.77
0.94
OIL OIL
REMOVED RESIDUAL
(gal/ (gal/
sq yd) sq yd)
4.8 0.0013
4.7
—
17.1 0.0006
3.6 0.0002
13.1 	
8.2 0.001
8.8 0.0001
7.2 0.0009
21.8 0.002
19.3 0.0019
                            Table 7: Removal of Thin Film of Oil - Summary of Test Results
      BEACH
TEST   CONDI-
HO.    TIONU>
B-l
B-2
E-2
                   RESTORATION PROCEDURE
                                                VOLUME            INITIAL
                                                OF  SAND            OIL      OIL       OIL
                                 MODIFICATIONS  REMOVED  RATE    LOADING   REMOVED  RESIDUAL
                                                 (cu yd/  (hr/     (gal/
                                                                                            (gal/    (gal/
Combination of Motorized Grader  Sand Baffles
and Motorized Elevating Scraper

Combination of Motorized Grader  Sand Baffles
and Motorized Elevating Scraper
with straw added
acre)    acre)   sq yd)    cu yd)    sq yd)


 297      2.56     0.43      7.05   0.0002
               Motorized Elevating Scraper
               with straw  added
                                                 None
                                                                  343
                                                                  377
                                                                           2.78
                                                            2.44
                                                                                    0.60
                                                                    0.58
                                                                                              8.4
                                                                               7.6
(a)  See Table 4
(b)  Based on 500-ft distance  to  unloading  area
                     Table 8: Full Scale Demonstration Tests - Summary of Test Results

-------
 514   OIL SPILL CLEANUP


TEST
NO.


G-3

G-5

F-3
F-5
E-3
(a)
(b)
(c)

BEACH
CONDI-.
TIONta)


3

5

3
5
3


RESTORATION PROCEDURE MODIFICATIONS


Combination of Motorized Grader Sand Baffles
and Motorized Elevating Scraper
Combination of Motorized Grader Sand Baffles
and Motorized Elevating Scraper
Motorized Elevating Scraper Sand Baffles
Motorized Elevating Scraper Sand Baffles
Motorized Elevating Scraper None

VOLUME
OF SAND
REMOVED RATE1 '
(cu yd/ (hr/
acre) acre)
260 2.32

76 1.64

231
345 1.75
245 4.35
INITIAL
OIL
PELLET
LOADING
(lb/
sq yd)
2.0

2.8

1.6
1.5
0.7

OIL
PELLETS
REMOVED
(lb/
cu yd)
36.5

175

33
21.1
14.1

OIL
PELLET
RESIDUAL
(lb/
sqyd)(c)
O

0

0.045
0.009
0.015
See Table 4
Based on 1500-ft distance to unloading area
A value of
0 indicates no oil-sand pellets remained on test
area



                           Table 9:  Removal of Thin Film of Oil - Summary of Test Results
 TEST RESULTS

     The major observations and data collected during the
 Phase II testing are given in Tables 4 through 6. Included
 are  detailed data on each test, including quantity of oil
 contamination;  time of operation;  area cleaned; depth,
 width and length of cut; material removed; and comments
 on the  performance of the equipment. The principal  test
 variables during the Phase II testing were beach conditions,
 equipment  modifications,  and equipment combinations.
 Specific equipment variables,  such  as blade  angle  and
 operating speeds, were evaluated during the Phase I testing,
 and the optimum settings determined therein were utilized
 in  the  Phase  II test  program.  The depth of  cut  was
 dependent upon the depth of ofl penetration in each test.
     Measures of effectiveness for each restoration pro-
 cedure  in terms of the total volume of sand removed per
 acre of beach  cleaned, the cleaning rate, the  ratio of oil
 removed to the volume of sand removed, and the residual
 amount of oil remaining on each test area after cleaning are
 presented in Tables 7 through 9. The total  area cleaned in
 each test  was  usually greater than the area contaminated
 with ofl Thus, to allow for comparisons between restora-
 tion procedures,  the total  cleared area was assumed to be
 uniformly contaminated with  ofl  at the initial ofl loadings
 given in Tables 7 through 9. The initial ofl loadings utilized
 would approximate 10,000 gal of ofl deposited over 1 mile
 of beach, 30 ft wide.
    The interaction between  the ofl  loadings  and  the
various  equipment  types evaluated was minimal, Le., the
presence of the film of ofl on the beach surface did not
affect the ability of the equipment to pick up, cut, or
transport  the contaminated beach material. The mixing
action that occurred in the cutting and/or pickup of a thin
film of ofl and the underlying clean sand results in a
uniform oil-sand mixture. Under these conditions, it is not
possible to separate oil-contaminated sand from clean sand
by screening.
    The experience of the equipment operator to properly
operate earthmoving equipment under the beach conditions
encountered in the  Phase II tests  was found to have an
important influence  on the volume of material removed
from each test area. The motorized grader operator for Test
A-l,  A-l-1,  G-l, and G-4, which were conducted in
combination with  the motorized elevating scraper, experi-
enced difficulty in maintaining a constant depth of cut, and
in most instances  cut deeper than required, thus forming
large windrows. This resulted in  removal  of  an excessive
amount of material from the test area.
    In contrast, the experienced motorized grader operator
utilized during Test D-l and H-l, conducted in combination
with front end loaders, maintained  a constant 1/2- to 1-in
cut, thereby forming smaller windrows and minimizing the
volume of material removed.
    The average depth  of ofl penetration on most  of the
tests  was limited  to 1/2 to  1 in. However, varying  oil
penetration was  noted on  most  test  area.  Its extent
depended upon the  nature of the beach test area and the
length of the interval between loading and  removal. Oil
penetration greater than 1 in.  usually  occurred in small
areas (2 to 3 sq ft) where coarser sand had concentrated. In
some instances, removal of these lenses of oil necessitated
additional cleanup passes; however, they could have been
easily removed .manually.
    In  Test E-2, the test area was a hard-packed tidal flat
and ofl remained pooled on the  surface with little to no
"penetration. In Test  B-2, in an area in the upper tidal zone,
ofl remained on the test area 2 to 3 hours prior to removal;

-------
                       EARTHMOYING EQUIPMENT   515
 during this time oil penetrated 2 to 3 in., thus requiring
 additional cleanup passes.

 REMOVAL EFFECTIVENESS

    The  oil  removal  effectiveness  was  determined  by
 manually removing all of the visible ofl remaining on the
 test area subsequent to  the completion of a restoration
 procedure and stripping the oil from the oil-sand mixture.
 The residual amount of oil for each test is given in Tables 7
 through 9. The  ofl removal effectiveness was greater than
 98% for  all restoration procedures.  The highest effective-
 ness was  achieved through the use of the motorized grader
 and motorized elevating  scraper working in combination.
 the lowesteffectiveness was obtained with the tracked front
 end loader.
    The removal effectiveness for oil-sand pellets was also
 greater than 98%, The residual oil-sand pellets on Tests F-3,
 F-5, and  E-3 resulted from spillage following raising of the
 filled bowl on the motorized elevating scraper at the end of
 the test area.

 CLEANING RATE

    Table 10 presents cleaning rates for each restoration
 procedure evaluated on both tidal zone areas and backshore
 area. The rates  presented  for the motorized grader and
 motorized  elevating scraper  were  obtained  from  the
 full-scale  demonstration tests, where the times of operation
 were longer, thus more  realistic than the  operating times
 from  the small-scale tests. A major factor affecting the
 cleaning rate is the distance the material picked up has to
 be hauled to  an  unloading  area. During the Phase II tests,
 distance to unloading areas varied from 50 to 2450 ft. To
 allow  comparisons of cleaning rates, the rate data given in
 Tables 4  through 6 were normalized to a  500-ft, one-way
 hauling distance for all tests.

    As indicated  in  Table  10, there was no significant
 difference in cleaning rates between the motorized elevating
 scraper working singly or in combination with the motor-
 feed grader. This is in contrast to the results  of Phase I,
 where   the motorized elevating scraper was  slower when
 working singly.  This  disparity was due to the manner in
 which  the motorized grader was operated. In Phase I, in
 which  no ofl was used, the motorized grader made 1/2-in.
 cuts, thus forming windrows that were easily picked up by
 the  motorized elevating scraper. In Phase II, the motorized
 grader maintained a depth of cut at depth of ofl penetra-
 tion, which  in  most instances was 1 to  1-1/2 in., thus
 forming larger windrows which increased the loading time
 for the motorized elevating scraper.
    Under ofl contamination conditions where ofl penetra-
 tion is greater than  1 in., it  is recommended that the
motorized elevating scraper be used singly. In  instances
where  ofl penetration is  limited to  1/2 in., such as on a
firmly packed tidal flat, the use of a motorized grader and
motorized, elevating scraping  working  in  combination is
recommended.
    The cleaning  rates for front  end loaders working in
combination with a motorized grader  were greater than
those of the motorized grader-motorized elevating scraper
combination by a factor of 8 for a crawler tractor mounted
front end loader and  a factor.of  2 for the rubber tired
mounted front end loader.
Combination of Motorized Grader^
and Motorized Elevating Scraper
Motorized Elevating Scraper
Combination of Motorized Grader and
Front End Loader mounted on crawler
tractor
Combination of Motorized Grader and
Front End Loader mounted on rubber-
tired tractor
(a) For 500-ft distance to unloading area
(b) Motorized Grader operated at rate of 0
TIDAL ZONE


-------
516 OIL SPILL CLEANUP
SIDE VIEW


TOP VIEW
                               Bowl bottom
                  -«H
                                  Bowl side
                                                                      "'•  •        ~                             -  '

                                                                Figure 10: Steel Half-Tracks Mounted on Motorized Grader
                   -45"	
                                     Moterial:  1/4" plate steel
                                            Two required
                              60"
                                                                                                      **&K

                                                                                                       .  •
        Figure 8:  Design and Position of Baffle Plates
Figure 9: Sand Baffle Mounted in Bowl of Motorized Elevating
Scraper
        Figure 11:  Non-Self-Propelled Elevating Scraper

    The effectiveness of the sand baffle plates in reducing
spillage  was evaluated by performing tests with and without
the baffle plates installed. Test results given in Table 7 for
Test E-l and F-l, and Tests A-l  and G-l show that under
the same beach condition, the addition of the baffle plates
resulted in the  removal of a significantly smaller amount of
material. This was due to a reduction in spillage around the
edges  of  the   bowl,  which  elliminated  the  need  for
additional  cleanup passes - passes which would be certain
to gather additional extraneous sand. However, when straw
was utilized  as an oil absorbent, there was no significant
difference  in the pickup efficiency  of the baffle-equipped
motorized  elevating scraper and the conventional unit.

Steel Half-Tracks
    The major  problem in  the use of the motorized grader
was its  inability to maintain traction when operating  on a
beach of low-bearing  sand. Flotation tires on all wheels will
overcome  this  problem on most   beaches;  however,  a
motorized  grader equipped with flotation tires  became
immoblized on Francis State Park Beach. A set of  steel
half-tracks were mounted on the motorized grader (see Fig.

-------
                                                                               EARTH MOVING EQUIPMENT   5)7
10) and evaluated.  The addition of  the  steel  half-tracks
enabled the motorized grader to maintain  traction but  the
low-shearing  strength  of  the  sand  prevented proper
formation of windrows.  The  sand  would roll  under  the
blade or spill around the leading edge of the blade. Under
such beach conditions, a tracked front end loader or towed
elevating scraper would have to be utilized for the removal
of oil-contaminated material.
Towed Elevating Scraper
   On  certain  beaches  of  low-bearing  strength,  the
motorized elevating  scraper  in its present  configuration
became   immobilized.  Under  these circumstances,  a
non-self-propelled elevating scraper, pulled by  a tracked
bulldozer, should be used.
   A Johnson  Model 80-C  (Fig.  11), non-self-propelled
elevating scraper connected to a crawler tractor, was used
on the Francis State Park  Beach. This combination proved
very effective in making thin cuts both in the tidal zone  and
backshore areas.
STRAW REMOVAL
   Straw has  been  the  most  widely used material  for
absorbing  oil on  both water and beach areas. However, the
subsequent removal of straw from beach areas has involved
the use of large amounts of manual  labor.  During the Phase
II tests, straw was used to cover the film of or! dispersed
during the full-scale  demonstration  Tests B-2  and E-2.
Figure 6 shows the straw being distributed over  a test area
by means of a straw blower.
   The straw was effectively removed from beach areas by
both the motorized grader and motorized elevating scraper
in combiantion  and  by  the  motorized  elevating scraper
operating  alone.  The effectiveness of straw in absorbing oil
on beach  areas will  depend upon the time of initial contact
with the oil. If the oil has time to penetrate into the beach
surface, straw will not be beneficial. However,  if straw  is
applied very  soon after  the oil arrives or on oil lying in
pools, it is most effective in  decreasing the amount of oil
that  would be  picked up by the  tires of rubber-tired
equipment.  Additionally,  as  noted in the Phase I tests,
straw tends to act as a binder for sand and reduces spillage
around the edges of the bowl on the motorized elevating
scraper as it makes a thin cut or picks up windrows.

UNLOADING RAMP AND CONVEYOR  SYSTEM
    The  use  of an  unloading ramp-conveyor  system for
transfer of oil-contaminated material to trucks for disposal
was evaluated in Phase II. A  ramp was  constructed using
surplus railroad ties  for the main  structural support and a
track roadway over the conveyor bin. Figure 12 shows the
motorized elevating scraper positioned on the ramp prior to
unloading. The structural framework and  roadway are  so
designed  that  they  can  be  easily relocated.  Only earth
ramps at  the new location would have to be constructed.
    The  conveyor  system  installed  was  used to  load
oil-contaminated sand directly intotrucks(Fig. 13) and, with
a  screening  system  attached   (Fig.  14),  to separate
oil-contaminated debris from the sand.
Figure 12: Motorized Elevating  Scraper Positioned on  Unloading
Ramp Prior to Unloading
              '

Figure  13: Conveyor System Discnarging Oil-Contaminated Sand
Into Truck
 Figure  14:  Conveyor-Screening  System  Separating  Oil-Straw
 Mixture From Clean Sand

-------
518  OIL SPILL CLEANUP
    A single-deck vibrating screen was used. The screen size
was determined by type of material to be  separated. For
the separation of oil-contaminated straw or beach debris
from the sand, a 2-in. mesh screen was used at the upper
end of the screen deck and a 3/4-in. mesh at the lower end.
This combination of screen sizes was found to efficiently
separate all beach debris (kelp, seaweed, rocks, etc.) from
the sand and 70 to 80% of the oil-straw mixture. When
using the screening system to separate oil-sand pellets from
clean sand, the 3/4-in. screen was used at the upper end of
the screen deck and a 3/8-in. screen at the lower end. This
combination successfully  separated all the oil-sand pellets
from clean sand.
    The  screening deck includes  adjustable oversize and
concentrating chutes to direct the flow of oversize and
screened material (see Fig. 14).

COST ANALYSIS
    The  cost  per unit of oil  collected,  unit  of beach
material handled, and area cleaned (for the removal of a thin
film of oil from a beach tidal zone) was calculated for each
restoration procedure evaluated. These costs are tabulated
in Table 11. The cost of moving the oil-contaminated sand
to an unloading  area is tabulated separately from the cost
of transporting the material to disposal sites at various haul
distances.  The  cost  of a  conveyor system to transfer
material into trucks is included in the removal costs for
restoration procedures utilizing  motorized  elevating
scrapers. Those restoration procedures utilizing front end
loaders are assumed to unload material directly into trucks.
The beach-restoration procedures that provided the lowest
removal costs are those that utilize a motorized elevating
scraper singly or in combination with a motorized grader.
    The removal cost per acre is the principal cost to be
considered in planning beach-restoration operations.  The
cost per gallon  of ofl removed is a function of the initial
oil  loading and  the cost per cubic yard  removed  is a
function of the effectivness of the equipment in making a
thin cut with a minimum of spillage. The transport costs are
a function of the amount of material removed to clean a
beach  area.  The higher transport  costs  associated  with
restoration procedures utilizing front end loaders reflect the
inefficiency  of  front  end  loaders  in  removing
oil-contaminated  material. Heavier initial oil loadings than
the 0.5 gal/sq yd used in this test program would have little
to no effect on the cleaning cost per acre if oil penetration
is limited to  1 in. However, the removal cost per gallon of
oil  would decrease in  proportion to  the  increase in oil
loading.
    The beach-restoration costs associated with the Santa
Barbara (California) and Grand Island (Louisiana) .oil-spill
incidents  were calculated  from information  reported  in
Refs.  10 and 11. The available data, was inadequate for a
complete cost analysis, but an  approximation of the cost
             •            '
*The cost analysis is based on information given for the cost per mile
of beach cleaned with no mention of width of beach cleaned. There-
fore, as the width of beach assumed to be cleaned increases, the cost
per acre decreases.
 per acre of beach cleaned was made. At Santa Barbara, it
 was statedlO that a work force of 50 men aided by 4 front
 end loaders, 2 bulldozers and 10 dump trucks could clean 1
 mile of beach per 8-hour day. By applying current local
 equipment rental rates and the prevailing labor rates in the
 Santa Barbara area, a cleaning cost of $325 per acre was
 calculated for 1 mile of beach 75 ft wide, and $500 per acre
 for 1 mile of beach 50 ft wide.* The cost of trucks was not
 included since not enough data were available on length of
 haul and number of trips per truck.
     At  Grand Island,  the restoration  procedure involved
 the use  of motorized graders operating in conjunction with
 front end loaders. A work force of 1 motorized  grader, 3
 rubber-tired front end loaders, and 20 men cleaned 15 miles
 of beach in 4 days. The cleanup cost was calculated on the
 same basis used for the Santa Barbara incident. This yielded
a cost of $140 per acre for 1 mile of beach 20 ft wide, and
 $170 per acre for 1  mile of beach 15 ft wide. As in the
Santa Barbara calculation, trucking costs were not included
because of insufficient data.
    Comparison of these costs with those listed inTable 11
for  the beach-restoration procedures evaluated in this
program shows that the Grand Island costs are comparable
to  those calculated  for the motorized  grader-front end
loader combination. The advantages of utilizing motorized
elevating scrapers in beach-restoration operations is readily
apparent when comparing the $108  per acre cost versus
$325 to $500 per acre cost incurred at  Santa Barbara,
where a large amount of manual labor was utilized.

 FINDINGS
     Based  on   the  efficiency  with  which  each
 beach-restoration   procedure  collects ^>r  spills
 oil-contaminated material and on  the overall production
 rates determined for
      • Motorized graders
      • Motorized elevating scrapers
      • Front end loaders
      • Conveyor-screening system
 utilized singly or in combination, the following findings are
 offered:
    1. A motorized grader and motorized elevating scraper
    working in combination provide the  most rapid means
    of beach-restoration when oil penetration is limited to
    less  than 1 in. For oil penetrations greater than 1 in., the
    motorized elevating  scraper operating  singly is more
    efficient. In addition, the use of motorized graders and
    motorized elevating  scrapers working  in  combination
    results  in the removal  of the  smallest amount  of
    uncontaminated beach material.
        (a) The optimum moldboard (blade) angle for the
        motorized grader,  in  which  minimum  spillage
        occurred while windrowing sand, was found to be
        50 deg from the perpendicular to the direction of
        travel. At  smaller angles the sand builds up on the
        moldboard and spills  around the leading edge. At

-------
                                                             EARTHMOVING EQUIPMENT    519
'a) (b)
Restoration Procedui Removal Cost
( $ \ ( $\ ( $ \
\qu yd/ \gal/ \acre/
Combination of motorized grader and
9 cu yd motorized elevating scraper
with 24-in. belt conveyor system 0.37 0.05 118
9 cu yd motorized elevating scraper
with 24-in. belt conveyor system 0.32 0.045 108
Combination of motorized grader and
3 cu yd rubber tired front end loader 0.75 0.07 176
Combination of motorized grader and
2 cu yd tracked front end loader 2.50 0.19 450
Tracked "ront end loader 1.92 0.64 1,540
(c)
Transport Cost CS/Acre) to
Disposal Area at
Indicated Distance
Miles
1 5 10 2O
30 90 150 3OO
32 93 161 321
25 77 124 220
20 60 96 173
88 261 420 757
(a) Basfd on initial oij loading of 0.5 gal/sq yd
(b) Based on 60-min working hour
(c) Based on 15-cu-yd-capacity trucLs
Table 11: Cost  Summary for Removal of Thin Film of Oil from  Beach Tidal Zone
                                               elevating scraper may become  immobilized during
                                               the conduct of beach-restoration operations.  For
                                               such   beaches,  flotation  tires  or  steel-belted
                                               half-tracks on  the  motorized grader  and  a
                                               non-self-propelled  elevating scraper with a tracked
                                               prime mover should be used.
                                               (e) The  addition  of  the  sand  baffle plates to the
                                               motorized  elevating scraper  bowl  resulted in the
                                               removal  of a significantly  smaller total amount of
                                               material  in the  course of removing a thin film of oil.
                                               This was due to a reduction in spillage around the
                                               edges of the bowl, which eliminated the need for
                                               additional  cleanup  passes  — passes which would be
                                               certain   to gather  additional  extraneous sand.
                                               However,  when  straw  was  utilized  as  an  oil
                                               absorbent, there was no significant difference in the
                                               pickup efficiency  of the baffle-equipped motorized
                                               elevating scraper and the conventional unit.
Figure 15: Motorized Grader Casting Second-Pass Windrow-

  larger angles, the operator loses the fine control of
  the blade  and has  difficulty  keeping  a constant
  depth of cut.
  (b) Straw spread on  beach areas is easily windrowed
  by  the  motorized  grader  and  removed  by  the
  motorized  elevating  scraper.  Removing  straw
  directly with a motorized elevating scraper posed no
  problems.
  (c)  Kelp,   seaweed   and  similar debris  do  not
  interfere with the operation of either the motorized
  grader or motorized elevating scraper.
  (d) On beaches possessing low  shear strength, both
  the rubber-tired  motorized grader and  motorized
                                             PLAN VIEW
                                            direction
                                             of travel
                                               Figure 16: Motorized Grader Operational Sequence

-------
520   OIL SPILL CLEANUP
                                                             Figure 19: Motorized Elevating Scraper Making Third Pass on Test
                                                             Area Contaminated With Oil-Straw Mixture
Figure  17:  Motorized Elevating  Scraper in Position to Remove
Windrow
                                                                                                               *•» *
                                   •1£  f !
Figure 18:  Motorized Elevating Scraper Removing Thin Film of Oil
  2. The oil removal effectivness was greater than 98% for
  all restoration procedures. The highest effectiveness was
  achieved through the use of the motorized grader and
  motorized  elevating scraper working in combination.
                                                            Figure 20: Motorized Elevating Scraper Removing Oil-Sand Pellets
                                                            from Test Area
The  lowest  effectiveness was obtained with the tracked
front end loader.
3. The  interaction between the oil loadings employed
during the test program and the various equipment types
evaluated was minimal, i.e.,  the presence of the film of
oil on the beach surface did not affect the  ability of the
equipment  to   pick  up,   cut, or  transport  the
contaminated beach  material. It  is believed that this
finding  could be  extrapolated to oil loadings several
times greater.
4. A front end loader mounted on a crawler tractor is
the most inefficient apparatus tested. In  addition, more
spillage   occurs  with  its  use  than  with any  other
equipment. We believe these results can be extrapolated
to apply also to bulldozers.  If front end loaders  are
utilized, it should be  in  combination with motorized
graders,  thus minimizing  the   volume  of  material
removed and increasing the cleaning rate.

-------
                                                                            EARTHMOVING EQUIPMENT   521
     RESTORATION PROCEDURE
                                                          METHOD OF OPERATION
 A.  Combination of motorized
     grader and motorized
     elevating scraper
     (Figs. 15,16,17)
 B.  Motorized  elevating
     scraper
      (Figs. 18,19,20)
 C.  Combination  of motorized
     grader  and front  end
     loader
 D.  Front  end  loader
Motorized graders cut and remove surface layer of beach material  and
form large windrows.  Motorized scrapers pick up windrowed material
and haul to disposal area for dumping or to unloading  ramp-conveyor
system for transfer to dump trucks.  Screening system  utilized  to
separate beach debris such as straw and kelp from sand when  large
amounts of debris are present.

Motorized elevating scrapers, working singly, cut and  pick up surface
layer of beach material and haul to disposal area for  dumping or  to
unloading ramp-conveyor system for transfer to dump  trucks.  Screen-
ing system utilized to separate beach debris such as straw and  kelp,
from sand when large amounts of debris present.

Motorized graders cut and remove surface layer of beach material  and
form large windrows.  Front end loaders pick up windrowed material
and load material into following trucks.  Trucks remove material  to
disposal area or to conveyor-screening system for separation of
large amounts of debris from sand.

Front end loaders, working singly, cut and pick up surface layer  of
beach material and load material into following trucks.  Trucks
remove material to disposal area or to conveyor-screening system
for separation of large amounts of debris from sand.
   Utilize  restoration procedures C and D only in instances where motorized elevating scrapers are not
   available.   Operations  of  front end loaders on oil-contaminated beach areas should be kept to a
   minimum.
                                 Table 12:  Recommended Restoration Procedures
5. A non-elevating motorized scraper  will not operate
efficiently on beach areas unless a tracked prime mover
is used as the principal source of power or as a pusher to
assist in loading. A thin cut is difficult to maintain, and
excess spillage occurs when loading.
6. Beach-restoration operations   on  backshore  areas
become very difficult due  to the  looseness of the sand.
Procedures  for minimizing the  oil contamination  of
backshore  areas  should  be  instituted  at the  first
indication of a possible shoreline-pollution event. Under
normal tide conditions, a berm or dike at the high-tide
mark  can  prevent  oil  from  contaminating backshore
areas.
7.  Conveyor-screening  systems  can  be effectively
utilized to:  (a)  load  oil-contaminated  material into
trucks  for  transport  to  disposal areas,  (b)  separate
oil-sand  pellets  from  clean  sand, and (c)   partially
separate  oil-contaminated debris  (i.e., straw,  kelp,
seaweed) from oil-contaminated sand.
8. The  mixing  action  that  occurred in  the cutting
and/or  pickup of  a  thin film  of fresh oil  and the
underlying  clean sand  results  in a  uniform  oil-sand
mixture. Under these conditions,  it is not possible,  by
screening  techniques, to separate oil-contaminated sand
from clean sand.
    The cost of removing a thin film (0.5 gal/sq yd) of
oil from a beach tidal zone ranged from $108/acre (with
a  motorized elevating  scraper  operating  alone),  to
$1540/acre (with a  tracked front end loader operating
                       alone). These  costs are based on a  haul  distance (to
                       unloading area) of 500 ft and average equipment rental
                       rates.

                            As a result of the tests conducted in this study, the
                        restoration   procedures  listed   in  Table  12 are
                        recommended   for  use in  the  restoration of
                        oil-contaminated beaches.
                     REFERENCES
                     1. Review  of the Santa Barbara  Channel Oil Pollution
                     Incident, Water Pollution Control Research Series, DAST
                     20, July 1969
                     2. Offshore Mineral Resources, Second  Report of  the
                     President's  Panel  on Oil Spills, Executive Office of  the
                     President, Office of Science and Technology, 1969
                     3. The  Torrey 'Canyon, Report of  the  Committee of
                     Scientists on the Scientific and Technological Aspects of
                     the  Torrey Canyon Disaster,  Her Majesty's Stationery
                     Office, London, England, 1967
                     4.  Earl,  J.  R., and   J.  D.  Sartor, Report of  Land
                     Reclamation  Tests,   U.S.  Naval  Radiological Defense
                     Laboratory, San  Francisco, California (AD-332E), March
                     1952
                     5.  Earl,  J.  R., and   J.  D.  Sartor, Report of  Land
                     Reclamation Tests, Conducted During  Operation JANGLE,
                     WT-400, February 1952

-------
522  OIL SPILL CLEANUP
 6. Sartor, J. D., H. B. Curtis, H. Lee, and W. L. Owen, Cost
 and Effectiveness of Decontamination Procedures for Land
 Targets,  STONEMAN  I, U.S. Naval Radiological  Defense
 Laboratory, USNRDLTR-196, December 27,1957
 7. Lee, H., J. D. Sartor, and W. H. Van Horn, STONEMAN
 II, Test of Reclamation Procedures, U.S. Naval Radiological
 Defense Laboratory, USNRDL-TR-337, January 12,1959

 8. Owen, W. L., and J. D. Sartor, Radiological Recovery of
 Land Target Components - Complex land Complex II, U.
S.  Naval  Radiological  Defense  Laboratory,
USNRDL-TR-570, May 25,1962
9. Owen, W. L., and J. D. Sartor, Radiological Recovery of
Land  Target Components - Complex  III,  U.  S.  Naval
Radiolgoical  Defense Laboratory,  USNRDL-TR-700,
November 20,1963
10. Gaines, T. H., Oil Pollution Control - Santa Barbara,
California, Union Oil Company of California, 1969
11. Humble Oil News Letter, February 1970

-------
                        FROTH   FLOTATION  CLEANUP  OF

                           OIL-CONTAMINATED   BEACHES

                                     Garth D. Gumtz and Thomas P. Meloy
                                             Meloy Laboratories
 ABSTRACT

    Based on laboratory studies and prelmiruuy design, a
 30 tons per hour froth flotation plant was built for cleaning
 oil contaminated beach sands. Selected laboratory data and
 demonstration data for three tests are considered in this
 paper. The essential elements for plant operation  were'^a
 froth flotation machine,  belt feeder,  oil recovery tank,
 process water pump, water supply,  elevating scraper, and
 front end loader. Demonstrations ranged from nominal runs
 with feed rates of 30 tons per hour and oil concentrations
 of 0.5% to one run at 60 tons per hour and another with an
 oU concentration approaching 3%. Some of the conclusions
 reached during the study were: 1) sea water is advantageous
 to the process, 2) similar (about 125 parts per million) or
 better residual oil concentrations should be possible when
 water is  not recycled,  and  3) mobilization of a froth
flotation beach cleaner is feasible.
    The work discussed in  this paper was performed in
fulfillment of Contract No. 14-12-809 between the Water
 Quality Office of the Environmental Protection Agency and
Meloy Laboratories (Mel-Labs, Inc.).
Froth Flotation Cleaning of
00 Contaminated Beaches

INTRODUCTION

   When oil  pollutes a sandy beach,  no single form of
contamination takes place:  It depends on the type of oil,
length of time at sea, temperature, time the oil has been on
the beach, and type of sand. Some oils, sufficiently long at
sea, will arrive  at the beach as pebbles or streaks, and can be

   *Based on  work performed  in fulfillment  of Contract No.
14-12-809 between the Water Quality Office of the Environmental
Protection Agency and Meloy Laboratories (Mel-Labs, Inc.).
removed easily by  a  beach cleaner.  Other types  of oil
(particularly crudes) which have been at sea for a long time
are water-oil emulsions that are somewhat similar to butter,
and look like chocolate mousse. These emulsions, while on
the beach, are altered by environmental and  biological
impact;  they become  putty-like and finally brittle. This
type of pollution can also be cleaned up by a beach cleaner
or dry screening.  Fresh crude (and many fuel  oils) will
penetrate the sand, coating sand particles and filling some
of the interstitial voids in the beach.
    Experience with liquid oil falls indicates that the depth
of penetration and position of the contaminant is not easily
ascertained from the surface. Uncontaminated sands may
bury the contaminated part, and the width and depth of
the oil  contamination  may vary markedly  within short
distances; thus, finding the contaminated  sand can  be
expensive. Modern practice has been to take large swathes
of the beach and, as  spots of contamination remain, to
either take a second cut of sand or dig out the contamina-
ted spots by hand. This results in a large amount of sand in
which relatively small sections are contaminated. Thus, any
cleanup  procedure  must either  concentrate  contaminated
sand  or  be very economical  in  the  treatment of the
contaminants.
    The Corps of Engineers uses the figure of $5.00 a cubic
yard for the replacement of sand on a beach. This price
includes finding the sand, transportation, and addition of
the sand to  the  beach.  Any process used  in  beach
restoration must consider that cleaning costs greater than
$5.00 a ton are in competition with simply removing the
sand, disposing of it, and replacing it with  fresh sand.
    Oil-soaked sand is  an  ideal material for  cleaning by
froth  flotation because processing costs are  very low and
very little, if any, chemical or physical pretreatment is
called for. The sand does not need crushing because it is
naturally finely divided, and it is also relatively free of
"slimes." The sand is naturally  hydrophilic  and  the oil is
naturally hydrophobic. Many oils froth rather easily. The
                                                     523

-------
524
        OIL SPILL CLEANUP
oil is less dense than either the watei or the sand, thereby
facilitating flotation.
    Large quantities of sand are cleansed by flotation in
the United States. New Jersey optical  sand is cleaned by
floating iron-bearing minerals from the bulk of the siliceous
sand; iron stains on the sand  surface are removed by the
violent  actions occurring in pumps,  flotation cells, and
cyclones; this sand, after cleaning, is sold for $3.00 a ton.
In North Carolina, sands are float-cleaned and scrubbed by
pumps and cyclones; they are sold throughout the country
for use in golf traps; this sand is exceedingly white. Dark
brown tar  sands in Canada are floated in hot  water  to
remove the ofl, using an otherwise standard flowsheet; these
sands come out very white. Flotation has often been used
to clean and to separate ofl from sands.
    Extensive laboratory  experiments  at  Meloy Labora-
tories  indicated  that froth  flotation  with appropriate
scrubbing permits the cleaning of a wide  range of sands
contaminated with a wide variety of ofls.  "Oils", ranging
from a very light crude  whose nature was  much like
gasoline to a baked solid fuel oil, were successfully removed
from mixtures with sands, ranging from Dam Neck beach
with  100% of its grains smaller'than  841  microns to  a
yellow river sand with almost 10%  by  weight  larger than
1.68 mm. The ofls were aged and unaged and deposited on
both wet and dry sand. In every  case in which it was
attempted, it was relatively easy  to select a combination of
operating conditions  under  which the cleaning process
worked. In short, flotation seemed to have considerable
promise for the cleaning of ofl contaminated beach sands.
    Based on the laboratory experiments and on consulta-
tion with individuals  and literature  familiar with the glass
sand cleaning industry, Meloy Laboratories proceeded with
the design and construction of a beach cleaning demonstra-
tion plant.  Preliminary design of the plant involved con-
siderations analogous to the design of sand cleaning and
froth flotation plants in the mining industry. Two criteria
were primary in the initial design:  First, the plant was to
operate at a sand feed rate of about 30 tons/hour and be
entirely self-contained, and, second, the cleaning system
was to be closed as completely as was practical so that no
extraneous ofl contamination could result from the opera-
tion of the plant  during the demonstration  studies. Of
course, all  the plant components had to be  relatively
resistant to a marine environment, and  provision  had to be
made for running analyses of ofl concentrations in both
sand and water at the site.
    A suitable site was found in the  vicinity of Virginia
Beach, Virginia; specifically, it  was on the U.  S. Navy's
Fleet Anti-Air Warfare  Training Center   at Dam Neck,
Virginia. Navy representatives reviewed the proposed pro-
ject and conferred with Meloy Laboratories' technical staff
before leasing the site in early 1970. Check out of the plant
unit operations began in mid-September of 1970 and was
completed  in less  than a month.  The first actual plant
demonstration took place on October 6,1970.
    The demonstration studies took place under conditions
comparable to those of a medium-sized minerals processing
plant. The  major differences were due to the comparative
isolation of the site from the, sometimes, necessary support
services. These differences were, however, themselves a
valuable education since a mobile beach cleaning unit may
very well have  to be  operated under similar  isolation.
Although directly aimed at demonstrating the efficacy of
the froth  flotation process for cleaning ofl contaminated
beach sands,  the project  also provided a wide variety of
knowledge about the field operation of such a system. This
knowledge ranged from the problems expected in operating
unmodified heavy equipment on a beach to the deleterious
effect noticed for the attrition scrubbing  of a  "normal"
oil-sand mixture.

    The project contract called for running five demonstra-
tions: these were: 1) a nominal run with a sand feed rate of
25 to 30 tons/hour and an oil contamination level of 0.5 to
1.0% by weight of medium fuel oil, 2) the same as number
1 but with a heavy fuel oil, 3) the same as number 1 but
with a sand feed rate of about 20 tons/hour, 4) the same as
number 1 but with the ofl partially sorbed into straw before
deposition, and 5) the same as number 3 but with a much
higher ofl content (estimated at 3% by material balance).
The results of these  tests were briefly as  follows.  Under
nominal conditions, with the closed loop process, the sand
was cleaned to an acceptable level (less than 150 ppm oil in
the water saturated,  cleaned sand), and the change to a
heavier oil made little apparent difference in the efficacy of
the process. Lowering the sand feed rate  had significant
effect on the processed  water and  little effect on the
cleaned sand. The presence of straw demands much more
continuous attention to  the  belt feeder unit  operation;
apparently, straw  also  promotes  dispersion of ofl into
water. Finally, the system islimitedmainly by the total flow
of ofl through it with a maximum acceptable level of oil
contamination at 30 ton/hour sand feed rate of about 1%.

 .   An elevating  scraper and front  end  loader  were
necessary  for  plant  operation. One of the first problems
with  the  demonstrations was getting this  equipment to
operate satisfactorily in loose  beach  sand; there was no
problem on the beach itself; the problems  came when the
heavy equipment had to move between the plant and the
beach. Reliable transport was finally achieved when pierced
steel planking was laid in a single track from the plant to the
beach; some  such  provision  should  also be made for a
mobile unit since vehicles with balloon tires or tracks may
not be available.
    The field  work  did show that  the major items of
process equipment are  very  dependable under  even very
severe weather conditions; this portends well for a mobile
unit.  The  components which did  give trouble were  the
pumps and dewatering  cyclone; since none of these items
are envisioned for use   in actual emergency operations,
problems  with  them are not particularly relevant.  The
hopper and  belt  feeder, flotation  machine, and  leased
submersible pump operated very dependably over long time
periods; maintenance was also only of minor concern. Since
these three items represent (along with a suitable  power
supply) a mobile beach cleaner, the results of the field tests
were quite heartening.

-------
                                                                        FROTH FLOTATION CLEANING
                                                   525
LABORATORY STUDIES

    The purpose of the laboratory  studies in  this project
was threefold. In the first place, it was shown that flotation
cleaning of oil contaminated beach  sand is feasible in the
context of the original proposal (feasibility studies); experi-
ments which simulated the "natural"  contamination of
beaches were also successful (simulated beach conditions).
Secondly, by attempting to clean severely  contaminated
samples  of  beach sand,  limits were  placed  upon  the
probable, successful operation of the proposed plant. These
limits were found  to  confine  a zone of plant operation
which is much  broader than originally  thought possible.
.Third, a quantitative method was developed for measuring
61  contamination  levels.  This method  was used in the
laboratory while running two series of tests  on the effects
of operating conditions on the efficiency of a laboratory
scale froth  flotation machine;  these lab tests are the only
ones considered in detail in this paper.
    The general problem of determining quantitatively the
contamination of sand by oil was beyond the scope of the
project. Both sands and oils are too variable to expect that
there is  any easy way to do this. What was needed,
however, was a quantitative technique  which will work
specifically  for  a given  oil  and beach sand. A number of
possible techniques came to mind:  photometrically meas-
uring the reflectance  of visible  light from  beds  of sand,
spectrometrically  measuring the oil  concentration  in a
solvent which has been used  to  extract oil from sand,
chemically  determining the concentration of  carbon  in a
solution obtained  by  digesting a sample of sand with an
appropriate chemical, measuring the transmittance of light
through an oil-sand-liquid mixture  where the liquid has a
refractive index which is the same as the  sand's, and using a
gas analyzer (methane or general hydrocarbon)  to detect
the "odor" of contaminated sand. The second of these was
finally settled upon as being most practical and  amenable
to field test conditions.
    Solvent  extraction  combined with spectrometic  anal-
ysis  does  not  have  the same limitations  as visual  and
photometric evaluations. In principle, this technique may
be used to detect oils which are invisible to the human eye.
Wave-lengths may also be sought which maximize absorp-
tion and, thereby, maximize detection sensitivity; unfortu-
nately, for complex mixtures like oils no general analytical
scheme can be worked out. Spectrometric analysis is much
more suited for detecting  the  components of a mixture
than the mixture itself. However, in the case of a known
contaminant a suitable correlation can be developed. Much
of the discoloration due to oil pollutants can be related to
suspended  solids:  asphaltenes,  carbenes,  carboids,  etc.;
these solids are not removed by most solvent extractions
and, therefore, are not usually detected  by this technique.
For  fixed oil, sand, and  solvent this method should be
successful; it was,  for this reason, used'during the demon-
stration study.
    Several solvents were tested for the analysis of sand
and water samples. Benzene was finally selected due to its
efficacy with the  fuel  oils most commonly used in the
demonstration plant  (numbers 4 and 6). It also had the
advantage of  being  relatively  low in cost while still of
analytical quality. Briefly, the analytical scheme went as
follows. A sample of the oil to be used as a contaminant
was put  into  solution with benzene; known amounts of
both  materials  were  used to  make  up  these  standard
solutions. The concentrations of oil in the benzene solu-
tions  were  then  correlated in  the  usual manner with
transmittance  readings from a Spectronic 20 spectrophoto-
meter by Fischer Scientific Company. As expected, concen-
tration varied  linearly with the logarithm of the trans-
mittance at a  fixed wavelength of incident light. Plots or
correlations of this sort had to be made up for each sand-oil
combination considered; since  such  correlations involve
standard,  classical analytical chemistry, no examples of
plots  are presented here. The wavelength of  light  was
generally around 450 millimicrons. Before unknowns could
be confidently considered, the standard correlations had to
be available; if they were not,  the best that could be done
was to express contamination levels in terms of equivalence
to some known oil contamination.
    Generally, large  variability of samples was discovered
under full scale, field test conditions; this was not unex-
pected; Background contamination in the sand at the field
site was  not  insignificant. The analytical results of one
demonstration indicated  a background contamination of
about  20  ppm in the  Dam  Neck  beach  sand prior to
contamination; this concentration is, of course, an equiva-
lent  value  in  terms  of the  No. 4  fuel  oil which was
eventually used to contaminate the sand.
    Toward;  the  end of Phase I of  the program, the
analytical technique  described  above was used in some
limited laboratory studies aimed at the effect of varying
froth flotation operating parameters. The  results of these
studies are discussed below.
    The first series of tests sought to attach numbers to the
effect of increasing turbulence in the laboratory flotation
cell. The  analytical results for these tests are presented in
Table 1. Aeration rates were varied in three steps from the
minimum rate to  the  maximum for each of four impeller
speeds; the minimum  rate was dictated by the lower limit
of the  rotameter used  to measure  aeration  and  was,
therefore, the  same for  each  impeller speed  while  the
maximum rate was itself a function of  the impeller speed.
Average  residual  oil concentrations  in the cleaned  sand
increased fairly regularly  with  increasing  impeller speed:
averages of 107, 101,  190 and 300 parts per million oil by
weight for 1000,1200, 1800 and 2400 rpm impeller speeds
respectively. There is  an implication  in this averaged data
that an optimum exists with respect to impeller speed; "a
priori," this must be the cast since at zero impeller speed
contaminated sand would settle to the bottom of the cell,
never contact air bubbles, and therefore, never be cleaned
while at very  high impeller speeds any oil which rose to the
top of the flotation  cell would immediately be returned to
the  sand slurry due  to the  intense  mixing action and,
therefore .cleaning would  once again not occur. The data was
not, however, precise enough to allow a determination of
the  optimum impeller  speed  on the basis of only  16
laboratory  tests.  Such  a  result relative  to precision  is
classically found for froth flotation on any scale; compre-

-------
   526    OIL SPILL CLEANUP
 hensive test work in the minerals industry always involves
 large numbers of repetitive tests on  a  large numbers of
 samples.
                                      Table 2: Analytical Results for Series Two Lab Tests
     Table 1: Analytical Results for Series One Lab Tests        Sand Charg£  Aeration Rat6j Maximum
     Impeller Speed       Aeration Rate
 revolutions per minute (liters per minute)
         1000
         1000
         1000
         1000
         1200
         1200
         120
         1200
         1800
         1800
         1800
         1800
         2400
         2400
         2400
         2400
  1.35
  3.55
  6.10
  8.85
  1.35
  4.80
  8.85
 13.25
  1.35
  8.85
  16.2
  19.2
  1.35
  6.10
11.8
26.8
  Oil in Cleaned
      Sand
(parts  per Million
   by Weight)
      173.1
       84.3
       82.1
       87.5
      131.9
      118.4
       94.5
       60.1
     483.0
      127.6
       75.6
       72.5
     302.2
     400.0
     360.4
      137.1
 These  tests were  run with the Wemco laboratory test
 flotation machine; each involved a 300 gram charge of sand
 contaminated at 5.00% with number 4 fuel oil and a froth
 flotation time of  3.5  minutes. A  standard 3 liter cell was
 used for each test.

     These test results may also be used to gain a semi-quan-
 titative grasp of the effect of aeration rate on the process.
 Each impeller speed was tested at four aeration rates which
 may be designated as  low, medium low, medium high and
 high; the averages over the four impeller speeds at each of
 these  levels  is  273, 183, 153  and 89  parts  per million
 residual oil  respectively. This  result  shows  clearly that
 increased aeration decreases residual oil contamination over
 the range of conditions considered; this was not unexpected
 although high  enough  aeration rates should eventually
 promote a  degradation in residual oil concentrations.
     The second series of laboratory tests looked for the
 effect, on a quantitative basis, of three variables: magnitude
 of sand charge, initial ofl concentration  and aeration rate.
 The results of these tests are presented in Tables 2 and 3.
 The data for increasing sand charge are somewhat incon-
 clusive although a general trend  towards increasing residual
 ofl with increased  charge can be seen. This makes sense for
 fixed feed concentration, impeller speed, flotation time and
 (relatively) aeration rate; increased sand charge implies
 increased total  ofl  in the  cell which,  in turn, implies
 increased solubflized and dispersed ofl in the process water,
some of which is always recovered with the cleaned sand.
     The twelve tests which considered three fixed aeration
 rates (see Table 3) confirmed the semi-quantitative  results
 of the series one tests. The averages over the four initial ofl
 concentrations were 109, 139 and 160 parts per million of
   (grams)        (liters per minute)
    100                12.8
    250                12.5
    400                11.8
    550                11.8
    700                10.4
 Oil in Cleaned
      Sand
(parts per million
   by weight)

     49.4
    107.4
    128.9
    130.0
     82.8
 *These tests were run with an impeller speed of 1200 rpm,
 a  feed  No. 4  fuel oil concentration  of 5.00% and  a  3.5
 minute flotation  time; again, the standard test  cell was
 used.
   Table 3. Analytical Results for Series Two Lab Tests

     Initial Oil,                          Oil in Cleaned
   Concentration                           Sand
  (No. 4 Fuel Oil)     Aeration Rate (parts per million by
 (percent by weight) (liters per minute)      weight)
          1                 11.8            135.1
          3                 11.8              64.6
          5                 11.8              77.5
          9                 11.8            160.1
          1                  6.1               54.5
         3                  6.1             110.4
         5                  6.1             186.1
         9                  6 1             203.6
          1                  1.35             39.0
         3                  1.35           130.2
         5                  1.35           182.6
         9                  1.35           289.8

*These tests involved an impeller speed of 1200 rpm and a
250  gram charge of contaminated sand; again, a standard
test cell and a 3.5 minute flotation time were used.

residual  oil  for  aeration  rates  of  11.8,  6.1 and  1.35
liters/minute respectively.  This  is  good quantitative evi-
dence  that  increased aeration decreases the  amount  of
residual  oil  in  the  cleaned  sand.  Again, the  data was
averaged over four tests at the same aeration rate; a more
comprehensive test program would have to involve repeti-
tive  testing  under identical conditions  to allow  statistical
evaluation of the analytical results.  Fortunately, the test
work discussed here was more to verify the practicability of
the  technique used to measure  oil  contamination levels
rather than to study, in depth, the laboratory scale cleaning
of ofl contaminated beach  sand by froth flotation. Such an
in-depth  study could be a project in its own right, although
its value  relative to full scale cleaning operations would be
dubious.
     Averaging over the three  aeration rates (see Table  3)
for the four  initial oil concentrations gives a quantitative
indication of the  effect of  feed oil for intital concentration

-------
                                                                        FROTH FLOTATION CLEANING
                                                   527
 on the process:  76,  102, 149, and 218 parts per million
 residual oil for initial  concentrations of  1, 3, 5 and 9%
 respectively. This result  substantiates quantitatively what
 had  been  observed  qualitatively  in other  tests:  For
 "significant" feed oil concentrations there is apparently a
 bottoming out of residual oil concentration; in other words,
 there is a minimum (and finite) exit concentration of oil in
 the cleaned sand which  cannot be eliminated except by
 decreasing the feed concentration of the oil to a very low
 level (this is, from an applications viewpoint, an impractical
 way to reduce the residual oil level.) This minimum oil
 concentration  is (considering  the data presented above)
 about  60 ppm or  0.006%; feed oil concentrations would
 have to be reduced to about this level to effect any further
 large decreases in residual contamination.
   The analytical problems observed during the laboratory
 tests were also  of importance  during  the  field demonstra-
 tions. Over and above this, the field tests  presented their
 own special difficulties: lack of, for instance, homogeneity
 of the feed sand, control over operating temperatures, truly
 representative  sampling,  and   absolute  control over all
 process  materials.  Such considerations  were  somewhat
 important during the laboratory test program, but they had
 to be kept constantly in mind when the analytical results of
 the full scale test program were considered.
DEMONSTRATION STUDIES

    Figure  1  is  a flowsheet  of the  plant  which  was
constructed and operated at Dam Neck, Virginia. As can be
seen, the operation was essentially that of a closed system.
This becomes even more obvious when it is realized that the
actual plant site was within a depression in the sand dunes
above the beach.  It was  literally possible to dump  and
experiment with oil at will in the area of the plant. This
was, of course, not true for the area of the beach which was
also used for the demonstrations. When oil was spilled on
the beach to contaminate the sand, great care had to be
taken so that oil did not  migrate into the surf. On some
beaches this would not be a problem, but at Dam Neck the
beach has a relatively great slope to it and is not at all  flat.
The latter condition also had considerable impact on the
efficiency with which contaminated sand could be picked
up.
    The flowsheet is self explanatory although it should be
remarked  that  the  equipment items  necessary  for an
emergency field  operation would be only the hopper and
belt feeder, the flotation machine and air blower, the oil
recovery tank, and an appropriate submersible  pump to
deliver  sea water from  the  surf.  The  extra pieces of
equipment represented  in the flowsheet served to make the
plant both safer to operate (in the sense of not producing
unwanted contamination during the demonstrations)  and
more  flexible  as  regards the information which could be
gathered from the demonstrations. For  instance, we knew
that if sand were contaminated in a fashion with which the
flotation machine  could not cope,  the  scrubber could be
used to  clean the sand at the price of very low capacity; to
resolve  such a problem low capacity  can be  tolerated.
Second, the scrubber provided valuable information on the
effect of undue turbulence on the froth flotation cleaning
process; with high residence time the scrubber dispersed oil
so well into'the process water that the flotation machine's
efficincy was decreased drastically. However, note that this
also  implies that  repetitive scrubbing in combination with
dewatering and gravity separation  of oil and water might
also be useful for cleaning oil contaminated sand.
     Figure 2 is a photograph of the plant as seen from the
discharge  end.  It is obvious from this photograph that the
plant was quite a sprawling affair; this facilitated access to
the various system's components and made modification of
the  plant for the purpose  of the various demonstrations
relatively  easy. Since  only  about  half  of the  equipment
items would be necessary for a mobile unit and  since they
could  also  be  placed  in much closer  proximity to one
another, the demonstration plant, as such,  is  somewhat
misleading.  The plant, of course, did give observers a much
clearer picture  as to what  was taking place in the process
than a mobile unit probably would.
     Table  4 lists some of  the data for the  first plant
demonstration. Water rates were uniformly high during this
run  although the attrition scrubber did operate at some-
thing more  than its  minimum residence time; this, of
course,  was eventually  found  to be deleterious to the
process. The number  4 fuel oil used in this demonstration
was  sprayed on the beach using a T-bar system with a small
compressor; the sand was wet down ahead of the oil spray.
Due to the undulating nature of the beach,  the elevating
scraper which was used to pick up the contaminated sand (a
WABCO Dill A) could not do  better than a four or five
inch cut. Even with  this relatively  deep cut it was still
necessary to go back over the  contaminated area  with a
front end loader and shovels  to  make sure that  no oil
contamination remained on the beach. The standard devia-
tions of the measured average oil concentrations are quite
high; this  is not surprising since  1) the samples taken were
small relative to the total processing  rates and 2) there was
no provision for mixing the feed sand into something like a
homogeneous state. This test,  as  did all others with the
closed loop in  operation, involved a  continually increasing
concentration  of oil  in the exit  water.  This was  first
observed visually as the feed water  to the plant became
more and more contaminated (see the feed water analyses
in Table  6); since plant start  up involved  an operating
period of 45 minutes in which  the  plant was  allowed to
come to steady-state,  the feed water contained a  significant
amount of oil by the time sampling was initiated. Compari-
son of the oil contents between  the feed and cleaned sands
is, however, quite encouraging.
     Table  5 presents  data for  the  third demonstration
which took place with a low sand  feed rate relative to the
first. As can be seen from the table,  the various  processing
rates were  essentially identical  to those  of the  first
demonstration. The only obvious difference is that pine oil
was  used  as a frothing reagent in  this test; this  continued
for several  of  the  following tests but was finally discon-
tinued when it  was found that the sample analyses did not

-------
                                                                        PROCESS MATER TAMX
                                                                         (JO n. DJA.  « i n. m.)
                                                                         (PLASTIC COMTMKtlOU)
                                              MAXB*UP
                                             PUMP (»• > 1 l/JM
»*» i 	 	 	 rh 7 L,
OCBM^ LJ 4 " •*! I"1
II OP* MATIR \ /
tn an HATER
1 H3 «...
PROCEIS MATER PUMP («• M 3")
TATS MaiHEERIlM
10 GPH ,10 OFH 109 aPN 10 0PM
MATER HATER MATER HATER C
1000 LS. /KIN. SAND - ._ 	 _. .„., L
T " 11 IM 1 0 3 *^ **•
"?"* *"" "•UM™
***' \ / /•>''? 51 tfl IP
FEED HOPPER \ / / >X^ IB
d»» eu. rt.) \ / // [>C] ' i
\ / //^ M "*" r—
\ / ss \ QR1"1'* 9
j I/ FEEDER \ |~^
	 	 LIKI-EU.I, 1 	 1— •' 	 	 1 1 	 ^ VERTICAL1 	 ' ' 	 1
XMC* ATTRITION SLURRY PUMP (2 1/2')
mU KRUEBER (UiilOHIH KACHI»E»Y CO.
(loo eg, FT.)
(7S NT. % SOLIDS) FSHS
DENVER EBUIPHBNT co. 1 1 	
BASItl U TCK« OF (AMD FSI>> 	
PROCESSED PER HOUR FLOTATION AIR BLOHBR
TTPICAL DATAI FII37
SPECIFIC DRAVITZB*.
OIL t.10
MATER 1.00
DENSITIES,
BUL> SAND (1.5 LES./CU. FT.
MATER 1.31 LBS./CAL.
ISTIMATie POKER REQUIREMIHH
ATTRITION SCRUBBER CO HP.
FLOTATION CILLE 30 HP.
PUMPS t CONTROLLER 51 HP.
•CAM FEEDER 2 HP.




10 SFN HASB
, "**•* »UU LIVIL CONTROLLER
105 GPH ""» EgUIPHENT CO.
NATER f H P] 	 1
f
^ 	 ~ 	 N
M 9 ? ? «•«
PULP

BLURRI >
f PUMP (I* > 9')
DENVER
EQUIPMENT CO. ^
O
J-. 9W L«
	 * 	 	 ' 45 am
\ /FLOTATION
/ CELLS
/ I2S m, 1 SOLIDS)
/ (240 CO. FT. )
/ DENVER EQUIPMENT CO.
/ FBI 30
20 LES/MIN. OIL
10 LBI/HIN. SAND
27 LBS/MII). KATtR
-
OIL RECOVERY TANK
U«00 CU. FT.)
(MOOD CONSTRUCTION)
FSI35A1B




m OPH


DENATERIHG
CYCLONE
124*)
/ RREBS
/

I./KTN. SAND
MATER



^
1™
r
o
r-
m
C
•o












                   ISO HP. OR 112 r».  (RATED. NOT DESISN)
1ITIHATED  RtllftlHCt TIHZI
(RASED OKLlf ON INPUT FLOWS)
FEED HOPPER
ATTRITION SCRUBBER
FLOTATION CILLI
OIL RECOVERY TANK*
PROCESS HATER TANK
 I.I KIN.
 1.5 M1N.
 4.4 KIN.
12.2 HRS.
»0.0 NIK.
  •NOT RUED Of FROTI VOLUB
                                             Figure 1:   Demonstration Plant Flowsheet

-------
                                                                      FROTH FLOTATION CLEANING
                                                                         529
    Figure 2:  Photograph of Dam Neck Demonstration Plant
(A. Hopper and Belt Feeder; B. Attrition Scrubber: C. Vertical
Sump Pump; D. Froth Flotation Machine;  E. Horizontal  Slurry
Pump;  F.  Dewatering  Cyclone; G.  Process  Water  Tank;  H. Oil
Recovery Tank; 1. Electrical Shed: J. Office and Laboratory Trailer)
                           Table 6  gives data for a run in which  the  attrition
                       scrubber was by-passed; in all other respects  that run was
                       identical to the third. The scrubber bypass  was a sluice
                       which  delivered sand  from  the  end of  the belt feeder
                       directly to the vertical pump's sump. The cleaned sand in
                       this test was much lower in residual oil contamination than
                       that in test three even though the feed sand was much more
                       contaminated. The exit water, however, was contaminated.
                       Some of this extra contamination can be  attributed to the
                       finely dispersed oil entering the system in the feed water.
                       The temperature  of the water during this demonstration
                       was  also  significantly lower  than during number three
                       (something  like  50°F).  One of  the important findings
                       during  the  project  was  that  lower water  temperatures
                       decrease process efficiency; although this was found to hold
                       for the full scale system, it  was not observed during the
                       laboratory studies.
show any apparent benefit  from the use of pine  oil. The
lower sand  feed rate caused an overall decrease in the  oil
concentrations in the exit stream. The change of concentra-
tion in the cleaned sand should be considered an anomalous
result; the change in the exit water was, however, dramatic.
Of course, attaching  importance to  these changes assumes
that the feed sands in tests one and three were essentially
the same; this is not unreasonable since they were prepared
in identical ways.
                       CONCLUSIONS

                           The froth  flotation demonstration  studies at Dam
                       Neck, Virginia, demonstrated the feasibility of the process
                       for dramatically  reducing  the  impact of oil pollution on
                       beaches  without  the  physical  disposal  of contaminated
                       sand. Observations  at the Dam Neck  site  led to  the
                       conclusion that cleaned sand with parts per million residual
                       oil has very little impact when  returned to a beach. At the
                                   Table 4. Data for Demonstration Number 1
                       Sand feed rate
                       Total water feed rate
                       Water rate to attrition scrubber
                       Water rate to vertical pump
                       Water rate to flotation machine
                       Aeration rate
                       Screen spray rate
                       Launder wash rate
                       Water rate to horizontal pump
                       Rate of pine oil addition
                       Oil type
                                   30 tons/hour
                                 450 gallons/minute
                                 110 gallons/minute
                                 100 gallons/minute
                                 220 gallons/minute
                                 280 cubic feet/minute
                                   20 gallons/minute
                                   none
                                   none
                                   none
                                   No. 4 fuel oil
                       Sample No.
      Analytical Results
(parts per million by weight oil)
 Feed Sand     Feed Water   Cleaned Sand    Exit Water
                            (H2O saturated)
                          B

                          C
                          D
                          E
                       Average
                       Standard
                       Deviation
     not
  measured
     but
  estimated
     at
    0.5%
  5,000ppm

    n/a

    n/a
                                                      not
                                                    measured
n/a

n/a
                                                                     133
125

137
129
142
133

5%
                                               348
263

216
162
443
286

39%

-------
530    OIL SPILL CLEANUP
                                 Table 5. Data for Demonstration Number 3
                       Sand feed rate
                       Total water feed rate
                       Water rate to attrition scrubber
                       Water rate to vertical pump
                       Water rate to flotation machine
                       Aeration rate
                       Screen spray rate
                       Launder wash rate
                       Water rate to horizontal pump
                       Rate of pine oil addition
                       Oil type
                                            Analytical Results
                                         (parts per million by weight oil)
                        19 tons/hour
                      450 gallons/minute
                      115 gallons/minute
                        40 gallons/minute
                      215 gallons/minute
                      280 cubic feet/minute
                        80 gallons/minute
                        none
                        none
                        approximately 1 cc/minute
                        No. 4 fuel oil
                       Sample No.   Feed Sand
             Feed Water    Cleaned Sand    Exit Water
                         (H2O saturated)
                          A
                          B
                          B
                          C
                          D
                          E
                          F
                          G
                          H
                          I
                       Average
                       Standard
                       Deviation
4,180
2,750
2,750
4,125
4,850
5,200
6,600
3,070
3,040
3,260
4,096

   29%
   not
measured
218

157
129
183
141
250
209
214
211
196

21%
384

246
183
 68
 90
141
 77
 55
 76
138

77%

-------
                                                                                    FROTHE FLOTATION
                                                                                                            531
                                     Table 6. Data for Demonstration Number 10
                        Sand feed rate
                        Total water feed rate
                        Water rate to attrition scrubber
                        Water rate to vertical pump
                        Water rate to flotation machine
                        Aeration rate
                        Screen spray rate
                        Launder wash rate
                        Water rate to horizontal pump
                        Rate of pine oil addition
                        Oil type
                                                Analytical Results
                                         ( parts per million by weight oil)
                        Sample No.   Feed Sand    Feed Water
                                                     154
                                                     212
                                                     232
                                                     244
                                                     355
                                                     400
                                                     288
                                                     284
                                                     258
                                                     304
      19 tons/hour
     440 gallons/minute
      none
     235 gallons/minute
     205 gallons/minute
     280 cubic feet/minute
      none
      none
     140 gallons/minute
      approximately 1 cc/minute
      No. 4 fuel oil
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
Average
Standard Deviation
7,100
9,000
4,160
8,840
7,050
4,800
6,740
6,450
11,900
4,160
7,020

Cleaned Sand
(H20 saturated)
100
106
99
106
79
93
104
125
120
132
Exit Water
622
340
230
284
615
600
615
303
630
825
                                                     273
         106
          496
                                                34%
 26%
14%
40%
worst, very, very limited visual evidence of oil appears due
to the action of surf and tides after sand has been returned.
The demonstrations served to show that froth flotation is
an adequate cleaning procedure without recourse to an
auxiliary  scrubbing  operation; therefore, mobilization of
the  process becomes  a  relatively  simple  matter. This
technique  becomes, perhaps, even more attractive when
cost estimates of 50 to 70 cents per ton of cleaned sand are
compared to the "baseline" cost of $5 per ton advanced by
the Army Corps of Engineers.
    Finally, the  authors wish to thank the Water Quality
Office  for their support of the work discussed above. We
also  express  our gratitude for  the  efforts of the  field
engineering crew without which this paper could not have
been written; B. C. Langley, K. W. Benson and S. J. Rose
are in a special sense co-authors.

-------
                 A  HOT  WATER  FLUIDIZATION  PROCE§S
                    FOR  GLEAMING  OIL-CONTAMINATED
                                         BEACH  SAND
                                              Paul G.Mikolaj
                                     University of California, Santa Barbara
                                                   and
                                              Edward J. Curran
                                      Standard Oil Company of California
 ABSTRACT
    A pilot device capable of cleaning one ton per hour of
oil-contaminated  beach  sand was built and  tested. The
processing scheme was a variation of the hot water method
used in the Athabasca Tar Sand Deposits and utilized liquid
fluidization  to effect the oil-sand separation. Tests per-
formed with a sand mixture containing 1 to 2 percent of a
23° API crude oil showed that upwards of 95 percent of
the oil could be removed.  Operation with a 14° APT
residual oil was less satisfactory.
    The hot water fluidization process is judged to be a
technically feasible  concept  although there appear to be
definite limitations as to its general applicability.  These
limitations are concerned primarily with the range of sand
particle  sizes that can be  fluidized  without excessive
eiutriation. Additional experimentation is needed to further
delineate the range of potential application.
INTRODUCTION

    The most serious threat posed by a major oil spill is the
potential damage  it  can cause to beaches and other
recreational shoreline  areas. This damage  can take many
forms,  ranging  from a  high  mortality to the  usually
abundant marine  life  found in the  intertidal  zone,  to
foregone recreational use.  A  recently  completed study
brings  out  the  magnitude of this damage. Mead and
Sorensenl have estimated that  the total economic cost of
the Santa Barbara oil spill was $16.4 million. Two items
stand out in their analysis:
    a)  $4.9 million  were spent for beach, harbor, and
       property cleanup operations.
   b) the value of  lost recreational  use  during  the
      12-month period .following the oil spiff was esti-

       mated to be $3.1 million.
Thus, nearly 50% of the total cost of the Santa Barbara ofl
spill  may be  directly  attributed to beach and shoreline
contamination.
    In  the face of this magnitude of costs, the need to
develop a combatant technology that will keep the oil from
coming ashore is obvious. Also required, however, is an
effective  method to deal with the beach contamination
problem  directly.  For,  even if a /working  cohtain-
ment-recovery system were available, some of the oil could
still  come  ashore.  Furthermore,  the  amount  of these
contaminants  could be very large, since there is a  sub-
stantial likelihood that time and logistic considerations
would prevent the necessary early deployment of open sea
combatant devices. This  relative certainty of beach  con-
tamination, coupled with the primitive techniques currently
in use,  thus provides considerable incentive for developing
new and better treatment methods.
    Additional stimulus  is  provided by the  fact  that
cleanup methods currently in use often result in the loss of
large quantities of valuable  sand. This factor  assumes
special, and sometimes crucial, importance in the case of
shorelines where encroachment of man-made marine struc-
tures or interference caused by jetties, breakwaters, etc. has
upset the natural sand supply processes. In these instances a
"cleaned" beach will have little recreational value unless the
sand is also restored.
    During the past few  years, a number of methods for
the in-place restoration of oil-contaminated beaches have
been proposed.^ These methods employ various processing
schemes  and may conveniently be categorized as either
                                                   533

-------
 534   OIL SPILL CLEANUP
thermal, physical, chemical, or biological in nature. In this
paper, we describe some preliminary results of a physical
processing technique — the mechanical removal of oil from
sand by means of hot water washing.
 HOT WATER PROCESSING

     The basis for a hot water processing scheme lies in the
 fact  that sand  is an inorganic material and is therefore
 preferentially wetted by water rather than by oil. Under
 ambient temperature conditions, oil adheres to sand par-
 ticles by a  combination of  surface  and  viscous forces.
 However, when an oil-coated sand particle is placed in a
 high temperature aqueous medium, these  forces  are sub-
 stantially reduced.  Since there is a  basic  absence of
 attractive forces between the oil and the  hydrophilic
 surface of the sand particle, the oil separates and rises to
 the water surface while the sand, by virtue  of its higher
 density, sinks to the bottom.
     In addition  to its basic conceptual simplicity, optimism
 for this approach to cleaning oily sand is provided by the
 commercial use  of a similar process  for recovering oil from
 the Athabasca  Tar Sands in  Alberta, Canada. These tar
 sands consist of viscous hydrocarbons  (called bitumen)
 trapped  in  a matrix  of day and loosely  consolidated
 sandstone. Hydrocarbon  content ranges from about 3 to 18
 percent. Although  details of  the commercial  hot water
 process are not important here, there are  several factors
 which distinguish  it  from  a  potential beach  cleaning
 application.
     The principal goal  in the Athabasca operation  is to
 recover a pure grade of bitumen, i.e., a hydrocarbon phase
 which is free of all entrained sand and clay particles. This
 purity  requirement necessitates a complex  processing
 scheme which involves conditioning, screening, primary and
 secondary  froth flotation,  settling,  and  centrifugation.
 Further complexities are introduced by way of economic
 constraints,  principally  in the form  of minimum water
 usage.
     By  way of  contrast, the focal point of a hot water
 beach cleaning operation is the sand and not the oil, i.e.,
 the condition, or solids content, of the recovered oil is
 irrelevant and immaterial (at  least  in principle). Further-
 more, the  oil-sand mixture is much easier to separate
 because, unlike  the consolidated Athabasca sands, beach
 sand is free flowing. Thus, the processing complexities of
 the  Athabasca operation are not necessarily indicative of
 the requirements for an effective beach cleaning operation.
     The physical separation of oil from sand by hot water
 washing is inherently a two-step operation — stripping and
 oil recovery. From the viewpoint of developing a workable
 process,  the first step  offers  the greatest  latitude for
 innovation. Whatever method or technique is selected, the
 output from the first step  will be an oil-water  mixture
which can .then be treated by well established procedures to
recover the ofl. We, of course, qualify this delination of the
problem by stating that  a prime criterion for judging the
suitability of the first step is that the oil-water effluent be
amenable to  standard  treatment,  i.e.,  a non-emulsified
mixture.
    The method we have investigated for stripping oil from
contaminated  beach  sand is hot water  fluidization. The
process consists of feeding oily sand to the top of a liquid
fluidized  bed contactor  and  adding  hot  water at  the
bottom. As the sand slowly sinks through a rising column
of hot  water, oil  is stripped off and rises to the surface
where it is taken off to an oil-water separator. Clean sand in
slurry form is removed from the bottom of the contactor.
Potential advantages of this method are:
    1. Reliability — there are no moving parts (agitators,
       etc.) which can suffer mechanical breakdown.
    2. Ease of  ofl recovery  — the low hydrodynamic
       velocities required for fluidization result in minimal
       ofl emulsification.
    3. Portability — the anticipated physical dimensions of
       a fluidized bed contactor, are such that the unit can
       easily be transported to the site of an ofl spill.
    The work described  in this paper was conducted by
students in the  Department  of Chemical  and Nuclear
Engineering at the University of California, Santa Barbara
and represents a preliminary evaluation  of the hot water
fluidization  concept. The principal  technical objectives
were: 1) examine conceptual feasibility, and 2) define the
major design problems which would have to be solved in
order to conduct a thorough technical investigation.
 DESIGN

 The Overall Process

     Groundwork for the design of a hot water process to
 clean  oily beach  sand was laid  by a group of chemical
 engineering students in the Spring of 1969. This effort was
 prompted  by  the  January,  1969 ofl spfll  in the Santa
 Barbara Channel and was undertaken as  part of the senior
 course in chemical engineering design. Although the original
 study  was only  a  "paper"  analysis,  the  results  were
 sufficiently optimistic  to stimulate  the following year's
 students into undertaking an experimental pilot operation.
 On the basis of results from the original student investiga-
 tion, as well  as  guidelines  provided by a Request for
 Proposals  issued by the Federal Water  Pollution Control
 Administration, the following design criteria were estab-
 lished:
     a) The process should make maximum use of readily
       available sea water.
     b) A  continuous process would  be  preferable  over
       batch-wise operation.
     c) The mechanical design should  be  as  simple as
       possible to insure reliability.
     d) Physical size should be small enough to permit easy
       transportation  both  to and at  the  site of an ofl
       spfll.
     e) Hardware configuration should  allow for ease in
       deployment and on-site setup.
     f) Process energy demands should be minimized.

-------
                                                                            HOT WATER FLUIDIZATION
                                                                                                             535
    BELT
  CONVEYOR
                  OILY
                  SAND
         LIQUID
    FLUIDIZED BED
      CONTACTOR
                          OIL-WATER
                          OVERFLOW
                                        RECOVERED
                                             OIL
                                           MAKE-UP
                tCLEAN  SAND
                    SLURRY
 Figure  1: Process Flow Diagram of the Hot Water Fluidization
 Concept.

    While these  objectives were  considered to be essential
for actual prototype operation, the extent to which they
could be realized  in  the  pilot test study  was limited  by
funding and available student  time. The design and subse-
quent testing, therefore, reflect these practical constraints.
    The processing method which was selected for accom-
plishing the hot water wash  is  shown  schematically in
Figure  1. Oily  sand  is  transferred  by means of  a belt
conveyor  to the top  of  a liquid fluidized  bed contactor.
The nominal design feed rate  was 20 cubic feet or about
one ton (dry basis) of sand per hour. At the bottom of the
contactor,  hot   water  is  added  at  a rate sufficient  to
maintain the sand in a fluidized state. The nominal water
rate is  5 gallons per minute and the temperature  is about
200°F. A clean sand slurry is removed from the bottom of
the contactor through  a diaphragm valve  and can  be
transported hydraulically  to a  suitable  storage area for
subsequent redistribution.
    At the top of the contactor, the stripped oil and excess
fluidizing water  are taken off through an overflow line and
pass, by gravity  flow, to an oil-water separator. The flow
rate of oil-water effluent to the  separator depends on the
amount of water  required  to generate  a  slurry  at the
bottom of the contactor but is nominally in the range of 2
to 3 gallons per  minute. The temperature of this stream is
approximately 160°F. The  separator,  in principle, can
operate either by continually removing the recovered oil or
by  accumulating the oil for  periodic  batch  removal.  In
order to provide heat economies, clarified water is with-
drawn  from the separator  and  is  pumped  back to the
contactor. Make-up water is added, either to the separator
for temperature  and  liquid level  control  purposes,  or
directly to the recycle water line.

    While many  alternatives were available  for  providing
heat energy to the process, direct addition of live steam was
selected on  the basis of simplicity, both from  the stand-
point  of hardware  design as  well as operability. The steam
sparger  design  consisted  of a capped 3/4-inch pipe,  with
1/16-inch  diameter drilled holes, mounted concentrically
within  a  two-foot length  of  2-inch  diameter pipe.  A
3/4-inch pipe was  also used for the water inlet and outlet
connections.
    For the process flow rates described above,  the input
energy  requirements are  in  the range of 3000 to 5000
BTU/min.. depending on  water recycle ratio and heat losses
to the ambient surroundings. With input steam at 95  psig,
this sparger system was found to be very effective (although
noisy) in maintaining  the desired operating temperature.
The heated  water  from  the sparger is then sent  to the
bottom of the contactor, thus completing the  processing
scheme.
    The entire  processing system was mounted on a heavy
duty skid which, in principle, could readily be transported
to any desired beach location. A photograph of the system
in its final configuration is  shown in Figure 2. The  large
hurdle-type brace  shown  in this photograph was used  to
support the conveyor  and is not  part of the  processing
system. The horizontal pipe  in the lower right hand section
is the clean sand slurry pipe.
Figure 2:  Photograph of the Scale Model Hot Water Fluidization
System.

-------
  536  OIL SPILL CLEANUP
 Hie Fluidized Bed Contactor

     The heart of the process shown in Figure 1 is the liquid
 fluidized bed  contactor.  Fluidization  is  a well  known
 phenomenon which occurs when a fluid (gas or liquid)
 passes upwards through a bed of solid particles. At low
 rates of flow, the fluid merely percolates through the void
 spaces between the stationary particles. The pressure drop
 across the bed is directly proportional to the flow rate and
 the bed is termed "fixed". As the flow rate is increased, the
 solid particles move apart somewhat and become rearranged
 so as to offer  less resistance to the flow of fluid. In this
 state, the voidage  is increased  and the bed  is  termed
 "expanded." This process of bed expansion continues with
 increasing flow  rate until  a  point  is reached when the
 particles all become freely suspended in the upward flowing
 gas or  liquid.  At  this point, the  fractional drag force
 between the particle and the fluid just counterbalances the
 weight of the particle. In this state, the bed is considered to
 be incipiently "fluidized" and the  pressure drop across the
 bed is approximately equal to the weight of the fluid plus
 the weight of all the solid particles. Further increase in fluid
 velocity causes still further bed expansion but the pressure
 drop remains nearly constant and independent of the flow
 rate. In essence, the bed of solids has been "rendered fluid"
 and its properties are, in many respects, equivalent to those
 of a dense, viscous liquid.
     While many factors govern the  behavior of fluidized
 beds3,4, a detailed analysis of Jhe complexities of this
 behavior is  beyond  the scope of our study. We, instead,
 focus attention on those aspects of fluidization which are
 significant in the design of a device for cleaning oily beach
 sand. In this regard, the major advantages are:

    a) Intimate contact between sand particles and fluid
       which, while  highly efficient, is sufficiently gentle
       to minimize  fee pendency to  form oiHn-water
       emulsions.
    b) Relatively low power requirements to achieve the
       necessary fluid-solid contact
    c) Fluid-like behavior  of the sand bed simplifies the
       mechanical problems associated with solids handling
       and transfer.

On the other hand, its disadvantages include:
    a) A tendency for rapid mixing of solids in the bed
       and nonuniform residence times which .can lead to
       contamination of the "dean" sand effluent.
    b) Difficulties in  maintaining a  uniform state of
       fluidization  when  the  input  sand  has .a  broad
       particle size distribution.


      Details of the liquid fluidized bed contactor design are
 shown schematically in Figure 3. The unit consisted of a
 column, one foot in diameter by six feet in height. Oily
 sand was admitted through an input cone (included angle of
 60°) fitted to a 15-inch length of 5-inch diameter pipe. The
 feed  pipe extended into  the freeboard  zone  of the
 contactor, thus permitting oily sand to be introduced in the
 approximate vicinity of the fluidized bed interface. The
 oil-water overflow line was 1% inches in diameter — a
 dimension governed more by potential plugging than  by
 flow rate requirements. Similarly, although not shown in
 Figure 3, the input cone was fitted with a  water spray ring
 (0.5 gpm) to prevent sand from bridging the feed pipe.
     The bottom of the contactor column was fitted with a
 number of upward directed jets to provide hot water for
 fluidization. These jets were of simple design and consisted
 basically of check valves mounted on 3/4-inch pipe outlets.
 The purpose of the check valves was to prevent clogging  by
 solids when the system was being shut down. In addition to
 the fluidizing jets, a separate water stream was provided to
 flush clean sand from the bottom of the column. The flush
 line consisted of a perforated 3/4-inch diameter pipe which
 extended to the apex of a 60° output cone. The cone was
 fitted with a  2-inch diaphragm valve that was used  to
 control the output rate of clean sand from the contactor.
 Although not shown in Figure 3, an auxiliary water line was
 added  downstream of the  diaphragm valve  to aid  in
 transporting  the  dean  sand slurry  to  the  location  of
 sand-water disengagement. The contactor was also equipped
 with provisions for measuring  temperature and pressure
 profiles.

                 OILY  SAND
                       I
                                INPUT  CONE
  OIL  LAYER
.OIL-WATER
OVERFLOW
                                 FREEBOARD  ZONE
PRESSURE __
   TAP    -~
  THERMAL
    WELL
                                 FLUIDIZED  ZONE
                                  FLUIDIZING   JETS
                                            1 INPUT
                                            i WATER
                               FLUSH   LINE
                             DIAPHRAGM  VALVE
                CLEAN  SAND
                   SLURRY

 Figure 3:  Schematic Diagram of the Liquid Fluidized Bed Con-
 tactor

-------
                                                                               HOT WATER FLUIDIZATION   537
The Oil-Water Separator

    The overhead effluent from the contactor consists of
oil,  water, and entrained fine sand particles. The function
of the oil-water separator is to clarify this mixture to the
greatest extent possible — the oil phase going to disposal
jnd the water phase for recycle. Clarification of the water
phase is the most important function as this directly affects
the  quality of clean sand effluent from the contactor. The
presence  of  entrained  sand,  however,  complicates  this
otherwise straightforward physical separation process.
    Traditional methods for clarifying an oil-water mixture
are barrier separation (the equivalent of fluid-phase "filtra-
tion") and gravitational  or centrifugal  separation. With
regard to  the present  study, the  effluent stream to be
separated ranged from  1 to 5 percent in oil content and, as
previously discussed,  it  was expected  that this effluent
would be  relatively "nondispersed" in nature. Therefore,
our design was based on the premise  that gravity  separa-
tion would yield a recycle water stream of sufficient clarity.
    Gravity   separation  depends  generally  on  the  slip
Velocity of ofl drops relative to water as a result of the oil's
tower density. The slip velocity acts to displace oil upwards
relative to the water in the separator. This slip velocity is
fflustrated by Stoke's  equation for the  steady upward
velocity, u, of a sphere in an infinite fluid mediumS.
u = gD2 (p0 - pw)
                                          (1)
In this equation, g is the gravitational acceleration, D is the
sphere  diameter, p0 and pw are the  densities of the (oil)
sphere and (water) medium, and v is the  viscosity  of the
water. While this equation is strictly applicable only to rigid
spheres,  it illustrates the basic and significant features of
gravitational separation. Slip velocity (and hence, ultimate
separator clarification)  increases according to the accelera-
tion field, density  contrast, and drop  size,  and decreases
with  increasing  water  phase  viscosity,  i.e.,  decreasing
temperature.
    Under  "normal" circumstances,  the separation of an
oil-water mixture is favored by higher operating tempera-
tures, Le., the density contrast increases6 and the water
viscosity  decreases.  In the present  study,  however, the
situation is complicated by the presence of entrained sand
in the contactor effluent  This sand acts to increase  the oil
droplet diameter and drecrease the density contrast.  At the
normally favorable high temperatures, however, ofl tends
to be stripped from the sand particles, thereby decreasing
droplet diameter. Since slip velocity is proportional  to the
diameter squared, the exact effect of separator temperature
is therefore difficult to predict
    The separator design used in this study consisted of a
standard 55-gallon  drum  fitted with appropriate instru-
mentation, piping, and valves as shown in Figure 1. Due to
the considerable uncertainty  in  anticipated  performance,
provision was made to add a second stage separator (also a
55-gallon drum) if needed. The recirculation pump was a
centrifugal  type delivering 30 gpm at 25 psi head. Flow
rates were measured by calibrated orifice meters.
TESTING

    Testing was performed during late  spring of 1970.
Initial efforts used only clean sand and  were devoted to
obtaining calibration data-and verifying the performance of
items such as the steam sparger, diaphragm valve, fluidizing
jets, etc.  While  most components functioned as expected
(or were  made  to do so with minor  modifications), two
potential problems were encountered:
    a) plugging of various flow channels due to rocks,
       debris, and other flotsam.
    b) entrainment of fine sand particles in the overhead
       effluent from the contactor.
    As discussed  in the previous section, the processing
unit was designed for in situ operation. While in this regard
the system is basically self-contained, it does have certain
auxiliary  requirements. These are: 1) power,  2) steam, 3)
water, and 4) a conveyance system. From an operational
standpoint, the steam requirement presented the  most
difficulties. Practical  considerations,  therefore,  dictated
that testing be conducted near a laboratory that had a ready
supply of available steam. Unfortunately,  this laboratory
did not have a  convenient supply of sea water (which was
the preferred aqueous medium) and, therefore, fresh water
was used instead.
    The use of fresh  water imposed stringent demands on
the resulting performance. Efficient operation of both the
contactor and the separator depends directly on the density
contrast between ofl  and the aqueous medium.  For oils
used in  this test (see Table  1), the substitution  of fresh
water decreased this  density contrast  by  20 to 50 percent
over that which would be obtained with sea water.
     Performance  tests were  conducted  with a synthetic
mixture of ofl  and local beach sand.  In  all test runs, the
mixture fed to the fluidized bed contactor  contained an
average of one to two weight percent ofl. This feed mixture
was not uniformly blended and had pockets of substantially
higher ofl content as well as pockets of essentially clean
sand. The properties of the ofls used in the  test  runs are
presented in Table 1  and a grain size analysis of the beach
sand is given in Table 2. Except where noted, all  test runs
were performed with the 23° API gravity crude ofl.

           Table 1: Summary of Oil Properties
                           Crude Oil         Residual Oil
                                                Gravity, °API

                                                Distillation, volume %
                                                        < 350° F
                                                     350 - 650° F
                                                     650 - 1025° F
                                                        >1025° F

                                                Viscosity, centistokes
                                                        @ 60° F
                                                        @100° F
                               23
                              10.6
                              29.5
                              33.2
                              26.7


                               39
                               12
  14
trace
15.7
53.2
31.0


 500
 160

-------
538 OIL SPILL CLEANUP
       Table 2:  Beach Sand Size Distribution

       Particle Size, Inches              Weight %
            <.006
         .006 - .010
         .010 - .014
         .014 - .020
             >.020
 5
48
39
 7
 1
     Because of limitations on available time, all tests were
 run at nominal design conditions and flow rates. The two
 problems which were identified during preliminary testing,
 i.e., plugging and entrainment, continued to be troublesome
 during this stage of testing. In addition, it became readily
 apparent that the oil-water separator was not performing as
 desired. Performance was improved by  the addition of a
 second  stage  separator  (the horizontal 55-gallon drum
 shown in Figure 2) but still  did not reach an acceptable
 level.  The  basic problem was that  dispersed oil in the
 separator recycle stream was contaminating the "clean"
 sand slurry from the bottom of the  contactor. The only
 solution found to be effective was to divert the contactor
 effluent to a separate, isolated vessel and not recycle any of
 water. Under these operating conditions, the effluent sand
 slurry then contained very little observable oil.
     Quantification of the cleaning ability of the hot water
 fluidization process was determined by analyzing the clean
 sand effluent  for residual  oil. The  method  used was a
 modification  of a  colorimetric technique reported else-
 where?. Briefly, it consisted  of  dividing a representative
 sample of clean sand effluent into two weighed portions.
 One portion was simply dried in order to convert measure-
 ments to a dry sand basis. To the other  portion, a known
 amount of hydrocarbon solvent was added (commercial
 paint  thinner was found to be effective). After agitation
 and settling, the hydrocarbon extract  was decanted, placed
 in a colorimeter, and the percent transmission of mono-
 chromatic light was measured. By comparing this trans-
 mittance to that of a suitably prepared and known standard
 solution, the oil content of the sand  sample could readily
 be determined.
     Results of these analyses showed that upwards of 95
 percent of  the oil was removed. Although the majority of
 samples indicated a cleaning efficiency of 98 - 99 percent,
 certain instabilities in the  process operation resulted in
 occasional samples that would register a somewhat higher
 degree of oil content The 95 percent figure  is therefore
 believed to be a realistic, but conservative,  measure of
 cleaning efficiency for the hot water fluidization process.
     Our original test schedule also called for operation with
 a  residual crude oil (see Table 1). The purpose of this test
 was to  simulate beach cleanup operations when dealing
 with a highly weathered ofl, i.e., an ofl which had lost most
 of its  volatfles and had increased in density because of a
 lengthy exposure to the marine environment. As expected,
 the clarifying ability of the oil-water separator was signifi-
 cantly worse when the contaminant was a residual crude.
 Furthermore,  the "clean" sand  effluent contained  sub-
 stantially more oily  contaminants even when the process
 was operated without water recycle. This degradation in
 performance was due to oil-sand agglomerates that were not
 broken up  during  the  downward  passage  through  the
 fluidized  bed  contactor.  Because  testing was limited,
 however,  the  exact  cause for this behavior could not be
 ascertained.

 DISCUSSION

    As mentioned previously, the main technical objective
 of this study was to examine conceptual feasibility of the
hot water fluidization process and define the major design
problems  which  would  have  to be solved  in  order to
conduct further studies. In this respect, it is appropriate to
examine  some of the problems encountered during opera-
tional  testing  and assess their effect on the design of a
prototype test model.
    The most pervasive problem appears to be the typically
broad  particle  size distribution of most beach  sands. In
comparison with other studies**, the sand used in these tests
had  a rather  narrow  grain  size  distribution.  As  this
distribution broadens, the problems become more severe.
    In the first place, the grain size distribution has a direct
effect on the fluidization process itself. When the fluidizing
medium  is a  liquid, the relationship between minimum
fluidizing velocity and particle  diameter may be approxi-
mated  by Stoke's equation (see Eq. (1)). Each particle size,
however,  also  has a characteristic  maximum  fluidizing
velocity3. Therefore, an operating velocity (or flow rate)
must be  chosen which is low enough so that fines are not
carried out the top and, at the same time, is great enough to
freely suspend the larger size particles. For the sand used in
these tests, the maximum velocity for fine grains was about
 3 to 4 times the minimum for the coarse grains. This range,
of course, narrows as the size distribution broadens.
    A  second,  but related, effect of particle size distribu-
 tion concerns  performance of the oil-water separator. The
 responsible  phenomenon is termed  elutriation,  i.e.,  the
 selective  removal  of  fines by entrainment from a fluidized
 bed which contains a mixture of particle sizes. These fines
 become  intimately  mixed with  the oil  droplets during
 passage from the contactor overflow to the separator, and
 drastically reduce the oil-water density contrast. In  the
 present study,  this effect was accentuated by the use of
 fresh water instead of sea water. Although a certain amount
 of fines  carry-over  is unavoidable,  the  problem can be
 minimized by  proper design of  the contactor  freeboard
 volume. Even with minimum carry-over, however, it may be
 necessary to resort  to barrier or centrifugal  separation
 techniques in order to obtain a water recycle stream of suf-
 ficient clarity.
    Another factor which affects cleaning performance is
 the  mechanism  of  sand  flow  through the  contactor.
 Fluidized beds are  normally considered  to  have a high
 degree of axial mixing and an associated broad range of
 particle  residence times. While this behavior accurately
 describes a gas fluidized bed, an entirely different situation

-------
                                                                             HOT WATER FLUIDIZATION   539
 is possible with liquid fluidized beds. The ideal operating
 mode for a beach  sand cleaner (and, in fact, the mode
 which was hypothesized in this design) is "plug" flow in
rwhich  axial mixing of solid particles relative to the bulk
 downward flow of sand is zero. Under these conditions, the
 residence time is constant, and all particles are exposed to
 the hot water wash for exactly the same length of time.
    In actual operation, however,  this situation does not
 prevail, even in the  case of liquid fluidization. Axial mixing
 does occur and, if it is sufficiently  large, some of the sand
 particles will  exit from the bottom of the contactor before
 they are completely  stripped  of oil. The extent of axial
 mixing (or nonuniform residence time) is dependent both
 on column operating conditions and also on mechanical
 design factors. With regard to the  former, axial mixing
 increases with increasing fluid velocity. Thus, problems can
 be expected if a bed of widely varying particle sizes is to be
 completely fluidized. In the matter of mechanical design,
 the most important factor is the manner in which fluidizing
 liquid is  introduced and distributed  across the bottom of
 the column. Improper distributor design or faulty operation
 can lead  to channeling. While this phenomenon is different
 from  axial  mixing,  the end result is  the  same, i.e.,
 insufficient contact between the wash water and oily sand.
    The  other problems encountered during operational
 testing of the hot water fluidization model were basically
 mechanical in nature. The major difficulties were associated
 with plugging of various flow channels and inadequate flow
 control of the  clean sand  effuent  stream. Some of the
 plugging problems may be attributed to the physical size of
 the  test model  and  others  are  amenable to  solution by
 suitable design, i.e., the use of traps, check valves, delump-
 ers, etc.  It is anticipated, however, that a full scale model
 would require preliminary screening of the input  sand to
 remove large debris. With regard to the second mechanical
 difficulty, improved flow control of the clean sand effluent
 could most likely be obtained by using a slurry pump or
 other appropriate hardware.

 CONCLUSION

    In  conclusion,  we judge the hot water fluidization
 process for cleaning oil-contaminated sand to be technically
 feasible and deserving of further study. Cleaning efficiencies
 in excess of  95 percent are indicated and a rough  scale-up
 of the test data indicates that 20 tons of sand per hour
 could be processed in a fluidized bed contactor 2 to 3 feet
 in diameter by 10 to 15 feet in height.
     On  the  basis  of  preliminary  tests  and  theoretical
 analysis, however, there appear to be definite limitations as
 to the general  applicability  of a hot water fluidization
process. These limitations are concerned primarily with the
range or distribution of sand particle sizes that can be
fluidized without excessive elutriation. Additional experi-
mentation is needed to delineate these limitations.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

    The following individuals  assisted  throughout  the
course of this study: Steve L. Gleitman, Charles H. Hanson,
Paul  A. Helman,  David  E. Farlow, Fahad A.  Somait,
Bernard C. K. Chan, Frederick W. Thoits, and Joseph M.
Seda.
 REFERENCES

 1. W. J. Mead and P. E. Sorensen, "The Economic Cost of
   the Santa Barbara Oil  Spill,"  paper  presented at the
   Santa Barbara  Oil Symposium, December 16-18, 1970;
   Symposium Proceedings to be published by the Marine
   Science Institute, University of California, Santa Bar-
   bara.

 2. "Combating  Pollution Created by Oil Spills," Vol.  1,
   Report to the Dept. of Transportation, U.  S. Coast
   Guard, prepared by A. D. Little, Inc., June 30, 1969.

 3. D. Kunii and O. Levenspiel, "Fluidization Engineering,"
   John Wiley & Sons, New York (1969).

 4. "Proceedings of the International Symposium on Fluidi-
   zation," A. A. Drinkenburg, ed., Netherlands University
   Press, Amsterdam (1967).

 5. "Chemical Engineer's  Handbook,"  J.  H. Perry,  ed.,
   McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1963).

 6. 'Technical Data Book  - Petroleum Refining," Am.
   Petrol. Inst.,  New York (1966).

 7. A. A. Allen,  R. S. Schlueter, and P. G. Mikolaj, "Natural
   Oil Seepage  at  Coal Oil Point, Santa  Barbara, Cali-
   fornia," Science, 170,974 (1970).

 8. "Cleaning Oil-Contaminated  Beaches with Chemicals,"
   Report prepared for the Dept. of Interior, FWPCA by
   the Northwest Region  Research and Development Pro-
   gram, Edison, New Jersey, August, 1969.

-------
                THE  STATE'S  ROLE  IN  OIL  SPILL  CLEANUP
                                                 John D. Harper
                                           Epro Oceanographic Institute
                                                      and
                                              TheMarsan Corporation
                                                  Elgin, Illinois
ABSTRACT

    With the policy of the Federal Government to respond
generally to oil and hazardous material spills beyond the
response capability of state and local governments, it has
become necessary for the Fifty States and other govern-
mental units to initiate measures whereby Strike Forces can
be  deployed by the states to  contain and recover the
numerous minor oil and hazardous material spills that in-
creasingly occur. Since  the states and local governments
provide police and fire protection for their citizens, they
are now being asked  to furnish a capable  team of trained
personnel with necessary equipment to safeguard the en-
vironment, the marine in particular,  from the abuses of
accidental oil and hazardous material spills.
    The John Muir oil spill in  Wausau, Wisconsin, in Octo-
ber - November, 1970, has shown how necessary it is for
assistance at the  state  or local government level to be
available for  those spills  not requiring federal or industry
response. It is recognized that the states and local govern-
ments are increasingly being burdened with fiscal responsi-
bilities in excess of revenues for the services they provide
their citizens. This could be one area where the Federal
Government could work in partnership with the state and
local governments by providing financial assistance.
    A  prerequisite in combatting an oil spill or the acci-
dental  discharge  of  other hazardous materials  into  the
environment is, of course, to respond with  a team of work-
ers  experienced and knowledgeable in the  subject of con-
tainment and recovery methods with the specialized equip-
ment necessary to perform the  tasks at hand. These "Strike
Forces" are the first line of defense and can  be compared to
other teams such as fire fighters, either municipal or in the
forest service, who actually perform the duties necessary to
conclude a successful operation. Where do the Strike Forces
come from? How many do we  have? How  well trained are
they? Must they be ad hoc groups hastily assembled on a
catch as catch can basis when a spill occurs? Must they be
almost exclusively in-house personnel of the offender aug-
mented with  well meaning but untrained and non-directed
volunteers? What  happens when  the  offender cannot
mobilize a Strike Force? These are  questions easily  asked
but not too easily  answered.  A Response Team of regula-
tory officials from  all levels  of government will, almost
without exception,  examine an oil or hazardous material
spill to determine what remedial measures are necessary to
minimize  the damage to  the  marine  environment. But
where is the Strike Force to implement these recommenda-
tions?
    A number of regional contingency  plans have evolved
whereby  provisions for  a  Strike Force  to  contain and
recover accidentally spilled oil are an integral part of the
operation. These are,  by and large, federally and industry
orientated. The industry plans take the form of a coopera-
tive  effort of terminal operators in  liaison with  the local
regulatory and harbor authorities.

    Two excellent examples of this are the Portland Harbor
Pollution  Abatement Committee Contingency Plan for the
state of Maine and the Louisville Area Industrial Mutual
Aid group that fields  Strike Forces to  work spills on the
Ohio River. Other cooperative  groups  have been formed
and are being formed, and it is anticipated that eventually a
veritable network of industry oriented Response Teams and
Strike Forces will be available  to police their own activities.
Additional Strike Forces may  be available depending upon
the geographic location of an oil spill by third party partici-
pants specializing in the contracting for containment and
clean up of oil spills. Third party contractors can provide a
valuable service by fielding Strike Forces where there is an
absence of a cooperative effort on the local scene, and the
nature of  the  spill is such that federal response is not called
for. The major disadvantage in the contracting for the clean

-------
 542   OIL SPILL CLEANUP
up of an oil spill is the lack of assurances that can be given
on the degree of effectiveness of the methods, and whether
these same methods are accepted or not by the regulatory
agency having jurisdiction on the spill. Another factor that
third party contractors have to contend with is that of the
matter of economics. A Strike Force with all the attendant
equipment peculiar to its needs and the trained manpower
can  be  expensive, especially when  working in the marine
environment ofttimes for long hours. Compensation for ex-
penses borne by a contractor in the performance of his
clean up  operations are defensible if these costs can be
justified and are not exorbitant. Another matter is whether
or not it is a defensible position to assume that third party
contractors should  be profit oriented while working a dis-
aster situation. All too often a Strike Force must be hastily
assembled as best it can from what is purportedly accurate
capabilities listed in regional contingency plans. Those who
have worked oil  spills - either as  a  member of a Response
Team or on a Strike Force - know that there can be a wide
disparity between the number of personnel, equipment and
materials listed as available in a contingency plan and the
number that can be  fielded to participate in an oil spill
dean up operation; and in  some parts of this country, con-
tingency plans are nonexistent.
    Recognizing  that not only are Response Teams neces-
sary at the scene of an oil  spill, but that Strike  Forces are
imperative if the actual containment is .to be attempted and
the recovery is to be initiated, the Federal Government has
established the means through the  U.S. Coast Guard and
the  Environmental  Protection  Agency whereby  Strike
Forces will become available to participate in major spills to
which there has been no local or regional response.

     In the National Oil and Hazardous Materials Pollution
Contingency Plan it is stated that,
      "The  policy of the Federal Government is to respond
      to -those situations  which  are beyond the response
      capability of State and local governments and private
      interests. Normally  minor  spills will be well within
      the capability of non-federal resources and will not,
      therefore, require a Federal response. Firm commit-
      ments for  response  personnel  and other resources
      should  be obtained from  state and local  govern-
      ments."
Further, in the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970,
Section 11, Control of Pollution  by Oil, Subsection (c) (2)
it is indicated, in part, that..."for efficient, coordinated,
and effective action to minimize damage from oil discharges
(duties) shall include.).. .(A) coordination with state and
local agencies	"
    As  much as it would be desired by some to place this
unhappy  burden of  cleaning up the nation's waterways
when oil spills occur solely upon  the  Federal Government,
it must be recognized by the states and municipal govern-
ments that this duty is viewed by the Federal Government
as the joint responsibility of the state and  local com-
munities acting with  federal agencies when a spill occurs.
While in the context of this paper the clean up of oil spills
 is emphasized, we must, nevertheless, recognize that Strike
 Forces should be equipped to deal with the accidental dis-
 charge or spillage of hazardous  materials including toxic
 gases and chemicals and radioactive waste material. It is
 imperative that consideration be  given by the chief exe'cu-
 tive officer  and responsible legislators of the Fifty States,
 the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,  the Virgin Islands, the
 Canal Zone, American Samoa, and the Trust Territory of
 the Pacific that provisions be made to immediately establish
 well equipped Strike Forces  to  deal  with the accidental
 discharge  of  oil  and other hazardous materials into the
 environment.  These  Strike Forces of  the states  and local
 governments could be a segment of the civil defense group
 or could be a working  arm of the Department of Natural
 Resources or equivalent  state agencies. Suggested state legis-
 lation  on the subject  of oil discharge  control  has been
 developed by  the Council of State Governments of Lexing-
 ton, Kentucky, and while patterned after the Maine statute,
 may be of assistance to other legislative bodies desiring to
 confront this problem.

    What constitutes a Strike Force? For  oil spill con-
 tainment and  recovery  a  minimum nucleus of ten  men is
 required  that  can be rapidly expanded  by drawing upon
other state and local government departments for labor as
 the situation demands.  A ten-man Strike Force would in-
 clude the Director of Operations and an Assistant Director
 with eight men who  would have the  multiple  capability of
 operating vehicles, equipment and small boats. Each should
 be licensed to  operate VHP radio on the standard ship band
channels, as communication between different segments of
the oil spill control operation  and merchant and other ves-
sels in the vicinity is of considerable importance. The Direc-
tgr and Assistant Director should be  equally well versed in
 the established procedures and operations for the control
 and recovery of oily pollutants as well as having personal
 characteristics suitable  for the job.  Only  experience will
 show that the Director of the Strike Force operations and
his assistant must be  of an unflappable nature, not prone to
 suffer under the pressures of his job. The  Director and
 Assistant Director should be  equally qualified  in  estab-
lishing and maintaining liaison with the Response Team and
 all of the regulatory  agencies having jurisdiction on  a parti-
 cular operation. The Director of a Strike Force operation
 assumes the responsibility for initiating  to the best of his
 ability and to the degree that the local situation dictates,
 the most efficient and effective containment and recovery
 operation! in j liaison j and upon  consultation •  with  the
 Response Team. His  assistant is delegated to'keep the oper-
 ation in action around the dock  as is so often required in
 working oil spills. Eighteen and twenty hour days  are the
 norm for these personnel and the scheduling must be such
 that responsible authority, either the Director or his assist-
 ant, is present continuously.  The  specialized equipment
 needed by a Strike Force is still subject to  some contro-
 versy. The obvious tools are necessary and must be acquired
 and these include the oil  containment  barriers, the  smaller
 boats, and  tools, vehicles,  and oil or sorbent removal
 devices. One word of caution  here is that there has been a

-------
                                                                                      THE STATE'S ROLE
                                                                                                               543
great proliferation  of hardware  supposedly designed to
remove oil from the marine environment, some of it quite
costly.  Unfortunately,  the equipment's performance in
practice does not always bear out the public relations state-
ments issued on its  behalf by its manufacturer. It is a  case
of, "All that glitters is not gold." Those desiring to establish
a Strike  Force would be well advised to take a hard long
scrutiny of equipment with alleged oil recovery capabilities
before making investments.  It is hoped that eventually an
Evaluation Commission including government, industry and
academia members, will be established to offer guidance in
the selection of oil spill containment and recovery methods,
equipment and materials. Another word of caution is given
the matter of permitting  "demonstrations"  of equipment
and  material by vendors during an  oil spill recovery oper-
ation.  Ofttimes the  attention paid to a  new or novel
approach may be out of proportion to that which is war-
ranted,  and  the primary  task using accepted  methods
suffers.  It is  not  too much to ask of the vendors to work
the "bugs" out of their own equipment  and materials on
their own time and not to compound the problems  of the
Director  of the Strike  Force during an  emergency oper-
ation. The Director should further  fully protect himself
against backcharges or rental of equipment  and materials
that he believes is being "demonstrated" gratis. It has been
known to happen that vendors try  to collect for the  trial
use of unproven equipment.

     The Director of a Strike Force should be cognizant of
 some of the  more pressing  legalistic problems  associated
 with working an oil spill.  An example is the interference
 with navigation through the deployment of oil containment
 barriers. A blocked channel effectively closing off shipping
 could result in demurrage assessments by a vessel  against
 the offender or the  Strike Force attempting to clean up the
 spill unless provisions are  made to open and close the bar-
 rier. This requires that an oil barrier blocking a channel be
 manned around the clock with a boat and personnel having
 the  ability to communicate with the vessel desiring passage.
 Frequently  a double barrier is required  across a channel,
 one several hundred yards below the other, to permit this
 locking  through  operation without the risk of losing the
 pollutant. These barriers should be lighted  for night  time
 visibility  to the prescribed requirements of  the U.S. Coast
 Guard. The  Director should be  aware of the  many  legal
 ramifications  of an oil spill operation, including the lia-
 bilities that can be incurred and be able to obtain expert
 consul when the need arises. Environmental  law is just now
 emerging and almost every adjudication  results in  a land-
 mark decision.

     In  any event,  it is necessary firstly to have a Strike
 Force and then to have it  prepared to perform its functions
 as that is seen to be.
     An almost classic example of the lack of preparedness
 that  can exist at the state level in combatting an oil  spill
 occurred in  Wausau,  Wisconsin, last October.  The John
 Muir oil spill began on  October  18 with the  discharge
 through heating  system vent piping from the John  Muir
 Middle School of some- 2,000 gallons of No. 5 fuel oil into
the City of Wausau's storm sewer system. As is so often the
case, this happened on a weekend and at night and went
undetected for several hours. The fuel oil found its way
into the Wisconsin River through the storm sewer system
and was first reported by hunters on the Wisconsin River
and Lake Wausau to  a Game Warden of the Department of
Natural Resources. The game warden, recognizing the ser-
iousness of the situation, attempted to learn  the source of
the pollutant's entry  into the river and notify local govern-
ment officials in the City of Wausau of the matter. The
early  history of the oil spill revealed that Game Warden
Harry Borner had to  be not only the Response Team, but,
with several of his men, also the Strike Force  until  such
time as the  school district could  mobilize manpower  and
equipment to perform the clean up tasks. Only the coopera-
tion of Superintendent Burton of the Wausau School Board
and the efforts of Game Warden Borner averted what could
have been a much more serious impingement on the quality
of the marine environment of the Wisconsin River, Lake
Wausau and the Rib River.  Mr. William Burton, Superin-
tendent of the Wausau School District, presented in a hear-
ing of the Division of Environmental Protection of the state
of Wisconsin testimony which said in part:
      "When  it became apparent  to me  that the responsi-
      bilities  associated with the cleanup of an  oil  spill
      would be the duty of the Wausau Joint District No. 1,
      I immediately requested expert assistance from those
      knowledgeable  in the field. The spill occurred on Sun-
      day, October 18. Indecision reigned for some three
      days,  until  Wednesday, October   21,  it  became
      apparent that the School Board would have to, in the
      absence of assistance from others, assume the respon-
      sibility  for  the oil spill cleanup.  The School Board
      had  manpower and  equipment consisting of boats,
      trucks,  and certain  containment booms. What we
      needed was some direction from someone or some
      agency  that had experience in oil  spill  containment
      and recovery."

     The John Muri oil spill is a classic example of a number
 of oil spills. All of  the elements that are  attendant in the
 major disasters were present at  the John Muir  oil  spill.
 Some responsible officials recognized that considerable per-
 sonal  and cooperative effort would have to be  made to
 control and remove  the oil. Others, unfortunately, did not.
 The history of the John Muir oil spill is written into the
 testimony presented to the Division of Environmental Pro-
 tection of the State of Wisconsin on October 27, 1970.

     The one lesson  that it is hoped could be learned from
 this spill, as with so many others, is the need for a state or
 local government Strike Force that can initiate immediate
 remedial measures when and where accidental spills occur.
     What would be the  cost of a state Strike Force? It
 would necessarily vary depending upon a number of factors
 including manpower requirements, equipment needs and
 geographic  area to  be served. I  would estimate an initial
 budget of  Five Hundred  to Seven Hundred Thousand
 Dollars plus an annual appropriation of Three Hundred to

-------
  544  OIL SPILL CLEANUP
Five Hundred Thousand Dollars could produce a vialbe and
effective  Stirke  Force. Existing  resources in  men  and
equipment of the state  or local government'could very well
reduce these  formidable  amounts to  something more
palatable. For example, the city of Wausau used  a vacuum
truck  perchased for catch  basin cleaning and leaf removal
Operations to  great advantage in their oil  spill recovery
operations.  An inventory  of existing equipment with its
locations and availability would be of inestimable value in
equipping  a Strike Force. Specialized containment  and
recovery  equipment would still  most likely  have to be
procured. Would  the burden for this expenditure be solely
upon the taxpayer? Not necessarily. There are a number of
means whereby expenses incurred on a spill are recoverable.
If  they were  not, we would not see  any third party
contractors in the business. It is not so much what the costs
are as  to how much it pays in the benefits of protecting the
state's natural  and water resources  from degradation by
accidental ofl spillages. I would fully expect that while it is
the state or local  governmental  body's  responsibility to •
field Strike  Forces, financial assistance should be available
from  federal sources. My  belief in this  is reinforced by
remakrs of Commissioner Dominick of the Water Qaulity
Office of Environmental Protection Agency in his address
to the  Association of State and Interstate Administrators in
Portland,  Oregon,  on  October 26,  1970.  Here  it was
indicated that the Federal Government believes cooperative
programs at all levels of government-a partnership based
on mutual respect in which all parties contirbute their best
efforts-will lead to a successful state-federal partnership of
water  pollution prevention and control. Further,  in  the
stauts report  of the FWQA, Clean  Water for the 1970's it is
indicated  that  there is to be  "better assistance  to  the
states." Whether  or not these  promises bear fruition and
federal assistance in the form of grants or other assistance is
made  available, the states  and many local governmental
bodies do have the responsibility and the duty, just as they
have in fire and police protection, to defend the quality of
their own resources, be they natural, marine, or mineral, for
the citizens  of their  state.
    Those states that have already initiated planning to
contend with oil spills including the formation  of Strike
Forces are to be commended, and it is hoped  their exem-
plary efforts will be inspiration to other states requiring
similar programs. The  states of  California, Connecticut,
Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Washing-
ton are singled Out as  being particularly cognizant of the
necessity for state directed action in oil spill containment
and clean up operations.
    My apologies  to  those I have  inadvertently omitted
who have recognized the need for local action to safeguard
the environment and have taken steps to implement reme-
dial measures when the occasion demands.
REFERENCES

 1.   The National Oil and Hazardous Materials Pollution
      Contingency  Plan, June,  1970,  US  G.P.O.;  1970
      0-398-938.
2.    Federal Water Pollution Control Act, US Department
      of Interior, US G.P.O. 1970 0-389-779.   •
3.    Clean  Water  for the  1970's, a Status Report, De-
      partment  of  Interior,  Federal Water Quality
      Administration, US GP.O. 1970 0-398-880.
4.    Ocean Dumping, a National  Policy, a Report  to the
      President, prepared by the Council on Environmental
      Quality, October 1970, US G.P.0.1970 0-404-547.
5.    Oil Pollution, Report  to the President, Department of
      Interior - Department of Transportation, February,
      1968, US G.P.0.0-298-767.
6.    Oil and Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan for
      Prevention, Containment and Clean Up for the State
      of Maine, January  1970, Portland, Maine,  Pollution
      Abatement Committee, 04111.
7.    1971  Suggested State Legislation, Vol. xxx, Oil Dis-
      charge Control, The Council of State Governments,
      Lexington, Kentucky, 40505.
8.    Testimony presented in the John Muir oil spill, Wau-
      sau, Wisconsin, October  27,  1970,  unpublished,
      presented to Division of Environmental Protection,
      Department of Natural Resources, State of Wisconsin.
9.    An Oil  Spill, We Profit  by our Mistakes,  Dick
      Kloppenburg,  October  23,  1970, Wausau  Daily
      Record-Herald.
10.   No Silent Partners, unpublished, Remarks of David D.
      Dominick, Commissioner Federal Water Quality Ad-
      ministration, US Department of Interior, Address to
      Association  of State  and Interstate Administrators,
      Portland,  Oregon,  October 26,  1970.

-------

PREVENTION
 OIL SELLS
    (mi


-------
  Proa
Joint
'ings of
  •noeon
         77ON
         TOOL
  OLSP/LLS



 June 15-17,1971
 .-«     -—-—^ / t -^r- 	
V\fflhmgton,D.C.

-------
  Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Catalog No. 74-124324
      American Petroleum Institute
           1801 K Street, N.W.
        Washington, D. C. 20006

-------
                                          CONTENTS


LAWS and ENFORCEMENT


Summary of Laws and Regulations Governing Spills and  Discharges of Oil                         3
  William K. Tell, Jr., Texaco, Inc.


Oil Pollution  Control Legislation and  the Water Quality Improvement
Act of 1970 — The Federal Viewpoint 	11
  K. E. Biglane and R. H. Wyer, Division of Oil and Hazardous Materials, Water  Quality
  Office, Environmental Protection Agency


National  Contingency Planning                                                                  17
  Comdr. Daniel  B. Charter, Jr.,  United States Coast Guard


International  Activity Regarding Shipboard Oil  Pollution Control                                   27
  Capt. R. 1. Price, United States  Coast Guard


The Oil Pollution Problem from the Viewpoint of Marine Insurance  	43
   Gordon W. Paulsen, Haight, Gardner,  Poor &  Havens


Should Financial Limitations Upon Liability Be
Applied to Oil Spill  Removal and Damage?                                                     49
   C. R. Hallberg, United States Coast Guard


The Maine Law — A Precursor for the Oil Terminating States                                     53
   William R. Adams, Environmental  Improvement Commission, State  of Maine


State  Jurisdiction  over OH Spills in a Federal System                                              57
   Daniel Wilkes,  University of Rhode Island
 OIL SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL, and MONITORING


 Remote Sensing of Controlled  Oil Spills 	71
   Clarence E. Catoe, United States Coast Guard                             I


 Methods and Procedures for Preventing Oil Pollution
 from Onshore and Offshore Faculties 	 85
   R. D. Kaiser and H. D. Van Cleave, Environmental Protection Agency


 Embroiled in  Oil 	91
   Harold Bernard, Environmental Protection Agency


 Prevention of Marine Pollution Through Understanding                                         97
   Paul M. Hammer, Marine Advisory and Associated Services


 Development of Tank  Vessel Overfill Alarm  Instruments  	103
   Donald J. Leonard, Shell Development Co.

                                                iii

-------
The Use of a Gravity Type Oil Separator for Tanker Operations  	109
  R. O. Norris and W. H. Lockwood, Jr., Cities Service Tankers Corporation


Identification of Oil Leaks and Spills 	119
  R. E. Kreider, Standard Oil Company of California


Ballast Water Treatment — A Major Undertaking                                                 125
  Jonathan W.  Scribner, Dept. of Health & Welfare, State of  Alaska


Containment of OH  by Sea  Ice — Some Qualitative  Aspects  	133
  F. G. Barber, Department of Fisheries and  Forestry, Ottawa


Puget Sound Fisheries  and Oil Pollution — A Status  Report                                      139
  Robert C. Clark and John  S. Finley, Biological Laboratory, National  Marine Fisheries
  Service


A Joint State-Industry Program for Oil Pollution  Control                                        147
  Donald Corey, Division of  Water Pollution Control, Massachusetts; Robert W. Neal and
  Gerald R. Schimke,  Arthur D. Little, Inc.


Alberta Ofl Spill Contingency Plan  	157
  7. G. Gainer, Canadian Petroleum Association


Development  of an Air Deliverable Antipollntion Transfer System  	165
  Corrtdr. Robert J,  Ketchel,  United States Coast Guard and H.  D. Smith, Goodyear Tire
  and Rubber  Co.


A Chemical Tagging System for Use in the Prevention  of Oil Spills 	179
  Robert A. Landowne and Ralph B. Wainright, American Cyanamid Company


California Contingency Plan for Oil and Other Hazardous Materials Spills                         183
  John F. Matthews, Jr., Division of Oil and Gas, State of California


Role of the Oil Spill Cooperative in  the Oil Producing  Industry                                    191
  5. C. Mut, Atlantic  Richfield Co.


OD Spill Prevention  and Detection  Using an Instrumented Submersible  	195
   Wadsworth Owen, Vast, Inc. and  William Leaf, Prototypes,  Inc.


Causes of Oil Spills from Ships hi  Port  	 199
   W.  H. Putman,  Dept. of Fish and Game, State of California


Removal of Oil from Sunken Tankers                                                            205
   Vincent C. Rose and Gerald C. Soltz, University of  Rhode  Island


 Ofl Versus Other Hazardous  Substances  	209
   C. Hugh Thompson, Water Quality Office, Environmental Protection Agency

                                                 iv

-------
Navy  Harbor Oil Pollution  Abatement  	213
  Jock E. Wilson, Naval Facilities Engineering Command


TREATING AGENTS


Sorbents  for Oil Spill Removal  	221
  Paul Schatzberg and K. V. Nagy, Naval Ship and Development Laboratory


Laboratory Investigations into the Sinking of Oil Spills
with Participate Solids                                                                         235
  O. Pordes, Egham Research Laboratories, U.K. and L. J. Schmit Jongbloed,
  KominMijke/Shell Explordtie en Produktie Laboratorium, The Netherlands


Burning Agents for Ofl Spill Cleanup  	245
  Arnold Freiberger,  Water Quality Office, Environmental Protection Agency


Assessment of Oil Spill Treating Agent Test Methods	253
  /, R. Blacklaw, J. A. Strand and P.  C. Walkup, Pacific  Northwest  Laboratories,  Battelle
  Memorial Institute


Oil Spill  Dispersants — Current Status and Future Outlook                                       263
  Gerard P. Canevari, Esso Research and Engineering Company


Dispersant Use vs Water Quality 	-	271
  Richard T. Dewling, 7. Stephen Dorries and George Pence, Water Quality Office,
  Environmental Protection Agency


Development of Toxicity Test  Procedures for  Marine Phytoplankton 	  	279
  John W. Strand, W. L. Templeton and I. A. Lichatowich, Pacific Northwest Laboratories,
  Battelle Memorial Institute


Mkrobial Degradation of a Louisiana Crude Oil in Closed Flasks
and Undej: Simulated Field Conditions	287
  Howard Kator, C. H. Oppenheimer and R. J. Miget, Florida State  University


Toxicity  of Oil-Dispersing Agents Determined in a Circulating  Aquarium System                   297
  R.  H.  Engel and M. J. Neat, William F. Clapp Laboratories—Battelle Memorial
  Institute


OH Spill  Treatment With Composted Domestic Refuse	303
  Walter G. Vaux, Stephen A. Weeks and Donald /. Walukas, Westinghouse Research
  Laboratories


PHYSICAL REMOVAL and  CONTAINMENT


A Study  of the Performance Characteristics of the Oleophilic Belt Oil Scrubber                      309
  /. P. Oxenham, Shell Pipe Line Corporation

Free  Vortex Recovery of Floating  Oil 	                          319
  Eugene B. Nebeker and Sergio E. Rodriguez, Scientific Associates, Inc. and Paul G. Mikolaj,
   Univ. of California—Santa Barbara

-------
Concept Development of a Powered Rotating Disk Oil  Recovery System 	329
  5. T. Uyeda, R. L. Chuan, A. C. Connolly and Philip O. Johnson,  Atlantic Research
  Systems Division


Lockheed OO SpHl Recovery Device	339
  Barrett Bruch, Lockheed Missiles & Space Co.


Development of Test Procedures for the Assessment of
Efficiency in Beach Cleaning  	357
  P. G. Jeffery,  Warren Spring Laboratory, U.K.


Investigation of the Use of a Vortex Flow to Separate
Ofl from an  Oil-Water  Mixture  	361
  Arthur E.  Mensing and Richard Stoeffler,  United  Aircraft Research Laboratories


"Dynamic KeeP Oil  Containment System                                                        369
  Frank A. March, Ocean Systems, Inc.


Pneumatic Barriers for Oil Containment  under Wind,
Wave and Current Conditions  	381
  David R. Basco, Texas A & M University


Theoretical and Experimental Evaluation of Ofl  Spfll  Control Devices                              393
  Wilbur Marks, Gunth R.  Geiss and Jules  Hirschman, Poseidon Scientific Corp.


Study of Equipment  and Methods for  Removing  or
Dispersing Ofl from Open Waters  	405
  C. H. Henager, P.  C. Walkup, J. R.  Blacklaw and  J. D. Smith,  Pacific Northwest
  Laboratories, Battelle Memorial Institute


The Recovery of Ofl from Water With  Magnetic Liquids                                          415
  R. Kaiser and G. Miskolezy, Avco Systems Division; C. K. Colton, Massachusetts
  Institute of  Technology and R.  A.  Curtis, Purdue Univ.


PHYSICAL-BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS


Some Effects of Ofl Pollution in Mflford Haven, United Kingdom                                  429
  E. B. Cowell,  Orielton Field Centre, U.K.


The Influence of  Ofl and Detergents on Recolonization
in the Upper Intertidal Zone               	437
  Dale Straughan,  Allan Hancock Foundation,  University of Southern California


Sources and Biodegradation of Carcinogenic Hydrocarbons  	441
  Claude E.  ZoBell,  University of California—San Diego


Cleaning and Rehabilitation of Oiled Seabirds 	453
  G. Odham, Goteborgs University, Sweden


Initial Aging of Fuel Ofl Films on Sea Water	457
  Craig L. Smith and William G. Maclntyre, Virginia  Institute of Marine Science

                                                vi

-------
Physical Processes in the Spread of Oil on a Water Surface  	463
  James  A. Fay, Massachusetts Institute of Technology


The Physical Behavior of Oil on Water Derived from
Airborne Infrared and  Microwave  Radiometric Measurements                                    469
  /. M. Kennedy, Resources Technology Corp. and E. G. Wermund, Remote Sensing, Inc.


Ofl Pollution Problems in the Arctic                                                               479
    Lt. (jg.) John L. Glaeser, United States Coast Guard


Effects of Exposure to  Oil on Mytilus Californanus
From Different Localities  	485
  Robert Kanter, Dale Straughan and William  lessee, Allan Hancock Foundation, University
  of Southern California


The Movement of Oil Spills 	489
  Henry G.  Schwartzberg, New  York University


OIL SPILL  CLEANUP


An Integrated Program  for Oil  Spill Cleanup                                                     497
  W. E. Belts and H. I.  Fuller,  Esso Research Center,  V.K.; H. logger,  Esso Petroleum Co.,
  London


Evaluation of Selected Earthmoving Equipment for the
Restoration of Oil-Contaminated Beaches  	505
  James D. Sartor, URS Research Co.


Froth Flotation Cleaning of Ofl  Contaminated Beaches                                              523
  Garth  D. Gumtz, Meloy Laboratories


A Hot Water Fluidization Process for Cleaning Oil-Contaminated  Beach  Sand                      533
  Paul G. Mikolaj and  Edward J. Curran, University  of California—Santa Barbara


The State's Role in Oil Spill Cleanup                                                            541
  John D. Harper, The Marsan Corporation
                                                 Vll

-------
LAWS AND  ENFORCEMENT
      Chairman: L. P. Haxby
        Shell Oil Company

      Co-Chairman: E. Cotton
       Gulf Oil Corporation

-------
                              SUMMARY  OF  LAWS  AND
                  REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  SPILLS AND
                                    DISCHARGES  OF  OIL
                                             William K. Tell, Jr.
                                                Texaco, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
   The past several years have seen a veritable explosion of
environmental laws and regulations, at all levels, federal,
state and local. In many instances the overall law in the area
has not evolved in an orderly manner. Legislatures, under
heavy  popular pressures to  enact  forceful  measures to
enhance the environment, have often  acted precipitously
without insuring that the total  fabric of laws and regula-
tions between the state  and federal and local governments
was coordinated, consistent and non-duplicative. In certain
instances earlier laws not specifically  tailored to today's
environmental problems  have been stretched by the courts
to apply to polluters with perhaps commendable results in
the particular case at bar, but creating legal precedents
which  are  difficult  to  reconcile with other laws  and
principles of statutory construction. Additional confusion
has been created by the large number of enforcement
agencies which have been brought into the picture at all
levels. These include the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), the Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard and
U.S. Geological Survey at the  federal level and a multitude
of state and local agencies.

   Further compounding the legal problems in the environ-
mental area has been the lack of adequate technical data on
the precise  harmful effects of various  pollutants. Legisla-
tures have generally felt lacking in-time  or expertise to
resolve the  complex  issues, and therefore, have frequently
delegated responsibilities  in  this  area to enforcement
agencies, often under extremely tight timetables for imple-
mentation. The result has too often been the adoption of
regulations  based on superficial  criteria  which  fail to
adequately appraise and reflect  (1) the true extent of the
injury to the environment, (2) the technological capability
of industry to curtail its discharge of pollutants  without
causing severe disruptions in  employment and  energy
supplies, (3) the time period reasonably required to install
such anti-pollutant devices, and (4) the ultimate cost to the
consumer. Unless realistic accommodations can be found in
these areas of potential conflict, and the public made better
informed on the price which it must pay  for a cleaner
environment, what could and should be a proud chapter in
America's industrial revolution may end on a very sour note
for all.

   This paper attempts to  generally summarize the current
state of the law applicable to oil discharges. Unfortunately
the law in this  area is evolving so rapidly that much of the
material contained  herein reflecting events as of April 1,
1971  will be  out of  date by the time of the Oil Spill
Conference in mid-June. Since there are  so many laws and
regulations in  this field, my  treatment of them has been
limited to a general description of the more  significant
provisions in the interest of keeping this paper to manage-
able length. In many instances, however, the full text of the
statute or regulation with respect to these provisions  has
been provided in an Appendix.
I. Federal Water Pollution Control Act Prior to 1970
   The basic federal statute covering discharges of oils is the
Federal  Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C., 1151 et
seq. This Act was  originally enacted June 30, 1948 and
has been amended on several subsequent occasions, includ-
ing major revisions in 1956, 1965 and 1970.

   Until the enactment of the Water Quality Improvement
Act of 1970, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act did
not specifically focus on the problem of oil discharges, nor
did it provide  national effluent  standards for oil or any
other  substances. Instead, the Water Quality Act of 1965
amended the Water Pollution Control Act by requiring each
state to establish, and obtain federal approval of,  water

-------
        LAWS AND  ENFORCEMENT
 quality  standards  for the  interstate  waters  within said
 state.1  Thus, instead of effluent or discharge standards for
 oil or  any other substance,  the statute provided for the
 establishment  of receiving water standards by each state.
 Such standards, which have now received federal approval,
 in whole or in part, for each state, normally do not contain
 a precise criteria for allowable oil discharges. A  typical state
 standard regarding oil discharges would state that

      "There  shall  be no slicks of free or  floating oil
   present in sufficient quantities to interfere with the
   designated uses, nor shall emulsified oils be present
   in sfuficient quantities to interfere with designated
   uses."2

   In addition  to the absence of precise standards, federal
enforcement is limited to situations where the discharge has
caused a reduction in the quality of the receiving waters
below the standards set for that water body, or has polluted
the waters to the extent that it endangers the public health
or welfare. In the latter case, extended conference and
hearing procedures must be complied with before a lawsuit
to abate the violation  can be commenced.  In cases merely
involving alleged violations of receiving water standards no
such prerequisites to an enforcement proceeding are con-
templated by the 1965 Act.

n. Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
  Congress on April  3, 1970 enacted the Water Quality
Improvement  Act of  1970,  33  U.S.CJV., 1161 et seq.3
amending the  Federal  Water  Pollution Control Act in the
following major respects involving pollution by oil4:
   1. The discharge of oil into or upon the navigable waters
     of the United States, adjoining shorelines, or into or
     upon the waters  of the contiguous zone is prohibited
     except in such "quantities and at times and locations
     or under  such  circumstances or conditions as the
     President may,  by regulation, determine not to be
     harmful." Regulations  establishing  permissible  oil
     discharges are to be  "consistent with maritime safety
     and with marine  and navigation laws and regulations
     and applicable water quality standards." Such regula-
     tions are to determine "those quantities of oil the
     discharge of which,  at such times, locations, circum-
     stances, and conditions, will be harmful to the public
     health or welfare of the United States, including, but
     not limited to, fish, wildlife, and public and private
     property, shorelines, and beaches."
    33 U.S.C.A., 1160. The pertinent provisions of the 1965 Act
are set forth in the Appendix hereto at pages i and ii.

   2
    Louisiana Water Quality Criteria and Plan for Implementation.

    The pertinent  provisions of the Act are set forth  in the
Appendix hereto at pages iii-v.
    Section 1 l(a) defines oil to mean "oil of any kind or in any
form, including, but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil
refuse, and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged spoil."
2. Any person in charge of a vessel or of an onshore or
   offshore facility  shall immediately notify the  U.S.
   Coast  Guard  of  any discharge  of oil  in harmful
   quantities. Failure to make immediate  notification
   shall be subject to fine of not more than $10,000, or
   imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.

3. Any owner or operator of any vessel, onshore facility
   or  offshore  facility  from  which oil  is  knowingly
   discharged io  harmful quantities shall be assessed a
   civil penalty of  not  more than $10,000 for each
   offense. Each violation is a separate offense.

4. An owner or operator  of a vessel or offshore  or
   onshore facility  shall be liable to the United States
   Government for reimbursement of costs incurred in
   the removal of oil discharges up to limits for vessels
   of $100 per gross ton or $14 million, whichever is
   lesser,  and for onshore and offshore facilities up to
   $8 million. If it is established that a discharge was the
   result  of  willful  negligence or willful  misconduct
   within the privity and knowledge of the owner, the
   above limitations on liability shall not apply. Excep-
   tions to liability for clean-up costs are granted where
   an owner or operator can  prove the discharge was
   caused solely by (1) an act of God, (2) an act of war,
   (3) negligence on the  part  of  the  United  States
   Government, or (4) an  act or omission of a third
   party.  The  provisions of the Act with  respect  to
   clean-up cost and other  procedures do not apply to
   offshore  facilities on  the Outer Continental Shelf
   which are  covered separately by Interior Department
   regulations promulgated under the Outer Continental
   Shelf Lands Act and discussed in Section HI, infra.

5. Adoption  of a National Contingency Plan adminis-
   tered by the U.S. Coast Guard containing regulations
   prescribing methods and procedures for the removal
   and prevention of discharge of oil. Violations of such
   regulations are subject to a civil penalty of not more
   than $5,000 for each violation.

6. Establishment of  a $35 million revolving  fund  to
   cover costs incurred by the  Government in arranging
   for the removal of discharged oil (the  Government
   having the right to recover any such costs incurred
   from the discharging party within the limits described
   in Paragraph 3 above).

7. Any applicant  for a  federal license or permit  to
   conduct an activity which may result in the discharge
   of oil into the navigable  waters of the United States
   must provide the  licensing agency with a certificate
   from the  state in  which the discharge originates, or
   the applicable  interstate  water pollution control
   agency having jurisdiction,  that there  is  reasonable
   assurance  such activity  will  not violate applicable
   water  quality standards. The  proposed regulations
   under this provision (Vol. 36, Federal Register, No.

-------
                                                                                SUMMARY OF LAWS .  . .
      25, page 2516, et seq.} define "license or permit" to
      include leases for oil, minerals, or other exploitation.

   8. Abatement  actions  may be  initiated by a  U.S.
      Attorney if there is "an imminent  and substantial
      threat to the public health or welfare of the United
      States, including, but not limited to, fish, shellfish,
      and wildlife and public and private property, shore-
      lines and beaches" because of a threatened or actual
      discharge of oil.

   The  regulations  promulgated by  the  Secretary of the
Interior pursuant to Section 1 l(bX3) of the Water Quality
Improvement Act of  1970 define prohibited discharges of
oil in quantities harmful to the public health and welfare as
being those which "(a)  violate applicable water quality
standards, or (b) cause a film or sheen upon or discolora-
tion of the surface of water or adjoining shorelines or cause
a sludge or emulsion to be deposited beneath the surface of
the  water  or  upon   adjoining shorelines."  35  Federal
Register, 14307 (Sept. 11, 1970). Literally applied  such
regulations would prohibit all oil discharges since even small
quantities of oil under certain weather and water conditions
will produce a sheen or discoloration. Strict enforcement of
the regulations would  require shutting in substantial quanti-
ties of offshore oil production since minute quantities of oil
are contained in the discharges of brine produced with the
oil.

   Following the issuance  of the  Interior  Department
regulations defining "harmful quantities" of oil, petitions
were  filed by  a number of  major  producing companies
urging that such regulations be modified on the grounds of
the impracticality and unworkability  of the "sheen"  stan-
dard. The  petitions pointed out that to the extent  such
regulations prohibited all discharges of oil they  were in
conflict  with  the  legislative  history  of the  Act which
contemplated that certain controlled discharges would be
permitted if they  were consistent with  applicable  state
water quality  standards, rules and regulations. Authority
for  the  administration of  the Federal  Water  Quality
Improvement Act was transferred to  the Environmental
Protection Agency on December 1, 1970 and as of the time
this paper was prepared such Agency had not acted on the
pending petitions.

III. Interior Department - Outer Continental
Shelf Regulations
   On August  22, 1969, the Interior Department promul-
gated regulations under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands
Act, 43 U.S.C.  1331  et seq., governing oil and gas leasing
operations  on the Outer Continental Shelf (30 CFR, Part
250 et seq; 43 CFR, Part  3380, et seq.}. These regulations
provide for, inter alia:
   1.  full consideration of all environmental factors by the
      Interior Department before determining to offer oil,
      gas and mineral leases for sale,
   2.  suspension of any producing operation which in the
      judgment of  the U.S. Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.)
      threatens the environment,
   3. prior review and approval by the U.S.G.S. of all plans
      for exploration, drilling and  development  for  the
      prevention of pollution, blow-outs and leakage,
   4. prompt reporting of leakage or spills to the Coast
      Guard, EPA and the U.S.G.S.,
   5. Imposition  of  obligations  upon the lessee  for  the
      control and total removal of any pollutant damaging
      or threatening  to damage, aquatic  life, wildlife, or
      public or private property.

   The  Water Quality Improvement Act  of 1970 is not
applicable to offshore facilities in the Contiguous Zone (the
area seaward from the boundary of state ownership to  the
12-mile limit) and such operations are controlled by  the
Interior Department regulations set forth above.

IV.  Refuse  Act of 1899
   The Refuse Act of 1899,5  although originally intended
to prevent navigational obstruction, has been used increas-
ingly in the  pollution area. In essence the statute prohibits,
among other things,  the discharge of refuse matter of any
kind into the navigable waters of the United States or their
tributaries, from any vessel or other floating craft, from  the
shore, or from a wharf, manufacturing establishment or mill
of any kind. The prohibition does not  apply  to refuse
flowing from streets or sewers in a liquid  state. Violations
are misdemeanors punishable  by a  $500 to  $2,500 fine
and/or imprisonment for up to one year. Under a literal
reading of the statute, if the Secretary of the Army believes
that a particular discharge will not injure navigation, he
may permit  said discharge under such limits and conditions
as are prescribed by him.

   The  1899 Act appears to affect the  problem of oil
discharges in the following manner:
   1. The 1899  Act was not superseded by the Water
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, although some persons
have attempted—without  success—to convince the courts
otherwise6.   The  statute  and  case law  relating  thereto
therefore  are still applicable  to oil discharges,  both of
accidental and chronic origin.
   2. Case law  has   extended the  concept  of  "refuse"
beyond  waste  materials  to  valuable  products,  such as
gasoline7.
   3. Case law also has extended relief under the statute
beyond the  above-mentioned  criminal sanctions to injunc-
tive  relief in  a civil action8. Therefore, although the Water
Quality Improvement Act of 1970 did  not  provide  for
injunctive relief against discharges of oil in harmful quanti-
ties, except  with respect to discharges determined by  the
     33 U.S.C.A. 407. The full text of the Act is set forth in the
 Appendix hereto at page vii.

   617.5.  v. Vulcan Materials Co.,  2 ERC 1145 (D.N.J. Sept  24,
 1970).

   7U.S. v. Standard Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224 (1966).
   8E.G., U.S.  v. Republic Steel Corp., 286 F.2d 875 (6th Cir.
 1961); U.S. v. Florida Power & Light Co., 311 F. Supp. 1391 (D.
 Fla. 1970).

-------
       LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
President as creating an imminent and substantial threat to
the public health or welfare, the Government can utilize the
1899 Act to obtain such relief.
   4. It has  been argued  that  industrial  discharges  con-
taining oil but not  solids are not  prohibited by the 1899
Act because such discharges flow from "sewers" and the
statute exempts refuse flowing from sewers in a liquid state.
Existing case  law, however, has  interpreted the exemption
as being limited to domestic—as distinguished from industri-
al—sewage9.
   5. The Department of the Army, in coordination with
the  Environmental Protection Agency, has commenced a
federal permit program for industrial discharges under the
statute,  and  has adopted  regulations to implement  that
program. All  facilities  affected by the permit program are
to apply  for such permits no later than July 1,  1971. The
primary  issue  to  be determined  in  processing permit
applications is whether a  specific  discharge is  consistent
with "applicable water quality standards and related water
quality considerations, including environmental values re-
flected in water quality  standards."  This criterion, the
determination of  which is to  be  in  the  hands of the
Environmental Protection Agency  rather than  the Army
Corps of Engineers,  allows the  federal  authorities to go
beyond the state certification of compliance with water
quality standards that must be provided to the federal
authorities  in order  for  a  permit to issue10.  Yet  no
standards whatever  are provided in the 1899 Act (which
speaks in the  context of obstructions to navigation) or the
regulations as the basis under which the federal determina-
tion on this  issue  is  to  be made. With  respect to  oil
discharges, the regulations may provide some clearer guid-
ance,  in  that they  also state   that "no permit will be
issued.. .for discharges or deposits of harmful quantities of
oil, as defined pursuant to Section 11 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act." Presumably the standards to be
observed regarding oil contained in the discharges subject to
the permit program are to be established by the anticipated
revision by EPA of the regulations originally promulgated
by the Interior Department  (see Sec.  II,  supra)  defining
"harmful"  discharges  of  oil  pursuant  to the  aforesaid
Section 11 of the 1970 Act. Until  that revision is adopted,
         v. Vulcan Materials Co., op. cit. supra. See also U.S. v.
Republic Steel Corp., op. cit. supra.

   10In a tetter to the Editor of the New York Times dated March
24, 1971, William D. Ruckelshaus, Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, outlined the circumstances in which the
agency would override state certification:
     "White encouraging the fullest assumption of responsibil-
  ity by state agencies, E.P.A. will override state recommenda-
  tions and apply appropriate water quality standards in these
  key cases:
     Where no state standard exists, or where  existing state
  standards contain loopholes.
     Where hazardous or toxic materials are discharged.
     Where state water quality  standards are inadequate to
  protect valuable fish and wildlife or their habitats.
     In any case where the applicable state standard is so weak
  as to be inconsistent with the purposes of the Federal Water
  Pollution Control Act"
however, applicants will be without any means of determin-
ing whether de minimis amounts of oil contained in their
discharges will be a basis for rejecting their applications.
   6. The  scope  of  the  1899 Act prohibition clearly  is
limited to "discharges from vessels and other floating craft,
from the shore, and from wharfs, manufacturing establish-
ments,  and mills  of  any kind."  Therefore,  neither the
statute nor the regulations can legitimately be extended to
certain  categories  of petroleum  operations, such  as dis-
charges or deposits from drilling or  production facilities
operating offshore or in inland waters, except to the extent
that  such  facilities discharge  refuse from a shoreline or
wharf11. Nevertheless, the aforesaid regulations implement-
ing the permit program  do not  appear to recognize this
limitation. Instead they explicitly state that the  1899 Act is
considered to  apply  to all  discharges or deposits into a
navigable  waterway   or  tributary,  although  for   policy
reasons discharges from and into certain government waste
treatment  systems, and  discharges  from ships  and other
watercraft, are  excluded from the permit program. This
point of controversy  has  not, to my knowledge, been dealt
with by the courts as of the date of this writing.
 V. State Oil Pollution Legislation
    1970 was a year of significant legislative activity on the
 state, as well as federal, level with respect to oil pollution.
 Four   states—Florida,   Maine,   Massachusetts  and
 Washington—enacted  far-reaching oil pollution statutes12.
 Those statutes, which apply to oil spills from vessels and
 other facih'ties located within the coastal waters and other
 areas of jurisdiction  of  the respective states, provide for
 strict liability, without proof of negligence, not  only for
 reimbursement of state-incurred clean-up costs, but also for
 damages to the environment and to third parties. The state
 statutes contain no defenses from strict liability, except for
 Washington, which provides relief from strict liability if it
 can be  established  that the discharge  was caused by an act
 of war  or by negligence on  the part  of the federal or state
 government. The state statutes also differ from the federal
 statute in that such liability is unlimited in amount. Other
 far-reaching provisions contained  in  some of  the state
 statutes include: (1)  extending liability beyond the vessel
 operator to the cargo owner (Mass.), (2) extending liability
 to  the terminal  operator  for discharges from  vessels
 approaching  or leaving  said  terminals (Maine),  and (3)
 imposing a terminal license fee of one-half cent barrel of oil
 transferred (Maine).
      Such discharges, however, are regulated by the Water Quality
  Improvement  Act and  Interior Department OCS  regulations dis-
  cussed in Sections II and III, supra.

    12Florida  Oil Spill Prevention and Pollution  Act; Maine Oil
  Discharge Prevention and Pollution Control Act, 16 Me. Rev. Stat
  §§541 et seq.; Mass.  Clean Waters Act; Wash. Water Pollution
  Control Act, RCWA Ch. 90.48 et. seq.

-------
                                                                                 SUMMARY OF LAWS .  . .
    The  efforts of various states to superimpose their own
 (and  often  duplicative)  statutory schemes  upon prior
 obligations created  by federal law  are a matter of serious
 concern for  the  petroleum,  marine and  other  industries.
 The question of whether and the extent to which prior
 federal  action in the pollution field may have preempted or
 otherwise Constitutionally bar  the states  from enacting
 pollution legislation is  a matter presently  under judicial
 consideration in lawsuits challenging the  constitutionality
 of the  Florida and  Maine statutes. As of April 1, 1970,
 court orders  were in effect restraining the enforcement of
 the Florida statute  and certain essential provisions of the
 Maine statute, pending a full  hearing on the constitutional-
 ity of this legislation.

 VI. Pending Federal Legislation
    Numerous bills designed  to strengthen existing  federal
 water pollution  legislation have been introduced in Con-
 gress this year.  Foremost among  them, perhaps, are  the
 Administration  bill  introduced by Senator  Cooper  (S.
 1014), and the bill introduced by Senator Muskie (S. 523).

    By looking at both bills, it is possible to anticipate  the
 types of substantive changes which may  occur  in  federal
 water pollution legislation in the near future.

   Amendments can  be foreseen to Section 10 of the Water
 Pollution  Control  Act  to  provide for uniform national
 federal water  quality criteria and effluent standards, as well
 as federally  recommended  pollution  control  techniques
 based on the  latest technology and  economic feasibility of
 alternate methods of control. The  states  may be given 9
 months  to a year  in  which to submit  to EPA,  for its
 approval, procedures and plans to  implement, administer
 and enforce such national standards. New  facilities may be
 required to be constructed with the latest available pollu-
 tion control techniques and certified as to compliance with
 applicable water quality standards. Violations will  be
 subject  to very  severe  monetary  penalties,  as well  as
 abatement, and,  additionally, may be the  basis for  citizen
 suits as well as actions commenced by EPA.
APPENDIX
Pertinent Provisions of 1965 Act Amendments
To Water Pollution Control Act
   SEC.  10.  (a) The pollution of interstate or navigable
waters in or  adjacent to any State or States (whether the
matter causing or  contributing to such pollution is  dis-
charged directly into such waters or reaches such waters
after  discharge into a  tributary  of  such  waters), which
endangers the health or welfare  of any persons,  shall be
subject to abatement as provided in this Act.
   (b) Consistent with the policy declaration of this Act,
State  and interstate action to abate pollution of interstate
or navigable  waters shall  be  encouraged  and shall not,
except as otherwise provided by or pursuant to court order
under subsection (h), be displaced by Federal enforcement
action.
          If the Governor of  a  State  or a State water
 pollution control agency  files,  within one year after the
 date of enactment of this  subsection, a letter of intent that
 such State, after public hearings, will before June 30,1967,
 adopt (A)  water quality  criteria applicable to interstate
 waters or portions thereof within such State, and (B) a plan
 for  the implementation and enforcement of  the water
 quality criteria  adopted, and  if such criteria and  plan are
 established  in accordance  with  the letter of intent, and if
 the Secretary determines that such State criteria and plan
 are consistent with paragraph (3) of this subsection, such
 State criteria and plan shall thereafter be the water quality
 standards applicable to  such interstate waters or  portions
 thereof.
                        *  *   *
   (5) The  discharge of matter  into such interstate waters
 or  portions thereof,  which reduces the quality  of such
 waters below the water quality standards established under
 this subsection (whether the matter causing or contributing
 to such reduction is discharged directly into such waters or
 reaches such waters after discharge into tributaries of such
 waters),  is  subject  to  abatement  in  accordance  with the
 provisions of paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (g) of this
 section, except that at least 180  days before any abatement
 action is initiated  under  either paragraph (1)  or (2)  of
 subsection (g) as authorized by this subsection,  the Secre-
 tary shall notify the violators and other interested parties of
 the violation of such standards.  In any suit brought under
 the provisions of this subsection the  court shall receive in
 evidence a transcript of the proceedings  of the conference
 and hearing provided  for in this subsection, together with
 the recommendations of the conference and Hearing Board
 and the  recommendations and  standards promulgated by
 the Secretary, and such additional evidence, including that
 relating to the alleged violation of the standards, as it deems
 necessary to a complete review  of the standards and to a
 determination of all other issues relating to the  alleged
violation. The  court,   giving due consideration  to the
practicability and to the physical and economic feasibility
 of complying with such standards, shall have jurisdiction to
enter such judgment and orders enforcing such judgment as
the public interest and the equities of the case may require.
                        *   *    *
   (g) If action  reasonably calculated to  secure abatement
of the pollution within the time specified in the notice
following the public hearing is not taken, the Secretary-
    (1)  in  the  case of  pollution  of  waters  which  is
   endangering the health or welfare of persons in a State
   other  than that  in  which  the  discharge or discharges
   (causing  or  contributing to  such  pollution)  originate,
   may  request  the Attorney  General to bring  a suit on
   behalf of the United States  to  secure abatement of
   pollution, and
    (2)  in  the  case  of  pollution  of  waters  which  is
   endangering the health or welfare of persons only in the
   State  in  which the discharge or discharges (causing or
   contributing to such pollution) originate, may, with the
   written consent of the Governor of such State, request
   the Attorney General to bring  a suit  on behalf of the
   United States to secure abatement of the pollution.

-------
       LAWS AND  ENFORCEMENT
Pertinent Provisions of 1970 Act
Amendments To Water Pollution Control Act
Section ll(b)
   (1) The Congress hereby declares that it is the policy of
the United States that there should be no discharges of oil
into or upon the navigable waters of the United States,
adjoining  shorelines,  or  into  or  upon the waters of the
contiguous zone.
   (2) The discharge or oil  into or upon the navigable
waters of the United States, adjoining shorelines, or into or
upon the waters  of the  contiguous zone  in harmful
quantities as determined by the President under paragraph
(3) of this subsection, is prohibited, except (A) in the case
of such discharges into the waters of the contiguous zone,
where permitted  under article  IV  of  the  International
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by
Oil,  1954,  as  amended,  and  (B)   where permitted in
quantities  and  at times  and locations or  under  such
circumstances or  conditions  as the  President may, by
regulation, determine not to be harmful. Any regulations
issued under this subsection shall  be  consistent  with
maritime  safety  and with marine and navigation laws and
regulations and applicable water quality standards.
   (3) The President shall, by regulation, to be issued as
soon  as  possible  after  the  date of enactment of this
paragraph, determine for the purposes of this section, those
quantities  of oil the discharge of which, at  such  times,
locations,  circumstances, and conditions, will be harmful to
the public health or welfare of the United States, including,
but not limited to, fish, shellfish, wildlife, and public and
private property, shorelines, and beaches, except that in the
case of the discharge of oil into or upon the waters of the
contiguous zone, only those discharges which threaten the
fishery resources  of the contiguous  zone or  threaten to
pollute or contribute to the pollution of the territory or the
territorial  sea of the United States may be determined to be
harmful.
   (4) Any person in charge of a vessel or of an onshore
facility  or an offshore  facility shall, as soon as he has
knowledge of any  discharge  of oil from such vessel or
facility in  violation of paragraph (2)  of this subsection,
immediately  notify the appropriate agency of the United
States Government of such discharge. Any such person who
fails to notify immediately such  agency of such discahrge
shall,  upon conviction, be fined not more than $10,000, or
imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. Notifica-
tion received pursuant to this paragraph or information
obtained by the exploitation of such  notification shall not
be used against any such person in any criminal case, except
a prosecution for perjury or for giving a false statement
   (5) Any  owner or  operator of any vessel, onshore
facility, or offshore  facility from which oil is knowingly
discharged in violation of paragraph (2) of this subsection
shall  be assessed  a civil  penalty  by  the  Secretary of the
department in which the Coast Guard is operating of not
more  than $10,000 for  each offense. No penalty shall be
assessed unless  the owner or  operator charged shall have
been given notice and opportunity for a hearing on such
charge. Each  violation is a separate offense. Any such civil
penalty  may be  compromised  by  such Secretary. In
determining the amount  of the  penalty, or the amount
agreed upon in compromise, the appropriateness of such
penalty to the size of the business of the owner or operator
charged, the effect on the owner or  operator's ability to
continue in business, and the gravity of the violation, shall
be  considered  by such  Secretary.  The  Secretary of the
Treasury shall withhold at the request of such Secretary the
clearance  required by section 4197 of the Revised Statutes
of the United States, as amended (46 U.S.C. 91), of any
vessel  the owner or  operator of which  is subject to the
foregoing penalty. Clearance may be granted in such cases
upon the filing of a bond or other surety satisfactory to
such Secretary.
   (cXO Whenever any oil is discharged, into or upon the
navigable  waters of the United States, adjoining shorelines,
or into or upon the waters of the contiguous zone, the
President  is authorized to act to remove or arrange for the
removal of such oil at any time, unless he determines such
removal will be done  properly by the owner or operator of
the vessel, onshore facility, or offshore facility from which
the discharge occurs.

Section 11 (e)
   (e)  In  addition to  any other action taken by a State or
local government, when the President determines there is an
imminent and  substantial threat to the public health or
welfare of the United States, including, but not limited to,
fish, shellfish, and wildlife and public and private property,
shorelines, and beaches within the United States, because of
an actual or threatened discharge of  oil into or upon the
navigable  waters of the United States from an  onshore or
offshore  facility, the President may require the United
States  attorney of the district in which the threat occurs to
secure  such relief as may be necessary to  abate such threat,
and  the  district  courts  of the United  States shall have
jurisdiction to grant such relief as the public interest and
the equities of the case may require.
   (fXO  Except where an  owner  or operator can prove
that a  discharge was caused solely by (A) an act of God, (B)
an  act of war, (C) negligence  on the part  of  the United
States  Government, or (D)  an  act or omission of a third
party  without regard  to whether any such act or omission
was or was not negligent,  or  any combination of the
foregoing clauses,  such owner  or operator of any vessel
from  which  oil is discharged  in violation of subsection
(bX2)  of this  section  shall, notwithstanding  any other,
provision  of law, be liable to the United States Government
for the actual costs incurred under subsection  (c) for the
removal of such oil by the United States Government in an
amount not to exceed $100 per gross ton of such vessel or
$14,000,000, whichever is lesser, except that  where the
United States can show that such discharge was the result
of  willful negligence or willful misconduct within the
privity and  knowledge  of  the  owner,  such  owner  or
operator shall be liable  to the United States Government
for  the   full  amount  of such  costs.   Such   costs  shall
constitute a maritime lien on  such vessel which may be
recovered in an action in rem in the district court of the
United States for any district within which any vessel may
be  found. The  United States  may also bring an action

-------
                                                                                 SUMMARY  OF  LAWS  . . .
 against the owner or operator of such vessel in any court of
 competent jurisdiction to recover such costs.
   (2) Except where an owner or operator of an onshore
 facility can prove that a discharge was caused solely by (A)
 an act of God, (B) an act of war, (C) negligence on the part
 of the United States Government, or (D) an act or omission
 of a third party without regard to whether any such act or
 omission was or was not negligent, or any combination of
 the foregoing clauses, such owner or operator of any such
 facility  from  which  oil  is  discharged  in violation of
 subsection  (bX2)  of  this  section shall  be liable to  the
 United States  Government for the actual costs incurred
 under subsection (c) for  the  removal  of such  oil by  the
 United States Government in an amount not  to  exceed
 $8,000,000, except that where the United States can show
 that such discharge was the result of willful negligence or
 willful misconduct within the privity and knowledge of the
 owner, such owner or operator shall be  liable to the United
 States Government for the full amount of such costs. The
 United States may bring  an action against the  owner or
 operator  of such  facility in  any court of competent
 jurisdiction to recover such costs. The Secretary is autho-
 rized, by regulations, after consultation with the Secretary
 of Commerce and the Small  Business  Administration, to
 establish reasonable and  equitable classifications of those
 onshore facilities having a  total fixed storage capacity of
 1,000 barrels or  less which he determines because of size,
 type, and location do not present a substantial risk of the
 discharge of oil  in violation  of subsection (bX2) of this
 section,  and apply with respect to  such  classifications
 differing limits  of  liability which may be  less than the
 amount contained in this paragraph.
   (3) Except where an owner or operator of an offshore
 faculty can prove that a discharge was caused solely by (A)
 an act of God, (B) an act of war, (C) negligence on the part
 of the United States Government, or (D) an act or omission
 of a third party without regard to whether any such act or
 omission was or was not negligent, or any combination of
 the foregoing clauses, such owner  or operator of any such
 facility  from  which oil  is discharged,  in  violation  of
 subsection (bX2)  of this section shall, notwithstanding any
 other  provision  of  law, be liable to  the United  States
 Government for the actual costs incurred under subsection
 (c) for the removal of such  oil by  the United  States
 Government in  an  amount not  to exceed $8,000,000,
 except that where  the United  States  can show  that such
 discharge was the  result  of willful negligence or  willful
 misconduct within the privity and knowledge of the owner,
 such owner or operator shall be liable to the United States
Government for the  full amount of such costs. The United
 States may bring an action against the owner or operator of
 such a facility in any  court of competent jurisdiction to
 recover such costs.

Section 21(b)(l)
   (bXO Any applicant for a Federal license or permit to
conduct  any activity including, but  not limited to,  the
construction or operation of facilities, which may result in
any discharge  into  the navigable waters  of the United
States, shall provide the licensing or permitting agency a
 certification from  the State in which the discharge origi-
 nates  or  will  originate,  or,  if  appropriate,  from  the
 interstate water pollution control agency having jurisdiction
 over the navigable  waters at the point where the discharge
 originates  or will originate, that there is  reasonable assur-
 ance, as determined by the State or interstate agency that
 such activity will be conducted in a manner which will not
 violate  applicable water quality standards. Such State or
 interstate  agency  shall  establish  procedures  for public
 notice in the case of all applications for certification by it,
 and to the extent it deems  appropriate, procedures for
 public hearings in connection with  specific applications. In
 any case where such standards have been promulgated by
 the Secretary pursuant  to section 10(c) of this Act, or
 where a State or interstate agency has no authority to give
 such a  certification, such certification shall be  from the
 Secretary.  If the State, interstate agency, or Secretary, as
 the case may be, fails or  refuses to  act  on a request for
 certification, within a reasonable period of time (which
 shall not exceed one year)  after receipt of such request, the
 certification requirements of this subsection shall be waived
 with respect to such Federal  application.  No  license or
 permit  shall be  granted until the certification required by
 this section has been  obtained or  has  been waived as
 provided in the preceding sentence. No license  or permit
 shall be granted if certification has  been denied by  the
 State, interstate agency, or the Secretary, as the case may
 be.


 Pertinent Provisions of Interior Department Outer
 Continental Shelf Lands Act Regulations
 §250.43 Pollution and waste disposal.
   (a) The lessee shall not pollute land or water or damage
 the aquatic life of  the sea or allow extraneous matter to
 enter and damage any mineral- or water-bearing formation.
 The lessee shall dispose of all  liquid  and nonliquid waste
 materials  as prescribed  by the  supervisor. All  spills  or
 leakage  of oil or waste materials shall be recorded by the
 lessee and, upon request of the supervisor, shall be reported
 to him.  All spills or  leakage of a substantial size or quantity,
 as defined  by the  supervisor, and those of  any size  or
 quantity which cannot be immediately controlled also shall
 be reported by  the lessee without  delay to the supervisor
 and to  the Coast Guard and the Regional Director of the
 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. All spills
 or leakage  of oil or waste materials of a size or quantity
 specified by the designee under the pollution contingency
 plan shall also be reported by  the lessee without delay to
 such designee.

   (b) If the waters  of the sea are polluted by the drilling or
 production  operations conducted by or on behalf of  the
lessee, and such pollution damages or threatens to damage
 aquatic  life, wildlife, or public  or private  property,  the
 control  and total removal of the  pollutant, wheresoever
 found,  proximately resulting  therefrom  shall  be at  the
expense of the lessee. Upon failure  of the lessee to control
 and remove the pollutant  the  supervisor, in cooperation
with other appropriate agencies of the Federal, State and

-------
 10
LAWS AND  ENFORCEMENT
local governments, 01 in cooperation with the lessee, or
both,  shall have the right to accomplish the control  and
removal of the pollutant in accordance with any established
contingency plan for combating oil spills or by other means
at the cost of the lessee. Such action shall not relieve the
lessee of any responsibility as provided herein.
   (c) The lessee's liability to third parties, other than for
cleaning up the  pollutant in accordance with paragraph (b)
of this section shall be governed by applicable law.

Refuse Act of 1899
   It shall not be lawful to throw, discharge, or deposit, or
cause,  suffer,  or procure  to be  thrown, discharged, or
deposited either from or out of any  ship, barge, or other
floating craft of any kind, or  from  the  shore, wharf,
manufacturing establishment, or mill of any kind,  any
refuse  matter  of any kind or description whatever other
than that  flowing from  streets  and sewers  and passing
therefrom in a liquid state, into any navigable water of the
United States, or into any tributary of any navigable water
from  which the  same shall float or be washed into such
                                                    navigable water; and it shall not be lawful to deposit, or
                                                    cause, suffer, or procure to be deposited material of any
                                                    kind in any place on the bank of any navigable water, or on
                                                    the bank of any tributary of any navigable water, where the
                                                    same shall be liable to be washed into such navigable water,
                                                    either by ordinary or high tides, or by storms of floods, or
                                                    otherwise, whereby navigation  shall or may be impeded or
                                                    obstructed: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall
                                                    extend to, apply to,- or prohibit the operations in connec-
                                                    tion with public works, considered necessary and proper by
                                                    the United States officers supervising such improvement or
                                                    public work: And provided further, That the Secretary of
                                                    the Army, whenever in the judgment of  the  Chief of
                                                    Engineers anchorage and navigation will not be  injured
                                                    thereby,  may permit the deposit  of any material above
                                                    mentioned in navigable waters, within limits to be defined
                                                    and under conditions to be prescribed by him, provided
                                                    application  is  made  to him prior to depositing  such
                                                    material; and whenever any  permit  is so  granted the
                                                    conditions thereof shall be strictly complied with, and any
                                                    violation thereof shall be unlawful.

-------
                OIL  POLLUTION  CONTROL  LEGISLATION
               AND THE WATER QUALITY  IMPROVEMENT
               ACT  OF  1970,   THE   FEDERAL  VIEWPOINT
                                         K.E. Biglane and R.H. Wyer
                                    Division of Oil and Hazardous Materials
                                            Water Quality Office
                                      Environmental Protection Agency..
ABSTRACT
    The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 was
enacted and signed into law on April 3, 1970. This Act
provides the mechanism for strong Federal actions relating
to oil removal, prevention and enforcement. This paper
discusses the most significant provisions of the Act and
describes  the  Federal  point of view  relating to key
provisions.  Emphasis is placed on the rationale behind the
designation of a harmful quantity of oil, the impact of the
notification  requirement,  adequacy  of oil  removal
procedures,  prevention  of spills, and  enforcement
provisions.

INTRODUCTION
    It is significant to note that oil, as a specific polluter of
water, received early attention by the Congress with the
passage of the Oil Pollution Act of 1924. Although the
Refuse Act of 1899 (33  U.S.C.A. 407) is generally regarded
as the forerunner of water pollution control legislation in
this country, the discharge of oil into navigable water was
not declared a violation under this statute until 1936 (La
Merced, 84F. 2d 444). It is also significant to note that the
prohibitive section of these two statutes did not specify the
amounts of  oil  (or refuse) which, when  discharged,
constituted a violation although under the  1924 Act the
Secretary  of War  (and later on, the Secretary of the
Interior) were authorized to prescribe permissible limits for
discharge.
    Violators of the  1924 Act were assessed a criminal
penalty of no more that $2,500. The Act was moderately
successful from the standpoint of taking punitive action
against a discharger but the environment still suffered the
impact of potentially toxic, oily materials. In recognition of
this, Congress amended the 1924 Act in 1966 and required
the violator to remove the oil from the navigable waters. If
the discharger failed to do so the Federal government was
authorized to take action and seek reimbursement for the
cost of cleanup.  Thus, the concept  of  environmental
protection through direct   cleanup actions  was clearly
established. The punitive section  of the Act was weakened,
however, by  requiring  proof of  willful  discharge. The
general attitude of the violator  to this legislation was to
totally disclaim knowledge of the spill and this resulted in
increased numbers in the mystery spill category. Cleanup
efforts at  first were  minimal, however, response  to spill
incidents increased  significantly  with ihe  advent of
chemical  emulsifiers.  This  technique was  touted as a
cleanup method which could quickly remove the oil "from
the public's eye." The method was portrayed as simple, fast
and an easy remedy but it also permitted the oil to remain
in  the  environment with  a  potential for  significantly
affecting vital marine resources. Suddenly, a new dimension
was added to the oil pollution problem - that is, the proper
method of treatment or removal of an oil spill from water
in  order  to  protect  the   aquatic  biota,  beaches and
waterfowl. In recognition of this problem, industry and the
Federal government began ambitious research programs to
devise better methods to contain and cleanup oil spills and
to try and  restore  the environment  once it became
despoiled.

    For the three years following the TORREY CANYON,
emphasis was placed on oil cleanup, new removal methods
and  techniques,  contingency  planning  and   cleanup
cooperatives. State legislation and local ordinances began to
evolve with emphasis in these areas but the number of spills
continued  to  increase,  unknown  sources were
commonplace, and only  punitive action through the 1899
Refuse Act was available to the government to curb the
                                                  11

-------
12
LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
now increasing  oil pollution  problem. Also,  during  this
period  an  additional  dimension emerged - an  almost
overpowering public concern over the impact of water and
air pollution on our environment.

Water Quality Improvement Act 1970
    In recognition of the deficiencies of existing legislation,
the need for effective enforcement, additional  liability for
vessels and facilities, and methods to prevent the discharge
of oil, the Water Quality Improvement Act was enacted and
subsequently signed into law on April 3, 1970. The most
significant provisions of Section 11 of the Act state that:
   a.  The  Federal  government established by regulation
      that quantity of oil determined to be harmful.
   b.  A person  in  charge of  a vessel,.or  an  onshore or
      offshore facility who fails to immediately notify the
      appropriate Federal agency of a harmful discharge of
      oil, can upon  conviction  be fined up to $10 thousand
      or imprisoned for one year or both.
   c.  The owner or operator of a vessel, or an onshore or
      offshore  facility  from which oil  is  knowingly
      discharged can be assessed a civil penalty of up to
      $10,000 for each offense.
   d.  The owner or operator of a vessel which  discharges a
      harmful quantity of oil can be held liable to the U.S.
      Government for cleanup  costs in an  amount not to
      exceed $100  per  gross  ton  of the  vessel or  $14
      million, whichever is less.
   e.  The  owner or.operator  of an onshore facility or
      offshore facility which discharges a  harmful quantity
      of oil can be held liable for cleanup costs in an amount
      not to exceed $8 million.
   f. The Federal government may remove discharged oil
      from the navigable waters and the contiguous zone at
      any   time, unless  it  is  determined  the owner or
     operator is properly removing the discharged oil.
   g. The Federal government  will  prepare and  publish a
     National Contingency Plan  which  shall  provide for
      effective   action  to  minimize  damages  from oil
      discharges  including surveillance  systems,
      containment  methods,  removal  procedures, and  a
      schedule designating use of dispersants.
   h.  The Federal government may remove or destroy a
      vessel involved in a marine disaster in navigable waters
      and take action against onshore and offshore facilities
      which present  an  imminent and substantial oil
      pollution threat.
   i.  The   Federal government  shall  issue  regulations
      establishing methods and procedures for the removal
      of oil; procedures, methods  and requirements for
      equipment to prevent discharges; and, governing the
      inspection of vessels carrying cargoes of oil.
   j.  The owner or operator of a vessel  or an onshore or
      offshore  facility  who   fails  to comply with  the
      provisions of the  regulations shall  be liable to civil
                                                         penalty of  not more than  $5 thousand  for  each
                                                         violation.
                                                       k. The owner or operator of vessels over three hundred
                                                         gross  tons  shall  provide  evidence of  financial
                                                         responsibility  of $100 per gross ton of the vessel or
                                                         $14 million  whichever is the lesser.

                                                    Harmful Discharge
                                                        The first and most  significant task facing the Federal
                                                    government after  passage of the Act was to define, under
                                                    Section 11, that quantity of oil that is harmful  to public
                                                    health and welfare. The definition of a harmful quantity
                                                    was the key to  activating the operational  provisions  of
                                                    Section  11.  The  widespread spills resulting from the
                                                    TORREY  CANYON,  the OCEAN  EAGLE  and the Santa
                                                    Barbara blowout were obviously harmful discharges but the
                                                    chronic, small discharges from both onshore and offshore
                                                    facilities are less obvious and, are believed to have the most
                                                    serious and long term  effects on the environment. Because
                                                    of the far  reaching impact  of this regulation a discussion of
                                                    the rationale used to define that quantity is important. The
                                                    nation's  of  the  world, the  United States  Government,
                                                    individual  States  and  industry all  recognize the need  to
                                                    protect  the  environment, but  the degree  of protection
                                                    considered adequate by each is highly variable.
                                                        The amendments to the  International Convention for
                                                    Prevention of Pollution  of  the  Seas by  Oil,  1954,  as
                                                    amended in 1962  and 1969, reflect the worldwide concern
                                                    for preventing damage to the oceans by petroleum and  its
                                                    by-products. The principal  changes affecting tankers specify
                                                    that:
                                                       a. The instantaneous rate of discharge  of oil content
                                                         does not exceed 60 litres per mile.
                                                       b. The total quantity  of oil  discharged on a ballast
                                                         voyage  does  not  exceed  1/15,000  of   the  total
                                                         cargo-carrying   capacity.
                                                       c. The tanker  is more  than  50 miles  from the  nearest
                                                         land when discharging.
                                                        The  amendments of  the Convention also  state that
                                                    these  provisions do not apply to  the discharge  of ballast
                                                    from tanks so cleaned that the effluent would produce  no
                                                    visible traces of oil on the surface of clean calm water on a
                                                    clear day.
                                                        At the Brussels NATO meeting in 1970, the United
                                                    States took the initiative and achieved wide international
                                                    support for terminating all  intentional discharges  of oil and
                                                    oily wastes from ships into the ocean by  1970, if possible,
                                                    and by no later than the end of this decade. The intent of
                                                    these agreements is to  eliminate the discharge of oil into the
                                                    high seas.
                                                        In  1965,  the  Federal  Water  Pollution Control
                                                    Administration  initiated an  intensive  program  to define
                                                    limits of toxic materials and other pollutants to the aquatic
                                                    biota. With the passage of the Water Quality Act of 1965,
                                                    the Secretary of the Interior  established the National
                                                    Technical Advisory Committee on Water Quality Criteria.

-------
                                                                    LEGISLATION AND THE ACT OF 1970
                                                     13
The  subcommittee  for Fish, Other Aquatic  Life and
Wildlife consisting of 29 scientists and leaders of the field
recommend the following be adopted:
     "Until  more  information  on the  chemistry and
     toxicology of oil in sea water becomes available, the
     following  requirements  are recommended  for  the
     protection  of marine life. No  oil  or  petroleum
     products  should  be  discharged  into  estuarine  or
     coastal  waters  in quantities that (1) can be detected
     as  a  visible  film or  sheen, or by  odor,  (2) cause
     tainting of fish and/or edible invertebrates, (3) form
     an  oil-sludge deposit on the shores or bottom of the
     receiving  body of water, or  (4) become effective
     toxicants according to the  criteria recommended in
     the "Toxicity" section."
    The  subcommittee  for Recreation  and  Aesthetics
recommended,  among other criteria, that surface waters
should be free  of  substances attributable  to discharges of
waste such as floating debris, oil, scum and other matter. It
is also interesting  to note that the majority of the states
now include this criteria  under the  general  provisions
category of State  Water Quality Standards. Other sections
of the State Water Quality Standards prohibit the discharge
of toxic  materials; however, quantitative limits for oil and
some other toxic materials such as mercury have not been
established.
    With the passage  of the Water  Quality Act of 1970,
Congress delcared that  it was the  policy  of the United
States that there should be no discharges of oil into or upon
the  navigable  waters  of  the  United States,  adjoining
shorelines, or into or  upon the waters of the contiguous
zone  and  called  for  the  President to  issue  regulations
defining  that quantity  of oil which will  he harmful. The
regulations were published  on  September 11,1970. They
state  that a harmful discharge of oil is one which violates
applicable  Water Quality Standards or causes a sheen or
discoloration on the surface  of the water.
    The existing  regulations defining a harmful quantity
should not be  interpreted as being absolute.  Both the
Federal government and industry are expending research
funds  to  better  define the harmful effect  of oil. The
amount may vary  depending upon local conditions, type of
oil,  marine resources,  currents and other environmental
variables. Based upon evaluation of findings of studies now
underway, prohibited  zones  should be  established  and
upgraded State Water  Quality  Standards  should  specify
toxic limits on oils and toxic materials, s,
Notification
    The next most impacting section of the Law deals with
the reporting of the  discharge of a harmful quantity of oil
to  the U.S. Coast  Guard  and/or EPA if inland  waters.
Failure to immediately notify would subject the discharger
to a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment  for
not  more  than one  year. How small of a quantity, what
type of oil, and how rapidly must  the violator report  are
the more significant  questions which have been raised. Any
quantity of  oil which violates water quality standards or
produces a sheen  or emulsion or sludge must be reported.
All  forms  of oil  including crudes, refined petroleum
products,  natural  oils, greases  and  sludges  excepting
dredged spoil must be reported.  The time frame  within
which the report must be made is  variable depending upon
circumstances. Anything other than immediate notification
would  require documentation by  the violation as to the
circumstance  surrounding  the   delay. Our  office  has
differentiated between those  materials considered to be oil
and those designated  as hazardous  materials.  This
differentiation is based  upon three considerations. These
involve  whether or not a  material  is petroleum derived,
whether  or not it is extractable by organic solvent or
whether or not the material's chemical structure is defined.
    It has been argued that the purpose of notification is to
ensure  immediate cleanup and that a thin sheen of oil could
be  caused by a small quantity of oil which would  not
warrent cleanup actions. In exploring this it has been found
that as little as 50 gallons per square mile would produce a
sheen and could be difficult to remove utilizing mechanical
means. However, if left unattended damages from such an
amount could result  to boats, high value shore areas, to
waterfowl and other  wildlife, and to the  aquatic biota. It
has  been  reported that when  oil  from  the plumage of
mallard ducks was coated  on eggs , hatching success  was
reduced from 80 to 21  percent. It also has been reported
that oil slicks and  oil sludge  tend  to concentrate pesticides
which  could have  additional  serious effects on the aquatic
biota.  Each incident must be evaluated to determine what
clean  up  actions  are  required  and  this  can  only  be
accomplished with immediate notification of the discharge
of a harmful quantity of oil.

Removal
    The new Act clearly states that if the violator fails to
act to  remove the oil he is liable  to the U.S. Government
for actual  cost incurred for cleanup of oil discharged in
violation of the harmful discharged regulations. Emphasis
on past spills has been to clean the beaches, clean the birds
if possible,  remove as much  of the floating oil as possible
and hope for the environment to absorb the greater portion
of the  oil. New priorities and a new insistance on cleanup
are being developed. EPA will be providing guidelines on
procedure for determining if the  discharger has properly
cleaned up  the  spilled oil. The  word  "clean" needs
clarification and a rationale  will be developed so that the
Federal government and the violator can determine if all
harmful quantities of oil have been removed. Consideration
will need to be given to local  environmental conditions, the
ecology and  the  available  technology in assessing  the
effectiveness of the cleanup operation. In  accordance  with
the Act, regulations establishing methods and procedures
for removal of discharges are being developed which  will
delineate  the responsibilities of  the violator  to  ensure
proper removal of discharged oil.  The problem associated
with the use of emulsifying agents has been evaluated and
the regulations will  reflect the  current EPA position on
their use.  The regulation will cover specific items such as
proper disposal  of removed  oil and adequacy of cleanup
efforts.

-------
14
LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
Prevention

    The concern over what to report and how to cleanup
will become academic if aggressive preventive measures are
undertaken by  industry. Spills caused by human  error
account for up to 88 percent of the spill incidents reported
to us. Industry must develop training programs, procedural
manuals and operating regulations to reduce the number of
incidents. In addition, fail safe design concepts including
alarm systems,  automatic controls  and shut-off  devices
must be  developed.  Secondary control systems such as
dikes, catchment  areas and holding ponds may also be
necessary  to  prevent  discharges  from entering the
watercourses.  The nation's major  pipeline  systems
exemplify a highly mechanized and automated system using
fail safe design concept, automatic valves, pressure sensors
and other devices to minimize opportunities for  human
error.
    In  contrast to pipelines, vessel pilots must exercise
considerable  judgment to  navigate  the  sealanes,  port
approaches and inland waterways. Storms,  fog, lack of
channel markers are all contributing factors but improper
judgment  is the primary cause of accidents. Installation of
echo  ranging, depth  sounding devices, inertial guidance
systems, and other navigation aids could drastically reduce
the number of vessel collisions and groundings. The air craft
control and aerospace guidance  systems  have already
developed much  of  the  necessary  technology.
Governmental agencies and private industry can take this
available  knowledge and  through  additional  research,
interpolate it for vessel navigation controls. Additionally,
secondary control systems such as double bottoms, and
gelling of petroleum during transport should be considered.
    Reliance on equipment  and automatic control devices
necessitates new technology to prevent equipment failure.
Failure mode and effect analysis  concepts  which  were
highly developed in the space technology field should find
wide  use in the petroleum industry. This approach requires
close coordination  between  regulatory  agencies and the
private sector. Those responsible for design, operation, and
maintenance of transport systems should incorporate these
concepts into the early stages of development.
    The implementation of prevention design concepts and
procedures is  the  responsibility  of  private  industry.
However, promulgation of regulations and enforcement by
regulatory agencies is essential. Human error  cannot be
totally designed out of a system but aggressive enforcement
of existing laws will no doubt encourage the  employment
of alert, well trained operators.
    The  Water  Quality   Improvement Act includes
provisions for the prevention of discharges. Under Section
1 lj(l)(C) regulations  are required to establish procedures,
methods  and  requirements  for  equipment  to  prevent
discharges of  oil  from  vessels,  onshore and offshore
facilities.  These  regulations have been promulgated in
general terms and permit industry  and their consulting
engineer  considerable leniency to upgrade and improve
present systems. It has been argued that stringent detailed
                                                    regulations restrict the advancement of new technology and
                                                    concepts.  However,  it can  also be  argued that general
                                                    regulations would encourage minimal  designs  which just
                                                    meet the requirement. It is the intention of EPA to monitor
                                                    very  closely  the  advancement made in prevention and fail
                                                    safe design concepts and if sufficient progress is not made,
                                                    more  stringent  and  detailed regulations  will need to  be
                                                    promulgated. Additionally, if the provisions of the Water
                                                    Quality  Improvement Act  are  not sufficient  to develop
                                                    strong aggressive prevention  concepts, new legislation may
                                                    be necessary.

                                                    Enforcement
                                                       In addition  to prevention  concept to eliminate the
                                                    discharge of oil, an  aggressive enforcement program will
                                                    also serve as  a deterent to reduce the number of incidents.
                                                    The Act provides for seven significant actions which may be
                                                    taken against a  violator. It should be noted  that these
                                                    actions do not  affect  private legal  actions and do not
                                                    preempt state authority to  issue requirements  or liability
                                                    with  respect to  the discharge  of oil  into state waters.
                                                    Federal action may be taken as follows:
                                                      a. Failure to notify of harmful discharge.
                                                      b. Deliberate discharge.
                                                      c. Cost for removal of vessel involved in marine disaster.
                                                      d. Relief against owner or operators of onshore/offshore
                                                         facility present imminent substantial threat.
                                                      e.  Recovery of cleanup cost.
                                                      f.  Violation of removal regulations.
                                                      g.  Violation of prevention regulations.
                                                       These provisions will be enforced either through legal
                                                    actions by United States Attorney in U.S. District Courts or
                                                    through  administrative  hearing procedures  established by
                                                    EPA  and the Coast Guard. Investigation and evidence will
                                                    be collected by EPA  and Coast Guard. Additional staff has
                                                    been  placed in each EPA region  to carry out spill response,
                                                    prevention and enforcement programs.
                                                       In addition to the enforcement provision of the Water
                                                    Quality Improvement Act chronic violators who comply
                                                    with  the requirements of  this Act but who also continue to
                                                    discharge oil will be prosecuted under the provisions of the
                                                    Refuse Act of 1899. If these legal actions fail to curb the
                                                    number of incidents  and degradation of the environment
                                                    continues,   additional  legislation  will  be  sought  to
                                                    strengthen the enforcement aspects.
                                                    SUMMARY
                                                        The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 provides
                                                    for  a strong  Federal effort in cleanup, prevention,  and
                                                    enforcement.  It has generated new legislation at the State
                                                    level and has received the support of conservation groups.
                                                    Most of the  petroleum  industry is responding  to  the
                                                    provisions of the Act and, at present, is demonstrating a
                                                    willingness  to  protect the  environment  against  the
                                                    unnecessary discharge of oil.

-------
                                                                    LEGISLATION AND THE ACT OF 1970     15
    International laws relating to oil pollution control are     provisions of the Act and to cooperate fully with the States
continuously being strengthened. The U.S. has provided     and industry to  eliminate or, most assumedly, minimize oil
international leadership toward an objective of eliminating     pollution. In the administration of the Act precaution will
oil discharges from vessels by the end of this decade.            be taken to ensure that the regulations are reasonable and
                                                           based  upon  the most current technology and scientific
    It is the intention of EPA to aggressively carry out the     findings.

-------
                   NATIONAL  CONTINGENCY  PLANNING
                                    Commander Daniel B. Charter, Jr., USCG
                                       Maritime Pollution Control Branch
                                 Office of Operations, Law Enforcement Division
                                           United States Coast Guard
ABSTRACT
   World production  and  transportation  of petroleum
products have  reached such magnitudes  that the United
States must be prepared to cope with a massive pollution
disaster near its coast. The problems of advance planning
for cleanup of oil spills have been recognized for many
years but received little active interest before  the Torrey
Canyon  disaster in  1967. Following that incident  the
United States began  developing national and regional oil
spiR contingency  plans,  and  the first national plan was
published in late  1968.  The  Water Quality Improvement
Act of 1970 spurred additional efforts, resulting in publica-
tion of a more comprehensive national plan and completion
of detailed regional plans. These plans created national and
regional response teams and established responsibilities and
procedures for responding to spills of oil and hazardous
materials in U.S.  waters  with  appropriate cleanup and
control measures.  The need for international contingency
planning has been recognized during the past year, and
some work has  begun in this area.

INTRODUCTION
   Today our society has  reached a point of almost total
dependence upon  petroleum and petroleum by-products. It
is essential every  day to move literally millions of tons of
these substances  through  U.S.  and international waters,
ports, and land areas. Without these various substances we
would be unable to maintain the standard of living that we
enjoy today. In fact, many of us would probably be unable
to exist. However, enjoyment  of the  benefits of these
commodities  has  not been without  problems, some of
which include serious environmental degradation. The best
method  of avoiding these environmental problems is to
ensure that  these commodities  are handled, transported,
and utilized in such a way  as to prevent their discharge into
the environment. However, when prevention fails, a number
'The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private  ones of
  the writer and are not  to be construed as official or reflecting the
  views of the Commandant or the Coast Guard at large
of actions can be taken to minimize damages from a spill.
To be effective, these actions must be well coordinated, and
this  is  the  function  of contingency plans. This paper
outlines the history of Federal contingency planning in this
country and summarizes the status of existing plans.

History of Petroleum
   Petroleum has been recognized and utilized for several
thousands of years. Probably the earliest usage involved
obnoxious seepage of oil in the Black  Sea and the Caspian
Sea; this was put  to  beneficial use in cooking,  heating,
lubrication,  road-making  and  other  construction.  The
Chinese actually drilled for oil over two thousand years ago,
using percussion bits, bamboo piping, and brute force. They
had  stumbled upon oil  accidentally while extracting salt
from brine wells and, being far  ahead of their time, made
recovery of petroleum and gas from the brine wells a major
objective.

   In this country  the  history of oil drilling began  in
Titusville, Pennsylvania, when Edwin L. Drake sank his first
well to 69 feet  to initiate the Pennsylvania oil boom on
August 27, 1859. In 1865 the first successful pipeline was
constructed, and in  1871 the first  rail tank car was in use.
By 1875 the first steel tanker was built.

   In 1860 world production of ofl was about 1/2 million
barrels. A century later this had climbed to approximately
7 billion barrels per year, and the world currently produces
over 15 billion barrels of crude oil per year. The increase in
production and usage  has naturally resulted in an increase
in transportation of ofl. Although through the years there
were numerous spills and vessel casualties that resulted in
heavy  releases of oil,  it was not until the 1940's that the
problem reached such  magnitude that  it drew serious
attention. Frequently our beaches were besmirched with oil
during World War II through the sinking of tankers in our
coastal waters. However, because of the dire circumstances
this did not generate  acute public concern for cleanup. In
                                                      17

-------
18    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
the years  following  Worid  War II,  with the increased
technological development and the attendant  increase in
production and consumption of oil, the problems  of spills
became more acute. During the 1950's numerous studies
were conducted by various organizations  and agencies on
the  problems  of oil spill  control.  In  some locations
companies were formed that conducted cleanup activities
when the clamor of the property owners became too great.
Although the  Coast  Guard  and other Federal  agencies
cooperated  in  these  efforts, the removal  of spilled ofl
generally  was not considered a government function, but
was  left  mainly  to  the  pressures  of  state  and local
government  and the  public. However,  the  records  do
indicate that on occasion considerable pressure was exerted
by the local Coast Guard commander to insure that  the
responsible party did conduct adequate cleanup.
                      NUM. MN&D CRUDE OIL PWOUCTION
 IIU.IOB
OF MMfU
                               I960
                                       INS
Figure  1:  In  the  past two decades  world crude  ofl
production has increased sharply, doubling about every ten
years..

Development of Federal Plans
   In my review of the  Coast Guard files the first specific
official recommendation that the Federal Government play
a major role in the removal of oil was contained in an
internal directive dated 3 November 1964. That memoran-
dum  proposed  that "the Ofl Pollution Act of  1924 be
amended to provide, among other things, that the Secretary
may order any owner or person who has violated the Act to
remove  such ofl pollution or to abate it. If there is a failure
to  comply  with the  order  the Secretary  may, at  his
discretion,  remove such pollution or abate it." The Secre-
tary referred to was the Secretary of the Army, who at that
time was responsible for administration of the 1924 Act.

   This  was  probably  the  result of  a conference on ofl
pollution held on 18 March  1964. The following is from the
minutes of that  conference:1 "As described by Captain
Frost USCG, the problem of reduction of occurrence in
removal of oil  slicks is  part of the formal activities of the
Coast Guard because that organization is duly charged, as
one of  several agencies,  with  enforcement of the  Ofl
Pollution Act.  This responsibility is concomitant with the
duties related  to the  safety of  vessels  and waterfront
structures. The Coast Guard operates primarily through the
Captain of the Port,  a Coast Guard officer assigned by area
to supervise Coast Guard law enforcement, safety, search-
and-rescue, and similar duties. In addition to reporting spills
and citation of violations, the duty of the Captain of the
Port includes  evaluation and recommendation for proper
action on the cleanup of oil spills. In order to meet this last
obligation properly,  the  Captain of the Port must  be
supplied with pertinent technical information of sufficient
depth  to advise on questions such as those which follow:
(1) The chemical and hazardous nature  of the  petroleum
spilled. (2) What information should be placed in the hands
of the Captain of the  Port to help him in his decision-
making? (3)  Must  the spill be  physically or chemically
removed,  or  can the hazard be minimized without spill
removal? (4)  What particular removal techniques are  avail-
able?  Which  method, if several  are  applicable  would  be
best?  Should these methods be chemical or physical? (5)
What  is  the  proper equipment  to be used? Where  is it
available? (6)  How does  the size of the spill bear on its
removal? (7) How does  the location of the spill bear on its
treatment and  possible removal, for example,  open sea
versus in-port, considering nearby buildings, port structures,
other  vessels,  and similar factors? (8) What will be the
influence of any chemicals introduced in  removing spills?
Will  the  oyster, shellfish,  or vertebrate  fish   crops  be
adversely affected?"

   The first mention that I have been able to locate of the
problem  of on-scene coordination is in  a letter from the
Commander, Second Coast Guard District, dated 18 Janu-
ary 1965, which was in  response to an inquiry by the
Commandant as to the capabilities and problems of oil spill
control in the various Coast Guard districts. In his letter the
Commander,  Second Coast Guard District, indicated that
when large spills or dangerous pollution occurs the Captain
of the Port having jurisdiction in  the area would assume
on-scene operational control and coordinate the activities
of Coast Guard units assigned to the case. There was also
provision that the district office would coordinate activities
beyond the  scope of the Captain  of the  Port.  The letter
further indicated that all Captains of the Ports and the
rescue coordination  center  would keep  a current list of
commercial and private facilities with cleanup capabilities
so that immediate action could be taken  to clean up  spills
considered hazardous or likely to  damage property.

   It is also interesting to note that the 1966 amendment2
to the  Ofl Pollution Act of 1924 required any person
spilling ofl from a vessel into  the  navigable waters of the
United States to remove the ofl immediately from the water
and from the adjoining  shorelines. If the spiller failed  to do
so, the Secretary of the Interior was authorized to arrange
for removing the ofl, and  the spiller would be liable for all
costs and expenses reasonably incurred by the Secretary in
accomplishing this removal. For various reasons this portion
of the law was largely ignored, and it appears that no action
was actually  taken in the conduct of cleanup pursuant to

-------
                                                                     NATIONAL CONTINGENCY PLANNING    19
the Act. Thus, in its  effect,  this law did  not contribute
materially to development of federal contingency plans.

   It is apparent from the study of Coast Guard records
that there was concern in the early and mid 60's over the
coordination  of  efforts  and  the  cleanup  of oil spills.
However,  it was  not until  March, 1967, when the super-
tanker  Toney Canyon grounded off the coast of England,
that really massive quantities of oil were released into the
water as a result  of a single casualty or accident. With the
grounding of the Toney Canyon the United  States and
other  nations became  acutely aware of the magnitude of
the problem of coordinating response efforts in cleanup of
a massive oil spill.

   The  immediate reaction in the United States was to
consider what we would have done had the same situation
occurred off our coast. It was apparent that no institution,
governmental or  non-governmental, national or local, had
either the  responsibility or capability for taking immediate
effective action.

   For  many years the  Coast Guard had been charged with
the responsibility for maintaining search-and-rescue forces
in  the  maritime  region  to  assist vessels and aircraft in
distress. The  established network of Coast Guard shore
stations, vessels,  aircraft and communications  facilities
made it a logical choice  for involvement in this  problem
area, and the Coast Guard Commandant created an oil spill
study group to evaluate the problem. The group included
representatives of the former  Federal  Water Pollution
Control Administration, in the Department  of the Interior,
and the Army Corps of Engineers, in  the Department of
Defense, since both of those Federal agencies had statutory
responsibilities related  to the protection of our territorial
and inland waters, generally as  to the development and
enforcement of water quality standards and specifically as
to the discharge of oil and other refuse.

   Another reaction to the Toney Canyon disaster was a
Presidential memorandum dated 26 May 1967 in which the
President  directed the Secretaries of the Interior  and
Transportation to conduct  a joint  study on how best to
mobilize the resources  of the Federal  government and the
nation  to  prevent disasters  involving major spillage of oil,
other pollutants,  and hazardous substances, and  to mini-
mize the threat to health, safety, and our natural resources.
The President's directive stated  that one of the  required
actions was development of contingency plans  to deal with
these  emergencies.  Shortly  thereafter all  Coast  Guard
District Commanders  were  instructed  to  prepare con-
tingency plans for their districts and  to coordinate these
plans with appropriate  representatives of Federal agencies,
local  authorities, and industry  representatives.  It  was
directed that  the  planning should include identification of
critical areas along shorelines, navigable and coastal waters,
and the high seas  within district boundaries; delineation of
areas of responsibility; an inventory of available equipment,
personnel,  and specialized  knowledge;  and methods of
alerting appropriate officials and deploying equipment and
personnel.

   Further guidance was provided in Commandant Instruc-
tion  5922.2 of  20  June 1967.  An enclosure to  that
instruction  contained an outline  of the factors  to be
considered in developing the  plans. Although several years
old, this guidance is still valuable in planning efforts today
and is included in appendix A to this paper.

   At the same time, through contract to a private  organ-
ization, a review  was completed on the state of the art in
technology for  response^ to oil  spills. Utilizing all available
information each  District^in coordination with other inter-
ested Federal agencies and local government  groups, then
refined  its plans.  It was fully realized that for these plans
to be effective, massive research  effort  was  necessary to
develop adequate response equipment, national legislation
was needed  to clarify authority  and responsibility,  and
adequate funding had to be  provided to insure the  availa-
bility of equipment and materials.

   These conclusions  were reinforced by a joint report to
the President3, in February,  1968, wherein the Secretaries
of Transportation and the Interior made specific recommen-
dations for needed action at the national level.

   In the early summer of 1968 a new planning initiative
was undertaken.  In  its review of marine concerns  the
National  Council  on  Marine Resources  and  Engineering
Development came to the conclusion that a unified national
planning effort was desirable. On  7 June 1968, following
the Council's recommendation, the President  directed the
Secretary of the  Interior to develop contingency plans for
each  coastal region  immediately. An  interagency work
group which was established to  develop these plans came to
the early conclusion  that it  was necessary to develop an
overall  national plan to provide a framework for  the re-
gional plans. Accordingly a national plan was developed,4
and in  September, 1968,  the President accepted the basic
national plan produced by the work group, with regional
and subregional plans to follow.

National Contingency Plan
   In the  meantime  the Congress was  developing  new
legislation. The  final  result was  the Water Quality Improve-
ment Act of 1970,5 which became law on 3 April 1970. It
included several very necessary and pertinent provisions.
These provisions,  as implemented by the  President,  can be
simply stated as follows:

   1.  The discharge of harmful quantities of oil (as defined
by regulations issued by the Secretary of the Interior) from
vessels or onshore or offshore facilities  into  any inland,
territorial, or contiguous zone waters is prohibited.

   2.  The person  in charge  of the discharge  source must
immediately  report the discharge  to the Coast Guard or
other specified officials.

-------
20   LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
   3.  The owner or operator of the discharge source must
immediately remove the discharged oil or must reimburse
the Federal government for its costs should Federal  action
be necessary.

   4.  A  revolving fund  of $35 million for immediate oE
removal needs was authorized.

   5.  A  national  contingency  plan for  Federal  action,
containing specific provisions, was required.

   In  connection with the  last item the President, using the
previous planning as  a foundation  and acting through the
Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality, pub-
lished the National Oil and Hazardous Materials Pollution
Contingency Plan on 2 June 1970.6 This Plan provides for a
pattern of coordinated and integrated responses to pollut-
ing spills by  departments and  agencies  of the Federal
government. It  establishes  a  national response team and
provides  guidelines  for  the  establishment  for  regional
contingency  plans and  response  teams.  This Plan  also
promotes the  coordination and direction of Federal, state,
and local response systems and encourages the'development
of local government and private capabilities to handle such
polluting spills.

   A  primary  objective of the National Plan is to encourage
the person responsible for a polluting spill to clean it up. If
this  person   is  taking  adequate  action  to  remove the
pollutant or  mitigate its  effects,  the principal thrust  of
Federal activities is to monitor the situation and to provide
advice  as  may   be necessary.  Further Federal response
actions are  required  only if  the person responsible for a
pollution incident does not act promptly  to contain, clean
up, and dispose of the pollutant.

   This  plan  is  effective  for  all United  States navigable
waters  including  inland  rivers,  the Great Lakes, coastal
territorial waters, and the  contiguous zone  and high seas
beyond this zone where there exists a threat to U.S. waters,
shoreface, or shelf-bottom.
   Although  many Federal agencies may at one time  or
another  become involved in a spill  response situation, only
a  few Federal agencies regularly become  involved in spill
cleanup  operations. These agencies have  been designated
the "primary" agencies by the National Contingency Plan.
Each  of them has responsibilities  established  by statute,
Executive Order,  or Presidential  Directive  which may bear
on the Federal  response  to a pollution incident. The Plan
promotes the expeditious and  harmonious  discharge  of
these   responsibilities  through  recognition of the specific
capabilities  of each agency. State  and local  governments,
industry groups, the  academic community, and others are
also encouraged to commit resources for response to a spill.
Of special relevance here is the  organization of a standby
scientific response capability.

   The Plan established  the National Interagency Commit-
tee for Control of Pollution by Oil and Hazardous Materials
            STANDARD REGIONS FOR FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION
                 - C.G Are* of Responsibly
Figure 2: Under the National Contingency Plan regional
contingency plans have been developed for the ten standard
regions  for  Federal administration. The Coast Guard is
responsible  for planning  and providing  on-scene  com-
manders in  coastal areas (dotted lines),  and the Environ-
mental  Protection  Agency performs  these  functions  in
inland areas.
(NIC), which is  the principal instrumentality for national
plans and  policies concerning  Federal  preparedness  for
response to pollution incidents.  This committee, which is
composed  of representatives  of the  primary  agencies,
develops procedures  to  promote the coordinated response
of government and private agencies to polluting spills and
makes  recommendations  concerning  the  interpretation,
application, and revision of the National Plan. It reviews
reports  on  the  handling  of major  or unusual pollution
incidents for the purpose of analyzing such incidents and
recommending  needed  improvements in the contingency
plans.

   Under the National Contingency Plan coordination and
direction of Federal pollution control activities at the scene
of  a spill  or potential spill is  accomplished through an
on-scene commander  (OSC). The OSC is the single execu-
tive agent predesignated by the regional plan to coordinate
and direct  these activities in his area of the region. In the
event of a spill of oil or other hazardous substance, the first
Federal  official  on  the  site from  any  of the  primary
agencies assumes the  duty of coordinating activities under
the Plan until the predesignated OSC becomes available to
take charge. The OSC determines pertinent facts  about  a
spill, such  as the nature, amount, and location  of material
spilled,  its  probable  direction and time of travel, and the
resources and installations which may  be affected and the
priorities for protecting them. Thje OSC then initiates and
directs Phase II, Phase III. and Phase IV response operations
(described below), and he provides support and documenta-
tion for Phase V activities.

   The  U.S. Coast Guard is assigned the responsibility to
furnish  or provide for OSCs  for the high seas, coastal and

-------
                                                                    NATIONAL CONTINGENCY PLANNING     21
                                                                                                          OCMI
                                                                                                       OSWEGO
Figure 3: In coastal areas, includingJhe Great Lakes, Coast
Guard Captains of the Ports (COTPs), Officers in Charge of
Marine Inspection (OCMs), and other Coast Guard units
 are the predesignated on-scene commanders for response to
 pollution incidents. Their geographic areas of responsibility
 are described in the regional plans.
contiguous zone waters, coastal and Great Lakes ports and
harbors,  and such  other  places  as may  be agreed upon
between  the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
the Coast Guard. EPA furnishes  or provides for  OSCs  in
other areas.  An exception to this rule is made whenever a
spill is caused by  a U.S. public vessel or by  a  federally
controlled facility;  in that case the  responsible agency
provides the  OSC and takes the initial response actions.

   The Plan also established a  National  Response Team
(NRT), which, like  the NIC, consists of representatives  of
the primary agencies. It functions as an emergency  response
advisory  team and  is activated in the event  of a pollution
incident  involving  oil  or any  other hazardous  material
which: (a) exceeds the response capability of the region  in
which.it  occurs; (b) affects  more than one  region; or (c)
involves national security  or presents  a  major hazard  to
substantial numbers  of persons  or nationally  significant
amounts  of property. During a pollution incident the NRT
meets at  the  National Response  Center  and reviews reports
coming from the OSC, requesting such additional informa-
tion as may be needed. The NRT coordinates the actions  of
the various regions  or districts  in supplying needed assis-
 tance  to  the  OSC.  It may recommend courses of action
 through  the  Regional  Response  Team  (see  "Regional
 Contingency Plans"  below) for consideration by the OSC
 but has no operational control of the OSC.

   The National Response Center (NRC) is the Washington,
 D.C., headquarters for activities relative to pollution inci-
 dents.  It  is accommodated in Coast Guard Headquarters
 and provides communications, information storage, person-
 nel, and other necessary facilities to promote the smooth
 functioning of this activity.

   For  the purposes of contingency planning the Federal
 response to a  polluting spill is divided into five phases, two
 or more of which may take place simultaneously. They are:

Phase I: Discovery and Notification
   Discovery   of  a spill  may  be  through vessel  patrols,
aircraft searches,  or  similar  deliberate  procedures,  or
through incidental observations of government agencies or
the general public. Such reports may come initially from
fishing  or  pleasure boats,  police departments,  telephone
operators, port authorities, news media, airline pilots, etc.

-------
22    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
Regional plans provide for spill reports to be channeled into
the Regional Response Center as promptly as possible.

Phase II: Containment and Countermeasures
   These are defensive actions  to be initiated as soon as
possible  after discovery  and notification of a  pollution
incident. After the OSC determines that further Federal
response actions  are  needed, he may direct appropriate
actions  such as source control, public health protection,
ship salvage, placement of physical barriers to halt or slow
the spread of the  pollutant, emplacement or activatipn of
booms or barreirs  to protect specific installations or areas,
and deployment of materials  to mitigate the effects  of the
pollutant on water-related resources.

Phase III: Cleanup and Disposal
   This  includes those actions taken to remove the pollu-
tant  from  the water and on-shore areas,  such as the
collection of oil through the use of sorbers, skimmers, or
other collection devices, the removal of beach sand, and
safe, nonpolluting disposal of pollutants which are  recov-
ered in the cleanup process.

Phase IV: Restoration
   This  includes those actions taken to restore the environ-
ment to its pre-spill condition, such as replacement of
contaminated beach sand.

Phase V: Recovery of Damages and Enforcement
   This  includes recovery of damages to government prop-
erty ; however, third party damage is not considered in this
phase. Recovery of the costs of cleanup is also included, as
are other enforcement activities. The collection of scientific
and technical  information  of value  for  research and
development activities and for the  enhancement of our
understanding of the environment may also be considered
in this phase.

   The nucleus of a national-level strike force, consisting of
personnel trained, prepared,  and available to provide the
necessary services to cany out  this  plan, has been estab-
lished by the Coast Guard. This force, presently located on
the east coast, is being augmented and will soon be sited at
various  locations  throughout the country. Assistance from
the national-level strike force  may be requested through the
appropriate Coast Guard District Commander, Area Com-
mander, or the Commandant. The strike  force will direct
the operation of any government-owned specialized pollu-
tion cleanup equipment  and will function under the OSC.

    At the  time of this  writing (March, 1971) action has
been initiated to amend the National Plan. The Comman-
dant of the Coast Guard has recommended amendments to
the plan to reflect the recent Federal reorganization and to
clarify  or  change portions of the  plan  that operational
experience has shown need amendment. No major changes
in the  thrust or procedures in the plan are known to be
required, and the plan will continue  to serve adequately in
its present  form until  the amendment  is made. It  is
understood that plans have  been made to  develop  the
amendment on a high priority basis.

Regional Contingency Plans
   As previously  indicated, the  President in June, 1968,
indicated that contingency plans  were to be developed for
each coastal region. Thus it is clear that it was recognized
initially  that  the  functional plans  would  have  to be
developed at  the regional level. The National Contingency
Plan provides the overall policy and general guidelines, for
these regional plans.

   Although the original  efforts  to develop regional plans
were made by the Coast Guard, the President in his memo
of 7 June 1968 assigned this responsibility to the Depart-
ment of the Interior. Coast Guard units were then directed
to work with the Federal Water Pollution Control Admini-
stration (now the Water Quality Office  of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency) in development of these plans.
Much of  the previous work  accomplished by  the Coast
Guard was used as the basis for this development.

   However, before  these plans being developed by  the
Department of the Interipr were actually completed and
submitted  to  the  National  Interagency  Committee  for
review and approval, responsibilities were again shifted.
Since the  agency coordinating  on-scene  operations and
providing the bulk of the response resources was different
from the agency responsible for the planning activity, some
problems  were  naturally encountered. Meetings between
representatives of the Departments of Transportation and
the Interior in February  and  March,  1970, resulted in the
present agreement on planning and  response responsibili-
ties.

   The Coast  Guard is responsible for  contingency planning
in the coastal  areas, and the Environmental Protection
Agency in inland areas. Coastal, areas generally encompass
waters subject  to  tidal  activity  or waters capable  of
supporting deep-draft vessels. The agency responsible for
planning is also responsible for furnishing or providing for
on-scene commanders and acts as chairman of the regional
response team. The standard regions developed for purposes
of general Federal administration are used as the regions for
planning purposes.  The coastal  and  inland regional plans
generally use standard format and procedures throughout
the country. The coastal plans are all based on a model plan
distributed in a Commandant Instruction in  April,  1970.
Most of the  inland plans were  also patterned after this
model plan.  Coastal  regional plans  are subdivided along
state boundaries. In  many  cases  states are  further sub-
divided into zones.

   The coastal and inland regional plans were submitted to
the Council on Environmental Quality in June, 1970, as an
annex to the National Contingency Plan. These plans were
developed  simultaneously  with  the National   Plan  and
before the full impact of the Water  Quality Improvement
Act of 1970 could be assessed. Therefore,  Coast Guard

-------
                                                                     NATIONAL CONTINGENCY PLANNING    23
district commanders were directed to revise the plans by 1
December 1970. While this revision was in progress, most of
the pertinent  responsibilities of the  Department of the
Interior were  transferred to the Administrator, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, by Federal Reorganization Plan
No. 3 of 1970. The December, 1970, editions of the coastal
regional plans were  therefore obsolete before they  were
approved. At the time of this writing (March, 1971), efforts
to develop further amendments have not been initiated but
will be as soon as the amendment to the National Plan is
developed.

   The regional plans closely parallel the National Plan but
are adapted to the special problems of the geographic area
concerned and provide a  considerable amount of detailed
information  about that  area. Their primary purpose  is to
provide  a  Federal response capability at the regional level.
In each region there is a Regional Response Team (RRT)
consisting of regional representatives of the primary agen-
cies. Since the agencies' regional boundaries do  not gener-
ally  coincide with  those of the  newly created standard
Federal  administrative regions,  a single  agency  may  be
represented  on the  RRT by any of several individuals,
depending on the location of the pollution incident being
considered. Like the NRT the RRT acts  as an emergency
response advisory team, but on a regional level. It  also
performs  review and advisory  functions relative  to the
regional plan similar to  those  which the NIC performs
relative to the National Plan. The RRT controls the extent
and duration of Federal  involvement in the response to a
pollution  incident and decides  when  a shift in on-scene
coordination  from   the   predesignated OSC  to  another
agency  may  be  appropriate. There  is  also a Regional
Response Center in  each  region which performs functions
parallel to those of the National Response Center.

   The  regional  plans also  provide  for local pollution
control strike forces which, like  the national  strike force,
are trained, prepared, and available to carry out the plans.
During an incident  these teams will be able to assist the
national strike force or merge with other  local forces, and
they will  be capable of full independent response to all
minor spill situations within their areas.  In  addition, at
major ports (to be designated by  the President) "emergency
port task  forces" will be established'to  complement the
national- and local-level  strike  forces. Detailed oil pollu-
tion  prevention and removal plans will be developed for
these ports, and adequate oil pollution control equipment
and materials will be provided.

International Contingency Plans
   The Torrey Canyon incident was of such magnitude that
it  affected more  than  one  country,  thus indicating the
necessity for international coordination in pollution inci-
dents. One of the earliest efforts to develop international
pollution contingency plans was  among the nations border-
ing on the North Sea. In the United States the first effort to
develop an  international  plan began  in  1970  under the
auspices of the United  States-Canada International Joint
Required Procedure for Rapid Alerting
notification required
                 notification required only if
                 spill might affect both countries
Minor Spills

        Report from any of various sour
port from any of various sources
                     OSC
           Deputy OSC (other country)
 Moderate and Major Spills and Pollution Incidents
        Report from any of various sources

                     OSC
                                Deputy OSC(other country)
   OSC's country's
   •enters of JRT
                      Deputy OSC's country's
                         neuters of JRT
Figure 4: This is an excerpt from a draft proposal  for a
joint  U.S.-Canadian  Great  Lakes pollution contingency
plan,  showing proposed  procedures  for notifying appro-
priate  officials of polluting spills. (OSC=On-Scene  Com-
mander; JRT=Joint Response Team)

Commission  (IJC).  In response  to  an April,  1970, IJC
report7 recommending that  the United States and Canada
develop a coordinated international  contingency plan for
dealing with spills of oil  and other hazardous materials in
the boundary waters of  the Great Lakes system, a joint
U.S.-Canadian working group began  preparation of such a
plan toward the end of last year. This project  was  given
additional impetus by  an  IJC  report  on  Great  Lakes
pollution8 dated December, 1970, which recommended,
among other things, that "the Governments of Canada and
the United States enter into agreement to develop coordi-
nated international contingency plans  so that both  coun-
tries may quickly and effectively respond to major  acci-
dental spills  of oils, hazardous or radioactive materials in
the boundary waters of the Great Lakes system."
   As of  March, 1971, a joint  U.S.-Canadian  pollution
contingency plan had been drafted and was being reviewed
by the joint working group. This draft plan would provide
for a  pattern of coordinated and integrated responses to

-------
24    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
 pollution  incidents on  the Great Lakes  by responsible
 federal,  state,  and local agencies in the U.S. and federal,
 provincial, and local agencies in Canada. It was intended to
 supplement the national, provincial, and regional plans of
 the two nations and therefore addressed itself primarily to
 international matters not covered by these plans.  It would
 cover the  waters of the Great Lakes (except Lake Michi-
 gan), their interconnecting waterways and major tributaries,
 and the international section of the St. Lawrence River for
 any polluting spill that affects, or threatens to affect, the
 waters of both nations. As drafted, the joint plan would
 establish a  Joint Response   Team  comparable  to  the
 Regional Response Teams in the United States.  For any
 spill  requiring  an  international response an OSC from one
 country and a deputy OSC from the other country would
 be charged with on-scene coordination. A reporting system
 would insure that such spills would be  reported promptly
 to the concerned government officials on both sides of the
 border.  Pre-planned  procedures  would be available  for
 coordinating rapid response measures, including the mobil-
 ization  of cleanup and control  resources.  A  command-
 control  structure  would be available to insure that emer-
 gency actions could proceed without delay. Coordination
 would also be provided in the areas of funding, surveillance,
 and public information.

    The need for international  contingency plans  received
 further recognition at the conference on Pollution of the
 Sea  by Oil  Spills which was  conducted  by  NATO's
 Committee on the  Challenges  of Modem  Society  in
 November, 1970. The conference  approved a resolution
 calling on  NATO nations to develop national  oil  spill
 contingency plans, to cooperate in detecting and reporting
 oil spills, to assist each other in minimizing the  damage
 caused by such  spills, and to cooperate "to insure  the
 greater possible consistency and  mutual assistance in  the
 preparation of their national  contingency  plans," among
 other things.  Specifically, the conference recommended
 that the member nations establish centers along their coasts
 to receive reports  of oil spills and relay these reports to any
 other nation that  might be affected. It recommended that
 member nations  require their  flag  vessels and aircraft  to
 report oil spills to these centers. The concept of regions of
 international cooperation based on geographic patterns of
 petroleum commerce  was also advocated  in connection
 with contingency planning.

    It is  evident that the area of international contingency
 planning is currently  an active one, and it will probably
 undergo considerable  development within the next few
 years.

 CONCLUSION
    The plans discussed in this paper are those developed by
 the Federal Government. In addition to the Federal plans,
 many state  and  local governments and industries have
 developed contingency  plans.  These  non-federal  plans
 should,  if possible, be developed in such fashion as to be
 responsive to the Federal planning effort.  This will  help
avoid duplication and confusion and permit a compatible
coordinated response when required.

   The planning effort never ceases. As further experience
is gained, the plans are re-evaluated, and changes are made
to improve their effectiveness. Also, agency responsibilities
will shift, and other changes will require amendments to the
plans. However, even with the best possible plans we would
still be unable to respond satisfactorily to spill situations at
present. Although the plans permit coordinated efforts and
clarify  responsibilities,   the  response,  no matter  how
smoothly managed, will still be limited by the capability of
existing  technology.  However,  as better equipment is
developed, the existing machinery for coordination of spill
control  efforts ^will facilitate prompt deployment of the
equipment. We still have a long way  to  go, but we  have
come a long way since the Torrey Canyon.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
 1. "Oil Slick Pollution," minutes  of Conference on Oil
 Slick Pollution of Harbors and Associated Waters, 18 March
 1964, U.S. Coast Guard.

 2. Public Law 89-753, Section 211.

 3. "Oil Pollution, A Report to the President," Department
 of the  Interior  and  the  Department of Transportation,
 February 1968.

4. "National Multi-Agency  Oil  and  Hazardous Materials
Pollution Contingency Plan," September 1968.

 5. Public Law 91-224.

6. "National Oil  and Hazardous Materials Pollution Con-
 tingency Plan," Council on Environmental Quality; Federal
 Register, Vol. 35, pp.8508-8514, 2 June 1970.

7. "Special Report  on Potential Oil Pollution, Eutrophica-
tion  and Pollution  from Watercraft," International Joint
Commission (United States-Canada), April 1970.

8. "Pollutuion  of  Lake  Erie,  Lake Ontario, and  the
International Section of the St Lawrence Seaway," Inter-
national Joint Commission (United States-Canada), Decem-
ber 1970.
APPENDIX A
Guidelines  for Combating Oil Pollution

Pre-emergency Oil Spill Planning
   Review Disaster Control Plans and related data to include
plans to cope with a major oil spill occurring in:
   (a)  Port areas
   (b)  Harbor approaches or channel
   (c)  Navigable rivers, estuaries, and waterways

-------
                                                                   NATIONAL CONTINGENCY PLANNING     25
  (d)   Coastal waters
  (e)   International waters posing a threat to the coastal
        area
Assessment of Threat Caused by a Major Spill:
  (a)   Effect of spill on:
        (1)   Navigation
        (2)   Port safety
        (3)   Marine life
        (4)   Wildlife
        (5)   Municipal water supply
        (6)   Privately owned property
  (b)   Determination of maximum credible potential oil
        spill.
        (1)   Quantity of spill
        (2)   Location of spill
        (3)   Survey of tanker operations in the assigned
             area (operational areas)
        (4)   Properties of probable pollutants
        (5)   Areas affected by the  spill
             (a)   Staying power of the  spill
             (b)   Weather effect
             (c)   Effect of current, tides, or wind
Warning System
   (a)   A system for identifying sources of pollutants
   (b)   Establishment of a pollution reporting system or
        network through:
        (1)  Voluntary participation  of local Federal,
             state and local  agencies
        (2)  Active patrols, air  and surface in the event
             of a major spill
        (3)  Normal operations
        (4)  Surveillance, position, dead-reckoning of the
             slick, plotting
   (c)   Establishment of a notification system to affect
        local Federal, state and local authorities, industry
        and the public  through:
        (1)  Port warning system
 On-Scene Operation
 1. General
   (a)   Procedures for establishing a Security Zone
   (b)   Procedures for controlling entry of persons and
        vessels
   (c)   An inventory of Coast Guard resources
   (d)   An inventory of other local resources of equipment,
        technical knowledge and expertise
   (e)   Safety instructions to personnel operating in  the
        spill area
   (f)   Total effects of containment, abatement or clean-
        up procedures and methods
 2. Abatement procedures - containment, cleanup
   (a)   On the vessel
   (b)   Surrounding waters
   (c)   Ports, harbors, channels, or beaches
3.  Containment
   (a)   Prior to majority container release
        (1)  Transfer to another container
             (a) vessel  (b) barge  (c) floatable bags
        (2)  Vessel salvage
        (3)  Destroy—sea water temp, swell size, location
             and pollutant property will dictate degree of
             success
   (b)   After container release
        (1)  Envelope containment-spill  boom, pneu-
             matic  barrier
        (2)  Chemical containment
             (a)   surface coagulants
             (b)   bottom coagulants—silicone base
        (3)  Dispersers—detergents, sodium or potassium
             soaps
        (4)  Absorbent materials-sawdust, cement, straw,
             chalk, lime, etc.
        (5)  Mutants-chemical emulsifier
        (6)  Destroy

4.  Cleanup
   (a)   Water
        (1)  Mechanical
             (a) skimmer (b) centrifuge   (c) vacuum
        (2)  Chemical
             (a)   Coagulants
                   (1)   Surface
                   (2)   Bottom
             (b)  Detergents
             (c)   Dilutants
             (d)  Absorbents
             (e)   Destroy
   (b)   Beach
        (1)  Mechanical
             (a) sand removal  (b) burial of polluted sand
        (2)  Chemical
             (a)   Coagulants
                   (1)   Surface
             (b)  Detergents
             (c)   Dispersers
             (d)  Destroy

Specific Comments:
   1. Physical properties  of many emulsifiers,  solvents or
detergents  are toxic to marine flora and  fauna, therefore,
these agents should  be used only with  concurrence  of
wildlife authorities.
   2. Emulsifiers, solvents or detergents  will  i'orm a thin
layer on  top of the  parent oil slick, and will be more
affected by the wind, than the current.
   3. Precipitating the oil to the  bottom  with  presently
known  products will only result in a short-term removal.
The oil will  eventually rise to the surface. Sunken oil will
kill bottom wildlife.
   4. Oil  mechanically  removed from the beaches  and
buried in the ground may contaminate the water table. This
method of disposal  should be  cleared with  local health
authorities.

-------
26   LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
   5.  Burning of heavier grades of oil in the open sea is
generally unsuccessful because of the inability to maintain
burning temperatures.
   6.  Burning of chemicals may be extremely hazardous.
All chemical properties should be checked with a qualified
marine chemist or chemical engineer.
   7.  Mechanical booms are  generally  effective  only in
sheltered waters; wind and wave action in the open sea will
either bridge or break the floating booms.
   8.  Firing  or bombing  of the vessel  will  probably
aggravate the pollution by further releasing oil remaining on
board.
   9.  Immediate action is  mandatory to prevent or mini-
mize  the  spread of oil—hence the importance of oil spill
pre-planning cannot be overemphasized.
  10.  Amounts of emulsifiers, solvents or detergents may
be effective in proportion to amount of escaped oil as low
as 1:6-9. Ideal mixture, however, is 50-50.
  11.  Detergent mixture sprayed on the oil in a fine spray
in the open sea is reported to be non-toxic to marine life.

To be effective the mixture must be  applied to  the oil and
be thoroughly  mixed within  30 minutes  of application.
Mixing can be accomplished by the use of a powerful jet of
water or motorboat or ship's screw. Wind and sea action are
significant  factors in  dissipating the oil-detergent-sea water
emulsion. Specific actions, however, will depend to a large
degree on the chemical properties of the detergent.

-------
                  INTERNATIONAL  ACTIVITY  REGARDING
                  SHIPBOARD  OIL   POLLUTION  CONTROL
                                             CaptainR. I. Price*
                                          United States Coast Guard
INTRODUCTION
  "... the coasts and coastal waters of many countries are
seriously affected by  oil pollution, the  results of which
include great damage to coasts and beaches and consequent
hindrance to healthful recreation and interference with the
tourist industry, the death and destruction of birds and
other wild life, and probable adverse effects on fish and the
marine organisms on which they feed. There is widespread
public concern in  many countries about the  extent and
growth of this  problem.
   The pollution is caused by persistent oils, that is to say
crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel oil and lubricating oil. While
there  is no conclusive  evidence that these  oils persist
indefinitely on the surface of the sea, they remain for very
long periods of time and are capable of being carried very
considerable distances by currents, wind and surface drifts
and of building up  into deposits on  the sea-shore. Very
large quantities of persistent oils are regularly  discharged
into the sea by tankers as a result of the  washing of their
tanks and the disposal of their oily ballast water. Dry cargo
ships which habitually use their fuel tanks for ballast water
also discharge oily ballast water into the sea and this also
gives rise to pollution. It is practicable for tankers to adopt
a procedure whereby their oily residues can be retained on
board and discharged into reception facilities at oil loading
ports or repair ports. Pollution resulting from the discharge
of ballast  water  from  dry cargo ships can be reduced or
prevented by the installation of efficient oily-water separa-
tors or other  means,  such  as  the  provision in ports of
adequate reception facilities for oil residues.
  *Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author and
not necessarily those of the Coast Guard or the Department of
Transportation.
   The only entirely effective method known of preventing
oil pollution is the complete avoidance of the discharge of
persistent oils into  the sea and, as stated above, measures
are possible which  would enable  this to be substantially"
achieved.
   While ... a date cannot be fixed at the present time by
which there should be complete avoidance of the discharge
of persistent oils into the sea,... complete avoidance of
the discharge of these persistent oils should, with certain
necessary exceptions, be observed from the earliest practi-
cable date and strongly urge all governments and other
bodies concerned to use their best endeavors to create the
conditions upon which the observance of such a prohibition
necessarily  depends by securing  the provision of adequate
facilities in their main ports and the necessary arrangements
in ships."
   Sound  familiar? You've heard or read that a hundred
times lately? Interesting!—That is a major portion of the
text of Resolution  No.  I  of the  1954 International
Conference on  Pollution of the Sea by  Oil,  titled the
"Complete Avoidance as Soon as Practicable of Discharge
of Persistent Oils Into the Sea."
First Efforts
   Efforts to control oil pollution internationally go back a
very long way.  Following World War I the U.S. Congress,
disturbed  by  damage caused by oil  in the sea in 1922,
proposed an international conference. Studies which were
carried out then within the government led in  1924 to the
National Oil Pollution Act.
                                                     27

-------
28    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
   In 1926, the United States convened an Intergovernmen-
tal Conference of Maritime Nations in Washington.* Al-
though the representatives of 13 governments endorse^ the
Act of that Conference, the Convention drafted then was
never  adopted. However,  cooperative  agreement among
some  ship owners to refrain from discharging  oily water
within 50 miles of any coast did emerge from an Interna-
tional Shipping Conference made up of private ship owner
organizations held in  1926.

    In  1936, the League of Nations proposed a Conference
 to consider a Convention similar to the one  drawn in
Washington ten years before but the Conference never took
 place. The subject was reopened in 1949 under the United
 Nations which accumulated the views of governments and
 in 1953 the Economic and Social Council of the U.N.
 endeavored to establish a group of experts to consider the
 matter. This  effort  was  postponed  when the  United
 Kingdom government proposed a diplomatic conference in
 London in 1954.
    Thirty-two  nations participated and produced the Con-
 vention of 1954  along lines similar to the product of the
 1926  Washington Conference.
 The 1954 Convention:
    The 1954 Convention for Prevention of Pollution of the
Sea by Oil was a rather broadly drawn effort which set up
zones in which it was prohibited to discharge  oil or an
 objectionable oily mixture (defined as having 100 parts or
more of oil per million of the mixture) and which instituted
an oil record book to be kept by each ship on the use and
handling of oil on board.

    The Convention was apparently viewed as a first cut by
the conferees because Resolution I went on to propose that
a future Conference  "to  review the matter in light of
experience  of tj»e working of the arrangements recom-
mended by this  Conference should be  held within three
years." However, it was eight years before there was to be
another meeting.

    The 1954 Convention had a number of weaknesses such
as failure to specify uniform penalties and to cope with the
difficulty of prosecuting the many vessels  of certain flags
which seldom return home. It exempted sludge and residues
provided these were discharged "as  far from  land as  is
practicable." Also exempted was oily  discharge  from ships
other  than tankers when proceeding to a port  not having
reception facilities. On the other hand, the Convention also
had a number of significant regulations, some  of which
were  rather  onerous. One placed a direct obligation on
   *. . . the representatives of some governments considered that
 after a specified period of notice  the discharge of oily mixtures
 constituting a nuisance should be prohibited everywhere, and that
 in the meantime a system of areas should be established within
 which no such discharge should be allowed. The other opinion was
 to the effect that a sufficient case had not  been  made out for
 prohibition everywhere fw>d that the establishment of an effective
 system of areas would provide a complete or almost complete cure
 for the evils complained of." (From the Report of the 1926 Wash-
ington Conference.)        	
 governments  to furnish adequate oil  disposal facilities in
 their ports. The United States with its extensive coast line
 would have been under considerable burden to satisfy this
 article within the stipulated three years after the Conven-
 tion  came into force. The Convention also  required  that
 within 12 months after coming in force all ships be fitted to
 assure that  bilges  could not be  discharged into the sea
 without the mixture being passed through an oily water
 separator, notwithstanding findings of a national committee
 on the inadequacies of separation equipment.

    In consequence of these and other difficulties the United
 States did not sign the Convention until 1961, in time to
 join  the following  year in a new Conference convened to
 amend the 1954 document.

 The 1962 Conference:
    The consequence of the 1962 amending Conference was
 a strengthening of the Convention extending prohibited
 zones considerably  further to sea. The oil record book was
 set out in greater detail. The impact of the 1954 document
 was also softened in certain respects such as allowing oil in
 bilges to be pumped overboard as long as the discharge did
 not contravene the Convention, where  the  1954 version
 required an oily water separator. The 1962 Conference also
 removed the obligation of Governments to furnish in each
 main port oily water reception facilities and instead charged
 them to promote provision  of such facilities. Combined
 with  retention of the exemption for ships proceeding  to a
 port  not having  reception facilities, some of the "clout"
 seems to have  been lost. However, this relaxation was not
 to  be allowed a new ship of 20,000  tons gross tonnage,
 which at that point in time was evidently regarded as the
 outer limit. (This corresponds approximately to a tanker of
650'  in length. Today supertankers exceed  1,000 feet in
 length.)  Any  future  such  vessel  was  precluded from
 discharging  oil  or  oily  mixture except in exceptional
 circumstances and then only outside the prohibited zones
 with  a full report of the  circumstances  of each such  case
 being required.


Reception Facilities:
   In preparation  for  the  1962  Conference the United
States National Committee  conducted  a survey of  the
extent to which  reception facilities for oily  wastes were
available in the United States.  The table at Annex  I is
excerpted from the Proceedings of the  Merchant Marine
Council  of the U.S. Coast Guard, issue of May,  1961. A
similar survey  is currently  under way  and  it  will be
interesting to leam what has happened in the past  10 years
toward increasing such facilities in this country.

Safety and Pollution:
   Pollution by ships is an offshoot of safety needs. This is
not  only the  case with  accidents but with "routine"
operations. Ships must regularly dispose of oily  bilge to
preserve  stability and to eliminate the accumulation of a
 fire hazard. Conventional  vessels at various times take on
 ballast into emptied fuel tanks to preserve stability. Tankers

-------
                                                                         INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITY ...    29
take  on  ballast  water  into  cargo tanks to adequately
immerse propeller and rudder for controllability  as well as
to immerse the hull to reduce structural stress in heavy seas.

  The problem is  getting rid of the contaminated water.
The delay and inconvenience caused by insufficient disposal
facilities in ports along with heavy  penalties for harbor
pollution have generally been  cause  for  evasion of the
carriage of required ballast in  oil tanks.  This  was  most
clearly demonstrated in  1956 when, having experienced a
collision off Nantucket inbound to New York,  the crack
Italian liner ANDREA  DORIA took a sharp  initial list
which led to progressive flooding and the eventual loss of
the  ship. According  to  a  Coast Guard investigation con-
ducted for the House Merchant Marine Fisheries Committee
the vessel ought to have survived the damage. While her loss
could be directly attributed  to failure to carry required
ballast water in the wing fuel tanks when empty, the
motivation  for non-compliance  was doubtless the  wish to
avoid the in-port problem of disposing of oily water. This
problem  of ballasting  of passenger ships  was  studied
extensively  by a U.S. Construction Committee preparing
the national position for the 1960 Safety of Life at Sea
Conference, convened as a  consequence of the  ANDREA
DORIA sinking. The Committee  concluded that a  ship
obliged to  rely  on ofly ballast operation had  a built-in
safety hazard as a consequence of the distasteful aspects
which prompt evasion by  the  master and engineer.  The
US., therefore,  recommended  to  the  Conference  that
reliance on oily ballast operation by passenger ships should
be minimized and  that future ships should be capable of
operating over as much of the intended route as practicable
without  resorting  to  oily ballast  for  maintenance of
required stability.

   What  emerged  in the  1960  Safety  of Life at Sea
Convention is less specific, i.e., Regulation 8, Chapter II -
      "When ballasting with water is necessary, the water
      ballast should  not in general  be carried in  tanks
      intended for  oil fuel.  In ships in which it is not
      practicable to avoid putting water in oil  fuel tanks,
      ofly water separator equipment to the satisfaction of
      the Administration shall be fitted or other alternative
      means acceptable to the  Administration  shall be
      provided for disposing of the oily water ballast."

IMCO:
   An important event in  1959 was the coming into force
of the Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organiza-
tion (IMCO), a specialized agency of the United Nations for
maritime matters. The IMCO Convention had been drawn
up  in 1948 but it took  10 years before there was  a
sufficient number  of signatories to bring the Organization
to life.

   The creation of IMCO provided a forum for  continuing
exchange among the world's maritime  safety administra-
tions. The  Organization promptly became the custodian of
important  international conventions regarding the sea and
the  means by which those international treaties could be
kept up-to-date on a regular basis. Among the first activities
of IMCO were  the conducting of conferences in 1960 on
Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) and in  1962 on amending
the Convention for  Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by
Oil as mentioned earlier.

   There are a number of international organizations taking
an interest  in controlling marine pollution but the actions
of IMCO have the most direct impact. From this point most
of the discussion will pertain to work  being done in this
Organization. It  therefore  seems appropriate to provide
some insight as to the mandate, structure and procedures of
this body.

   The Assembly is the central body of the Organization
and  is  composed  of  the  72  member  states.  Regular
Assembly meetings  are held every two years but the body
may hold  extraordinary sessions when there  is an urgent
need. The Council is the administrative  organ comprised of
18 states which generally meet twice a year. Subordinate
to  the  Council  are  the  Legal Committee, Facilitation
Committee, and as  the primary action  element, the Mari-
time Safety Committee (MSC). The  MSC is made up of 16
member states and beneath this body there are at the
present time 11 working Subcommittees handling technical
matters according to function or discipline. Annex II is a
graphic depiction of the IMCO structure. The work in the
IMCO technical  program is  not conducted  by its small
established Secretariat but by  the  representatives of the
member nations. This has  a steadying effect because
proponent  and advocate are  obliged to personally under-
take  the basic  research to document and support  their
porposals.


   The Organization holds approximately 24 meetings each
calendar year. These meetings range from the subcommittee
level in which'purely technical considerations are appropri-
ate to those of the Assembly which as the governing body
of IMCO votes on proposals from the lower bodies after all
phases of the proposals have been considered.

   The finished product of IMCO is the IMCO resolution. It
has  been examined carefully from all angles and  been
approved by vote of the Assembly on which all member
nations have equal representation.

   At this point it is essential to appreciate the effect of an
IMCO decision upon the U.S. industry and the public in
general. To begin with, it should be clearly understood that
IMCO decisions are NOT automatically binding upon the
various governments. IMCO "recommends" the decision to
the  governments for  adoption. It is then  up  to the
individual  governments to  decide if they  want to adopt
IMCO's recommended action. In this country, if the IMCO
recommendation relates to an International Convention or
an amendment  to  an International Convention, it would
not be binding upon industry or the public until:
   a. Ratified by the United States.
   b. Implementing legislation is passed (if needed); and

-------
30     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
   c. Regulations (if needed)  are  promulgated  in  the
     normal manner (in the case of Coast Guard Regula-
     tions, this includes a public hearing).

   If the IMCO  recommendations  did not  relate to an
International Convention  it would  not be binding upon
industry or the public until:
   (1) The Department of State refers the matter to the
       appropriate  agency (in  the  case  of  a technical
       maritime safety matter this would probably be the
       Coast Guard);
   (2) Implementing legislation  is passed  (if needed); and
   (3) Regulations  (if needed)  are promulgated in the
       normal manner (in  the case of Coast Guard Regula-
       tions, this includes holding a public hearing).

 Pre-TORREY CANYON:
   Up to the point  of the TORREY CANYON incident in
 the  Spring of  1967, IMCO had undertaken  studies on a
 wide range of subjects through its Technical Subcommittee
 Organization, based primarily upon  the recommendations
 of the 1960 Safety  of Life at Sea Conference including the
 Rules  for the Prevention  of Collisions at Sea- and of the
 1962 Conference for the Prevention of Oil Pollution at Sea.
 Agreement  was  reached  by the  Organization   on  the
 following items  having a bearing  on prevention of oil
 pollution without the  stimulus  of that unfortunate inci-
 dent:
   -Standardized day  and  night markings  for  oceano-
     graphic craft and structures;
   —Recommended   maintenance  of  certain  navigation
     lights on  islets in the Red  Sea  to enhance safety of
     tankers and other vessels plying those waters;
   -Endorsed the separation of  traffic in the Strait  of
     Dover along with  the improvement of the pertinent
     navigational aids;
   -Developed jointly with the International Labor Organi-
     zation a guidance document on  the education and
     training of masters, officers and seamen;
   —Revised the International Code of Signals;
   -Agreed upon lights and shapes for dracones under tow;
   -Promoted the extension of weather reporting services;
   -Agreed to encourage provision of spaces onboard ship
     for  the separation, clarification or purification and
     carriage of slop oil  by allowing such spaces to be
     deducted  from gross tonnage  in determining net
     tonnage.
   -Recommended the performance  of navigation lights in
     large vessels with high superstructures aft.
   —In 1966 conducted a major international conference to
     update  the International Load  Line Convention of
     1930, including for the first time requirements for the
     internal compartmentation of cargo ships.

Post-TORREY CANYON:
   The pace quickened with the grounding of the TORREY
CANYON leading the United Kingdom Government to call
for a special meeting of the IMCO Council, which in May
1967 added to the Organization's already formidable work
program new dimensions and priorities regarding pollution
control.  Following an outline prepared by  the British,
measures discussed were broken down as follows:
      (a)   Preventive Measures:
             Sealanes
             Shore Guidance
             Speed Restrictions
             Navigational Equipment
             Officer and Crew Training
             Use of Automatic Pilots
             Construction and Design of Tankers
             Identification and Charting of Hazards
      (b)   Remedial Measures:
             Procedures in the Event of Accidents
             Research on Oil Clearance
      (c)   Legal Measures:
             Legal Rights of a Coastal State
             Official Inquiries
             Liability in Event of Accidents
             Compulsory Insurance for Tankers
             Movement of Salvage Equipment

   Technical proposals were assigned to IMCO's  standing
Subcommittees for study and to  cope with the  legal
questions there was established under the Council a Legal
Committee. On the suggestion of the United  States, these
groups were given wide latitude in their studies.

   The IMCO program on control of pollution has pro-
ceeded at a steady pace and at Annex III is the record of
actions taken by the Assembly  in 1968 and 1969.

   Resolution 175 was the most significant action, amend-
ing the Convention on Prevention of Pollution of  the Seas
by Oil. The changes were directed toward promoting use of
the  "load  on top"  procedure in  tankers.  This is  the
technique currently employed in such vessels which in-
volves decanting of the tank washings during the cleaning of
tanks and the drawing off of  water from beneath the oil.
The remaining oil and water mixture is transferred to a slop
tank and there further decanted. Eventually, the residue is
mixed with the next cargo which is added on top of the
slops. Evaluation  of this procedure started in  1965 by the
IMCO Subcommittee on Marine Pollution which found that
the load  on top procedure, during certain phases, contra-
vened the Oil Pollution Convention and suggested a number
of possible  modifications  to  bring  it more  nearly  into
compliance. Resolution 175 recognized that, notwithstand-
ing its shortcomings, the load on top procedure offered a
means of reducing the amount of oil going into the sea and
should be encouraged.
1969 Revision of the Ofl Pollution Convention:
   The principal change eliminates the free zones in which
dumping or  discharge  of oil  is not  regulated with an
exception that the ship or tanker be proceeding en route

-------
                                                                          INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITY ...    31
and that  the "instantaneous  rate  of discharge  of oil
content" does not exceed 60 litres per mile.

  In ships other than tankers, discharge must be made as
far as practical  from land, and the oil content less than
100 parts per 1,000,000 of the mixture.

  The amount of oil so discharged from a tanker must be
limited to 1/15,000 of the total cargo-carrying capacity and
the discharge must take place more than 50 miles from the
nearest land. This would not apply to  ballast from a cargo
tank which if discharged from a stationary tanker into calm
water on a clear day, would leave no visible trace of oil on
the water.

  Another change  eliminates the exemption for discharge
of oily residues.

  A twelve-month period is allowed for vessels to change
oil drainage and  bilge systems, after which they would be
required to comply with the amended Convention.

Brussels Conventions:
  Pursuant to  Resolution  171, in  November 1969 an
International Legal Conference  was held in Brussels, Bel-
gium, resulting in two Conventions entitled:
  (1) The International Convention Relating to Interven-
      tion on  the  High Seas  in Cases of Oil  Pollution
      Casualties.
  (2) The International Convention on Civil Liability for
      Oil Pollution Damage.

  The Convention Relating to Intervention  on the High
Seas is important in  dealing with oil pollution hazards on
the high seas  since at present it is unclear under interna-
tional law what rights a State has to take  action against a
foreign-flag vessel beyond its territorial sea. The Convention
permits Parties to take such measures on  the high seas as
may be necessary to prevent, mitigate or eliminate a "grave
and imminent" danger of pollution by oil to their coastline
or related interests. Except in extreme urgency requiring
immediate measures, a coastal State exercising these rights
is required to first consult with other States affected by the
maritime casualty, and  to  notify persons whose interests
would be affected. Measures so taken must be proportion-
ate to the actual or  threatened damage. The vessel owner
may question the measures taken and receive compensation
for unjustified coastal State action.

   The  Convention  on Civil  Liability establishes  rules
relating to the liability of the owner of an oil carrying vessel
to governments and private parties for the  damages caused
by oil pollution. Under the Convention the owner of the
vessel is liable in all  cases for oil pollution  damage except
when he can prove that the damage was caused by: (a) an
act  of war, other hostilities, or act  of God  ("a  natural
phenomenon  of an exceptional inevitable  and irresistible
character"), (b)  an act or omission done  with intent to
cause damage by the person suffering damage or by a third
party, (c) negligence  of the person suffering damage, or (d)
negligence  of  a government.  Procedures are  set  forth
whereby the shipowner may limit his liability (per incident)
to $134 per gross registered ton or $14 million, whichever
is  lesser; the limitation is not permissible if the incident
occurred as the result of "the actual fault or privity of the
owner."  Once  this  fund  specified for  meeting  damage
claims in a given incident has been established, claims for
pollution damage arising out of that incident may not be
invoked against any other assets of the  owner. Another
requirement is that the owner of a ship carrying over 2,000
tons of oil  in  bulk  as cargo maintain insurance or  other
financial security sufficient to  cover his potential liability
under the Convention.

1970-71-The Age of Environment
   Just as  the  seventies  opened, explosions  occurred in
three  supertankers in the  space of one week. This did not
lead to pollution as  some wrongly  supposed,  because the
ships were ballasted and in process of cleaning tanks on the
return leg to the  Persian Gulf. However, these incidents
underscored the safety problems in transport of bulk crude
oil. As the year progressed, Murphy's Law (if anything can
go wrong, it will) seemed  to be in  full effect as collisions
and strandings  of oil tankers and blowouts in offshore oil
drilling 'operations occurred with perverse frequency, rivet-
ing the world's attention on the pollution issue.

   In  February  1970, the IMCO Subcommittee on Ship
Design &.Equipment reported  that as regards ship design
and construction, present technology afforded no immedi-
ately   practical  means  to  reduce  risk  of collision or
stranding.  Improvements  could,  however,  be  sought
through new devices such  as high-powered lateral thrusters,
braking  devices  and  controllable  pitch  propellers  and
research on these units was under way in several countries.

   It  was recognized that these risks could be reduced by
the extension of the concept  of separation of traffic and
improvement of the rules for  preventing collisions at sea,
both  of which were  under  active  development  by the
Subcommittee  on Safety  of Navigation. The  Ship Design
Subcommittee  did, however, draw up a  suggested format
for presentation of maneuvering and stopping data to be
carried on the bridge of large vessels for the information of
the master and watch officers.

   With regard  to measures to limit the escape of oil should
collision or stranding occur, the MSC noted that the size of
individual tanks  was increasing  with increase in size of
tanker so that the amount of oil that could escape from a
single accident was becoming enormous. The Subcommittee
on Ship Design was instructed to investigate the economic
impact of installing additional bulkheads on the cost of ship
construction and operation. The United  States Delegation
urged  that IMCO evaluate the  implications  of increasing
tank  size in supertankers from an  ecological  as well as a
naval  architectural standpoint.
   When the MSC met in October 1970, it agreed  as an
interim measure to recommend that no further increases in

-------
32     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
 tank size should be contemplated and set as a provisional
 upper limit 30,000 cubic meters for a wing tank and 50,000
 cubic  meters  for  a center tank. The U.S. Delegation
 consented to this proposal purely for interim purposes. The
 MSC agreed that the lower values should be adopted if at all
 practicable  and instructed  the  Subcommittee  on Ship
 Design and Equipment to deal with the determination of
 feasible reduction in tank  size limits as a  matter  of the
 highest urgency.

 NATO:
   Then  in November  1970, Secretary of Transportation
 Volpe addressing the opening session of NATO Conference
 on Challenges of Modem Society propose'd that the nations
 there   assembled  resolve to achieve  "by  mid-decade  a
 complete halt  to all international discharge of oil and oily
 wastes into the oceans by tankers and other vessels." With
 the change that this should be achieved by mid-decade if
 possible and certainly by 1980, this resolution was adopted.
 Detailed recommendations agreed to by NATO nations to-
 ward this end involve:  (1) Early ratification of the 1969
 amendments to the Convention for the  Prevention of
 Pollution of the Sea by Oil, (2) support and acceleration of
 the work  on  the  part  of international  organizations,
 particularly  IMCO,  on  development  of equipment  and
 procedures for ship safety, and for measuring and control-
ling oil content of discharges and (3) the improvement of
 reception facilities for oily wastes.

   In  effect, Secretary  Volpe  proposed that at last the
 world should set the date which could not be  fixed in 1954.
IMCO-1971:
   The NATO proposal was advanced by the U.S. Delega-
tion at the March 1971, meeting of the IMCO MSC and will
lead to an acceleration ot* that organization's work program.
The MSC also adopted additional traffic separation schemes
bringing the total number  to  65. The location of these
schemes are listed as Annex IV. Additionally, in an unusual
action, the MSC agreed that member governments should
make it an offense for ships of their registry which transit
any of the adopted traffic  separation schemes to proceed
against the established direction of traffic flow.

   Other Committee actions included study by the Sub-
committee on  Safety of Navigation of recent incidents in
the English Channel relative to a possible need to unify the
buoyage system used in international waters, particularly
those marking wrecks and other dangers  to  shipping;
performance standards for  navigational radar equipment
were approved;  and a recommendation was adopted on
improving the reliability of the  steering gear in large ships.
Studies  were  authorized  on  promulgating navigational
warnings to shipping and on enhancing safety of navigation
through the Straits of Dover.  Responding  to a proposal
submitted by Australia an amendment of the Oil Pollution
Convention was prepared to  prohibit discharge of oil within
50 miles of the Great Barrier Reef.
   The Committee also considered the results of the two
tasks of the Subcommittee on Ship Design & Equipment
mentioned earlier.

   The increased cost of building and operating oil tankers
corresponding to reduced volume of individual tanks was
evaluated by means of the parameter Required Freight Rate
(RFR)-the cost to transport  one ton of cargo without
profit.
where
        SE = operating cost per year
        /  = investment cost
            =
             (1 + /V* — 1
                           amortization coefficient at in-
                           terest rate i for an amortiza-
                           tion  time length  of n years
        Ta = tons of cargo carried per year.
The study was carried out for tankers of 140,000, 227,000,
312,000 and 425,000 DWT, in each case with subdivision
arrangements ranging from 4  sets of  tanks to  12 sets of
tanks. Longitudinal bulkheads were assumed placed at 1/4
and 1/3 the beam inboard of the side.

   Using the relative  increase  in  RFR permits neglecting
such factors as taxes and net profit which vary from one
nation  to another and from time to  time.  The diagram
appearing as Annex  V gives the essential results. While
recognizing  its  simplifications,  the  study procedure has
been concurred in by the tanker industry, except for an
opinion that the Subcommittee somewhat underestimated
the capital cost per ton of construction.  This would  shift
the absolute scale but would not significantly alter the
relative  results.  A similar  effort  by the  International
Chamber of  Shipping appears as Annex VI on which also is
shown  the variations of "hypothetical oil outflow" men-
tioned below.

   The Subcommittee also  developed  a proposal to limit
arrangement and size of tanks in future  tankers to minimize
oil  outflow  in  the event of collision or stranding.  The
Subcommittee tried to allow the designer maximum  free-
dom while  promoting installation of  defensive measures
such as double bottoms  and wing void spaces. Standard
damage  conditions were  assumed  for stranding and for
collision against which are evaluated the volume of tanks
breached.  For collision breaching the  hull at a bulkhead
between two wing tanks, all of the oil is assumed to escape.
In stranding, opening  the bottom at the junction of four
tanks, 1/3 of the oil is assumed to escape unless certain
special arrangements have been provided. The consequence
of  these injuries  should  not exceed  a "hypothetical oil
outflow" limit which was left to the MSC to decide:

-------
                                                                         INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITY . ..
                                                   33
   In March  1971, the MSC determined  that this figure
should not exceed a fixed quantity of 30,000 cubic meters
of oil. The proposal was drawn up as an amendment to the
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by
Oil and will be acted upon by the Assembly this fall. The
text of the resolutions and amendments appear at Annex
VII. If adopted as drafted, this requirement will affect all
tankers contracted for after 1 January 1972.

   In addition to these  technical  activities, the Legal
Committee of IMCO  is at work on preparations for a
Conference in Brussels in December 1971, to establish an
international  fund  to compensate  for damage  from  oil
spillage.  The  fund would  draw  its  resources  from  all
persons or companies (public and private) that import oil by
sea. The U.S. feels a condition for participation in the fund
should be that shipowners meet certain technical require-
ments toward preventing pollution incidents such as devel-
oped by IMCO.

Future Developments:
   In the fall of 1971 the Assembly will act on the product
of the work  program of the past two years. Additionally,
the aforementioned Legal Conference on the compensation
fund will take place.  In  1972, United Nations Conference
on the Human Environment is scheduled, to be followed in
1973 by a Conference on Marine Pollution under IMCO
auspices to deal  with maritime aspects arising  from  the
1972 UN. Conference. Also in prospect is a conference in
1973 or 1974 to revise the Rules for the Prevention of
Collisions at  Sea. Studies are under way  in the technical
Subcommittees to modify the Load Line or Safety Conven-
tions to extend subdivision measures to control floodability
of  a  ship's machinery space. The Subcommittee on Ship
Design will be looking into improving the stopping and
maneuverability  of vessels. By  1975 or 1976, a need to
revise the Safety  Convention will necessitate a Conference
because  of many changes in construction  requirements
since the 1960 Conference.

What's Missing:
   Over  the   past  9  years,  the  author  has been U.S.
representative and advisor to  nearly all  the  technical
subcommittees and the  Maritime Safety Committee.  He
considers IMCO  one of the most useful and productive of
international  forums and has nothing but admiration for its
dedicated staff and profound respect for the competence .of
those representing other governments. However, the agenda
of the MSC is very full in dealing with the technical work of
its functionally aligned subcommittees. The MSC, in  the
author's opinion  needs to provide  an  up-dated central
philosophy which would permit effective tradeoff between
construction  and operational requirements.
   'Commander Warren D. Andrews, a brilliant young officer, was
struck down by a stray ballet while passing, unaware, the scene of
a resisted arrest
   Internationally, a  great  deal  has been  done  and is
continuing in connection with pollution  abatement,  but
there is still lacking a comprehensive  analysis to decide
priorities.  This is not easy to achieve and definitive results
are not assured. Attached at Annex VIII is a draft of such
an analytic  approach dealing with  accidents leading to
pollution.  This was drawn up by the Planning Staff of the
Office of  Merchant Marine Safety, Coast Guard Headquar-
ters  over  two years ago. However, owing  to  the untimely
death of one of its leading members,*  the project was set
back severely and was  never  undertaken because of the
press of other requirements. (Development of the severity
factor "R" is particularly difficult.)

   Analyzing control  of pollution from "routine" opera-
tions, is  even more involved. This relates  to  Secretary
Volpe's proposal to NATO,  to completely  eliminate all
discharges of oil to the  sea. Virtually  all  existing tankers
and other  ships were designed with some such discharge as a
tolerated practice.

   To gain a little insight into the breadth of this matter,
consider eliminating tank washings from tankers. There are
five'conceivable "pure" alternatives:
   (a) Construct the  tankers  with sufficient clean ballast
      space that water need  not be taken into the cargo
      tanks. This would require more expensive hulls with
       reduced cargo deadweight capability for the volume.
      New ships constructed  on this line  would not enter
       service considering  the present  backlog  of orders
       before 1975 or 1976. Existing ships could of course
      be  converted to this mode of operation by eliminat-
      ing certain percentage  of the tankage. That would
      have   the  effect  of reducing suddenly  the  total
       available lift capacity the world over and would lead
       to  an almost immediate shortage  of oil.

   (b) Contrive  means of keeping oil and water separated
      by  a barrier or film to allow putting first  oil and
      later  water into the same tank.  This scheme would
      be  fitted in sufficient tanks to cover the ballast
      requirement, say 30%. This is easier said than done
      owing to the fact that crude oil is an impure product
      full of sand  and  sludge forming heavy deposits on
      surfaces. There would also be problems of access and
      the dimensions involved should not be ignored as a
      difficulty.

   (c) Develop  an oily  water separator that will totally
       eliminate the emission  of oil in the discharge. The
       flow rate required is in terms of hundreds of tons
       per  hour and  an  effective  oil content meter is
       necessary to insure control. These devices have been
       sought for the last 15 years or more without signal
       success. These devices  are  needed to enhance the
       reliability of the load on  top  procedure.  It is
       conceivable  that  separation  devices  could be fur-
       nished at shore side reception facilities where there
       is no restriction as to space, weight, power  or time,
       if not for shipboard use.

-------
34     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
  (d) After discharge  of the cargo, clean the tanks at a
      special cleaning station before authorizing the vessel
      to return to sea and take on ballast. The ship would
      then sail approved as clean enough to take on and
      discharge ballast freely. Such stations would involve
      extensive capital investments in the  oil consuming
      countries and would perhaps add a delay of three
      days to the schedule of tankers which is tantamount
      to a reduction in the world carrying capacity.
  (e) Build reception  facilities ashore  to receive the oily
      water before loading a fresh cargo. These faculties
      would have to be  located at the point from which
      the oil is taken, primarily the Persian Gulf, North
      Africa, Southeast Asia, and Caribbean. These facili-
      ties  would  necessitate a capital  investment,  the
      construction of facilities and the  obtaining of the
      operating technicians.

  It  is obviously possible  to have a mix  of these  five
alternatives and if we were only dealing with the problem
of disposition of tank washings from tankers it would not
be too difficult to discern where to make the investment.
However, Secretary of Transportation Volpe's proposal to
NATO also embraces  the elimination of bilge and oily
ballast discharge from conventional vessels. Although there
is less of this  waste by far per ship there are many more
such ships and unlike tankers, which have a relatively fixed
routing, the ports of call for conventional vessels are many
and  far flung. Consequently, in the total picture capital
investment in reception faculties on a world wide scale
seems essential if the objective of eliminating discharges of
oil to the sea is to be attained.

   There needs  to be  an extensive analysis to determine
how best to dedicate resources on a global basis. As far as
the  author is  aware   no such  analysis  has yet been
undertaken.
CONCLUSION:
   From this account of the international activity over the
past 50 years directed against oil pollution, two conclusions
can be drawn. First, had the problem been  simple  or
economic to solve, it  would have been solved a long time
ago. Second, it is time the control of oil pollution was
finally achieved.

-------
                                                              INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITY
35
                                        APPENDIX: 1
                                   TABLE I—December 1960
                U.S.A. SEA PORT AND LAKE PORT SHIPYARDS OF.VARIOUS CATEGORIES
        STATIONARY  AND MOBILE FACILITIES  FOR OILY WATERS, IN LONG TONS OF 2,240 POUNDS
Tort area

New York



Los Arigfctes

Seattle 	
Total 	 	
Total 1955. . —

Num-
IXTOl
yards
G
9
i
l-
13
•j
6
69
55
Stationary facilities
Tanks
Num-
ber
20
19
3
10
13
9
17
17
110
93
Tons
415
3.91.2
•> MS
1 i~<;
3*2
137
IC.'SW
42.125
32. 55'J
Pond sepa-
rators
Num-
ber

""G
o
10
2
24
20
Tons

1.032
"'S
2. 461
i.7f3
SO
C.OS9
12,423
Total
Num-
ber
20
23
S
1«
IS
9
27
19
131
US
Tons
415
4.994
2. HI ii
4,021
6.9S7
3S2
l.^O
2ii, 910
48.214
44. 9>2
Mobile facilities
Barges
Num-
ber
5
8
17
9
1C
10
18
80
PI
Tons
7.292
1.G74
1.300
7,9211
94(i
1,852
785
2.593
24,302
23,459
Tank ears
Num-
ber
12
9
7
4
8
2
42
56
Tons
308
293
247
2S
309
130
1.375
1.423
Tank tracks
Num-
ber



2
4
"I
10
37
33
Tons



10
62
369
50
491
361
Portable
tanks
Num-
ber


	
3
15
18
125
Tons


	
30
540
570
S63
Total
Num-
ber
19
5
17
•M
9
27
39
45
187
295
Tons
T.600
1.674
1.593
xir;
94-5
1,972
1.523
3.313
2-5.79S
26.106
Totfil ill
facilities
Num-
ber
39
28
20
44
24
36
06
64
321
113
Ton?
Ji.C'15
t>.er-
minnls
503
3. 2A5
S. 175
'M!
5. 70s
9,790
7.030
9.025
U, MS
4. 435
4, 7S3
3. 3'Jl
4. 3'JO
1.211
Gfi. 9M
C2.UI1
Oily water storage capacity
Tanks
Num-
ber
6
20
14
3
7
13
2
10
17
9
7
S
G
3
125
124
Lone
tons
1.459
39. 01S
S3. 3DS
l.t'SO
32.5*5
49,720
11.571
47.9S3
12.640
2S.543
u. 97
S7. wlO
31.77o
53.M7
120. 709
3i. 3S4
15.53S
15.6-VI
6. V
44. K3
1U3. SIC
1.CC1
571.7*1
3S7, 14!
Total
Num-
ber
10
3)
27
16
10
*v>
10
16
£s
15
11
19
&
3
232
217
Isr-Z
toes
4. NO
H.O.J5
UJ.WS
»ibc«
V5.0V2
1:0. ias
40.955
63.53
%3M
34.6*5
Ii.'J4
117,361
17.167
3,492
?j-. 175
t-a,>ii

-------
36     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
                                                APPENDIX:  2
APPENDIX: 3
October 1968—Resolutions of an Extraordinary
   Session of the Assembly:
Resolution No.
   146—Amends SOLAS  1960  to  require  radar,  radio
      direction-finding gear, gyro compass, echo sounder,
      nautical publications and use of automatic pilot.

   147—Requires masters to report all accidents in which
      they are involved to a government appointed officer
      or agency  if  an oil spill  occurs  or  is  probable.
      Governments to insure that such  reports are for-
      warded to the appointed officer or agency promptly
      and to provide  IMCO with information designating
      appointed officers or agencies for circulation  to
      member nations.

   148—Governments to implement arrangements in order
      to deal with significant spillage of oil from ships.

   149—Regional cooperation in dealing with significant
      spillages  of oil,  such as among  the North Sea
      countries.

   150—Research and exchange of information on methods
      for disposal of oil in cases of significant  spillages.

   151-Govemments to cooperate in detection of offenses,
      enforcement  of provisions,  and  investigation  of
      infractions of the International Convention  for the
      Prevention of Pollution of the Seas by Oil.

   152—Encourages development and use of any possible
      system or device whereby oily mixtures from tank
      cleaning or ballasting are not discharged into the sea.

   153—Urges review  of national laws  on penalties for
      unlawful discharge of oil outside the territorial sea to
      insure  adequate severity,  to  improve  penalties  if
      necessary and  submit study and results to IMCO.
      Prosecuting  authorities to be given instructions as
      will  enable  systematic proceedings to be  taken
      against any unlawful discharge of oil. Proposals for
   amending the  1954 Oil Convention in order to more
   severely  penalize unlawful  acts of pollution to be
   prepared in time, if possible, for consideration of the
   next IMCO Assembly meeting.

154—Governments are to report installation or changes
   of oil  reception facilities to IMCO for distribution,
   to encourage studies on how facilities can be used
   more effectively and to encourage ships under their
   flag to use shore reception facilities where available.
155-The Maritime Safety Committee of IMCO to insure
   that amendments to the Oil Pollution Convention
   (especially in respect to prohibiting the discharge of
   oil outside the prohibited zone) are proposed in time
   for the next session of the IMCO Assembly, and the
   need  for  amendment  as regards to detection and
   enforcement of deliberate  pollution be determined.

156-Ships  to carry an  efficient electronic position-
   fixing device suitable  for  the trade in which em-
   ployed and appropriate amendment of SOLAS 1960
   to  be prepared for  consideration  by  the  IMCO
   Assembly.
157-Recommendation on the use and testing of ship-
   borne navigational equipment. Importance of mak-
   ing most effective use of all navigational aids to be
   brought to notice of ships' masters. Operational tests
   of shipborne navigational equipment to be carried
   out  as  frequently  as  possible at sea, particularly
   when hazardous navigation is expected. Tests to be
   recorded in the Log Book. Development and use of
   reliable  speed and distance indicators to be encour-
   aged.

158—Recommendation on port advisory services, partic-
   ularly  in  terminals and ports where noxious or
   hazardous cargoes are handled, and requiring masters
   to give  early indication of expected time  of arrival.

-------
                                                                        INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITY . . .
                                                37
  159-Recommendation on pilotage services to be organ-
     ized as a contribution to safety of navigation. Ships
     for which pilot services are mandatory to be defined.

  160-Recommendation on data concerning maneuvering
     capabilities and  stopping  distances  on ships  to be
     available  on  the bridge for various conditions of
     draught and speed.

  161-Recommendation on establishing traffic separation
     schemes and  areas to be avoided by ships of certain
     classes.  Adopts terms, definitions and general prin-
     ciples  concerning traffic  separation  and  routing.
     Requests  the IMCO Maritime Safety Committee to
     keep the subject of traffic separation schemes under
     continuous review.

  162—Recommendation on  additional  day and night
     signals for deep-draught ships in narrow channels.

  171-Convening  of a conference on public and private
     law aspects  of  pollution damage resulting from
     maritime  casualties to be held in November 1969, in
     Brussels.

  172—Recommendation  for  uniform application  and
     interpretation of Regulation 27 of the International
     Convention on Load Lines,  1966. Governments to
     give  effect  to  this  recommendation as  soon as
     possible.
   173-Participation in  official inquiries into maritime
      casualties. A state  affected by or having an interest
      in a maritime casualty to be allowed participation in
      the inquiries  or  other  such proceedings relative to
      the casualty.
Activity in 1969:
   In October 1969, the IMCO Assembly met in London
for its sixth regular session, and adopted  the  following
resolutions:

   175—Amends  the  International  Convention for the
      Prevention  of Pollution of the Sea by Oil. (To be
      explained in this paper.)

   176-Noting the  U.N. Conference on Human Environ-
      ment  scheduled  for 1972, decides on  an interna-
      tional conference on Marine Pollution for 1973 to
      consummate agreement on international restraint of
      contamination of the  sea, land and air  by ships,
      vessels and other equipment in the marine environ-
      ment.

   177-Recommends performance  standards  for naviga-
      tional  lights  to  ensure  early identification among
      vessels of their respective attitudes and conditions of
      operation.
178—Recommends adoption of rules for positioning of
   navigation lights to increase accuracy in estimating
   the aspect of observed ships.

179-Recommends establishment of fairways or shipping
   routes through off-shore exploration areas to ensure
   that exploitation  of sea-bed  resources does  not
   obstruct shipping routes.

180—Recommends  location of off-shore platforms be
   disseminated by Notices to Mariners and/or radio
   warnings.

182—Recommends  off-shore platforms and associated
   ships,  aircraft  and  land  stations  be  fitted  with
   maritime mobile safety radiocommunications equip-
   ment.

186-Adopts traffic  schemes in the approaches  to New
   York Harbor, Santa Barbara and Delaware Bay, long
   with schemes for other areas  in Europe and South
   Africa.
188—Recommends   the  "Document  for  Guidance—
   1968" on training of masters, officers and  crew to
   supersede one approved earlier.

189-Study  on  need  of centralizing in  IMCO   the
   statistical experience of oil spills.

192—Authorizes study and preparations for a conference
   revising the Regulations for Preventing Collisions at
   Sea, 1960, to be held in 1972.
                APPENDIX: 4

          Traffic Separation Schemes
          A. Baltic Sea:
            1. Off Sommers Island
            2. Off Hogland (Gogland) Island
            3. Off Rodsher Island
            4. Off Kalbadagrund Lighthouse
            5. Off Porkkala Lighthouse
            6. Off Hankoniemi Peninsula
            7. Off Kopu Peninsula
            8. Off Gotland Island
            9. Off Oland Island
          10. Approaches to Rostock
          11. In the Sound

          B. Western European Waters
            1.  Off the Oslo Fjord
            2.  OffOksoy
            3.  OffLindesnes
            4.  OffLista
          5-6.  OffFeistein
            7.  In the German Bight
            8.  At North Hinder
            9.  North of Sandettie Bank

-------
38     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
             10. In the Strait of Dover
             11. Off Lizard
             12. Off Lands End
             13. South of the Scilly Isles
             14. West of the Scilly Isles
             15. Off Smalls
             16. Off Skerries
             17. Off Chicken Rock
             18. In the North Channel
             19. Off Tuskar Rock
             20. Off Fastnet Rock
             21. OffCasquets
             22. OffUshant
             23. Rochebonne Shelf
             24. Off Finisterre
             25. Off Cape Roca
             26. Off Cape St. Vincent
             27. At Banco del Hoyo
             28. Off Hook of Holland
            C. Mediterranean and Black Sea
              1.  In the Strait of Gibraltar
              2.  Off Card Island
              3.  Off Cape Bon
             D.  Indian Ocean and Adjacent Waters
              1. In the Gulf of Suez
              2. In the Southern portion of the Red Sea
              3. In the Bab el Man deb Strait
              4. In Hormuz Strait
              5. In Persian Gulf

             E.  Off South Africa
              1. Cooper Point
              2. South Sand Bluff
              3. Bashee Point
              4. Hood Point
              5. Great Fish Point
              6. Cape Recife
              7. Seal Point
              8. Cape Agulhas
              9. Quoin Point
             10.  Slangkop Point
             11. Alphard Banks

             F. Far East and South East Asia
              1. Cape Terpenie (Sakhalin)


             G. America, Atlantic Coast
              1. Off New York
              2. Off Delaware Bay
              3. In the approaches to Chesapeake Bay
              4. OffChedabuctoBay

             H. America, Pacific Coast
              1.  Off San Francisco
              2. In the Santa Barbara Channel
              APPENDIX:  5
    RFR VERSUS SWCffD VOUJME OF WNGWKS
             SHIP A 14000 TWO-HFE
                 B 227000 "
               -  C 3BOOO •
               -  D «5000 •
               TOMMCODE Vl/ll ANNEX III
                                             5,00
450
                                                                                                            350
    vc( of single wing tanks (in c/mvWH
                 APPENDIX: 6
             trfo    soxtwn1^
-XK
2QDOO
                                  FrcmMCOMSC XXH82

                                         fig «5

-------
                                                                        INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITY . . .
                                                   39
APPENDIX: 7
MARITIME SAFETY COMMITTEE
23rd Session
Agenda item 8


LIMITATION OF TANK SIZE OF OIL TANKERS
FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF MINIMIZING
POLLUTION OF THE SEA BY OIL

Draft Resolution
Amendments to the International Convention for
the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil, 1954

THE ASSEMBLY,
   NOTING  Article   16(i)  of  the Convention  on  the
Inter-Governmental Maritime  Consultative Organization
concerning the functions of the Assembly,

   BEING CONSCIOUS of the responsibility of the Organ-
ization for taking effective measures for the prevention and
control of pollution of the marine environment which may
arise from maritime activities,

   REALIZING that  notwithstanding the adoption by the
Organization  of various measures for preventing collisions
and strandings of ships, it  is  not possible to eliminate
entirely accidents  which may lead to release of oil, but
desiring to minimize ensuing damage to the environment,

   RECOGNIZING that construction of oil tankers of large
size without  accompanying  control  of size  or  internal
arrangement of cargo tanks leads to the possibility, in the
event of a single accident, of serious environmental pollu-
tion,

   HAVING EXAMINED the recommendations relating to
tank  arrangements and  to  the limitation of tank  size
prepared by the Maritime Safety Committee at its twenty-
third session,


   CONSIDERING that the  universal  implementation of
such requirements  can best be achieved by amending the
International Convention for  the Prevention of Pollution of
the Sea by Oil, 1954,


   NOTING that Article XVI of the International Conven-
tion for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil, 1954
provides for procedures of amendment involving participa-
tion by the Organization,

   ADOPTS the following Amendments to the Articles and
Annexes  to that  Convention,  the  texts  of  which  are
attached to this Resolution:
   (a) the addition of a new Article VI bis, and
   (b) the addition of a new Annex [C],
   REQUESTS the  Secretary-General of the Organization,
 in conformity with subparagraph (2)(a) of Article XVI to
 communicate  for consideration and acceptance, certified
 copies  of this  Resolution  and  its attachment,  to  all
 Contracting Governments to the International Convention
 for the Prevention  of Pollution of the Sea by Oil,  1954,
 together with copies to all Members of the Organization,

   INVITES  all  governments  concerned  to  accept  the
 Amendments at the  earliest possible date, and

   DETERMINES  in accordance  with  paragraph  (5) of
 Article  XVI  that  these  Amendments  are  of such  an
 important nature that any Contracting Government which
 makes a declaration under paragraph (4) of Article XVI and
 which does not accept the Amendments within a period of
 12 months after the Amendments come into  force, shall,
 upon the  expiry of this period, cease to be a party to the
 present  Convention.
ARTICLE VI bis
(1) Every tanker to which the present Convention applies.
  '  and for  which the building contract is placed on or
    after the date of coming into force of this Article shall
    be constructed in accordance with the provisions of
    Annex [C].  In  addition, every tanker to which the
    present Convention applies and for which the building
    contract is placed,  or  in the absence of a building
    contract the keel of which is laid or  which is at a
    similar stage of construction, before the date of coming
    into force  of this Article shall  be required, within two
    years after that date, to comply with the provisions of
    Annex [C], where such a tanker falls into either of the
    following categories:

(a) a tanker, the delivery of which is after 1 January 1977;
    or
(b) a tanker to which both the following conditions apply:
    (i) delivery is not later than 1 January 1977; and
    (ii)  the  building contract is placed after 1  January
        1972,  or in cases where no building contract has
        previously  been placed,  the  keel  is laid or the
        tanker is  at a similar stage of construction  after
        30 June  1972.
(2) A tanker required under paragraph (1) of this Article to
    be constructed in accordance  with Annex [C] and so
    constructed shall carry on board a certificate issued or
    authorized by the responsible Contracting Government
    attesting  such  compliance. A tanker  which under
    paragraph  (1) of this  Article is  not  required to be
    constructed in accordance with Annex [C] shall carry
    on board  a  certificate to  that  effect issued or au-
    thorized by the responsible Contracting Government, or
    if the tanker  does comply  with Annex  [C]  although
    not required  to do so,  it  may carry on  board a
    certificate  issued  or authorized  by the  responsible
    Contracting Government attesting such compliance.  A
    Contracting Government shall not permit such tankers

-------
40     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
    under its flag to trade unless the appropriate certificate
    has been issued.

(3) Certificates issued under the authority of a Contracting
    Government shall be accepted by the other Contracting
    Governments for all purposes covered by the present
    Convention. They shall  be regarded  by  the  other
    Contracting Governments as having the  same force as
    certificates issued by them.

(4) If a  Contracting  Government has clear grounds for
    believing that a tanker required under paragraph (1) of
    this  Article to  be  constructed  in  accordance with
    Annex [C]  entering ports u> its territory or using
    off-shore terminals under its control does not in fact
    comply with Annex [C], such Contracting Government
    may  request consultation with the Government with
    which the  tanker is  registered. If, after such consulta-
    tion  or otherwise,  the Contracting Government is
    satisfied that the tanker does not comply with Annex
    [C],  such Contracting Government may for this reason
    deny such  a  tanker access  to ports in  its territorial
    waters or to off-shore terminals under its control until
    such  time  as  the Contracting Government is satisfied
    that the tanker does comply.
ANNEXC
Requirements Relating to Tank Arrangements
   and to the Limitation of Tank Size
Assumed Extent of Damage
   In  the  following paragraphs three dimensions of the
extent of damage of a parallel piped due to both collision
and stranding are assumed. In  the case of stranding, two
conditions are  set forth to be applied individually to the
stated  portions of the  ship. These values represent the
maximum assumed damage in such accidents and are to be
used to determine by  trial at all conceivable locations the
worst  combination  of compartments  which would be
breached by such an accident.
Collision
Longitudinal extent (/r):

Transverse extent (fc)
inboard from the ship's
side at right angles to
the centreline at the
level of the load line:

Vertical extent (yc):

Stranding
1/2/3
       or 14.5 m, whichever is
       less
B
— or 11.5 m, whichever is less
   from the base line upwards
   without limit
                        For 0.3L from
                        the forward
                        perpendicular
                        of the ship
                   Any other
                   part of
                   the ship
                                  Longitudinal ex tent (/s):     —
                                                          n
                                  Transverse -extent (ts):   -7- or 10.0 m,
                                                            whichever is less
                                    5m
                                    5m
                                  Vertical extent (vs)
                                  from the base line:
                B_
                15
or 6 m, whichever is less, for
any part of the ship
                                  where:  L, B in metres and perpendicular are as defined in
                                          Regulation 3 of the International Convention on
                                          Load Lines, 1966
                                  HYPOTHETICAL OIL OUTFLOW FROM TANKS
                                     ASSUMED TO BE BREACHED AS A RESULT
                                     OF THE ACCIDENT
                                     The hypothetical oil outflow in the case of collision (Oc)
                                  and stranding (Os) should be calculated by the  following
                                  formulae with respect to compartments breached by each
                                  assumed location of damage as defined in Section  1.
                                                          Collision
                                                          Oc =
                                                          Stranding
                                  where:
                                                                                    (0
                                                                                                           (2)
                                o
 Wf =  volume of a wing tank in m  breached by
      the  damage assumed in  Section 1; Wj for a
      clean ballast tank may be taken equal to zero,
 Ci =  volume of a centre tank in m  breached by
      the  damage assumed in  Section 1; Cj for a
      clean ballast tank may be taken equal to zero,

Kf=  1	; when £>,- is equal to or greater than £,
         'c
      KJ should be taken equal to zero,
       _h(
Zj =  1 —=- ; when A,- is equal to or greater than vs,
       ""-Vs
      Zj should be taken equal to zero,
h{ =  width of wing tank in m under consideration,
hj =  minimum depth of the double bottom in m
      under  consideration; where no double bot-
      tom is fitted, hi should be  taken  equal to
      zero
wing  tank = any tank adjacent to the side shell
      plating,
centre tank  =  any tank inboard a longitudinal
      bulkhead.

-------
                                                                          INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITY ...    41
Special requirements

   If a void space or clean water ballast tank of a length less
than/c as defined in first section is located between wing oil
tanks,  Oc in formula (1) may be calculated on the basis of
volume W{ being the actual volume of one such tank (where
they are of equal capacity) or the smaller of the two tanks
(if they differ in capacity) adjacent to such space, multiplied
by Si as defined below and taking for all other  wing tanks
involved in  such a collision the value  of the  actual  full
volume.
where:
/,-  =

              length in m of void space or clean ballast
              tank under consideration.
   (a)  Credit should only be  given  in  respect of double
       bottom  tanks which are either empty or carrying
       clean water when cargo is carried in the tanks above.

   (b)  Where the double bottom does not extend for the
       full length and width of  the  tank involved, the
       double bottom  is considered non-existent and the
       volume of the tanks above the area of the stranding
       damage is to be included in formula (2) even if the
       tank is  not considered breached  because of the
       installation of such a partial double bottom.

   (c)  Suction wells may be neglected in the determination
       of the value hi provided such wells are not excessive
       in  area and extend below the tank for a minimum
       distance and in no case more than half the height of
       the double bottom.  If the depth of  such a well
       exceeds half of the height of the double bottom, hi
       should be taken equal to the double bottom height
       minus the well height.

       Piping  serving such  wells  if installed within the
       double bottom should be fitted with valves or other
       closing arrangements located at the  point of connec-
       tion to the tank served to prevent oil outflow in the
       event  of damage of the piping during stranding.
       Such piping should be installed as high from the
       bottom shell as possible.

       In the case where stranding damage simultaneously
       involves four centre tanks,  the value of Os may be
       calculated according to the formula
           Os  =
                                           (3)
       An  Administration  may  credit  as  reducing  oil
       outflow  in  case  of stranding, an  installed cargo
       transfer system having an emergency high suction in
       each cargo oil tank, capable of transferring from a
       breached tank or tanks to segregated ballast tanks or
       to available  cargo tankage if it can  be assured that
                                                         such tanks will have sufficient ullage. Credit for such
                                                         a system would be governed by ability to transfer in
                                                         two hours of operation, oil equal to one-half of the
                                                         largest  of the breached tanks  involved and  by
                                                         availability of equivalent receiving capacity in ballast
                                                         or  cargo  tanks.  The credit should be confined to
                                                         permitting calculation  of Os according to formula
                                                         (3). The pipes for such suctions should be installed
                                                         at least at a height not less than the vertical extent
                                                         of the stranding damage vs.

                                                         The Administration should supply IMCO with  the
                                                         information concerning the arrangements accepted
                                                         by  it, for circulation to other governments.
LIMITATIONS OF SIZE OF CARGO OIL TANKS

Limitation of hypothetical oil outflow
   The hypothetical oil  outflow  Oc or  Os calculated in
accordance with  the formulae in  Section 2  should  not
exceed 30,000 m3.

Limitation of volume of single tank
   The volume of a wing tank should  not exceed 22,500
m3..
   The volume of a centre tank should not exceed 50,000
m3.

Limitation of tank length
   The length of each tank should not exceed 10 m or one
of the foDowing values, whichever is greater:


   (a) where no longitudinal bulkhead is provided:
                         O.IL
   (b) where a longitudinal  bulkhead  is provided at the
       centreline only:
                         0.15L
   (c) where  two  or more  longitudinal  bulkheads  are
        provided:
       (i)  for wing tanks:
                         0.2L
       (ii)  for centre tanks:

           (1) if ~  isfequal to or greater than —
                13                         5
                         0.21
                b{           i
           (2) if— is less than —:
                D            J

              -where no centreline longitudinal bulkhead
               is provided:
                         (0.5 ^ + 0.1) L

              -where  a  centreline  longitudinal  bulkhead
               is provided:
                         (0.25-' + 0.15) L
                              B

-------
42     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
 DRAFT RESOLUTION
 RECOMMENDATION TO PUT INTO EFFECT
   REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO TANK
   ARRANGEMENTS AND TO THE LIMITATION
   OF TANK SIZE FROM THE POINT OF VIEW
   OF MINIMIZING POLLUTION OF THE SEA BY OIL


 THE ASSEMBLY,
   NOTING  Article  16(i)  of  the  Convention  on the
 Inter-Governmental  Maritime Consultative  Organization
 concerning the functions of the Assembly,

   NOTING  FURTHER  that  at its present  session  it
 adopted  by  Resolution A. (VII)  Amendments to the
 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution  of
 the Sea by Oil, 1954 concerning tank arrangements and the
limitation of tank size from the point of view of minimizing
 pollution of the sea by oil,

   INVITES all Governments concerned:

(a) to make known the provisions of the said Amendments
    to shipowners and operators under their jurisdiction,

(b) to put  into effect  the  said Amendments as  soon  as
    possible without  awaiting the entry into force of the
    said Amendments with regard to ships  intended for
    their registry for which the building contract is placed
    after the date on which this  Resolution is adopted and

 (c) to inform the Organization of measures taken by them
    in this respect.
APPENDIX 8:

Outline
   The purpose is to compare the relative effectiveness of
measures proposed to prevent or minimize potential pollu-
tion of the sea by oil from ship casualties.

   The  procedure  involves  considering circumstances in
which oQ may be released, taking into account the degree
of pollution which  may occur and the likelihood of the
incident.
   II. Potential Pollution Incidents: (not a complete list)
      a. Collision with Ship — Busy Populated Port
      b. Stranding - Populated Area
      c. Collision with Ship at Sea < 10 miles
      d. Collision with Ship > 10 < 100 miles at Sea
      e. Collision with Ship - Small Unpopulated Port
      f. Stranding — Isolated Area
      g. Collision with Ship > 100 Miles at sea
      h. Collision with Offshore Structure
      i. Collision in Port with Dock
      j. ...


  III.  Severity Factor: (R)
   R  is a factor to take cognizance  of the seriousness of
any one of the potential polluting incidents, as regards the
quantity of oil which may be released, the difficulty of
controlling the  released  oil, problem of cleaning  up, and
the extent of damage ensuing.

   Thus, Ra is the severity of the incident "Collision with
Ship - Busy Populated Port."

 IV. Frequency: (F)
   F is  the relative likelihood that any potential polluting
incident will occur. (Data on pollution are known to  be of
limited  quantity and detail, pollution having only recently
been recognized as a significant problem. Therefore,  since
the method  is entirely comparative, it could be valid to
draw  upon the record of incidents  listed  befalling  large
ocean-going vessels generally.)

   Thus, Fa is  indicative of  the  relative  probability of
potential polluting incident "a. Collision with Ship - Busy
Populated Port."

    V.  Effectiveness: (£)
   E is  a factor to evaluate the utility of any Alternative
Measures as applied to any potential  polluting incident.

   Thus, E\a is defined as follows:
        Number of incidents of  Type  a in which
      	Alternative 1 might be beneficial
    la ~f        Number of incidents of Type  a
 Elements Involved:
   I.  Alternative Measures: (not a complete list)
      1. Training of Ship's Officers
      2. Installation of Radar
      3. Tank Size Limit
      4. Tank Arrangement
      5. Backing Power Requirement
      6. Decreased Turning Circle
      7. Sea Lanes
      8	
      9	
 VI. Comparative Worth: (MO
   W is the comparative worth of any Alternative Measure.
Thus the Worth of Alternative Measure 1 is:
= 2 (RaFa
                                          . RnFnEln)
VII.  Other Factors:
   It is conceivable that in some Alternative Measures there
may  be inherent an increase in  risk of pollution. Such a
factor would have to be separately identified and a means
found for judging the negative contribution to Worth.

-------
                   THE  OIL  POLLUTION   PROBLEM   FROM
                THE  VIEWPOINT  OF  MARINE  INSURANCE
                                            Gordon W. Paulsen
                                       Haight, Gardner, Poor & Havens
    Together with Mr. Nicholas J. Healy of New York, who
has worked with me in the preparation of this paper, and to
whom  I  am  greatly indebted, I,  as an attorney,  have
represented  the   major  Protection  and  Indemnity
Associations—marine liability insurers—during the extensive
hearings which have been held for the last few years here in
the United States  concerning the Insurance  aspects of
proposed legislation respecting oil pollution by vessels. Our
clients have been referred to as the "London  Group" of
Protection and  Indemnity Associations, which  together
insure the owners and operators of approximately  three
quarters  of  the  world's  ocean-going  tonnage  against
liabilities  including  those resulting from oil spills. While
these Associations are called the "London Group", they are
not only  British but also Norwegian, Swedish, Japanese,
Luxumbourgian  and Bermudian.  The  assureds  include
vessels of all  nations including the United States. For  a
number of reasons, United States insurers of these types of
liabilities manage their coverage in different ways and for
these reasons are not included in the "London Group."

    Over one hundred years ago, as the maritime commerce
of the  world  grew  rapidly, various groups of shipowners
found that  the only way they could handle the risks of
claims being brought against  them was to band  together
mutually  to  insure  one another's liabilities.  The  basic
principle was  to be mutuality—that all of the members of
each Association were to be as nearly equal as possible with
respect to risks of  exposure. The risks with  which the
Protection and  Indemnity Associations  were  concerned
included all legal liabilities except  those covered  by hull
insurance. By  "legal liabilities" they included virtually all
liabilities  imposed by law, among which were liabilities to
passengers who might be injured, to shippers whose cargo
might be damaged in transit, and liabilities to persons  in no
way related to the  venture who might be damaged as  a
result of the operation of a vessel. There never has been any
doubt that one of the risks covered by the Protection and
Indemnity Associations was the risk of damage to persons
or property caused by accidental discharges of oil, provided
that  the  applicable  law recognized  such liability  and,
further, provided that the facts established that the incident
came within the proscriptions of such law.

    THE GENERAL MARITIME LAW AS APPLIED
       BY THE ADMIRALTY COURTS OF THE
       UNITED STATES IMPOSES LAIBILITY
          UPON VESSEL OWNERS FOR OIL
                    POLLUTION

    1. Damages
    While  there  have been  very  few  litigated  cases
concerning the question, it has long  been recognized by
Protection and Indemnity Associations that the  general
maritime  law imposes liability for damages resulting from
negligent  discharges of oil. One case in which this question
is specifically discussed is In Re New Jersey Barging Corp.,
168 F. Supp. 925, 1959 A.M.C. 2532, 1956 A.M.C. 1338,
1955  A.M.C.  2270  (S.D.N.Y.  1958).  Because of this
liability  the Associations have,  whenever the occasion
required,  financed extensive clean-up measures to prevent
such liabilities from arising, or at  least to keep them at a
minimum. For example, when there have been collisions or
groundings  in which  oil tanks  have  been ruptured the
Associations have paid for the measures required to contain
the oil and to prevent the oil's being spread to areas where
it could cause damage to persons  or property. During the
Congressional hearings evidence was produced to show the
amounts  which the Associations expended to  contain oil
spills  and also  to pay  damage  claims  when complete
containment was  not possible. Obviously such expenditures
would  not have been made  if  there had not  been  a
recognition that liability for such claims  exists without any
legislation whatsoever.
                                                    43

-------
 44    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
     2. Government Clean-Up Costs
     As  I  will  discuss later, after the Torrey Canyon
 grounding  in international waters off the coast of England
 in  1967,  the   British Government  asked  the
 Intergovernmental Maritime  Consultative  Organization
 (IMCO)  to draft an International Convention concerning
 the  power of  a  government  to act  with respect to
 containment  and  clean-up of  oil  spills  occurring in
 international waters. It was also feared that Her Majesty's
 government might  possibly be regarded by  a Court  as a
 "good  Samaritan"  or  volunteer  if  the government
 undertook  activities and would therefor not be entitled to
 recover  expenses incurred  in  connection with  such
 activities. I submit that the doubt as to power existed only
 because the incident occurred in international waters and
 that there  is little doubt that a  government would be
 entitled to take measures to control the effects of an oil
 spill  in  its own territorial waters-that  such government
 then would be held to be acting within its normal powers. I
 also  submit that  any  court  hearing  a  claim  for
 reimbursement would not deny such claim on the  ground
 that the government   was   a    volunteer   or  "good
 Samaritan". As a matter of fact, the Governments of both
 the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
 are  taking  the position  that  even  without  enabling
 legislation  they  are  entitled  to  recover   under similar
 circumstances. Thus,  they are now  claiming  for  such
 clean-up  costs in connection with the Ocean Eagle incident
 which occurred at San Juan, Puerto Rico on March 3, 1968,
 before enactment of P.L. 91-224.
    I further submit that even in the event of a government
 incurring costs of clean-up or minimization of damage to its
 shores resulting  from a high seas incident, there is little
 doubt that  the government would be able to recover from a
 negligent shipowner. The best evidence that no legislation is
 needed is the fact that the Torrey Canyon interests paid to
 the  French and  British governments  a total of over $7
 million for  the clean-up and preventive costs incurred in
 that high  seas incident even without  any international
 convention. Since  the  Protection  and Indemnity
 Association and  the excess under-writers which paid these
 amounts  do not exist for the purpose of cleaning-up the
 environment but  to protect and indemnify  their members
 for payments  with  respect to legal liabilities, it appears to
 me that  this substantial payment is the best evidence that
 legislation is not needed.
    In view  of the fact  that  liability for  damages  and
 clean-up  costs resulting from negligent discharges of oil
 already exists under the general  maritime  law, and since
 increasing  such  liabilities  by making  them absolute or
 unlimited has  no preventive effect whatsoever (but on the
 contrary  results in  heavy  expenditures by  the  maritime
 industry  and by  government without any  commensurate
 benefit to the public) I submit that legislation regarding civil
 liabilities in this field, is misdirected, and is at best a futile
exercise,and at worst simply fooling the public.
    Nevertheless, since  enactment  of laws  is apparently
 regarded  as a panacea for problems of almost any sort, let
 us examine the history of legislation in this area in order to
 ascertain whether or not there is a proper role for legislative
 action with respect to control and prevention of oil spills.
    THE ROLE OF LEGISLATION IN PREVENTING
   OR REDUCING OIL POLLUTION FROM VESSELS

     1. Enactment of New Legislation
    Ever  since the unfortunate  grounding of the Torrey
 Canyon there has been a great  deal of time,  money and
 effort  expended concerning legislation  with respect to
 liability for oil pollution from vessels. These efforts have
 taken place in the international  arena (through IMCO), at
 the national level, and at state and local levels. The cost to
 the governments has been enormous, and so has the cost to
 the  maritime  industry.  None of this  monumental
 expenditure has  resulted in the clean-up of any waters or
 the prevention of any oil  spills-nor has it  resulted in any
 reimbursement to governments for clean-up costs beyond
 that which they would have recovered in any event.
    It  appears to me that it  is time to take a fresh look at
 the role which legislation can play in preventing oil spills in
 order to determine whether the public is receiving  from
 recent legislation  now  on  the books any   benefits
 commensurate with the cost.


    The British Government, in referring these questions to
 IMCO, stated that it was refraining from  enacting  any
 domestic legislation in this field and it was suggested that
 other nations also refrain from enacting domestic legislation
 pending  agreement  as to  an  international  convention.
 Nevertheless, the United States  Senate  on December 12,
 1967 passed S.2760 which was  designed to  impose strict
 liability on a vessel owner whose ship was involved in a
 collision or stranding  which resulted in an oil spill and to
 deprive the owner of his right to limit  liability  for oil
 pollution damage. A House Bill, H.R. 14,000, was similar to
 S.2760. Whereas S.2760 had passed without any substantial
 debate or  public discussion, very extensive hearings  were
 conducted by the Sub-Committee on Rivers and Harbors of
 the House  Committee on Public Works, starting in April of
 1968. As a result, H.R. 14,000 was substantially modified.
 Senator  Muskie's Sub-Committee  on  Air  and Water
 Pollution of the Senate Public Works Committee also held
 public hearings concerning the implications of the proposed
house legislation.
    At  all  of  these  hearings,  the maritime community
pointed out that the proposed legislation would create risks
which were to some extent, at least, uninsurable and, to the
extent  that some insurance was  available,  the  cost to the
government and to the consumer would far outweigh  any
possible benefit. It was pointed  out  again and again that
those portions of the bills which dealt with liability for oil
pollution from vessels would not prevent pollution and that
this type of legislation was not necessary since existing law
already  covered  the field. Of course, Congress could not
legislate with respect to the powers of governments to act if
incidents, occurred in  international  waters-this  was  a
subject for  an international convention.

-------
                                                                 THE VIEWPOINT OF MARINE INSURANCE     45
    Nevertheless, eventually Congress passed Public  Law
91-224, entitled the "Water Quality Improvement Act of
1970".  Section 11  of the Act is  entitled "Control  of
Pollution by Oil". Much of this section properly deals with
such aspects of the  problem as  requiring the reporting of
discharges  of  oil  (Section  11  (b)(4)), civil penalties for
knowingly  discharging  oil  (Section  11  (bX5)),  and  the
establishment  of a National Contingency Plan for removal
of oil (Section 11 (cX2)). The act also makes clear (Section
11  (cXl)), that the President of  the  United  States is
"authorized to act ot remove or arrange for the removal of
such oil at  any time, unless he determines such removal will
be done properly by the  owner or operator of the vessel,
onshore  facility,  or offshore  facility  from  which  the
discharge occurs". It further makes clear (Section 11 (d) &
(e)) that whenever there are substantial or imminent threats
of pollution hazards  the President of the United States has
authority to act. While  it  is my  opinion that much of this
section of the  act was unnecessary because such powers of
the  Federal  Government  are  already  vested  in    the
President  of  the  United  States,  nevertheless I cannot
criticize these  aspects of the law if there was any doubt as
to such powers or any  lack of clarity with respect to the
extent of these powers. In any event, there has been  no
objection by the maritime community to these sections and
they can properly be said to come within the  title of the
section, "Control of Pollution By Oil."
    The  same  can be  said for  Section  11 Q)(0 which
entitles the President to "issue regulations consistent with
maritime safety  and with marine navigation laws  (A)
establishing methods   and  procedures  for  removal  of
discharged oil, (B) establishing criteria for the development
and  implementation  of  local  and regional oil removal
contingency plans, (C)  establishing procedures,  methods,
and requirements for equipment to prevent discharges of oil
from vessels and from onshore facility and offshore facility,
and (D) governing the inspection of vessels carrying cargoes
of oil and the  inspection of such cargoes in order to reduce
the likelihood of discharges of oil from  such vessels in
violation of this section. All of this  can really result in
"Water Quality Improvement"-the title of P.L. 91-224.
    The same  cannot logically be said to be true of Section
11 (0(0, which changed the basis  for liability  of vessel
owners to  the  United States Government from negligence
to absolute liability  "except where an owner or operator
can prove that a discharge was caused solely by (A) an Act
of God, (B) Act of War, (C) negligence on the  part of the
United States  Government, or (D) an act or omission of a
third-party without  regard to  whether  any such  act or
omission was   or  was  not negligent", and established a
separate limitation fund  for the benefit of the United States
Government "in  an  amount not  to  exceed one hundred
dollars per gross ton of  such  vessel or fourteen million
dollars, whichever is larger, except that where the United
States can show that such  discharge was the result of willful
negligence  or   willful  misconduct within  the privity  or
knowledgeof the owner, such owner  or operator shall be
liable to the United States Government for the full amount
of such costs." Section  11 (g) is similar with respect to the
liability of third-parties and Section 11  (pXO,(2)&  (3)
requires that all vessels and barges over 300 gross tons using
any  port  or place  in  the  United States  or the navigable
waters of the  United  States give evidence of  financial
responsibility to meet  the  obligations imposed  by the  act
and  provide  that  the United States may bring a direct
action against  an  insurer who  gives  such evidence of
financial responsibility. During the extensive and protracted
hearings which were  held  in the two years prior to  the
enactment of P.L. 91-224, it was pointed out by witnesses
from the maritime industry, and especially by Mr. Peter N.
Miller  and Mr.  John  C.J. Shearer of  London,  England,
representing  the  London Group  of  Protection  and
Indemnity Associations, that the capacity  of the insurance
market to cover the risks imposed by this legislation was
limited  and  that  too stringent  legislation  would  be
self-defeating in that  vessel owners would be unable to
obtain adequate  insurance coverage. It was also pointed  out
that there was  no  real need for  requiring evidence of
financial  responsibility since  there had  never  been  an
incident where there had  been  refusal to pay legitimate
claims under  existing law  where  liability  had  been
established on the part of the vessel. Furthermore, there
is  generally no need  for  such  requirements when  the
incident occurs within the territorial waters of  the United
States since the  types of spills which Section 11 of Public
Law  91-224  is  designed to cover  result  from extremely
serious accidents which would never escape public notice.
     Despite the  general  unhappiness  in  the maritime
community with those aspects of Public Law 91-224 which
deal with  liability  for accidental oil spills  (as distinguished
from those aspects of the bill  dealing  with  control of
sewage from vessels and other areas  of a more technical
nature, to which there had been no objection)  it has been
found that the  liability imposed by the statute could be
insured and the evidence of financial responsibility to meet
the liabilities imposed by the statute has been furnished to
the  federal Maritime  Commission. However,  the  cost and
inconvenience  to the industry  and to  the United States
Government of  administering the  financial responsibility
sections has been immense.  See the article in "Seatrade" for
March 1971 at page 49 entitled "Legislation Which Could
Make Pollution  Risks  Uninsurable" by Malcolm  Bennett.
He states  that  without the evidence given by the Protection
and  Indemnity  Associations before  the  Congressional
committees "the American Act (P.L. 91-224) would have
been much more punitive and, probably, unworkable."

     Section 11 (o)(2) of Public Law 91-224  provides that
"nothing  in this section shall be  construed as  preempting
any  State or political sub-division  thereof from imposing
any  requirement or liability with respect to the discharge of
oil into any waters within such State." This  provision  has
been, in my view,  wrongfully construed ^to open  the way
for many  coastal states to enact legislation which purports
to impose additional liabilities on the  part of vessel owners
for  accidental oil   spills over  and  beyond  those already
imposed by Public Law 91-224.  Such legislation-which I
regard as unconstitutional—has been enacted in Washington,

-------
 46    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
Maine, Michigan, Massachusetts and Florida, among others.
The result has been utter chaos. For example, the Florida
statute, which imposes absolute liability without limit to
the State of Florida for  clean-up costs and to Florida
residents for damages resulting  from accidental oil spills,
also requires that vessels trading to Florida provide evidence
of financial responsibility to meet the obligations imposed
by  that  statute. For  most vessels  this means evidence of
insurance—but the insurers already extended themselves as
far  as they  can to provide such evidence to the Federal
Maritime Commission  and they have stated that they cannot
give evidence to the various coastal states. (See Figure 1).
    I submit that this flurry of activity with respect to
legislation is not well  thought out and that it is politically
motivated rather than being directed to actual solution of
problems. As stated by Mr. Edgar Paulson at the Hazardous
Polluting Substances Symposium held by the Department
of  Transportation,  United States  Coast Guard, in  New
Orleans on September 14-16, 1970 "some politicians have
discovered pollution as McCarthy discovered communism.
Decisions about water pollution are based  upon political
consideration rather than the greatest good for the greatest
number" (Abstract of Proceedings, VII-17).

    2. Enforcement of Existing Legislation
    While no legislation  regarding liabilities for accidental
oil  spills  resulting  from groundings and  collisions can
prevent such  incidents—no navigator wants  to have  a
collision  or to ground his vessel—enforcement of existing
legislation concerning  operational spills can be effective in
reducing pollution of our waters. It has already been found
that one of the best vehicles for  stopping such operational
spills is the Refuse Act of 1899,33 U.S.C J§406-407. Other
such Federal legislation is the Oil Pollution Act of 1924 as
amended (33 U.S.C.S433  et seq.) and the New York Harbor
Act of 1886. For  discussion of this legislation and the
general problem of control of oil pollution on  navigable
waters see Sweeney, Oil Pollution of the Oceans, 37 Ford-
ham Law Review 155 (1968). Also see Lohne, Oil  Pollution
of Coastal and Inland Waterways of the United States Under
the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970,38  Insurance
Counsel  Journal  49  (January  1971).  The  problem  of
operational oil spills resulting from tank cleaning operations
at sea is covered by the  International Convention for the
Prevention  of Pollution  of the Sea By Oil and the Oil
Pollution Act of 1961, 33 UJS.C.i§1001-15. See Healy &
Paulsen,   Marine  Oil Pollution  and the Water Quality
Improvement Act of 1970,1 J. Mar. Law & C. 537, especial-
ly pages 539-40.
    However, enforcement  of  any  legislation requires
appropriations—and this  has never been a popular subject
with  politicians.  I submit  that  uniform and  rigid
enforcement of legislation concerning operational oil  spills
will do far more to clean-up the navigable waters of the
United States than will any new legislation concerning civil
liabilities for  spills  which  were  accidental  and which
resulted from good  faith  errors of judgment in moments of
crisis. The cost  of such enforcement is of course heavy, but
 the  results can  readily be  seen if  the  enforcement is
 effective. The  popular writer on financial problems, Miss
 Sylvia Porter wrote in her column for September 23,  1970
 on the subject "What Price Clean?"


Miss Porter wrote:
     "/ read with interest your column, Sylvia, stating
 that  it's  the  U.S. consumer who will pay  for the
 control  of pollution.  You  are right. There will
 inevitably be either higher prices to the customer for
 most products, or there will be a big dent made in the
 private enterprise, profit motivated economy  we have
 in this country, with serious repercussions on the
 value of equities, etc., etc."
    Okay, Bob-a friend, and  the president of a
 world-famous chemical company-has zeroed in on a
 basic question.
    Are you  a consumer,  prepared to pay for the
 staggering costs of not only  cleaning up  today's
 environmental mess, but also preventing further air,
 water and other types of pollution?
    Are you, a consumer, prepared to support the
 measures the company in which you own stock takes
 to prevent or combat pollution-if the measures mean
 costs which bite into profits?
    Are  you, as  a  taxpayer,  ready  to  pay
 anti-pollution taxes and to bear the costs of more and
 more bond issues in your community to raise bigger
 and bigger sums of money for pollution controls?
     YOU HA VE to pay for them, you know, in one
 guise or another. There is no one else but YOU to pay
 for them. NO ONE.
    Pollution is unmistakably, undeniably on your
 mind.
    More  than seven in ten Americans say they are
 worried about environmental pollution; a recent
 Gallup poll disclosed  that  10  per cent  of a
 cross-section of Americans now consider pollution
 one of the most important problems facing the
 nation, vs. only 2 per cent in June; some observers go
 so far as to say this single issue of cleaning our air and
 water will close the generation, racial and affluence
 gaps.
    But are you prepared to put your money where
 your mouth is?
     Tragically, the probability  is that you are NOT.

    Item: In a recent public opinion poll Americans
 were asked whether they would pay $15 more  in
 federal  taxes  to  finance a  meaningful pollution
 control program. By two to one, younger Americans
 vowed that they would, but by two to one  those in
 the over-50 bracket opposed the tax. By two to one,
 the better educated were for the tax, but by two  to
 one the less educated were against it. Only $15!

-------
                                                                                LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT  47
    And this is just the beginning of conflict.  The
evidence points clearly to a real showdown in the
1970s between the business-as-usual segment of our
population which looks upon pollution as a price we
just have  to pay for our material affluence and the
younger environmentalists  who insist that factories
must close if they cannot meet rigid standards.
    Item: Local taxpayers the nation over are voting
down a record number of bond issues proposed to
raise funds not only for schools but also for pollution
controls. And even the sums being refused are utterly
inadequate to meet most local needs.
    Item: Federal income taxpayers are battling-via
their  Representatives  and  Senators  in
Washington—even the paltry sums being debated by
Congress to fight pollution. Total federal spending for
pollution  control now amounts to only  about $1
billion a year,  and the typical $10,000-a-year city
taxpayer's  annual federal  tax  bill for  pollution
abatement is estimated at only $4-against $26 a year
for federal highway construction.
    Item: Motorists are shunning the slightly more
expensive  lead-free and low-lead gasolines now being
sold.
    But the fact remains. As another reader, Kerry
W.  Mulligan,  chairman  of California's Water
Resources Control Board wrote me: "People will have
to come to grips with the fact that environmental
protection  costs money.  To  search for  'cheap'
solutions will be the most expensive step in the long
run.  The  basic  choice  is  between  short-term
correction of pollution and long-term environmental
protection."
    Which will YOU choose?
    She poses the question "Are you, a consumer, prepared
to pay  for the staggering costs of not only cleaning up
today's environmental mess, but also preventing further air,
water and other types of pollution". She comments, "YOU
HAVE to pay for them, you know, in one quise or another.
These is no one else but YOU to pay for them. NO ONE." I
submit  that  the  public, if given  a clear picture  of the
problem-and here I  am more optimistic  than  is Miss
Porter-will  be  willing to  pay  for preventing  further
pollution of  our  waters, but that the  public will  not be
willing  to  bear  the  cost  of  new  legislation which  is
unnecessary, irrelevant and does not result in prevention of
pollution.

CONCLUSION
    It is my  conclusion based on the experience which I
have had  in representing  Protection  and  Indemnity
Associations,  in attending at legislative  and other hearings
concerning  proposed  laws  in  the  area  of control  of
pollution from vessels, and as a taxpayer and as an avowed
conservationist that:
          1. While  major casualties  such as the Torrey
     Canyon grounding are more dramatic,  the  principal
     sources of oil pollution of navigable waters are the
     compound  effect  of  many  relatively  minor
     operational spills which can be controlled by better
     technology  and  uniform enforcement  of  existing
     laws.
          2. That major  casualties  such as the Torrey
     Canyon  grounding  will  not be prevented  by
     legislation imposing absolute liability and uninsurable
     limits—that the principal deterrent to such casualties
     is the  risk to  the lives and careers of the navigators
     themselves which result from their in extremis errors
     in judgment and that navigators do their utmost to
     avoid  such  incidents. Again, the solution  is better
     technology.
          3.  That  the  cost  of  transportation  of
     commodities which  the public wants and  demands
     will  be increased by reason of the types of legislation
     now  being proposed  and  discussed without  any
     commensurate benefit whatsoever to the public.
          4. That the most appropriate type  of legislation
     covering  liability for oil  spills  from  ocean-going
     vessels is an Internation Convention. Even  though a
     proposed convention  may  not  be  perfect,  the
     essential  requirement of uniformity would outweigh
     any  disadvantages of  such  a  convention  (e.g., the
     1969  Brussels Convention  concerning  civil  liability
     for oil pollution and the powers of governments to
     act.) In any event, legislation by individual states and
     municipalities  in addition  to  that  of the  Federal
     Government is  not  only unconstitutional  but  also
     impractical and self defeating.

          5. That appropriations of money to provide for
     enforcement  of existing  laws with respect  to
     operational  oil  spills and to provide for  improved
     technology  in  connection  with  transportation,
     loading and discharging of oil  and  other hazardous
     substances  and  clean-up  procedures  when  spills
     nevertheless occur will  give the public  its money's
     worth, as well as making clear to the  public that there
     is no way to avoid the cost of ecological progress.

    Finally —don't be afraid of the word "discrimination".
Not  everything that  is done  in  the name .of ecological
progress will clean up  the environment. Separate the wheat
from the  chaff. Discriminate between legislation which
merely improves a politican's image and that which also
does the essential job of cleaning up the environment. And
make sure  that you  get something of value  for  your
money—since it  is you who will be  paying for it in any
event.

-------
48  THE VIEWPOINT OF MARINE INSURANCE
                            THE  WEST OF ENGLAND SHIP OWNERS
            MUTUAL  PROTECTION  & INDEMNITY  ASSOCIATION  (LUXEMBOURG)
                                       (INCORPORATED  IN  LUXEMBOURG)
       THE WEST OF  ENGLAND SHIP
       OWNERS MUTUAL INSURANCE
       ASSOCIATION  (LONDON)  LTD.

            1 LLOYDS AVENUE.
            LONDON. EC3N 3DN
TELEPHONE OI-4BO 7*72


TELEX WESTENG LONDON «aaO2»

TILCOIIAMS • CABLES
WESTENO. LONDON
                                                                                                   Ref 71 M
             To  All Members
                                                                             22nd February. 1971
                                       OIL POLLUTION —FLORIDA
                  We refer to our Circular of December. 1970 covering legislation in Massachusetts. We
             have now been informed that the State of Florida has issued  regulations, the full terms of
             which  are as follows :—
                  "(1) No vessel or barge, carrying oil of any kind and in any form, gasoline, pesticides.
                  ammonia, chlorine, or other hazardous materials as cargo, shall use any port in Florida
                  on or after 1st March. 1971. for any purpose unless a Certificate of Financial Responsi
                  bility has been issued by the Department covering  such vessel or barge.
                  (2) Either Owners or Operators of vessels or barges subject to Chapter 70-244. Laws
                  of Florida,  must establish  and maintain with the  Department evidence  of financial
                  responsibility in an amount  not to  exceed $100 per gross  ton of such  vessel or
                  $5.000.000 whichever  is lesser.  Provided, however, that if an applicant is the Owner
                  of more than  one vessel  or barge subject to this  rule, financial responsibility  need
                  only be established in an amount necessary to meet the  maximum amount of financial
                  responsibility to which the  largest vessel  or  barge  could be subjected  hereunder.
                  Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit third parties from establishing evidence
                  of financial  responsibility for such  Owners or Operators  of vessels  or barges.
                  (3) The financial  responsibility herein required  may  be established and  maintained
                  by any one  (1) of. or a combination of  the-following methods  acceptable- to the
                  Department :
                     (A)  Evidence of Insurance—conditioned to pay all costs and expenses of the clean
                     up of any discharge as well as damages caused to  the State and  any other  person.
                     (B)  Surety Bonds  payable to the Governor of the State conditioned to pay all  costs
                     and  expenses of the clean-up of  any discharge as well as  damages caused to the
                     State and any other person.
                     (C)  Qualification as a self insurer, or
                     (D)  Other   evidence of  financial responsibility satisfactory  to the Department
                  (4) All applications, evidence,  documents, and other statements required to  be filed
                  with the Department shall be in English, and any monetary terms shall be expressed  in
                  terms  of United  States  currency.   Such  evidence  of financial responsibility shall be
                  on forms furnished by the  Department upon request of the Applicant.
                  f5) Where  evidence of financial responsibility  has  been established, a separate Cer
                  tificatc covering each  vessel shall be issued evidencing  the  Department's finding  of
                  adequate financial responsibility to  meet the minimum  requirements of this Rule."
                  As we  warned Members  in the Massachusetts Circular  referred to above, the under
             signed Associations will not be able to issue separate  Certificates for Florida.
                  We particularly draw your attention to the  fact that  these regulations come into  force
             on the 1st  March. 197:
                                                                 Yours  faithfully
                         Assuranceforeningen Card
                         Assuranceforeningen Skuld
                         Newcastle Protection & Indemnity Association
                         Sunderland  Steam Ship Protecting & Indemnity Association
                         Sveriges Angfartygs Assurans Forening
                         The London Steam-Ship Owners' Mutual  Insurance Association Limited
                         The North of England Protecting & Indemnity Association Limited
                         The Standard Steamship Owners' Protection & Indemnity Association Limited
                         The Standard Steamship Owners' Protection and Indemnity Association (Bermuda) Lfi
                         United Kingdom Mutual Steam Ship Assurance Association (Bermuda) Limited
                         The West of England Ship Owners Mutual Protection and  Indemnity Associatior
                             (Luxembourg)

                                                      Figure ].

-------
                SHOULD  FINANCIAL  LIMITATIONS  UPON
                     LIABILITY  BE  APPLIED TO  OIL  SPILL
                              REMOVAL  AND  DAMAGE
                                               C. R. Hdlberg
                                     Maritime International Law Division
                                          United States Coast Guard
ABSTRACT
   The title of this paper might lead the uninformed to the
conclusion that the question is yet to be resolved. To the
more knowledgeable it might appear to be a discussion as to
the merits of locking the bam long after the horse had been
stolen. While several august bodies, including the Congress
and the 1969 Brussels International Conference on Marine
Pollution Damages have concluded that there should be, at
least in certain cases, a financial limitation upon liability for
damages resulting from oil spills, the issue is far from dead.
The purpose of this paper is to raise the question as to
whether financial limitation schemes are the best solution
to the problem of cost distribution with regard to damage
caused by oil.

INTRODUCTION
   In the  old common law, as it existed before James Watt
and John  MacAdam and the rest of the succeeding host of
persistent mechanics upset the status  quo, the  basic idea,
when someone had been injured or damaged, was  to make
that  person  as  whole   again as possible. The focus  of
attention  and concern seemed to be upon the victim, and
within the capabilities of his purse, he who had done  the
injury had to pay up. This is not going to be an historical
treatise on the good old common law and in the interests of
brevity the foregoing statement  is something of a general-
ization, and subject to the infirmities attendant upon broad
statements. However it is necessary to  look, albeit quickly,
at the antecedents of  our body  of laws in order  to
comprehend, even minimally, just how we arrived at our
present sorry situation.

   But, laying aside all  of the complicating side issues, in
the good old days the basic limitation upon the tortfeasor's
liability to pay for damages was the size of his fortune. This
resulted, of course, in a certain amount of injustice to  the
injured party who was not fortunate enough to be injured
by  a  financially sound tortfeasor. However the law, as a
Philadelphia lawyer once observed, is not the road to the
millenium but simply a means to keep the peace. The idea
of spreading the cost of the damage beyond the parties to
the transaction did not flourish in the common law.

   With the advent  of the steam engine  and the modern
paved  road,  the  opportunities for people damaging and
injuring one another increased almost as rapidly as  the
opportunity to make vast sums of money did. Paying out
the large sums of cash to workmen injured in industrial
accidents,  to  pedestrians  trampled by  the  speedy  post
coaches and other  such victims c-f what the school teachers
choose to call the Industrial Revolution put unpleasant
dents   in the  profit columns  of the   burgeoning  new
industries. What with the frailties of their machinery, their
unsophisticated financing structure and the mysteries of the
marketing mechanism,  there was little question but that
these industries needed help. The problem of government
was how to give this help—preferably at  the least  out-of-
pocket cost to the government. One of  the many  devices
that came to  be employed was that formulated  by the
fearless common  law judges  who  created a whole new
concept of tort liability for these infant industries whereby
the  injured parties themselves were made to foot the bill.
This approach also had the happy advantage of not  costing
the  government money. At least not then.  The idea  of
wrong doing in the moral sense was refurbished and trotted
out to limit  the cases  of recovery. This was  further
bolstered by the creation of the doctrines of contributory
negligence, assumption of risk and other quasi-moralistic
means of transferring the  costs of damage or injury from
the back of industry onto what the international lawyers—
with wry humor—have come to call the innocent victims.

   Turning from the lawyer's perspective of the matter to
the economist's, the  practical effect of these doctrines was
                                                    49

-------
50
LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
to create a form of inverse subsidy, or better, it external-
ized some of the costs of doing business. This may be taken
to mean that the price of the product or service involved
did not reflect all of the costs of production. When one is
attempting to foster new industry somebody has  to  foot
the bill. To the extent that the specific beneficiaries do not
do  so  by  reason  of cost externalization, the so-called
general  beneficiaries—the  taxpayers, the  public  at large-
pay. Some form of taxation is usually required to make a
roughly equalized distribution of these costs. This has the
saving grace  of fairness. However when these  costs are
distributed solely amongst an irrationally selected group,
such as the corps d'elete of innocent victims, the element
of fairness seems to  vanish.

   It  is necessary to observe  that as  industry  developed
from its tottering infancy, reaction set in against what had
become unnecessary advantages and  the ponderous  legal
pendulum began to swing back  toward  the side of the
innocent victim. The various workmen's  compensation
schemes are exempletive  of the  new  devices which  were
developed to ameliorate or eliminate the harshness of the
legal rules of tort liability. These  mechanisms also  had the
happy  effect—from  the  economists  point of view-of
internalizing the costs. The pendulum is still swinging,  as
evidenced by  the  recent interest in no-fault automobile
insurance laws.

   There were, of  course, many  other devices created  to
limit liability of which the most important was the limited
liability company or corporation.  Another was a statutorily
stated financial  limitation upon liability. Both of these
concepts were designed to foster  the growth of commerce
by the expediency of modifying the terms of contracts.

   For  reasons of  public policy, it was important  that
travellers had a place to stay  and merchants a reasonably
reliable way to ship goods. Innkeepers and common carriers
were  not overly enthused with the prospects on  the one
hand  of having to accept just about anybody or  any cargo
that came along and on the other of having a high duty of
care  imposed upon them. Since this was  a  reasonable
emotion, the solution was to either let them be choosey as
to their clients or limit their liability in some fashion. The
latter course prevailed and to this day, financial limitations
upon the liability of innkeepers and common carriers and
others of their general  ilk are  common. This does not
distress the economists since  the costs of the  service  or
product remain internalized. Both parties to the contract
know where  they  stand beforehand  and can  take  due
precautions. Cargo shippers will insure their cargoes and the
costs  of the premiums will be reflected in the price to the
consumer.  A  parallel  situation  exists  when  one  does
business with a limited liability company.
   However it  is  important  to  note that  the financial
limitation upon the liability of a common  carrier applies
only to the relationship between the shipper and his cargo,
except  in the maritime field-of which there will be more
later. If the common carrier's truck  should run  down a
                                                    pedestrian,  the  financial limitation upon liability is not
                                                    applicable. The parallel between financial limitations upon
                                                    liability and the limited liability company diverges at this
                                                    point  of course.  The limitation scheme for companies
                                                    applies with great  equality to those outside of the contrac-
                                                    tual ambit as well as to those within. The judiciary, never
                                                    satisfied to leave things alone, has undertaken to set aside
                                                    the inequities of the limited liability of a company to an
                                                    injured party through a means which has the slightly risque*
                                                    label of "piercing  the corporate veil." But this attack upon
                                                    limitation is really still in its infancy and it will probably be
                                                    quite  sometime   before  the  ordinary  run  of the  mill
                                                    tortfeasee (to carry legal jargon to the brink) can derive any
                                                    solid comfort from it.
                                                       If industry ashore was in precarious state two hundred
                                                    years  ago, industry  afloat was in that state two thousand
                                                    years  ago and there still isn't much improvement  to write
                                                    home  about. Freight on  the first voyage of a ship in the
                                                    days  of  sail had better cover  the  capital  outlay and
                                                    expected profit since  the risks were rather enormous, and
                                                    hoping for a second successful voyage was not too realistic.
                                                    Insurance as we know it was developed for the spreading of
                                                    the risks involved  in the maritime mercantile ventures. But
                                                    this was insufficient  and other  devices were employed.
                                                    Amongst these was the financial limitation upon liability.
                                                    This  limitation did not apply just  to the  contractual
                                                    arrangements between the vessel and the cargo or passen-
                                                    gers, but to all activities of the vessel  except where  the
                                                    vessel  owner was privy to whatever nefarious conduct that
                                                    resulted in a claim. All that this exception did was to drive
                                                    any remaining seagoing ship owners ashore.

                                                       As a matter of practical impact upon persons outside of
                                                    the contractual ambit, the limitation had litle effect since
                                                    nearly every vessel going to  sea enjoyed an essentially
                                                    identical provision of liability  limitation. Thus, when one
                                                    vessel  collided with another, both were standing on a fairly
                                                    equal  footing  insofar  as avoidance of  liability was con-
                                                    cerned. Furthermore it was rather difficult for a merchant
                                                    vessel   to  damage  something  outside  of the maritime
                                                    environment.   Costs   therefore   tended   to   remain
                                                    intemalized-at least  when  the shipping  industry was
                                                    viewed as a whole. However, with the advent of bigger
                                                    vessels carrying sizeable cargoes  of rather hazardous com-
                                                    modities, explosives, lethal gases, petroleum, pesticides and
                                                    the  like,  it became  fairly easy  for  a vessel  to cause
                                                    substantial  damage  where  the hazard  had  not before
                                                    existed. Thus substantial portions of Halifax and Texas City
                                                    and South Amboy were hoist by maritime petards (a petard
                                                    being  an iron pot full of explosives hung on a fort's front
                                                    door with a view toward gaining a disputed  access to said
                                                    fort) and in the latter two cases the innocent victims found
                                                    the shipowners claiming their liability extended only to the
                                                    value  of the vessels after the incident, with the comforting
                                                    addition thereto  of pending  freight, if any. It should be
                                                    noted that the corporate veil piercing judiciary is beginning
                                                    to take a similar  tack in admiralty, hanging  an occasional
                                                    shipowner on a newly wrought privity hook. This exposi-
                                                    tion into the gallery of rat holes that are available routes to

-------
                                                                              FINANCIAL LIMITATIONS ...
                                                                                                                51
escape payment for damages done would not be complete
without at least cataloging the regimes of so-called absolute
liability, strict liability and ordinary fault liability. Absolute
liability, or the doctrine of extra-hazardous activities, is a
throwback to the good old common law when the state of
your  moral  fiber, your good or evil intentions, and the
nature of your  enterprises was irrelevant and immaterial to
the issue of payment for damages. This doctrine was crept
back  to  a  very  limited degree, frequently  covering the
movement  and handling  of explosives, and for a  time
covering the  new fangled flying machine.  Just recently a
few states have resurrected the concept  to  apply to  oil
pollution, to the general horror of prospective  polluters and
their underwriters. The doctrine of strict liability is a notch
below absolute liability in  its stringency-the tortfeasor is
given  a limited  number of escape hatches, usually including
acts of God, war and other assorted hostilities, intentional
acts by third parties and possibly a few more  of similar ilk.
The doctrine of strict liability is probably best described as
the political compromise between the grim proponents of
absolute liability and the genial exponents of ordinary fault
liability, the creature from the Industrial Revolution.

   Financial limitation, corporate limitation, fault limita-
tion and of course purse limitation all exist independently
in the armory of the defendant and can be deployed singly
or in conceit as needs dictate.

   With the foregoing as background, the issue  of financial
limitation may be viewed in context as simply one of the
available defenses to the  payment  of  what the  Brussels
1969  conference  termed "full and adequate" compensation
for oil pollution damage.

Brussels Civil Liability Convention and the
   Amended Federal Water Pollution Control Act
   Both the Brussels Civil Liability Convention and Section
11  of the  amended Federal Water Pollution Control Act
impose the  strict liability  regime—with  closely parallel
escape hatches. The Civil Liability Convention applies only
to  vessels carrying oil  in bulk as cargo  while  Section 11
covers any installation, vehicle,  or device that can spill into
navigable waters except aircraft and structures on the Outer
Continental  Shelf. The  Civil Liability Convention provides
an  exclusive remedy  for the damages to any party-govern-
mental or private—while Section 11 is limited  to the Federal
government's removal costs, leaving the government's other
damages (such  as in its  proprietary capacity)  and the
damages of all other innocent victims to their  remedies
under State  or   Federal  law.  Both  the  Civil  Liability
Convention  and Section 11  with respect to vessels have a
very similar financial limitation—in the former about  $135
a convention ton (smaller than gross, bigger than net) up to
a ceiling of $14 million, in the latter $ 100 a gross ton up to
the same  $14  million.  Section 11  further imposes an $8
million limitation on the liability of installations other than
vessels (with provision for a reduction in the case of  small
and deserving  facilities). When one  dwells on  the  money
available from vessels it is well to remember that very few
ships are of sufficient size to reach the magic $14 million
figure.  A  good sized oil barge  will gross around 2000 to
2500 tons which translates into a limitation figure of about
$250,000.  A  small  tank farm  ashore of comparable oil
capacity has a limitation figure of $8,000,000. How's that
for equity amongst prospective polluters?

   It is,  of course,  relatively  useless to discuss financial
limitation schemes without reference to how high they are
in relationship to the anticipated damages. If the ceiling is
truly high enough, then there is no real impact upon the
innocent victim whose damages fall below  the  limitation
figure and he cannot complain about the law on that score.
But one  has to watch out for the meaning of the term
"damages,"  particularly in the pollution area. Section  11
clearly attempts to define "removal" costs (removal proba-
bly comprehends  more than the commonly used  phrase
"clean-up") in a manner to obviate the necessity  of proving
"damages" in its commonly accepted (by lawyers) sense.
The Civil  Liability Convention tries to do the same thing,
but  less  blatantly,   and  possibly  less effectively.  The
practical  impact is to jack up considerably  the amount of
the claim that can be asserted, which of course then affects
the assessment as to whether  the limitation figure is high
enough.  From  the   available  statistics that have been
gathered, the only thing that can be perceived with clarity
is that no one really knows how much an oil spill can cost.
Equally no one knows how much real damage (as opposed
to legal damage) oil  can do and for that matter just who is
entitled to claim injury (plants, animals and fish have no
standing  in their own right, which is very convenient for
us). Thus the participants at the Brussels 1969 conference,
although  they  agreed on the $135/ton limitation figure,
retained  sufficient  doubts about  the  adequacy  of that
amount  to  commission the elaboration  of still  another
Convention on oil pollution damage  in order to raise the
effective ceiling on  recovery for the innocent victims to a
figure of at least $30 million per incident.

   While  $8  million looks like a pretty high  limitation
figure  for onshore and offshore facilities, it is not beyond
the realm of  reason to postulate a case where the costs
might  exceed that amount-the forced interruption of a
major  city's water supply might suffice. But  in the same
situation where a vessel causes the incident, the Section 11
figure  of $100/gross ton leaves the author at least with an
uneasy feeling. The  feeling is heightened when the other
damages (e.g. other than Federal removal costs) are consid-
ered  in  the  light  of the vessel's  remaining  limitation
defense-its value after the incident,  plus freight.  This
defense incidentally  (though  there is  nothing  incidental
about  it)  is available even though suit is brought under a
State  statute  which, say, imposes unlimited and absolute
liability for oil pollution damage.
   At  this point two questions (at least) appear  to require
an answer. Why  was a financial limitation of liability
included in the Civil  Liability Convention and in Section 11
of the FWPCA? How were the limitation figures  deter-
mined?

-------
 52    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
   The published answers are contained in the records of
the hearings  and deliberations on the subject  and are, if
nothing else quite voluminous. The gist would appear to be
that producers and transporters of oil prefer to spread the
costs of the risk of pollution incidents through the medium
of insurance.  The word "prefer" in point of fact hardly
describes the emotion involved. They view the  availability
of insurance coverage—at a premium they  can afford to
pay—as a necessity of economic life. Underwriters—equally
concerned with the necessity of the good economic life-do
not  write  policies  for liability in unlimited amounts. It
follows then  that  if  insurance  is  obtainable  only  in
determinable amounts, liability should be limited to such
an amount. The strength of this argument quite evidently
carried  the day in  both arenas  and I  leave it  to  the
proponents to elaborate thereupon. However, using a rather
common example, that of an automobile collision, it could
be observed that the tortfeasor's liability is unlimited—in
the sense of a financial limitation scheme—even though he
cannot obtain insurance  coverage in an unlimited amount.
Carrying the argument forward then, all tort liability in the
United States  should  then have a limitation ceiling. But the
economists will  then point out that where the  damages
exceed  the limitation figure, the costs  of the  product,
service or activity will be externalized and will be borne, in
an irrational distribution, by our  corps d'elite of innocent
victims.

   The  answer to the second question is harden  to pin
down.  Within the  determinable  amounts of insurance
coverage, the degree of exposure has a great deal to do with
the premium charged on the one hand and the  amount of
risk capital available in the insurance market. In the case of
oil pollution damage by vessels where the contemplated
liability regime was to be that of strict liability, and where
the knowledge as to what these damages would total up to
be was so sparse and uncertain, it seemed to work out that
the available insurance risk capital in the world's underwrit-
ing markets would top out the limitation figures which are
incorporated in the convention and the legislation.  In short,
while there was ample capital available if the ordinary fault
regime  was  applied,  there  was  precious  little  money
attracted to cover  the strict liability regime even  with a
financial limitation ceiling.  The  iconoclastic observation
was made by some that the aircraft industry—which has no
financial limitation ceiling for so-called third party dam-
ages—was not having difficulty in locating enough insurance
risk capital.

   From the viewpoint of the concerned industries,  the
national and international  legislation on  oil  pollution
damage has or will  impose a very heavy burden, and a
financial limitation  upon their liabilities is an  essential
element in their ability to continue to do business. From
the dispassionate viewpoint of the economist the equitable
(in the economic  rather than legal sense) approach is to
internalize  all  of the  costs of the  product or  service,
including the costs of pollution prevention and pollution
damage. Financial limitation schemes, and for that matter,
all of the other means of liability avoidance or limitation,
tends to defeat the goal of internalization. They argue that
only when  the consumer is paying the full bill can he make
an intelligent choice  in the market place. Products costly in
the pollution sense  would  tend to  fail of selection in
competition with products less costly, other factors being
equal.

"INNVIC"
   Lastly, the viewpoint of the innocent victim should be
considered. In  this age of abbreviations and acronyms it
would probably be stylish to refer to him as the INNVIC.
When old.INNVIC finds himself on  the  receiving end of an
unwanted load  of liberated hydrocarbons which fouls his
beach  or water supply or otherwise  disturbs his tranquil
enjoyment  of  what is left of the environment,  he  will
predictably react by demanding that  the mess be  cleaned
up—fault being sort of meaningless—and further that he be
fully compensated for his injuries, preferably to the extent
that his balance sheet shows a bit  of untaxable profit as
well. What do  you  suppose is his opinion of the justice,
equity and propriety of a law  that limits his recovery to
something  less  than  the  chimerical  full and  adequate
compensation?  Does he bear  with equanimity the concept
of inverse irrationally distributed subsidy? Does he  glory in
assuming, quite involuntarily, a disproportionate share of
the costs of petroleum production, distribution and con-
sumption?  Or  does  he, perhaps, share the views of  the
unfortunate owner of a defective automobile that has been
repossessed  who has  just become apprised of the  full
meaning of the phrase holder-in-due course?

-------
                   THE  MAINE  LAW-A  PRECURSOR  FOR

                           THE  OIL  TERAAINALING  STATES

                                                William R. Adams
                                     Environmental Improvement Commission
                                                 State of Maine
INTRODUCTION
   Long  before  TORREY  CANYON,  and as early as
November of 1963, when the Liberian tank ship NORTH-
ERN GULF ran aground in West Cod  Ledge, off Casco
Bay, Maine, spilling 21,309 barrels of a light crude oil along
the rocky coast  of Maine, causing untold  devastation to the
shoreline  and aquatic ecology, the concerned citizenry of
our State became acutely aware of the hazards involved in
transporting oil  and oily products  upon the clear, cold,
coastal waters of countless miles of our coast. This massive
spill stirred the  dander of the yankee fishermen, the boat
owners, and the  property owners and prodded them into a
concerted  effort to  increase clean up programs and seek
stronger enforcement by the regulatory  bodies. Numerous
small suits evolved as a result of this oil spill and only as
recently as last  year was the final civil suit settled. The
lobstermen and  fishermen claimed  irreparable damage to
their catches. Shore  property owners were unable to cope
with the  spill; clean-up agencies did not  exist; the state of
art for clean up  was crude, at best. The clean up panacea in
those   years  consisted  of  dumping large  quantities of
dispersants on the water  to seemingly make the black ugly
oil dissolve  and disappear.  The philosophy of, "Out of
sight,  out  of mind" prevailed, resulting in the dumping of
untold numbers of barrels of toxic chemical emulsifying
agents on the spill.

   We  have  progressed  considerably since those  days.
International attention was focused on much greater spills.
TORREY CANYON and OCEAN EAGLE became house-
hold  words. The  anti-pollution  tempo approached  its
zenith. Research and development  programs were under-
taken on the campus, in the laboratories, as well as in the
basements of citizens who  were simply concerned with
coping with the  problems of oil.
   All during these years the attitude and determination of
the Maine Legislature was taking shape. People were talking
to  their  Legislators.  The  blast  of  the  danger  whistle
resounded in the  newspapers, editorials,  magazines, and
television. The sleeping giant, the public, had awakened. A
new course was being set.

A New Law on the Horizon
   The  First Special  Session  of  the 104th Legislature
foresaw the need  for strong  Legislation.  The Legislative
hands  at  the  helm  of the  State  drafted  the  strong
Legislation needed for the  task ahead. They declared by
preamble to the proposed law, "that  the highest and best
uses of the seacoast of the State are as a source of public
and private recreation and solace from the pressures of an
industrialized society, and  as a source of public use and
private commerce  in fishing, lobstering and gathering other
marine life used and useful  in food production and other
commercial activities". The Legislature found  "that preser-
vation of these uses is a matter of the highest urgency and
priority and that such uses can only be  served effectively by
maintaining the coastal waters, estuaries, tidal flats,  beaches
and public lands  adjoining  the seacoast  in as close to a
pristine  condition as possible taking into account multiple
use accommodations necessary to  provide  the broadest
possible promotion of public and private interests with the
least possible conflicts in such diverse  uses. The transfer of
oil, petroleum  products and  their by-products between
vessels within the jurisdiction of the State and State waters
is  a hazardous undertaking;  that  spills,  discharges and
escape  of  oil,  petroleum products and  their by-products
occurring as a result of procedures involved in the  transfer
and storage of such products pose threats of great danger
and damage to the marine, estuarine and adjacent terrestrial
environment of the State; to owners and users of shore front
property; to public and private recreation; to citizens of the
                                                      53

-------
54     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
State and of her interests deriving livelihood from marine-
related activities; and to the beauty of the Maine coast; that
such  hazards have  frequently  occurred in the past; are
occurring now  and present future  threats of potentially
catastrophic proportions, all of  which are expressly de-
clared to be inimical to the paramount interests of the State
as set forth and  that such State interests outweigh any
economic burdens imposed by  the Legislature upon those
engaged  in transferring oil, petroleum  products and their
by-products and related activities."

   Police powers  of the State were given  to  the Environ-
mental  Improvement  Commission.  The  Commission  re-
ceived "power  to deal.with the hazards  and  threats of
danger and damage posed by  such  transfers and  related
activities; to require the prompt containment and removal
of pollution  occasioned thereby; to provide procedures
whereby persons  suffering damage from such occurrences
may be promptly made whole, and to establish a fund to
provide for the  inspection and supervision of such activities
and  guarantee the prompt payment of reasonable damage
claims resulting therefrom."

The Law—More Than a Paper Promise
   The law provides for the following:
   1. Prohibition of  the corruption of waters and lands
adjoining the seacoast  of the State.
   2. Grants the Environmental Improvement Commission
the exercise of police powers and duties to implement the
law.
   a.  Extends jurisdictional powers and  duties out to a
distance of 12 miles from the coastline of the State.
   b. Provides for the issuance of licenses.
   3. Establishes  procedures for adopting regular and emer-
gency rules and regulations.
   4. Authorizes the Governor to declare, by proclamation,
an emergency whenever any  disaster or catastrophe exists
or appears imminent within  the State arising from the
discharge of oil  or oil products.
   5. Requires  the immediate  undertaking of removal of
the spill by the  perpetrator.
   a. Removal must meet the Commission's satisfaction.
   b. The Commission may undertake the removal of the
discharge or retain agents and contracts for such purposes.
   c. Authorizes  for  the  removal of any  unexplained or
"mystery spill" within State waters.
   6. Provides  for the establishment and maintenance of
adequate employees  and equipment at strategic locations
within the State to carry out the provisions of the law.
   7. Creates  the Maine Coastal Fund as a nonlapsing,
revolving fund  of four million dollars. These  monies to be
used for administration of the law, research and develop-
ment for thud party damages.
   a. Sets a license fee of 1/2 cent per barrel for all  oil and
oil products transferred on Maine waters.
   8. Places the onus of liability on the licensee for  all acts
and omissions  from the moment his carrier (vessel) enters
and until departure from State waters.
Action of the Oil Industry
   Initially, the oil industry did not object to our new law;
their real concern was over the liability provisions and the
1/2 cent  per barrel license  fee  for  petroleum product
transferred upon Maine waters. On May 10th, one day after
the law became effective, ten large oil companies and an oil
pipeline company brought about companion suits in a State
Superior  Court  against the Environmental Improvement
Commission to have  the  law  declared  unconstitutional. It
alleged, among other things, that  the  law violated or was
contrary to:
   1.  The Import-Export  clause of the constitution
   2.  The Commerce clause
   3.  The Admiralty clause
   4.  The Due Process clause
   5. The equal Protection clause, and
   6. Raised  similar  objections based  upon  the State of
Maine constitution including deprivation of right to a trial
by jury.

   The oil companies  managed  to obtain  a preliminary
injunction against the  Environmental  Improvement Com-
mission, pending the outcome of the  suit. Essentially the
injunction allows the oil  companies involved in the  suit to
pay monthly license fees to the  Court,  which  is holding
these  amounts in escrow, pending the  final outcome of the
suit. For parties not involved in the suit, the Environmental
Improvement Commission has voluntarily set up an escrow
fund. This injunction does not preclude the Environmental
Improvement  Commission from  otherwise  enforcing the
law.

The Present Situation
   Comprehensive and meaningful oil  discharge prevention
and pollution control regulations were  drafted and adopted
on December 11, 1970 to become effective December 26,
1970. These regulations fulfill and supplement the meaning
of the law. They are,  what we consider, minimal uniform
safety requirements for the oil handling facilities of Maine.
The thrust  of responsibility is directly  placed upon the
terminal operator.

   The regulations require the establishment of such mat-
ters as a  pre-transfer conference to insure for the  proper
and safe loading/off-loading  of oil cargo. To name just a
few, they delineate safe  transfer procedures from vessel to
shore and vice versa; they allow for the transfer of vessel to
vessel within designated  safe  anchorage areas; they  require
the taking of samples, and periodic inspection about the
vessel while transferring cargo.

   Additionally,  they  require the establishment of local
contingency  plans for each terminal; they require 12 hour
advance notice of any transfer; periodic and final reporting
of all spills and clean-up; and require fire fighting equip-
ment, which surprisingly  as it may seem, many terminals do
not have, and  finally the prohibition  of  dispersants  is
provided for.

-------
                                                                                      THE MAINE LAW
                                                    55
   All of the terminal regulations are safety  oriented and
are designed to benefit not only the terminal  operator but
also the people of Maine. Hopefully, they will bear fruit as
will be evidenced in the months that lie ahead.

Staff and Money—The Common Cry
   At present  our  Bureau of Oil  Pollution  Control  is
understaffed  and underfunded. Our entire staff for this
program  consists of two personnel, both of  whom  are
financially supported from the State's general fund. A plea
to the present Legislature  for additional personnel and
funding  has  been  made  and  favorably  received.  The
additional personnel are  needed  on location  at  the  oil
transferring activities.

   With the limited funds and personnel available, we  are
continuing to enforce the tenets of the law. More important
than the regulating  and enforcing of the spirit  of the law,
we feel that we have developed a communication with  the
entire oil industry. Greater feed back and cooperation is a
result. This is not exactly a new tack; but the change of
course is perceptible.

The Future
   It is conceivable at this time that the license  fees will be
tied  up  in  litigation for  a long time  into the   future.
Nevertheless,  we  cannot  sit back  and idly  rest  on our
laurels and expect the powers given to us by the  Legislature
to magically  solve our  problems. Money  is  necessary  to
actively pursue  this aggressive program which has been
placed squarely upon bur shoulders. We plan to continue
our efforts under the stars of this strong regulating law. We
are hopeful that our own Legislature will  allocate enough
monies for us  to continue and expand  our  endeavors of
planning, inspecting and regulating the transfer of oil.

   Functionally  speaking,  we recognize   that  the ships'
masters,  the  ship  owners  and operators,  the  terminal
operators, as well as operating personnel are all under the
pressures  of  our  competitive  economic   profit-making
system and all too often  short cuts are taken to  reduce
turn-around time and increase pumping rates. Moreover, we
recognize  and have  had   to  face the  realization  that
self-regulation by the  oil industry is not possible. It has
been  tried and failed  drastically.  Stringent control by  a
regulatory body seems to be the only answer.

   Compliance with our regulations will insure clean waters
in and around terminals, thereby  not  only  improving the
waters but  also  improving the  terminal  image  to  the
community. The  "bureaucratic monkey"  can  always be
placed upon our backs. It is easier for the terminal operator
to go to his company and say, "they require it," rather than
the terminal operator himself requesting safety or abate-
ment equipment. Yes, this State has a lot to offer to the
terminal  operator  of Maine: Continual safety  inspection
programs,  closer  monitoring of  transfer  operations by
trained inspectors, dialogue  with the oil  industry, and
cooperation with other  agencies.  These appear to  be the
best  oil  dispersant agents  known to date.  We feel that
through extensive  education and  rigid safety  inspection
programs, together as a team effort with the oil industry,
we can make  Maine  a  leader  in  the prevention of spills
should  a  spill occur, contingency plans,  stockpiling  of
abatement equipment and a sound State organization will
surely aid in the prompt clean up.

   The day will come when the nation will be able to look
proudly to  our coordinated efforts and statistically show
that  spills in  Maine will  be at the nadar  for the  nation.
Many states are anxiously watching to see what will happen
in Maine.  They are awaiting the results of the litigation and
the formulative  preparation that  we have  undertaken in
anticipation of  the future.  Perhaps the  great American
dream can be realized and  once again it will be said that,
"As Maine goes so goes the nation."

-------
                  STATE  JURISDICTION   OVER  OIL SPILLS
                                IN  A  FEDERAL  SYSTEM
                                                Daniel Wlkes
                                        Department of Political Science
                                    University of Rhode Island, Kingston, R.I.
ABSTRACT

    A comparison of the bases for state and federal juris-
dictions, in the light of Canadian Arctic, Florida, Maine and
Federal  Water Pollution Control Acts,  shows  when, how
and why state and federal officials will find they have over-
lapping jurisdictions. The results of this preliminary study
point to several areas in which  the overlaps should be kept
and some key ways in which they may be more rationally
related, especially  in preventive measures and contingency
planning.

INTRODUCTION
    The passage by states such as Florida and Maine of laws
to deal specifically with oil spills has raised questions about
both the limits and wisdom of  state action in a federal
system. The Florida Oil Spill Prevention and Pollution Con-
trol Act took effect on July 1, 1970 and is to be found in
Florida  Laws of 1970, chapter 70-244. The Maine "Act
Relating to Coastal Conveyance of Petroleum" was signed
into law by the Governor on February 5, 1970; it added a
new subchapter II-A to Title 38,  chapter 3 of the Maine
Revised Statutes called "Oil Discharge Prevention and Pol-
lution Control" in sections 541 to 557. Both acts are sum-
marized and compared with federal laws in  the  United
States  and  Canada in the  Table  of  Oil Spill Legislation
under Part II of this study below.

Crux of the Matter of State Laws
and Aims of This Study
    The crux of  the question of state controls over oil
spills—their  prevention, containment, cleanup  and reim-
bursements  for costs or losses—lies in the fact  that certain
functions which each  state presently performs make it  a
natural unit to handle local problems, while some results of
purely state control just do not fit into rational  manage-
ment of the Oil Spill Problem.

    For the United States, this study of state powers to
handle oil spills is  made at a time in its federated system
when renewed responsibility is  being handed to state cap-
itals over most aspects of control over seabed sands  and
minerals  or  fish resources within three  miles of shore.
Simultaneously, enforcement of water quality standards for
tidal waters has  been made into the state unit's primary
responsibility under national laws.
    For example, the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, by
Title 43 of the United States Code, in Section 1311 "con-
firmed .  . and vested in" the coastal states "all" resources
within  territorial  waters  or   the  seabed  under  them,
including "the right. . to manage  them  . .  in accordance
with applicable state law." For Florida and Texas,  The
Supreme  Court held in 1960, for historical reasons, that the
federal Congress had intended these two  states to get all
natural resources "underlying the Gulf of Mexico" up to 9
miles out.)
    This means that
      1) spill-producing activities related  to  state^icensed
     oil  production  offshore, and

      2)  protection of local oyster beds, lobster grounds,
      sport fisheries, trawling waters and the like fall within
      state responsibilities.

In short, the state unit has had concern over oil spills thrust
upon it whether it  wishes to be concerned or not.

    What this study aims to do, therefore,  is: first, to set
forth some examples of federal and state laws in the United
States and  in Canada for comparison; second, to  spell out
the limitations upon state powers under the federal system
                                                    57

-------
58     LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
in the United States; and third, to present the author's own
views  on (a) how both units may cumulatively use their
respective jurisdictions, and (b) which areas are those where
it is wisest to have federal rule-making exclusively, and
those  where past  patterns of concurrent jurisdiction still
serve a valid purpose.

Application Elsewhere of Lessons from
Jurisdiction in the U.S.
    fa a few ways, the United States has special problems
of how much control over oil spills the federal government
can or  must  leave to state subdivisions. Most  of the
problems  discussed in this  study, however, apply to
questions  raised  in  other  coastal nations.  For  a few
"federal"  states,  such as Argentina,  Australia,  Brazil,
Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, India and Mexi-
co,  some of these  issues may arise in the future simply out
of the existence of separate governmental units or  regions
of authority in  oil spill situations.

    Most  important, however, is the  fact that,  for all
nations, there are  marked similarities between the  choices
                                        their governments will have to make in connection with
                                        international regimes for control of pollution and those
                                        choices  which states of the  United States must make
                                        vis-a-vis their government in Washington, D.C.

                                        COMPARISON OF SAMPLE STATUTORY
                                        OVERLAPS IN POWERS OVER OIL SPILLS


                                            The following Table of Oil Spill Laws affords a means
                                        for comparing the ways in  which four governmental units
                                        have set forth, in their specific oil spill law, a few rules on
                                        jurisdictional control and  conduct in relation  to  oil
                                        pollution.
                                            WARNING: It is vital to stress  that  every one of these
                                        jurisdictions has other laws which apply to spill prevention,
                                        control and liability. Each, for example, has decisional rules
                                        in tort liability, admiralty or reach of its judges in requests
                                        for equitable relief to be found in written court decisions.
                                        Further, this Table has selected only a  few parts of each
                                        statute, often without adding every exception. It is an aid
                                        to pinpoint the issues, not a guide to United States, Maine
                                        Florida or Canadian legislation.
Table of Oil Spill Laws
What the
law does
REACHES
EXTRATER-
RITORIALLY

BODY TO
REGULATE

REGULA-
TIONS CAN
COVER
ACTS IN
CASE OF
SPILL
CONTIN-
GENCY
PLAN
CANADIAL ARCTIC
WATERS POLLUTION
PREVENTION ACT
100 miles from
shore above 60°
North latitude

Governor-in-
Council

Waste-threatening
activity, cargo,
ship; safety zone;
hull construction
sterring & propul-
sions gear; maximum
cargo; load lines;
maintenance; navi-
gation aids, crew,
lookouts & cleanups
supplies on board
pilotage, ine navi-
gators & breakers;
closed seasons;
load lines; lanes
Pollution Preven-
tions Control
Officer (PPCO)
Not specified
FLORIDA OIL SPILL
PREVENTION AND
POLLUTION CONTROL
ACT	
None
Department of
Natural Resources
(D/NR)
Containment gear &
trained crew in
ship or terminal;
safety; removal by
state when owner
fails; criteria on
plans & means of
removal; minimum
sea conditions to
enter & master's
duty to report
his discharges &
troubles & denials
of entry; other
needed rules
Executive Director
of D/NR

State Plan plus
11 deep water
port plans
MAINE OIL DIS-
CHARGE PREVENTION
AND POLLUTION
CONTROL LAW
12 miles from the
coastline
Environmental
Improvement
Commission (EIC)
Operating ships &
terminals; safety
of ships & equipment
& inspection; remov-
al of pollutants;
control districts;
other needed rules
EIC (Governor also
has Civil Defense
powers)
State plans to be
developed
FEDERAL WATER
POLLUTION
CONTROL ACT,
SECTION 11

Zone allowed under
Territorial Sea
Convention when
proclaimed by U.S.
President (dele-
gated to the
Coast Guard)
Methods for remov-
al; criteria for
local & regional
plans; preventive
measures; equipment
on ship or shore
Coast Guard's
On-Scene
Commander
National Plan
by Coast Guard
regions

-------
                                                                            STATE JURISDICTION. . .     59
Table of Oil Spill Laws (continued)
Law
SPILL OF UN-
KNOWN ORI-
GIN SPECIAL-
LY COVERED
DUTY TO
NOTIFY ON
NOTICE TO
GOTO
SPECIAL MEN
& EQUIP-
MENT

INSPECTION
CANADIAN ARCTIC
No
Master or person
in charge
Pollution Preven-
tion Control
Officer
PPCO's icebreakers
& (possibly) ice
navigator & pilots

Ship or shore site
FLORIDA
Yes
Pilot and master
Port Manager and
nearest Coast
Guard station
State and Port
Response Teams
and equipment

Terminals, ships &
MAINE
Yes
As regulated
As regulated
EIC may employ &
equip port or
state teams

Terminals, ships &
FEDERAL U.S.
No (yet subject to
surveillance sys-
tem called for)
Person in charge
"appropriate
agency" (as desig-
nated in rules)
Strike forces to be
set up or designated;
center to be set up
to co-ordinate & direct
national plan
Vessels "carrying oil"
ARE TERMINAL  No, but permit
LICENSES      would be needed
REQUIRED     to operate, build
               or expand one

© 1971 Daniel Wilkes
FORBIDS      Any unauthorized
               deposit or allow-
               ing one; not
               notifying of a
               spill or threat or fol-
               lowing orders of a PPCO
WHO IS
COVERED BY
IT
CRIMINAL
PENALTIES
EXEMPTED
FROM CRIM-
INAL LAW
AIDS TO
ENFORCE-
MENT
CIVIL
PENALTIES

EXEMPTED
FROM CIVIL
FINE
Depositors, owner &
master of ship or
cargo; i in charge
For deposit $5000/day &
$100,000/ship & for-
feit ship & cargo
(maximum) For others:
up to $25,000 & forfeit
No one
PPCO s have full
police powers
None
                          personnel
                          Yes for terminal
                          ships & personnel;
                          $300 fee & show -
                          cleanup ability
Discharging oil
in coastal waters
& lands unless re-
ported & removed;
an unlicensed ter-
minal; not notifying
of spill or follow-
ing orders & rules
Operator, master &
pilot, owner or  1
in charge
For failure to
notify: up to
$10,000 or two
years in jail

No one
Not specified
in Act
To $50,000/day
                          Immediate report-
                          er who fully re-
                          moves under rule
                          personnel
                          Yes for terminal,
                          ships & personnel;
                          one half cent per
                          barrel fee on oil
                                                    Discharging oil in
                                                    coastal waters &
                                                    lands or waters
                                                    that end up  there;
                                                    violating orders,
                                                    rules or a license
Terminals & 1 vio-
lating a rule or dis-
charging oil
Per violation:
$10045000 per
day
One who promptly
reports & removes
spill under rules
EIC Inspection &
Enforcement em-
ployees have
powers of a
constable
None
                    No, but Corps of
                    Engineers permit
                    needed to build
                    or expand one
Discharging oil in
navigable waters,
shorelines or con-
tiguous zones in
amounts rules call
"harmful"; not
notifying of spill or
following rules
Owner, operator or
1 in charge

$10,000 or  one
year or both is
maximum for
failure to notify

Person in charge
who notifies
immediately
President may ex-
tend enforcing to
contiguous zone
To $10,000/knowing
discharge & $5000/
other violation
No one

-------
60    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
Table of Oil Spill Laws (continued)

Laws              CANADIAN ARCTIC
LIABLE FOR
DAMAGE
LIABLE FOR
COSTS OF
CLEANUP
EXEMPTED
FROM COST
OF CLEANUP
CAN THEY
DESTROY SHIP
AIDS TO
LAWSUITS
 INFORMATION
 OWNERS MUST
 SUPPLY

 FUND FOR
 COSTS
 SOURCE OF
 FUND
AMOUNT IN
FUND
COSTS THAT
FUND PAYS
FOR

EXPRESS
RELATION TO
OTHER JURIS-
DICTIONS
Anyone for all
losses caused to
anyone

For reasonable
federal costs,
entrepreneurs, owner of
ship/cargo or charter party
No one
Yes

Liability of a
contributor for
his share
Any reasonable
information re-
quested

None (bond may
be required)
Cumulative with
provincial laws
under Canada Water Act
(within 12 miles of
shore)
    FLORIDA

Not under Act or
Fund
Persons dis-
charging
Mere aider not
guilty of wilful
misconduct (he's
also exempt from
civil liability)
No provision

Can sue insurer
or surety direct
& owner of ships &
terminals must
have local agent

Terminal capacity
& plans & agree-
ments or equip-
ment for cleanup
Coastas Protec-
tion Fund
License fees & pen-
alties & $100,000
from treasury

To  $5 million

Cleanup, abate?
ment, administra-
tion & rehabilita-
ting wildlife
Port Manager to
keep in touch
with Coast Guard
    MAINE

Under Fund, for all
loss by anyone up
to indirect loss
of income
Oil terminal, for
acts of employee
or of ship which
uses it
No one
No provision

Can avoid suit in
claim settled by
Fund or arbitrated
As regulated
Coastal Protec-
tion Fund
1/2 cent/barrel
fee penalties &
reimbursements,
bonds
To $4 million

Cleanup by anyone,
damage to anyone,
administration and
research
No rule to be in-
consistent with a
federal one; towns
keep non-con-
flicting police
powers; EIC  to
cooperate with
states, U.S. &
other nations &
agencies & can
agree with U.S. or
New England
Compactees
FEDERAL U.S.

Not under Act or
Fund
For costs to U.S.:
lesser of $ 100 per ton
or $14 million if ship,
S8 million if from
shore, unless wilful
misconduct
No one
Yes

Costs are liens on
ships; can sue in-
surer or surety
direct; injunction
authorized

As regulated
 Revolving Fund &
 possible bond
 Fines, reimburse-
 ments & U.S.
 Treasury

 To $35  million

 Cleanup costs to
 U.S. & owner who
 is without fault

 Federal  may "coord-
 inate and direct"
 entire cleanup;
 rules are cumula-
 tive with state &
 local, but Plan
 rules may over-
 ride states ones;
 1954 Oil Convention
overrides all in
contiguous zone

-------
                                                                               STATE JURISDICTION. .
                                                                                                              61
WARNING :This Table is for illustrative purposes only as an
          aid to understand the main areas and means of
          setting out jurisdiction, liabilities both civil and
          criminal,  and regulatory responsibilities. It is
          not  a guide to legislation in Florida,  Maine,
          Canada or the  United States. Each jurisdiction
          has other statutory provisions in the Act used
          as an  example, aside from those summarized;
          many  provisions encapsuled  above have  ex-
          ceptions or  qualifications  which are  not  set
          forth, so as to make comparison easier.  Lastly,
          as  "Common  Law"  jurisdictions,  all four
          governmental units include in their rules of law
          those  decisions of  their courts in  the past
          which, by reason of persuasiveness  or finality,
          are supplements to statutory rules.
    The above Table shows that the potential for state or
provincial jurisdictions to overlap with federal laws exists in
the United States, and through somewhat similar overlaps
in Canada, for almost every area of oil spill regulation. This
study will take  up:  first, the possibility of resolving these
overlaps by  means of federal  supremacy (in the  United
States) in Part HI; next, in Part IV, the limits upon state
action in the absence of any valid federal exclusion from
concurrent rules;  and lastly, in Part V, some preliminary
proposals for future jurisdictional developments.


EXCLUSION OF STATES OF THE UNITED
STATES UNDER THE 'FEDERAL
SUPREMACY CLAUSE'

Constitutional Framework
    The framework  for divisions of powers between the
Washington legislature and each of the 50 state legislatures,
from Alaska and Hawaii to the tip of Florida, is contained
in four parts of the United States Constitution: Article I on
the  powers  of Congress,  Article III  on  maritime
jurisdictions, Article  VI which makes  certain federal laws
supreme over state ones, and the Tenth Amendment which
reserves certain unstated powers to  each  of the 50 states.
Basically, the following rules  applying to overlaps are  laid
down:
      Rule One-77ze  "Constitution., shall be the supreme
      Law of the  Land." (Article VI.) By court interpreta-
      tion, this means that neither Washington  nor state
      lawmakers can pass valid laws which exceed some lim-
      itation in the Constitution itself.
      Rule Two-77/e  "Laws of the  United States (federal
      enactments and decisional  rulings)  shall  be  the
      supreme Law of the Land..and every State shall be
      bound thereby," anything in the laws of any State to
      the  contrary  notwithstanding.  (Article  VI.)  This
      means that  any valid federal law which conflicts with
      a state law will override that  state law, unless some
      unusually higher state right has  been given to  the
      state by some other part of the Constitution.
      Rule Three-TTze federal legislature has power to enact
     all  "necessary and proper" laws to carry out federal
     functions under the  Constitution,  which  include,
     among others, these four powers related to oil spill
     rules, namely, power to:

           (1) lay uniform taxes;
           (2) regulate commerce which goes to or comes
              from outside  any single state;
           (3) define and punish  "Piracies and Felonies
              committed on the high seas, and  Offenses
              against the Law of Nations";  and

           (4)  "exercise exclusive Legislation" over areas
               owned by the  federal government by pur-
               chase  from a state, and provide for the gen-
               eral welfare.  (Article I.)
     Rule  Four-Treaties which bind the United States are
     also "the supreme Law of the Land." (Article VI.)
     Thus, federal laws to carry out obligations under in-
     ternational oil pollution conventions, or similar treaty
     arrangements such  as the International Boundary
     Waters Treaty covering water pollution disputes be-
     tween the  United States and Canada, may  override
     state laws, as may the  treaty  itself to  the extent that
     it is "self-executing".
     Rule  Five-Federal judges shall have power, to handle
     "all Cases  of admiralty and  maritime Jurisdiction. "
     (Article III.) This clause  has been interpreted as per-
     mitting Congress to give exclusive jurisdiction over
     admiralty matters to federal courts, and to inversely
     authorize the federal government to legislate in mat-
     ters which   affect  any  "navigable waters"  of  the
     United  States, which  for our  purposes include all
     coastal waters where the high tide allows any boat to
     go (or would but for silting up since).
     Rule  Six-v4// powers which the Constitution neither
     delegated to the federal government nor prohibited to
     the  States  are  "reserved to  the States."  (Tenth
     Amendment.) This  means that some  unspecified
     kinds of state actions have been  reserved to the states,
     and a pollution abatement measure might conceivably
     be  held  by  a court to rest  on such a power inde-
     pendently of federal laws.

Effect of this Framework on
Regulation for Oil Spillage
    Taken  together, the above six rules give the Congress
ample  room to take over practically all of the rule-making
functions in order to control oil  spills. Action by any state
unit, therefore, must rest on either (a) an absence of federal
action—for example, arguably, if  no sea lanes are laid down
to prevent  tanker  collisions  in a harbor and the state's li-
cense to operate a terminal is conditioned on observance of
sea lanes; (b) federal laws which are not intended  to "pre-
empt the field"  of oil spill control or bar  all  state ac-
tion-for instance, as is currently  the case under the concur-
rent regime of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended, summarized in the Table  of Oil Spill Laws above;

-------
62    LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT
or (c) some special state  claim  that it has an inherently
reserved right to take action in a given set of critical circum-
stances.
    Special bases for this last type of power are discussed
in Part V below. Under the present concurrent regime, the
significance of state arguments about "reserved rights" may
be solely in those cases in which  the federal government is
logically the one to make exclusive rules, but is deadlocked
and unable  to act, so that a state unit's irreducible security
needs could be held by a judge to require it to act, rather
than to suffer the consequences of federal unwillingness to
act.
    As  a first step in rational jurisdictional management,
therefore, it will be important to identify  those types of
rules where exclusive federal control is either logically or
jurisdictionally required. A preliminary list of items to be
considered for possible exclusivity might include:
    1. Lighting on booms, floating barges, skimmers and
wrecked tankers which might perform both the navigation
safety functions of more general  lighting requirements and
give  notice of the  special spill cleanup and fire or stain
hazards in the area. This is most  logically  an area in which
the Coast  Guard should perform its traditional exclusive
role by promulgating and disseminating rules as quickly as
possible. There is no reason why a state's contingency plans
for oil spills cannot incorporate  both the  need for special
lights and knowledge about them, nor why interested states
cannot  suggest rules or amendments based upon their ex-
perience.  The need for uniformity, especially in interna-
tional waters, as well as the primary federal responsibility
for ship movements, puts this high on any exclusively fed-
eral listing.
    2. Channels for one-way traffic for  tankers, and for
vessels with which  they might collide. From the Table of
Oil Spill Laws it can be seen that Maine  envisaged this as
one of  the functions for its Environmental Improvement
Commission, whereas the Canadian Arctic legislation made
this a federal function. At present, the United States federal
authorities have  no  such rules for Portland Harbor, the fifth
most-trafficked oil port in  the United States. The question
arises, therefore, whether  this state of affairs creates the
condition in which Maine  might  not take  action under its
Oil Discharge Prevention and Pollution Control law and ar-
gue that its "irreducible security  needs require the state to
act, rather than to suffer the consequences of federal unwil-
lingness  to  act?" As this is written (February 1971), the
Coast Guard has under consideration alternative routing for
sea lane separation for tankers entering and leaving Portland
Harbor. Thus, the logical denouement of an exclusively fed-
eral  solution  may  soon be reached. The  Maine example,
however, poses the type of problem which may be expected
for similar sea lane situations elsewhere.

    The state's  interest is still not small by  any means.
First, the biological species placed in jeopardy by any tank-
er disaster are part  of the resources which the state holds in
trust for its residents. Second, its public beaches and rocky
shores may, as  in  the case of Maine or Rhode Island or
Florida, play a principal role in recreation responsibilities of
the state unit to its people. Third, the men and equipment
siphoned  to  the site of a disaster, when  they  come  from
state and  local public employee groups, will be (a) far more
numerous than federal employees are likelyy to be, (b) far
more likely to be taken off other needed  public service for
extended  periods of time, and (c) far more disastrous to the
state unit than to the federal one in terms of both diver-
sions of human assets and diversions of the slim monetary
resources  required.
    The significant consequence of this is that no state can
"successfully" manage any but the most minor spill.lt will
always be the loser, and in the case of a tanker collision or
grounding during a delivery run, the relatively  bigger loser
(at the very least until Disaster Funds begin to offset those
immediate diversions). Thus, the only spill "management"
against major spill threats is prevention.
    This  means two things: in arriving at  exclusive federal
rules, state concerns for adequate preventive measures will
be entitled to significant influence, probably an  influence
their legislators in Congress  will be  urging upon the federal
executive  branch; and it will  depend on that adequacy of
the final  rules whether the  exclusive powers of the Coast
Guard will be beyond reach of any overriding claim by the
state based on Rule Six above.
    3. Minimum draught and sea conditions for tankers
entering port are expressly made subject to the Department
of Natural Resources in Florida under that state's Oil Spill
Prevention and Control Act. Here  again is an area of ship
safety  traditionally  handled  by  the  federal  authorities.
Again, the state's concern  is for "preventive  medicine".
Here too, the remedy could be prompt and adequate feder-
al rules. One  thing is certain: after the San Francisco Bay
Disaster of 1971 through collision in a fog, no state will be
any less concerned than Florida about preventive rules for
loaded tankers on their way into port. In some cases, the
prevention does not lie in barring entry, for the very rough
seas which may make entry hazardous make staying at sea
often just as risky; a regulatory response in terms of more
sophisticated entry navigation or deeper and wider channels
may be the right one, and here, too, the federal authorities
are the logical ones to act.
    4. Hull construction, steering and propulsion gear are
reflected  in Canada's schedules of subjects for preventive
regulation, and in more general terms in Florida and Maine,
powers  to regulate ship safety. Functionally, freedom of
movement and ability to charter tankers to serve land-based
needs require some degree of uniformity; logically, there-
fore,  international bodies,  federal  authorities  or  the
Commissioners on  Uniform  State Laws are the ones to for-
mulate any such protective requirements-awe? in that order.
It will  only be through failure  of IMCO  or  the  federal
rule-makers to make an adequate response  that any possible
tipping  of the balance in  favor of a  unilateral state rule
could conceivably occur.

    5. Enabling legislation for treaty obligations is properly
an area for  exclusive  federal control. It  is worth  noting,
however,  that here, too, the adequacy of the federal re-

-------
                                                                               STATE JURISDICTION. .  .    63
sponse may be the key to  whether state action is barred.
For  example, when the Oil Pollution  Act of  1924, as
enacted, was shown to be unduly restricted in light of the
Oil Pollution Convention of 1954, as amended, the ques-
tion of who would implement the Convention if the federal
government would not become a  recurrent problem for
congressmen  holding Hearings before the Committee on
Merchant Marine and Fisheries of the House of Representa-
tives in  the spring of 1969. Since Rule Four says that all
treaties  are "the supreme Law of the Land", a state  could
conceivably enact enabling legislation-in default of federal
activity  -to carry out the responsibilities which the United
States has as a result. For example, conditioning grant or
renewal  of a terminal  license on  shore  on adherence by
tankers entering or leaving the terminal to the Oil Pollution
Convention of 1954 might be a permissible state response,
or so it would argue.

History of "Exclusivity" Under the Studied
Laws on Oil Spills
    Despite a  specific request  before the Public  Works
Committee of the House of Representatives, during hear-
ings  in April and May  of 1968 on versions of the present
Section  II  summarized in the Table of Oil Spill Laws above,
the Congress rejected use of the federal supremacy powers
to make its federal oil spill law substitute for state action.
Page 358 of the transcript put out by that committee  under
the  title "Federal Water Pollution  Control Act Amend-
ments -1968" shows that the marine general manager of
Mobil Oil Company asked that the new oil spill provisions
expressly preempt the field by providing that no other fed-
eral  statutes could be construed as including within their
terms any discharge of oil and
     that  no State or  local  government or administrative
     agency may impose on any vessel owner or operator
     any requirement,  penalty, or liability with respect to
     cleanup of any discharge of oil into or on the territor-
     ial seas or navigable waters of the United States.
The  reason for this rejection by Congress of any language
which would invoke the 'Federal Supremacy Clause' is most
abundantly reflected in the fact that not a single govern-
ment official testifying wanted that power. On  the con-
trary, repeated reference is made to the  great reliance the
Coast Guard expected to place on the states and  localities
living up to their duties to (a) handle the lesser  spills en-
tirely by themselves and (b) play a large role in the support
groups to handle the larger spills. Also to the contrary is the
provision in Annex X  of the National Contingency Plan
under paragraph 2005.2, in June 1970, that the use of dis-
persants, in any  but exceptional  cases  spelled  out pre-
viously,

      shall  be  subject  to this schedule except in States
     where State laws, regulations or written policies that
     govern  the  prohibition, use,  quantity,  or type of
     dispersant are in effect. In such States, the State laws,
     regulations  or written policies shall  be  followed
     during the cleanup. (Emphasis added.) "See FWPCA §
      11(0)."
 ADJUSTMENTS OF STATE AND
FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL POWERS
    The most superficial appraisal of the oil spill threat and
the resources to meet it in any federal system reveals that
enforcement of preventive and cleanup measures will need
both jurisdictions to be effective. The Coast Guard does not
have the inspectors, ships and lawyers to prepare and pro-
secute each  and every case of infraction; the same might be
said of  the  United States Attorneys in each  federal  court-
house who  must try  the  federal cases, of the state pros-
ecutors  and  coastal zone employees. What is said of so slow
a process  as court enforcement goes double for the rapid
demands on both systems during a moderate  or major spill.
In short, since neither can "go it alone", each will depend
upon concurrent enforcement possibilities by  the other.
Concurrent Jurisdiction as a Device
to Enforce Exclusively Federal Rules
    As  a  result, it is vital to keep in mind that no federal
rule needs to bar carbon  copy  state action in order to be
exclusive. The need for uniformity, or to preserve federal
interests in exclusivity for subjects of uniquely federal con-
cern, is  not a  need for federal  enforcement alone;  it is a
need for  a  single federally-formulated  rule. This can be
done while  multiplying the human, equipment and court
resources  available on the order of ten to several hundred
times simply by  retaining concurrent jurisdiction even in
Single Rule  cases, just so long as the state enforcement can
conform to the federal rule.
    Therefore,  it  is  in  the  interest of the federal
government  (1) not to "preempt the field" in oil spill con-
trol by  expressly barring state regulation, and (2) to work
out concurrent enforcement possibilities under the regional
and sub-regional components of the National Contingency
Plan.
Overlap Areas Where Potential for
Conflicting Rules Exists
    In most cases, there will be neither an exclusive federal
rule nor  an absence  of  concurrent jurisdiction. A brief
glance across the columns of the Table of Oil  Spill Laws
above quickly spells out  the inevitable existence of con-
current  administration, concurrent  rule-making,  and over-
lapping  enforcement   to  be  expected in  any oil spill
incident. The problem is not how to eliminate the conflict,
but  how  to most rationally adjust the workings at both
levels.
    The potential for conflicting requirements also lurks in
the data revealed by the following  table prepared for this
study from Appendix C of the Dillingham Report's Volume
I on "Analysis of Oil Spills and Control Materials":
  TABLE OF  LISTED POTENTIAL DEVICES OR CHEMICALS*
   Mechanical Equipment
Chemicals
Kind No. Listed
Booms 45
Recovery devices 35
Dispersant applicators 12
Pneumatic barriers 6
Domes 2
*As of February 1970 only
Kind No. Listed
Dispersants 1 26
Absorbent materials 37
Sinking materials 27
Burning promoters 3
Gelling promoters 3
Bird rehabilitators 2

-------
64     LAWS AND  ENFORCEMENT
This early 1970 listing turned out to be only the top of the
iceberg. Just what adjustments are needed in each regula-
tory area of possible overlap, as discussed separately below,
one  conclusion  is easy  to  reach: it will take the scientists
and  spill experts of federal plus state laboratories and teams
to provide the initial findings and evaluations for even the
most minimal list of products, species and oil environments.
     1. Removal and containment methods
     The most obvious place for predicted conflict between
state and federal officials  lies in an area covered by  spill
control powers in all of the four laws studied; this is in
methods of removal of the oil. Here especially, tempers can
be expected to run high in each of the following problem
areas if different levels insist on different inconsistent rules:
     Booms-Vfhen there are not  enough booms at the site
of a spill to prevent all areas of escape, choices will have to
be made. For example, the local official's primary concern
may be to have a boom protect a critical indentation in the
shore to save  a local oyster ground. This might clash with a
Coast Guard On-Scene Commander's primary concern for a
slightly wider seaward circle of booms to keep  the oil
pushing shoreward rather than out  to sea. There are  two
solutions to this type of problem. First, regional versions of
the  National Contingency  Plan and state laws both allow
the  state to work out uniform protections in case of acci-
dent; thus, possible conflicts may be resolved in cooler per-
iods. Second, the very identification of such problems in
advance can play a role in setting requirements for booms
on hand for both private and public planners; there is no
good reason,  for example, why  our hypothetical conflict
should  be  allowed to arise, as  both port safety and  bed
survival are equally valid aims of spill control.
     Removal equipment-The degree to which a state puts a
"crisis" tag on an oil spill potentially affecting  key areas
will  determine how important it will become to have equip-
ment (and storage barges or means) available to pump oil
off the surface as soon as possible, once a spill has occurred.
In a sense, federal interests should be no less; however, a
company's arrangements  to have equipment  brought in
when a spill occurs may seem more reasonable from a  fed-
eral  point of view than from that of any state or port which
sees catastrophic results if no equipment is available. This
could  be  the case, for example, off those parts of Long
Island's north shore where  intensively  cultivated  oyster
beds are leased from the  State  of  New  York or owned
outright. Again, legal  supremacy is no answer; advance
accommodations between state and federal officials is. Max-
imum safeguards to meet high priority local needs may be
the appropriate response as sophistication and equipment
availability increases. The oil company has a right to insist
that both levels impose costs of  such on-site equipment or
storage capacity only when the  interest to be protected is
sufficiently important to make such  an expense reasonable
in all the circumstances involved.

    Dispersants  and non-sinking absorbent  agents-The
prospect for the sharpest state-federal  conflicts will lie in
the labelling under state and regional plans of Brand X as a
permitted dispersant or Brand Y as a prohibited one. At
present, under paragraph 2005.2 of the June 1970 National
Contingency Plan, federal authorities appear to be bound to
follow state rulings on detergents, at least in two cases:

      (1) where the On-Scene Commander is not required to
      act to reduce risk to life or risk of fire, and
      (2) where the state has a law, regulation or written pol-
      icy against it.

In our present  state  of flux, it  is possible  that the dis-
persants on hand will  not  have been ruled on  by either  a
regulation or a written "policy". (Only Canada  has a speci-
fic  law directed against the manufacture and  sale  of nu-
trient  detergents which might  apply within 12 miles of
shore after  present  administrative extensions run out.) An
argument can be made out, however, that the listing of
dispersants in the sub-regional or regional contingency plans
of the Coast Guard without any  written protest from the
state amounts to acquiescence in their use where no policy
statement has been made at all.
    If both state and  federal lists are made up, however,
what  may be a rare conflict can become an important one
to avoid. When both  lists agree, there is no problem. The
ability of a state to ban a dispersant as
      one which risks harm to local biological species of
      concern  to the people of this State or connected with
      food chains on  which fishes or other marine species
      caught in state waters depend
is no  small exercise of state responsibilities. The state's job
is (a) to protect the livelihoods of its commercial fishermen,
as in  protecting Maine's lobstery  from the havoc wreaked
by  detergents  on  Brittany's lobsters  after the  Torrey
Canyon slick arrived (per J.E. Smith of the Plymouth Lab-
oratory); (b) to support recreational fishing, as off Florida;
and (c) to act as owner and trustee of the wildlife resources
within 3, or in two cases nine, miles of shore.
    For the oil spill  fighter there  is a practical solution,
namely to have available supplies of those dispersants which
are allowed under both local and national lists, or have been
labelled as "least toxic" by the Water Quality Office on the
federal level and by its state counterpart laboratory.
    For the two jurisdictions, however, sheer quantity of
testing  suggests some adaptive rules be created. For in-
stance, state laboratories will be  the ones more likely to
have established toxicity to local species under the syner-
gistic  effects of local water quality conditions to be expect-
ed in oil spills. If they have done so, rational management
would suggest  drawing up sub-regional federal  lists  based
upon  state  testing. Sometimes, on the other hand, the fed-
eral laboratory will have disclosed harmful  effects from  a
dispersant whose toxicity had not shown up in  state tests.
Here, paragraph 2005.2 aside, rational management would
suggest changing the state's contingency plan to coincide
with the federal findings.
    In a final class of cases, both sets of scientists will have
made  identical tests and the state  laboratory will "find"

-------
                                                                                STATE JURISDICTION. . .
                                                    65
Brand  Y  toxic  when  the  national laboratory  "finds" it
non-toxic  to the identical species. Here paragraph 2005.2
suggests a way to avoid a clash—the state promulgates a
written policy declaration against use of Brand Y and  the
On-Scene Commander can follow it. In the long run, how-
ever, it is  suggested that resolving conflicts by a State  Su-
premacy absolutism will  be no better than the theoretical
federal ability to proclaim  itself supreme Two reasons  are
pivotal here. First, oceanic movements as well as migratory
movements of fishes,  crabs  and lobsters  make  no spill
purely one state's affair. Second, far too  much on-going
collaboration  will be required for successful resource man-
agement and pollution abatement for avoidable conflicts to
be sought  or for unavoidable ones to be resolved solely on
jurisdictional criteria.
    The easiest accommodation to make, therefore, is to
allow cumulative regulation to prevail wherever possible.
Indeed, the "accumulation" will often have to  include
other states in the region, or,  for toxic results  on a sea-
board-ranging fish like the mackerel, even all states on one
coast. Practical realities may likewise dictate needs to give
way in still other circumstances. For instance, tankers with
cargoes for Britain and the  United States will have to have
BP-1100 available for use in U.K. waters, thus making this
dispersant  one of the potentially available ones in spills of
the same tanker here. When COREXIT was first announced
in the New York Times of  April 19,  1968 on page  81,
column 6, officials were  reported to have  announced this
dispersant  would be carried by ESSO's entire 125-tanker
fleet; if such is in fact the case, it may make common sense
to have a clearance of  this dispersant as "non-toxic to
marine species in foreseeable concentrations and synergistic
relationships" come from a national,  or even international,
source instead of a state one. (Reports  of toxicity of this
dispersant  at  the December 1970 FAO  meeting in Rome
pinpointed the need  for such an evaluation, although they
were themselves far from conclusive.)

     Finally, it should not be forgotten that tradeoffs are
 not merely between the  costs of dispersion versus the risks
 to local ecologies. Fire hazards, for example, attend certain
 grade  spills.  Further,  movement of a particular slick can
 threaten beaches, coral reefs or fishing  grounds elsehwere,
 as in the  Naval Sludge Dump Incident off Florida in 1970
 where high seas fisheries and Georgian resources were with-
 in range of the moving slick. Lastly, particular dispersants
 may make oil brought on shore harder or easier for local
 teams to  remove, as in  the OCEAN EAGLE disaster  one
 half mile  from shore near  San  Juan, Puerto Rico in  March
 1968. There, the New  York Times reported  on page 1,
 column 4 on March 5th  that at least eight resort hotels had
 to close  their beaches "as oil and emulsifying  chemicals,
 used to combat the ever-widening slick, fouled the usually
 clear  waters,"  and the Dillingham Report stated  that
 treated oil of the 83,400 barrels of crude spilled was "much
 harder to  remove from shore".
     Sinking  materials and sinking absorbents-lhese raise
 identical  problems.  In addition,  however,  the bottom and
 bottom-related  species are distinguishably threatened by
their use with significant consequences for potential clashes
in the decision whether to use them. These species, such as
lobsters and  flatfish, are  the very ones about which  the
Coast Guard normally  knows the  least  and state natural
resource agencies normally know the most. In this respect,
the Florida and Maine systems for dealing with spills differ
appreciably. The Florida Department of Natural Resources,
which regulates for and acts during spills, can actually be
expected to know more about sea and bay floor life than
federal navigation and spill control authorities. In Maine, on
the other hand, the analogous body is yet to  be created,
and  spill control is placed  in the hands of the Environ-
mental  Improvement Commission  which  has  only  some
overlaps with personnel knowledgeable about crucial shell
fish and flat  fish grounds threatened by any choice to  use
sinking  materials;  the Mullion Harbour bottom photo on
page 33 of  Dr.  Smith's  'Torrey Canyon' Pollution and
Marine  Life   shows  most  dramatically  what  ex-lobster
grounds can become. Yet it will be necessary to get biolo-
gists in  the state government outside Maine's EIC to have
their say before contingency plans are drawn up if they are
to have an impact on the federal level.
LESSONS FOR FUTURE JURISDICTIONAL
GUIDELINES

LESSON ONE:  Why federal control over planning and
                directing spill control is the most logi-
                cal

    Logically, the  federal government should take com-
plete charge  because: (a) it has more territorial control,
nationwide expertise and mobilizable resources  in ships,
planes, helicopters and men  than the single state unit; (b) it
has the widest enforcement jurisdiction through: control
over all navigable waters, wide  service of process papers,
and the widest power to reach owners of offending ships, as
by denying port clearance for an oil spilling tanker; and (c)
it has  the  most money, as  in its authorized $35 million
revolving Fund for federal cleanup costs when the expected
appropriation comes in.
     Yet, if the  Coast Guard had both exclusive power and
  responsibility over oil spills today, the ability to handle one
  would  be seriously set back. Federal authorities are most
  often  those  farthest removed from local conditions and
  often least knowledgeable about them. Then, too, Washing-
  ton is just beginning to develop a core of men whose main
  profession is to tackle major oil spills; this  is the single
  National Strike Force based on the East Coast. All other
  federal authorities who might become involved, from the
  Water  Quality  Labs to  regional  "strike  forces"  and
  On-Scene Commanders, are men with other duties.
  LESSON TWO:  Why state control over planning and dir-
                 ecting action is case of a spill is the most
                 logical
     Logically, state units  should be strengthening  their
  ability to exercise jurisdictional control over spills because:
  (a)  they  are closest physically to the scene in most cases;
  (b) they are  most familiar with the ecologies threatened and

-------
66    LAWS AND  ENFORCEMENT
with their relative importance in the livelihoods and life of
the state; (c) they have more at stake in preventing, rather
than cleaning up, oil spills; and (d) they have  been given
primary responsibility to control the  quality of all waters
within their state by the federal government.
    Yet, if the states had both exclusive power and respon-
sibility today, the ability  to handle an oil  spill would be
seriously set back.  They have woefully  inadequate  re-
sources. For example, the Florida system begins, before  the
first fees and fines come in, with only the $100,000 trans-
ferred from the treasury.  With eleven deep water ports to
protect, this  Coastal Protection  Fund could not even pay
salaries for one expert per Port Response Team, let alone
for the equipment which  Section 9 says must  come from
this  same Fund. Maine began its Oil Discharge Prevention
and Control Law functions with $30,000 for the first year,
two-thirds for wages and $10,000 for everything else.
    In theory, the Maine Coastal Protection Fund will also
get  fines  and  reimbursements  plus  the
One-Half-Cent-Per-Barrel license  fee which terminal oper-
ators must  pay  on "oil, petroleum products or by-products
transferred" by the terminal each month. On the 1967 data
supplied by Dillingham Environmental Company, Portland
terminals handle a bit over 150,000,000 barrels each year.
Thus, an added $750,000 would be available for research,
inspection and  spill cleanup in  Maine. This fee is not col-
lected while it is being fought in the courts.
    It is possible that the license fee will be sustained as a
reasonable burden for oil transport to pay toward prepared-
ness for spills. If so,  the other  21  states with major ports
handling oil can be expected to consider following suit. The
illusion, however, is  that this will make those states inde-
pendent of federal resources when moderate or major spills
occur, as the listing below shows:
         EXPECTED STATE OIL SPILL FUNDS
       FROM  HALF-CENT4>ER-BARREL FEES*
ALABAMA
ALASKA
CALIFORNIA
CONNECTICUT
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MASSACHUSETTS
MARYLAND &
VIRGINIA
$ 154,000
33,000
1,772,000
351,000
668,000
73,000
204,000
409,000
789,000
662,000

584,000
                           MISSISSIPPI
                           NEW YORK &
                              NEW JERSEY
                           NORTH CAROLINA
                           OREGON
                           PENNSYLVANIA
                           RHODE ISLAND
                           SOUTH CAROLINA
                           TEXAS
                           WASHINGTON
$ 461,000

 3,909,000
   91,000
  150,000
 2,294,000
  288,000
  114,000
 4,357,000
  417,000
 'based on Appendix B data in Dil-
 lingham Report, vol. 1, rounded to
 nearest 1,000.
The five states which would have over one million dollars in
their spill funds are among the very ones with the greatest
risk of major spills. In that same year of 1967, for instance,
tankers  and oil barges made a trip into or out of a major
port: in California...20,000 times; in  New York and New
Jersey...48,000 times; in Pennsylvania..! 2,000 times; and
in Texas—some 136,000 times, as shown by doubling round
trip port  data  from Dillingham's  Appendix  B. Since  the
same Report shows on page 26 that over 60% of all major
spills surveyed occurred less than ten miles from shore, it is
clear that all twenty-two coastal states have both the high-
est  stakes at risk and the greatest need for federal  involve-
ment.

LESSON THREE:  Thus, cumulative jurisdiction is a must,
                especially for rational enforcement teams

    Spill control is not the  only area where each level of
government needs  to have concurrent powers available. The
most  critical  need is for overlapping criminal enforcement
so  that  understaffed  units,  such  as state Departments of
Natural Resources with manifold duties, can be reinforced
by  Coast Guard employees who also must do other tasks.
    Despite the obviousness of this need-which led  Con-
gress  to  reject maritime requests for  federal  criminal
sections on oil spills to be exclusive-the most logical step to
make this two-level system work has not yet been taken.
This is to revise state laws so that federal officers, say in the
Water Quality Office and the Coast Guard, may issue sum-
monses for violations of state laws to bring  charges into
state "courts. Often, for example, small cases belong in the
lower court system; yet, when it is the Coast Guard which
spots the violation, they either must prosecute in federal
court or find a state official to serve a summons or make an
arrest.
    The reverse may also prove useful. For instance, often
ships  of foreign registry are better brought in Canada and
the United States  under the federal system with its clear-
ance  tools and admiralty rules.  A parallel exists under
Section 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, found in
Title 33  of the United States Code at Section 407, where in
certain cases a non-federal witness to pollution can bring a
suit. His action is based on the informer's interest in his
50% of the fine. The policy of allowing persons who are not
Coast Guard officers to initiate federal action in carefully
defined  flagrant violation cases would be stronger, rather
than  weaker, in  the  case of enforcement  officers of the
state  departments most immediately concerned  with  oil
spills.
LESSON FOUR:  The logic behind exclusively federal  rule-
                   making does not diminish  this  need for
                   overlapping enforcement.
    This study has identified at least five areas where fede-
ral  or international  uniformity  is functionally required.
These were: 1. lighting of booms, floating barges, skimmers
and wrecked tankers; 2. channels for one-way traffic; 3.
minimum draught  and sea conditions on entering port; 4.
hull construction, steering and propulsion gear; and 5. laws
to implement treaties.
    The  same logic applies here which supports overlapping
jurisdiction in general, say during the  136,000 times per
year in which a tanker or barge enters or leaves Port Arthur,
Houston-Galveston, Corpus Christi  or Brownsville in Texas.
So long as the state rules in an exclusively federal sphere are
carbon copies of the  federal ones, as in required  to avoid
conflict  under  the Maine  law, for instance, dual  enforce-

-------
                                                                               STATE JURISDICTION. . .
                                                    67
merit does not destroy uniformity of rule while it does raise
chances for uniformity of enforcement.
LESSON FIVE:  States  will not leave regulation to federal
                or  international  bodies  where they are
                left grossly inadequately protected against
                spill threats to their own security
    If  an entire city of over one  million people,  such  as
Qeveland, can lose  100% of its water supply by a spill  in
Lake Erie, it would be a harsh rule-but a possible one-for a
federal judge to hold that Ohio must  subject its coastal
cities to  possible risk of a  waterless period if the federal
legislature so insists. Honesty, however, must force lawyers
to advise federal officials that state claims to an irreducible
level of security below which federal and  international in-
action cannot make them go may well be upheld by judges
in today's atmosphere of environmental concern.
    There are at least five theories under which such state
powers to override grossly inadequate rule-making at higher
levels could be urged upon a sympathetic court:
   The Burden-on-Exclusivity Theory-A court, putting
   the  burden  of  persuasion  on  the one arguing for
   exclusivity, could find that Congress could not  have
   intended  to "preempt" where to so hold would lead
   to an unconscionaable result.
   The Tenth Amendment Theory-The  judge could
   find, under  our  Rule Six  above, that the powers
   reserved include  the  right  to  survival-oriented  spill
   prevention rules, at least where the federal legislation
   or rules are materially less stringent than state ones.
  The  Property Right Theory-A  court could enforce
  state rules on the ground it is owner and trustee of
  public lands and waters "granted and confirmed" to
  the state under the Submerged Lands Act of 1953; its
  claim would be,  not to stand vis-a-vis the national
  government as a competing jurisdiction, but rather as"*
  an  owner entitled  to   "due  process"  before its
  property is put in jeopardy.
  The Inherent Right Theory-It may be held that fed-
  eral rules cannot deprive states of those powers which
  must inherently be included to carry out duties which
  are left clearly theirs; thus, when a 8.4 million gallon
  tanker  runs  aground in fog  outside  New Haven
  harbor, as happened this  past January, and Connec-
  ticut  employees  are  required  to  try everything to
  protect and  rehabilitate  wildlife  and shorelines, it
  may be judicially  required to  hold that Connecticut
  cannot be deprived of incidental powers needed to do
  this job or to minimize chances of such spills.
  The  Police Power Theory-A judge might prefer this
  theory to fit into familiar frameworks in the case law
  by holding that the residual powers of a state which
  override  some  constitutional federal powers include
  the right to "police" to some minimum extent nec-
  essary to avoid injuries to public health and safety,
  such as might attend an oil spill.
LESSON SIX:    More attention should be paid to state-
                 federal collaboration than has been giv-
                 en to it in the past
    This study has been a preliminary one; neither time nor
the limitations placed on this unfunded study for the 1971
Conference  on Prevention and Control of Oil Spills have
made it possible for all ramifications to  be explored, nor for
the present findings to be elaborated  upon. The working
out between the  Coast Guard, the Federal Water Quality
Laboratory  and state officials of sub-regional  contingency
plans has so far proven to be the  most effective means to
date of ensuring the kinds of collaboration called for, yet it
has not touched upon most of the very issues raised above.
The findings also  suggest that states will step into the gaps
if such further work is not done-and soon.
LESSON SEVEN:   Future international work must bear in
                   mind that these rationales for state uni-
                   lateral action in a federal system apply
                   to nations within the international one
                   if inadequate steps are taken there
    This lesson is most dramatically reflected in the history
of the Canadian Arctic  Waters Pollution Prevention  Act,
summarized in the Table of Oil Spills above. The key impe-
tus for that act was the failure  of the IMCO Conference at
Brussels  to adequately address itself to  the  question  of
preventing spills. Yet, according to senior scientist Dr. Max
Blumer of the Woods Hole  Oceanographic Institute, the
dangers to shore and bottom communities  from  dousirigs
with  oil, toxic  effects from dispersants or  habitats de-
stroyed by sinking agents, when combined with  possible
risks of cancer in humans as  more hydrocarbons enter the
food  chains, lead to but one conclusion:  the only way  to
successfully manage oil spills is to prevent them.

-------
OIL  SPILL PREVENTION,  CONTROL
        AND MONITORING
    Chairman: Rear Admiral C. A. Richmond
         United States Coast Guard

    Co-Chairman: Commander W. E. Lehr
         United States Coast Guard

-------
                       REMOTE  SENSING   OF  OIL   SPILLS
                                                Clarence E. Catoe
                                         and LTJG Frederick L. Orthlieb
                                       Office of Research & Development
                                           United States Coast Guard
ABSTRACT

    A prerequisite for the control of coastal oil pollution is
the development of surveillance techniques which are capa-
ble of monitoring large areas of the ocean surface to detect
the presence of oil slicks. The U.S. Coast Guard Office of
Research  and Development is currently engaged in basic
and applied research to determine the feasibility of various
remote sensing techniques for the detection and identifica-
tion of oil slicks.  To date, several remote detection tech-
niques  have shown  promise for the  detection and  sur-
veillance of oil slicks; these were tested in a series of air-
borne measurements of controlled oil spills.
 INTRODUCTION

    Two  separate  experiments  were  conducted by the
 Pollution  Control Branch. The first was conducted in the
 Gulf  of Mexico  approximately  80  miles offshore. This
 experiment was concerned with the detection and quantifi-
 cation of oily discharges from vessels  underway. Using a
 carefully calibrated metering pump, an extensive series of
 controlled volume oil spills was generated. Each slick was
 photographed in  color and black  and white from  an or-
 biting helicopter  and from a vessel one-half mile astern.
 Trackline  overflights at 2000 feet were  conducted utilizing
 color visible, color  infrared, and multispectrial  ultraviolet
 cameras, as well as passive microwave radiometers operating
 at 10 Ghz and 30 Ghz. Data were obtained for five oil types
 at 3 ship  speeds over a wide range of surface and atmos-
 pheric conditions.
    The second experiment consisted  of a  series of four
 controlled oil spills in which 330 gallons each of (1) No. 2
 diesel  fuel oil (39 API gravity), (2) Bunker C oil (9.7 API
 gravity), (3) 21.6  API gravity crude, and (4) 26.1 API grav-
 ity  crude were  discharged off the Southern California
 coast in October through December 1970.
    The objectives of this experiment were (1) to obtain
multjspectral signature data  of oil  spills and to determine
the capability of remote sensing techniques for surveillance
and detection of slicks, and (2)  to  determine from remote
sensor and surface vessel observation the spreading rate and
extent of the oil slicks in the ocean.

Background
Gulf of Mexico Experiment
    The first controlled oil slick experiment was performed
in April 1970 to provide a  tested  means of aerial surveil-
lance, and detection of spilled oil, as well as a set of refer-
ence photographs of spills of known volume and concen-
tration for comparison with  photographs of suspected pol-
lution violations.
    Under the provisions of the International Convention
for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by  Oil, 1954, as
amended in  1962, and as promulgated by the United States
Government in 33 U.S. Code 1001, certain vessels are pro-
hibited  from discharging  oily  mixtures  containing more
than one hundred parts oil per million parts mixture within
specified oceanic and coastal zones. A 1969 amendment to
that  Convention, currently awaiting  final  ratification,
would revise the oil discharge limit upward to sixty liters of
oil per nautical mile  of ship's track. In either case, enforce-
ment of 33  USC  1001 has been  delegated to the Coast
Guard.
    Prosecution  of violators under the law requires  first-
hand proof of illegal discharge, especially  in the absence of
a confirming entry in  the vessel's  Oil  Record Book.  Such
evidence usually takes the form of aerial surveillance photo-
graphs,  which are interpreted by  expert witnesses as de-
picting either more or less than  the legal limit of pollution.
This procedure is readily subject  to challenge, especially
under the hundred parts per million (ppm) criterion,  since
the apparent oil slick is dependent upon the total amount
of oil discharged, rather than  its  dilution  in an effluent
                                                       71

-------
72    OIL SPILL PREVENTION .. .
stream. Sea and sky  conditions also greatly influence the
appearance of surface slicks.
     Reference photographs showing the appearance of oil
slicks of known volume and concentration under a variety
of sea and sky conditions could serve as standards of com-
parison for both initial decisions as to the probable legality
of a particular discharge, and for presentation of surveil-
lance photographs during courtroom activities. They would
help to substantiate  the  testimony  of expert witnesses in
borderline cases, and might obviate such testimony in cases
of gross and flagrant violation.
 Southern California Experiment
     From 22 October to 3 December 1970,  a  series of
experiments were conducted to study various techniques of
 remote oil slick measurement. The tests were conducted on
 the open ocean in the vicinity of 119° 08, west longitude,
 33° 45, north latitude (off the California coast). During this
 period four sets of test were made.
     Each experiment involved spills of 300 gallons each of
 diesel oil and 9.7, 21.6 and 26.1  API gravity crude oils in
 discrete slicks. A 65 foot work  boat  was used to gather
 ground truth data, as well as to generate and monitor the
 slicks. The data collected during these tests consisted of:
 local weather, water  temperature, humidity, surface winds,
 sea state  in and out of slicks, condition of oil, thickness at
 edges and center (for possible volume determination), size
 of oil slick,  area of coverage, location of observers and time
 of  observation. The boat remained  with the slicks in the
 test area until they  had dissipated (approximately three
 days).
     Airborne measurements  with  various sensors  were
 made of the slick periodically throughout its duration.
     The  timing of the four sets of tests was dependent
 upon weather and sea state conditions. During the course of
 the experiment an attempt was made to cover a broad range
 of sea surface conditions from calm to fairly rough.

 Experimental Results
 Gulf of Mexico Experiment

     In the period 6-12  April  1970, controlled oil slicks
 having concentrations up to and including the legal limits
 were produced and photographed. Each of the five oil types
 was tested at ship speeds of 10, 14, and 17 knots, in order
 to determine possible wake turbulence effects on the dis-
 persion of the oil  stream. A total of 103  tests were con-
 ducted, including  underway and static  oil spills, a  few
 underway spills of non-persistent  gasoline-oil mixtures, and
 a static spill (ship drifting)  of sub-surface  water from the
 River Rouge in Detroit, Michigan. Weather conditions from
 clear  and calm to rain and fog with moderate seas  were
 encountered. The remote-sensor equipped aircraft overflew
 the entire series of  tests; a separate report has been pre-
 pared covering the overflight program.O)
     The  oil types and discharge rates used in the Gulf ex-
 periment were:
Oil Types
    No.  2 Fuel Oil - a light distillate, often spilled during
in-port fueling and ballasting of a wide range of vessels.
    9250 Lube Oil - a medium weight ( ~SAE35) product,
often the major constituent of  bilge-pumping discharges.
    Crude Oils - account for the bulk of marine oil trans-
port; spilled in varying quantity as a result of tank cleaning
and deballasting of tanker vessels.
    South Louisiana  Crude - a low viscosity crude, con-
taining many lighter fractions and natural surfactants which
promote spreading over water.
    Trix-Liz  Crude (Texas)  - a high viscosity,  low sur-
factant crude having a much lesser spreading tendency.
    No.  6 Fuel Oil - the most widely used residual fuel,
transported in large  quantities  and  often  spilled  during
transfer operations.

Discharge Rates
    Pumps through which ships might discharge oil or oily
mixtures  range  in  capacity  from  50 gallon per  minute
(GPM) bilge  pumps upwards to  2-5,000 GPM cargo and
ballast pumps. Simulation of such a wide range of flow
might have been impossible, had it not been discovered by
the  British  during   earlier  experiments*2)  that  the
appearance of a vessel-generated oil slick on the ocean
surface  depends chiefly upon the total quantity of oil dis-
charged per mile of ship's track, regardless of the volume of
the effluent stream in which  it was mixed, provided that
the oil  was well mixed  into the stream. Thus, an entire
family of discharge  mixtures might be simulated by  a single
test discharge having the same net oil content. For example,
a controlled discharge of pure oil at a rate of 0.1 GPM will
correspond to any discharge wherein the product of the oil
concentration and total discharge rate equals 0.1 GPM, pro-
vided that the experimental oil flow is well mixed into the
ship's wake.  In the tests conducted for this project, dis-
persion of the oil  into  the  wake was  achieved by intro-
ducing a  metered stream of oil directly into the wake just
aft of the ship's stern, whence it  was sucked into the twin
screws and violently churned into the turbulent wake area.
Table 1 presents the mixture discharge rates and ppm con-
centrations simulated in this experiment. The production of
controlled slicks similar  to the proposed 60 liter per mile
limit is equally straightforward, but ship speed rather than
mixture  discharge rate  is  the controlling  parameter. For
example, a ship making  15 knots travels one mile in 4 min-
utes; the oil flow to  produce a 60 liter/mile slick is there-
fore 60/4 or 15 liters per minute, whereas a ship making 10
knots would cover one mile in 6 minutes, and the oil flow
to produce a 60 liter/mile slick would be 60/6 or 10 liters
per minute. It is therefore apparent that oil flow to produce
a slick of specific intensity is directly proportional  to ship
speed. This relationship is shown in Table 2.
     Having accounted for the effects of oil type, discharge
rate, and ship speed, there remain sea and sky conditions
and  viewing  angle as variables of concern. The availability
of test vehicles was severely limited and precluded  waiting
on weather.  To determine the effect of viewing angle on

-------
                                                                                 REMOTE SENSING OF SPILLS    73
slick detectability, an operational scenario was developed
which provided  both aerial  and surface platform photo-
graphic  coverage.  Aerial   photos  in  both  color  and
black-and-white were obtained from an HH-52A helicopter
flying a clockwise oval  pattern  at an altitude of 500 feet
over the  slick, including bow,  starboard bow, starboard
quarter, stern, port quarter,  and port bow aspects of the
oil-spilling 210 foot  Medium Endurance Cutter, with one
additional color exposure at stern aspect from an altitude
of 200  feet. Surface photos were taken from an 82 foot
Patrol Craft while following  1/2 mile astern of the "210",
at positions within and directly alongside the oil slick, and
including bow, beam, and quarter viewing angles. Figure 1
is a schematic plan view of these photographic locations.
                 Parts-Per-Million Equivalents
                      Volume Basts
^S. 20
0.01
= 0.02
1 0.05
o
- 0.1
3
0.2
1 0.5
g
E! i.o
5 2.0
5.0
500
1000
2500
5000
1C 000
25 000
50 000.
100 000
250 000
TOTAL DISCHARGE RATE - Gallons/Minute
50 , 100 , 200 500 . 1000
200
400
1000
2000
4000
10 000
20 000
40 000
100 000
| 100
200
500
1000
2000
5000
10 000
20 000
50 000
50
[ 100
250
500
1000
2500
5000
10 000
25 000
20
40
100
200
400
1000
2000
4000
10 000
10
20
50
TOO
200
500
1000
2000
5000
2000
5
10
25
50
100
250
500
1000
2500
5000
2
4
10
20
40
100
200
400
1000
  Solid Line — « 100 parts-per-roillion liitit
  Dashed Line	• 60 liters-per-nile limit («t normal ship speeds)

 Table 1:    Oil Flow Rate as a Function of Total Discharge Rate
Slick Intensity
11ters/mile
1
2
5
10
20
30
60
90
120
Oil Flow Rate
1iterS'-"-/knot
0.016
0.03
0.08
0.16
0.33
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Flow at 15 Knots
9a11ons/mi-n.
0.066
0.13
0.33
0.66
1.32
1.98
3.96
5.94
7.92
River Rouge water spill  remained coherent long enough to
obtain any photographic record.
    Neither color nor black and white surface photography
provided  sufficient  discrimination between  oil slicks and
the clean surface to be useful as a reliable means of pollu-
tion detection.
    Aerial color and black and white photographs were ob-
tained under a wide variety of atmospheric and sea condi-
tions  during the experiment. These photos hold the most
promise of serving as useful surveillance tools. Table 3 gives
the author's evaluation  of the slick detection achieved for
each test.
    Table 4 gives equivalent  discharges in liters/mile and
gallons/minute as  an aid in evaluating the detection  capabil-
ities of conventional aerial photography under either the
100 ppm or the 60 liter/mile criterion.
                                                               -= Not Detected

                                                               + = Positive Detection
                                ? =  Detection Uncertain

                                        0 = Not Tested
N^.05 GPM
#2
FUEL OIL
9250
LUBE OIL
10
kt
LIGHT 14
CRUDE kt
17
kt
HEAVY
CRUDE
#6
FUEL OIL
0
0
—
—
0
—
—
OIL FLOW
0.1 GPM
-
—
7
?
7
+
7
RATE
0.5 GPM
?
—
+
+
+
+
+
1.0 GPM
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
60 jP/mi
0
0
+
+
-f
+
+
                                                               Ship Speed  =  14  knots  Unless  Otherwise  Noted
  Table 2:    Dependence of Oil Slick Intensity on Ship Speed
    Aerial and surface photographic data were obtained for
all tests, but only spills of persistent oils were detected by
photographic  means.  Neither  the gasoline spills nor  the
          Table 3:     Photographic Detection Results

-------
 74    Ol L SPILL PR EVENTION
    Altitude
    500'
         500
         Altitude
    Figure 1:    Diagram of Aerial and Surface Photographic
               Locations

 Southern California Experiment
 Microwave Radiometric Investigations
     Before the sea tests were conducted, laboratory mea-
 surements had been performed on the petroleum pollutants
 which indicated that:
     1. The microwave signature of an oil film is inversely
 proportional to the sensor wavelength.
     2. The horizontal  polarized signature is twice the ver-
 tically polarized signature of an oil slick on  a flat water
 surface.
     3. All signatures were greater than calm water without
 oil (as shown in Figure 2).
     In addition, the dielectric properites of the pollutants
 were measured at 0.8 cm wavelength using an  ellipsometer
 (precision  reflectometer). The  real part of the dielectric
 constant for the petroleum pollutants ranged from  1.85 to
 2.41 as compared  to a value of approximately 21  for sea
water at  23°C. A  slight increase  in  the  real  part of the
dielectric  constant  and in large increase in  the imaginary
GALLONS
PER
MINUTE
0.01
0,02
0.05
0.1
0.2
0.5
i.O
2.0
2.69
3.77
4.57
LITERS PER KILE
At 10 knots At 14 knots
.227
.455
1.14
2.27
4.55
ii.<»
22.7
45.5
60.0


.163
.325
.813
1.63
3.25
8.13
16.3
32.5

60.0

At 17 hrcts
.134
.268
.669
1.34
2.6S
6.69
13.4
26.8


60.0
  [50

  [40

  1 30

  I 20

  i  10

  ' 0
                                                                       Table 4:     Oil Discharge Rate Equivalents
                                                                       1.1» minim piutiann rai
                                                                            UtLE 31° Fill Mill
                                                                                    ^.-"^"^	Bunker "C"
                                                                               nSf^^-^^^-^T. 2.9*'	c-rtiZ
                             05
                      111 Fill TIICIKSS II Ml
30

2O
IO

n
r i » » unziiTii riunaiin mi
HUE 31° Fill Illll

	 Bunker
	 ^- 	

-.

____ _ . . — •*
ilZ-20 API
	 40 API 	 —
	 1 	 1 	
         O.I
                             0.5
                      III Fill TIICIKSS II II
                                            Gasoline
                                                      1.0
      * Low vohMS may be due to nan-uniform distribution of oil
 l-'igure 2:    Summary of Microwave Response to Petroleum
             Samples Examined During Laboratory Experiments
part were observed as the pollutants aged (shown in Figure
3).  The ellipsometric measurements showed an almost lin-
ear  increase in the dielectric  constant  for crude  oils with
decreasing API gravity.
    The airborne measurements were performed using dual
polarized radiometers  operating  at  0.3 cm and  0.81  cm

-------
                                                                               REMOTE SENSING OF SPILLS   75
wavelength. A  Piper Apache aircraft with the radiometers
mounted at a  view angle of 45°  was used for these tests.
The antenna brightness temperatures of the slicks (300 gal-
lons of pollutant) showed increases on the order of 3-20°K,
as indicated  in Figures 4 and  5. Radiometric temperature
anomalies were dependent on the oil thickness and sea con-
ditions during  the overflights. The  brightness temperature
anomaly for a  given thickness of pollutant is less for higher
sea states (warmer radiometrically) than the same thickness
on a calm sea as indicated in Figure 6. These measurements
indicate thinner  oil slicks are more  detectable  than  had
been expected at low sea states. Analysis of laboratory data
(Figure 6) show  the vertical polarization temperature does
not vary appreciably for thicknesses less than 0.10 mm at a
view angle of 45°.
    From the  microwave investigation of the controlled oil
spills the following conclusions can be made:  (1) the emis-
sivity of petroleum  products is  significantly higher than
that of a calm  sea surface, (2) crude oil pollutants have
decreasing dielectric  constants (increasing emissivity) with
increasing API gravity, (3) time of day and age of oil have
only small effects on the radiometric response,  (4) detec-
tion improves with  decreasing sensor wavelengths, and be-
comes poorer as the sea state increases, and (5) a microwave
oil pollution detection system can be configured for de-
tecting oil slicks of the type examined during the experi-
ment.
   3.2 I-
   2.8
 _ 2.4
   2.0
 X  1.6
 •- 1.2
    0.8
    0.4
    0.0*
                       A«0.8I cm.
                                     AGED 3 DAYS
                                           N AIR
IN OfEK
           EFFECT
            AGING
             FRESH OIL
                                VACUUM
                             _L
                20            30           40
                        API UNITY
                   (•-BDNKEI '(' FUEL  OIL]
     l-'igure 3:    Dielectric Constant of Crude Oils Versus API
               Gravity
                       Spectroradiometric Investigation
                           The objective of  this program was to evaluate several
                       radiometric techniques for detecting oil on water, by mea-
                       suring the contrast of  sunlight as reflected by oil and water.
                       Figure 7 illustrates the overall  technique: oil and water re-
                       flecting or backscattering sunlight to the aircraft.
                           For test purposes a  Cessna 401  was equipped with a
                       Carey 14 spectroradiometer  which operated from .3 to 1.1
                       micrometers with and without polarizing attachments. Dif-
                       ferential and correlation radiometers were used to compare
                       two or more specified frequencies associated with oil fluor-
                       escence in the ultraviolet and blue end of the spectrum.
                           Since variations in solar intensity, spectral  distribution,
                       polarization  and angle of incidence influence  the radiance
                       measured by the above instruments,  the next few figures
                       illustrate  the characteristics of the skylight. Figure 8 illus-
                       trates the amount of  direct and diffuse sunlight impinging
                       upon a horizontal surface, showing that the diffuse compo-
                       nent  increases with cloudiness. One of the results from this
                       investigation is that the best contrast between oil and water
                       is obtained under overcast  sky conditions. This is due to
                       the increase  in  the diffuse component. Figure 9 illustrates
                       how  the  spectral distribution  of  sunlight varies with the
                       sun's position in the sky. Sunlight impinging from different
                       directions  will  therefore  have  different  spectral  dis-
                       tributions. Figure  10 illustrates that skylight depends on
                       the angle  of incidence  and sky conditions.

                             Results of this portion of the experiment indicated the
                        following:

                             1. The maximum contrast between oil and water  is in
                        the ultraviolet (380nm) and the red (600 nm).
                                                             nm.
2. The minimum contrast is in the range 450 to 500

3. The oil almost always appeared brighter than water.

4. Light oils appeared brighter than heavy oils.
                            5. No distinct absorption regions, which would dis-
                        tinguish one oil from another were observed.


                            6.  Sky conditions are the most  important factor in-
                        fluencing these results. Best contrast was achieved with an
                        overcast sky.

                            7. The effect of sea state needs more research.


                            8. Density gradients in the oil are qualitatively detec-
                        table, but more research is needed for quantitative results.

                             9. Polarization is a promising technique.
                             10. Future  studies should be conducted with spectro-
                        radiometers which either rapidly  scan or record several
                        wavelengths simultaneously.

-------
76     OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
                    10
 20
     125
                        TIME IN  SECONDS
                       30         40         50
60
                                                                                            70
                                                                          8O
 5 75
     50
 -3 25
          \\N^lVXy^^
                                                       OIL SLICK
                   1700
3400
                      5100       6800       8500       10200        M900
                        DISTANCE IN  FEET
DATE' 10/30/70                        X = 8.1mm
A/C ALTITUDE =  100 FT                ANTENNA VIEW ANGLE = 45°
A/C SPEED =  115 MPH                  SLICK DIMENSION = 595 FT.
WATER TEMP =  16.4                     OIL TYPE =  MERGED 9.7, 21.6, 26.1
SEA STATE  = 0                                      AND 34.1   API  GRAVITY
                       12600
                                                  Figure 4
Multispectral Investigation
    The University of Michigan, using their Douglas C-47
aircraft, overflew  the  controlled  oil spills  and  obtained
multispectral imagery from the  ultraviolet, visible, and in-
frared portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.
    The  multispectral  imagery obtained provided a quali-
tative look into the problem of oil pollution detection.
Examination  of the  imagery in  conjunction with conclu-
sions drawn from theoretical modeling of the slicks has shed
some light onto the question of interaction and  the rela-
tionship between the thermal and UV region of detection.
Also, laboratory fluorescence data on several oils  has indi-
cated that potential identification of oil types may be pos-
sible using fluorescence signatures as indicated in Figure 11.
                             Shown in Figure 12 is a black and white print of the
                         ultraviolet (.32-38 micrometer) imagery. At least a part of
                         all four types of oils used in the experiment show up on
                         brighter than the water background, while three of the oils
                         (21.6 API Crude, 26.1 API Crude, and Diesel fuel) also have
                         areas that are darker than water. This change  in contrast
                         relative to water is due mainly to thickness variation within
                         the slick. However, it is also a function of oil type as shown
                         in Figure 13.

                             Using index of refraction and scattering and absorption
                         coefficients measured in the laboratory, a mathematical re-
                         flectance  model for oil on water was used to generate values
                         of radiance from  each  of the four oils as  a function of
                         thickness. The results for the UV region (.36-.3S micro-
                         meters) are plotted in fugire 12 along  with values for two
                         types of water. The meteorological condition  were set up to
                         match those of the actual flight. It is obvious from the

-------
                                                                            REMOTE SENSING OF SPILLS    77
                      TIME  IN SECONDS
               10
20
30
                                           40
                             50
oo
CO
                                         OIL  SLICK
               I
 I
                            A =8.1 mm
                                                                               TIME IN  SECONDS
                                                            IOO
                                                             75
                                                             50
                                                             25
                                                                         10
                                                                                  20
                                                                    30
                                                                                                     40
                                                                                       50
                                                                                   T
                                                                    T
                                        1
              1700     3400     5100     6800

                     DISTANCE  IN FEET
                   ANTENNA VIEW  ANGLE  = 45°
                   SLICK DIMENSION = 105 FT
                   OIL  TYPE = 26.1 API GRAVITY

                   DATE =  10/28/70
                   A/C  ALTITUDE  = 200  FT
                   A/C  SPEED = 115  MPH
                   WATER TEMP  = I6.4°C
                   SEA  STATE  = I
                            8500
                                       1700     3400     5100     6800
                                             DISTANCE IN  FEET
                                          ANTENNA VIEW  ANGLE  = 45°
                                          SLICK  DIMENSION  = 935 FT
                                          OIL  TYPE =  26.1  API  GRAVITY

                                          DATE:  10/28/70
                                          A/C  ALTITUDE  =  200 FT
                                          A/C  SPEED  = 115 MPH
                                          WATER TEMP = I6.4°C
                                          SEA  STATE  = I
                                                                                      8500
                                                     Figure 5
  graph  that in the UV, thin layers of oil should be brighter
  than water while thick layers will be darker, the cross-over
  point being a function of the type of oil and water present.
  The reason behind this change in reflectance with thickness
  of an  oil  layer may be explained as follows. The radiance
  viewed by the observer consists of two  components, a
  specular part (not sunglint) which is related to the oil layer
  and an upwelling diffuse portion from the water beneath.
  The specular radiance from the oil is essentially constant.
  The diffuse radiance from the water varies with oil layer
  thickness. The diffuse component is maximum for clear
  water but approaches zero for very thick oil  films.

    In the thermal region, one finds intriguing results. Figure
  14 shows a black and white print of the thermal (9.3-11.7
  micrometer) imagery. Comparing  figure 14 and figure 12,
  one sees that, for crude oils, the lightest areas in  the UV do
  not appear at all  in the  thermal; whereas, the areas of
  intermediate  UV  brightness  appear colder (darker)  than
                                    water,and the darker-than-water areas in the UV show up as
                                    hotter than water in the thermal. Diesel fuel, on the other
                                    hand, shows up as colder than water while the intermediate
                                    or darker UV areas appear somewhat warmer (though still
                                    colder than water).  The obvious conclusion to be drawn is
                                    that thickness variations (as observed in the UV) are having
                                    some effect on emitted radiation, although at present one
                                    can only  hypothesize as to the reason behind  this effect.
                                    One possible explanation  is that as the oil layers become
                                    thicker,  evaporation  losses  from  the  volatiles  present
                                    increases, producing  lowered temperatures in  the  slick.
                                    However, as  the oil  becomes  thick enough  to absorb
                                    significant solar energy, this cooling trend is overwhelmed
                                    by solar  heating and a "warm" slick results.  The highly
                                    volatile and relatively transparent  diesel soil  never attains
                                    enough thickness to  permit significant solar heating, and
                                    thus always appears colder than water. Even here, however,
                                    the  thickest  portions are  slightly warmer  than the
                                    surrounding areas of moderate thickness.

-------
78
OIL SPILL PREVENTION . . .
             TIME IN SECONDS
         10
                                       —   100
                                       —   75
                                            50
                                       —   25
        I70O     34OO    5IOO     6800
            DISTANCE IN FEET
      ANTENNA VIEW ANGLE = 45°
      SLICK DIMENSION = 2550 FT
      APPROXIMATE OIL THICKNESS = .068mm
      OIL TYPE = 21.6 API GRAVITY

      DATE: I2/2/7O
      A/C ALTITUDE = 100 FT.
      A/C SPEED = 115 MPH
      WATER  TEMP. = I2.8°C
      SEA  STATE=4
                                                            TIME IN SECONDS
                                                        10
                                                                      20
                  30
40
                                                                  BOAT-
                    IOILSLICK! —
                                                              X   3 3mm
                                                                 I
170O     34OO    5IOO
    DISTANCE IN  FEET
                                                                                        6800
                                                          ANTENNA VIEW ANGLE -45°
                                                          SLICK DIMENSION = 2550 FT
                                                          APPROXIMATE OIL THICKNESS =. 068mm
                                                          OIL TYPE =21.6 API  GRAVITY

                                                          DATE: 12/2/70
                                                          A/C ALTITUDE = IOO FT.
                                                          A/C SPEED = 115 MPH
                                                          WATER  TEMP. = I2.8°C
                                                          SEA STATE =4
                                       Figure 6
                       sntmuimina
                            u
                      wntmui uuwmi
                             l;igurc 7:   Airborne  Oil Slick Detection

-------
                                                                               REMOTE SENSING OF SPILLS   79
   no

  100

   90

IE 80
 ca
•70


I50
140

   30

   20

   10

    0
                             TOTAL (DIRECT AND DIFFUSE)
                             DIFFUSE ONLY
                                       CLEAR  SKY
                                       CIRRUS
                                       ALTOCUMULUS
                                       STRATUS
                                                                          1.00
            20   4O   60    80
            SOLAR ZENITH ANGLE
                                100
         Figure 8:    Solar Irradiance at Ground Level
                 ZENITH ANGLE:  50°
 240



 200


•160
u go
   40
     300
   Figure 9:
                       500
                  ffAVELENGTH.il
                                     700
900
             Spectral Distribution of Diffuse Radiance at
             Various Azimuth Angles
    Analysis of the thermal, visible, and UV data obtained
thus far has indicated that no signatures exist in the passive
mode  which would permit identification of oil  types. Al-
though it has been demonstrated that the UV region can
define  the areal extent of an oil slick and that the UV
together with the thermal region gives thickness informa-
tion, neither holds much promise for identification. The
key to the problem may be in the fluorescence  spectrum
                                                             DEGREE OF
                                                            POLARIZATION
                                                                           .20  -
                                                                                                      ANTISOLAR
                                                                                                         POINT
                                                             Figure 10:
                                                            5 .6
                                                            £=  -4
                                                                         -.20
                                                                              90 7O 50 30  10  10  30 5O 70  90

                                                                                       NADIR ANGLE, deg.
                                                                        Degree of Polarization as a function of Direction
                                                                        in the Sun's Vertical
                                                                              ucimiiii snciu IIEFMEI IIESELJ
                                                                                      IESPIISE SPECTII (IEFIIEI IIESEL)
                                                                                       EieillTIIK SfECTII (HUE)
                                                                                               V-iE$n«j[
                                                                                                               (tint)
   ZOO     28O     360     440     52O    GOO     68O
                      •mtEKTI, »
      Figure 11:   Detection and Identification of Oils by
                 Fluorescence
Radar Investigation
    The Naval Research  Laboratory using the EC-121 air-
craft  equipped with the NRL four frequency dual polarized
radar system participated in two of the controlled oil spill
tests.
    The 4FR system is  basically four different pulsed co-
herent  radars  transmitting at  P-band/UHF  (428  MHz),
L-band  (1228 MHz), C-band  (4455 MHz)  and X-band
(8910Mhz) with approximately 25 kw peak power. Each of
the four transmitters is  designed to operate with two an-
tennas,  one polarized horizontally and one vertically, either
separated or pulsed in rapid succession to provide a total of
eight  different frequency polarization combinations. Al-
though  these are  eight distinct transmissions from the 4FR
system, there are 16 different frequency polarization com-
binations in the return.  This  is  because the ocean surface

-------
80    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
9.7 API  FUEL  OIL   21.6  API  CRUDE OIL
26.1  API  CRUDE OIL  #2  DIESEL  FUEL
                Hgure 12:   Black & White Print of Ultraviolet Imagery    Alt: 2000'  Time: ]200 \ = .32-.3S
                               xc
                               \
                                   CHPTY B*» WATER,.
             'i us. mi
             11 in mi u
             ;i i in inii
\   N
   \x    \
             figure 13:   Radiance vs Thickness
roughness acts as a depolarizer and  converts some of the
incident  vertically polarized return to horizontal and vice
versa. Each  of the signal returns has amplitude and phase.
For the production of a Synthetic Aperature Radar(SAR)
image, however, only the phase of the return is required.
The phase data is recorded on film from a cathode ray tube
for later optical porcessing by  which the SAR  imagery is
generated. The tests performed with four frequency radar
indicate  that it is possible to map the oil slicks in the verti-
cal polarization  while the horizontal polarization  is not
responsive. In the vertical polarization (VU) the presence of
oil on the synthetic aperature radar imagery is represented
by a  dark non-reflecting area. This can be attributed to the
fact  that within  the oil areas the capillary.waves which are
required for backscatter are  being damped. However, the
horizontal  polarization (HH)  and  cross  polarized  com-
ponents give no indication of oil. This lack of apparent oil
detection by the horizontal and cross polarized components
is not a  characteristic of the oil slicks as might be thought.
but rather a characteristic of slightly rough surfaces viewed
at shallow angles. Under  such  conditions, the horizontally
polarized radar cross section (RCS) is much smaller (6-20
db)  than the vertically polarized RCS and the cross polar-
ized RCS is even much smaller.
    9.7 API FUEL OIL
                                     21.6 API CRUDE OIL
                                                                        26.1 API "CRUDE OIL
                                       #2 DIESEL FUEL
                   liiuia-14:   Black & White Print of Thermal Imagery    AH: 4000'   Time:  1200.0 A- 9.3-11.7

-------
                                                                              REMOTE SENSING OF SPILLS   81

        J
                   NAUTICAL
                                 MILES
      RAMOS I    1320 GALLONS OF OIL

      SANTA BARBARA AREA

      29 OCT 70   (31)
       VERT. POL., DEPRESSION ANCLE ~ 8'

            AIRCRAFT ALTITUDE 2000 FEET
 Figure 15:   L-Band Imagery of Oil Slick on 29 October 1970
                                           '
 UHOS I

 5AKTA BARBARA AREA

 29 OCT «

1320 CALLOWS OF OIL
                    VERT. POL.. DEPRESSION ANGLE - 7*

                       AIRCRAFT ALTTTITDE 2000 FEET
  Figure 16:   P-Band Imagery of Oil Slick on 29 October 1970


    In Figure 15 we have L-band imagery taken  over  the
test site on 29 October  1970 at 2000 feet. P-band imagery
taken at the same time is given in Figure 16. The oil image
in  this  case  is compressed in the horizontal direction by a
factor of 2,  and most of the resolution of the slick is lost.
This compression  of the image  in P-band is  a scaling effect
of the radar.
    Since the volume of the oil released in the  spill was
known, it was possible to compute the average  film thick-
ness which is given in Table 5, and Figure 17. The area of
                                                             o
                                                             -•
\e.

10


6


g


4



2


n
,
SANTA BARBARA AREA */ —
6 NOV 70 /•
660 GALLONS OF / •
API 26.1 CRUDE OIL *
CALM SEA /
LIGHT AIRS

—


_



/

/
x
L_r__J I

2.5

^
3 E
n
z
4 E
(A
5
6 £

0

10 v>

20
30

       0          I          2         3          4
                  HOURS AFTER  SPILL

         Figure 17:   Thickness of Oil Slick Versus Time

the oil slick was determined from the imagery by use of a
planimeter.
Ground Truth Data
    The ground truth data collected  during the course of
the experiment is given in Table 6.
CONCLUSIONS
Gulf of Mexico Experiment
    Conventional aerial  photography  will provide positive
detection of oily mixtures discharged from vessels under-
way at normal speeds whenever the oil content of the dis-
charge is at least  1 GPM, regardless of sea conditions, illumi-
nation angle, or oil type.
    Black and  white photography  is the  preferred  sur-
veillance  tool. Color  photography  achieves slightly  lower
detection thresholds than black and  white, but  the diffi-
culties in  obtaining color prints with the proper balance and
contrast more than offset that advantage.
    The  detection  threshold is  significantly lower (>\/2
GPM) for heavier oils and crudes, particularly if the slick is
patchy or ropy  in  character. Down-sun  and down-sea as-
pects further enhance contrast and aid detection, as does an
overcast sky.
    The  effect of ship speed on detection  is limited  to a
slight  loss of contrast at higher speeds, due to  increased
wake turbulence.

 Southern California Experiment
     Ultraviolet photographic techniques are considered to
 offer  great  potential for detecting oil.  The fluorescence
 coming from the oil  due to solar illumination  is  easily de-
 tected.

-------
CO
c
•<

o>
1
Date Run Freq. Mean
No. Local
(1970) (MHz) Time


28 OCT 7 1228 0918
29 OCT 29 1228 0822
31 1228 0835
35 428 0904


6 NOV 78 428 1352
80 1228 1404
82 1228 1415
84 1228 1427
87 1228 1444
88 1228 1451
91 8910 1517
93 8910 1530
95 8910 1542
96 4455 1548
98 4455 1600
7 NOV 108 8910 1249
112 4455 1315
114 4455 1328
Large Oil Slick
Quantity Area Average
of Oil , ? Thickness
(gallons) (10eft ) (microns)
Diesel oil, API 34.1
Released 28 OCT. 0800-0827
330 -00.38 ~35
1320 48 1
57 1
43 1
Crude oil, API 26.1
Released 6 NOV. 1145-1230
660 1.0 26
1.9 14
2.9 9
3.2 8
4.0 7
7.3 4
8.4 3
9.2 3
11 2
10 3
10 3
Unidentified Oil Slick
660 21
18
23
Small Oil Slick
Quantity Area Average
of Oil , . Thickness
(gallons) (106fO (microns)
Crude oil, API 26.1
Released 28 OCT, 0840-0902
330 ~0.20 ~67
"The four spills of 28 OCT -
diesel (34.1), crude (26.1)
crude (21.6), #6134 fuel (9.7) -
_have merged into one slick.
#6175 fuel oil, API 9.7
Released 6 NOV. 1235-1315
660 "-0.2 ~130
0.86 31
0.82 33
0.86 31
1.6 17
1.4 19
1.7 16
1.5 18
1.7 16
1.8 15
2.0 13
Unidentified Oil Slick
660
3.7
5

-------
DATE
10/22


10/23

10/24
TIME
12:45
13:00
13:05
13:28
15:00
10:57
11:19
11:35
13:15
12:50

12 Diesel spill initiated
Diesel spill completed (330 Gal)
26.1 API spill Initiated
26.1 Spill completed (330 Gal)
21.6 API gravity spill initiated
21.6 Spill completed (330 Gal)
9.7 API gravity spill initiated
9.7 Spill completed (220 Gal)
One day aged 9.7 & 21.6 API
SEA STATE
(VISUAL
APPROX.)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
WIND FORCE HATER
BEAUFORT TEMP.'C
SCALE
i
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
16.1
16.1
16.1
16.1
16,1
16.3
16.3
16.3
16.3
16.5
AIR
TEMP.'C
18
18
18
18
18
17
17
17
17
17
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.9
.9
.9
.9
.3
RELATIVE
HUMIDITY
*
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
75
75
75
75
67.0
BAROMETRIC SKY
, PRESSURE CONDITIONS
(MM H«>
768
768
768
768
768
763
763
763
763
764
Low thick
Low thick
Low thick
Low thick
Low thick
nigh thin
High thin
High thin
High thin
High thin
broken
broken
broken
broken
broken
scattered
scattered
scattered
scattered
scattered
           10/28
3
3
D.
H
c
3-
10/29
            10/30
            11/6
            11/7
             11/8
             12/2
             12/3
                   gravity oil in two distinct
                   slicks
           14:51    One day aged 9.7 & 21.6 API
                   gravity oil In two distinct
                   slicks

                   #2 Diesel spill initiated
                   #2 Diesel spill completed (330 Gal)
                   26.1 API Spill initiated
                   26.1 Spill completed (330 Gal)
                   26.1 API gravity spill initiated
                   26.1 Spill completed (330 Gal)
                   9.7 API gravity spill initiated
                   9.7 Spill completed (330 Gal)
08:00
08:27
08:40
09:02
09:08
09:35
09:49
10:20
12:20
14:48
16:11

07:40
08:40
11:30
14:57
16:09
 09:00
 11:30
 13:00
 14:26

 11:45
 12:30
 12:35
 13:15

 12:30
 16:00
            09:00
            11:00
            13:30
            13:55
            14:43
            15:00
            15:40

            13:20
            15:30
            16:00
The four slicks from 10/28
have merged forming one
large slick of irregular
shape   3 Ml x 4 Ml.

Same as 10/29
 26.1 API  gravity spill Initiated
 26.1 Spill  completed (660 Gal)
 9.7 API gravity spill initiated
 9.7 Spill completed (660 Gal)

 One day aged 9.7 & 26.1 AFX
 gravity oil in two discrete
 slicks - 26.1 slick Is highly
 streaked - 9.7 slick Is well
 coalesced.

 26.1 API slick had dlspersered
 completely - 9.7 API slick has
 taken  on an elongated shape
    .5x2 miles.

 #2 Diesel spill initiated
 #2 Diesel spill completed  (660 Gal)
 21.6 API gravity spill  initiated
 21.6 Spill completed

 The two  slicks  from  12/2 have merged,
 creating one  large slick   .5x6 miles.
 At - Sea experiment  terminated.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1

0
0
0
0

1-2
                                                                                                 16.5
                                                                            16.4
                                                                            16.4
                                                                            16.4
                                                                            12.8
                                                                            12.8
                                                                            12.8
                                                                            12.8

                                                                            13.1
                                                                            13.1
                                                                                                           17.3
                                16.9
                                17.2
                                17.5
                                17.0
                                17.0
                                16.0
                                16.0

                                15.0
                                15.4
                                                                                                                     96.9
78
80
75.5
69
69
72.0
72.0

60.0
62.3
                                                                                                                                  764
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
3
3
16,4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.3
16.3
16.3
16.4
16.4
16.2
16.4
16.4
16.5
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.4
16.2
16.2
16.9
16.9
16.9
16.9
16.9
16.9
16.9
17.1
17.5
17.5
17.2
17.0
17.0
17.2
17.2
17.2
16.4
18.2
18.4
18.0
16.8
16.8
17.0
17.5
16.9
16.7
67
67
70.5
70.5
70.5
70.5
57.5
57.5
52.5
64.0
81.0
71.5
71.5
78.5
79.0
84.0
81.5
87.0
84.0
78.0
76.5
76.5
78.5
81.5
74.5
72.0
775
775
777
777
777
777
774
774
770
769
773
774
774
770
770
769
770
773
770
770
769
769
770
773
769
767
770
773
770
765
765
769
769

765
765
                                                                                                                        High thin scattered
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear

                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        Clear
                        High  thin scattered
                        High  thin scattered
                        High  thin scattered
                        Clear

                        Low thick broken
                        Low thick broken
                        Low thick broken
                        Low thick broken

                        Clear
                        Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear

Clear
Clear

-------
84     OIL SPILL PREVENTION .. .
    The optical-mechanical scanners such as infrared ima-
gers and the multispectral scanners are effective in detecting
oil  slicks if they operate in the ultraviolet and blue, and 8
to  14  micrometer portion  of the spectrum.  Here oil fluor-
escence and oil emissivity can be used to provide detectable
differences. However, this approach is  presently limited to
clear weather, i.e.,operates effectively only during clear sky
and daylight conditions.
    Radar and passive microwave techniques appear very
promising. They  show the best potential for providing ad-
verse weather coverage of large areas. A cursory amount of
data has been obtained to date for this technique in  re-
ference to oil slick detection. Additional work in this area is
necessary to 'fully  understand this technique's potential.
The mapping experiment performed in  the Chedabucto Bay
area of Nova Scotia and the Southern California experiment
has resulted in synthetic  aperture imagery in which  oil
slicks are quite evident and well defined.  Even though the
imagery was  obtained  on  a variety  of  frequency/polar-
ization combinations, no signatures were identified which
could  not be  positively termed characteristic of the spill.
The use of radar in locating and monitoring oil contami-
nation  on the sea surface has the advantage  of  rapidly
searching wide areas with  good resolution under  adverse
weather conditions. In general, there already exist sophis-
ticated models of radar  scattering processes, and in parti-
cular,  a fundamental understanding of the  mechanism  in-
volved in slick detection. The major liability of  radar tech-
niques is the difficulty in obtaining real time  processing.
    Using passive microwave techniques, it is possible to
detect oil  slicks  on the open ocean.  However, additional
work in this area  is necessary, to fully understand this tech-
nique's potential.  The additional work should address itself
to these areas: (1) Oil slick detection capability as a func-
tion of sea conditions. (2) Feasibility of estimating oil film
thickness  from measured  signatures.  (3) Feasibility  of
estimating  oil film thickness  from sensor characteristics.
Measurements to date indicate  that a constant antenna view
angle of 30° to 45° produces the most favorable oil slick
signature.  Depending  upon whether  or not the microwave
system is operating in the scanned or unscanned mode the
data obtained can easily be displayed on a strip television
monitor, facsimile  machine, and/or strip chart recorder,
providing almost-real-time display capabilities.
REFERENCES
    1. Detection of Oil Emission  From  Ships at Sea by
Observation from  Aircraft,  October  1969, Report No.
CRR/ES/15, Department of Scientific and Industrial Re-
search,  Warren  Spring Laboratory, for  the Ministry  of
Transport, United Kingdom.

     2. Aukland, J.C., and Trexler,  D.T., October 1970, Oil
 Pollution Detection and Discrimination by Remote Sensing
 Techniques, Report No. 714104/A/006-1  for the Applied
 Technology Division, U.S. Coast Guard.
     3. Guinard, N.W., and Purres, C.G.,  April 1970, The
 Remote   Sensing  of Oil Slicks by  Radar, Project  No.
 714104/A/004 for the Applied Technology Division, U.S.
 Coast Guard.

-------
                     METHODS  AND  PROCEDURES  FOR
                   PREVENTING  OIL  POLLUTION  FROM
                           ONSHORE  AND  OFFSHORE
                                           FACILITIES

                                      R. D. Kaiser and H. D. Van Cleave
                                           Water Quality Office
                                      Environmental Protection Agency
 ABSTRACT
  Presention-the first line of defense against oil pollu-
 tion-requires a well planned program for the implementa-
 tion of fail safe design criteria and operating procedures,
 personnel training, and reliable detection and safety equip-
 ment.  This paper summarizes current pollution prevention
 practices in the production and development of oil and
 associated appurtenances both  onshore and offshore and
 possible future developments of prevention technology.

  The discussion of  onshore activity  will focus on the
 Colorado  River Basin which covers approximately one-
 twelfth of the continental  United States. Within this vast
 area there are approximately three hundred producing oil
 and gas fields. An oil pollution control program related  to
 oil and gas exploitation will be discussed.

  In the beginning the Program's primary emphasis was on
 the drilling activity. Field inspections  were made on all
 drilling sites  in  the States of Colorado and Utah.  The
 second phase  of the  program dealt with periodic field
 inspections of the 300 oil and gas fields with attention
 given to the overall housekeeping, well head leaks, gathering
 lines, and  tank  bettery operations including the use  of
 slammer ponds.

  Offshore oU and gas production and development has
 generally been conducted in water depths of less than 300
 feet. However, indications  are that offshore technology is
 advancing to the point  to not only drill, but also to produce
 in water depths reaching 1000-1300 feet. As offshore oil
 and gas  operations  move ever  seaward operators are
 encountering increasing well pressures and other forces and
 stresses to control. These increasing  pressures,  natural
forces and conditions coupled with "multiple-use" plat-
forms containing "multiple completion wells" present a
 "multiple challenge"  to design engineers in preventing
uncontrolled flow from a well. Single fixed structures with
a capability of supporting the drilling of from 20 to 60
wells directionally presents a costly structure vulnerable to
total loss if one well flows out of control. Therefore, a
sound "safety-in-depth " approach should be standard pro-
cedure for  not only the driller but also  the production
foreman if we are to prevent oil spills from uncontrolled
wells. The  discussion  of offshore  facilities will review
generally the present safety devices, methods, and pro-
cedures for controlling well flow.

  Procedures and equipment for prevention of oil spills
during drilling, production, and development are described;
their existing applications summarized, and the potential
for future developments is given.  The equipment includes:
blowout preventers, surface and sub-surface safety devices.
Practices for the use of curbs, dikes and catch basins; flood,
hurricane and fire control procedures are examined from
the viewpoint of oil spill prevention. The role of design
criteria,  personnel operating procedures, and human error
in spill prevention are discussed,  and future practices are
postulated.
INTRODUCTION
   Onshore and offshore  wells represent 84%  and 16%
respectively of the world's  current oil production. The
current  aggregate  offshore reserves of 85 billion barrels
represent approximately 20% of the world's total reserves.
Within the United States, approximately 10% of the current
oil production is offshore. The U.S.  Department of the
Interior  estimates that by 1980, approximately 30% of the
U.S.  oil  requirements  will come  from our offshore re-
serves. l

   U.S. oil production in open unprotected waters began as
early  as 1938. Increasing  oil demands, technological ad-
                                                   85

-------
 86    OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
vances and  economic  and political  factors have led to a
total  U.S.  production increase in  offshore  oil and gas
production from less than 1% in 1954 to approximately 9%
in 1969.2

   There are many similarities  between onshore and off-
shore  exploration, drilling,  completion  and production
technology  and practices;  however,  environmental and
economic factors have also created significant differences in
these phases of petroleum  operations. For example, the
limited space of offshore  facilities has resulted in standard
operating practices of multiple drillings and  completions
from single  facilities.  Also, separation of oil and water in
the production  of oil  may utilize  different equipment or
procedures.  Similarly, the  potential of water pollution due
to oil  or brine water is different in offshore  than it is in
onshore  facilities, and therefore,  it  seems reasonable  to
expect that  pollution prevention and control practices will
differ.

   In this  paper,  we  will describe  an onshore pollution
prevention and control program that was established in a
regional oil production area. This program will be presented
in a case study format, emphasizing prevention and control
methods and procedures  that are  peculiar to onshore oil
operations. We will phase into offshore drilling and produc-
tion  by  pointing out  some similarities in  well  control
methods and  procedures  during drilling operations  both
onshore  and offshore. A description will  follow of the
complexities of offshore  drilling and production that are
peculiar to offshore operations  and how these complexities
require more  detailed considerations in  establishing  an
offshore  pollution prevention program. By this comparison
study, we are attempting to demonstrate the need to more
thoroughly  examine requirements  for offshore pollution
prevention and control if we are to prevent the potential
economic and  ecological losses accompanying offshore
drilling and production mishaps.

Onshore Prevention and Control Program
   On November 3,1967, the Utah Water Pollution Control
Board requested  the   Federal  Water Pollution Control
Administration, now known as  the Water Quality Office of
the  Environmental Protection  Agency,  to  evaluate  the
pollution effects connected with the disposal of oil  field
brine water.

   This was not the first time that Utah was aware of water
pollution problems associated with oil production. The U.S.
Geological  Survey already  had engineers  in  the   field
supervising  drilling and production. However, since Utah
only had one U.S. Geological Survey engineer assigned to it
and  Colorado only had two, it was impossible for such a
small force  to also investigate for water pollution at well
sites.

   In order  to answer Utah's request for assistance, FWPCA
began  to provide technical assistance to  the State and the
U.S. Geological  Survey. Firmer contorl over oil  associated
water pollution began to take effect.
   It soon became apparent  that because of the extensive
oil exploration  and production in the States adjacent to
Utah, this field survey project was extended to include all
of the Colorado River Basin—an area which covers approx-
imately one-twelfth of the continental United States. This
program not only dealt with prevention of oil pollution but
with other wastes associated with oil exploration—such as
oil field brine water disposal. It is interesting to note here
that this voluntary program was started in the fall of 1967,
well before the passage of the Water Quality Improvement
Act of 1970.

   The first  phase of the program dealt with the drilling
activities  within the Basin. The Colorado River-Booneville
Basins Office of FWPCA received notices  of intention to
drill from the States of Utah and Colorado. These notices
listed  the name  of the well,  the  location  and  depth
expected  and the company drilling the well. The notices
were received  weekly and  an  average of 30  wells  were
announced each month, including not only development
wells, but also wildcat wells.

   The locations of over 200  well sites were  plotted on
USGS 7 1/2 minute quadrangle maps. Approximately 40%
of  these  were within one mile  of the nearest perennial
stream into which oil or wastes could be discharged. These
sites, in  addition  to another  10 randomly selected sites,
were inspected to determine  the measures that  were being
used to protect the environment from oil spills.

   Approximately 25% of the sites visited had the potential
for  pollution problems. The  field visits considered  all
aspects of potential pollution problems, including selection,
access, layout and construction of the site.


   The site selection for development wells was  set  on a
specified  acreage pattern. Several sites were in the  flood
plain of streams known to have a great potential for flash
flooding during certain seasons  of the year. In  these cases
consideration was given to the length of time the rig would
be on the site and the protection measures provided for the
site, hi addition, it  was suggested that drilling contractors
remove all liquids from the pits after completion of the well
to insure that later floods would not wash this material into
the stream.

   The most common problem encountered at individual
well sites  was the location of the mud pits. These pits were
often located in the stream bed, particularly if it was a dry
wash.  During  the  flash flood  season  these  pits  were
vulnerable and the contents could easily be washed into the
nearest perennial stream. Another problem resulted from
air  drilling operations. Pits for the cuttings were not used
and  the  cuttings,  liquids, and detergents  were  discharged
onto the surface of the ground.

   Many of the problems uncovered in the field visits were
quickly remedied by the  drilling engineers, drilling contrac-
tors, and on many occasions by  the USGS who administers

-------
                                                                         METHODS AND PROCEDURES ...
                                                    87
oil and gas operations on Federal lands. An important facet
of this program was the educational value it carried. The
program  made  the drilling engineer, his  company and the
drilling contractors  aware that consideration should  be
given to protection of the environment in the selection and
development of drilling sites. The results of this inspection
and review program were shown by a decrease in improper
site location and construction.

   In addition to the  regular  well site activity, a search for
old abandoned  wells which were leaking  oil, water and gas
was also undertaken. When these were found  a program for
preventing oil or other wastes from entering a water course
was established. One typical program was developed for the
plugging of the Cane Creek wells below Moab, Utah. These
wells had been  discharging brine and oil into the Colorado
River. Preliminary investigations revealed that these wells
kd been  drilled during the 1920's and 1930's. Two of the
wells had  a  history of high  pressures and one  well was
reported to have "blown-in" during the drilling, resulting in
an oil slick affecting most of the Colorado River with some
oil reaching the Gulf of California. Other information from
the well logs also indicated potential for  an oil discharge to
the river.

   These wells  were located  on the bank of  the river and
were butted up against a 500-foot cliff.  This was the last
location  on the river where adequate oil  pollution control
measures  could be constructed before the river discharged
into Lake Powell. Based upon this information, the FWPCA
and the State of Utah agreed that the following measures
should be used to prevent oil from entering  the Colorado
River:

   1. Skimming ponds be constructed to skim oil from the
surface of the water before  discharging the  water  to the
river.

   2. A perimeter dike be constructed around the wells and
the skimming ponds.

   3. Emergency pumping equipment be available to re-
move excess oil from the skimming ponds if necessary.

   4. A  boom be constructed  across the Colorado River
downstream from the well sites and that straw would be
available to absorb the oil.

   The first  three measures were implemented by the State
of Utah. The boom  was not  used since available booms do
not work effectively in velocities such as encountered in  the
Colorado River. Construction of an open fence-type boom
was  considered  too  costly.  The  wells  were successfully
plugged,  thus resulting in  the elimination of oil and brine
from the  river.

   Another phase of the program centered around  inspec-
tions of the approximately 300 oil and gas fields within the
upper Colorado River. Attention focused on the disposal of
produced waters to  the prevention and control of oil spills.
The survey indicated that produced water, which varies in
dissolved solids concentrations from less than 1000 mg/1 to
more  than 250,000 mg/1, was disposed of in evaporation
pits, discharged to streams or injected into the ground.
During  1969 approximately  165 million  barrels  of water
were  produced in  the  Colorado River  Basin  of which
approximately 25% used surface disposal methods. Approx-
imately 98% of this surface disposal  was  in Colorado and
Utah. During the inspections it was found that housekeep-
ing practices at most of the fields were not adequate. There
was evidence of oil around well heads, tank batteries, along
gathering lines  and in the dry washes and stream banks. Oil
spills  had occurred throughout  the fields,  indicating  the
apparent lack of concern and/or training of personnel who
operated the field. Containment  or cleanup of such spills
was minimal and oil was carried into streams by the heavy
runoff.

   Two of the most common potential problem areas for
oil  spills were  the placement of gathering lines and  the
diking  of  tank  batteries.  The  gathering lines  generally
consisted of small diameter steel piles laid  on the surface of
the ground and were vulnerable to breaks caused  by heavy
equipment.  The pipes meandered across the ground,  cross-
ing dry  washes or streams, and were subject to breakage
during heavy runoff. Since  these gathering lines  were  not
generally equipped with automatic shutoffs, a break  could
p6rmit oil to be pumped into surface water courses for long
periods of time  before  being discovered. In some fields,
however, consideration of the location and protection of
these lines was evidenced.

   Very few of the oil fields surveyed had dikes around the
tank batteries.  This in itself presented a great potential for
oil spills since many of these tank batteries were perched on
hills above dry washes  or streams. The inadequate house-
keeping and the lack of diked facilities were pointed out to
field  operators and agencies  as  sources  of oil pollution.
Results were minimal.

   These  surveys again proved  valuable by making  the
various companies and government agencies aware of the
potential for oil  spills and the  methods and procedures
which  can   be used to  prevent such  spills.  Although
immediate action to remedy potential pollution  problems
was not observed, it was felt that this program provided an
approach which could  ultimately be utilized by agencies
and field operators to prevent oil spills.

   The major success of this onshore program was in the
greater awareness for pollution control in oil exploitation
shown  by  personnel from  the  various companies  and
agencies,  and  in  the  placing of the responsibility  for
pollution prevention  at the  earliest  point  in  the   oil
production cycle.
 Offshore Well Control
   A desirable well control and pollution  prevention pro-
 gram must begin before a well is drilled and continue until

-------
 88   OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
the producing  formation is  played  out,  and the well is
successfully plugged and abandoned.

   Much of the technology of controlling wells offshore is
derived from onshore methods and procedures, particularly
during drilling operations. The same care and detailed well
planning  is  required  regardless of well location.  The
engineer and geologist  must plan the well based on the
depth of the geologic formation, the estimated pressures,
and  other considerations. During drilling, equipment  or
environmental  mishaps  that could  occur require careful
blowout and pollution prevention planning. Every foot of
hole made by  every  rig presents  the  possibility  of  a
blowout.

   Generally, the necessary blowout prevention procedures
utilized onshore are used offshore. The function of drilling
muds are common both onshore and offshore. Essentially,
drilling mud  cools and  lubricates the drill bit, carries drill
cuttings to the  surface, stabilizes the walls of the hole and
by increasing the weight of the mud in the fluid column,
becomes  a  safety  method  to  control   hole  pressures.
Likewise,  casing is used during drilling operations on and
offshore as an  important part of the blowout prevention
plan. Casing has the extremely important safety function of
shutting out high pressure zones and stabilizing the  well.
Blowout preventers are used as a surface safety device when
drilling or  when the drill string is out of the hole. Usually
blowout preventers are tailored to  meet the  particular
requirements of  the well. Blowout prevention equipment
used in drilling must meet rigid standards, particularly when
working with extremely high pressures.  This equipment,
once installed,  is frequently tested  to  assure that it will
function properly  during an emergency  situation.  Both
onshore  and offshore  drilling crews practice emergency
shut-down procedures to make sure they all  understand
what to do when emergency action is required.
   However,  despite the  technological advances in casing
design, pumps, drilling fluids,  blowout  preventers, sub-
surface safety devices, computer applications for estimating
well conditions, and better training of operating and drilling
crews, blowouts still occur and in some cases coRtffbiite to
large amounts of oil being discharged into  the environment.

   To suggest a standardized prevention and control system
to control all wells during drilling operations onshore and
offshore would be  impractical. Well control problems are
unique to  each well and require individual attention, even
though this  specialized or customized attention for  each
well drilled  requires much  more  planning effort  when
moving offshore into a  marine  environment. Additional
planning effort is required because of the added stresses and
forces associated with marine operations, and other  envi-
ronmental considerations. There is a distinct difference in
the method  of operation offshore as compared to typical
onshore procedures.  Onshore drilling and production are
sequential  and  separate,  whereas  offshore  drilling and
production can occur together on the same platform. This
is  not  to  suggest  that  blowouts are  occurring  more
frequently offshore  than onshore. On the contrary,  the
safety record offshore is exemplary. However, when one
reviews records of successful completions it becomes clear
that considerable planning and investment was made in well
control procedures and equipment before the first foot of
hole was  drilled. The thousands of successful completions
are basically a result  of balanced drilling with  prevention
and control programs planned in depth.

   The  technology for deep water production is relatively
new. Offshore production of oil to date has been accom-
plished in water depths of less than 350  feet with the bulk
of offshore facilities in water depths of less than 100 feet.3
While it could generally  be  concluded that shallow water
production of oil has been somewhat successful, it does not
necessarily follow that deep water operations will enjoy the
same high degree of success. As offshore  production moves
into deeper water, conventional production safety devices
now in use  may not  be  adequate to control  up to 200
producing wells 'on  one platform. Ocean  Oil  recently
announced development  plans calling for installation of a
drilling and production platform in 700 feet of water, five
miles offshore in California. As many  as three drilling rigs
could be  installed on the deck for drilling up to 60 wells
directionally.

   It would  seem from the foregoing that improved  or
non-conventional safety  devices and spill prevention pro-
grams  need   to  be  examined in  light of the  planned
mammoth multi-purpose platforms. The onshore drilling
and  production  site presents one well  with essentially one
problem.  However, when offshore, the one well  problem
could rapidly become a multiple  well problem.  Further-
more, the risk for environmental damage increases and the
quantity of  oil  which could  be spilled  becomes  greater;
therefore,  the costs are expected to be greater. Hence, the
increased  investment  in  prevention  and control  must  be
accepted.

   An example of this cost can be demonstrated by a recent
offshore catastrophe reported in Ocean Oil Weekly Report.
"Approximately 60 men were working on the platform at
the  time  the fire started.  Four men died and  37 were
hospitalized  as  a result  of  the  accident. The  burning
platform contained 22 wells (21 duals  and 1 single), was in
water approximately  55-60 feet deep  and was valued by
some sources around SI2.5 million. Although the cause of
the accident is  not  known,  it was not a blowout. It is
believed that  the initial explosion  and fire started with a
producible well  that was being worked over by a wireline
company  at  the time.   .  .  . naturally, since the  well was
being worked on there wasn't  any down-hole safety valve
installed." The subsequent cost of several relief wells plus
the cost of cleanup suggests  that  the cost of additional
safety equipment  and improved operating procedures re-
quired  to control the well   become  insignificant when
compared to the loss suffered.

-------
                                                                           METHODS AND PROCEDURES ...     89
  What  new technology is available or is under develop-
ment that can  be utilized  for  offshore prevention and
control problems? It is standard practice to position well
head safety devices on the ocean floor when drilling from
floating  rigs. The experience  and technology from  such
underwater practices  has expanded to  include underwater
completion and  production. Improved varying, manifolding
and surface-to-ocean  floor communications have contrib-
uted to successful completions in  shallow water. Existing
underwater  technology  is  being  applied in the further
development of  underwater oil completion and production
practices for deeper water.

  Humble  Oil  is developing a  submerged production
system (SPS) including subsea well heads, manifolding, and
control and safety devices and equipment. A full-scale SPS
system is now being developed. We are looking forward to
the field  testing and the success of this project.

  Some  advantages of underwater completions and pro-
duction are:
  Less converging or consolidation of flow  lines to one
centralized platform
  Less vulnerability to hurricane damage
  Less potential hazard to navigation
  Less chance of fire or explosion
  Less chance for debris to intefere with killing operations

  Other  improvements are also  reported in sub-surface
safety devices.4  There are available as standard items direct
controlled and remote controlled sub-surface  safety  valves
that  can  be  installed  in most wells, regardless  of original
down hole design. The  concept of redundant sub-surface
safety valves should be considered in pollution  prevention
planning. However,  when  redundant varying  cannot  be
installed  there is a tubing removable ball-type safety valve
available that contains some excellent features that provide
back-up  controls  in the event of  failure  to activate. This
valve operates on  a hydraulic pressure, piston principle and
is controlled from the  surface  by  a control manifold.
Monitor  pilots detect  loss in hydraulic pressure.  Should the
valve  fail  to close  it  could be closed at the surface
manually.5

  There are also improvements in surface safety valves that
can  be   automatically  shut-in  by  pilot  signals due   to
high-low pressure  sensors, fire,  liquid levels,  and tempera-
tures.  In  addition, there are remote/direct control valves
sensitive to  well  conditions  that  can be  tailored  to  the
peculiar conditions of a given facility.
SUMMARY
   We believe that an effective oil spill prevention program
can  be accomplished  for oil well  drilling and production
both onshore and offshore. However,  the unique facilities
and  environmental conditions that exist offshore deserve
special  attention if  oil  spills  are to  be  reduced  and
environmental  damage  minimized. A sound safety-indepth
or fail-safe approach should become standard procedure in
offshore drilling and production. These  standard procedures
would apply to the production foremen just as they apply
to the  driller  or the  tool pusher.  Many of  the offshore
platforms today are  multiple use structures that  support
not  only multiple producing wells but  also drilling rigs for
simultaneous drilling operations. As these complex offshore
facilities move into deeper  water more consolidation and
unitization  should  be  expected. Therefore, the increasing
complexities of such structures present a distinct challenge
not  only to the design and safety engineers, but also to the
environmental  engineer.
REFERENCES
   1. International and  National Regulation of Pollution from
Offshore OB Production. Robert B. Kruiger. From a paper delivered
at a conference on International and Interstate Regulation of Water
Pollution, March 13,  1970, Columbia University, New York, New
York.
   2. Petroleum and  Sulfur on the U.S. Continental Shelf. U.S.
Department of the Interior. December 1969.
   3. Ibid.
   4. Ocean Oil Weekly Report. December 7,1970.
   S. Safety  Equipment  that can help Prevent Pollution. Odis
Wilder. From  a  paper  delivered  to the American Society  for
Petroleum Engineers, November 1970, Lafayette, Louisiana.
   6. Ibid.
GENERAL REFERENCES
   Economics of Oil and Gas Operations  Offshore, U.S.A. R.C.
McCurdy, President, Shell Oil Company. May 1969.
   Louisiana Oil and Gas Facts. Eleventh Edition, Mid-Continent Oil
and Gas Association.
   Offshore Petroleum and the Environment. Staff paper prepared
by the Committee on Public Affairs, American Petroleum Institute,
October 6,1969.

-------
                                      EMBROILED  IN  OIL

                                                 Harold Bernard
                                  Agricultural and Marine Pollution Control Branch
                                    Division of Applied Science and Technology
                                         Environmental Protection Agency
ABSTRACT
   The fate of used automotive crankcase oils are analyzed.
It appears that current methods for handling waste oils
dispose of about 0.5 billion gallons per year directly to the
environment. Burning tests using the waste oils for fuel oil
produced mixed results. Some tests indicated a 3:1 dtlht-
tion  ratio could  provide adequate  results;  other tests
indicated coking  of fire tubes and clogging of burner
nozzels. A novel rerefining flow sheet which uses vacuum
distillation without clay treatment or chemicals to produce
a No. 2 and No. 4 fuel oil is presented. Additional research
and development is required, but the process has a potential
for about an 85-90% yield without producing any solid or
Squid pollution.

INTRODUCTION
   All of us, the entire nation, are embroiled,  not only in
oil but in the quality of our environment, en  toto. No
longer can we be  concerned solely with production effi-
ciency as it is related to maximizing unit output at lowest
cost.  We  must now consider as  part of the  production
processes, the ultimate fate of the product we produce. A
good  case in point is the use of detergents.  It was the
panacea for  cleanliness. But  look  what it's doing to our
rivers and lakes. It's accelerated their rate of aging from one
of geologic time to only years. Many states have already
regulated against the  further use of phosphates in  deter-
gents.

   Both  industry  and the  government are  involved in
research  to  try to find a substitute that is effective  as a
detergent but at  the same time does  not detrimentally
affect any segment of the ecological cycle to an extent that
is unacceptable to the public.
   Are we getting ourselves in  the same dilemma with waste
crankcase oils? How many of you have  given any thought
after you leave the service station to what happens to your
automobile crankcase drainings after you leave? As is our
nature-"out of sight, out mind". However, that conception
can no longer be tolerated.

    Two recent messages from the President of the United
 States paid particular attention to oil pollution and to  a
 need for recycling a hitherto considered waste product. The
 President's message to the Congress proposing Administra-
 tive and Legislative actions on May 20, 1970, was stated in
 relation to oil pollution from ship transportation, but you
 may be able to relate it  to oil pollution in a broader sense.
 It began with "the oil that fuels our industrial civilization
 can also foul our natural environment.

    "The threat of oil pollution from ships-both at sea and
 in  our harbors—represents a growing danger to our marine
 environment.  With the  expansion of world  trade over the
 past  three decades, seaborne oil transport has  multiplied
 tenfold and presently constitutes more than 60 percent of
 the world's ocean commerce.

    This increase in shipping has increased the oil pollution
 hazard. Within the past ten years, there have been over 550
 tanker collisions, four-fifths of  which  have  involved ships
 entering or leaving ports. The routine discharge by tankers
 and other ships of oil and oily wastes as a part of their
 regular operation is  also a major  contributor to the oil
 pollution problem.

    "The development of world commerce and industry and
 its growing  dependence on  oil need  not result in  these
 added dangers.  The growing threat from oil spills can be
 contained not by stopping industrial progress—but through
 a careful combination of  international cooperation and
 national initiatives."
                                                      91

-------
92
         OIL SPILL PREVENTION .. .
   The message continued and outlined a number of actions
which the Congress  should take to reduce the risks of oil
pollution.

   It  included  international  conventions, development of
standards, a  Ports and Waterways Safety  Act to control
navigation, traffic control, cooperation of private industry,
a broad program of research and development, licensing,
charging the  spiller for oil pollution cleanup, and increased
surveillance.  The President further noted  that  "many of
these (oil) spills result from willful violations of laws which
limit  the discharging of oil. Such spills can be reduced by
more stringent surveillance procedures."

   Another recent message from the President to Congress
related  to recycling of junked automobiles. It  stated, "The
particular disposal problems presented by  the automobile
are unique. However, wherever appropriate we should also
seek to establish incentives and regulations to encourage the
reuse, recycling or easier disposal of other commonly used
goods." Let  me repeat that last sentence for emphasis.
"However, wherever  appropriate,  we  should  also seek to
establish incentives and regulations to encourage the reuse,
recycling or  easier  disposal  of  other  commonly used
goods."

   This concept  relates directly to waste oils,  but we have
done precious  little, if anything in this area. For example,
sales  of automobile and  industrial lubricating oils is now
approximately  2.5 billion gallons  per  year. It is estimated
that approximately 50 percent of this oil is not consumed
and is  drained  periodically  to be  replaced with  new oil.
What happens  to the 1.25 billion gallons that are drained
annually? An attempt is made here to ascertain the current
fate of this oil.
   But before I proceed, let me say that I am not concerned
here  with a  presentation  of absolute values, but only with
portraying the pollution potential of the problem.

    A report by the State of Massachusetts on distribution
of  waste oils  was utilized  by the American  Petroleum
Institute to  extrapolate the problem  on a national scale.
A.P.I,  indicated   a  national  pollution  potential  of
approximately  450,000,000  gallons   annually.  The
distribution and sources are indicated in Table  1.

                         Table 1
                    Fate  of Waste Oils*
         Use                %          Volume-Gal/Year
 Reprocessed for reuse    37-40%            -5 billion
 Road oil use                 12%            150 million
 Farm Use                   3.0%             40 million
 Dumped on  ground        23-25%            300 million
 Dumped into sewers           1%             12 million
 Fate unknown            18-20%            250 million
 *Based upon draining of 1.25 billion gallons per year
    As the distribution of waste oils for the aforementioned
 use may  be the antithesis of environmental protection,
permit me to amplify on this for each of the above "Use"
categories.

   In the category,  "Reprocessing  of  the  Waste Oils for
reuse,"  I have included rerefining of oil as well as use of
settled oil  for  fuel.  In the current state of the industry,
about 30%  of  the  oil ends up as  an  acid sludge. That's
equivalent  to another  30 million  gallons/year requiring
disposal. Add to that the unknown mountains of spent oily
clay used to clarify the product. Many states now refuse to
permit these sludges to be disposed of in sanitary land fills.
The industry has no  sludge burner such  as we recently
developed and demonstrated by the American Oil Company
in a joint  project with  the Water  Quality Office  of the
Environmental Protection Agency.

   Where can all  this sludge go? Where will it end up in the
environment? Last November, a large rerefmery in Pennsyl-
vania experienced a disaster. Lagoons holding the bottoms
sludges, gave way, venting 3 million gallons of oil waste to
the  Schuylkill  River.  The company involved  elected to
cease operations. Bankruptcies and shutdowns have de-
creased  the industry's capacity  from  about 300  million
gallons/year in  1966 to about 100 million gallons per year
in 1971. Waste handling costs is the reason  this industry is
experiencing an increasing rate of plant shutdowns. What's
happening to the  oil?

   Another use for the waste  oil is to recycle it for a fuel.
The American  Petroleum Institute  presents some evidence
that if the waste oils are diluted with virgin oil, it may have
little or no detrimental affect on burner operation and
maintenance. However, let us take a real hard look at the
potential problems  that could confront us from this use.
Tests performed  by the Petroleum Rerefiners  Association
indicate that waste  crankcase oils contain huge quantities
of metallic pollutants as described in  Table II: Pounds of
combustion products as Oxides per 10,000 gallons of waste
crankcase oil.2

    Tests performed by National Oil Recovery Corporation,
a grantee of the Water Quality Office of the Environmental
Protection Agency, plus analyses  conducted by  oil com-
panies on both industrial and residential fuel burning units,
indicate that the waste oil can contribute to a buildup on
heating  surfaces  of hard thick deposits accumulated in a
 relatively short time as well  as a slow  buildup of metallic
oxide films akin to those formed by high temperature flame
 spraying  processes.  Needless to say,  such deposits incur
 significant maintenance costs and detract from the burning
concept.

    Though I haven't gone into an indepth  consideration of
 the air pollution and air transported health problems that
 can be  considered  when burning  a  fuel  with the large
 quantity of metallic pollutants noted in Table II, there is
 evidence in  the  literature  to indicate  that under certain
 conditions  of  burning,  some of the  impurities  could
 constitute a health  hazard, or could necessitate additional

-------
                                                                                       EMBROILED IN OIL    93
effluent handling features such as high discharge stacks, air
cleaning equipment, monitoring or specific limitations as to
location of industry complexes that may burn this type of
fuel oil. Even if one were to assume that proper ratio could
be found that would preclude some of the above mentioned
problems  the  current  industry  modus  operand! is  the
antithesis  of  requisite   management  practices.  The  API
recognizes that  the used oil  is picked up by scavengers or
collectors. What do these collectors  do with the  oil?  They
can either  sell it to fuel oil suppliers, or  sell  it as a fuel
themselves. In either case how can one be  assured  that the
oil will be utilized in  the I-to-3 ratio prescribed in the API
report and  in  any other  proper  ratio? How  can such  a
system be  enforced without bringing public agencies into
the picture?  Figure 1 is  an example of the  results  of using
crankcase oil as a fuel  without proper safeguards. These
clinkers  were  taken  from a  fire tube  boiler  that  used
undiluted waste oils.  Even with proper mixing safeguards,
the long-term effects  of the use of this oil are unknown. As
seen from Table II significant quantities of metals are in the
waste oil. What happens to these  in the burner irrespective
of  their concentratipn?  If it's anything like  flame-metal
spraying, will the unsuspecting individual homeowner  who
is the recipient of  this  oil have  his maintenance  costs
skyrocket? Can recycling of waste oils directly as  a fuel be
realistically adopted without the manufacturer of the oil or
the  user  becoming responsible  for its ultimate  fate, or
without public regulations and proper enforcement?  This
area is under study by both industry and the Water Quality
Office of the Environmental Protection Agency.
                        Figure 1


    The report extrapolates that 150 million gallons of oil
  may be used as road oil. Is this the right type of oil for this
  purpose? It  is high in emulsifiers and low in asphaltics. If it
  rains soon after the oil is applied, does the oil emulse off
  the  roadbed into drainage  ditches and  into streams? What
  percentage of the 150,000 gal/year of  road oil ends up in
  receiving waters? Then there  is the 300,000,000 gal/year in
  the category which is dumped on  the ground at the source.
  What part of this runs off to sewers, drainage ditches and
streams? What  of the  250 million  gallons per year whose
fate  is  unknown? If this volume were redistributed  back
into  the previous three categories in accordance  with  these
present percentages  about 50 million  gallons of waste oil
would get back to the environment.

   And ladies  and gentlemen, it  does get back into the
environment.   We  polled our  Regional  Directors;  they
indicated  that  used oil  dumped  into sewers,  rivers and
harbors is a serious problem in their regions.

   From  this  analysis it is conceivable that half a billion
gallons of oil are being discharged to the environment in an
uncontrolled manner.

   This then is the current status!! What of the future??

   "Trends" summarized by the  API in the same  report
 indicate that the insult to the environment from used oils
 may increase substantially in the near future. They project
 a substantial decline  in  free pickup services with costs of
 pickups being $5.00 & up. Will the user  pay for pickup or
 will  he conveniently  dispose of it  himself to save a couple
 of bucks?
    The API report also  projects "considerable diminution
 of rerefming activity, and a growing tendency of scavenger
 firms to go out of business."  Triplex, a large  rerefiner  in
 Long  Island  was  reported in bankruptcy last year. The
 previous winter two others in this  geographic area also went
 bankrupt. How  many more will bite the dust?

    The API further states that  pickups, where available are
 sometimes being made by uncontrolled "gypsy" operations.
 "These include  septic tank  pumpers and a wide assortment
 of  truckers, including  a few irresponsible, unknown, and
 unreliable  operators, who may take the oil to  city dumps,
 open fields, or other locations from which a portion of the
 oil  may find its way into streams, lakes, and fields." Yet if
 these entrepreneurs do not  pick up the oil, who will? With
 rerefmers going out  of  business,  will the collectors follow
 suit? If their  numbers decline, what will happen to the oil?
  Rerefmers are reluctant to accept oil from "gypsies." The
  main  reason  given in the API report is mixing of different
  products and chemicals.  Regardless of the reasons, this
  indicates that oil that was  picked up may  not end up at a
  rerefmery, or  there will not  be a sufficient  number  of
  rerefmers to service the  industry.

      Burning is recommended by the API as the method that
  should be emphasized for used oil pollution control. Again,
  who will collect it and how will it be monitored for quality
  control?
      Remember,  don't  concentrate  on  the numbers  I've
  spewed out, just  recall that  they most likely are in  the
  hundreds of millions of gallons of oil; that 100 gallons of
  oil can  easily  form a slick  in  a  river that  will  require
  significant efforts to clean up; and  that the clean up costs
  may be of the order of $1,000. That's $10 per gallon for a

-------
94
OIL SPILL PREVENTION . . .
Table 2.
POUNDS OF COMBUSTION PRODUCTS AS OXIDES
PER 10,000 GALLONS OF WASTE CRANKCASE OILS2
Zinc
Copper
Aluminum
Barium
Calcium
Nickel
Chromium
Iron
Silicon
Lead
Tin
Phosphorus
Boron
Magnesium
Total
Jackson Okla. City
Miss. Oklahoma
36 46
1.1 0.9
4.6 5.1
43 25
136 220
0.2 0.3
2.6 2.9
34 32
29 22
650 650
0.6 0.6
225 225
3.6 3.6
23 10
1188.7 1243.4
Washington Doraville
D.C. Georgia
58 33
1.4 1.2
2.6 5.1
57 20
162 131
0.3 2.4
4.8 1.5
17 30
13 24
400 570
0.6 1.0
255 211
2.8 4.3
23 36
997.5 1070.5
San Carlos Dearborn St Louis
Calif. Midi. Mo.
54 45 32
1.6
4.4
31
220
0.5
3.i
28
24
480
0.9
173
3.6
19
1043.8
Norco Rerefining Costs3 Table
Feed
Run# (Gal.)
4 176,288
5 228,324
Total 404,612
Product
Bottoms
Hvy.
Lt.
Barometric
Gasoline
Fuel, Loss (H2O)
Bottoms
(Gal.)
67,850
47,360
115,210
Total Gal.
#4 and #5
115,210
149,000
84,066
22,000
1,776
32,560
Hvy. Lt.
(Gal.) (Gal.)
46,700 44,475
102,300 39,591
Baro.
(Gal.)
22,000
149,000 84,066 22,000
Combined Yield
of #4 and #5
28.4
36.8
20.8
5.5
0.5
8.5(F)

1.4 1.2
4.8 4.5
9.3 33
147 120
0.6 0.3
2.6 2.2
36 32
27 64
720 650
1.0 0.9
264 189
5.9 3.6
31 25
1295.6 1157.7
3:
Gas
(Gal.)
863
913
1,776
Yield %
#4
38.5
26.5
25.2
Houston
Texas
32
1.3
4.4
45
162
0.9
2.9
30
19
570
1.3
189
3.8
61
1122.6

Fuel Water
Loss
16,400
16,160
32,560

Lyons
111.
44
1.5
6.3
38
168
0.7
1.2
42
24
650
0.9
173
5.9
25
1180.5

Yield %
#5
20.7
44.9
17.3
9.6
TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (Runs #4 and #5) per gallon
DIRECT COSTS $ 16,240.77 =
.0401 /gal. processing costs )
FEED CHARGE 404,612 )
TOTAL FIXED COSTS
$1,226.58 =
.003/gal. processing cost)
                                  404.612

-------
                                                                                       EMBROILED IN OIL
                                                    95
waste product that costs of the order of 5 cents per gallon
to dispose  of in  an acceptable manner. This then is the
magnitude of the waste oil problem.

  In our opinion there are two or three possible methods
for solving this vexing problem. They all involve recycling
of the waste oils.

Recycling for Fuel (without re-refining)
  This method is feasible, but not in the manner proposed
in the API report. Considerable research is still required to
determine  the constraints necessary  to make  burning of
waste oils  acceptable.  The  burning tests  that  were con-
ducted on the large industrial furnaces  should be repeated
for  smaller burners, such as the homeowner types.  Long
term effects  should be noted. No matter how successful
burner tests are, the institutional modifications required to
make this  concept  practical will not be quickly available.
Who will follow the fate of the oil? How will proper mix
ratios be enforced?  These are really the critical paths that
will determine the success or failure of this concept. Who in
each political subdivision will be responsible for enforce-
ment? These are  real institutional problems that must be
faced squarely and resolved on an individual basis. Except
for  the expanded  burning  testing  program  suggested,
actions  necessary  to  make  this approach effective  Ire
confined almost  exclusively  to the political  arena.  This
avenue is always a long time in coming.

  In my book, then, burning of waste oils cannot be an
approach that can be  expected to  produce effective and
desirable utilization of waste oils in the 70s.

Pickup by distributors of Virgin Oil
  The institutional problems envisioned  for  the hetero-
geneous pickup system noted above can be eliminated if the
oil distributor picks up the waste oil himself-sort of the
way the soda-pop  distributors do for empty returnable
bottles. This  method is also fraught with problems:
   1. It is  more costly.
  2. The  majors would have  to modify:
     a. Distribution and collection methods and equip-
        ment.
     b. Bulk storage facilities at local depots.
     c. Bulk shipment to refineries or burner installations.
     d. Proportional  distribution  for  refinery runs to
        handle the waste oils with virgin oil refining.
     e. Special runs or facilities  for handling this type of
        oil.
  The problems would be unique for the majors as waste
oils volumes  are relatively small when  compared with the
millions of gallons  put through a large refinery. Although
these problems can be solved  relatively easily, the total
problem of collection and disposal of waste oils would still
require  extensive institutional reforms  to resolve  such
questions  as the  fate  of oil received by  independents,
garages and terminals and the relationship  of sales of oil in
retail outlets that permit individual automobile owners to
service their  own cars. What do these fellows do with their
drainings?  Should these retail  outlets be permitted to sell
oil without accepting waste oils in return? Or should oil be
permitted to be  sold only by those who have  adequate
drainage and storage  facilities? Unless these other institu-
tional problems are resolved at the same time as oil pickup
is instituted in  all likelihood the oil problem will  still rank
high in pollution potential.

Rerefining of Waste Oils
   If for no other reason  than  it appears to be readily
attainable in a year or two, waste  oUs can and should be
"economically" rerefmed and recycled into the  competi-
tive  market place  to  be  reused  or  consumed in  an
acceptable manner. I believe we are part way  there, as
exhibited by our project in Bayonne, New Jersey, with the
National Oil Recovery Corporation (NORCO).

   In this concept, utilizing a vacuum distillation technique,
the grantee  has produced with relatively antiquated equip-
ment, marketable Number 2 and Number 4, sulfur-free and
metallic-free fuel oil.  The flow sheet, mass balance and cost
estimates are shown in Figure 2 and Table III.  The fuel oil
products  become dark  following exposure to light, and
exhibit  a floe plus a slight odor which precluded  its sale to
those outlets which also required the oil to be  esthetically
acceptable.

   Extensive investigations  to determine the source  of the
trouble indicated it to be:
     a.  Oxygenated hydrocarbons which are generated in
small percentages during fuel burning, and enter the engine
crankcase mainly as blowby past the pistons.
     b.  Nitrogen oxide in  blowby gases which  acts as a
catalyst in tar formation.
     c.  Additives that are compounded into the  motor oil
to inhibit the  formation of deposits during engine  opera-
tion.

   These additives appear to break down at temperatures of
about 700°F  and become the precursor of tarry deposits
during the distillation process.

   Double distillate runs and removal of the polymers and
metallics by   head-end treatment  processes  indicate an
enhancement of color and odor and a marked decrease in
the  light induced floe. Additional runs are proposed with
new modern critical equipment, plus modified flow sheets
to demonstrate  that used crankcase oils can be economi-
cally converted  to not only fuel oils, but also  to diesel oil
and as  metallic free chemical oil stocks for use in industry.

   Note that in the present mode of reprocessing the waste
oils, approximately 25 percent of the original charge is in
the  bottoms.  A customer of NORCO  has purchased the
bottoms, mixed  it at a high ratio of about 10-to-l and has,
in turn, sold it on a rotation system to a few customers who
have burning  equipment that have not  been noticeable
affected following some burning tests. The fuel oil vendor
indicated that because some of his customers' equipment
was detrimentally affected, he now maintains a strict log on

-------
96
          OIL SPILL PREVENTION
                    BAR CONO.
                                                                                         100  PSIG STEAM

                                                                                 BAR.OONQ.
       FLASH
       FURNACE
STORAGE
TANK I
r
   -LL
     t
            \
          •A
                                      VENT
                                       100 PSIG
                                       STEAM
                        VWC
                        FRACTKDNATOR
                        2T HG-MO°F
 FLASH
-TGWER
                                50»F -W>F
  CHARGE MOGPH
  OH., 1737GPH
  H2O.63GPH
           OIL-V^TER
           SEPERATORS
                         rf
                  NAPTHA 27GPH
                               i

\
1 -
K VY CUT
f
' S04GPH " J
                                            FRACTIONATOR
                                            OVERHEAD
                                            W2GPH
                                                    BOTTOMS
                                                    COOLER
                                                    396 GPH
                                                             648GPH
                                                  Figure 2
sales to all customers so each will not obtain more than one
or two loads of this mixture in five deliveries.

   Of the several methods proposed for handling waste oils,
I firmly believe that, only if a viable waste oil industry can
be  created,  one which is also compatible  with  environ-
mental requirements, will the waste oil problem be really
resolved.

CONCLUSIONS:
   The  fate of large  volumes  of waste oils cannot be
accounted for.  This waste product is potentially a great
source of pollution. Whereas the rerefining industry may
have, in the past, been able to handle the entire volume and
recycle this product for useful and safe consumption, the
combination of changes in the crankcase oil, economics of
handling and processing plus air, water  and solid  waste
management statutes  have  caused  the  capacity of the
industry  to suffer markedly. The volume of oils that can
                                      potentially  be released to the environment  can  become
                                      staggering and  can  become  one of  the  greatest water
                                      pollution and nuisance problems in the nation.

                                         It is important that this potential source of pollution be
                                      recognized  and  that both management  and technology
                                      changes be instituted to recycle this valuable resource.
                                      REFERENCES
                                         1.  American Petroleum Institute Final  Report  of the
                                      Task Force on Used Oil Disposal, May 1970.
                                         2.  Association of Petroleum Re-Refiners Letter Report,
                                      February 11,1970.
                                         3.  Natonal Oil Recovery Corporation Project No. 15080
                                      DBQ  Demonstration of the complete conversion of crank-
                                      case oil into useful products without producing Pollutant
                                      Materials, January 1971.

-------
                  PREVENTION  OF  MARINE  POLLUTION
                           THROUGH   UNDERSTANDING
                                              Paul M. Hammer
                                    Marine Advisory and Associated Services
ABSTRACT
  In order to  place new emphasis on marine pollution
prevention in the complex field of tanker operations, the
author developed, and is currently conducting, a Shipboard
Pollution  Control Indoctrination and  Training Program.
This program, presented on-board during passage, covers all
aspects  of ship  operations at sea and in port which have
pollution  potential.  Through  the  use  of movies,  slides,
formal and informal discussion  sessions the officers and
crew are given a better understanding of the economic, legal
and technical factors of marine pollution; good operating
practices are reviewed; the ship/terminal relationship  is
explored;  the policies and programs of management are
emphasized; personnel  are prepared for  more  effective
action should an incident occur; and the overall pollution
control posture of the vessel and  terminals is evaluated.
Meetings with management are held before and after the
shipboard  session as a result of which comprehensive
pollution control programs are instituted or updated based
to a great extent upon the feedback from the ships and
recommendations of the author.

  Based upon experiences with independent, oil company
and government contract tanker operators, and government
agencies functioning in the field, 1) details of the program
and its reception are reviewed, 2) observations are pre-
sented relative to conditions and particular problem areas
encountered, 3) suggestions for further concerted efforts in
the direction of pollution prevention are set forth and, 4)
farther desirable actions in the direction of education and
training are outlined.
INTRODUCTION
  There seems to be a feeling on the part of many in both
government  and industry  that marine  pollution  and its
control constitute new problem areas with histories devoid
of  concern, corrective work and progress. These same
people are  prone to offer partial, and often impractical,
solutions without recognizing the complexity of the field or
taking the  time  to determine what has gone before. The
progress they are in a position to bring about is therefore
limited and basic approaches to effective pollution control
are overlooked. My conviction that maximum utilization of
the most effective marine pollution prevention mechanism
available  to us—total involvement of a ship's officers and
crew—could bring about immediate and identifiable pollu-
tion reduction resulted in development of the  Shipboard
Pollution Control Indoctrination and  Training Program.
Ultimately, regardless of laws, regulations  and company
policies, it is those involved in daily activities on  board who
have  substantial  control  over management expenditures
attributable to pollution.  At the same time the  reputation
of the ship operator rests in the hands of the Master, his
officers and crew. History bears witness to the fact that this
is one of the "traditions of the sea" and always will be.
   Consider the Union Oil Tanker SANTA RITA which put
two fascinating records on the books in  1907—an unusual
cargo delivery for a tanker and one of the first recorded oil
pollution oriented casualties. In February of that year, after
being cleaned by steam injection, she delivered a cargo of
800 pianos to San Francisco. The next month she returned
to San  Francisco with a load of fuel  oil  (not further
identified but quite possibly kerosene) and large quantities
were discharged into the  Bay. The oil on the  water was
ignited  by a spark from a locomotive and the  flames
reached  the French vessel BEIELDIEU. Consider also the
following  1907 account from J.D. Henry's  "Thirty-Five
Years  of  Oil  Transport-the Evaluation  of  the  Tank
Steamer" which gives us one of the first recorded ballast
handling lashups along with a beautiful example of under-
statement.
                                                    97

-------
98  PREVENTION THROUGH UNDERSTANDING
   "There was a curious accident to one of the Pacific Oil
Traders a few months ago. While the vessel was off the
Coast the pumps were employed to clear some of her tanks
of water ballast, when, by an extraordinary mistake, they
started  to discharge large quantities of oil  cargo into the
sea."

   Hundreds of thousands of words have been written in
laws, regulations, company policies and procedures related
to ship-oriented oil pollution control alone since 1907. Yet
we  continue to  be  faced with  the  same operational
problems reflected by the above incidents. Definitive goals
have  been set toward international  total  prohibition  of
discharge of  oil  from any  vessel anywhere within this
decade. Pressures build daily toward  similar goals for  all
forms of ship generated refuse. Many of the current design
and  fitting-out approaches to overall pollution control are
appropriate   for new vessel buildings,  and  a  relatively
"pollution-proof ship-dry cargo, bulk,  tanker, or passen-
ger—is not difficult to envision. We will, however,  have
thousands of existing vessels with us for decades which
must be provided with alternative means for disposal of oily
ballast, bilge wastes, sanitary wastes, bunker/ballast double
bottom oily mixtures, garbage, trash and the like. Having in
mind limited means and capacities for handling shipboard
wastes on board, even through retrofitting with foreseeable
separators and treatment plants for example, there must be
a realization  that all types of existing vessels need in-port
support facilities if sea and navigable waters  pollution from
this  source is to be brought to the absolute minimum. Up
to this point ships have  been regarded as  totally  self-
sufficient with the  waters  of  the world serving as  their
waste  dumping grounds—and we  now know this cannot
continue. Each person in a position to do so  must use every
possible  political,  regulatory  and  administrative  means
available to promote  in-port provision and use  of waste
disposal facilities by both domestic and foreign flag vessels.

   In the interim and regardless of what future  tools are
provided on-board  and in-port  for pollution control the
men sailing  the ships must be brought to, and maintained
at, the maximum level of overall pollution control orienta-
tion. With this orientation shipboard personnel  are  in a
position to make, and have made, substantial contributions
in the way of ideas (particularly in relation to operations on
their individual vessel)  for implementing  or upgrading
managements pollution control programs. The result quite
often is considerable reduction of the pollution potential of
the vessel without great expenditures of money. This is one
of the major facets of the shipboard training program and
only results from "going to sea" with the ship.

   The decision to develop the Shipboard Pollution Control
Indoctrination and  Training Program was  made after a
thorough evaluation of current pollution control activities
and  attitudes here and abroad specifically as they relate to
ship operation. Discussions were held  with ship operators,
marine insurers and government agencies; Coast Guard and
other agency records of numerous pollution incidents were
 analyzed; present industry approaches were reviewed; and
 the moods of the Congress and the public were considered.

    The  results  of this evaluation  dramatically confirmed
 that the  operators  of  all types  of vessels,  and  most
 particularly tankers, were potentially faced with an un-
 precedented  number of  financial  and operational  diffi-
 culties  directly attributable to  pollution control attempts
 both domestically and internationally. A partial listing  of
 these  would include  intense  legislation and  regulation
 toward  vessel operational  controls with vastly increased
 fines for violations,  new  vessel design requirements, new
 in-port cargo handling controls, increased insurance  costs
 and out-of-line spill cleanup costs all entangled in a web  of
 interests  and jurisdications. It  was felt that the resultant
 impacts could be lessened and the total interests of ship
 operators  best  protected  through  prompt  institution  of
 their own progressive and knowledgeable programs toward
 effective  shipboard pollution control  and preparation for
 the future. The  focal  point  for  any  such programs  is
 obviously the vessel.  Only through  possession of a compre-
 hensive and proper knowledge of the total spectrum  of
 political, economic, safety  and  technical aspects of pollu-
 tion  can  shipboard  personnel become  dedicated to  its
 prevention  and  proper handling should an incident occur.
 In addition to the obvious economic benefits resulting from
 a  shipboard  educational  program it is  appropriate  to
 emphasize that  1) announcement of implementation of a
 practical and applied major step toward pollution control
 has great public relations value, 2) the courts and regulatory
 agencies are favorably disposed toward those who use every
 available approach, including out-of-house contract services,
 to  improve operations, 3)  training  intensifies  profession-
 alism and creates a feeling of responsibility, 4) the total
 shipboard  safety  posture  is enhanced, 5) all operations
 which create a pollution potential are brought into perspec-
 tive, 6) where pollution control instructions are in effect
 they are reinforced through integration with the on-board
 training program, 7) a solid foundation is established upon
 which management can plan and build an in-house pollu-
 tion control program if none now exists and, 8) the growing
concerns of organized labor over environmental matters are
recognized.

   Three  specific  phases comprise   the  program over an
approximate period  of  7-8 days.  First is  a one-day
preboarding  session with  management during which  the
following matters are considered relative to  the on-board
phase:

   —Review of the details  and philosophies of the ship-
     board presentations,
   -Tentative scheduling to include  all of the officers and
    as many crew members as possible having in mind
    union contract terms and the voyage work schedule, all
     to be finalized with the Master after boarding,
   —Discussion of existing  company policies and instruc-
     tions toward pollution control,

-------
                                                               PREVENTION THROUGH UNDERSTANDING   99
   -Discussion of, and suggestions on, management plans
    for the future relative to pollution control programs,

   -Discussion of the Final Report coverage,
   -Evaluation of the previous reports and  recommenda-
    tions,  and their  pertinency to  the current vessel, in
    those cases where other vessels  in the fleet have been
    involved.

   The second phase consists of spending the equivalent of
one leg of a coastwise or nearby foreign voyage aboard,
including observation of the loading  and discharging opera-
tions. For the purposes of the program either the loaded or
ballast leg is appropriate. On one hand, the loaded voyage is
the most relaxed; on the  other hand observation of tank
cleaning and related operations can  be of value providing
program  participation by the officers  and crew is  not
severely handicapped. In any case  the in-port stay and the
first day  at sea are  devoted  to observation, becoming
known, and laying  the  foundation for  the  subsequent
program. It is during this period that success of the formal
and informal sessions can be assured by overcoming the
normally suspicious nature of seamen.  When they find that
the "stranger" holds a current USCG  Mate's License, knows
tankers and their operation,  speaks  their language, has no
interest in evaluating individual performance, and knows his
subject,  discussion  and  progress across-the-board com-
mences.

   Six to eight hours (over a period  of 2-3 days) are spent
in  formal  sessions  with   all deck  and engine   officers.
Low-key  lectures,  movies,  slides  and  question/answer
periods are all utilized to upgrade  understanding of the
pollution  control  problem and delineate the part each
officer has  to play  toward  its solution  in his own best
interests and those of the  company.  The major headings of
subject matter covered during these sessions are set forth in
ANNEX A. However the extensive  material discussed under
each major item is continually revised  to reflect  current
developments, to incorporate individual management phi-
losophies and pollution control instructions, and to accom-
modate particular areas of interest shown by vessel person-
nel. It should be noted that approximately the first third of
the program  is devoted  to developing the background
understanding necessary for vessel personnel to realize the
importance  to both  themselves and management of the
practical aspects presented in the latter two-thirds. While all
aspects  of  oil pollution  receive  major  treatment other
pollution  sources  (hazardous  materials, sanitary  wastes,
trash and garbage, galley wastes,  and to some extent air
pollution) are covered in detail

   The approach during the two hours spent with the crew
(one or two evenings after supper) is  somewhat different.
Here the emphasis is on generating their concern, reviewing
their responsibilities  on deck and in the engine room,  and
emphasizing  the  necessity  for total  understanding  and
proficiency in their jobs. The interest in the program which
is represented by  the average 80% voluntary participation
by off-watch crew members  from  the three operating
departments is quite encouraging.

   Equally important is the time, averaging 15 hours, spent
in informal discussions with the  officers and crew. It is
during these sessions that much of the feedback so valuable
for effective implementation of management's policies and
procedures is gained, as are numerous practical suggestions
relative to the vessel and its operation. These discussion
periods are also used to obtain officer evaluation of the
feasibility of new concepts and procedures being considered
for fleet-wide application.  By design  much  of this discus-
sion is with the Master, Chief Mate and Chief Engineer-
those who set and  implement policy on board.

   The remainder of the time on board is spent in observing
all  aspects of the operation of the vessel. These observa-
tions, coupled with those  made in port, result in a good
picture of the overall pollution control posture of the vessel
and aid in highlighting  specific  design or procedure prob-
lems which may require attention by management.

   The third phase consists of development,  submission,
and review of a comprehensive  report covering the time on
board  for  consideration by management.  Included is an
evaluation  of the  effectiveness of the training program,
evaluation of current operating practices on board and in the
terminals visited, recommendations pertinent to such prac-
tices, suggestions  related to future pollution  control pro-
gram  needs, and  other matters which may be agreed to
during the preboarding session. Part of this report is an
eighty-item checklist which evaluates the pollution poten-
tial design and operational characteristics of the terminals,
the terminal/ship interrelationship, and the ship itself. The
end results of the evaluations and recommendations of
these reports  have been upgrading of existing pollution
control procedures  and  development  of extensive  new
programs for fleet-wide  application such as a total over-
board discharge  line valve  sealing concept. The Shipboard
Pollution  Control  Indoctrination  and Training Program
objectives  of 1)  bringing  about, through  training and
education  on  board,  an  immediate  reduction  of  the
potential for a vessel causing a pollution incident, 2) giving
management a knowledgeable understanding of the  effec-
tiveness  of their  current approaches, and  3) aiding in
development of effective new  approaches toward putting
the company and its ships in the best possible situation
have  been  proven  out  to both  management  and  the
shipboard personnel.
Observations:
   The  Shipboard  Pollution Control  Indoctrination and
Training Program has been conducted on a  total of ten
vessels operated by five  tanker companies (both indepen-
dent and integrated oil company operators) calling  at 18
petroleum terminals. Based on that involvement, the many
hours of related discussion with shipboard and management

-------
 100   OIL SPILL PREVENTION
personnel,  and  the  current situation  in the  maritime
pollution  control field the  following  observations  and
conclusions are  offered for  deliberate  consideration  by
those who have legitimate interest in the reduction of sea
and  navigable  waters pollution. Certainly exceptions to
each exist  but the intent is  to reflect general areas which
require broad-based consideration.

   -Officer and crew personnel are quite concerned over all
    aspects  of  marine pollution, particularly  as  their
    profession and jobs are affected. For this reason they
    welcome every new step taken by management toward
    giving them the  knowledge, tools and support neces-
    sary to  do the best possible job under the pressures
    they are now facing in U.S. and foreign ports.

   -Several trends that seem to be under way  reflect the
    possibility that the tanker industry may face a shortage
    of experienced and competent tanker  officers in a few
    years. Due to the increasing involvement of manage-
    ment, government and  unions with the ship and its
    operation (with the resultant pressures on the officers)
    the highly experienced and professional tankermen are
    abandoning ship as soon as their finances  and retire-
    ment programs will permit.  Concurrently, the general
    lack of programs toward assurance  of a secure career
    for junior  officers does nothing to  promote their
    interest in becoming proficient and dedicated tanker-
    men.  The  situation is further complicated by the
    number  of  relatively senior dry cargo ship officers
     taking  tanker jobs  without  an inclination toward
    gaining  proficiency.  The  increasing  complexity of
     tanker designs, cargos,  and operating conditions dic-
     tates that every possible step be taken toward promo-
     tion of the education, training, proficiency and reten-
     tion of tanker personnel.

   —There is  a great lack  of written  and audio-visual
     materials  appropriate and  specifically designed  for
     marine pollution control training and  education. Such
     materials,  properly  and  knowledgeably  developed,
     could make  a  substantial contribution  to pollution
     reduction.  Their use by maritime training schools
     (state, federal and union), management, and on board
     would result in a considerable raising of understanding
     and competency levels. Related to this is the difficult
     situation created by the  fact that experience in the
     complex concept  of safe  and efficient bulk liquid
     transfer and overall cargo handling operations can only
     be gained on an operational vessel since no shoreside
     training  facilities  exist.  Development  of  training/
     educational  materials and facilities with marine pollu-
     tion   control  orientation  by  the  ship/terminal/
     petroleum  industries  working  together with govern-
     ment support is worthy of careful consideration.

   —A major area of concern by ships' personnel, related to
     pollution control as well as  overall operational safety,
     is the great variance in design and operational charac-
     teristics of terminals, the apparent lack of concerted
     effort to bring terminals to a level of control parallel to
  that placed on the vessel and its personnel, and their
  interrelationship  and  joint responsibilities  with  ter-
  minal  personnel.  Quite often the ultimate result  is
  conflict not  in  the  best  interests  of  the ship or
  terminal. Resolution of this situation should be a high
  priority matter for those with a legitimate part to play.

—By their nature,  and as a result of past incidents, the
  so-called persistent oils have  received the bulk of oil
  pollution control attention.  However  the  impact of
  current legislative and regulatory controls on navigable
  waters emphasizes the fact that the operation of clean
  oil vessels, and  the  problems  encountered by their
  personnel, are equally as important. Further, an inport
  spill situation  involving clean products or hazardous
  materials,  regardless  of the source, can present diffi-
  culties  in excess of  these  encountered  with many
  persistent oils. The differentiation between oil pollu-
  tants, particularly in territorial waters, does nothing to
  promote overall pollution reduction.

 -Traditionally tankers and their personnel have been
  singled  out  for  special scorn in connection with oil
  pollution by those who do not grasp the total marine
  pollution situation. Perhaps  there is some foundation
  for this but if total dedication to pollution control is
  desired from tankermen immediate attention must be
  paid to all sources of oil pollution in the ports and on
  the seas of the world they share with others. Tankers,
  dry cargo and passenger vessels of U.S. and  foreign
  registry; naval  vessels;  tugs and  barges; shoreside
  facilities and other sources all contribute substantially
  to the total marine pollution problem. Unfortunately,
  tanker  operators and  personnel suffer under  another
  "tradition of the sea"—when oil appears on the water
  it is automatically assumed by enforcement personnel
  that a tanker was the source  and action is taken under
  that  assumption. It  is also traditional  that those
  involved with the  true source are quite  willing to
  perpetuate the "it must have been a tanker"  assump-
  tion. The defensive position this situation forces them
  into is  quite frustrating to tanker personnel and they
  anxiously await  evidence that sources of oil other than
  from tankers are being recognized and corrected.

 —The current trend  toward  uncoordinated and  con-
  flicting state, municipal and  other  local regulation of
  vessel  operation in  connection with  all  phases  of
  pollution control is  producing mass confusion and
  consternation on board the ships. Under the Constitu-
  tion the Federal Government preempts the control of
  interstate and foreign commerce, and in  fact specif-
  ically did so by  Presidential Order in connection with
  bringing tank vessel safety under control of the original
  Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation  in order
  to  resolve the intolerable situation created  by  con-
  flicting local  regulation.  The  same situation exists
  today  in  relation to pollution control,  and it is also
  becoming  intolerable.  The  inevitable  result  will  be
  costs   to  the ultimate consumer  far  beyond those
  necessary for effective pollution control. Development

-------
                                                         PREVENTION THROUGH UNDERSTANDING  101
and promulgation of a coordinated, comprehensive,
and effective set  of pollution control requirements
covering all  aspects of marine  operations  involving
interstate and international commerce appears manda-
tory,  and  should be  the  result  of  the  involved
industries  and  the  Federal  establishment working
cooperatively toward  a  common goal-Federal pre-
emption of the field! If this is not accomplished utter
chaos lies immediately ahead and attainable  pollution
control goals will never be achieved.
CONCLUSIONS:
   As has been proven  on board ship the most effective
approach to immediate  reduction of marine pollution is
upgrading of the  knowledge and  operating practices of
personnel directly involved  in activities having pollution
potential. Once this has been done institution of a knowl-
edgeable program to keep them  constantly  aware  and
informed will enable  them to effectively implement future
procedures, particularly if the operating personnel have had
the opportunity to provide practical inputs to management.
The alternatives,  pollution control by management  edict
and duplicatory government regulation, cannot succeed.
                        SHIPBOARD POLLUTION  CONTROL TRAINING PROGRAM
                        Subject Coverage Outline
                        Orientation to the Objectives of the Program
                        The Program Content and Approaches to Presentation
                        History of Pollution Control Activities Within the Federal Government
                        History of Pollution Control Activities Within the Shipping Industry
                        History of Pollution Control Activities at the International Level
                        Review of Pertinent Domestic Laws and Regulations
                        Review of Pertinent International Conventions
                        The Process of Development of Domestic Requirements
                        The Process of Development of International Requirements
                        Domestic Agencies, their Jurisdictions and Activities
                        International Agencies, their Jurisdictions and Activities
                        Legal and Financial Liabilities of the Officers and Crew
                        Responsibilities of Vessel Personnel to Management
                        Responsibilities of the Terminal Operator
                        Effects of Various Pollutants on Marine Environments
                        The Complex Relationships Between Pollution and Safety
                        Refinery Operations Related to Crude Processing
                        Physical and Chemical Aspects of Oil and Other Pollutants On and In Water
                        The Potential for Pollution from Routine Ship Operation
                        Potential Pollution Problems During Cargo Transfer
                        Potential Pollution Problems During Bunkering Operations
                        Operating Practices for Pollution Prevention
                        Maintenance as  a Pollution Control Practice
                        Tank Cleaning Procedures from the Viewpoint of Pollution Control
                        Ballast Handling from the Viewpoint of Pollution Control
                        Shoreside  Ballast/Slop Handling Facilities
                        Bilge Waste Handling Procedures
                        The Load-on-Top Approach to Crude Carriage
                        The Tanker Owners Voluntary Agreement on Liability for Oil Pollution
                           (TOVALOP) and Vessel Personnel Responsibilities Thereunder
                        Priority of Actions in Minor Spill Situations
                        Priority of Actions in Gross Spill Situations
                        Evaluation of the Seriousness of an Incident
                        Operation of the Federal Oil Spill Contingency Plan
                        On-Board Spill  Handling Techniques
                        Over-The-Side Spill Handling Techniques
                        The Lessons of History on Repeated Spill Causes
                        Current Status  of Technological Development Projects
                        Continuing Sources of Pollution Control Information
                        The Future Plans of Management Relative to Pollution Control
                        Reporting Requirements

-------
               DEVELOPMENT  OF TANK VESSEL OVERFILL
                                ALARM  INSTRUMENTS
                                            Donald J. Leonard
                                           Shell Development Co.
                                           Emeryville, California
 ABSTRACT

  At the API-FWPCA joint conference on prevention and
 control of oil spills held in New  York in  1969,  it was
 reported that two-thirds of the oil spill incidents each year
 occurred in port and harbor areas and were generated
 during routine petroleum transfer operations. Based on our
 investigations, the spills are generally the result of personnel
 errors and only rarely due to equipment failure.
  This paper describes the concept, development and
 initial trials of a number of devices made for Shell and used
 to prevent spills due to tank overfilling during tank vessel
 boding.  The instruments  are inserted into  the tanks
 though tank-top ullage holes.  They sound an alarm when
 product reaches a level where a spill is imminent, alerting
 crewmen and allowing them to take corrective action.
  Complete instrument  specifications are given as they
 were presented to companies working with Shell on the
 device development.
  The evaluation, shipping company and U.S. Coast Guard
 involvement and support, field testing of prototypes and
factors affecting Shell's device choice are described.
  Apparent favorable initial device  reception by the users,
ihip  crewmen and dock personnel (bearing  largely  on
instrument effectiveness) is described.
  A second phase effort is described which will accumulate
these alarms  and provide an automatic link to shore
facilities to shut down pumps or close  valves upon receipt
of an overfill alarm,


INTRODUCTION
  In a continuing effort to prevent oil spills in Shell marine
loading operations, a  project was begun to determine if
further means could be  devised to  prevent small spills of
this nature.
CONCEPT

   Our  investigations showed  that error on the  part of
personnel was the major source of spills with most of the
spill incidents resulting from tank overfilling. For many
reasons, personnel did not give enough attention to the
details of tank loading.  Adding to  the problem  are the
higher loading rates now encountered as compared to those
formerly used. Rates can reach 10,000, 20,000 bbl/hr and
sometimes, compartments can be filled  in less than  one
hour.
   Some of the problems encountered by shipboard people
can be illustrated by the following comments from reported
spills:
   ".	we filled that tank and was filling this one but the
valve  between them must have leaked so here the stuff
comes up out of the first tank. ... "
   "	he thought it was  only going  into  Number  1
Center but it was going into 1 Port too which is smaller and
he didn't check it	"
   " ....  we saw the tank start  to overflow but  the
wharfman couldn't stop his pumps in time	"
   Candid conversations with any tank vessel crewmen will
reveal similar stories and comments shared by  all  oil and
shipping companies.
   The major  problem for dock personnel is to  be  im-
mediately available when action is required to stop product
loading.  Lack  of rapid communication between ship and
shore at the time of emergency is a common problem. At
times the ship is not notified when flow rates change. In
addition, crewmen are reluctant to close shipboard valves
against the  on-shore pumping  pressure,  feeling  that a
broken hose  could cause a worse situation than a compart-
ment overflow.
   What  can be done to assist crewmen and wharfmen to
better control the loading operation?
                                                  103

-------
 104    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
   After much observation of loading operations on many
tankers  and  barges  of various shipping lines  and  oil
companies  and many long discussions with ships' crews,
officers  and  dock  people  it became  apparent  that  one
immediate solution for this type of spill would be some sort
of equipment which could be used in each tank being filled.
The  apparatus  would sound an alarm in order to alert
crewmen that a spill was  imminent (in the event that a
filling tank had been neglected or missed and product level
became  abnormally high) and that some action should be
taken to prevent it.


IMMEDIATE SOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT

   In other words,  what was required was a portable high
level alarm. Simple. As can be seen from the specifications
as they finally evolved, the requirements were anything but
simple (see appendix for complete specifications essentially
the same as were sent out  for quotation). There are many
subtle problem areas. The biggest problem and indeed still a
potential bottleneck is in the area of tank entry.
   Shell wanted a safe, lightweight, self-contained, reliable,
rugged instrument that  initially would be  stored on docks
to be carried aboard tank vessels. It would have the widest
application, that is, it would be usable on all varieties of
tankers and barges that visit Shell terminals as well as with
all of the normal refinery products.
   In March,  1970,  in conjunction  with  the visits to
tank  vessels  and  barges,  a  search  was  made of trade
literature to  try to find devices already  existing for this
application. None was found.
   Several companies, selected by various means (referrals,
trade journal ads, exhibits  at trade shows) were contacted
to  determine their interest in developing the  required
instrument. Concurrently, our own development of a device
was attempted  and several approaches rejected.  A foreign
company was discovered marketing  a unit that appeared
promising for alarming on overfilling tanks. The instrument
was  purchased  and examined and found  unsuitable for a
number of reasons.
   It  was soon felt that the satisfactory development  of a
suitable instrument would best be done by taking advantage
of  the  talents  of more  companies.  Since  no suitable
instrument  existed  and  progress seemed  slow, it  was
decided that a  description  of the instrument requirements
would be sent to a number of companies in order to  take
advantage  of many  diverse  technologies and  enable  a
selection to be made from many proposed solutions.
   In the evolution of the specifications, Keystone Shipping
Co., a barge line, the U.S. Coast Guard MMT  office and
various Shell departments were consulted and shown drafts
of  the  specifications  with requests  for comments  and
direction before the inquiries were released.
   The description that was developed (included here in its
entirety as an appendix) was sent in August, 1970, with
requests  for  quotation  reaching 170  companies selected
from industrial instruments and control, cryogenics, fluidic,
geophysical and oceanographic concerns.
   A total of 111 companies responded. Of this 111, 34
submitted  preliminary  proposals of  which  16 appeared
reasonable.
   In the end, seven companies supplied prototypes for
evaluation. As hoped, they offered widely varying solutions
to  the  many subtle problems.  As  some devices are  still
under development by a number of companies, only very
general  descriptions will be given here in order to preserve
proprietary information.
   Two are  powered by  wind-up spring motors. This  is
really the ideal energy source with respect to replenishment
because the  recharging mechanism  is walking around the
ship in  the form of a crewman. The  major drawback for
these units turned out to be the sound level available. It was
judged  to be insufficient for large tankers but perfectly
adequate for barges or smaller vessels.
   Three are  gas powered. CO2 was finally selected as the
best gas (superior to freon for this application)  because of
its  availability  (even small towns have a fire extinguisher
recharging concern), it  retains usable pressure over wider
temperature  ranges than  most  freons, and  its "expand-
ability" (here defined as the volume  of gas available at
ambient conditions from  a  given volume of the liquefied
gas) was satisfactory  as was the sound production of all
CO   devices.  Also,  all  handling  and storage  of C02
cylinders and instruments can take place in any hazardous
area.
   Two are battery powered. Both are intrinsically safe but
a safe area must be provided for their recharging. These
turned out to be the units lightest in weight but provided
lower sound output than the gas operated devices.
   All but one of the  prototypes made use of the tank
entry technique of passing  a small  tubing or cable under
existing fire screens.

TANK ENTRY

   How to enter a tank and do it safely?
   The  most  direct way,  keeping the concept  of a light-
weight,  portable instrument is to insert a probe of some
sort into the  tank through an existing opening - namely the
ullage hole. (A sketch of a typical tanker tank top showing
the ullage hole is included in the appendix for reference.)
This must be  done so as to disturb the integrity of the fire
screen as little as possible. Many fire screens were seen to fit
quite loosely  in their ullage holes so that a tubing or cable
no more than 1/8" in diameter could pass under the screen
and  into  the compartment without interfering with  the
operation  of the  fire  screen. The  San Francisco USCG
office agreed, at least for purposes of the proposed field
tests of prototype devices under adequate supervision.
   Present USCG  regulations concerning ullage  fire screen
operation are contained in 46 CFR 38.30-10 in "Rules and
Regulations  for Tank  Vessels", Subchapter D-CG  123,
which is given here.
   "38.30-10  Cargo tank hatches, ullage holes, and Butter-
worth plates-TB/ALL. No cargo tank hatches, ullage holes, or
Butterworth plates shall be opened or shall  remain open
without flame  screens  except under supervision  of  the

-------
                                                                       OVERFILL ALARM INSTRUMENTS    1Q5
 senior  members  of the crew on  duty, unless the tank
 opened is gas free."
   An  alternate  means  of  tank  entry  for  a  portable
 instrument is  the "universal fire screen" approach. In this
 technique, the existing fire screen  is completely  removed
 and another is put in its place. The new screen will be
 equipped to pass a probe  into the  tank while maintaining
 screen  integrity.  The  approach has  generated  handling
 problems, a potentially cumbersome device and one that
 may interfere with normal tank gauging operations.
   Another solution is, of course, to modify the ship itself,
 installing permanent  fittings, remote tank level measure-
 ment devices or even entire instruments somewhere in the
 compartments. It was felt that to modify all vessels would
 be a major, costly  effort involving extensive development
 and long lead times.  The portable alarm development was
 undertaken  to provide  a universal instrument which could
 be used immediately and which would reduce the number
 of spills at least until a major effort could be defined and
 gotten under way.

 FIELD TESTING

   Field testing of prototypes consisted solely of exposing
 instruments  to handling by the people who would be using
 them - namely ships' crewmen and dock personnel.
   After receipt of the prototype instruments,  an energy
 analysis was made of each electrically powered unit  to
 ensure  that  they  were  intrinsically safe. Once this was
 established and the devices were felt structurally suitable
 (Le., able to withstand the abuse to which they would  be
 subjected) they all were taken to the San Francisco USCG
 MMT office  for their inspection  and approval. The officers
 verified the safety of the instruments and provided a letter
 so stating, authorizing Shell to use a particular device for a
 certain  period  of time (months) as an experiment. The
 devices  were  then  demonstrated to Port  Security-Dock
 Patrol personnel -  those who would encounter the instru-
 ments during the normal course of their duties.
  Then the instruments were  taken  aboard vessels, ex-
 plained  and demonstrated  to   the  ships'  officers and
 crewmen. The sensors were immersed in product and the
 devices  produced sound to everyone's satisfaction. Crew-
 men handled  the  units and  offered their very valuable
 comments regarding  device handling  characteristics and
 improvements.  These  suggestions  were  relayed  to the
 instrument manufacturers in order to develop more usable
 devices.
  Keystone Shipping Co. kindly offered much encourage-
 ment plus the  use  of their  vessels and facilities for the
 development effort. The cooperation of their management,
 ships' officers and crew play a major part in the progress of
 the project.

RECEPTION

  In general, the reception given the prototype devices by
shipboard people has  been  extremely  favorable  and no
acceptance problem is anticipated.  The view seems to be
that the instruments present a means to assist the crewman
in his job as well as reduce the potential for costly fines and
delays.  In fact, the concept of the instrument has generated
enthusiasm wherever it has been aired.
   There is an initial fear that crewmen will learn to depend
upon the alarms to make  their jobs easier, relaxing until
they hear an alarm, finding the alarming tank and servicing
it.  After demonstrating  the  sound volume of the  instru-
ments,  it is generally  agreed that the fact that the alarm
indicates a possible error would preclude its use as a routine
signal.
SELECTION

   Two instruments were selected for further investigation
by Shell. One is  the  "Metralert" from Metritape Inc. of
Concord, Massachusetts (battery powered) and the other is
the  "Polluta-Hooter"  by  Cryogenic  Research  Co.  Inc.,
Boulder, Colorado (CO2  powered). At this time, both meet
most of the requirements (weight, ease of handling, sound
level, etc.) better than others. Some  manufacturers are still
continuing development so  others  may turn  out to be
superior in the future.
   For  the present, these  two  are  acceptable and are
farthest along in their development. The reason two  were
selected  is since one is battery powered and the other is
CO2 powered, we can offer acceptable alternatives to users
where construction of special facilities, ease of handling, or
as yet  unknown  local factors become important.  Both
companies are aware of the potential for further modifica-
tion of their devices as a result of some as yet undefined
requirements.  The sensors for both  enter the  tank by
passing a small tubing for the "Polluta-Hooter" and a small
cable for the "Metralert" under the ship's fire screens.
   At this  writing, Shell is planning to purchase quantities
of each instrument for more intensive trials. The trials will
demonstrate instrument  use and recharging patterns that
will  evolve and  may uncover possible jurisdictional  or
manning problems. As has been done since the inception of
the project, we will continue to work closely with the Coast
Guard (or other  agencies that may   become involved),
shipping companies  and barge lines in order to develop
mutually acceptable  instruments. Although the two devices
are usable  at present,  there are areas that will be revealed
only  by use  that  are  worthy  of  further improvement in
order to produce  a sturdier, lighter, more easily  handled,
etc., instrument. This could be considered the final proto-
type stage  for the  instruments. As presently visualized, the
trials will  involve realistic handling of devices by wharf
personnel and crewmen, with the wharf persons accounting
for  the  instruments,  maintaining  them  and  providing
introduction  and  initial  simple use  training  to  incoming
tanker crews and bargemen.
   An observer will be on hand to   record comments,
reactions  and  problems  and to provide training, backup
support and encouragement to the wharfmen. He will also
define and relay directions  for improvements to the device
manufacturer.

-------
106    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
   When this phase is complete, there will be available two
high quality instruments that  Shell or anyone else can
purchase with confidence.

CONTINUATION

   It is proposed that the next phase be an investigation of
ways  to accumulate the alarm signals from  each instru-
ement in use on the  tank vessel to provide a signal to shore
facilities in  order to automatically shut down the loading
operation upon receipt of an alarm.
   Present philosophy is that after an overfill  alarm begins
to sound and does so continuously for, say, 30 seconds, a
crewman must service the alarming tank by shutting off the
instrument (which means that he must be at the tank and
so available  in most cases to divert product flow somewhere
else), or the entire  loading operation is shut down  auto-
matically. Insertion  into each instrument of  a  small, low
power telemetry transmitter with a receiver either on the
dock or hanging on the ship's rail is one way to accomplish
this.
   One  common aspect  of the evolution of  these instru-
ments is the enthusiasm and support offered by everyone
involved. The feeling most prevalent seemed  to be one of
relief to the extent that something specific was being done
to help  prevent spills. At  the very least,  the project has
generated activity and interest  in a problem area and it is
believed that any attention focused on cures  for this type
of problem can only result in a  reduction of accidental
spills encountered in  marine operations.
     MATERIAL  IS
     ALUMIHUM,  IROU
      OK  sreet.
                                       HATCH  COVER
                                        ULLAGE HOLE
                                          FIK£ SCREEN
                                         RIHG. - FIKE
                                         SCREEN KKTS
                                         ON THIS RIUG
                                            TRUHK
                        (TAUK)
                                             DECK
Figure  1: Typical Tank Top Cross Section Type 'T2" Tankers
Showing Ullage Hole and Fire Screen Location.
 APPENDIX

 Request for Quotation on Overflow Alarm Device


GENERAL

   This inquiry describes requirements for portable instru-
ments to be used on board tank vessels (tankers, barges) to
give an indication of imminent tank overfilling (high level)
in order to prevent spillage of products into waterways. The
instruments will be used on the decks of the vessels and will
sound an audible alarm (they may provide a visual signal as
well, such as a flag or light) which will alert ships crew and
dock personnel to take appropriate action to avoid a spill.
   Readout or measurement of absolute  tank level is NOT
required.
   There should be  a single instrument type to cover  all
applications.
   The instruments will be stored on docks and possibly
also on board tank vessels. They will be used  at any time,
day or night. They must be self-contained, that is, requiring
no  external  power supply  connection, they  must  be
lightweight, easy to carry about and handle,  and ultra-
reliable.
   The audio signal should be loud and distinctive in order
to be heard in conditions of high  ambient noise (storms)
and over distances of 500 feet.
   The devices  should be  able  to operate in ambient
temperature  conditions  of -20°F  to  140°F  and  the
environmental  conditions associated  with  a  corrosive
marine  atmosphere. They should be  able to  withstand
anticipated rough handling, such as repeated dropping from
a 4-foot height.
   The instruments may be powered electrically, pneumati-
cally, mechanically, or combinations of any energy source.
The  energy  source must be  easily replaceable  and/or
rechargeable  with a minimum of  special  equipment  or
handling required. It must be easy to test the status (charge,
pressure, etc.) of the energy source. Some means to test the
operation of the entire instrument is required. This should
test as much of the instruments' operation as possible.
   The device  should operate for at least 12 hours without
depletion of any of the  energy sources and at the end of
that time be able to sound its alarm for at least one minute.

SAFETY

   An absolute requirement is the safety of the device. The
location  of use  is considered Class  I, Division I, Group D
(Pentane  Group). The  instruments may or  may  not  be
stored in  a safe area.  The equipment, if  electrical  or
electronic, must be  shown to be intrinsically safe by the
manufacturer  by presentation to Shell Development of a
detailed energy balance statement with schematic and parts
list,  etc.,  demonstrating  conformance  to ISA Recom-
mended  Practice  12.2  for intrinsically safe equipment.
 Explosion proof equipment  is also acceptable and must
 conform to National Electrical Code Chapter  5 for Class I,

-------
                                                                       OVERFILL ALARM INSTRUMENTS    107
 Division I, Group  D  locations,  although it is  felt that
 explosion proof equipment may be prohibitively heavy.
   Products to be loaded into tank vessels are any standard
 petroleum  refinery  product from  gasoline through cat
 cracker feed stock, bunker fuel, crude oil, to asphalt at over
 300° F. Densities will  be  from approximately 0.75 to 1.
 Service is often dirty so the instrument should be easy to
 dean and maintain.
 SENSOR

   The sensor, or that portion of the instrument which will
 be inside  the  tank  must  be  capable  of  withstanding
 operational  temperatures to  350° F.  It  must  function
 without becoming  clogged as could happen with repeated
 immersions in asphalt. Size  should be small so  as not  to
 interfere  with normal  tank  gauging operations. Pressures
 inside the tank during normal filling operations may be 1  to
 2 inches of water or less. The device should be able to sense
 product level 10 feet below the lip of the ullage hole (see
 sketch).
   Limited use of the instrument is anticipated for loading
 of bunker fuel into cargo ships. This would require a sensor
 capable of sensing fuel  levels to 50 feet below the edge" of a
 small (6 inch diameter) ullage pipe. Temporary replacement
 of the normally-used sensor portion of the instrument with
 a longer one for this purpose  is acceptable.
   Since  tank  filling  rates  will  vary, some degree  of
 adjustability is  desired. This could  be accomplished by
 simply coiling a tube  or cable (or providing a slippable
 hangar) in order to vertically position a sensing element.
 Where possible,  distances in feet from the end of the sensor
 should be marked  on the tube or cable. This is especially
 important for the bunkering operation.
   For protection against  dangerous static discharges, there
 must be no unearthed  conductors placed inside  the  tank.
 Proposed instruments with metallic sensors must provide a
 positive means for  grounding the instrument,  possibly by
 way  of a substantial  cable and large  clip  for  external
 connection  to ships' structure. There  should be no sharp
 points present on the conductive sensor.
   [Later it was decided to insist that no exposed metallic
 objects be placed inside the tank.]
   Insulators and insulating material placed  inside the tank
 present no problem.
TANK ENTRY FOR LEVEL SENSING DEVICES

  Although  the  audible sounding mechanism and power
supply may  rest outside  the  tank, some  portion of the
device, the  sensor,  will probably  be placed temporarily
inside  the tank.  Two  methods  of tank entry have  been
approved for trial purposes by the local U.S. Coast Guard.
Both methods require  operation around a "fire screen" or
"ullage screen." The enclosed sketch shows some details of
the access area around a typical tanker tank top.
Fire Screen

   A fire screen is a removable structure, 6,8, 10 inches in
diameter (these dimensions  are valid for  most American
tank vessels, although there are many different sizes and
shapes, i.e., unusual dimensions on foreign vessels, and on
some barges seen  on the Mississippi  River, the removable
fire  screen  is square and  the ullage  hole  is oval  shaped).
There is a  screen associated with each on-board tank to
provide a place for the crew to check  tank ullage. They also
allow safe venting of vapors as the tank is being filled.
   The screens usually rest horizontally on a ring mounted
inside the ullage hole (a section of pipe) and approximately
3/4  to 2-1/2 inches down from the top of the ullage hole.
They are made of brass, aluminum,  or stainless steel and
weigh between one-half pound and six pounds. The screen
portion is at least 30 X 30 mesh. The  screen must remain in
place at  all  times while loading and unloading cargo except
when removed by a crew member for tank gauging.
   One approved method of tank entry involves removing
the existing fire screen and replacing it with a "universal"
screen which would  cover all sizes  of ullage holes. This
screen would fit OVER the ullage hole and be at least 10
inches in diameter to cover all smaller size ullage holes.
Special penetration of the "universal" screen by the sensor
could be accomplished to maintain the integrity of the fire
screen mesh.
   The  variable structure  (typical of that shown in the
sketch)  around  the  ullage  hole makes   this approach
difficult. It can be seen that the hinges for the ullage cover
would interfere with a larger size  screen being placed over
the hole. A staggered or stepped screen may work, however.
   The Mississippi River barges, with their square fire screen
and  oval ullage hole, further add  to  the difficulties of the
"universal" screen  approach. Other barges are fitted with an
ullage hole which is  a 41-inch high,  6-inch diameter pipe
mounted on the deck, with no surrounding structure at all.
   The other approved method  for tank entry is to retain
the original screen but slip a tube or cable under the edge of
the screen slightly cocking it. The  screens do not fit tightly
in the holes. The tube or cable should be 1/8 inch diameter
and  there should probably be some  means to support the
tube from the ullage hole lip.
   It may be possible to devise some means  to couple a high
tank level signal through the fire  screen (magnetic, sonic,
electronic) which would  eliminate  the problems of  a special
screen or tank access around the screen.
   During tank filling operations on those vessels having no
automatic  tapes or  other  tank  gauging equipment,  the
crewman checks tank ullage by lifting the fire screen and
looking into the tank sometimes lowering a float on the end
of a metal  tape to gauge depth of product in the tank. The
fire  screen  is replaced  in  the ullage  hole  after gauging is
complete.
   It is conceivable that the fire screen could be dropped or
jammed  against the  tube or cable entering the tank from
the alarm  device,  crushing,  shorting  or severing it. Some
form of protection should be employed to prevent this or
at least to detect the presence of faults of this nature.

-------
108     OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
   There should be nothing placed inside the tank which
will be used as a sensor that will float freely under normal
conditions because there are ship  structural members and
ladders in the ullage hole area, and  the device when floating
could become entangled and lost.

Operation
   At present, the general  conception of operation of the
alarm instrument is that dock personnel or ships crewmen
will carry on  board as many instruments as there will be
tanks being filled (say 10,  although many tankers have 30
or more tanks which could conceivably be filling at one
time). The instruments will be positioned near each ullage
hole on the hatch  cover or possibly hung on the lip of the
ullage hole (attractive for barges with their 41-inch ullage
pipe). The sensing element will be passed into the tank, and
the fire screen will be replaced. Then the instrument will be
turned on, tested  for operation, and left alone. Crewmen
will  supposedly be checking tank ullage in the normal
fashion which will not disturb the alarm. The device should
be removed before the  final supervised topping off of the
tank takes place. It will probably be put aside to later be
used in another tank or to be picked  up and taken ashore
for storage. However, the sensor will many times remain in
the tank  until rising product level activates or covers  it.
Only then will it be removed.

Tests
   On  board  tests of instrument prototypes or finished
instruments will determine actual use patterns and demon-
strate  instrument  sturdiness. Prototypes  must  meet  all
applicable final safety requirements and should be mechani-
cally able  to  withstand the abuse to which they will  be
subjected.
   At least one prototype  instrument is required although
more than one will offer a better test.
   Preliminary designs may be submitted to Shell Develop-
ment for discussion and clarification and should be received
not later than 30 days after receipt of this request. Upon
mutual approval  of a preliminary design, a  final design,
specifications, and prototype instrument should be received
within 60  days.  This  includes any energy balance state-
ments for proof of device safety.
   After Shell Development has been shown that the device
meets  all requirements, we will submit all documentation
and equipment to  the local U.S. Coast  Guard office for
their  approval to conduct on-board trials at a Shell dock.
We will witness  the tests and report the results to the
manufacturer. The U.S. Coast Guard will be kept continu-
ally aware  of progress and problems and indeed may also
wish to observe.
   Representatives of  the appropriate  shipping and barge
companies  have agreed to the use of their vessels for  these
tests and are quite interested in the project.
   Shell  Development will  evaluate all  instruments  sub-
mitted and recommend purchase of the instrument which
best meets  the requirements as outlined in this note.
   It is expected thai other oil and transport companies will
be  interested in  equipment  of this  nature for similar
applications which will considerably  broaden the market
beyond Shell's requirement.
   This note  is  meant merely  to provide  very  general
constraints in the interest of saving time  and should in no
way' limit  the ingenuity or  special skills  of any manufac-
turer.
   Applicable USCG publications are:
   "Rules and Regulations for Tank Vessels", subchapter
D, CGI 23.
   "Electrical Engineering Regulations",  subchapter J. CG
259 (see Section 111.60 and Section 111.65)
   To  request the  Coast  Guard  publications, contact
Officer-in-Charge, Marine Inspection,  U.S.  Coast Guard,
local office.
   The ISA publication on  intrinsically safe  equipment is
RP 12.2, "Intrinsically Safe and Non-Incendive Electrical
Instruments." ISA, 400 Stanwix  Street,  Pittsburgh, Penn-
sylvania 15222.

-------
              USE  OF A  GRAVITY  TYPE  OIL SEPARATOR
                             FOR TANKER  OPERATIONS
                                              W. H. Lockwood
                                       Cities Service Tankers Corporation
                                                R. O. Norris
                                 Research Division, Cities Service Oil Company
ABSTRACT

    The need to control the oil content in ballast and tank
cleaning discharges to meet increasingly stringent seawater
pollution standards has led to the development of a gravity
type separator capable of handling up to 300 tons/hour of
city ballast water. When properly handled these separators
enable the tanker operator to clean tanks and process oily
ballast with an oil content of up to 100% without fear of
contamination of the seas.  This continuous and automatic
operation  is  unaffected  by normal movements.  The re-
covered oil is available for burning as fuel aboard ship,
"load-on-top "or disposal ashore.
    Separators  of this type have  been  in  use on  three
70,000 DWT  ships, for periods of one to three years. On
typical voyages a ship  of this size can recover enough slop
oU to provide one day or  more of bunkers if the ship is
equipped  to  bum  the recovered oil.  The  ship's crew is
trained to carry out analysis of the oil to determine if the
oil can be burned onboard immediately following separa-
tion or must be treated to drop out salt and/or water prior
to burning. Several typical ballast voyages using the separa-
tor  will be discussed.  The overboard discharge of water
from the separator is analyzed to assure compliance  with
current pollution regulations and a means to shunt the over-
board discharge into a holding tank is employed if the oil
content is too high. Limitations and possible improvements
of this type of separator will also be presented.

    In  May,  1967 the  1962 Amendments to the 1954
International  Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of
the  Sea by Oil  came into force. One of these amendments
prohibits all ships of 20,000 DWT and over, for which the
building contract is entered into on or after May,  1967,
from discharging oil or an oily mixture, defined  as water
with an oil content equal to or greater than 100 parts in
one million parts of the mixture, in designated areas of the
world.

    The IMCO Subcommittee on Marine Pollution met in
December,  1968  to consider, among other things, possible
changes to the International Convention for the Prevention
of the Pollution of the Sea by Oil, 1954 as amended.
    An amendment to Article III of 1954 is to substitute
the following: Subject to the provisions of Articles IV and
V; The discharge from a tanker  to which the present con-
vention applies, of oil  or oily mixture  shall be prohibited
except when —
    1. The tanker is proceeding en route and is more than
50 miles from the  nearest land, the instantaneous rate of
discharge of oil content from cargo carrying spaces does not
exceed 60  litres per mile and  the total quantity  of oil
discharged on a ballast voyage does not exceed 1/15,000 of
the total cargo carrying capacity.
    2. The discharge consists of ballast from a  tank which
has been effectively cleaned since cargo was last carried
therein.
    These rulings are very stringent ones and have set the
major oil companies searching for an efficient and practical
oily  water  separator to  supplement the widely practiced
policy of "load-on-top".
    "Load-on-top" was pioneered  by the  major oil com-
panies  and  consists of collecting all tank washings and oil
contaminated ballast drainings in a final slop tank. A period
of time is allowed  for the water and oil to separate, then
the relatively clean water is pumped to the sea until the
interface is reached. The residual  oil,  though  it contains
high percentages  of water, is retained, and the  next cargo
loaded on top of it. This method has prevented gross pollu-
                                                     109

-------
 110   OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
tion by crude oil carriers. There is still a chance that as the
interface in the slop tank is neared, a certain amount of oil
is liable to be carried over  in the discharge of the settled
water. This possibility has led  our company to study and
test other means to prevent oily water discharge.
    Past experience with gravitational methods of separa-
tion has indicated that good separation so as to meet the
present IMCO standard of 100 p.p.m. or any new amend-
ments will be most difficult. InTables 1 through 5 we show
the  conditions  and factors that  led  us to  feel  that  the
"load-on-top" method of pollution control is not as effec-
tive  as is desirable. These figures indicate  that even with
good weather,  an  excessive amount of  oily water  exists
below the interface and is difficult  to remove by normal
gravitational separation. Table 1 shows the analysis of dirty
ballast water under adverse weather conditions  during  a
twenty-day ballast leg. Table 2 shows the analysis of dirty
ballast on a smooth voyage and indicates the amount of oil
in the water  after five days of settling. The samples were
taken over a five hour period after the start of gravitation
into another  tank. There were 1500 barrels of oil and water
left in the tank at the point where the  analysis showed 500
p.p jn. oil in water.
     As an  example of the quantity of oil and water dealt
with during ballast  and cleaning operations Table 3 shows a
typical ballast voyage with  the quantities of ballast, wash
water  and oil involved. A total of 136,000 barrels of oily
water was handled by the ship.
    Tanks that were prepared for clean ballast were washed
and  stripped into a holding tank  where the mixture was
allowed to settle for 48 to 72 hours before being pumped
overboard. Table 5 shows the oil content of the water dis-
charged overboard  over a period  of seven days. Several
analyses were taken during each period of  discharge, the
overall average being 550 p.p.m. of oil.
    From the  data  gathered  the  load-on-top method of
pollution  control during tank  washing appeared to be un-
satisfactory. Therefore, an extensive survey was made of all
known means of separating oil and  water. The  methods
most widely used were those employing mechanical means
of oil and water separation and the search was concentrated
in this area. The required  separator  had to meet certain
criteria such as:
     1. Reasonable size and weight
    2. Construction for marine use
    3. Automation and ease of operation
    4. Throughput of approx.  2,500 bbls/hour
    5. Oil content in discharge less than 100 p.p.m.
    6. Ease of sludge removal
    In general there  were three types of mechanical separa-
tors investigated.

Coalescer or Coagulation Separators
     These are  very  high  performance type  of units that
have been successfully used in lube oils and jet type fuels
Days of
Treatment
1
3
4
5
8
9
10
11
14
15
17
20
No. IIP Center
1000+
1000+
Oil layer
Oil layer
Oil layer
1000+
3000+
Oil layer
Oil layer
3000+
3000+
1000+
No. US Center
1000+
1000+
Oil layer
Oil layer
Oil layer
1000+
3000+
Oil layer
Oil layer
3000+
3000+
1000+
Sample Depth
1 meter
1 meter
1 meter
1 & 2 meters
1 meter
1 meter
1 meter
1 meter
1 meter
1 meter
1 meter
1 meter
Remarks
No. IIS oil layer
Ship is rolling
Ship rolling
Ship less rolling


Ship is rolling again
Ship rolling




                              Table 1:    Analy sis of Ballast Water - PPM of Crude Oil in Ballast
                                         Water
     Overboard discharge of "clean" ballast water after set-
 tling for seven days is shown in Table 4. It should be point-
 ed out, that following standard procedures, all pipelines and
 pumps had been  stripped free  of oil prior to overboard
 discharge of any water.
for removing water  and other contaminants. It is  very
doubtful if a coalescer could handle a heavy oil mixture
(the heavy emulsion  between the  oil and water interface)
without becoming clogged with sand and scale emulsions or
passing the oil through; there is also the problem of clean-
ing the coalescing medium.

-------
                                                                          GRAVITY TYPE OIL SEPARATOR    111
TIME OP





* Time
tank
SAMPLE *
1/2
1
2
3
4
(hours) Pit. COMTEMT fppTr.)
500
100
100
100
200
5 500 (10 foot level)
after start of gravitation to another
following
a settling period of 5 days
                                                            gravity  type of  separator using any of  the  above types
 Table 2: Analysis of Dirty Ballast - Normal Trip - 5 Days  Settling
HO. OF TANKS
33
K>. Of TANKS
6
TOTAL VOLUME OF
WATER & OIL (BBLS.)
40.000
DIR1Y BALLAST WATER
TOTAL VOLUME OF
DIRTY BALLAST (BBLS.)
96.000
VOLUME OF WATER &
OIL AFTER STRIPPING
9.000
VOLUME OF WATER &
OIL AFTER DISCHARGE
OF CLEAN WATER
6.000
 Table 3:    Tank Cleaning Operations
  TIME FROM START OF
   DISCHARGE (HOURS)
        0.1

        0.5

        1.0

        1.5

        2.0

        2.5

        3.0

        3.5

        4.0

        5.0

        6.0
OIL CONTENT, ppm *


      800

      500

      100

      100

      200

      200

      300

      400

      500

      800

     1000 (tank at 3 ft.
             level)
   All samples of water were taken from a slip stream
   rigged from the six-inch discharge valve on the
   starboard side of the ship;  a small 1/2" valve was
   placed in the flange plate of the discharge line
   for sampling.
        Table 4:    Oil Content During Discharge


Flotation and Flocculation Type
    The flotation type of separator  injects air bubbles to
separate the mixture, which would only increase the emul-
sion problems in an oil and water separation.
    The flocculation  injects  a  chemical  compound  for
separation  of materials. These systems are ideal for ore re-
fining techniques.

Gravity Type Separators
    This type of separator is ideal as it meets most of the
criteria set up by our studies and others. We eliminated any
DATE
11/27/66
11/28/66
11/29/66
11/30/66
12/1/66
12/2/66
12/3/66
DEPTH OF WATER OIL CONTENT
DISCHARGED * »ur= - oPH
6
14
17
14
26
20
10
* "Depth of water
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
discharged" means
300
500
400
500
500
750
900
the amount of water removed from

the tank.


          Table 5:     Oil Content During Settling
     Those operating under vacuum or pressure or involving
 electrical voltages were also discarded by our work. Centri-
 fugal separators were also eliminated as some of the  crude
 oil emulsions were impossible to break in laboratory centri-
 fuges.
     These are several manufacturers of gravity type separa-
 tors both in continental Europe, Asia and the U.S.A. It is
 not the object of this paper to discriminate between  the
 various types of gravity separators. In most cases the design
 is somewhat different but  the basic  principle  is the  same,
 i.e., a large surface area is needed to separate the oil from
 the water and the natural buoyancy of oil in water tends to
 aid the separation.
     The performance of the separator depends in large part
 upon such factors as the  oil content at the inlet, the roll of
 the ship, water temperature, type of oil, piping arrange-
 ment, slope of the separator, and the history of the oil to
 be  separated; i.e., the number of times, and when the oil
 passed through the pump  system.
     We decided  to use the SEREP  separator  which was
 developed by P.   Cheysson, the Director of the Sometran
 research and tank-cleaning  installation in LeHavre, France
 and has been developed over the last ten years. The name
 SEREP is derived from the words "Societe d'Etudes  et de
 Realisations d'Equipements Petroliers".
     In 1967,  Butterworth System, Inc.  bought the patent
 rights of  the  SEREP separator, and it  is now marketed
 under  the name Butterworth outside  continental  Europe.
We have installed and operated three SEREP T-24 Separa-
 tors, rated at 250 tons per hour.
    These separators were installed on three 70,000 DWT
company  tankers, the S.S."W. ALTON  JONES" in 1967,
the S.S."BURL S. WATSON" in  1968 and the  S.S."J. ED.
WARREN" in 1969.
    The installation and piping were carried out as recom-
mended by the  specification and guidance drawings  to
insure that the separator  was placed so that the oil outlet
was in a  fore  and aft  line leading forward, utilizing the
normal stern trim of the ship to  aid in  oil recovery. The
recovered  oil outlet line was installed as vertically as possi-

-------
 •112  OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
ble from the separator to our slop oil tank, thus minimizing
any lengths of horizontal piping.
    The separator was placed at the after end of the main
deck on the port side just aft of the last port center tank.
The ship has a slop oil tank located in 13 port center and
the relationship of the separator and slop oil tank is shown
in Figure 1.
    The separator used on these 70,000 DWT tankers is the
SEREP T-24 and has the following dimensions:
                                                                                     OKICT MCOVERV
                           VENT-
                                         r«- INLET
                                          wCLEAN  WATER
     DROP  LINE
      TO  TANK
                        SUCTION  TO CRUDE
                        OIL  SERVICE  PUMP
                    Separator/Slop Tank Arrangement

                     250 ton/hr.
                     14 ft. 7 in.
                     7 ft.  11 in.
        Figure 1:
Capacity
Height
Diameter
Weight:
Dry                 11,900 Ibs.
Operating           43,000 Ibs.
    At  the  present there are  18 SEREP/Butterworth T-24
separators in  operation on various tankers. Some six larger
T-27 units (300 tons/hr.) have been installed on larger tank-
ers.
    The T-24 separator  is shown in a cut-away  view in
Figure 2 with identification of the various parts. Figure 3
illustrates the way in which the oily water mixture is sep-
arated.
    In the separator, the oil water mixture to be separated
is delivered through the  inlet (1) to  the upper part of the
apparatus. This mixture  undergoes deaeration and a first
rough separation in the upper part of the separator, and the
separated oil  flows  directly into the oil recovery chamber
(14).
                                                                  MIXTURE INLFT
                                                                                                      2nd Stage
                                                                                                      Recovery
                                                                                                      Chamber
                                                                                                         INT FlUSHtK,
                                                                                                      CONNCCTION
                                                                 SLUDGE OUTLET
                                                                   Figure 2:    SEREP/Butterworth T-24 Separator
                                                                                                 VENT
                                                                  OIL/WATER MIXTURE IN
                                                                 MAIN
                                                                    Figure 3:    SEREP/Butterworth Oil/Water Separator

                                                                  The remaining  partly separated mixture  flows  down
                                                              through an annular space (2) to the bottom of the separator
                                                              and then through the opening (3) into the compartment (4)

-------
                                                         GRAVITY TYPE OIL SEPARATOR    113
        SEPARATOR REPORT
            Voy.
63
                                 s/S

DATE
H«v. 26,
1970
•
*
Dec. 1,
1970
•
H
II
»
*
N
•
n
•
•
•
*
•
*
*
H

SAMPLING
T3ME(AKvt«fl
1400
1500
1600
0100
0200
0300
0400
0500
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700

P.P.M.
DISCHARGE
200
200
150
50
50
50
100
200
200
200
20C
150
150
100
50
150
100
50
50
150

STRIP. PUMP
DISCH L/THR.
200
IT
n
200
n
n
N
N
II
II
»
N
H
»
n
n
N
»
»
n
AVERAGE
SPEED VESSE]
15.40
n
It!
15.26
n
it
it
N
Hi
It
It,
l»
It
»
It-
IT
15.00
»
n
»
Pase 1 of 3
REMARKS: (include)
(1)(AFI Gravity of Crude)
(2) (Identity of Tanks Cleaned)
(3) (Ho. EBIS. Recovered Slop Oil)
CO (Dirty Ballast Tanks)
(1) API - 34.3
(2) AH tanks
(3) Slop oil recovered, 400 BBLs for
burning and 1200 BBLs pumping
ashore at gas free station,
Marseille.
(Li Dirtv Ballast Tanks t 1.6.7 and
11 centers










CHIEF ENGINEER
CHIEF MATE
                                                                          MASTER
                           Figure 4:    Typical Separator Report, Page 1

-------
114
OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
               SEPARATOR REPORT
Voy. #   63 B/P
                                                                   S/S  J. ED. WARREM
                                                                               Page 2 of 3
DATE
Dee 1,
1970
N
»
»
•
»
•
Dae 2,
1970
•
N
H
*
•
•
»
•
•
•
II
H
SAMPLING
TBffif/iKvfifl
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
0100
0200
0300
0400
0500
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
P.P.M.
DISCHARGE
100
50
50
150
50
50
50
50
150
50
50
50
50
200
200
100
100
50
150
100
STRIP. PUMP
DISCH L/THR.
200
*
•
*
•
m
n
•
*
N
•
H
N
*
II
•
m
*
N
*
AVERAGE
SPEED VESSE:
15.26.
H
•
*
li-
ft
It
14.92
H
•
»
»
»
•
»
»
»
•
»
H
REMARKS: (include)
(1)(API Gravity of Crude)
(2) (Identity of Tanks Cleaned)
(3) (Ho. BBLS. Recovered Slop Oil)
CO (Dirty Ballast Tanks)
















       CHTKF ENGINEER
                                 c.H I Ki«' MATE
                                                                                   MASTER
                                   Figure 5:    Typical Separator Report, Page 2

-------
                                                           GRAVITY TYPE OIL SEPARATOR
        SEPARATOR REPORT
Voy. #  63
                                 s/S
                                                                   Page 3 •* 3
DATE
Dec 2,
1970
»
•
•
•
•
•













SAMPLING
TIME(AKvt«fl
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000













P.P.M.
DISCHARGE
50
50
50
150
100
50
50













STRIP. PUMP
DISCH L/THR.
200
n
n
N
II
•
N













AVERAGE
SPEED VESSE]
14.92
H
»
»
IT
•
N













REMARKS: (include)
(1)(AFI Gravity of Crude)
(2) (Identity of Tanks Cleaned)
(3) (No. BBU3. Recovered Slop Oil)
CO (Dirty Ballast Tanks)
















CHIEF ENGINEER
CHIEF MATE
                                                                          MASTER
                            Figure 6:    Typical Separator Report, Page 3

-------
116    OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
 between the bottom cone and the second stage cone and
 then  is diffused at (5)  where it undergoes another separa-
 tion.  Much of the oil in the form of small  droplets is
 retained by the ring of blades placed in the way of the
 diffuser. These small droplets  coalesce and rise up  the
 blades, increasing  in  size until their buoyancy is sufficient
 to float off the tip of the blades. This oil collects at (6) and
 then  flows  upward  in  the oil recovery column (11) and
 enters the oil recovery chamber. The nearly oil-free mixture
 then  flows through  the conduit (7) to enter the compart-
 ment (8) from where it is diffused again at (9).
    The last oil particles similarly are caught by the blades
 of the second stage, are collected at (10) and flow upwards
 in the adjustable weir (12) and finally into the oil recovery
 chamber.
    The clean water rises through funnel (13) and flows
 over its lip to the water outlet.
    The surface of the water above the lip of funnel (13)
 establishes a reference level above which the oil in the oil
 recovery columns  rises  to a height which is related to the
 difference in density  of the two liquids, i.e., oil and water.
 The oil in the recovery  columns flows into the oil recovery
 chamber over weirs set higher than the water reference level
 but  lower than the maximum  height to  which the oil
 columns will rise.  If pure oil or grossly contaminated water
 enters the separator, the free oil will not pass down to the
 bottom of the separator but  will flow directly to the oil
 recovery chamber (14).
    The oily water mixture is fed directly to the separator
 by a  6 inch line from  the stripping pump discharge line in
 the pumproom. Recovered oil from the separator drops by
 a 12  inch line  to No. 13 port center chemical tank (2,000
 bbl  capacity)  through  the main deck and the  outlet is
 placed  just  off   the  bottom  of  chemical  tank. The
 clean-water flows  through a  10 inch line with a 10" gate
 valve and then over the side and through a canvas sleeve to
 the sea.
     The  separator  and the  associated steel work were
 coated with white paint and the unit blends fairly well with
 the rest of the ship. The unit has been firmly supported and
 bracketed and the piping also provides some support to the
 separator.
     One half inch sampling valves were placed on the oil
 and water discharge lines for test purposes. Our procedures
 for these tests were given in a paper, "Combustion of Crude
 Oil  in  Ships  Boilers",  presented  at the API Tanker Con-
 ference on May 15 -17,1967 by Bassett & Norris.
     This paper covers three 70,000 DWT tankers using the
 SEREP T-24 separator over some 44 voyages during a three
 year period. Some 20 voyages  have been used in the calcula-
 tions for this paper. The other 24 voyages were not used
 because in the beginning the ships' reports did not cover the
 number of samples taken, the number of tanks cleaned or
 the number ballasted. The only data recorded was the num-
 ber of barrels of slop oil burned.
     Our ships must send a report on data collected during     tors.
the ballast voyage on the separator operation. Figures 4, 5
and 6 show a typical operation report. The only thing unu-
sual in this report is that 1,200 bbls of burnable slop oil was
pumped ashore when the ship arrived for repairs.  Due to
insufficient time between ports all of the slop oil could not
be burned. However, 400 bbls were burned at sea prior to
arrival.

    Over a period of three years data has been accumulated
on the amount of slop oil recovered from separator opera-
tions on three 70,000 DWT tankers. The average amount of
burnable slop oil recovered is 1,200 to 1,500 bbls per trip.
Table 6 shows the amount of slop oil recovered for each of
the three ships during the period 1967 through 1970.
    Tables 7, 8 & 9 show the relationship between p.p.m.
oil discharge, rate  of discharge  and the  permissible dis-
charge of 60 liters per mile or 1/15,000 of the total cargo
carrying capacity.  As  the   three ships  involved  have  a
500,000 bbl  capacity, then  a total of 33 bbls discharge is
permissible
    Compilation of Tables 7,8 & 9 shows an average of 2.6
liters of oil discharged per nautical mile and an average of
7.8  bbls of  total oil discharged per voyage. The total
amount of oil retained onboard from the three ships over a
three-year period was 45,058  bbls.
     From the data presented it can readily be seen  that  the
T-24 separator  can be used as a reliable and simple method
of separating oil and water  in shipboard operations. This
method  separates the emulsion  layer easily from the re-
latively clean water  from either a holding tank or  directly
from cleaning operations. The oily emulsion is discharged
along with oil  and can later be separated. We have found
that the separator works very well from 190 - 220 tons per
hour, with very good quality water obtained  at 150 tons
per hour. We are not sure how far to go in practice, because
we feel that on these ships the oil discharge to sea has been
drastically  cut  with a minimum of ship's  personnel and
time. As we  discharge from  tank cleaning directly to  the
separator, we eliminate a slop oil tank. We have been able
to clean all tanks on these ships obtaining some 2,500 bar-
rels  of slop oil containing 30 - 50 per cent sea water. This
could be a "load-on-top" operation now. This oil is then
treated  with  an emulsion breaker and allowed to settle in a
heated tank, until the quality is such that  the oil can be
burned; that  is with less than 2% water and less than 20#per
1,000 barrels. These tests are run by the Engineering  De-
partment. For a shipyard voyage  we can  arrive at the yard
with only our slop oil tank dirty and not gas free as it may
contain oil not  burned in the  ship's boilers.
     The data shows that this type of separator is  about
95% efficient (60 liters vs. 3 liters) staying well below  the
maximum discharge of 60 liters per nautical mile.

CONCLUSIONS
 1. SEREP/Butterworth  T-24 is an  efficient  oily  water
separator.
2. IMCO Amendments can fully  be met by Tanker Opera-

-------
                                                                               GRAVITY TYPE OIL SEPARATOR
                                                                                                                      117
3. Improvements or additions are needed for the separation
of waxy crudes and heavy No. 6 oils from water.
4. Need automatic instrumentation for analyzing discharge
streams. We have not discussed this need in this paper but
the authors and  ship personnel have a great need for an
instrument that  would analyze a discharge stream without
taking samples and running a chemical extraction  vs. a set
of oil standards.
   OIL CONTENT IN   RATE
   DISCHARGE, ppm** Ton/
TOTAL
BBL OIL
DISCHARGED   LITERS/NAUTICAL
  TO SEA    	MILE
RECOVERED SLOP OIL
NO. OF
SHIP VOYAGES
». ALTOS JONES 20
BURL S. WATSON 18
J. ED. BARREN 6
TOTAL! 45,058
RECOVERED
SLOP OIL. BBLS.
23,074
16.884
5,100
bbls or 6,437 tons
DATE SEPARATOR
INSTALLED
1967
1968
1969
51
54
57
60
61
62
64
65 •
481
290
3?2
265
353
289
404
1000
194
200
120
213
225
125
40
64
13.48
5.66
3. 14
6.01
10.20
6.21
10.44
33
6.10
3.59
2.67
2.89
5.10
2.40
0.35
3.80
                                                                             * The cargo for this voyage vas a
                                                                               heavy wax like crude, which causes
                                                                               trouble in separators.  There is a
                                                                               need for additional heating coils
                                                                               in this type of service,
                                                                            ** Ave of 20-40 analysis

                                                                       Table 8:     S.S. "Burl S. Watson" - Separator Data


VOYAGE
NO.

57
se
59
60
62
63 «

Table 6:

OIL CONTENT IN'
DISCHARGE, ppm

318
150
129
131
135
103

Recov

RATE
Ton/Hr .

200
200
200
200
200
200

'ered Slop On
TOTAL
BBL OIL
DISCHARGED
TO SEA

9.86
4.69
5.92
4.82
3.88
5.84

VOYAGE (
NO. I
LITERS/NAUTICAL
MILE
61 *
4.52 67
1.99 68
1.92 69
1.81 70
1.83
1.52

TOTAL
BBL OIL
)IL CONTENT IN- RATE DISCHARGED LITERS/NAUTICAL
vrgf-HARf-.P , ppm" TON/RR. TO SEA MILE


-
110 117 3.42 0.85
92 68 3.55 0.42
133 103 5.27 0.97
250 125 5.7 1.12


* This voyage was with #6 fuel oil which
                                                                                separation,  i.e., larger heating coils..
             Voyage 63 - All tanks cleaned for shipyard.


            * Ave of Z0-40 analysis
                                                                              ** Ave of 20-40 analysis
Table 9:     S.S. "W. Alton Jones" - Separator Data
          Table 7:     S.S. "J. Ed. Warren" - Separator Data

-------
                           IDENTIFICATION   OF  OIL  LEAKS
                                             AND  SPILLS
                                                 R.E. Kreider
                                       Standard Oil Company of California
ABSTRACT
    Development of a tentative method of comparison of
unknown petroleum leaks and spills with known sources is
reported. Methods of sampling and preparation of a residue,
free of water and solids, equivalent to a 24-hour weathered
sample are described. The principal method of analysis is
high-resolution   temperature  programmed  gas
chromatography. Additional analyses considered are sulfur,
nitrogen, nickel,  vanadium and infrared. Analyses  of
samples by 10 cooperating laboratories are reported.

INTRODUCTION
    In October, 1969,the Western Oil and Gas Association
initiated  a  subcommittee  of their  Air  and  Water
Conservation Committee for the purpose of developing
methods of sampling and analysis of spilled oil to establish
its identity. Ten major oil   companies  are  cooperating in
the  work. The  number  of  participants has  recently
increased to include  four commerical laboratories and one
government laboratory. Fifteen laboratories are currently
analyzing six samples according to the method developed
thus far  (Appendix 1). This work should be completed and
evaluated for reporting at  the Conference. The method is
subject to change depending upon that evaluation.
    It has been the intent of the committee  to develop
rapid  methods  that  will  be  useful  to  oil   companies,
independent and  government laboratories alike. This has
been done without the use of extremely costly laboratory
equipment. It is possible that some cases may  require the
use  of elaborate techniques such as  mass spectroscopy,
nuclear  magnetic resonance, and carbon  isotope analysis.
Neutron activation analysis for a number of trace elements
is being used on samples for the U.S. Coast Guard and other
Federal  agencies.  Infrared  analysis has been used by some
investigators for analysis of slicks and spills,l-3 however,
the  committee feels  that  gas chromatography is a much
more  useful  technique. Infrared apparatus is  commonly
available and may be another useful means of identification
in certain cases. The British Institute of Petroleum4 has
published  a compilation of methods related to the subject
of  analysis of beach  pollutants. There  is considerable
similarity in their approach to that of the Western Oil and
Gas Association, however, they describe some additional
tests  that are  elaborate  and  time  consuming.  A novel
approach  using  fluorescence  spectroscopy  has  been
published.5 It  may be useful in a small area investigation,
but it may be lacking when applied to a broad area.
    Based upon the experience of the committee and upon
the literature,6-8 it was decided  to rely heavily on high
resolution gas chromatography. Using standard conditions,
gas  chromatography  has been  extremely  useful  in
controlling losses to  refinery  drainage systems  by visual
comparison   of  chromatograms  of unknowns  with
chromatograms of knowns, ranging from gasoline to crude
oil and bunker fuel. In a refinery, the bigger the system, the
more  complex some samples become, but frequently some
portion  of   the  sample  is  distinctive enough  for
identification  of  that  portion  to be  made.  If  a
chromatogram of a  sample  does not match  any
chromatogram in  the  reference  file,  there  is  still
considerable information that can be gained by inspection
of the  chromatogram,  depending upon experience. This
includes boiling range if  it  is a distillate,  whether  it  is a
crude oil or a residual fuel, whether it is waxy as indicated
by high carbon number normal paraffins, or whether the
cutter is straight run or cracked stock.
    In a bigger area, such as a bay or  ocean, the gas
chromatographic technique  is  not  the only answer  to
identification  of spills. The proposed method will also use
sulfur, nitrogen, nickel and vanadium contents and possibly
infrared analysis. While sulfur, nickel  and vanadium are
frequently included in such  analyses, nitrogen is  included
because  of  its  relatively high  concentration  in some
California crude oils.
                                                    119

-------
 120    OIL SPILL PREVENTION
 Treatment

     One  problem of  slick  and spill analysis is that such
 samples are weathered, the extent of which depends upon
 the conditions of  exposure.  This can seriously  affect
 elemental analyses and other analyses in relation to those of
 an unweathered sample.
     In simulated weathering, a crude oil lost essentially all
 of its light ends boiling up to Ci2 (216°C) in 24 hours. The
 simulation consisted of pouring a pint of crude oil onto the
 surface of a barrel of sea water exposed to the weather. The
 oil was sampled on successive days for gas chromatographic
 analysis. The extent of weathering increases  with time,
 however, when the lighter hydrocarbons have  weathered,
 the semi-solid portion weathers at a slower rate  (Figure 1).
 Subsequent work showed that  thinner films weather more
 quickly. (Figure 2). One sample known to have been on San
 Francisco Bay for five days lost hydrocarbons up to C\2< It
 is impossible to simulate all conditions of weathering, but
 the case of 24 hours seems to be a reasonable choice. The
 committee chose to  simulate such weathering by  distilling
 all  samples, including  reference samples, to  282°C liquid
 temperature  in  ASTM distillation  equipment,9 using an
 inert gas flow to reduce thermal decomposition.  Without
 the inert gas, a liquid temperature of 315°C was used earlier
 and slight cracking occurred in some samples. The similarity
 between simulated weathering and the weathering achieved
 by distillation is shown in Figure 3.
    Samples picked up from the water or the  beach will
probably  be contaminated with  water and solids. All
 samples are dissolved in an equal volume of chloroform and
 the solution centrifuged to separate solids and water. Water
 is aspirated from the surface and the  clear solution distilled
as described in  the  method.  The residue is .cooled and
poured into suitable containers for analysis.
     2.5r
                             CN
        Figure 1: Effect of Time on Weathering, 0.5 mm
                  Initial Film Thickness
    2.0

  CM
 O


 «  1.5

 j=


 =  1.0
 j*

 o>
 Q.


 I  °'5
 CD
 O>
           Initial Film Thickness
                          aim
          	1	L
                18
                                           12
                     16        14

                         CN

Figure 2: Effect of Film Thickness on 24-Hour Weathering
10
 o
 ~z
 o
                                         1.9 mm Film
                                           24 Hr
Q.

o>
 CO

 o:
                                              282°C. N2
                                              15 ml/Min.
                             CN

         Figure 3: Comparison of Simulated Weathering
                Distillation and Weathering by

Analysis
    The first set of samples exchanged by the participants
was analyzed by the best  methods the individual members
had available. A  second set of samples was analyzed by
more  definite procedures.  The most specific  section of the
method  is  to  obtain a chromatogram of  the prepared
sample  residue  under  conditions  capable  of partial
resolution of double peaks at both €17 and C]g positions.
These two double peaks occur in many, but not all crude
oils and are shown  in  Figure 4. Using the non-polar or
boiling  point  column described in  the  method, in the
manner described, will accomplish the desired resolution.
Performance of the column should be checked periodically
with  a  known  sample to  follow deterioration of the
column.

-------
                                                                 IDENTIFICATION OF SPILLS AND LEAKS   121
    The chromatogram of the sample of unknown origin is
compared visually to chromatograms of samples of known
origin (Figures 5, 6). Visual comparison  is adequate  in
limited situations, however,its capability is taxed in a large
refinery and is exceeded in a multi-refinery  or larger area.
The participants are  currently working on the application
of  computer techniques  to  the  problem.  Computer
technique is available, however,the immediate problem is in
obtaining data  for use of the computer. The chromatograms
do not return to baseline and  obtaining useful simultaneous
digital data from them will require some ingenuity.

Results
    In mid-1970 the participants reviewed analyses of their
second  set  of samples.  Complete  conformity to  the
conditions prescribed for gas chrornatography had not been
achieved,  due to  limitations  of  available  equipment.
however, most  laboratories  met  or  exceeded  the desired
resolution.
    Elemental  analyses  of the second set  of  samples are
shown in Tables 1-4. Assuming samples E  and F, and G and
H to be duplicates and excluding  the values  for nickel and
                  30                25
                       Time, Win.
                                                     20
       l-igure 4: Partial Chromatogram of Mixed Crude
             1       Mmas Crude
20 I  18 ,  16
 vanadium  from a commerical laboratory, only 5  of 140
 values  exceeded  95%  confidence  limits.  The  standard
 deviations  for sulfur and nitrogen are from 5 to 7% of their
 means,  but those for nickel and vanadium are from 12 to
 17% which is rather high. This indicates that experience and
 strict attention to the details of any method are necessary
 for satisfactory determination of nickel and vanadium.

APPENDIX I

WOGA Method for Analysis of Beach
Pollutants, 11-1-70

 Identification

    Identification, or denial  of identity, is by comparison
of data from analyses of an unknown oil with comparable
data from  known oils, selected because of their possible
relationship  to  the  particular  pollution  incident;  for
example, suspected,  accused,  or questioned sources. Thus,
                     San Joaquin Heavy Crude
                              "'.< c,,
                                                                                  San Ardo Crude
                                                                                  Time. Mi n
                                                                     Figure 6: Comparison of Naphthenic Crudes
                                                                                                   Sample
                                                           Company
                                                              1
                                                              2
                                                              3
                                                              4
                                                              5
                                                              6
                                                              7
                                                              8
                                                              9
                Method
           X-Ray Fluorescence
          Combustion-Turbidity
          Combustion-Titration
          Combustion -Titration
          Combustion-Turbidity
           X-Ray Fluorescence
          Combustion-Titration
           X-Ray Fluorescence
          Combustion-Titration
                Mean
E
1.48
1.60
1.60
1.36
1.47
1.41
1.47
1.45
1.26
1.47
F
1.47
1.63
1.60
1.35
1.46
1.44
1.52
1.54
1.36
1.47
G
1.58
1.56
1.81
1.45
1.58
1.73
1.58
1.60
1.49
1.58
H
1.58
1.60
1.64
1.47
1.52
1.67
1.68
1.58
1.36
1.58
          •igure 5: Comparison ot'Paraffinic Crudes
         Table 1: Percent Sulfer in Exchange Samples

-------
  122   OIL SPILL PREVENTION
samples of such known oils must be collected and should be
submitted along with the unknown for analysis at the same
time. At present, identification of the source of a
weathered unknown oil sample by itself cannot be made
since a file of comparable data from weathered known oils
is not yet available.
One certain difference between unknown and known is
enough to deny identity; several moderately certain
differences may also suffice. Many close similarities (within
the uncertainties of analyses and samples) will be needed to
establish identity beyond reasonable doubt. The analyses
described below will distinguish many but not all samples.
For cases in which these analyses do not clearly distinguish
a pair of samples, and for important cases where additional
comparisons are needed to strengthen confidence in
conclusions, other analyses beyond those described in this
method will be required.

Sample
Company E F G H
1 0.91 0.92 0.99 1.02
2 0.99 1.01 ) 06 1.05
3 0.89 0.93 1.03 0.95

4 0.92 0.81 0.98 1.05
5 0.92 0.93 1.04 1.04
6 0.95 0.93 1.06 1.04
7 0.94 0.93 1.06 1.08

8 0.77 0.99 0.89 1.06

9 0.94 0.94 1.06 1.07
Mean 0.92 0.93 1.04 1.05
Samole
Company
1


2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9


Method
X-Ray Fluorescence
Atomic Absorption

Emission Spectroscopy
Emission Spectroscopy
X-Ray Fluorescence
Colorimetric
Emission Spectroscopy
X-Ray Fluorescence
Emission Spectroscopy
Colorimetric
Mean


E
138
150

26
140
211
165
135
187
140
148
148

Table 3: PPM Nickel in Exchange

F
141
143

80
150
216
160
134
169
145
140
145

Samples

G
113
110

27
170
179
123
105
148
115
120
120



H
113
99

17
135
133
120
110
147
110
120
120


Sample
Company
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8
9

Method
X-Ray Fluorescence
Emission Spectroscopy
Emission Spectroscopy
X-Ray Fluorescence
Colorimetric
Emission Spectroscopy
X-Ray Fluorescence

Emission Spectroscopy
Colorimetric
Mean
E
33
32
30
38
37
34
38

40
40
37
F
34
73
30
38
35
27
41

40
29
35
G
120
57
170
158
118
134
140

100
132
134
H
ID
48
155
159
IB
142
D9

100
124
D9
         Table 2: Percent Nitrogen in Exchange Samples

Sampling

    It  is  desirable to  get from 4-oz. to  a  pint  of
representative  sample  of  oil  to the  laboratory in  a
previously clean container that can be closed securely. This
can be  done by  skimming into the  container and, after
settling  a short while, inverting the closed container  to
drain water by   cautiously  opening  the  closure. The
container can  be  filled  by  further skimming. A more
elaborate device such as a separatory funnel could be used
to obtain a maximum of oil and a minimum of water.

    If only a small amount of sample is available, or if it is a
very thin film on water, it may be picked up with glass
doth that has  been treated for use in boat hulls and auto
         Table 4: PPM Vanadium in Exchange Samples.

bodies. The lightest and cheapest grade (2 oz. duck) is suit-
able. Lay a square on the film, pick it up, and place it in a
clean  container and close securely. A piece of new cloth
from the same source should be enclosed in another   clean
container as a control. Additional methods of sampling are
described in a recent Federal publication.^
    The  choice of container and closure is important and
the following should be considered:

1. Container:  First choice is glass, preferably new, though
used glass containers cleaned with detergent and thoroughly
washed with water are satisfactory. Second choice is a new
tin coated can. Resin coated cans, rusted cans and plastic
containers should not be used.

-------
                                                               IDENTIFICATION OF SPILLS AND LEAKS   123
 "2. Closure:  For wide mouth bottles and screw cap cans,
 caps with aluminum coated cardboard inserts are preferred.
 Aluminum foil should not be used because it will probably
 leak.  Second choice is a  plastic coated cardboard  insert.
 Saran Wrap  may make a satisfactory seal for an otherwise
 unsatisfactory  cap.  Wax coated cardboard  inserts should
 not be used. Tin coated friction lids can be used on some
 cans.  For narrow necked  bottles,  new or clean corks are
 satisfactory, but rubber stoppers should not be used.
 3. Labeling: It  is  important  that samples  be properly
 identified as to  date, time  and exact location of origin,
 along with the name of the person taking  the sample.  It
 may be desirable to include the name of a witness  to the
 sampling.

 Shipment
    Flammables, i.e., flash  point less than 27°C, cannot be
 shipped by  U.S. mail, however, they can be shipped  by
 common carrier. Non-flammable liquids can be shipped  by
 mail if adequate  protection against breakage and sufficient
 absorbent packing  are  provided to protect other mail in
 case of breakage. Samples as large as  a quart may require
 special handling.

 Treatment
    Dissolve approximately 100 ml of the oil sample in an
 equal  volume of chloroform. If the sample is waxy, warm
 the solution, including the centrifuge tube  and shield, to
 60°C  to  prevent  precipitation  of wax.  Centrifuge the
 solution according to ASTM Method D-96 to separate free
 water and sediment. Aspirate the free  water and decant
 about 100 ml of the treated solution to  a chemically clean
 ASTM D-1078  flask.  If there is an intermediate  layer of
 solids between the water and chloroform, aspirate the free
 water and decant through a loose plug of glass  wool to
 remove  the solids. Insert  an  ASTM  high  distillation
 thermometer (8C) to 6 mm from the bottom of the flask.
 Also insert a 4 mm O.D.  by 2 mm I.D. glass tube  to the
 same depth  but with the bottom 5 cm bent about 20° to
 direct the flow of  nitrogen away from the thermometer
 bulb.  Start a nitrogen gas flow of 10-15 ml per minute
 through the  tube and distill in ASTM E-133 equipment to a
 liquid temperature  of 282°C. Continue  the gas flow until
 the liquid has  cooled  to 175°C and pour the residue into
 suitable containers  for  analysis. If more treated sample is
 needed, add more treated  chloroform solution and repeat
 the distillation.
    Reference  samples  are  to  be treated  in the  same
 manner as spill samples.
    The  prepared sample  is to be used in the following
 analyses and results reported on that basis.

Gas Chromatography
    The  following  conditions  should  be adhered  to  as
dosely as practicable with the best equipment available:
Conditions:
     Injector Temperature:
     Detector Temperature:
325°C
350°C
      Flow Rate:              20 ml/min.
      Initial Temperature:      50°C
      Final Temperature:       325°C
      Temperature Rate:       6°C/min.
      Chart  Speed:             1.25 cm./min.
Column:
      Support:   80/100 mesh Chromosorb W (AW-DMCS)
      Substrate: 10% OV-101
      Length:    3 m stainless steel
      Diameter: 3.2 mm x 0.3 mm
    Chromatograms  are  to  be obtained  at  a  single
attenuation  so that the highest peaks are at approximately
3/4 of  full  scale on the  recorder. The final temperature
should  be  held until Csg or C4fj has been eluted. The
resulting chromatograms can be used for visual comparison
of sample and suspect sources.
    Samples   too  viscous  for injection   into  the
chromatograph  may be diluted with  chloroform. Partial
resolution of double peaks occurring at both Cn and Cjg
positions is  the primary measure of column performance
(Figure  4). These peaks occur in many, but not all crude
oils. Each laboratory should select a sample that can be run
periodically  to  follow  the deterioration  of the column
under these conditions. When resolution of the Ci7 and
CIB pairs is no longer adequate, the  column should  be
replaced.
    Information as to  the extent of  weathering and the
nautre of the sample can be obtained more rapidly by gas
chromatography of the initial chloroform solution. The
object  of  the  distillation procedure  is  to  remove  the
chloroform  and  to  simulate  approximately  24-hour
weathering so  that  elemental analyses are on a  relatively
constant basis.

Sulfur
    Determine  sulfur by  any desirable ASTM procedure.
Precaution  should be taken  against erroneous results  by
chloride interference in combustion procedures.
Nitrogen
    Determine  nitrogen by Kjeldahl procedure.

Nickel and Vanadium
    Determine  nickel  and vanadium  by appropriate
methods provided that precaution against matrix effects are
used in  X-ray and emission spectroscopy methods. If ashing
techniques  are  used in preparing concentrates, precaution
against  loss  by  volatilization  must be  used in the form of
prior  treatment with  sulfuric  acid,H"13     sulfur,^
benzene sulfonic acidlS or equivalent.  If determinations of
other metals, particularly cobalt, copper and manganese are
conveniently available, report them also.

Ratios
    Use of sulfur/nitrogen or nickel/vanadium ratios should
be  approached with caution, especially if an element  is
being determined near its limit of detection by a  particular
method. When reasonably precise quantities have been

-------
124    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
determined, useful ratios may be obtained. Ratios should
not  be  reported  unless absolute  values  for  individual
elements are also reported.
Infrared
    If infrared spectra are determined, use thin films of the
prepared sample residue  between sodium chloride plates.
More than one  thickness will  probably  be required  to
obtain optimum spectra throughout  the  2-15  micron
region;  one spectrum  should  have  more  than  10%
transmission  for the major bands and another should  be
with a thicker film to emphasize the minor bands. Spectra
can be compared visually.
REFERENCES
1.  Kawahara,  F.K.,  "Laboratory  Guide for  the
Identification  of Petroleum  Products",  U.S. Dept.  of
Interior, FWPCA, Cincinnati, Ohio (1969).
2. Mattson, J.S., et al, "A Rapid Nondestruction Technique
for Infrared Identification  of  Crude  Oils  by  Internal
Reflection Spectrometry",^nai Chem. 42:234 (1970).
3. Kawahara, F.K., and Ballinger, D.G., "Characterization
of Oil Slicks on Surface Waters", Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod.
Res. Develop. 9:553 (1970).
4.  Institute  of Petroleum  Standardization  Committee,
"Analytical  Methods for Identification  of the Source  of
Pollution by Oil of the  Seas, Rivers, and Beaches", /. Inst.
Petrol. 56:107(1970).
 5. Thruston, A.D., and Knight, R.W., "Characterization of
 Crude  and  Residual-Type  Oils  by  Fluorescence
 Spectroscopy",£>m>0H. Sci. Technol. 5:64(1971).
 6. Cole, R.D., "Identification  of Slop Oils-an Aid  in
 Tracing  Refinery Oil Leaks",/. 7ns/. Petrol. 10:288(1968).

 7. Brunnock, J.V. Buckworth, D.F., and  Stephens,  G.G.,
 "Analysis of Beach Pollutants", ibid, S4: 310 (1968).

 8. Ramsdale, S.J., and Wilkinson, R.E., "Identification of
 Petroleum Sources of Beach Pollutants by Gas-Liquid  Chro-
 matography", ibid, 54:326 (1968).
 9. American  Soc. Testing Materials, ASTM Std. 17:1214
 American Soc. Testing Materials, Philadelphia (1970).
 10. Federal  Water Pollution Control Administration, "Oil
Sampling  Techniques".  Water Poll.  Cont.  Res.  Serv.
 DAST-12, 15080 QBJ (1969).
 11. Milner, O.I., et al, "Determination of Trace Metals in
 Crude and  Other Petroleum Oils", Anal.  Chem. 24:1928
 (1952).
 12. Gamble,  L.W.,  and Jones,  W.H.,  "Determination  of
 Trace Metals in Petroleum", ibid, 27:1456 (1955).
 13. McCoy, J.W., "Inorganic Analysis of Petroleum",  pp.
 180-183, Chemical Publishing Co., New York (1962).
 14. Agazzi, E.J., et al. "Determination of Trace Metals in
Oils by  Sulfur Incineration  and  Spectrophotometric
Measurement", Anal. Chem. 55:332(1963).
 15.  Shott,  J.E.,  Garland, TJ.,  and  Clark,  R.O.,
 "Determination of Traces of Nickel  and Vanadium  in
Petroleum Distillates", ibid, 33:506 (1961).

-------
                BALLAST  WATER  TREATMENT:   A  MAJOR
                                         UNDERTAKING
                                             Jonathan W. Scribner
                                        Division of Environmental Health
                                         Department of Health & Welfare
                                                State of Alaska
ABSTRACT
   Port Valdez is an important fishery resource area located
at the proposed terminus of a 48 inch diameter, 800 mile,
crude oil pipeline system. This terminus facility will provide
for the transfer  of crude  oil to large oil tankers for
shipment to the "lower 48" and will also provide for the
treatment of oily ballast water from incoming vessels. The
degree of treatment required  by State and Federal agencies
will limit the treated effluent water to 10  mg/1 total oil
content. This is considered to be as stringent a requirement
as exists for a similar facility anywhere in  the world and
was  imposed  upon  the industry  to ensure maximum
protection of marine life. The treatment facility will consist
of primary gravity separation, secondary dissohed-air flota-
tion with the addition of chemicals and an outfall/diffuser
system terminating in Port Valdez at a depth greater than
100 feet.

INTRODUCTION
   Vast crude oil  discoveries on the  North Slope Alaska
contemplate enormous impact upon the State of Alaska.

   At the present  time, there is a plan to transport these
crude oil  reserves (estimated in the tens of billions  of
barrels) southward across the State of Alaska via an 800
mile, 48 inch diameter pipeline  to a terminal facility to  be
located at Port Valdez, Alaska.  From this terminal facility,
the oil will be transferred to  oil tankers varying in size
from 16,000  to 250,000 DWT vessels and  transported  to
oil refineries located along the Pacific-coasts of Washington,
Oregon and California at the rate of 2 million barrels per
day.

   This plan is receiving extremely close scrutiny from a
number of private and governmental entities in the United
States. Professing concern for the environment, critics are
attacking and analyzing the project for its economic, social
and political impact upon Alaska and upon the nation as
well.

   Three  dominant points of view are evident. One says the
oil reserves of Alaska should never be developed and insist
that  Alaska  become a vast  national park preserved  for
future  generations to enjoy.  Another group, more con-
cerned with  economics, insists on immediate development
of Alaska's natural resources for  development's sake. The
third position expresses concern for the environment saying
that  development should and must occur only when strict
environmental  safeguards are integrated into the entire
project.

   It is not the intention of this paper to deal in depth with
these many interesting ideas.  Instead, this paper will focus
upon one small but very important  portion of the entire
project. This is the ballast water treatment facility to be
located at the pipeline terminus. It is small in terms of the
total $1.5 billion project and important because this ballast
water treatment facility is the largest known facility of its
kind designed to protect an important fishery resource in
the Valdez  Area  and will  serve to eliminate  unlawful
discharge of oily ballast water at sea.

   This paper has three objectives:
   1. To provide the environmental background of Valdez
Harbor1  which served as the basis for the design of  the
ballast water treatment facility;
   2. To discuss the applicable laws and regulations govern-
ing the control of oil pollution as they relate to this project
from the point of view of the State regulatory agency; and
   3. To describe the method and efficacy of the ballast
water treatment facility.
                                                    125

-------
126    Ol L SPILL PR EVENTION ...
 BACKGROUND
   In December 1969, the University of Alaska Institutes of
 Marine Science and Water  Resources, (supported by  the
 Trans Alaska Pipeline System), (now the Alyeska Pipeline
 Service Company),  completed  a baseline environmental
 study of  Port Valdez. This initial  report  quite under-
 standably lacks much detailed information, yet it provides a
 valuable aid for the development and design of the terminal
 facilities.

   Port Valdez is located in southcentral Alaska and is  a
 typical fiord estuary commonly studied in other parts of
 Alaska.  It is  surrounded  by  sharply rising  mountains
 consisting  predominantly of rock outcrops as high as 6,500
 feet.

   The City of Valdez (population approximately 1,000) is
 situated on the northeastern shore of Port Valdez. Magnifi-
 cant scenery   and excellent salmon  fishing are primary
 reasons  that   tourism  is   the  most active  business. In
 addition, Valdez is the terminus of the Richardson  High-
 way, long  an access route to interior  Alaska. Sewage from
 the  municipal sewage treatment  system  represents the only
 present significant waste discharge into the entire estuary.

   Extreme air temperatures range from -28' to 87°F. with
 the  average daily maximum being 43°F. and the average
 daily minimum being 29°F. Annual mean precipitation is 62
 inches (245 inches as snowfall).

   There are three major  rivers and many lesser streams
 flowing into the estuary. All of these  rivers and streams are
 glacier fed. The melting glaciers create very high suspended
 solids, however, other water quality  characteristics of the
 rivers and  streams are exceptional. For example, dissolved
 oxygen measurements were consistently found to be greater
 than 95%  saturation  and chemical oxygen demand values
 were generally less than  10 mg/1.

   Port Valdez is a positive estuary in that more fresh water
 is added through  precipitation and the inflow from rivers
 and streams than is lost by evaporation. It has an area of
 approximately  25 square  miles, a maximum  depth of 850
 feet  and  a  mean depth   of 750 feet.  Port Valdez is
 connected to  Prince  William  Sound by  Valdez  Arm.
 Maximum  exchange  of water between Port Valdez and
 Prince William Sound is limited by  a sill 485 feet  deep,
 extending  across the southern portion of the inlet to Port
 Valdez.  In addition, the  deep waters of Prince  William
 Sound below 575 feet are isolated from the deep waters of
 the Gulf of Alaska by the continental shelf.

   Nevertheless, studies of the^tructure and circulation of
 fiords in Alaska reveal that  there is a continuous or at least
 frequent renewal  of the water within the fiord. Similarly,
 information obtained from Port Valdez to  date indicates
 that frequent renewal of the entire water structure within
 the fiord occurs.
   An interchange or overturning occurs each spring and
carries the oxygen-rich surface waters to replace the bottom
waters.  Thus  the fiord  contains high  concentrations of
dissolved  oxygen  throughout  its depth enabling aerobic
organisms to thrive. During the preliminary studies by the
University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science, the lowest
dissolved oxygen value obtained was found at 650 feet and
was  within  78% of saturation. Comparable depths in the
Gulf of Alaska reveal dissolved oxygen levels observed in
Port Valdez are very important when one considers that
theoretically considerable organic loading could be applied
before nuisance conditions would develop. Extreme caution
is necessary,  however,  because the  preliminary  studies
available do not allow an  accurate  estimate  of the waste
organic  matter than can be safely  consumed by aerobic
micro-organisms.  In order to more  accurately predict this
value many factors such as vertical mixing Tales, rates of
decomposition, tidal action and fresh water flushing need
to be determined.

   During the summer months salinity measurements indi-
cate fresh water outflow occurs in the upper  100 feet and
below 100 feet there is a very slow flow of saline water into
the estuary. Below 300 feet fairly uniform conditions exist.

   The  present data indicate that there  is a  complete
flushing of the estuary at least once a year. However, it is
emphasized  that  considerable study  needs  to be  done
before the actual circulation and flushing characteristics of
Port Valdez are completely understood.

   Preliminary biological  data  have  been obtained in Port
Valdez and there is noticeably lower productivity within
this  system  compared to that  obtained from Valdez Arm
and  other bays within Prince William Sound. The available
data suggest that the physical environment within Port
Valdez is  severely limiting and that  the few organisms that
do exist are not vital to the present  ecology of the area.
There  are several important  salmon streams,  however,
which support large numbers of salmon. These streams will
require  protection from  the effects of oil spills and other
industrialization.  Major  attention  must  be  focused  on
maintaining  salmon  productivity  in  the   Port  Valdez
vicinity.
LAWS AND REGULATIONS2 •3-4-5
   It  is  important  to  recognize  that  there  is  a vast
complexity of laws  and regulations governing the modus
operandi of this plan to remove oil from beneath the frozen
ground on the North Slope of Alaska and ship it south to
market  in the "lower  48". The following discussion,
however, will  deal with only one  set of laws which are
particularly significant  when viewed in connection with the
ballast water treatment facility.

   The State of Alaska has the responsibility and the right
to prevent and  to  control  water pollution within  its

-------
                                                                            BALLAST WATER TREATMENT    127
 boundaries. This is set forth in the Federal Water Pollution
 Control  Act  of 1956 and although this  Act  has been
 amended many times since original passage, the legislation
 defines in clear terms congressional intent to make this
 activity a State responsibility.

   Toward this end the policy of the State  was established
 as follows:

   "It is  the  public policy  of  the  State to  maintain
 reasonable standards of purity of  the waters of the State
.consistent with public health and public enjoyment, the
 propagation and protection of fish and wildlife, including
 birds, mammals and other terrestrial and aquatic life, and
 the industrial development of the State, and to require the
 use of all  known  available  and  reasonable  methods  to
 prevent  and  control  the  pollution of the  waters  of the
 State3". The Alaska Department of Health  and  Welfare is
 assigned the jurisdiction to abate and prevent the pollution
 of the waters  of the State.

   The Water Quality Act of 1965 provided that each of
 the states must adopt water quality standards for interstate
 waters.  Thus Alaska  revised its  existing  Water Quality
 Standards to  meet the approval of the Federal government.

   These Water Quality Standards classify the waters of the
 State according to use and establish Water Quality Stan-
 dards for each  of these classifications. Class "A" water has
 the highest use classification possible descending in priority
 to  the  lowest possible use  classification  Class  "G". All
 coastal waters  are Class "D" or Class "E"  (the difference
 being in Class "E" waters shellfish  are present). Port Valdez
 is an important fishery area  and is therefore a Class "D"
 water.

   The serious  concern of the Alaska Department of Health
 and Welfare  for  protecting  the  valuable   fishery  in the
 Valdez Area  has resulted  in  one of the  most stringent oil
 removal requirements in the  world.  Although State Water
 Quality  Standards  imply a maximum  of about 15 parts per
 million of oil in the receiving waters (a visible sheen occurs
 at  about this  level)  State  engineers have required the
 Alyeska Pipeline Service Company staff to develop equip-
 ment to reduce oil in the effluent from the ballast water
 treatment plant to  a maximum of  10  parts per million.
 Since the 1970 Legislature has enacted a law to provide
 that tankers bring all oily ballast ashore for treatment, the
 Alyeska  Valdez terminal  treatment  plant  will actually be
 protecting not only the Valdez  Arm, but areas within and
 off Prince William Sound where tankers might have been
 expected to  discharge surplus ballast prior to coming into
 port.

   Both from the standpoint of adequate laws and regula-
 tions and from the  standpoint  of cooperative effort with
 other state and Federal agencies, the Alaska Department of
 Health and Welfare has developed a strong program which
 exhibits a deep concern for environmental protection.
   Through a program of plan review and permit issuance,
the Department exercises jurisdiction over all new industrial
and  municipal  sources  of pollution.  Preliminary  plans
usually are discussed  with  staff engineers, final plans and
specifications are reviewed  for compliance with our statute
and  codes, and the  completed project  is monitored for
adherence to requirements set forth in a waste  discharge
permit.

   Prior  to  the  greatly  enhanced Federal Oil  Pollution
Legislation of 1970,  the Alaska Oil Pollution Task Force,
consisting of representatives of State and Federal govern-
ments as well  as  of  industry, provided a mechanism for
development  of a contingency plan, a  communications
network, and for evaluation  of plans for preventing and
controlling oil pollution. Particular stress was placed on the
need for all  employees  on  drill  rigs  and  pipelines  to
understand the absolute  necessity for preventing the loss of
oil from  any system.

   As spills are  reported anywhere in Alaska  today, State
and Federal engineers and biologists investigate promptly to
assure absolute minimum residual effect on the environment.
The  industry  or agency responsible is  advised  regarding
clean-up, and the investigating officer may assist in locating
absorbents and equipment for clean-up.

   The Alyeska Pipeline Service Company will be required
to show  in its plan submitted for Department approval that
adequate stockpiles of clean-up materials will be provided at
the  terminal  and that its employees have been trained to
make use of these materials as needed.

Ballast Water Treatment Facility

General:
   Transferring 2 million barrels per day of Alaskan North
Slope crude oil from land  based storage tanks to crude oil
tankers for shipment  to refineries located in the "lower 48"
presents  problems of great magnitude.

   Because of damage that has been sustained to the marine
environment in areas  where oil spills have occurred; because
of public clamor and because of increasingly more stringent
Federal  and  State requirements regarding the disposal of
oily ballast water on the  open sea, future policy necessitates
that  industry   meet  its legal  and moral obligations  to
maximize  the  utilization  of modern,  efficient onshore
treatment facilities.

   Recognizing these  obligations, Alyeska Pipeline Service
Company intends to construct what is perhaps the largest
facility  of its  kind  to accept oily ballast  from vessels
entering Port Valdez and reduce the total oil content to a
maximum of 10 mg/1 prior to discharging the effluent into
the waters of Port Valdez.

   Three primary considerations served as the basis for the
design:

-------
128   OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
   1.  The effluent must meet State and Federal require-
ments;
   2.  The facilities must be easily operated and economi-
cally suited to local conditions; and
   3.  The facilities must be expandable to meet long-range
terminal capacity.

Laboratory Examination:
   After  agreeing with State and Federal water pollution
control officials that their ballast water treatment facility
must  produce an effluent  containing not more than  10
mg/1  total oil, Alyeska Pipeline Service Company engineers
retained a consultant to associate with an experienced man-
ufacturer to develop the equipment capable of meeting this
requirement. The manufacturer  conducted  extensive lab-
oratory tests under controlled conditions to determine the
feasibility of the project.

   Alaskan North Slope crude oil with a specific gravity of
0.88  and Wilmington crude oil  with a specific gravity of
0.92  were used in the tests for comparison or results. The
Alaskan crude was chosen as being representative of typical
problems to be encountered and the heavy  Wilmington
crude was chosen to represent  extreme  conditions to be
expected in separating the oil from the water. Ocean water
obtained from Pudget  Sound and artificial sea water were
used to prepare the wastes.

   A  Waring blender (16,000 rpm) and a centrifugal pump
were  used to mix and emulsify the oil and ocean water.
Dissolved-air flotation  laboratory equipment was used to
demonstrate the effectiveness of the process.

   Total  oil content was  determined by the  procedure
described in Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, Twelfth edition.

   The effects of aging time  after emulsification, tempera-
ture,  emulsification  time, various chemical treatment meth-
ods and chemical treatment and dosages were evaluated in
order to recommend a method of meeting the requirements.

   The  results  of  the laboratory  studies  showed that
dissolved-air flotation with the addition of 25 mg/1 Alum
[Al2(SO4)3l8H2O]  and 2  mg/1 of a synthetic cationic
polyelectrolyte coagulant aid would produce the desired
results.

   In these tests the Waring blender was used to emulsify
the oil/water mixture  for  1 and 2.5 minutes which was
considered to be more  severe than the conditions expected
in the actual installation. Flocculation was allowed to occur
for 5 minutes in the laboratory  tests and flotation using a
50% cycle rate was used.
Design Considerations:
   The southern shore  of Port Valdez was selected as the
site for the terminal facilities. This area provided excellent
topography  for  the  oil tanker docking facilities  and by
benching the treatment facilities  into bedrock some 100
feet  above sea level  maximum  protection was  afforded
against tsunamis and earthquake action in this seismically
active region.

   Figure  1  illustrates the basic design considerations for
this  facility.  It should be noted  that the operations are
planned for  two phase construction. The first phase facility
will  have  the capacity to accommodate the ballast  water
from the simultaneous arrival of 2-250,000 DWT oil tankers
and  1-120,000 DWT oil  tanker. It will provide sufficient
volume to store 1.29 million barrels of ballast water. The
future phase  will be able to accommodate the simultaneous
arrival of 4-250,000 DWT  tankers  and  1-120,000 DWT
tanker and have storage capacity for 2.15 million barrels of
oily  ballast water.

   The ballast  water secondary  treatment  system will
effectively treat 33.6 and 56.0 mgd at maximum flow for
the  initial and future phases, respectively. Matching maxi-
mum oil recovery rate of 0.69 mgd and 1.15 mgd will be
accmumulated if required.

   Ballast water temperatures are expected to range from
35°F. to 50°F. and the ballast water to be treated is assumed
to contain not more than 2!  oil by volume. After primary
treatment, the ballast water is expected to contain 50-80
mg/1 and the final effluent will be required to contain not
more than 10mg/l total oil measured on 24 hour composite
        Basis for Ballast Storage Capacity:
          Initial:  2-250,000 DWT, 1-120,000 DWT
                  1.29 million barrels
          Future: 4-250,000 DWT, 1-120,000 DWT
                  2.15 million barrels

        Ballast Water Treatment Plant:
          Initial:  23,340gpm(33.6 mgd)
          Future: 38,900 gpm (56.0 mgd)

        Dry Oil Recovery System:
          Initial:  480 gpm (0.69 mgd)
          Future: 800 gpm (1.15 mgd)

        Temperature Ballast Water:
           35°F to SOT

        Crude Oil Content (Ballast Water):
          To storage:         2% by volume
          To treatment:      50-80 mg/1

        Effluent Oil Content:
          10 mg/1 maximum (based upon 24 hour
             composite samples)
                                                                      Figure 1: Design Considerations

-------
                                                                            BALLAST WATER TREATMENT    129
 Description of Facilities
   There are three basic components  to  the ballast water
 treatment system: Primary gravity separation storage tanks,
 dissolved-air flotation secondary treatment with the addi-
 tion of chemicals for flocculation and an  outfall/diffuser
 system extending into Port Valdez at least 100 feet deep.

   In addition  to  these  components,  there  will  be an
 extensive oil recovery system, complete facilities for chemi-
 cal storage  and addition, a storm drain/treatment system
 and  incineration  facilities. Piping has been arranged to
 provide complete  versatility throughout the entire system.
 Modern laboratory  equipment  and facilities will be  pro-
 vided to  control and monitor the effectiveness  of  the
 operation.

   Oily ballast water from incoming vessels will be pumped
 quickly into the onshore primary ballast water treatment
 facility. It  is anticipated that it will  contain 2-3% oil by
 volume. The primary system will consist of quiescent aging
 in 430,000 barrel capacity storage tanks (250 feet diameter
 x 53 feet high) for 6 to 8 hours. The settled ballast water
 is expected  to have an oil content of 50 to 80 mg/1.

   The dissolved-air flotation  process has been used exten-
 sively to  remove oil and suspended  matter from  water.
 Often  chemicals  are added  to  the  process  to  enhance
 efficiency.  The laboratory  results showed that chemicals
 were necessary to achieve the high degree of treatment
 required.  Figure  2 provides  the  design criteria for  the
 dissolved-air flotation system. These criteria follow closely
 those recommended by the American Petroleum Institute's
 Manual on Disposal of Refinery Wastes, Volume on Liquid
 Wastes 1969, chapters 5,6, 7 and 9.

   There are three basic units in the dissolved-air flotation
 process:
   1. Flocculation,
   2. Pressurized aeration and mixing, and
   3. Flotation.

   The ballast water, including  dosages of Alum (25 mg/1)
 and  polyelectrolyte (2  mg/1) which  have been  added
upstream,  is retained in the flocculating chamber for ten
 minutes. During this time, gentle mixing promotes floccula-
 tion.

   After the flocculation process, the ballast water is mixed
 with an  air-charged  stream  consisting  of 50% recycled
effluent. As this stream (pressurized to 50  psig) is released
into the flocculated ballast water tiny air bubbles mix with
 the ballast  water  and attach  themselves  to the flocculated
particles and suspended matter.

   The flotation process follows  the mixing chamber  and
consists of a quiescent chamber which  allows tiny air
bubbles to carry the solids and oil to the surface where
mechanical skimmers remove the floating mixture.
   After flotation,  the  treated ballast water flows into a
collection flume, where it will be continuously monitored
for oil content, hence to a 42" diameter outfall pipeline
which extends  into Port Valdez terminating at a depth of
more than  100  feet.  At this point, there is  a  diffuser
network designed to promote dilution and  mixing of the
treated water with the receiving waters of Port Valdez.
      Criteria
      Maximum influent flow = 23,340 gpm
      Recycle Rate = 50% of influent flow
      Rise rate Vt = 0.4 feet per minute
      Flocculation detention time =10 minutes
      Maximum channel width =  24 feet
      Effective channel water depth =12 feet

      Features of System (based on criteria)
      Channel flow-through area = 288 square feet
      Number of channels = 6
      Flow through velocity Vh = 2.7 feet per minute
      API design factor = 1.39
      Channel effective length =112 feet
      Flotation detention time =  41.5 minutes
    Figure 2;  Design Criteria for Floccu'ation-Flotation
                       Process
   The laboratory results showed that it was necessary to
 add 25 mg/1  Alum  and 2  mg/1  of synthetic  cationic
 polyelectrolyte  to  the  ballast water  for most effective
 treatment.  An  investigation  into  costs, transportation,
 equipment  requirements and operation  resulted in the
 utilization of a total liquid handling system.

   The Alum will be diluted to a 6% solution and fed to the
system  30 seconds upstream of the flocculating zone  by a
variable speed diaphragm pump. The polyelectrolyte will be
diluted to a 1% solution and added  to the system  by a
variable speed pump  immediately following the Alum.

   All  pumping  and storage systems are environmentally
controlled to ensure longtime trouble free operation.

   The  free  oil removed from the ballast water during the
primary  gravity  separation phase  is to be transferred to
skimmer tanks for additional  gravity separation, hence to
oil heater treaters  which produce an oil effluent having less
than 1 % water content. This recovered oil is transferred to
the  terminal storage  for ultimate shipping.  The water

-------
                                                                     / / ft'1 >    ''     (   r
                                                                       //:  ti/^       \  •-
                                                                     #y///          3
.
                              Figure 3:  Ballast Water Treating General Flow Diagram, Drawing No. D-50-M408-0 (Reproduced with

                                                 permission from Alyeska Pipeline Service Company).

-------
PORT  VALDEZ CRUDE OIL  STORA6E
           Figure 4;  Ballast Water Treating General Plot Plan, Drawing No. D-50-L401-0. (Reproduced with
                                permission from Alyeska Pipeline Service  Company).

-------
 132    OIL SPILL PREVENTION
removed  from  this process is  returned to the primary
gravity separation tanks.

   Incineration  is planned  to dispose of  sludge deposits
which accumulate in the ballast water storage  tanks and
other components of the separation process. This incinera-
tor will meet Federal emission standards.

SUMMARY
   The ballast water treatment facility proposed for Port
Valdez will play an important role in the eventual elimina-
tion  of  oily ballast  water at  sea  which  has caused
unnecessary damage to the marine environment in the past.
This facility  will be modern, expensive  and efficient. In
fact, the  standard of 10 mg/1 maximum oil content in the
effluent  of the treated ballast  water  imposed  upon the
Alyeska Pipeline Service Company by the  State and Federal
regulatory  agencies  is  perhaps   the most stringent  ever
required for a similar project.

   It is proposed to quickly accept the oily ballast water
from  incoming oil tankers into huge  primary gravity
separation  tanks.  The waste  water  will  then enter a
dissolved-air flotation system and with  assistance of chemi-
cal additives the  desired  effluent is  to be  obtained.
Recovered oil will be transferred to the oil storage tanks for
shipment south. All waste sludges will  be incinerated. The
facility is to  be designed  for versatility and backup units
will provide maximum reliability of operation. The facility
will be designed to accept all wastes and  treat them on site
to  meet  all  State statutes and regulations relative to
pollution of the land, air, and water.

   Port Valdez is a typical estuary, deep, high in dissolved
oxygen  content  and  continuously  active. This is very
important when considering that the effluent from a highly
treated ballast water treatment facility will be discharged
into it. The effect of this effluent upon the marine life can
be expected to be minimal.

   Of primary  concern must be  the protection of  a very
important salmon fishery resource in Port Valdez. Biologi-
cal productivity has not been found to be diverse in Port
Valdez and no particular species except the salmon are vital
to the overall ecology in the estuary. This is not the case in
Valdez Arm  or  Prince  William Sound, however. In these
areas, massive oil spills, if they occur have the potential to
inflict  serious  environmental  insult  upon  the  prolific
growths of plant and animal species in these highly produc-
tive  and diverse waters. The potential for  disastrous  oil
spills from huge oil tankers traveling in the Prince William
Sound area  demands that extensive, failsafe vessel move-
ment patterns  and  contingency  plans be  instituted  to
eliminate  this possibility from  occurring for all practical
purposes.
   In the opinion  of this  author,  the  Alyeska  Pipeline
Service  Company  is  committed  to producing an excep-
tionally high quality ballast water effluent  and has more
than met the challenge.

REFERENCES
   1. Hood, D.W.,  1969. Baseline Data Survey for Valdez
Pipeline Terminal Environmental Data Study, Report No.
R69-17, Institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska,
College, Alaska 99701.
   2. Laws of the  United States relating to Water Pollution
Control  and  Environmental  Quality compiled  by   the
Committee on  Public Works, U.S. House  of Representa-
tives, Superintendent  of  Documents,  U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.
   3. Alaska Statutes, Title 46. Water, section 46.05.
   4. Alaska Administrative Code,  Title  7.  Health  and
Welfare, Chapter 70. Water Quality Standards.
   5. Statement  of  Commissioner  Frederick McGinnis,
Department of Health and Welfare, State of Alaska, at  the
Department  of Interior  Hearing,  February   24,  1971,
Anchorage, Alaska.
   6. Incon, Inc.,  Engineers &  Constructors,  Houston,
Texas, Engineering Design Report, Ballast Water Treating
Facilities Trans Alaska Pipeline System Port Valdez Alaska
Terminal, July 1970.
   1. American  Petroleum Institute, Manual on Disposal of
Refinery,  Wastes, Volume on Liquid  Wastes, First edition
1969. (Priority)
   8. Aqueous Wastes From Petroleum and Petrochemical
Plants, Milton R. Beychok, 1967.

-------
                           OIL  SPILLED   WITH  ICE:    SOME

                                  QUALITATIVE   ASPECTS
                                                  F.G. Barber
                                         Marine Sciences Branch, Ottawa
  ABSTRACT

     The note gives an indication of the ways in which con-
  tainment by an ice cover of spilled oil can occur and of
  some of the ways in which the containment may be utilized
  in cleanup. There is in the experience the implication that
  certain characteristics of an ice cover may be usefully sim-
  ulated in a man-made structure.
     If spilled oil is to be removed from a water surface, i.e.,
  picked up or burned, it must first be contained. If this is
  not achieved by a shore and by the material on a shore, e.g.,
  by debris, weed or ice, then it is frequently not possible to
 provide  containment  by  the deployment  of man-made
 structures. In the following it will be suggested  that an ice
 cover can limit  oil movement  at the surface almost as well
 as a  shore and that perhaps certain features of an ice cover
. could be incorporated into the techniques of boom con-
 struction and deployment. It is emphasized that the experi-
 ence is largely qualitative, so that while a clear indication of
 processes is not possible, several are suggested. Of course an
 operational  association  with  oil  spills  usually  does not
 provide adequate opportunity to obtain  anything but quali-
 tative data; however, it  is believed that the considerations
 described here  could be  examined through experiment,
 perhaps of the type described by Vance 1.
    The  general conclusion about the effectiveness of an
 ice cover was derived in part from an experience on the east
 coast of Canada in late winter2 and from two in summer in
 the Canadian Arctic3-4. In each, the containment by the ice
 was such as to limit the extent of shoreline eventually con-
 taminated and in one, the containment allowed time for the
 consideration of a number of recovery  and cleanup meth-
 ods which included pumping on to the  sea ice to facilitate
evaporation. It is clear, however, that we  are not yet able to
exploit containment on every occasion  it might occur. As
ice can provide  unusually  effective containment, methods
of such exploitation in  the arctic and  other ice covered
waters might be pursued. This would include the considera-
 tion that the containment by ice can  occur for oil on a
 water surface, on the ice surface, and perhaps under the ice
 surface, and within the structure of the ice.
 Particular Oil in Ice  ,

     Bunker C from the tanker ARROW aground in Cheda-
 bucto Bay was found as particles within the structure of the
 ice (Figure la); a form of oil which was very reminiscent of
 the  oil  seen in seawater samples obtained there at depth.5
 Apparently, the oil particles were at the surface and became
 contained in the ice during the process of freezing. Later,
 when ice was melting it was possible to discern areas of
 "dirty" ice, at least 50 feet in diameter, within which were
 near-surface accumulations of oil  2-6 inches in  diameter
 (Figure Ib). At this time I was able to view samples of the
 ice and oil and I considered that the pattern resulted from a
 redistribution of the particulate oil due to internal move-
 ment with melt water (the ice cover was 4" thick and had
 been 8" thick), but this is not at all certain. Neither is it
 certain  by what process  the  oil particles were formed.
 Forrester5 suggested  that wave action on oil at the water
 surface  and  on oil ashore  could lead to the formation of
 particles; Wicks6 has shown that "showers of droplets" can
 occur at the head wave region of oil containment. It seems
 likely that both processes occurred at Chedabucto.

 Oil on  the Water Surface with Ice
    In particular, large accumulations of oil were contained
 across ice barriers there (Figure 1 c) which could have led to
 the oil droplets of Wicks and hence the particles. Oil had
 become incorporated into the ice sheet during growth and
 ice can be seen mixed into the accumulations of oil at the
 leading edge. Although an entirely adequate survey method
 was  not developed,  we did attempt  to determine  the
 amount of oil contained. On some  occasions the  oil was
judged to be 2-4 inches thick, but generally  it appeared to
 be less  than an  inch. At  the time there was no way by
 which we could pick up the Bunker C so contained; neither
 did we learn how to burn it. Even now I am not certain
                                                      133

-------
134    OIL SPILLED WITH ICE . .
      Figure 1- Four photos, the last three from a helicopter on
  March  21  1970  of oil and ice in Chedabucto Bay2, (a) Oil in
  paniculate form in a sample of ice from the relatively new ice cover
  in Lennox Passage on February 28. View is of a vertical section; the
  eraser end of the pencil is at the under-side of the ice. (b)  The i<


  how best this containment  might have been exploited, al-
  though pickup machinery of the type developed by Sewell
   would likely have been effective.
       Containment  by  ice  occurred  at Resolute,  N.W.T.
   (about 75° N latitude) in  August, 1970 when a spill4 oc-
   curred into  the  harbour  where an  8-9 tenths ice cover
   existed. The spill was relatively small, perhaps 3000 gallons,
surface toward the eastern edge of the ice cover in Lennox Passage.
(c) View  to the north of Haddock Harbour, (d) View of Janvnn
Lagoon in which the last of the ice and oil there and the boom at
the entrance may be  seen.
and was of a relatively light fuel oil, heavier than diesel but
much lighter?  than a Bunker C type. For  about six days
after the spill occurred, the ice containing the oil was c<
fined to the head of the harbour by  the southerly  wind^
Subsequently the  wind changed to the north and movec
much of the ice and oil out of the harbour, although by this
time  a portion  of the shore had  been  oiled (Figure 2).

-------
                                                                                    OIL SPILL PREVENTION   135
    Figure 2: Ice grounded on a relatively heavily-oiled portion of
the intcrtidal /one at Resolute.

Unforlunately, we  were not able to observe  the situation
prior to  this major  movement,  so that  it  is  not clear
whether either pumping or burning  would  have been clean-
up  options,  although  I  lend to believe they would have
been, particularly early in the spill. For  example,  the oil
might have  been pumped inlo containers  ashore or into  a
ship, or  to  other  areas  of containment  by sea ice and
burned  in discrete amounts.
Oil on  Sea Ice
    These considerations were based on experience  gained
in June, 1970 at Deception Bay in western  Hudson Strait in
an  association with cleanup of  a  spill from a  tank farm
(Figure  3a)  of about  400,000  gallons of diesel fuel and
some gasoline.3  The spill  from the farm occurred during  a
time of small  tide at a location where the tidal range varied
from about  1 2 to 19 feet and where  the sea was completely
covered with  ice over  four feet thick. Most of the oil was
contained within the large blocks of ice, 4-7 feet thick, on
the  intertidal zone in  front of the slide  (Figure 3b) and
nearby  on the surface of the water in pools along the tidal
hinge. As the  tidal  range increased to a maximum (on June
22), oil  moved out  of the area of containment in the inter-
tidal /.one of the slide  onto these pools;  however,  a con-
siderable quantity of oil remained and  this was eventually
cleaned  up by burning. The burn (Figure  3c)  was initiated
at low  water  al  the time of maximum tidal  range. It fol-
lowed a general  cleanup  of the site during  the previous
week. The cleanups was initiated by pumping onto the sea
ice   surface   where it  was  eventually burned.  The  com-
bination proved an appropriate method of cleanup although
the burning caused some air  pollution and some  biological
damage  resulted8.
    The significant aspects of the incident are that the ice
cover provided effective control of the spill  over a period of
two to  three weeks and furnished  an effective platform
from which  to  work.  It  also provided a  unique type of
containment, i.e.,on the ice surface, as a secondary step in
cleanup. The  considerations  which led to  pumping the oil

    Rgurc 3: The tank farm at Deception Bay, Quebec after the
slide of early June, 1970. (a) The six tanks in the farm; that tank on
the  far right was reported  to  have been nearly empty, (b)  Area
about  the lank on the intertidal zone after cleanup. Note that the
burn has "opened up" the ice of the intertidal zone in front of the
slide, (c)  The start of the burn within  the intertidal zone of the
slide.

-------
136
OIL SPILLED WITH ICE...
 onto the sea ice included the observation that evaporation
 was occurring and that, as the exposure and surface area
 would  be very  much increased, the rate and  quantity
 evaporated  would increase. I concluded that this would
 have been an effective method of cleanup of that oil on the
 ice surface. However, there were other considerations, in-
 cluding  the imminent breakup  of the ice  cover  and the
 requirement to burn at least part of the oil, i.e.,that portion
 mentioned above  which remained in the intertidal zone of
 the slide area out of reach of the pumps. Therefore, it was
 decided to effect an immediate cleanup by burning.

 Oil under Ice Cover

     It was  a tentative conclusion  that, away from inter-
 tidal zones and lagoons, oil did not accumulate under an ice
 cover, at least not under the  uniformly flat ice  without
 ridges which  was generally experienced. It was also con-
 cluded that unoiled shores downwind of an area of contain-
 ment remained free  of oil. The initial consideration was
 that  the ice cover was simply serving as a very effective
 "boom." Subsequently, it  seemed that  oil may  be trans-
 ported under an ice  cover, but  in particulate form within
 the water column, and hence not generally available to oil a
 shore.
     On  the other  hand, many of the small  lagoons around
 Chedabucto Bay  became ice covered  and  a number con-
 tained oil. The topography of some lagoons was such that
 they were relatively  strongly coupled to the sea  outside.
 Nevertheless,most of the oil in them remained as long as the
 ice cover remained, i.e., the ice and oil were generally dis-
 persed from the lagoon at  the same time  (Figure Id). In
 certain other lagoons (containing oil) with little coupling to
 the sea, the oil did not move about under the ice cover, i.e.,
 it was generally observed in the same location and pattern.
 Subsequently, the ice cover was dispersed  by melting and
 the oil was then  moved about by the wind to oil the in-
 ternal shores of the lagoon.

    To some extent this experience might have been antici-
 pated. The ice cover removes the influence of wind and the
 Bunker  C fuel oil should have little tendency to spread at
 water temperatures near freezing10, especially if it con-
 tained water2. As well,  and with regard to-the lagoon ex-
                                                   perience generally, it was not known to what extent the oil
                                                   was trapped between  layers of ice  there, except that  in
                                                   some places it was2-
                                                       That ice  can provide very effecitve containment is
                                                   evident.  It is also evident that containment cannot always
                                                   be exploited in recovery or cleanup as some fule oil, Bunker
                                                   C for example, can be difficult to pump or burn. There is
                                                   some evidence that both these difficulties may be overcome
                                                   so that given containment it should be possible to clean up
                                                   any spilled fuel oil. On the other hand, there has yet to be
                                                   an  adequate  solution to the  problem of  containment
                                                   generally JO, at least in areas without  an  ice cover, so that
                                                   provision of containment has continued  to be the central
                                                   problem of cleanup. The experience with ice cover and the
                                                   general  conclusion  concerning  the effectiveness of an ice
                                                   cover carried with it the implication that certain features of
                                                   an ice cover might be arranged for in a man-made structure.
                                                   It was   realized  that  an  ice  cover  achieved  significant
                                                   containment  of oil  on the water surface even though the
                                                   cover could be relatively  shallow.  It was also realized that
                                                   most failures of booms were  due to "over-topping"! 1. The
                                                   failure does not occur with an ice  cover mainly because of
                                                   the greater expanse relative to an ordinary boom, but also
                                                   because  the  leading edge  of the ice  barrier  generally
                                                   contains broken ice which reduces the sea state, or "chop",
                                                   and  hence,  over-topping.  Subsequently,  oil becomes
                                                   contained and further reduces the chop. The critical feature
                                                   here is that an ice cover achieves a separation between the
                                                   line along which containment is achieved  and the line along
                                                   which the wave energy acts. In most ordinary booms the
                                                   two coincide.

                                                       There are a  number  of ways  by  which the  separation
                                                   might be achieved including the use of an air bubble barrier
                                                   to reduce the wind waves or by the addition of material to
                                                   simulate a field of broken ice. Were either of these measures
                                                   effective it might then be possible to  look to a redesign of
                                                   the main barrier within  the concept of a horizontal, rather
                                                   than vertical, array  and so achieve a containment approach-
                                                   ing that  of an ice cover. It is conceivable  that such an array
                                                   would be inherently stable and flexible.

-------
                                                                               OIL SPILL PREVENTION    137
REFERENCES
1. Vance, George P. 1971. Control of Arctic oil spills.
Ocean Industry. January: 14-17.
2. In "Task Force Operation Oil (Cleanup of the ARROW
oil spill in Chedabucto Bay". Volumes 2 and 3.  Canada
Ministry of Transport. 1970.
3.  Barber, F.G.  1970. Oil spills  in  ice: some  cleanup
options.

4. Barber, F.G.  1971. An oiled Arctic shore. Arctic (in
press).

5. Forrester, WX).  1970. Oil particle surveys. Presented at
Fifteenth General Assembly IAPSO Tokyo.

6. Wicks, Moye,  1969. Fluid dynamics of floating  oil  con-
tainment by mechanical barriers in the presence of water
currents. In  Proceedings Joint Conference on Prevention
and Control of Oil Spills: 55-106.
7.  Dr.  A.Y.  McLean, Nova  Scotia Technical College,
Halifax. Personal communication.

8. Grainger, E.H. and J.W. Wacasey. MS 1970. Report on a
visit to Deception Bay to examine the biological effects of
the oil spill of early June, 1970. Fisheries Research Board,
Canada.
9. Walkup, P.C., L.M. Polentz, J.D. Smith and P.L. Peter-
son. 1969. Study of equipment and methods for removing
oil  from harbour waters. In Proceedings Joint Conference
on Prevention and Control of Oil Spills: 237-248.
10. Anonymous. 1971. Booms and bubble barriers. Marine
Pollution Bulletin. 2(1): 1-16.

11. Lehr, W.E. and J.O. Scherer.  1969. Design requirements
for booms. In Proceedings Joint Conference on Prevention
and Control of Oil Spills: 107-128.

-------
                     PUGET  SOUND  FISHERIES  AND  OIL

                           POLLUTION - A Status  Report

                                      Robert C. Clark, Jr. and John S. Finley
                                             Biological Laboratory
                                        National Marine Fisheries Service
                                           Seattle, Washington 98102
ABSTRACT
    The Greater Puget Sound Basin is one of the largest oil
handling areas on the West Coast of North America. Due to
the increased local need for petroleum products and to the
proposed influx of Alaskan North Slope crude oil in the
near future,  this area will  undoubtedly experience even
greater petroleum transportation and processing activities.
In terms  of living resources of economic value-fish, shell-
fish, waterfowl and aquatic animals-Puget Sound is one of
the most productive estuaries on the Pacific Coast. There is
increasing evidence that the extensive sport, commercial
and aquacultural fisheries resources are threatened  by pol-
lution resulting from oil spilled in the transport, handling,
and use of petroleum.

    This  paper presents  a stauts report of what is being
done in the Pacific Northwest by the petroleum industry,
state government and federal agencies to protect  the en-
vironment prior to the anticipated expansion of the petro-
leum industry. Research  activities which will provide addi-
tional information for minimizing the impact of oil pollu-
tion on an already pollution-stressed environment are also
discussed.

   The Greater Puget Sound Basin has all the natural re-
sources necessary to make it one of the most productive
estuaries in all of North America. This basin is that portion
of the  Pacific Northwest containing all the inside  waters
from Cape  Flattery  to north  of  Vancouver,  British
Columbia. See Figure 1. With a shoreline equal in length to
the entire coastline of Washington,  Oregon and California
and a surface area of 2,500 square  miles, the Washington
State portion  of the basin has the advantage of providing
protected deep water ports as well as a natural setting for
marine aquaculture. Today this area is becoming one of the
major oil  handling centers on the West Coast of the  United
States.  Can the area meet the challenge  of protecting its
natural environment while permitting an orderly develop-
ment of the petroleum industry?

Existing Fisheries and the Potential for
Aquaculture - The Renewable Resource
    Deforestation, flood control, hydroelectric dams, in-
dustrial and  municipal  pollution have severely depleted
many of the  nursery areas for Puget Sound fisheries. Fur-
ther urbanization and  industrialization threaten their com-
plete destruction. Since it is unlikely that this process will
be reversed, it is becoming apparent that conventional fish-
ing methods will have  to be supplemented by aquacultural
technology to maintain fishery hields at satisfactory levels.

    Today the rich and productive waters of Puget Sound
directly support a commercial and sport fisheries valued at
75 to  85  million dollars annually. Two-thirds of this value
is derived from sport fishing. Intensive aquacultural acti-
vities, developed over  the next decade or two, could add an
additional 100 million dollars annually. During the same
period of time,  the volume of petroleum and its products
moved over Puget Sound waters could also increase as much
as ten  times if the trans-Alaska and trans-U.S. pipelines are
built. Properly developed and managed, aquaculture and
the petroleum industry should be able to exist side by side
in the  estuaries. While it would  be difficult for properly
planned aquaculture to exclude the petroleum industry, the
oil pollution  caused by a single large accident  inside Puget
Sound could  destroy the area's entire aquaculture industry.
    Aquaculture is just beginning to emerge as an industry
in Puget Sound. One of the most ambitious projects  is being
developed by the Lummi Indians on land situated between
two major oil refinery complexes in  north Puget  Sound:
Cherry Point-Ferndale a few miles  to  the north and Ana-
cortes to the  south. The Lummi Indians have an investment
worth  four million dollars in four  aquacultural activities:
                                                    139

-------
140  OIL SPILL PREVENTION
         Voncouver  Island
                                                                1*1 if u M vnvmtcuk
                                                            *t  FERNDALE*
                                                                          BEJ.LINGHAM<^
                                                                i I J I ' ' ^ ^^   *
                                                                (Kw^ANACORTES
                                                                V- U  Im  \  =
                                                                  Whidbey
                                                                  Island
                                PORT ANGELES
  Union
(Standby)  .if
                       Olympic   Peninsu la
                            Refineries
                            Crude Oil Pipelines
                        mini Product Pipeline
                                 Figure 1: The Greater Puget Sound Basin

-------
                                                                                           PUGET SOUND   141
(I) an oyster-spawning hatchery, which is being used to
establish and perpetuate their stocks of seed oysters-an ex-
cess of which they plan to sell to other Puget Sound oyster
growers who are now dependent upon imported Japanese
seed oysters; (2) a series of diked ponds on the tide-flats for
rearing salmon,  trout and rafted oysters; (3) a commercial
algae-harvesting operation which provides raw materials for
East Coast reduction plants; and (4) a bait  worm industry
in the intertidal zone.
   At Manchester, Washington, Ocean Systems Inc. has
undertaken  a  pilot   salmon rearing  project  based  on
salt-water  rearing  methods developed  by  the National
Marine Fisheries Service.  Salmon are grown from  eggs to
marketable fishes of 3/4 pound in one year. In Europe and
Japan mussels, clams and  shrimp have proved amenable to
rearing under controlled conditions.

The Petroleum Industry —
The Unintentional Competitor
   While aquaculture may represent the future for Puget
Sound, the  present demands more than 400,000  barrels
each day (b/d - 42 U.S. gallons per barrel) of refined petro-
leum products  to keep the factories, furnaces and motor
vehicles fueled  in  the coastal portions of  Washington,
Oregon and British Columbia. The refining capacity of the
area is considerably less than the  demand; so additional oil
is supplied  by  tanker from California. The  demand for
petroleum  products is expected to increase  by approxi-
mately 4.5% annually  for  the western United States, and
the petroleum industry has started to build additional re-
fining facilities locally. There are already  four  refineries
near Vancouver, one at Ferndale, two at Anacortes, and two
small refineries in Tacoma.
   A new Atlantic-Richfield Company (ARCO) refinery is
nearing completion at Cherry Point, and though it will in-
crease the area's production by 26%, it will still not meet
local demands. Standard Oil Company of California has a
large block of land  adjacent to  the ARCO refinery site and
Union Oil Company of California has actively sought a
Puget Sound refinery site in the past.
   Additional local refineries  will have to be built if the
present inflow of refined products from California  is to be
reduced. The Trans Mountain Pipeline supplies low-sulfur
crude oil from Alberta and British Columbia oil fileds to
the existing refineries in  Vancouver, Ferndale  and Ana-
cortes. This  supply of pipeline-delivered crude oil is essen-
tially limited to these refineries  which are  producing near
their design capacity now. Therefore, any new refinery will
probably be dependent  on crude oil supplied  by tanker.
ARCO will require  up to  100,000 b/d, and each additional
facility will only add to this amount resulting in an abrupt
jump from 17,000 to several hundred thousand barrels of
crude oil shipped into Puget Sound daily.
   When the Trans-Alaska Pipeline boosts its pumping rate
to the projected 2,000,000 b/d, the amount of crude oil
awflable at  the  Valdez terminal will exceed 'the  western
united States  petroleum  requirements. The  demands for
petroleum  products are becoming critical in the Midwest
and East Coast, especially for low-sulfur crude oil such as
that from Alaska's North Slope. One plan under active con-
sideration is to transport North Slope crude oil through the
Trans-Alaska  Pipeline,  load  it  aboard  supertankers  at
Valdez, ship it to a Puget Sound terminal of a trans-U.S.
pipeline and then pump it to eastern markets. A feasibility
study has been undertaken by ARCO, British  Petroleum,
Humble, Marathon and Mobil for this  2,600-mile, big-inch
pipeline. Depending on the size of such a trans-U.S. pipe-
line, up  to  1,000,000 b/d of North Slope crude oil  have
been predicted to enter Puget Sound.
    The  transportation  of  refined products  in western
Washington and Oregon  is  by products pipeline  (26%),
tanker and barge (69%) and tank and  railcar (5%). On the
average,  one finds approximately 28,000 barrels of crude
oil and  nearly  220,000 barrels  of refined products being
transported daily  on waters of the Greater Puget  Sound
Basin. Nearly 45 tankers  (usually 15,000-30,000 dwt ves-
sels) call each month in Puget Sound ports to bring in crude
oil or products and to ship out locally-produced products,
and a small amount of crude oil.
   , The  mammoth tanker has become the most economical
and  feasible   method  for  the  transportation  of bulk
petroleum on a worldwide basis. Unless exception is made
to the Jones Act requiring U.S. built and manned vessels on
domestic runs, the crude oil shipments from Valdez to local
refineries will be in U.S. tankers. Figures on United States
and world tanker construction  are presented in Table  1.
The conclusion that  can  be drawn from these facts and
figures is that more and more petroleum will be moving in
Puget Sound - and in larger and larger  vessels.
 Oil Spills - Examples of the
 Potential Danger
     Four principal reasons have been given for pollution in
 oil ports: design faults, mechanical failures, spillage during
 loading and unloading, and human error. Of these, the last
 is the most important cause of oil pollution and the most
 difficult one to correct. The majority of the large accidents
 in recent years has been attributed to human error or poor
 judgment. No oil port  is able to avoid spillage. Severe
 measures have been taken to prevent or control oil pollu-
 tion  in Milford Haven, a large and modern British oil port
 adjacent to a National Park. There, 210 million barrels of
 oil were handled in 1966;  of this, 21,000 barrels were spil-
 led  in port. Thus, in spite of modern technology and in
 spite of the  declared intention to  minimize pollution,
 0.01% of the oil entering this port was spilled. Other oil
 ports may  have less favorable  records, and a single large
 catastrophe in port could  increase this spillage rate drama-
 tically. It would appear that oil spills and  discharges  are
 inevitable  in  oil ports and refinery complexes. Assuming
 that  the loss in port can be limited to the exceptionally low
 level of 0.01%, the average spillage from a  1  million b/d
 shipping activity would be on the order of 100 barrels  per
 day.

-------
142   OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
                                                    TABLE 1
                            UNITED STATES AND WORLD TANKER CONSTRUCTION
Company
ARCO


Overseas
Shipbullingh
Mobil Oil Corp.
Number
1
2
2
1
1
1
Deadweight
tons
120,000
120,000
69,800
62,000
120,000
126,000
Completion Yard/Notes
1973 Bethlehem Steel Corp.
1 974 Sparrows Point, Md.
1971
1970
1973
1972 Sun Shipbuilding &
                   Standard Oil (Calif)
                   Seatrain Lines

                   World Fleet
                   World Fleet
                   World Fleet
                   Largest Vessel
                                        DDCo.
  2        69,800           1972    Bethlehem Steel Corp.
  1       230,000           1972    Seatrain Shipbuilding
  1       230,000           1973       Brooklyn, N.Y.
 21       200,000-plus       1969    As of June
 94       200,000-plus       1970    As of June 30
168       150,000-plus       1973    On order as of Nov. 1970
  2       477,000           1973    On Order in Japan
    Oil pollution in Puget Sound has appeared to increase
slightly over the last four years as shipping and industriali-
zation have also increased.  This may either be a real in-
crease or an  apparent  increase based  on greater public
awareness and reporting of  oil spills-or a combination of
both factors. A primary source of oil spill data has been the
U.S. Coast Guard. Over the last four years there haveljeen
over  200 Coast Guard investigations of oil spills in the
Pacific Northwest,  exclusive of  British  Columbia waters.
The location of the polluting source, probabe cause, and
severity of these reported oil spills are given in Table 2.
Usually a loss of more  than ten barrels is considered a major
spill in this area, although in  a  confined space as little as
two barrels can represent a major problem (bunker oil on a
swimming beach, in a yacht harbor,  or in a sewage treat-
ment plant). The striking fact is that Puget Sound has a
higher percentage of major spills compared with  other
Pacific Northwest ports (Portland, Lower Columbia River,
Coos Bay and coastal).
    At the present  time very little oil pollution is obvious
at the existing major Puget Sound refineries. Accidents do
occasionally occur during loading and unloading operations,
but they are generally  cleaned up quickly by refinery opera-
tors. There are few  subsurface sources of oil in this area; so
existing oil pollution  problems come either from ships or
shore. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimated  that
40% of the 2,000 spills in UJ5. waters in 1966 were  from
land-based sources.  In addition to the known sources of oil
pollution, there  are  serious contributions from  the dis-
charge of fuels and  spent lubricants in untreated municipal
and industrial wastes and from the incomplete combustion
of marine fuels.
    The Washington State Department of Ecology has also
kept a detailed file of the total number of oil and hazardous
materials spills that  have been reported from all sources. In
1970 there were 234  spills  reported  within the waters of
the State of Washington, of which 218 were in Puget Sound
waters or tributaries.  See Table  2. The large "unknown"
                  values reflect  the inability of the State and the Coast
                  Guard to  completely  investigate every spill  because  of a
                  lack of funds, equipment and personnel.  The majority of
                  the  reports were  from private citizens, not  from official
                  monitoring or surveillance activities.

                  Regulatory Actions by the State of
                  Washington - A Potential Deterrent
                      To combat the dangers of oil pollution in Puget Sound,
                  the State of Washington has enacted one of the strongest oil
                  spill laws in the country leaving the oil companies, oil car-
                  riers and users with unlimited liability for cleaning up oil
                  spills as well as paying for damages to  persons, property or
                  wildlife regardless of whether the cause  was accidental or an
                  "act of God." In addition to being liable for cleanup and
                  damage costs, a person who intentionally or negligently per-
                  mits oil pollution can be subjected to fines up to $20,000.
                  Thjs law, passed during a special legislative session in 1970,
                  also sets up rapid review and court procedures for appeals
                  and allows the  state  water pollution control agency to
                  apply  standards  on effluents going into all waters of the
                  state. The State of Washington is also considering the estab-
                  lishment  of an oil spill  cleanup fund  to  complement the
                  unlimited liability law.
                      The State of Maine has a nonlapsing revolving fund of
                  $4,000,000 based on  annual licence fees of 1/2 cent per
                  barrel of oil, petroleum products or their by-products trans-
                  ferred within the state.  When the  fund reaches the estab-
                  lished limit, the  fees are reduced proportionately to cover
                  only administrative expenses and sums  allocated to research
                  (maximum of $100,000 per year) and development.  This
                  concept has been suggested for Washington. Another pro-
                  posal includes the establishing of a fee of 1/100 cent per
                  barrel on refinery production until a 4 million dollar fund is
                  reached. Such a  fund would permit the state to  move im-
                  mediately through the Department of Ecology to  cleanup a
                  spill and then assess the offender. It would also permit the
                  State to clean up spills of unknown origin.

-------
                                                                                           PUGET SOUND   143
   The  Department  of Ecology, established  in July  of
1970, is responsible for enforcing the State's water quality
standards and monitors its  water resources. The Depart-
ment has also developed contingency plan capabilities for
responding  to major oil  pollution accidents in  state  waters
and have aggressively pursued their responsibilities.
   The possibility of Puget Sound oil and gas exploration
in the near  future has been reduced due to public pressure
and official decisions. The Washington State Public Lands
Commissioner in November  1970 denied 95 marine oil and
gas lease applications for 140,000 acres  of Puget  Sound
water  bottoms  on  the  grounds  that the  present
state-of-the-art in petroleu drilling technology could not as-
sure a  100%  pollution-free environment. The  State consi-
dered such  drilling as being  incompatable with a potential
multi-million  dollar a year seafood cultivation industry in
portions of the  2 million acres  of  water bottoms under
State control. The Canadian Department  of Fisheries and
Forestry denied  Standard  Oil  Company of  California
seismic drilling permits at the entrance of the Strait of Juan
de Fuca off the west coast of Vancouver Island in January
1971.

Research Activities-The Search
for an Equitable Solution
    One of the limiting  factors in  developing reasonable
procedures for handling large quantities of petroleum in the
Greater Puget Sound Basin is insufficent knowledge of how
oil pollution  damages the marine environment. Large-scale
and long-term studies in the past have usually dealt with
major  tanker disasters after  the accident occurred (such as
the Torrey Canyon, Tampico, Ocean Eagle, Arrow and the
West Falmouth barge spill).  What is  needed is research into
the problem of biological damage to local major ecological
zones: to determine the background distribution patterns
and the amounts of natural  and man-introduced pollutants
in the environment; to  establish through laboratory and
field experiments and bioassays, what effects might be  ex-
pected if a pollutant escapes into the local environment;
and to describe and catalog the local  marine flora and fauna
by ecological zone and by seasonal distribution.

    Preliminary  research has been initiated in the Greater
Puget  Sound Basin by  federal, state, educational and in-
dustry groups. At the Federal level, the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency  (EPA)  has  contracted with Texas Instru-
ments of Dallas to investigate oil and hazardous materials
spills in the inland navigable waters, coastal and estuarine
zones  of Washington, Oregon  and  Alaska. Texas Instru-
ments would start their study immediately after a major
accident to collect and evaluate meteorological and oceano-
graphic data, biological  and ecological information, chemi-
cal and physical characteristics of the spill material, as well
as to  monitor  the pollutant  movement  or dispersion.
Western Washington State College at Bellingham received  a
$16,227 research  grant in  1969 from the Federal Water
^Pollution Control  Administration to study the effects of
pollutants  from an aluminum plant  and an oil refinery on
marine plants. Battelle-Northwest at Richland received  a
grant last year from the Federal Water Quality Administra-
tion for the development of a hydraulic skimmer capable of
recovering 50,000 gallons of oil per hour from an oil spill.
    The Office of Sea Grant  within the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric  Administration (NOAA) provides research
funding to the University of Washington (and Oregon State
University) to promote long-term, ecological baseline data
acquisition and research activities. The University of Wash-
ington  has  instituted multi-discipline ocean  engineering
systems design courses for students interested in working
on oil spillage problems in Puget Sound.
    The National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA) has a
research unit at the Seattle Biological Laboratory studying
the biological effect of oil pollution on Puget Sound marine
organisms by determining the  existing  background content
and  distribution of saturated hydrocarbons and by observ-
ing short-term, sublethal  physiological changes and chemi-
cal uptake  of pollutant  hydrocarbons under  laboratory
bioassay conditions.
    The Coast Guard has developed regional contingency
plans for the Seattle Coastal area, and NOAA  is developing
plans for combining the scientific capabilities  of its various
component  Services (National  Weather Service, National
Ocean Survey, Environmental Data Service, Environmental
Research Laboratories, Office of Sea  Grant  and the Na-
tional Marine Fisheries Service) into a  coordinated disaster
response team to interface with the Coast Guard and State
contingency plans.
     The Washington  State  Department  of  Fisheries,  in
conjunction  with  the former  Water Pollution Control
Commission, has conducted research in the area of relative
toxicity  of various  oil  dispersants  on  oyster  larvae,
steelhead and  coho fingerlings, and  has  determinad the
dispersing  efficiencies of  the  materials  under  local
conditions.

    The petroleum industry has also  been sponsoring re-
search in oil pollution effects. Esso Research and Engineer-
ing Company has awarded a  5380,000 contract to Bat-
telle-Northwest to study the long-term fate of oil in the sea
and  its long-term  effects on  marine life. This study, the
major part of which is being conducted at the Marine Re-
search Laboratory at Sequim Bay, Washington, is develop-
ing tests to assess the immediate toxicity of crude oils, oil
and dispersant, and dispersants singly  on a wide variety  of
local marine organisms. Balanced eco-community bioassays
are contemplated as well as research into sublethal effects
and synergistic effects. The ultimate goal is to  predict the
level at  which these pollutants cause short-term acute and
long-term sublethal effects on the local organisms.
     In addition  to funding research,  the local petroleum
industry, through the Seattle office of the Western Oil and
Gas Association, has established a cooperative cleanup pro-
gram and mutual self-help plan  for Southern, Central and
Northern Puget Sound.
     Even private citizens have become involved. One indi-
vidual has patented an air-dropped  inflatable  flotation oil

-------
144    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
spill control  system utilizing a  boom which could be
attached to a ship's  hull by  electromagnets or  by vinyl
H-beam connectors to corral the spill oil.
    Other industries in Puget Sound are more or less direct-
ly involved in oil pollution matters. To reduce the number
of possible  tanker collisions and  groundings, Honeywell,
Inc., through their  Seattle Marine  Systems Center,  has
developed a "Proposed Automated Marine Traffic Advisory
System for Puget Sound" using a computerized radar con-
trol concept. Another Seattle firm, Stanley Associates, has
proposed  the development of  a private  "fire  brigade"
organization  to  stockpile needed  oil  spill  cleanup equip-
ment (boats, skimmers, booms, absorbents, etc.) at strategic
points  in Puget Sound from which they could direct the use
of such equipment in emergency and salvage operations.
This service would supplement the local oil industry con-
tingency plan and could be financed by the industry on an
annual maintenance fee plus additional charges for cleanup
after an accident.

    The Canadian Department of Energy, Mines and  Re-
sources (the Marine Sciences Branch which  is now in the
new Department of the  Environment) has  formed an oil
pollution research program to study the long-term fate of
petroleum in sea water and sediments.  This research, to be
conducted  at  the Fisheries Research  Board of Canada's
Nanaimo Biological Station and at the Pacific Environment
Institute in  Vancouver, will provide complementary infor-
mation  from the Canadian  portion of the  Greater Puget
Sound  Basin. The Marine Services of the Canadian  Depart-
ent of  Transport  has developed a contingency  response
capability for British Columbia oil spills.

CONCLUSIONS
    Unlike oil and  gas, food from  the sea is a renewable
resource that can  be utilized only as long as the water
quality  allows the fish and plant life  to enjoy maximum
growth. Unfortunately,  the greater the amount of petro-
leum handled, the greater the risk for hydrocarbon pollu-
tion of the marine environment. The best procedure for
combatting oil spills in view of the damage to natural re-
sources and recreational  facilities is to prevent them from
happening in the first place. By starting now it may still be
possible to restrict the potential damage of the Puget Sound
environment from oil  pollution by promoting research into
the specific effects of these pollutants  on the local marine
environment with the results being used to continually up-
date cleanup procedures and regulatory actions.
    If modern pollution  control technology is introduced
and practical pollution control regulations are enforced, it
would theoretically  be possible to reduce the amount of oil
pollution  while  increasing  the  volume of  oil  handled.
Neither the well-being of the fishery resources nor the in-
creased  development  of the  petroleum industry in the
Greater Puget Sound Basin  need be  mutually exclusive. By
developing stringent,  yet realistic,  rules  and regulations
based on adequate research and applied under local condi-
tions, it should be possible to provide for the orderly de-
velopment of both the petroleum industry and the fishery
resources of Puget Sound.

-------
                                                                                    PUGET SOUND    145
                                                TABLE 2
                                 OIL SPILLS IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST
                                               1967-1970
                                   U.S. Coast Guard Oil Spill Investigations1

               REPORTED SPILLS             ATTRIBUTED CAUSE
            Number   Major             Human    Equip-  Unknown
            of Spills   Spills                       ment
UNITED STATES
  19683       714
     ATTRIBUTED LOCATION
Shore     Ship      Unknown
PUGET SOUND ONLY
1967 12
1968 25
1969 18
1970 26
19702 218
33%
20
28
12
4
84%
52
67
62
39
16%
16
22
15
7
0%
32
11
23
54
42%
40
44
50
54
58%
32
50
31
15
0%
28
6
19
31
OTHER PACIFIC NORTHWEST PORTS
1967 20
1968 31
1969 33
1970 42
0%
10
12
2
55%
81
73
62
15%
3
3
5
30%
16
24
33
25%
16
39
37
60%
61
34
42
15%
23
27
21
ENTIRE PACIFIC NORTHWEST
1967 32
1968 56
1969 51
1970 68
12%
14
18
6
66%
68
70
62
16%
9
10
9
18%
23
20
29
31%
27
41
43
60%
48
39
37
9%
25
20
20
42%
49%
1
 Accident (Oil Spill) Reports, U.S. Coast Guard, 13th District, Intelligence and Law Enforcement Branch
 Washington State Department of Ecology, Monthly Reports of Reported Oil Spills
 Department of the Interior data; 0.3% from oil drilling activities.
9%

-------
                             A  JOINT  STATE-INDUSTRY
               PROGRAM  FOR OIL  POLLUTION  CONTROL
                                           R.W.Neal, G.R.Schimke
                                            ArthurD. Little, Inc.
                                                 D.L. Corey
                                      Division of Water Pollution Control,
                                       Commonwealth of Massachusetts
 ABSTRACT
    This paper describes a project undertaken to establish
 specific measures for reducing the threat of oil pollution
 and to respond more effectively to oil spills in an intensely
 utilized estuarine area  near Boston.  Its recommendations
 are the result of a study of potential sources of pollution
 and  the mechanisms that spread  it.  To  help design a
 fast-response system  for containing  and removing spilled
 oil, the study team  developed a computer program that
 could predict the probable path of oil spilled anywhere in
 the area under various  conditions of wind  and tide. This
 information was used to select locations for containment
 devices and determine  the speed with which  they would
 have  to  be deployed.  The study was supported by the
 Massachusetts Division   of  Water Pollution Control and
 aided by the active cooperation of local industries through
 a joint industry committee.

 INTRODUCTION
   In all the coastal  states, numerous industrial complexes
 are located on the waterfront for access to marine shipping.
 Industries that handle oil or petroleum products have been
 the source of accidental spills that  threaten  the  natural
 ecology, and interfere with  the recreational and aesthetic
 values so prized  by property owners, boating enthusiasts,
 swimmers,  and  both commercial  and  recreational
 fishermen. Further pollution is introduced by  the disposal
 of oily materials in nearby drains that eventually empty
 into the estuarine waters.

 Description of Study Area
   The Town River Bay and Fore River area bordering the
towns of  Quincy,  Braintree,   and Weymouth  in
Massachusetts  typifies   the  intense,  multiple-use
development of  estuarine areas located  near large urban
centers.  This area located about ten miles southeast  of
Boston (Figure 1) is not characteristic of many such areas,
however, because  its  waters  and shorelines  still  remain
relatively clean. Nevertheless,  it  is increasingly threatened
by pollution: reported oil spills have increased in  all but
one of the past six years, as shown in Table 1.

                     TABLE 1
                  OIL SPILLS IN
  TOWN RIVER BAY AND FORE RIVER, 1964-1970
          Year
          1964
          1965
          1966
          1967
          1968
          1969
          1970
No.of
Spills
   1
   3
   7
   2
   7
  11
  17
    The area has almost  16 miles of shoreline, about 49%
of which is zoned for residential use and 41% for industry.
Public and  open-space zoning accounts for about 8%, and
the remaining 2% is set aside for business (see Figure 2).
Almost  one fourth of the shoreline  is undeveloped  and
consists  largely of marshes. Beaches and park land occupy a
total of two miles of shoreline.
    The area has significant shellfish resources, as shown in
Figure 3, but  their  utilization is hindered by pollution.
Quincy has 256 acres of "restricted" clam flats and 41 acres
of  "seasonal"  clam flats; Weymouth has  136 acres of
"restricted" clam flats. The remaining shoreline is closed to
shellfishing. These classifications are  based  on coliform
standards established by the Public Health Department, but
                                                   147

-------
148     OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
  the  areas can  also  be  closed  in  case  of oil  pollution.
  Professional  diggers are  permitted to  harvest  clams in
  restricted areas  if the clams are taken to a cleaning station.
             N.M
    MASS
    R.I
               Figure 1:   Location of Study Area

 Study Background
     Three years  ago, recognizing the need for cooperative
 action  and  pooling of resources,  seven  of  the major
 industries located on the waterfront formed  an Industrial
 Anti-Pollution Committee. Among other accomplishments,
 they  have  developed  mutual  aid response  plans  for
 combating oil spills in the area. Assistance and resources are
 offered in  all cases, regardless  of the spill source. The
 member companies and  their locations are shown in Figure
 4.
     Despite  the  Committee's  efforts to  prevent, control,
 and  clean   up   spills  more   effectively,  incidents have
 continued  and  even  increased.  Accordingly,  the
 Massachusetts Division of Water Pollution Control (DWPC)
 decided that additional steps were necessary to reduce  the
 frequency  and magnitude of  these spills and to halt  the
 gradual deterioration of  the environment  that would result
 if the  apparent trend continued. Working with the DWPC,
 Arthur D. Little, Inc. has completed a study in this area
 that is viewed as  the first step  of a longer term program of
 positive action. The study produced the following:
(1)   Physical surveys of each waterfront activity.
(2)   Specific recommendations for changes in equipment
      and procedures to reduce the chances of accidental
      spills.
(3)   Surveys of a large sample of businesses located in the
      adjacent drainage areas that might discard oOy wastes
      into storm drains.
(4)   A detailed survey of surface currents, from which a
      computer  model was  developed.  (This  model  was
      utilized to predict the path  of oil  spills  under a
      variety of conditions and  to  calculate the  required
      response  times that must  be met for an effective
      response system.)
(5)   Recommendations  for a fast-response system tailored
      to the specific needs in this area.
                                                                    OUINCY
                                                                          BRAINTREE
     • HES10CKTKL     MIIIIM mcuSTm»L    VTTTH CITr OWCD. PURJC. Off*    '•'•"'-'••' fluSMESS


          Figure 2:    Zoning of Waterfront Property
Surveys of Potential Spill Sources
    Clearly,  the most desirable and effective means of
preventing oil  pollution  is to  stop  spillage. A  complete
program of prevention would include: (1) well-engineered
systems incorporating  a variety of safeguards that forestall,
or mitigate the  effects of  both mechanical  failure and
human  error; (2)  well-trained  and  highly  motivated
operating personnel;  and (3) a comprehensive system of
reporting and analysis  so that the causes of accidental spills
can be established and steps taken to prevent similar future
occurrences.
    Although the frequency and magnitude of spills can be
greatly  reduced by preventive  measures,  it appears that
adverse  circumstances  combine  sooner  or  later  and
accidents  inevitably occur. When an oil spill results, its
potential  seriousness   can be  mitigated  if  it is quickly
detected and measures are rapidly employed  to confine it.

-------
                                                                 JOINT STATE - INDUSTRY PROGRAM ...     149
      HESTBICHC    ^B CLAMM-KO SEASOWL    	HtLATIVEL* UNDE VELOPED AND HIGH ECOLOGICAL VALUE
Figure 3:    Shellfish Beds and other Areas of Ecological Value
      QUINCV
   tUJOB INOUSTIilES
  E -GEICRAL DTNAMCS.'QUMCr tt\
  T • BOSTON EDISON
  G-CITtS SEBVICE OIL CO
  H-BBJUHTHit CLECnnc
  •, >
OT8ATM*6 BEACHES
•» BOAT YABOS OB VACWT CU*S
       Figure 4:    Major Industries and High-Use Areas
    To develop specific  recommendations for changes in
equipment  and  procedures  to  prevent  oil  spills, we
conducted a  program  of physical plant inspections and
interviews.   All  plants  and  facilities  located  on the
waterfront that handled oil  products were included in the
surveys.  In  addition, a  sample  of inland  businesses that
might be sources of oil wastes via storm drain systesm was
examined.

Waterfront Plants
    We conducted  surveys  at  14 waterfront plants and
facilities. These included:
        5 tank farms
        1 fuel oil unloading dock
        3 power generating stations
        1 shipyard
        1 soap manufacturing plant
        2 yacht clubs
        1 marina
    Altogether,  these facilities have  nearly 100 storage
tanks  for  petroleum  products  and  over  50  for  other
chemicals, most  of which are filled from ships or barges. In
recent years  a number of small spills  and five major spills
have been recorded. Of the latter, two resulted from human
error  (accidentally leaving valves open),  two were due to
equipment failure, and one was associated with an accident
in testing a new ship.
    Following  these   surveys,  we  prepared
recommendations  for  each  of the  facilities. The  measures
recommended differed from plant  to  plant, but they may
be generally summarized as follows:
   •  Installation of high-liquid-level alarms;
   •  Regular use of containment  booms around ships or
      barges during transfer operations;
   •  Installation of check valves in fill lines;
   •  Periodic testing and  inspection  of tanks, lines,  and
      hoses;
   •  Erection and proper maintenance of tank dikes;

   •  Periodic maintenance of valves and joints to eliminate
      chronic leadage;
   •  Careful  maintenance  of  oil-water  separators in
      drainage systems;
   •  Improvement of plant security, including  the locking
      of critical drains and valves;
   •  Preparation  of written  procedures for  oil transfer
      operations;
   •  Establishment of emergency response plans; and
   •  Institution of regular training programs for operating
      personnel.

Inland Businesses
    In addition  to direct pollution from waterside sources,
oily substances can also reach the water basins via drains
and sewers from inland sites. Therefore, a  second portion of
the  survey  effort   was  devoted to  investigating  the
magnitude of such sources of pollution.
    We determined  what  areas of the towns  of Quincy,
Braintree, and Weymouth  have  storm drain systems  that
discharge into the Town River Bay and Fore River. We then
identified all  businesses in these areas that could  be sources
of oil pollution or of discharges that might occasionally be
identified as  oil "slicks." A survey of all possible sources
was not feasible,  so a statistical sample comprising 35% of
the  total  was  selected  to  cover  various  categories of
businesses  throughout  the project area. Service stations
were   not included,  because  information  was  already

-------
 150   OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
 available  from  an earlier study of automotive waste  oil
 disposal practices in Massachusetts^1)
     The larger companies appeared to exercise care in their
 disposal of oils and solvents. In most cases they reuse oil, or
 oily waste is placed in 50-gallon drums and removed by a
 service or taken to the  city or town dump. Most  of the
 small businesses have  very  little waste in the  oil, paint, or
 plastics categories, and it  usually  ends up  in the town
 dump. Only three of the businesses surveyed might pose an
 oil pollution problem, and these are small.
     On the basis of this survey and the previously cited
 study of automotive waste oil practices, we concluded that
 the contribution to the oil pollution problem in this area by
 random sources within the  drainage area is probably very
 small.  Service  stations  and similar  operations probably
 dispose of approximately 1500 gallons of automotive waste
 oil per year in these waters.

 Study of Surface Currents
     Previous studies  gave  some  insight into  the  gross
 circulation and flushing characteristics of this estuary .(2-5)
 However, they  did not  give primary emphasis to surface
 currents and thus did not provide adequate information for
 predicting the paths of oU  spills. To obtain this data, we
 placed floats at various locations throughout the study area
 and took periodic aerial photographs of their positions.

    The aerial  survey data were combined with separate
 observations from a small craft to infer the circulation  of
 the surface water over the entire tidal cycle.
    Once the surface  current field throughout the region
 had been  specified, the data were spearated into unit areas
 (cells)  for computer processing. The computer program was
 constructed so  that data on a hypothesized spill  may  be
 entered for any location within the project  area, at any
 stage of  the  tide cycle, and  for any wind speed and
 direction. The computer then plots  the predicted path  of
 the spill for further examination.
    The model assumes  a simple relationship between the
 tidal currents off Quincy Point (which are forecast in the
 annual  tide and current  tables issued by the Coast and
 Geodetic  Survey)  and the  current in each  of the several
 hundred cells throughout the project area. Thus, given the
 predicted  current  at Quincy Point and the  results of the
 survey, the computer  can calculate both magnitude and
 direction of the current  in each cell. A further theoretical
 simplification is that the tidal current and the wind-driven
 current may be added  vectorially and that the wind-driven
 current transports  the oil at 3% of the wind speed in the
 direction of the wind.
    The model does not reflect the continuous  changt  in
 the shape  of the shoreline with the tide; as a result, it may
predict movement of an oil  slick across exposed tidal flats.
However,  the computer  printout  identifies  the  general
physical makeup of each cell by means of a predetermined
code. The  model computes the path of the oil until it enters
a cell consisting entirely of dry land, at which time the
 calculation terminates and the path is plotted on a cathode
 ray tube and on a printout.
     In  the  calculation  it is  assumed that the oil can be
 represented as a single spot. The model does not take into
 account the  spreading of the oil, nor does it recognize the
 possibility that the oil can be transported along the beach
 by wind  currents. However,  it does show the generalized
 path that the oil will follow under specified tidal current
 and  wind conditions. Examination of the plot gives insight
 as to how much of the shoreline will be affected.
     Figure  4 shows the  principal potential  sources of
 accidentally released oily substances and thier proximity to
 the  principal high-intensity use areas along  the shoreline.
 We  hypothesized  spills at each of the potential sources
 under various wind  and tide conditions to determine the
 minimum amount of time available for protective response
 measures.
    Figure 5 shows the distribution of minimum travel
times for each of the eleven destinations. Under conditions
that  favor rapid oil transport, every destination except No.
 7 (far up the Fore River) can be reached by oil in less than
an hour from one source or another; the mean time for
spills to reach the critical throat area (where the installation
of barriers is reasonable) is on the order of 20 minutes.

     Typical  computer plots are reproduced in  Figures 6A
 and  6B. The former shows the effect (on the  path  of oil
 spilled  at source D) of a  5-knot wind blowing in  three
 different directions.  (Note that the "wind bearing" is that
 toward  which it blows.) Figure  6B  shows  oil movement
 from sources A, D, and G at  maximum ebb current with a
 6-knot southeast wind.

 Fast-Response System
     The key factors in minimizing the  damage associated
 with an oil spill are early detection, rapid containment and
 control, and  physical removal of the oil. In  the confined
 and  heavily populated estuarine area covered by this study,
 oil  not  quickly   contained  and  removed  will  cause
 immediate and serious damage. Our recommended response
 system  emphasizes these three steps, and is designed to
 supplement   local  containment and  cleanup  procedures
 which would be undertaken in any case by the responsible
 and cooperating parties.
     If the system is to be properly designed, its objective
 must be clearly spelled out. Its cost depends on the size of
 spill   which  the  equipment  must  handle   and  on the
 requirements for containing the spill. Considering the  area's
 topography and past history  of spills, we believe that the
 following response system requirements are reasonable:
   •  Containment of  the  spill within the branch of the
      estuarine area  in which it occurs and  protection of
      the other branches from oil intrusion.
   •  Capability to pick up oil in  a 1/4-inch  slick at a rate
      of 50 gallons per minute.
    Containment depends on the  speed of detection and
 the  capacity  of the  containing equipment. Removal rates

-------
                                                                           JOINT STATE - INDUSTRY PROGRAM
                                                                                                                         151
          depend on equipment capacity and crew size. Spills which
          ;xceed  the design rate of removal will  cause damage and
          necessitate   additional  cleanup  operations.  Thus,  the
          selection of a design performance level is a calculated risk.
              The demonstrated capabilities of available hardware
          fall  considerably   short  of   the  requirements  of  a
          fast-response   system,  but  better  equipment  (barriers  in
          particular) is being developed and may  be available soon.
          Booms  have  been  demonstrated   to be  effective  in
          containing oil spills in calm harbor waters, but they require
          i significant  time for  deployment. Air barriers, which can
          be  activated  very  quickly,  have undergone  only limited
          containment  tests; they need additional testing and redesign
          before they can be considered efficient and reliable.
        CO
        -
17
U
UJ
Q   8
           10
           11
«

                            • ••••*•• •

      0             1.0           2.0           10
                 MINIMUM TRAVEL TIME (hours)


    Figure 5:   Minimum Travel Time: Frequency of Occurence by
              Destination Number

   Detection
      The  effective  application  of a  fast-response  system
   depends on early detection of an oil spill. Detection can be
                                                                                                     sr/wr TBC>  4-co
                                                                                                     STEP THE-  7-K
                                                                                                     THE' MAXDUI OB
                                                                                                                 5*00
                                                                                                     • IKJ BE**0>ClCeB) •  90.00
                                                                              E
                                                                                                     5TMTT THC-  1-«J
                                                                                                     SJtf me-   3-m
                                                                                                     THE- MMOIAM CM   - O-SO
                                                                                                     roc VtHKMJTS).  S.OQ
                                                                                                     •DC
                                                                         Figure 6-    Oil Spill Paths Obtained by Computer Simulation
                                                               enhanced in three basic ways. First, operators must be alert
                                                               ot  the appearance  of an oil  slick on  the  water and  to
                                                               unusual conditions in the plant which might be expected to
                                                               result  in a  spill. Second, control  systems within the plant
                                                               should   include,  where  possible,  alarms   to  warn  of
                                                               conditions (e.g., high tank levels) that might result in a spill.
                                                               When  such  alarms are activated, personnel should check the
                                                               area  for  spillage.   Finally,  continuous  instrumental
                                                               monitoring of surface  water and plant effluents could give
                                                               immediate detection.
                                                                            Ideally, it would be desirable to monitor for oil at each
                                                                       point where  a major spill could enter the estuary, but the
                                                                       present high cost of the available instruments, together with
                                                                       the  uncertainty -as to their  reliability and durability in a
                                                                       heavily  populated estuary,  argue against  this approach.
                                                                       Considerable  development  is  under way and should  be
                                                                       followed carefully; meanwhile, a trial installation  in the
                                                                       vicinity of a selected plant is under consideration.

-------
152    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
 Figure 7:    Containment Branches and Potential Boom Locations
Containment
    To  meet  the basic containment  requirements, barrier
protection must  be  available  at the locations  shown  in
Figure 7. A spill  in  Branch II would be contained by a
barrier at location a-b or d-e, depending on tide and wind
conditions.  A spill in Branch I would be contained by a
barrier at location a-c. It is unlikely that barriers at a-b and
a-c would be required simultaneously.
    This  protection could be  provided either  by one of
several commercially available booms, which must be towed
into place following  a spill, or by air barriers,  which  are
installed beforehand and activated  by  starting  the
compressors which supply air to them. The relative merits
of booms and air barriers are summarized in Table 3 and
discussed below.

       Table 3: Comparison of Booms and Air Barriers
                               Disadvantages

                               1. Must be physically drag-
                                   ged into position.
                               2. Impede boat traffic when
                                   deployed  .

                               3. Subject to wear and tear
                                   on handling.
                               4. Subject to damage and  loss
                                   of effectiveness in pack
Advantages
               BOOMS
1. Well tested in many appli-
    cations.
2. Will contain oil in currents
    up to several knots in
    calm water.
3. Lower  cost - $5-20/ft for
    calm water applications.
4. Little preventive  mainte-
    nance required.

           AIR BARRIERS
1. Available  for immediate
    use, once installed.
2. Do not impede boat traffic.

3. Should be effective in
    water containing pack
    ice.
                               1. Relatively  little available
                                   performance data.
                               2. Pass oil in relatively low
                                   currents (0.5-1 kt.)
                               3. High cost  ($30-50/ft).
                                   Cost per foot increases
                                   with length  due  to  air
                                   supply requirements.
                               4. Should  be submerged at
                                   least 5-6 ft  but prefer-
                                   ably  not  deeper than
                                   25ft.
                               5. Regular maintenance  re-
                                   quired  on  submerged
                                   pipe and air supply.
                                                             Booms
                                                                 A fast-response system  for use today  would have to
                                                             rely on booms for containment of spills. Many booms have
                                                             been tested and are commercially available.
                                                                 Two booms will be required. One, approximately 1200
                                                             feet long, should  be stored  at  point  a (Figure  7)  for
                                                             deployment  either to point b or c as conditions require.
                                                             The other, approximately 1700 feet long, should be stored
                                                             at point d for deployment to point e.
                                                                      , OIL SLICK CONTAINED BY
                                                                       INDUCED SURFACE CURRENTS
            Figure 8:    Air Barrier Operation

    End closure of a  boom poses no real problem if it can
be attached to  bulkheads that continuously draw  water.
Sliding supports can provide secure anchoring at any water
level. Problems arise,  however, if the horizontal  position of
the waterline changes with the tide, or if the boom crosses
mud flats that are  exposed at low water, as  would occur
between points  d and e.  For ease  of deployment  of the
boom  and  effective   end  closure,  3-5 feet  of water is
required. To assure this depth under any tidal condition, a
channel must be dredged and piers constructed at each end
to support sliding boom attachments.


 Air Barriers
     Air  barriers  are just  now  coming  into  use  for
 containment of surface contaminants. The basic principle is
 shown  in Figure 8. Air is pumped through a perforated pipe
 laid on the  bottom  or floated at  any desired level. The
 rising air entrains water, causing  an upwelling  which is
 converted to  a current away from the barrier at  the surface.
 The  induced current opposes any natural current  coming
 toward the barrier, thereby restricting the spread of surface
 contaminants.
     The critical parameters of air barrier installations  are
 not well defined, but it  appears that the pipe must  be at
 least 6-10 feet below the  surface. At  shallower  depths,  the
 air  geysers  out  at  the  surface and only small  surface

-------
                                                                  JOINT STATE - INDUSTRY PROGRAM ...   153
currents  result.  The  maximum  depth  for  effective
containment depends  on the currents in which the system
must operate. Tidal  currents deflect  the air  screen and
reduce its  effectiveness in proportion to the depth of the
pipe. In addition, increasing  the depth of the pipe increases
the air pressure required to activate the system, resulting in
larger pumping costs and in larger capital  outlay for more
powerful compressors. The optimum depth appears to be in
the range of 10-25 feet.
    Limited  tests  to  date suggest that  the  containment
capability of air barriers is significantly degraded in currents
as low as 0.5-1 knot. Oil tends to pass the barrier by being
drawn into vortices near the barrier, carried through the
barrier by the vortices beneath the surface, and released at
the surface downstream of the barrier. This problem can be
partially  alleviated (at greater expense) by installing  the
barrier at an angle to the flow.
    To reduce air pumping costs and capital  equipment
costs, and to reduce  the  effect of currents, floatable air
barriers are being investigated/^) The pipes  lie on  the
bottom when not needed and quickly rise to the optimum
depth when air is supplied.  These would  be useful in the
deep waters at locations a-b and a-c.
    As with booms, the mud flats at location d-e prevent
the use of an air barrier at low  water unless a  trench is
dredged.
    The potential advantages of air barriers are particularly
important for a fast-response containment system in a busy
estuary. In addition, they  offer the possibility  of keeping
the barrier locations ice-free.  Either air or warm water from
a utility  company's  cooling  water  effluent   could be
continually pumped through the air supply system during
the winter. This circulation would also flush the air supply
pipe  and  prevent possible  clogging  of the nozzles.  The
feasibility  of continuous  circulation  requires  detailed
engineering analysis, however.
    Therefore, we recommend that air barriers be strongly
considered  .for use in  the long-term system  and  that a
demonstration  program be initiated  to  test them in  this
application. On the other hand, we do not believe that their
present  state  of  development permits their  use as  key
elements in a present-day fast-response system. The long
lengths required and variable depth conditions at the barrier
locations pose  application  problems  that press or exceed
the state of the art.

Removal
    Many  skimmers and other oil collection  devices are
currently available or under development, and several are in
regular use in estuarine areas. Difficulties with  respect to
collection efficiency and operating reliability have yet to be
solved, however, and intensive   development  effort  is
under way.
    The recommended boom configuration suggests  that
most contained spills  will be collected in the  vicinity of
points a  and b, but  the  remaining collections  could be
scattered throughout the study  area. The  collector should
therefore be portable and based in the vicinity of points a
and b. Portability, together with an  ability to pick up oil
from  a  1/4-inch slick at a rate of 50 gallons per minute,
indicates that  a  moderate - sized, self-propelled unit  is
required.
    Collected oil  can  best  be stored in rubber  bladders
towed by  the  collector. Such bladders are commercially
available in sizes ranging from 55 to 515 gallons; these have
built-in  hose connections for oil transfer and can be rolled
on land as well as  towed in the  water. Several  of these
bladders should be  available, and  a  method for changing
bladders during collection should be  devised. Collected oil
can  be  stored in  the  bladders   until  suitable  disposal
arrangements can be made.
Auxiliary Equipment and Supplies
    In addition to the specific equipment described above,
boats will be needed to deploy the booms, and one or more
trucks must be available to carry  away  the collected  oil.
The only additional requirement is a plan which assures the
immediate availability of this equipment when required.
    Absorbents will be needed to clean  up any oil which
escapes containment and reaches the shore. In this case, fast
response is  not of prime urgency. We recommend that a
small stock of  treated straw be kept available for minor
cleanup operations and that the procedures for cleaning up
major  spills which reach the land  be decided upon when
and if such  situations occur. Chemical dispersion or sinking
is not considered to be generally suitable in this area.
 Operational Requirements
     To provide fast  and effective response  to an oil spill,
 the key operational requirements are:
   • A  central  control  location through  which  rapid
      telephone contact with  a Control Chief is assured.
      The Control Chief should be a knowledgeable, trained
      person with access to contingency plans that describe
      whether  and   where  booms should  be  deployed,
      depending on the source and size of the spill, the tide,
      and wind conditions.
   • Immediate availability of a trained crew to deploy the
      booms and to activate the skimmer. At this time, we
      believe that a five-man crew is sufficient to put  the
      fast-response system into operation: three men with
      one boat  to deploy the  booms,  and two to activate
      the skimmer.  Following the  immediate  response,
      additional men will be required within a few hours to
      assist in the cleanup and to dispose of collected oil.
   • A  detailed  set of  contingency  plans (referred to
      above) which  specify the action  to be taken for  any
      foreseeable  emergency condition. These plans  allow
      rapid  response  by  the  Control  Chief;  only  in
      exceptional  cases should  he be required to exercise a
      significant amount of personal judgment in activating
      the fast-response system.

-------
 154    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
      The decision of whether or not to deploy the system in
  a given situation must be made quickly, on the basis of
  perhaps limited information available at the time the spill is
  detected. The basic criterion should be the minimum size of
  the  spill, such as  100 gallons,  a figure that would be
  specified in advance. If the  amount is  not known,  it is
  better to  put the system into operation than to risk the
  damage from an underestimated spill.
     Special charts can be made to help response personnel
 decide which barriers)  to deploy. One would furnish the
 tide  condition  for the particular time and date; another,
 based on  the information developed with our oil path
 model, would specify where barriers were needed for  that
 tide  condition and  the  prevailing wind  direction, and (if
 applicable) the order in which they should be deployed.
     Local response to an oil spill  must be coordinated with
 state and  federal plans  and procedures for dealing with
 spills. The DWPC is developing  a statewide contingency
 plan  which will enable  the state to  ensure that effective
 action is taken. Current  thinking  is that the DWPC should
 be notified of any spill in the waters of the Commonwealth
 so that it can:
   •  see that all possible appropriate corrective action is
      taken  by  the  responsible   party,
   •  coordinate state activities at the site as required,

   •  request assistance  from  the U.S. Coast Guard,  the
      WQO regional office, and/or outside contractors, as
      required,
   •  approve chemicals  used in cleanup and the methods
      of disposal of collected oil,
   •  work with the Attorney General's  office to  recover
      costs, expenses, and damages to the  Commonwealth,
      and
   •  take  follow-up   action  as  required  to  prevent
      recurrence of the spill.
    The federal plan(7)  requires  that the Coast Guard be
notified in the event of a spill  and describes the manner in
which the response  of interested federal  agencies will be
coordinated.

 SUMMARY
    This  project  comprised  physical plant  inspections,
 physical  surveys,  technical  studies, and analyses  for  the
 purpose  of  developing  specific  recommendations  for a
 program that will lead to improved prevention  and more
 effective control of oil pollution in the waters of the  Town
 River Bay and Fore River, bordering the towns of Quincy,
 Brain tree, and Weymouth.
    We  conducted  individual plant  surveys of  all  the
 waterside industrial operations and developed for each a set
 of specific recommendations for equipment and methods to
 improve the  prevention  of oil  spill accidents. In addition,
 after identifying the businesses  in the parts  of the three
 towns where storm drainage empties into  the waters  of the
 study area,  we physically surveyed a selected  sample of
 those that might dispose of waste oil (or oily substances) in
 storm drains.
     We designed and carried out a study of surface currents
 utilizing aerial photography and surface floats. These results
 were combined with those obtained by other investigations
 of water currents in this area to establish the true pattern of
 surface  currents  over  a  complete tidal cycle. Weather
 Bureau  data on  wind  speed and direction  were  then
 incorporated with the  surface  current  findings,  and  a
 computer model  was developed that could predict the path
 and travel time  of  an  oil spill occurring at any selected
 location.
     Records of past spills in the project area were compiled
 from a variety of sources. These were analyzed to show
 frequency  of occurrence,  seasonal patterns^  sources, and
 causes (when known).
     Combining the results of the above work, we developed
a  set  of recommendations for  improved prevention and
described a  system of equipment and  procedures  that
would provide a  true  fast-response  system  for effective
action if a spill does occur.
     By forming and participating actively in a mutual aid
group, the indistries have  already done much to maintain
the quality of this area. Some of the companies involved
have already  begun installing equipment recommended for
spill prevention. The Industrial Anti-Pollution Committee is
presently studying the recommendations for a fast-response
system to determine what further steps the joint industry
group can support.
    By initiating and supporting this study, in which all
concerned  industry  groups  have  fully  cooperated,  the
Massachusetts Division  of Water  Pollution  Control  has
taken the first step in what must be an on-going program to
reduce  still  further  the threat  of oil  pollution and  to
preserve  this  estuarine area. Putting our recommendations
into practice will  require additional effort  if tangible
benefits are  to  be  realized.  The  DWPC,  with   the
cooperation  of the  local  industries  and the support of
interested federal agencies, should  continue  to supply the
required leadership.
     The demonstration of an organized regional approach
 to the prevention of oil spills and the limitation of spill
 damage could be of widespread importance. The concept of
 investing in  a fast-response system to  reduce the future
 costs  which would  accrue  from spills not  otherwise
 contained can)be applied usefully in  industrialized  port
 areas,around the  country.
 REFERENCES

 1. "Study of Waste Oil Disposal Practices in Massachusetts"
 January 1969, C-70698, Arthur D. Little, Inc.
 2.  "Tidal Current  Tables,  1970," U.S. Department  of
 Commerce, Environmental Science Services Administration.

-------
                                                            JOINT STATE-INDUSTRY PROGRAM...  155
3. U.S.  Naval Oceanographic  Office,  "Field  Report,
Weymouth Fore River Dye Dispersal Test, Quincy,Mass.,"
Unpublished Manuscript.
4. Dayton E.  Carritt - "Report  to  the Boston  Edison
Company on the Conditions  of the Marine Environment
Pertinent  to Siting  a Nuclear Power Plant on Weymouth
Fore River," 1966, Unpublished Manuscript.
5. Weston Geophysical Engineers,  Inc.,  "Hydrographic
Survey,  Weymouth  Fore  River, East Braintree,
Massachusetts,"  June  1970, for  Braintree  Electric
Department under  the  direction  of  R.W.  Beck and
Associates.

6. J. Grace and A. Sowyrda, Journal WPCF, XLII, No.  12
(December 1970), pp. 2074-2093.

7.  "National  Oil  and Hazardous  Materials Pollution
Contingency Plan," Council on Environmental Quality,
Federal Register, June 2, 1970.

-------
                                 THE  ALBERTA  OIL  SPILL

                                   CONTINGENCY   PLAN

                                                  J.G. Gainer
                                      Environmental Conservation Committee
                                         Canadian Petroleum Association
INTRODUCTION
    The  Environmental  Conservation Committee  of the
Canadian Petroleum  Association  undertook the task of
investigating the reports  of several serious oil spills in the
province  in 1970, in  order to determine how the industry
might  minimize  the  dangers of  an  apparently growing
hazard. The committee's limited  investigations  indicated
that, as in the early cases of the "Torrey-Canyon" disaster,
the Santa Barbara Coast spills and the recently published
McTaggert - Cowan report  of the  "Arrow" incident, the
problems were not so much due  to lack of equipment and
containment  techniques,  but  rather  in  their  proper
deployment.
    In each of these  studies, it  was most apparent that a
single authority or  "task  force commander" should be
immediately  designated, and that a consistent approach to
any  given problem  must  be  maintained.  The particular
approaches may vary for spills occurring on the high seas,
coastal or inland  waters, but some established plan must
exist.
    It  was in this  vein that the committee addressed itself
to the  peculiar problems of Alberta where production and
pipeline  operations   were  carried  out  in  the  forested
foothills, arid plains,  nothern  muskeg  and  in close
proximity to rivers and lakes. Initial discussions were held
with the  staff of the Department of Lands and Forests who
were able to lend their particular expertise in these diverse
environmental studies. It  was  realized  early  in  our
discussions that there were  striking similarities between the
organization  which would  be required to combat a major
oil spill, and that which already existed in the Fire Fighting
Service of the Department of Lands and Forests.
    The  outcome of  these  discussions  was  that  the
Canadian Petroleum Association accepted the responsibility
of developing  a  joint Industry-Government Contingency
Plan for the control of oil spills throughout the province. A
six-man "Alberta Oil Spill Contingency Plan Task Force"
was  immediately  formed  with  members of C.P.A. and
I.P.A.C.  representing both the  Production  and Pipeline
segments of the industry.
    Concurrently, with  the CP.A.'s initial investigations, a
petroleum industry spill control cooperative was formed in
the Pembina  Area  under the  chairmanship  of Amoco
Canada  Petroleum  Company  Ltd. Throughout the
development stages of the Provincial Plan, the Task Force
maintained an extremely close liaison with the Pembina
Cooperative.

    The  proposed  plan has drawn  upon the considerable
corporate experience of the Task Force member companies,
as well  as model  contingency  plans  advanced by such
industrial associations  and  governmental  agencies with
which they are in contact throughout  the world. Locally,
we have  taken into  consideration  the advice of the
Department of Lands and Forests as well as the practical
knowledge developed by the Pembina Cooperative.
    The plan has been briefly reviewed with the Chairman
of the Oil and Gas Conservation Board, and has received
approval  in principle from the  Board of Directors of the
Alberta Division of the C.P.A.

Scope of the Plan
    In our initial discussions with the Department of Lands
and Forests, it was agreed that the authors would take
considerable  liberties  in  defining  the  roles  of the
governmental departments and regulatory agencies involved
in pollution  control,  in  order  to design an  effective
emergency  organizational  structure. We believe that the
plan  is  pragmatic,  but  we  realize,  that  in order   to
implement  it, some  changes will  be  necessary in the
presently  defined jurisdictions  and  responsibilities   of
certain departments and regulatory  agencies. We recognize
also,  that many changes will  evolve with the formation  of
                                                     157

-------
158   OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
the  recently  announced Department  of Environmental
Improvement.
    Figure I presents the scope of the Contingency Plan, in
terms  of  the problems  encountered  throughout  the
principal four  facets of the petroleum industry, together
with  the  approach  to  the  problems in  defining  the
respective roles of industry and government. The  plan is
drawn up on the premise that industry will take care of its
own  problems, and only  where  the  spill exceeds  the
capabilities of  the operating companies will the combined
forces of the public and private sectors be utilized.
    Our plan  concentrates on pipeline breaks and' spills
from wells or other producing facilities and does  not
concern itself directly with manufacturing and distribution
which are a more localized technical problem.  Large spills
resulting  from the  manufacture  and distribution of
products could well be handled by our proposed structure.

structure.
    The plan  is predicated upon the assumption that spills
will occur, through material failure, operating errors, or the
actions of forces outside the industry; and for this reason, it
may be considered  as a remedial action  program only. The
existence of such a plan will however, generate a  greater
pollution control awareness at all operating levels, and thus
it  will  serve  a secondary  purpose by  strengthening the
design and practice of other existing  preventive programs.
                                           COVEKMMEHT
  HH>OUCT»O«i
                                            - fOUCt
                                            - f.m.a.
                                            - court
                         Figure 1

     By this plan we recognize  industry's responsibility to
 train the civil authorities and agencies in certain aspects of
 petroleum technology; to prevent the possible confliction
 of  pollution control practices with  industrial  safety
 procedures.  An example  of this apparent  paradox is the
 case  of a leak in a products  pipeline  carrying a  highly
 volatile  hydrocarbon  stream.  Whereas  pumping  would
 normally cease in the event of a break; in this instance, the
 preferable procedure might be to increase the pump rate in
 order to replace  the light hydrocarbon with a safer, less
 volatile product.
    The plan may be defined as a major spill plan and, as
such, is not concerned with the lowhazard spills on lands
which are not endangering water bodies or water courses,
but rather with those spills which pose a potential threat to
the environment  beyond  the  immediate confines of the
producing or pipeline facility.
    Throughout the province approximately  14,000 wells
are capable of delivering oil, although less than 9,000 are on
production in  a typical month. The wells are contained in
over 180  producing areas as defined  by the Oil and  Gas
Conservation Board field limits.
    The contingency plan proposes a  grouping of the  180
producing areas into less than 20  spill control units, with
the allocation based upon the local  operator's  radius of
responsibility,  and the degree of hazard for the  respective
area as determined by evaluating the  parameters listed in
Figure 2. In addition to applying purely industrial statistics
to these parameters, the  careful consideration of the four
points listed under item No. 8, in determining the degree of
hazard, is a clear illustration  of the  Canadian Petroleum
Association's  officially  expressed  support   of   the
"multiple-use" concept in evaluating all natural  resources.
    Inter-company  cooperatives organized  in each of  the
20 areas would constitute the basic units in the plan, and
provide the first line of defense in the event of a major spill.
To  illustrate the manner in which a  cooperative might
function,  we will outline the organizational work of  the
Pembina Area Pollution Control Cooperative Committee.

Pembina Area Pollution Control
    Cooperative Committee

    On August 18, 1970, the operating companies in  the
Pembina area met to form a committee for the purpose of
establishing procedures for the effective control of major
spills which could result in  the pollution of the Pembina
and  North Saskatchewan river  systems. In order to attain
these  objectives, three  committees  were  formed  and
provided with the terms of reference shown in Figure 3.

    The prime objective was an evaluation of the drainage
basins to select sites where corrective action could be taken
to prevent pollution of major streams.  The second objective
was to  evaluate  available control  equipment and  cleanup
materials.
     That  the Pembina plan fully recognizes the autonomy
of the member companies is seen  in the recommendations
that all equipment will  be privately  owned and that  the
operating company responsible for the spill will provide the
"on-scene" commander for all incidents. The alternative
procedure of  assigning a standing "on-scene" commander
has  the  advantage of a  permanent  organization, but it
unfortunately results in a change of command when a spill
threat responsibility is handed from the single operator to
the cooperative's  control.
     The Equipment Committee has investigated materials
available  from some 90 suppliers and evaluated several
locally   fabricated  containment  and cleanup  devices.
Preliminary tests have indicated that many commercially

-------
                                                                            ALBERTA CONTINGENCY PLAN  159
      PEMBINA  AREA  POLLUTION  CONTROL

            CO-OPERATIVE  COMMITTEE

                 PLANNING ORGANIZATION
                  STEERING COMM.
                       -  PURPOSE
                       -  BOUNDARIES
                       -  COMMUNICATIONS
                       -  REGULATIONS
   DRAINAGE BASIN
        - TOPOGRAPHY
        - ROADS
        - CONTROL PTS
        - REGULATIONS
        - MANUAL
EQUIPMENT & MATERIAL
     -  CONTAINMENT
     -  REMOVAL
     -  INVENTORY
     -  LOGISTICS
                        Figure 2
        ALBERTA OIL SPILL  CONTINGENCY  PLAN

PRODUCTION  OPERATIONS  -  DEGREE  OF  HAZARD
          1.  NO. OF WELLS
          2.  PRODUCTION RATES (PER UNIT)
          3.  TOTAL PRODUCTION
          4.  REMOTENESS
          S.  AGE OF EQUIPMENT
          6.  HISTORY OF SPILLS
          7.  PROXIMITY TO MAJOR WATER COURSES
          8.  USE OF WATER COURSE
             (A) DOMESTIC SUPPLY
             IB) FISH ft WILDLIFE
             1C) RECREATIONAL
             (D) AGRICULTURE

                       Figure 3

available devices require considerable modification to meet
the local requirements.
    The  Drainage Basin  Committee has  prepared draft
copies of the Contingency  Plan Manual, which  will,when
finalized, be distributed to all  Government  and Regulatory
agencies as well  as to key  operating personnel among the
member companies. The plan  outline is  essentially shown
under the "Index" displayed in Figure 4.
    The maps constitute the  key sections  of-the manual.
The National Topographic  Series provide data on surface
features,  main   roads  and  drainage  systems,  while  the
Alberta Lands and Forests maps contain current data on all
production facilities, secondary and private roads. Through
the  parallel series of maps, which have been reduced to a
common scale with a complete  cross-reference system based
               PEMBINA   FIELD
MAJOR   OIL  SPILL   CONTINGENCY  PLAN


                        INDEX

  EMERGENCY PROCEDURES

  COMPANY  CONTACTS

  GOVERNMENT CONTACTS

  EQUIPMENT  CHECK LISTS

  EQUIPMENT  USAGE

  CONTROL  POINT DESCRIPTION

  MAPS     -  NATIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC SERIES

             -  LANDS 8c  FORESTS

                         Figure 4

           CONTROL POINT CLASSIFICATION

 TYPE A.  LARGE RIVERS             TYPE B. SMALL RIVERS 8 CREEKS

                                   />04o-\    ,-CUIXHT
                        TYPE C.  SMALL RIVERS 8 CREEKS

                                       -tmoee
                                                      TYPE D.  SMALL RIVERS ft CREEKS
                                                Figure 5
                        on the Legal Survey, an operator can locate the spill and
                        dispatch  equipment  and  personnel  to the  site by the
                        shortest and safest route.
                            The  maps  are  a  clear  manifestation  of  excellent
                        Industry-Government  cooperation, for  without  the
                        assistance  of  the  respective  Federal  and  Provincial
                        departments  in this  compilation,  the final cost  of the
                        manuals would have increased tenfold.
                            A detailed  ground  reconnaissance  by the  Drainage
                        Basin Committee produced the series of control point types
                        presented in Figure 5.
                            Type A represents the most feared form, where the oil
                        has entered a large river.
                            Types  B and C represent a spill in a small stream, with
                        banks, which could be controlled with limited equipment

-------
160   OIL SPILL PREVENTION
                PEMBINA  COOPERATIVE

                EQUIPMENT CHE C K  LIST
                                  TYPE OF SPILL
   EQUIPMENT REQUIRED


    AIRPLANE

    BOATS
    WINCH TRUCKS
    LIGHT PL

    VACUUM TRUCKS
                     - DISPATCH IMI

                     - OPTIONAL

                       Figure 6
supplementing  the  existing  roadways  to  form
pseudo-natural barriers or separators.
    Type  D suggests a point in a stream where no natural
bank exists and  a  supplementary lateral barrier would be
required.
    Based on  this  categorization, the  equipment required
to clean up a specific spill is readily determined by referring
to the Equipment check list shown in Figure 6.
    The preceding three exhibits represent  only  a small
portion of the total manual,  but  serve to  illustrate  how
intensively the Pembina group has studied the problem, in
order to provide an  entirely practical  communication and
action plan.
    As other areas are organized, each will prepare similar
books, copies of which will be supplied to the Conservation
Board as well  as the Provincial Organization, so  that any
spill may  easily be  referenced and categorized when re-
ported or when assistance is requested.

Provincial  Plan
     Figure 7  illustrates  the  16 drainage  basins  in  the
province. Ten of these basins contain petroleum production
operations, and  each of these has been studied in some
detail to establish  the  degrees of hazard, and the possible
number of control areas required.
    The most southerly basin, the Milk River, will require
additional special study because it is part of the Mississippi
system and therefore  falls within  the jurisdiction of the
International   Joint  Commission. This  presentation  will
consider only  the Alberta and the interprovincial drainage
basins. In  finalizing the contingency plan, due consideration
will be  given to  regualtions under  the   Federal  acts
pertaining to interprovincial streams. At  this time we  have
reviewed  only the  Navigable Waters Protection Act  in
reference  to establishing permanent control point anchors
and oil retention booms in  the Pembina Area.
    The  Proliferation  of  pipelines and the  density  of
             ALBERTA

   DRAINAGE        BASINS
                       Figure 7

producing areas shown in Figure 8 indicate the magnitude
of exposure to  potential  spills in each of the river basins.
The  light  areas represent  heavy  oil production  which
does not  pose a serious containment problem but may well
require specialized cleanup techniques.

    The  North Saskatchewan River Basin has conceivably
the highest exposure to potential spills in light of the large

-------
                                                                        ALBERTA CONTINGENCY PLAN    161
                    ALBERTA

OIL    FIELDS     a      PIPELINES
                       Figure 8
number of highly productive oil fields.the concentrations of
refineries in the greater Edmonton Area, and the numerous
major pipeline river crossings. Fortunately, the two most
advanced contingency  plans  have been  instigated in this
basin, namely:
(i)   Pembina Area Cooperative.
(ii)   Edmonton Area - Survey and Contingency Plan for
     the North Saskatchewan River.
The Edmonton Area Study will provide:
(1)   Specific  recommendations  for the  control  and
     recovery of oil spills in the North Saskatchewan River
     by  the strategic  location of  booms  through full
     utilization  of  the  established  river  flow
     characteristics.

(2)  A  general  procedural  manual  which  outlines  the
     application  of  available  hydrological  data  in
     predicting the movement of oil slicks in other rivers,
     where subsequent spill  contingency plans may be
     desirable.
    Significantly, the  Edmonton study will include boht
open  water and  ice-bound conditions,  to  further
complement the Pembina program, which has to date been
limited to the summer state only. The data derived from
the two plans will considerably reduce the time required to
formulate in detail other area contingency plans.
    In Figure 9, cooperative centers are  listed  for  the
protection of the six river basins which contain the largest
number of producing wells.
    The  Pembina area ranks first in degree of hazard based
on operating wells, but it ranks last in terms of production
per well. The Rainbow wells produce  in excess of 700
Bbls./day and represent  the greatest hazard on a per well
basis. The detailed ranking of all fields is too extensive for
this presentation, but the majority of the larger fields have
been shown.
    The  Snipe Lake field is shown in two drainage basins,
but the  control  center  has been  selected as Valleyview,
where   the  field offices,  industry  services  and
communication centers are located.  We would solicit  the
assitance of the  Department of Lands and Forests  in
designating other drainage area border cases which cannot
be defined solely by the logistics of the industry.
    The  industrial Edmonton  area, and the Fort McMurray
oil  sands projects  cannot  be categorized by the same
parameters used in  the production  areas, but the follwoing
pipeline  capacities  adequately indicate the importance of
these areas:
                                                             I.
                                                             :
                                     45,000 B/D
Fort McMurray
Edmonton
  -Light and Medium Crude 1,043,000
  -Synthetic                 45,000
  -Pentanes Plus and LPG's    75,000
                                                                 TOTAL
                                                                                           1,163,000
    Figure 10 shows the communications structure of the
plan.  The bottom  tier  shows  the  individual  oil  spill
cooperative areas which handle their own spills to the limit
of their capability. This could include isolated pools which
do not belong to a cooperative.
    We recommend  for  simplicity and uniformity  that
emergency reporting  be done, as shown, to a  single point,
which  would  have  a  24-hour answering  service.  It is
suggested  that  this be tied in through  the Oil  and  Gas
Conservation Board's  telephone exchange.

-------
 162    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
                  COOPERATIVE CENTRES
 pence

 SMOKY
 ATHA8ASKA
 M 5ASK

ZAMA

RAINBOW
SNIPE

KAYBOB


SNIPE

SWAN H.

MeMURRAY


PEUBINA

LEDUC

REDWATER

EDMONTON


STETTLER

JOFFRE
                                299

                                169
                                312

                                181
                    189

                    102
157

107
                               IT,
                                      SI
                               2970  2670

                               1083   471

                                794   278

                               (INDUSTRIALI
                                633

                                M3
291

211
          ZAMA

          RAINBOW
                             FOX CREEK


                             VALIEYVIEW



                             MeMURRAY


                             DRAVTON

                             DEVON

                             EDMONTON

                             EDMONTON


                             STETTIER

                             RED DEER
                         Figure 9
                          0
                        1   1  T"""| ..... |   »
                      r-L-,rJ-,rJ-irJ-ir-L,
                      TOHS IOMONKM «CFHOIV MM) < -
                      i  1 1   1 1  1 1   ii  1
                         Figure 10

    We further recommend that  this reporting procedure
be extended to also include pipeline oil spills but only for
emergencies  with  other normal reporting  requirements
remaining unchanged. Communication would be made from
this point, as necessary, to other agencies and Government
Departments.  Where an  area cooperative  or  isolated
operator  cannot cope with  a spill, the communication
would continue  to  the  Forest Protection  Service  of  the
Department of Lands and Forests which we have shown as
the emergency organization to combat  serious spills. Other
functions are  also  shown  on  this  figure  but they  are
auxiliary functions and not directly involved with the plan.
    Figure  11  shows  the normal communication routing
under various  circumstances and conditions. The  legend
describes  the symbols. It should be noted that "B-Board
and/or Pipeline Branch"  is our recommended Conservation
Board Emergency Communication Point and "D-Provincial
Organization"  is  the  Forest  Protection Service   of  the
Department  of Lands and  Forests.
    The  Communications, under emergency conditions,
would  originate  with  the  spill  observer,  probably  an
                                                                        ALBERTA OIL SPILL CONTINGENCY  PLAN
                                                                          INITIAL COMMUNICATIONS  PROCEDURE

                                                                        NORMAL ACTION            EMERGENCY fiCTinw

SOURCE
IDENTIFIED
AS SELF
AS OTHER
OPERATOR
SOURCE
UNIDENTIFIED
OR OPERATOR
UNAVAILABLE
MINOR
OM GROUND MARSH
OR ISOLATED SLOUCH
NOT MIGRATING
A 	 -B
0-A_B
\
INTERMEDIATE
POTENTIAL MIGRATION
(CONTt*IUING SPILL.
SPRMG BREAKUP. PREC 1


0 — A;-— B
0— B-— A
\t
MIGRATING

\t\
°
0— A 	 B
\!\
0— B, — -A
MAJOR
SPILL OM LAKE
Oft STREAM


0 	 -A 	 -B
'N
C 	 >D
0 — -B 	 -A
                                                          O - OBSERVER
                                                          A - OPERATOR RESPONSIBLE FOR SPtLL
                                                          i - BOARD AND/OR PIPELINES BRANCH
                                                          C - AREA CO-OPERATIVE
                                                          0 - PROVINCIAL ORGANIZATION
                                                                 —- MANDATORY

                                                                 - — DISCRETIONAL
                                                                     Figure 11


                                                  ALBERTA OIL  SPILL  CONTINGENCY PLAN

                                           SERVICES AVAILABLE  FROM DEPARTMENT OF LANDS & FORESTS


                                                            1.   MANPOWER

                                                            2.   EMERGENCY POWERS

                                                            3.   MOBILITY

                                                            4.   STRATEGIC BASES

                                                            5.   COMMUNICATIONS

                                                            6.   PUBLIC RELATIONS


                                                                   Figure 12


                                            operator, who would report to the Communication Center's
                                            emergency number.

                                                If the responsible operator cannot  be identified or
                                            located or is not  competent  to clean up the spill, the
                                            Conservation Board would immediately engage the services
                                            of the area cooperatives' members. If the spill is beyond the
                                            capability of the area cooperative, or is in an isolated oil
                                            pool  or section of a pipeline which is not attached to a
                                            cooperative, then the Board  will immediately  contact the
                                            Provincial Organization which  will  actuate its  emergency
                                            procedures to contain and clean up the spill.

                                                Where, in  the  opinion  of the Board no  emergency
                                            exists, it   would  identify  and  contact   the  responsible
                                            operator to undertake  cleanup or, failing this, it would
                                            engage antoher operator,  the area  cooperative  or  a
                                            contractor to clean up the spill.

-------
                                                                            ALBERTA CONTINGENCY PLAN  163
    In  the  extreme  situation  where  the  Provincial
Organization  is called into action, it would take complete
control  under  its emergency powers  and would  quickly
deploy manpower, equipment and supplies as necessary in a
particular situation to contain and clean up the spill.
    We  strongly recommend that the Department of Lands
and  Forests,  through  its Forest Protection Service,  be
designated  as the "Provincial Organization" and given full
emergency  powers for combatting oil  spills, equivalent to
the powers it has for  fighting  forest fires. With  such  an
expanded role, additional operating and capital funds will
be required by  the  Department, but  at this point in the
planning, it is difficult to forecast the incremental cost.
    Figure  12 enumerates the reasons  why we believe that
the Department of Lands and  Forests is best qualified to
act as the ultimate oil spill control agency. Industry could
duplicate these services although at great cost, but without
emergency  powers  it  would  be  severely  hampered  in
combatting spills and  we  therefore strongly urge the
Government  to  permit  utilization  of  this  existing
organization.
    One of the  major problems encountered by both the
Pembina Cooperative and the Contingency Plan Task Force
in the  early  planning  stages   was how  to  protect the
operator or  cooperative against financial  loss, and  third
party liability, when they undertake  to  control and clean
up a spill  where emergency action is necessary  but the
action has  not been requested by the operator responsible
for the  spill. Such a situation could result from such things
as:
 -an unidentified spill
 -the responsible operator being unavailable, or
 •the offending operator not being competent to control the
  spill and unwilling to engage assistance.

 In such a  situation the law  does not  indemnify the  good
 Samaritan  for costs  or third party liability and, therefore,
 unless help is requested by the offending operator, a second
 party is not inclined to place himself in jeopardy.
     The Oil and Gas Conservation Board has powers under
 the  Act to take control and  to  engage third  parties  for
 specific services such as controlling wild weils, and also to
 recover the costs of such actions. In such cases the Board's
 agent is protected. The Board's powers do not appear to be
 sufficiently  broad,  however,   to  cover  all  manner  of
 situations  concerning oil spills and it  appears  that
 amendments of the Act and Regulations are necessary. With
 such expanded authority the Board could, where a reported
 spill requires  immediate  action, engage a  contractor,
 operator or an area cooperative to control and clean up  the
 spill and  such  agent  would  then  be  protected. Upon
 completion of  the  cleanup, all costs incurred could be
 assessed against the responsible operator or  in the case of an
 unidentified  spill,  be  appropriated from  the  Board's
 operating fund.
     Similarly, where a spill is sufficiently serious to require
 the services of the Department of Lands and Forests,  the
 Department could be engaged as an agent of the Board and
its costs recovered as above or it could, through legislation,
acquire  the power to assess costs of control and cleanup
directly to the offending operator. The Task Force favors
the plan involving the Board as the agency to whom the
offender is accountable.
    It should be  pointed  out here that major spills which
would  involve the  Department would virtually all  be
identifiable, thus practically eliminating the need to draw
on a special fund for the cost of unidentified spills.
    In summary then we offer the following comments:
    As  stated previously the industry plans to tend  to its
own oil  spill problems through cooperative  effort in the
various  areas. An occasional  serious spill will occur which
will  be  beyond the local organization's ability to control.
For  such a  situation an emergency  organization  will be
needed  for  the  reasons  enumerated,  and  we  have
recommended that the Department of Lands and Forests be
directed to act in this role at such times as it is required.
That then is the basic framework of the plan.

    In order to  organize  along the simple, direct lines
recommended,  certain legislation, reorganization  and
reassignment of jurisdiction will be required and these are
shown on Figure  13. Specifically, the following actions are
proposed for your consideration.
1. (a)      Name  the Forest  Protection  Service  of the
           Department of  Lands  and Forests  as the
           ultimate environmental protection agency.
      (b)   Provide the  Forest Protection Service with an
           expansion of the emergency powers it now has
           for fire  fighting  to include  containment and
           cleanup of oil spills.
      (c)   Direct the service  to utilize, during emergency
           actions, an  advisory  group made  up  of the
           operator  responsible  for  the  spill,  a
           representative  from  the   Oil  and  Gas
           Conservation Board,  and, when  applicable, a
           representative of the Pipeline Division.
      (d)   Provide the  Department with the necessary
           funds for the purchase of specialized equipment
           and supplies  for  strategic  location  in the
           province  and  make  provision  for  selected
           members of the Department's  staff to receive
           specialized training.
2.    Designate  a  single  contact  point for oil  spill
      emergency  reporting,  preferably the  Oil and Gas
      Conservation Board.
3.    Designate the Oil  and Gas Conservation Board as the
      authority which engages all spill control and  cleanup
      services where the responsible operator fails to handle
      his own spill. This should include engaging the Forest
      Protection Service when needed. Further, the Oil and
      Gas  Conservation  Board  should be authorized  to
      assess costs of spill control  and cleanup  against the
      offending operator in all situations,  including  those
      where   the Forest  Protection  Service has  been
      engaged.

-------
 164    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
           CONCLUSIONS &  RECOMMENDATIONS
  LANDS « FORESTS
                                   ULTIMATE ENVIRONMENTAL

                                   PROTECTION AGENCY


                                   EXTENSION OF EMERGENCY

                                   POWERS TO MAJOR OIL SPILLS


                                   ADVISORS TO ON SITE

                                   COMMANDERS
  SINGLE COMMUNICATIONS POINT


  LEOAL * FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY


  DETAILED PLANNING


  SECONDARY PROGRAMS
                                  CURRENT TECHNOLOGY

                                  RESEARCH

                                  INDUSTRY STANDARDS

                                  STATISTICAL ASSESSMENT
                       Figure 13

4.    Regardless of  the  form that the contingency plan
      ultimately takes, we strongly recommend that further
      planning  be  done  with  the  full  involvement  of
      industry and to this end industry is prepared to make
      available whatever manpower may be required.

      I.P.A.C.  and C.P.A.  are  currently  preparing
      communications  to their  memberships, appraising
      them of the status of the provincial plan and pointing
      out  the urgent need for area  plans to fit into the
      proposed Provincial Plan. Work along this line will be
      further accelerated in hazardous areas where the Oil
     and Gas  Conservation  Regulations require the
     preparation  of contingency plans. The pioneer work
     done  by  the  Pembina  Cooperative  with the
     Government's  assistance, should greatly simplify the
     formation of these other cooperatives.
5.   Secondary programs which may evolve from the basic
     plan might include:
     (a)  Maintenance of up-to-date information on new
          developments  in equipment,  supplies and
          techniques  and  their effectiveness  in our
          particular environment.   Such  information
          would then guide the Department and Industry
          in  acquiring the  appropriate equipment and
          supplies.
     (b)  Information garnered  in  the foregoing  could
          point to areas where research is needed  to fill
          particular knowledge voids. This organization
          could conceivably act as an agency for directing
          or contracting for  research and could control a
          research budget.
     (c)  A  set of preventive  equipment design and
          operating  procedure standards  could be
          developed from  oil  spill  experience.  Such
          standards could then either be recommended to
          industry   or  used  as a  basis  for  amending
          regulations.
     (d)  The Oil  and Gas Conservation Board, since  it
          would be the recipient of all oil spill reports,
          could maintain statistical records of spills. Such
          records  could  facilitate   more  logical and
          effective planning in all phases of  preventive
          and remedial standards.

-------
               DEVELOPMENT  OF  AN  AIR  DELIVERABLE

                  ANTIPOLLUTION  TRANSFER  SYSTEM

                    INCLUDING  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF

                     OF  AN  OPTIMUM  OIL  STORAGE

                                      CONTAINER
                                        Commander R.J. Ketchel
                                        United States Coast Guard
                                                and
                                             H.D. Smith
                                     Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co,
ABSTRACT
    During the past two years development of a special
purpose emergency tanker unloading system was accom-
plished. The Air Deliverable Transfer Pumping and Storage
System (ADAPTS) is now being provided for operational
use. This paper traces the development of the system from
inception to procurement specifications preparation. Prob-
lems encountered during the development effort are identi-
fied. Solutiom.and the rationale behind them, obtained to
overcome the technical and operational problems are dis-
cussed. Field test experience and performance data on the
ADAPTS system are presented.

INTRODUCTION

 .  Uncontrolled  oil  spills from grounded  or damaged
tankers have in recent years caused large scale pollution of
ocean and shoreline areas. The U.S. Coast Guard has during
the past two years undertaken a three phase effort to com-
bat this threat to the environment. This program consists of
the development of equipment and  techniques to reduce
the quantity of oil released, to control the spread of the
spilled oil and to remove the spilled oil. This  paper  will
describe the development of a self-contained system for the
emergency unloading of damaged tankers to reduce  the
quantity of oil released.
   This development has resulted in a unique Air Delivera-
ble Antipollution Transfer System (ADAPTS), consisting of
portable pumps, pump prime movers, temporary  oil storage
containers, transfer piping, necessary fittings and tools and
requisite  air  delivery equipment. This system will  be
pre'positioned at selected U.S. Coast Guard Air Stations and
will'be air-lifted to the scene of tankship casualties which
threaten an uncontrolled release of oil. Coincidentally,
Coast Guard Strike Force and civilian salvage personnel will
be helicopter delivered onboard the  stricken vessel. The
system components will be delivered by parachute into the
water  in  close proximity to the stricken vessel Delivery of
these  components  onboard  will be  accomplished by
helicopter recovery of a  lifting device and the helicopter
assisted retrieval of the remaining components by means of
the lifting device. Once onboard, system components will
be "assembled and operated by the Strike Force. Using the
portable ADAPTS pumps or the ship's  installed pumps if
still operable, Strike Force personnel will transfer cargo oil
from  the ship into temporary storage container. These
temporary storage containers, also parachute delivered, will
be towed  to a safe anchorage by Coast Guard ships for later
disposal. The system has the capability of unloading 20,000
tons of cargo oil within 24 hours of a reported ship pollu-
tion incident. Deployment of the system is shown in the
artist's conception of Figure 1.
Development

   Development of  the system began in the Spring of
1968 with the inception of a concept for an emergency
*This paper was not presented during the conference.
                                              165

-------
166   OIL SPILL PREVENTION
tanker unloading system.  Background  studies were com-
pleted and  the  basic system  concept  feasibility was es-
tablished. General  system design  criteria were established
and  included  that  system  development  was  to  utilize
existing technology, materials and equipment  to the great-
est  extent possible. The system was to be complete and
self-contained and  not require  support from the distressed
ship.  System components would include  pump capacity,
pump power source, temporary storage  containers, transfer
piping,  necessary fittings and tools and the air delivery
equipment to deliver the packaged system. The components
 nust  be  compatible for air delivery at the spill site by para-
 ;hute from the HC-130 Hercules aircraft within four hours
 jf notification of a potential oil spill incident. The system
 -nust  perform in 40 mph winds and in  12 foot seas and be
 :apable of transferring and storing 20,000 tons of crude oil
 within a 20 hour period against a 60 foot head. A nominal
 :rude oil having a viscosity of  100 ssu at 70°F and 340 ssu
 it 40°F was designated  as  representing a typical average
 :rude oil.  The oil transfer  pump must also pass through
 Butterworth fittings.
    A Request for Proposal for the Design and Development
of an Operational Prototype of this system was issued late
in  1968.  The  contract  for this  development effort  was
awarded to Ocean Science and Engineering, Inc. of Bethes-
da, Maryland in  the Spring of 1969. The total  ADAPTS
prototype system was designed to consist of the  following
three subsystems:
      I. Air Delivery Subsystem
     II. Transfer Pumping Subsystem
    III. Temporary Storage Subsystem

Air Delivery Subsystem
    The Air Delivery Subsystem consists of equipment for
the controlled delivery by parachute of system components
during deployment and  a means to  release parachutes and
component restraint  on  water  impact. Pioneer Parachute
Co. Inc. was subcontracted for the design and manufacture
of the air delivery subsystem. Air delivery  is to be effected
in two modules. One module consists of the system machin-
ery and includes the  cargo  oil transfer pump, the pump
                                     Figure  1:   Artist's Conception of ADAPTS in Use

-------
                                                                  AIR DELIVERABLE TRANSFER SYSTEM
                                                                                                            167
prime mover, a 55 gallon  prime mover fuel supply and a
combination A-frame/tripod for recovery and movement of
the components. This equipment is air delivered by para-
chute from an altitude of 600 feet  while  packaged on a
8'xl2'  air delivery platform. This air delivery is shown in
Figure  2. The module components are restrained by means
of a special container which is severed by pyrotechnic cut-
ters on water impact which allows the various components
to float  free. This  module  weighs  approximately 5000
pounds and uses a single vent controlled 100 foot diameter
G-l 1A  parachute for recovery.
Strike  Force  who  use  the  hand  winch  on  the
A-frame/tripod  to  recover the machinery components. A
lightweight hydraulic powered winch is packaged with the
prime mover and is used to recover  subsequent machinery
components. The winch is powered by  the  diesel  prime
mover hydraulic power supply. Following recovery  of all
equipment, the  A-frame is converted into a tripod and used
to lower the submersible cargo oil pump into the hold of
the vessel.
    A second module  contains the  temporary oil storage
container, 300 feet of 6 inch diameter transfer hose, infla-
tion and release equipment, a 40 pound anchor and two
crown recovery buoys. This 8'xl2' module  is extracted
from  the aircraft at an altitude of 800 feet by a 22 foot
diameter ring slot parachute. The container module is then
separated  from  the  air  delivery  platform  in mid-air by
means of static line cutter knives which sever the bindings
holding the module  to the platform. This procedure was
incorporated to minimize water impact forces and to sim-
plify the deployment of the anchor and buoys in air.

       Figure 2:    Air Delivery of Pumping  Subsystem

    This main parachute  is deployed by means of a static
 line following extraction of the  platform from the aircraft
 by a  15 foot diameter ring slot parachute. Standard Air
 Force  low velocity extraction airdrop methods  are  used
 therefore no new development was required. However, dur-
 ing descent, a 22 pound ancrior and two crown or recovery
 line buoys are deployed along separate  trajectories. This is
 done prior to splashdown to prevent fouling or tangling of
 the crown  and anchor lines which would prevent retrieval
 of the anchor. This effort required special trajectory analy-
 sis and the design of this unique mooring system package.
 A .water actuated electrical circuit was also designed to re-
 lease the parachute on water impact. The cargo oil transfer
 pump  is packaged in a flotation enclosure along with  160
 feet of high pressure hydraulic hose. This  pump, the diesel
 prime  mover packaged in a watertight  case and  the prime
 mover fuel supply are tethered together and anchored. The
 combination A-frame/lifting tripod with a recovery line and
 buoy  attached floats  free and is ready for pick up by the
 recovery helicopter. Figure 3 shows this recovery. This heli-
 copter delivers the device to the Strike Force on the dis-
 tressed vessel. The helicopter then attaches a messenger line
 to  the machinery crown  line buoy and delivers it to  the
      Figure  3:   Recovery of A-frame by  Helicopter

    Figure 4 shows this deployment.  Trajectory analysis
played an important role in determining the feasibility of
this concept  of air delivery. These studies included trajec-
tories and dynamics of the mooring system deployment
concept and  water impact. Two 100 foot diameter G-l 1A
parachutes are deployed for recovery  following platform
separation. On water impact the parachutes are released by
water actuated pyrotechnic release devices. The folded con-
tainer, restrained in a specially designed harness, is floating
and anchored. Styrofoam packaged within the  container

-------
 168   OIL SPILL PREVENTION .
causes the module to assume an upright attitude. Following
a  100 second delay the harness release  devices are  fired
which allow the container to unfold. A squib value is also
fired  which  releases nitrogen gas into the container's bow
buoyancy chamber. A recovery buoy is attached to the end
of the transfer hose which is  retrieved by a helicopter. A
messenger line is  attached to this hose end  and the line
delivered to  the Strike Force onboard the distressed vessel.
The  hose end is  then  recovered by use of the hand  or
hydraulic winch as necessary.
           ./nrv
    Figure 4:   Air Delivery of Storage Container  Module

    During concept development, an alternate approach for
storage  container  deployment  was considered. This pro-
cedure called for platform extraction from the aircraft, con-
tainer module and platform separation and deployment of
the container in  mid-air using a parachute to stabilize it as
necessary. This technique was rejected due to the potential
for damage  to the container on impact and  the complica-
tion of needed accessories.

Transfer Pumping Subsystem

    The  Transfer  Pumping  Subsystem  power  source
consists of  a  four cylinder, air cooled, 40   horsepower
die^el  prime mover manufactured by Avco-Lycoming. This
standard engine has been slightly modified to  incorporate a
manual  hydraulic starter in  place  of the  normal electric
starter and an external fuel tank in place of the integral fuel
tank. This integral fuel tank was converted into a hydraulic
oil reservoir for  the hydraulic  power transmission system.
The system hydraulic power is supplied by a  Lucas IP-500
MAMS model variable displacement hydraulic pump. Ancil-
lary hydraulic system components  are the hydraulic fluid
reservoir, a  hydraulic prime pump, an Eastern Industries
Series 100 Model 107-41 supercharging pump, a 10 micron
hydraulic fluid filter and necessary  system check and relief
valves. The  prime mover and  attached hydraulic power
supply,  the system flowmeter readout device and the hy-
draulic winch are packaged in a watertight enclosure mea-
suring  40"x43"x48".  This  component  weighs  approxi-
mately 1150 pounds and is shown in Figure 5. The cargo oil
transfer  pump is a  two  state centrifugal  10 inch type  H
              Figure  5:   Diesel Prime Mover
submersible pump manufactured by  the  Byron Jackson
Pump  Division of the Borg Warner Corporation. It  is de-
signed  to fit into a  12 inch  diameter hatch so it can be
lowered into ships' tanks through standard Butterworth fit-
tings or  deck  plates. The  pump is powered by  a  small
hydraulic motor which is directly coupled  to the pump at
its lower end below the intake. The six inch diameter  trans-
fer hose attaches to the pump discharge by means of  a cam
locking quick  acting fitting.  The  hydraulic  supply and
return  hoses are  attached  to the  cargo  pump  and  the
hydraulic power system by means of Snap-Tite quick acting
fittings. The oil transfer pump which weighs approximately
450 pounds is packaged with the two 80  foot lengths of
hydraulic hose in a  rectangular  aluminum structure mea-
suring 28"x28"x82". This structure  contains polyurethane
foart] to provide flotation of the enclosure and pump  when
they are  deployed on the sea during recovery. This  com-
plete package weighs  950 pounds and is shown in Figure 6.
This lightweight versitile pumping subsystem is capable of
transferring the design nominal crude oil at a rate of 1000
gallons per minute against a 60 foot head and through 300
feet of 6 inch diameter transfer  hose. The difficult  prob-
lems of delivering the necessary pumping power through a
lightweight unit and of providing design  pumping capacity
in a relatively  small, low powered pump were thus solved.

Temporary Storage Subsystem

    The  temporary storage subsystem consists of large 500
ton  capacity flexible  storage  containers, flexible transfer

-------
                                                                     AIR DELIVERABLE TRANSFER SYSTEM
                                                    169
hose and related  equipment. The first system prototype
container developed by Uniroyal, Inc. consists of a mod-
ified pillow tank design incorporating  a tapered bow which
is  heavily  reinforced to withstand  and distribute towing
loads.  The  initial  design  called for  the container to be
double ended for ease of deployment andrecovery, however,
model  tests  showed this  configuration to  be unstable in
yaw. Yaw stability was gained by removing the after taper.

Any tendency for the container to  dive was corrected by
incorporating an inflatable buoyancy chamber on the bow
itself. These features proved to be very effective  in achiev-
ing these goals as demonstrated through operational testing.
The difficult problem  of  designing and fabricating a tem-
porary  storage container with strength to withstand towing
forces and  forces of a  12 foot sea which was also light and
flexible to allow for air delivery by parachute had to be
solved. This problem was solved by conducting a model test
program  that utilized scale models instrumented with strain
gauges, internal pressure transducers, and a  towline tensio-
meter to determine the fabric  stresses and towline  loads
that would  be  experienced  by the full  scale prototype.
However, these tests gave  inconclusive and inconsistent re-
sults due to  the difficulty of scaling fabric thickness. The
difficulty of fabricating reliable  strain gauges also contri-
buted to the problem. A  significant result of the test pro-
gram was the determination that internal fluid surges set up
in  resonance with  the  sea could cause excessive stresses in
the full scale prototype. The  container design was based on
theoretical  calculations which  included the prediction of
maximum loads to 60,000 pounds.  The container was de-
signed  to withstand these  loads with an appropriate safety
factor.  To  provide for the predicted higher stresses in the
stern  area  of the  container this area of the container was
reinforced  by the  addition  of a second fabric  layer. An
additional  model  test  program  was  also  undertaken to
verify the results of the initial program. This second model
test  utilized  1/15, 1/20,  and  1/40  scale  models instru-
mented to determine  internal  pressure, fabric stress and
towline tension. A graphical technique of data analysis was
used in which data from the  several  scale models were plot-
ted and  compared on  a  common basis. The conclusions
reached were based on these graphical comparisons  in an
effort to solve the problem of fabric thickness scaling. The
results  of this test  program indicated that the internal pres-
sures were  directly related  to the quasi static head and that
only insignificant internal  fluid dynamic forces exist within
the container.
    The  prototype container was instrumented with  inter-
nal and external pressure transducers and a  towline tensio-
meter and  tow tested at sea to verify  the model  test pred-
ictions. Tests were conducted in seas of six  foot significant
wave height and at tow speeds to 6  knots. Tow loads were
measured  which  are  approximately   50%  greater than
predicted, however,these loads were observed to follow the
predicted load versus speed relationships. Significant inter-
nal fluid  pressures  were also measured. Maximum values of
approximately 10  psi gauge were measured. This indicates
that internal fluid dynamic  forces  are  present. However,
fluid  pressures  of  the  same  general  magnitude  were
measured by the externally mounted gauges. Maximum ex-
ternal pressures of approximately  13  psi gauge were  mea-
sured with   external-internal  pressure  differentials  of
approximately 1-3 psi gauge noted. These  test results  are
presently  being analyzed to  explain the container  internal
fluid dynamics. The results of the sea trials indicate that  the
internal fluid surges are present and that the magnitude of
the internal pressures are intermediate between those pre-
dicted by the two  model test programs.

      Figure 7 shows  this prototype container during  sea
trials. Additional  trials in seas of up to 12  foot significant
wave heights are  planned to provide additional real world
data. Test  data  available  indicate  that  this container is
suitable  for towing  to speeds of five knots in calm to
moderate seas and to  speeds of four knots in  moderate to
rough seas.
              Figure 6:    Oil Transfer Pump

     A second prototype container, also fabricated by Uni-
 royal, Inc., was of the same basic design as the first proto-
 type. A tear problem in  the  tow point design of the first
 prototype was corrected  on this  container along with the
 addition of coloration  of the external coating. These con-
 tainers were  fabricated  of 13 oz. per sq. yard woven nylon
 fabric which is coated  internally and externally  with a ni-
 trile  rubber  compound. This prototype is 135'x35'x6' in
 size when filled and has  a capacity  of 500 tons of oil. It

-------
170     OIL SPILL PREVENTION
 weighs 8500 pounds when empty. When fully rigged for air
 delivery this module has a weight of 13,000 pounds.
     To ensure maximum success for the ADAPTS system a
 parallel development of temporary storage  containers was
 undertaken. The  Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. was con-
 tracted with for  the development of a  temporary  storage
 container of optimum shape, size and  strength and to be
 compatible with the ADAPTS system.
     On June 1, 1970 Goodyear was awarded a contract by
 the Coast Guard for the development of an optimized flexi-
 ble  storage  container for the ADAPTS. The program in-
 cluded a concept study; the fabrication  and  testing of one
 fortieth  and one  eighth scale  models: the  design  and
 fabrication of a prototype container; and a  packaging, de-
 ployment and retrieval study.
     The Concept Study consisted of  a review.of hydro-
 dynamic and structual theory for flexible towed bodies and
 the choice of scale model size and shapes. From this study
 evolved the six basic shapes for one fortieth scale  model
 testing shown in  Figure  8. They included four cylindrical
 bodies with both  hemispherical  and  conical ends and had
 fineness ratios (L/D) ranging from 9.31  to 23.5. One cylin-
 drical  body featured a ram inflated nose.  Also included
 were a tapered  cylindrical  body and a flat configuration
 with pointed nose similar to the Uniroyal container shape.
 Flow trippers,  vortex generators and a drogue were  pro-
 vided to more  closely simulate the  prototype flow condi-
 tions and to help stabilize the bodies where required. These
 devices are illustrated by Figure 9.
                              MOD«L.»
i.   C
«.*c
                                  CYLINDRICAL

                                     •ODIES
**C
 5.
                               FLAT

                                 IODY
6.  C
                             TAPERED BODY
                                                                         Figure 8:   1/40  Scale  Models
                                                                           FLOW TRIPPER
                                                                                      PLA*TIC TUBING
                                                                         VORTEX .GENERATOR
                                                                     -PLASTIC TUBIN«
                                                                         VORTEX GENERATOR
                                                                       -FABRIC SKIRT
   Figure 7:   Uniroyal, Inc. Prototype  Oil Storage Container
                                                                PLASTIC com

                                                                    Figure 9:    Model Stabilization Devices

-------
                                                                    AIR DELIVERABLE TRANSFER SYSTEM   171
    The one fortieth scale model testing was conducted in
mid-July in the circulating channel at Naval Ships Research
and Development center (NSRDC).  Over 250  runs were
made under the following conditions.
 Variable
 Velocity, Knpts
 Full  Scale

 '   5
   10
   15
 Tow Line Lengths, Feet  100
                          300
                          500
 Percent Fill
  95
 100
    1/40  Scale

      0.8
      1.6
      2.4
      2.5
      7.5
     12.5
      95
     100
     This testing was conducted as a screening process and
 performance was evaluated by visual observation during the
 tests and later study of movie films taken during the tests.
     Of the nine configurations  tested, the tapered body
 model with hemispherical ends was the most stable through
 the  range of test  conditions. This model and a second
 model having cylindrical body with conical nose and hemis-
 pherical tail section were selected for the larger  one eighth
 scale model study. The latter shape was added since it could
 be stabilized  with a vortex generator  and because of its
 anticipated lower fabrication cost.
    These two models were made of a square woven 4.5
 ounce  per square  yard nylon  cloth  coated with poly-
 urethane and utilized a closed cell vinyl foam along the top
 interior surface  for  buoyancy. Both  models  were instru-
 mented for internal pressures at forward, aft and midpoint
 locations  and for tow line tension. The tapered body also
 had  strain gauges on the skin at the forward, aft and mid-
 point locations. Figure 10 shows the instrumented models.
    The tests were conducted the week of August 7th  at
 NSRDC's deep water tow basin which, in addition to being
 considerably larger than the circulating channel facility, has
 the additional capability  of wave making. These models, as
 well as the earlier one fortieth scale models, were filled with
 a water-alcohol solution  having a  specific gravity of 0.85.
 One hundred and seventeen runs were made with combina-
 tions of the following conditions.
Variable

Velocity,  knots


Wave  Height,  feet



Wave  Period,  seconds
Full Scale

      5
     10
     15
      0
      6
     12
     16
    5.7
    6.8
    7.9
1/8 Scale


   1.8
   3.5
   5.3
    0
   .75
   1.5
   2.0
   2.0
   2.4
   2.8
 Variable                 Full  Scale       1/8 Scale


 Percent Fill                   95              95
                             100             100
                             105             105
 Towline Lengths, feet        300            37.5
                             500            62.5
                            1000             125

           TAPERED  MODEL
SI. S2
r
i
p
/S.S" aA.
«•.*«,
SS.S*
-»-re
21' -T

s^. so,
59. 310
~~" PS-*- ^\
J

21.2." UA. —
                                              CYLINDRICAL MODEL
                                                                                   27.2* OM
                                                            n  n P9-PRESSURE TRANSDUCER
                                                                          LOCATIONS
                                                            81 THRU 3K>- STRAIN CAUSE
                                                                          LOCATIONS
               Figure 10:   1/8 Scale Models

    Based on the results of the tow tests, the tapered body
showed stable performance generally under all  conditions
tested. The cylindrical model was stable for all conditions,
except with less than  100%  fill. Towline  tensions  on
the tapered body was slightly higher than on the cylindrical
body indicating higher  drag  forces,  which probably con-
tributed to its greater stability. Compared to the fuU scale
design limitation of 60,000 pounds at ten knots in twelve
foot  seas,  the  model tests  indicated 52,000 Ibs for the
tapered body and  45,000 pounds for the cylindrical con-
figuration.
    After careful analysis of the strain gauge,pressure guage,
and towline data,  it was concluded that only the towline
data were reliable. An attempt was made to correlate the
strain gage  data with stresses calculated from the pressure
data by laboratory tensile  testing of a section of fabric cut
from  the tapered body  with  strain gauge intact, but it was
unsuccessful. It was also  found  that slight flexing of the
fabric produced large tension and compression readings of
the strain gauges.
    In trying  to  determine the  internal  pressure upon
which hoop stress  in the  container is dependent, two dif-
ficulties were encountered. First, since the external pressure

-------
 172   OIL SPILL PREVENTION
was not simultaneously measured, the differential pressure
acting on  the container-could not be  calculated.   Second,
it was felt that the internal pressure measured contained a
velocity pressure element as  well  as  the static pressure,
and since  the velocity of the fluid inside the container was
not known  the actual  pressure contributing to'hoop stress
could not be determined. The only conclusion  that could
be firmly  drawn  was that the hoop stress in the container
was less  than those values calculated  from the pressures
measured.
    Based on test results, materials  availability, weight, and
cost consideration, a decision was  made to build the  pro-
totype container in  the tapered configuration using a square
woven  fabric of  twelve  ounces per  square yard having a
tensile  of 650  pounds per inch. This  decision  was made
with the realization that  the use of this weight fabric could
possibly restrict tow speeds and wave heights to less than
the design goal of ten knots  in twelve foot waves.  The
actual operational limitations were  to be established by sea
trial of the prototpye container.
    The prototype  container was fabricated in Goodyear's
Phoenix facility and was shipped to Moorehead City, North
Carolina on January 7,  1971 for sea test.  Figure 11  is a
sketch of this container showing some of its design features.
Its overall length is 173 feet five  inches including hemis-
pherical ends.
fifteen foot  tow harness of 2 5/8 inch diameter nylon rope.
A 40,000 pound fail safe link joins this  rope to  the  285
foot nylon tow rope of the same size. The other  end of the
tow rope has a  Danforth anchor attached. The anchor  is
provided with a retrieval line and marker buoy. Figure 12
illustrates this assembly.
    I igure  12:  Prototype Container Forward Closure
               Assembly
                               ravmG SKACKf 7
  Figure 11:   Sketch of Goodyear Tire and Rubber  Company
             Prototype Container

     The diameter at  the forward end is ten feet two inches
 and it is  fourteen feet two  inches at the  aft end. It has a
 150,000 gallon capacity and weighs 2975 pounds without
 hose and other  accessories  except  fittings. The fabric  is
 coated with  approximately .040 inch of polyurethane elas-
 tomer. All seams are longitudinal and are both sewn and
 cemented. A 25 inch diameter aluminum  fitting is located
 in the center of each  domed end.
     The  forward closure  plate is designed for a 60,000
 pound tow load  and  contains the  tow point for attaching a
  Figure 13:   Prototype Container Alt  Closure Plate  Assembly

     The aft closure plate, as shown by the exploded view in
 Figure 13, contains a fitting with a  close coupled butterfly
 valve  to which a six inch  diameter  hose  is attached. Three
 lengths of  hose totaling  300 feet  is  provided, A pair of
 towing brackets with  harness are also  located on the  aft
 closure plate.
     Reinforcing bands extending around the container  are
 located at approximately 43  foot intervals along its length.
 Aluminum  D-rings are  fastened  to these bands  on either
 side for attaching mooring lines and  to assist in handling  the
 container.

-------
                                                                   AIR DELIVERABLE TRAMSFER SYSTEM   173
    Closed cell vinyl foam sections located on the interior
top surface of the tank provide buoyancy when it is empty.
    A vent fitting and beacon  are located on the top aft
end of the tank. For sea  testing of the  prototype, two
additional fittings were located  in the sides of the tank for
mounting differential pressure  transducer  units and  tabs
were provided  on the top of  the  tank for  mounting an
electronic package  required for transmitting the pressure
data to the towing vessel.
    The  tank was packaged by folding onto an eight by ten
foot pallet along with hoses, lines, anchors, and other ac-
cessories. The total package weight was 4600 Ibs.
    Deployment of the tank was accomplished by lifting
both ends with a crane and lowering into the water. It was
emptied  and retrieved by lifting the nose end with a  crane
and draining from  the  aft end.  Additional lifting by the
D-rings along  the body enables the  container to be com-
pletely emptied and  removed  from the water. When dis-
charging  oil instead of the fresh water as used in the proto-
type testing,  a pump would be provided at the aft end to
transfer the oil ashore or to a barge.

    Figure 14 shows this container during the sea  trials.
Tow loads measured were in general agreement with those
predicted by the model test program. Internal fluid pressure
measurements showed that the  pressures in the bow section
were  greater  than  predicted while the pressures in other
container sections were in general agreement with the pre-
dictions   of  the model  test  program. These  tests  had
predicted a higher pressure area in the bow of the container
but not  of the magnitude observed. Maximum pressures of
approximately 15 psi gauge were measured in this area with
maximum pressures of approximately 7 psi gauge measured
 in other container sections. As noted during sea trials of the
 Uniroyal, Inc. prototype, external pressure measurements
 observed were of the same general magnitude as the internal
 pressure   at each  location. Thus only low pressure dif-
 ferentials are  indicated across the  container fabric. Maxi-
 mum  tow loads of  approximately 20,000  pounds were
 measured at a speed of 6 knots in 5 foot seas.  This con-
 tainer will be towable to speeds of 6 knots in calm to
 moderate  seas and to  speeds  of 5 knots in moderate to
 rough seas. However, the full analysis of test results has not
 been completed. Additional tow testing of this container is
 also  planned   for  the  near  future  to  provide additional
 pressure  and  loading data  for a full evaluation  of  opera-
 tional performance and limitations.
     Subsystem testing of components began in the Fall of
 1969. These   tests included  air drop tests  of dummy
 modules to  verify the air  delivery concept for  the oil
 storage  container module, pumping subsystem performance
 tests, dockside drop tests of system modules to test impact
 shock'resistance, retrieval tests and tow  tests of the tem-
 porary storage container. The first full system test was held
 in lower Chesapeake Bay in February 1970.
     This test  held under calm conditions  was followed by
 three  additional full system tests in the same location and
 under the same general  conditions. Figure 15 shows the
      Figure 14:   Goodyear Tire  & Rubber Company
                 Prototype Container


machinery module being loaded onto a trailer for transfer
to the  test  aircraft. The oil storage container  is shown
loaded in the  aircraft in  Figure 16. Use of the A-frame to
recover  the  system prime mover is shown  in Figure 17.
Maximum wind velocity experienced during these tests was
20 knots with maximum seas to four feet observed.  The
major problem experienced was difficulty with the water
actuated parachute and restraint release circuit. This prob-
lem was corrected and the system improved  with the addi-
tion  of  redundant circuitry  and pyrotechnics. Figure 18
shows  the pumping  subsystem on  deck. A  pumping  sub-
system air drop test has been conducted under moderate to
heavy weather conditions of forty  knot winds and six  foot
seas. These  tests  have  demonstrated the  feasibility of the

-------
174    OIL SPILL PREVENTION. .  .
system and have provided basic operating procedures. Com-
ponent  reliability  has  also  been  tested  while material
weakness identified and corrected. Additional  rough-water
tests are planned for February 1971 to identify other prob-
lem areas and to  determine system operational limitations.

    Supplementary component testing has also been under-
taken. These tests will better determine the capability  of
the pumping system under varying conditions, will establish
the reliability and  endurance of the diesel  prime  mover
while operating at full load under extended periods of time
and provide the actual load trajectory for both the machin-
ery and storage  container modules.  This  data  will more
fully  establish the operational capability  of  the system. Im-
proved  utilization of the  helicopter in system deployment
and  retrieval is also  being investigated. This will include
retrieval of system components by the HH-3F  helicopter
with  towing  of components  also  envisioned.  These
improved deployment techniques will be incorporated into
the system on completion of development tasks. Detailed
design  and procurement specifications for an operational
system are now being prepared within the Coast Guard.
Procurement action for this system has been initiated with
contract award anticipated during the Summer of 1971.
SUMMARY

    The development  of the ADAPTS system completes
the first phase of the Coast Guard program to deal with the
problem of open sea oil spills. System feasibility  has been
established and operational procedures developed through
subsystem  and full system testing of an operational proto-
type.   Additional  operational  testing is  in  progress  to
establish operational limitations and to test component re-
liability. Procurement  of the first operational system  has
been initiated with contract  award anticipated during the
Summer of 1971. This will result in the delivery of this first
operational system by the Summer of 1972.
                                         Figure  15:  Machinery Module Loading

-------
                              AIR DELIVERABLE TRANSFER SYSTEM    175
l;igurc  16:  Oil Storage Container  Module in Aircraft

-------
176   AIR DELIVERABLE TRANSFER SYSTEM
                                    Figure  17:  A-frame in Operation

-------
                                  OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...    177
Figure  18:  Pumping Subsystem on Deck

-------
                A CHEMICAL  TAGGING  SYSTEM  FOR  USE
                     IN   THE  PREVENTION  OF  OIL  SPILLS
                                       R.A. Landowne and R.B. Wainright
                                         American Cyanamid Company
                                            Central Research Division
                                               Stamford, Conn.
ABSTRACT
     The bulk handling of various oils, especially crudes and
fuel oils, presents many chances for accidental spills.  The
single most effective deterrent would be a tag in  the oil
which would positively identify  the party responsible for
spilled oil at the time of spillage. Crude petroleum from one
field can usually be distinguished from another by analy-
zing for trace constituents, such as heavy metals, but would
not discriminate among operators and carriers who  handle
the same crude. Such discrimination is best achieved via
chemical tags blended into the oil at the time of change in
responsibility.
    The most important property criteria for chemical tags
are discussed, including sensitivity,  stability in  the  spill
environment, and non-interference with processing  or use
of the oil.  It is also necessary that the tags belong  to a
system providing a large coding vocabulary. The Organic
Electrophore  System  is  described,  together  with
preliminary findings which suggest it will satisfy the above
criteria.  Ability  to detect a  tag at 1 ppb concentration in
crude oil using commercially available gas chromatographic
instrumentation   is reported.  Questions  to be resolved
before the system can be brought to operational status are
discussed.
INTRODUCTION
    Once oil has been spilled on surface waters, the ques-
tion of its effect on the environment is only one of degree.
Damage can be  reduced through the use of more efficient
surveillance and cleanup methods,  but never eliminated.
Thus, maximum attention  must be focused  on means of
preventing oil spills.
    A convention adopted at the IMCO International Legal
Conference in November of 1969 covers civil liability for
the cost of oil  cleanup, and holds owners and operators
liable for such  costs up to  a  limit of $134 per gross re-
gistered ton, or $14 million, whichever is the lesser. This
magnitude  of potential  cost  penalty  is  an enormous
incentive to the owners and operators to take all practical
steps to avoid spills. An additional giant step in this dir-
ection can be taken by extablishing a means of positively
identifying the source of pollutant oil from examination of
the oil  subsequent to spillage. In waters carrying  heavy
traffic, the evidence revealed in logs and other operating
records too frequently falls short of legal requirements, and
can at best indicate the most probably offender. Such is
particularly true in the  case of. relatively  small spills re-
sulting from  various malpractices on the part of carriers.
Although  small  spills  are individually  of  minor con-
sequence, collectively they have become a major environ-
mental problem. It is estimated by the Water Quality Office
of EPA that a total of 7,000 spills occur annually  in U.S.
Waters.
    It is desired, then, that a workable means be devised to
provide positive identification of the party responsible for
release of oil onto surface waters, with emphasis  on oils
that have already entered the channels of commerce and are
being transported, transferred, or stored. To be workable,
the means must not be prohibitively costly, must not inter-
fere with further processing or use of the oil, and must
satisfy other criteria to be discussed below.  For maximum
utility, the means  must be adopted universally within a
specific region, or throughout the world.
    Consideration of the source identification problem has
led some to propose the  use of trace metals and other con-
stituents indigenous to petroleum as "fingerprints". While it
is  true that oil from one producing field can usually be
distinguished from oil that is produced in another field, the
technique of "passive tagging" does  not adequately dis-
criminate among the numerous operators or carriers who
might reasonably carry, transfer, or store  crude oil and
refined  oil products  originating in the same production
field.
                                                     179

-------
180    OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
     Active tagging of materials has long been practiced for
 various purposes, including the  policing of patent rights,
 the identification of stolen goods, and the tracing of goods
 at  various stages in processing. One of the prime require-
 ments for tags in all of  these applications is long  term
 stability.  Another is  ability  to distribute  uniformly
 throughout the goods, and a third is non-interference with
 the ultimate use or function of  the goods. Generally, the
 tag is in the same physical state as the tagged article. Con-
 ceivably,  active  tagging  might  be  used  either  as  a
 self-sufficient system or as an adjunct to passive tagging.
     One  type of active tagging  system that has been de-
 veloped  requires the use of radioactive materials. Another
 depends on the use of metals or metal-organic compounds.
 Neither seems well suited to the  tagging of oils because of
 the limitations they would impose  on further processing or
 use.
     As  far  as oils  are concerned,  the  extremely  large
 volume handled and the  relatively low commercial  value
 (often about one cent per pound) demand a system of tag-.
 ging agents that are detectable at  very low concentration
 levels, say, 1 ppm or below.
 Description of System
     Our   work  has  centered  around  a   metal-free,
 non-radioactive system  we call the Organic Electrophore
 System,  in  which  organic   compounds   known as
 electrophores  are  utilized to provide  the desired  code
 system. These electrophores, which possess a strong affinity
 for capturing free electrons while in the gaseous state, can
 furnish a very large coding vocabulary because:
         • quite  a few classes  of chemical compounds
           exhibit this property,

         • within each class, variations in molecular weight
           and molecular  configuration  produce discrete
           code bits, and
         • it is likely that  workable combinations of code
           bits from the same and different classes can be
           put together.
     The remarkable  potential of the proposed system de-
 pends on a  combination  of two laboratory analytical-
 procedures, gas chromatography and electron  capture de-
 tection. The chromatography process makes a separation of
 components based on their partitioning behavior in relation
 to a liquid substrate material and an inert carrier gas. This
 alone would not be  useful for the present purpose.  How-
 ever, when  the  components  separated by gas chromato-
 graphy are subjected to electron capture spectrometry, an
 additional distinction can be made with great sensitivity,
 based on the level of affinity for electrons as measured in
 an ionization chamber. The principle of this technique has
 been described in the literature. (1,2)
     The  system of  choice has outstanding features that
 immediately  suggest its worth.  First,  our investigations
 show it to have great sensitivity, providing unequivocal dis-
 crimination at a concentration of 50 ppb (parts per Wffib/z)
and lower. Second, it has the potential to be set up and
operated  using  presently  known  and  readily  available
organic chemicals. Third, the analytical methods require
little  further development, and the  apparatus is available
commercially. Finally, since we believe the Organic Electro-
phore  System can be operated at a tag concentration level
of about 100  ppb, or  below,  it seems likely  that the
materials costs will be a tiny fraction  of the value of the
product. It is interesting to contemplate that, assuming 100
ppb of a $20/lb tagging agent, the largest tanker spill, which
cost in excess of $10 million  to  clean up, could have been
tagged with $370 worth of agent. Many of the compounds
that seem likely to be  included are available commerically
at prices below the assumed figure.
    Stability of the tags  is an important concern. It should
be assured that the source of pollution  can be  identified
after a minimum of thirty days and preferably sixty days
exposure to ambient conditions, preceded by a much longer
period of time in storage. During ambient exposure, de-
gradation might  occur  by hydrolytic  and oxidative  pro-
cesses. Since the tags  are organic compounds, uniformly
dispersed at very low concentration in  the oil, they are not
prone to attack. Photodegradation would not occur because
of the aosorbance  of  naturally occurring aromatic com-
pounds in the  oil in greater  concentration (.001-1%) and
with much  higher absorption coefficients (1033-105)than
any of the electrophores. The lack of solubility of the elect-
rophores would also prevent  their  leaching out into the
surrounding waters, nor  would they be hydrolyzed at the
surface at any significant rate.
    Degradation of oil by microorganism attack is said to
be up to  10 times as rapid  as that  by photo-enhanced
chemical oxidation (3*. Here again, eliminations of organic
tags because of differences in biodegradability is unlikely
considering  the  extreme  dilutions  to be  used.  The
electrophore system offers  wide latitude in selection of
compounds having the required physical properties, and
which will "stay  put" for the desired length of time, both
during storage  and (after a spill) during exposure on the
surface waters.
    The Organic Electrophore System  is unlikely to suffer
from  interference by the components normally  found in
oils. There  is an almost complete absence of compounds
having significant electron affinities in  crude oils, as deter-
mined by analysis of Kuwait, southern Louisiana and Tia-
juana crudes, and Bunker C fuel oil.  Even if an exceptional
case were discovered, it would be easy  to select a code that
would avoid interference since the  principle of analysis is
based  on chromatographic  fractionation combined with
electron  capture  detection. Attempts  might be  made to
"jam" the code by adding one or more  active electrophores
to an  oil slick. It would be so difficult to accomplish this
both uniformly and at the normal  dilution level that the
jamming would be evident, and could be allowed for in the
analysis based on a standard  kept on file after the tagging
operation.
    Addition  of  the proposed tags  to oil can be accom-
plished by  means  of  known,  proven  procedures. It  is

-------
                                                                         CHEMICAL TAGGING SYSTEM...
envisioned  that the tags would be stored as concentrates,
and metered into the oil during transfer of the oil. Com-
mercially available proportioning  and metering equipment
would be  used.  Because  of the very  great dilution, a
two-stage operation is desirable in which the tag concen-
trate  is first blended  into a batch of the oil to be tagged,
after which the tagged blend is metered into a transfer line.
As an example, the concentration of tag might vary from
10% (100,000 ppm) in the concentrate to 100 ppm in the
intermediate blend to 0.1 ppm in the tagged oil.
  (i)
  (2)
  (3)
  (5)
  (6)
        - C - CH - CH -
€>-<<
  (7)   o - c      ;c - o
             ^ • <

  (8)    -X
        where X • haloatcm (chloro, brcno,  iodo, fluoro)

  (9)    -SOs
     Figure 1: Typical Electrophone Functional Groupings.

    There are many classes of chemical compounds known
to have pronounced electron affinity. A partial listing of
the functional groupings that confer this property is shown
in Figure 1. The list expands greatly when one considers the
large number of molecules that are known to contain these
groupings. This is,  naturally, advantage in that  there is a
potentially large coding vocabulary.
    Although some  data are available from the literature
(4-8) an(j from general knowledge of experts in the field as
to which types of chemical compounds  possess high elec-
tron affinity, many sensitivity values for high electron af-
finity compounds  must still be determined under actual
analytical conditions. However, known likely  candidates for
tagging  agents are,  for example, nitroalkanes and nitro-
phenyl derivatives, monochloroacetic acid, oxalacetic acid,
phthalic acid and cinnamic  acid esters, benzoyl derivatives,
benzoquinone derivatives and haloalkane and halobenzene
derivatives.
Analysis Procedure
    A small sample of the spilled oil, approximately 10 ml
eate,  nitrotoluene or  chloroacetanilide might  be model
compounds found to be acceptable. Each is representative
of many additional compounds differing only in the size of
alkyl groups or alkyl substituted  benzene groups. These re-
lated materials would then form  a single coding group such
as the nitroalkyl benzenes or the dialkyl phthalates. Separa-
tion of the members of a homologous series is easily accom-
in size,  would suffice. The actual measurement of electron
affinity values is carried out using a gas chromatograph with
an electron capture detector. Another detector, preferably
a flame ionization detector, is also required. The  standard
procedure is  to  determine the sensitivity of the potential
tagging  agent in terms of the smallest amount that can be
detected by the electron capture detector under suitable gas
chromatographic conditions. The flame detector is used to
determine the purity of the compound under test and to
more  conveniently establish the conditions of analysis, such
as the proper chromatographic  column and its operating
temperature and flow rate. When this is accomplished it is a
simple task to switch to the electron capture detector with-
out altering any other parameters, since  the electronics for
the operation of both  detectors are alike. (Even simultan-
eous operation of both detectors for monitoring the efflu-
ent from the same column is possible.) The sensitivity or
response of the detector  to the test compound  is deter-
mined by injecting as small an amount as possible into the
chromatograph.  This is achieved by  continually diluting a
solution of the material with a suitable solvent and noting
the reduction of the peak for the test compound. A value
for the  minimum detectable amount, in  grams, is then cal-
culated. Typical results ranged from 10-10 to  10"! 2 grams.

    This value so determined is  then used to  compute the
concentration of the test compound in  crude oil, or some
other oil, that  can conveniently be detected  by the same
analytical technique. When it is desired  to measure the af-
finity of a test compound dissolved in an oil to be tagged,
the chromatography is performed with  oil substituted for
the solvent.
    Using the above general method, the utility of the Or-
ganic  Electrophore System was tested using dibutyl maleate
as the electrophore. Three solutions were prepared as fol-
lows:
      No. 1    2% Louisiana crude oil, 98% hexane,
              and 50 ppm dibutyl maleate
      No. 2    2% Louisiana crude oil, 98% hexane,
              and 2 ppm dibutyl maleate
      No. 3    100% Louisiana crude oil and 1 part
              per billion of dibutyl mateate
When Solution No. 1 was compared against a blank con-
taining no  electrophore,  using  gas chromatography
combined with a  flame ionization  detector,  results  were
identical,  and the peak for dibutyl maleate could not be
distinguished. When the three solutions plus a blank were
processed using the same technique except for the  substitu-
tion of an electron  capture detector, the control sample
uielded  essentially no peaks whatever, while the other sam-
ples showed distinct peaks about 13 minutes after sample
injection. Although the peak at  1  ppb concentration  was

-------
182   Ol L SPILL PREVENTION ...
quite  small, and required a lower attenuation setting for
readout, it was clearly distinguishable.

Discussion
    When a model compound is found sufficiently sensi-
tive, additional members of the same homologous series
become promising candidates. For example, diethyl mal-
plished by gas chromatography so that each member of the
coding group is distinguishable at virtually the same analyti-
cal conditions used to test the model compound.
    Many of the homologs in these classes of compounds
are  available  commercially. Even if exceptions should be
met, the  commercial supply would not be  a problem. Pre-
paration of homologs of satisfactory purity would be facile
since they are formed by adding side chains, and pure start-
ing reagents would be readily available. By  this approach a
large total number of coding agents can be made available
that can be subgrouped according to their common electro-
phores and  further broken  down  based upon molecular
weight, which determines gas chromatographic retention
time.
    When the formation of isomers is possible, the very
difficult separation of these isomers is not required and can
be ignored. Actually, the chromatography will be run so as
not to distinguish between isomers, for example the alkyl
nitrobenzenes, but  only to separate  them according to
molecular weight.  Usually, one or at most two isomers,
exceedingly difficult to resolve, predominate in such a mix-
ture and it would not be worth the effort to further extend
the size of the coding group by the complete separation of
all the possible isomers. Only when an isomer pair is as
easily resolved as is a homologous pair will both isomers be
used as individual  coding agents. This is rarely the case,
however, except possibly for the t-butyl and isopropyl iso-
mers vs. their straight chain parent. The use of positional
isomers in the aromatic series  as individual coding agents
would  not be pursued because it is far more difficult to
elute them from the chromatograph individually than as a
single component.
    It  is essential to be able to use electrophores in combi-
nations in order to construct a large vocabulary. There
seems  to be  no question  about combinations within the
same homologous series. However, one problem that might
be encountered is the accidental similarity  in elution char-
acteristics of agents from two different chemical classes. If
this situation develops, it may be necessary to introduce a
second chromatographic procedure to fully decode a sam-
ple.
    An unequivocal  demonstration  of  stability  would
appear to be crucial if evidence is to be utilized in legal
proceedings. Ultimately, each tagging agent, or combination
of agents must  be tested under actual field conditions.
However, a laboratory program simulating exposure to  the
natural environment may be satisfactory for screening these
compounds.
    In conculsion, the Organic Electrophore System offers
promise as an active tagging system useful in the enforce-
ment against and prevention of oil spills. The extremely low
concentration of relatively stable yet harmless compounds,
their easy detection and wide variety for coding purposes
point up the desirability of putting such a system into wide-
spread use.
REFERENCES
   1. Locklock I.E. and Lipsky, S.R., "Electron Affinity
     Spectroscopy-A  New Method  for Identification of
     Functional Groups in Chemical  Compounds Separa-
     ted by Gas Chromatography", JACS 82, 431 (1960).
   2. Lovelock, J.E., "Affinity of Organic Compounds for
     Free Electrons with Thermal Energy: Its Possible Sig-
     nificance in Biology", Nature, 189, 729 (1961).
   3. Dzyuban, I.N., Byull Inst. Biol. Vodokhran. Akad
     SSSR.I, 11, (1958).
   4. Landowne, R.A. and Kipsky, S.R., "Electron Capture
     Spectrometry, and Adjunct to Gas Chromatography",
     And. Chem., 34, 726, (1962).
   5. Zielinski, W.L., Fishbein, L. and Thomas, R.O., "Re-
     lationship  of Structure to Sensitivity in  Electron
     Capture Analysis. III. Chloronitrobenzenes, Anilines
     and Related Derivatives,"/. Chromat., 30, 77 (1967).
   6. Landowne,  R.A. and  Lipsky,  S.R., 'The  Electron
     Capture Spectorscopy of Haloacetates",^4nai Chem.,
     35, 532(1963).
   7. Landowne, R.A. and Lipsky, S.R., "High Sensitivity
     Detection of Amino Acids by Gas Chromatography
     and  Electron Affinity  Spectrometry", Nature, 199,
      141 (1963).
   8. Landowne, R.A., "Electron Affinity Applications in
     Gas Chromatographic Analysis", Chem. Anal (Paris),
     47,589(1965).

-------
                  CALIFORNIA  CONTINGENCY   PLAN  FOR
                          OIL  AND  OTHER  HAZARDOUS
                                      MATERIAL  SPILLS
                                           by John F. Matthews, Jr.
                                     California State Division of Oil and Gas
 ABSTRACT
    There  is  a dual approach  in  California  for the
 contingency plan for spills in that it must tie in with federal
 plans plus suffice for the needs of heal areas within the
 state. There are specifications in  the plan for one state
 authority to be in complete charge of the state's response.
 In addition, the California approach also includes a State
 Interagency Oil Spill Committee which draws its members
 from  the various affected state  agencies. Members  of
 industry cooperatives, industry itself,  and federal agencies
 aid by adding input at committee meetings.
    In organizing the state plan,  three  basic items have
 been  catalogued: the type  of areas within the state, the
 possible sources of pollution including probable quantities,
 and the capability of the local areas. Types of areas include
 the various shoreline  configurations including  offshore
 islands and inland areas. Probable  sources include tankers,
 pipelines, and transportation  systems. The capability  of
 local areas includes manpower, equipment, and dump sites;
 the prime consideration, though,  is  the interest of the
 governmental  entities in these areas as lack of interest will
 require increased involvement by the state government.
    Overall regulations must  be continually reviewed in
 relation to  the federal plans  or local conditions and the
 State Interagency Oil Spill Committee is used in California
 for this purpose.
    The state's basic consideration always is the protection
 of its populace and natural resources.

 INTRODUCTION
   By  definition contingency is a condition of being
 subject to chance or accident. Any oil spill contingency
 plan should meet the needs of a  political  subdivision to
 abate, contain, and  recover  oil from any spills within its
jurisdiction.
    The  principal objective of the "California Oil  Spill
Disaster Contingency Han" is to maintain an integrated and
effective state organization to combat major oil spills in and
about  the  State  of  California.  Included are all major
elements,  public and  private,  which have  significant
resources and technical knowledge which may be required
or utilized  in the public interest to combat such  a  spill.
Operations  under the  plan  are  directed  toward the
preservation of the lives and health of the civil populace,
the protection of public and private property and the
preservation of natural resources.
    The  plan is  designed to function independently or
effectively  with  either  the  U.S.  Coast  Guard  or the
Environmental Protection Agency on a national, regional,
or subregional basis.

Definitions, Duties, and Organization
    In order for a plan to  function,  the  duties and
organization must be clearly defined. The California plan is
as follows:

ABBREVIATIONS
(National Plan)
EPA —  Environmental Protection Agency
NRC —  National Response Center
NRT -  National Response Team
OSC —  On-Scene Commander
OSOT  - On-Scene Operations Team
ROT —  Regional Operations Team
RRC —  Regional Response Center
RRT —  Regional Response Team
USCG  - United States Coast Guard
(State Plan)
DOG   - Division of Oil and Gas
OC    - Operations Center
OSC   - On-Scene Commander
                                                   183

-------
184
OIL SPILL PREVENTION .. .
 RWQDB -.Regional Water Quality Control Board
 SIOSC  -State Interagency Oil Spill Committee
 SLD   -  State Lands Division
 SO A    -State Operating Authority
 SOT    -State Operating Team
 SST    -State Support Team
 SWRCB -State Water Resources Control Board

     Disaster: A  calamity   from  any  cause,  natural  or
 man-made, of such extent and severity that large numbers
 of persons are imperiled and/or vast quantities of property
 or natural resources are threatened, damaged, or destroyed.
 Implicit in the term  is the requirement to marshal and
 employ the resources of numerous organizations, public
 and private, civil and military, to minimize and recover
 from its effects.
     Oil: For the purposes hereof, this includes petroleum,
 petroleum products,  or  sludge, oil refuse, and any other
 oil-like substance which when spilled or discharged in large
 quantities  presents an imminent  or immediate substantial
 hazard to  public  health,   safety or  welfare,  to natural
 resources, or to public or private property.
     Oil Spill Disaster: The discharge of large quantities of
 oil which  presents an imminent or immediate hazard to
 public health, safety, or welfare, to natural resources, or to
 public or private property, of a magnitude greater than the
 mitigative capabilities of local organizations.
     This term does not  include small oil discharges which
 cause  only minor  pollution of a local nature and which
 constitute  no major hazard. Such discharges are of interest
 primarily from the law  enforcement aspect  by the local,
 State, or Federal agency or agencies having jurisdiction.
     Support:  The   furnishing  of resources  such
 as:  technical  expertise including legal counsel, personnel,
 equipment  and  material,  and  the  delegation  of  the
 authority  necessary  to  direct  the  effective  utilization
 thereof.
     On-Scene Commander (OSC): That  person  (or
 organization) charged with the responsibility and delegated
 commensurate authority for  planning and  directing  the
 overall operations of all organizations engaged in combating
 an oil  spill disaster; specific operations, however, will be
 conducted  under  the supervision  of  the  respective
 organizations.
     For spill  disasters affecting navigable waters, the U.S.
 Coast  Guard  will  normally  be the OSC. If a Regional
 Operating  Team  is activated under the provisions  of  the
 national contingency plan,  the Regional Operating Team
 will  be advisory to  OSC. Under the leadership of the OSC,
 the  State Operating Authority directs all  state and local
 government agency oil spill disaster operations.
     The Environmental  Protection Agency  and the State
 Operating  Authority  are joint  On-Scene Commanders  for
 inland waters above the ebb and flow tide line. This line has
 been defined for each river in the state.
     For all other  oil  spill disasters, the State Operating
 Authority shall be the OSC.
                                                        State  Operating  Authority  (SOA): That person
                                                    charged  with  the  responsibility  and  delegated
                                                    commensurate authority  for  planning and directing  the
                                                    coordinated  overall  operations  of  all state  and  local
                                                    government  agencies engaged  in  combating an oil  spill
                                                    disaster, and to coordinate these operations with those of
                                                    federal  agencies  and  private organizations.  He  shall be
                                                    delegated such authority as may be necessary to effectively
                                                    carry  out this responsibility  by, and shall  serve at  the
                                                    pleasure of, the State Support Team. He is also a member
                                                    of the Regional Team under the federal plan of the EPA or
                                                    USCG.
                                                        Either  the SOA  or one  of his alternates  shall be
                                                    available for  immediate  communications  contact at all
                                                    times.
                                                        State Support Team (SST): This team consists of:  the
                                                    Secretary  for  Resources, who  shall  be  chairman;  the
                                                    Secretary for Agriculture and  Services; the Secretary for
                                                    Business and  Transportation;  the Secretary for  Human
                                                    Relations; the Attorney General; the Director of the Office
                                                    of Emergency Services;  State Adjutant General; and  the
                                                    Director of the Department of Finance.
                                                        The State Support Team shall designate the SOA as
                                                    specified above, and shall provide him with such support
                                                    and authority as he  may properly  need to  meet  his
                                                    responsibilities.
                                                        State Operating Team (SOT):  This on-scene team shall
                                                    provide technical  advice,  operating personnel  and
                                                    equipment, and general counsel to the SOA during oil spill
                                                    disasters.  The  SOT  will  be  composed  of  designated
                                                    representatives and alternates from the following agencies
                                                    or organizations:
                                                            Department of Conseivation
                                                              Division of Oil and Gas (2 members)
                                                              Division of State Lands (if required)
                                                            Department of Fish and Game
                                                            State Water Resources Control Board
                                                            Department of Parks and Recreation (if required)

                                                            Department of Public  Health (if required)

                                                            Department of Public Works
                                                              Division of Highways
                                                            Office of Emergency Services
                                                            Office of the Attorney General
                                                            Local Government
                                                            Industry
                                                        SOT members will be  appointed  by their department
                                                   heads and must have a thorough knowledge of the resources
                                                   their organization can provide and commensurate authority
                                                   to place these resources at the disposal of the On-Scene
                                                   Commander in a timely manner. Team members will act as
                                                   liaison between the OSC and their respective agencies and
                                                   will  arrange  and expedite their  agency's response  to a
                                                   request  for  support  by the OSC in  such a manner as to
                                                   optimize the state's efforts in combating an oil spill.

-------
                                                                        CALIFORNIA CONTINGENCY PLAN   185
    The SOT shall meet annually in October (at the call of
 the SOA) and/or at any other time at the request of the
 SOA, for the purpose of discussing the past operations of
 the team, changes in available resources, proposed changes
 in the plan, and any other pertinent subject.
    They shall also hold a formal critique, within 3 days of
 its deactivation, of any incident during which the Team, or
 any  part thereof, was activated. A  written  report  of
 the results of this meeting shall be transmitted to the SOA
 within  5 days  and shall,  if warranted, include  specific
 recommendations for revisions and additions to the oil spill
 disaster contingency plan.
    The Department of Conservation Public  Information
 Officer  will  be responsible  for public information and
 public relations services for OSC  and furnishes progress
 reports to the Governor's office.
    The local government member shall be as  specified by
 the local contingency plan or  as otherwise designated by
 local authorities.
    The industry member  shall  be  designated  by  the
 company involved or  otherwise by the industry association
 deemed  most appropriate by the  OSC. When the SOA is
 also  the On-Scene Commander, a representative of  the
 industry most closely  affected by the oil spill (preferably
 from the company involved, if any) shall also be a member
 of the operational element of the SOT.
    Such additional support from  other state  agencies as
 the OSC may require shall be provided through the SST.
    A representative of the Office of Emergency Services,
 as a member  of the SOT, shall work directly with the SOA
 and  provide  for  early alerting,  other communications
 services, and progress reports to the Governor's office.
    State agency members of the SOT shall be designated
 by their respective agency heads. The  local  government
 member shall  be as specified by the local authorities. The
 industry member  shall  be designated by the company
 involved or otherwise  by the industry association deemed
 most appropriate by the SOA.

    Operations Center (OC): The Operations Center shall
 be oil spill disaster headquarters for the SOA and the State
 Operating Team. The  SOA, in cooperation with the Office
 of Emergency  Services, shall select  facilities  as  near  as
 practicable to the spill site considering such factors  as
 accessibility,  communications   facilities, location  of
 operational units, and safety.

    The  Department of Conservation  shall be in charge of
establishing, equipping,  and maintaining  the  operations
center. Other members of the SOT will furnish personnel to
staff the center as requested by the SOA.

    The  Operations Center may be relocated  at any time
 by the  SOA  after 24 hours notice  (if possible) to all
organizations directly concerned.
    State Interagency  Oil Spill Committee (SIOSC): This
standing  committee is hereby  created and shall function
until dissolved by the State Support Team.
    SIOSC shall be responsible for the following:
1. Establishing and maintaining liaison with federal, local,
and regional public and private organizations engaged in oil
pollution prevention and control;
2.  Coordination   between  state  agencies  and  other
organization in day-to-day procedures and practices relative
to the  prevention and mitigation  of  pollution from oil
discharges;
3. Reviewing this plan at least once yearly  to consider the
effect of  newly enacted legislation, for consideration of
suggested  amendments and additions, and for circulation of
recommendations for same to the parties hereto:
4. Reviewing contingency plans of other organizations; and
5. Recommending neccessary research, development  and
testing  by  the  appropriate  organizations of materials,
equipment, and methods related to oil  spill prevention and
control.
    The SIOSC shall consist of the SOA, as chairman, and
as regular members, a  representative and  alternate from,
and  appointed by  the head  of,  each of the  following
agencies:  Department  of  Fish  and Game,  Department of
Conservation,  Water Resources Control Board, and State
Lands  Division.   An Office of Emergency  Services
representative   shall  participate in all contingency  plan
considerations. In addition, the SOA  may request other
agencies  to  be  represented  from  time  to  time as
appropriate.
    SIOSC shall meet annually in October at the call of the
chairman  and  at any  other  time  at  the  request of the
chairman or of any two regular Committee members.
Operational Responsibilities
    Local Authorities: Action to  abate  oil  spills  on
uplands or on nonnavigable inland waters, unless otherwise
governed by statute, is the primary responsibility of local
government.  Local  authorities  must  take all  necessary
action to  rescue and evacuate endangered citizens; secure,
contain, and abate  the spill; alert the SOA and/or Coast
Guard;  and enforce  the security  of  the  affected  area.
Personnel  from the  industry involved  in the spill can be
expected (or may be required by law) to exert all possible
efforts to mitigate the  spill; local authorities may need to
support industry efforts with  personnel and  equipment,
particularly  from fire  departments and law enforcement
agencies.  The  existence of a  local or regional  oil  spill
contingency plan will expedite operations. Establishment of
a central operations and communications center will greatly
aid coordination of the  various operational elements which
may be employed, including state and federal agencies.
    U.S. Coast Guard (USCG): In the event of oil spills on
navigable  waters,  including inland navigable waters  to the
ebb and flow tide line, the  Coast Guard  has a primary
responsibility to take mitigative action in accordance with
standard operating procedures. Local authorities and the
SOA should be alerted and prepared to provide assistance as
requested. Local authorities should take all possible steps to
abate  the effects of oil  and oil-contaminated  materials
which reach shore regardless of the origin of  the spill.

-------
186    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
                                                  Federal^
                                                   Agency


URCB


DC
(DOC)


DFG


SLD


Other
State
Agency

1
Local
GoT't

Industry
 Figure 1:  U.S.  Coast  Guard  as On-Scene Commander.  (Spill
primarily on navigable waters of the state of California, national
contingency plan activated.)
 Figure 2: U.S. Coast  Guard as  On-Scene  Commander. (Spill
 primarily on Federal navigable waters, national contingency plan
 activated.)

     Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): In event of
 oil spills on inland waters above the ebb and flow tide line,
 the EPA and the State Operating  Authority have joint
 responsibility  to  take  mitigative  action (Organizational
 Chart 4).
     State of California: Upon notification of an oil spill
 "alerting procedures" the State Operating Authority will
 ascertain  all  available  facts  regarding  the  spill  by
communication with  local authorities, state  personnel on
the scene or in the area, the Coast Guard if involved, and by
any other available means. If it appears that state assistance
is or may become needed, he shall alert the State Operating
Team and the Chairman  of the State Support Team and
proceed, or dispatch  a representative, to the  scene. The
SOA  or his representative will then establish an on-scene
communications base, monitor operations at the spill site,
and  furnish  technical assistance  from  state agencies as
required.
    At his discretion, the SOA may partially activate the
State Operating Team to act  in an advisory  capacity. If a
need for major state efforts is indicated, he shall, with the
approval of the State Support Team, declare the existence
of  an "oil spill  disaster" and  fully activate  the  State
Operating Team.  At this  point, if the Coast Guard is not
already actively involved, the SOA becomes the On-Scene
Commander for all spill-related operations. Otherwise, he
shall  direct state and local agency  operations under the
leadership of  the  Coast  Guard  On-Scene  Commander.
Depending upon  the gravity of the situation,  he may
recommend that  the State  Support Team request the
Governor to proclaim a State of Disaster.
    Figure 3: Organization Charts (1) State Operating Team
    Federal Regional Operations Team (ROT): If, in the
judgment of federal authorities, the magnitude of the spill
disaster exceeds the mitigative capabilities of the otherwise
available forces, or if the spill originates in an area under
federal  jurisdiction, the "National  Multi-Agency  Oil and
Hazardous Materials Pollution Contingency Plan" will be
activated. A Regional Operations  Team will  be   formed
which will be  advisory to  OSC. The SOA will  function
directly  under the On-Scene Commander under  the U.S.
Coast Guard plan or as co-OSC under the  EPA plan with
the  continued responsibility of directing  state and local
agency  operations. Unless the  spill is primarily  on
state-owned lands, the industry representative, otherwise on
the  State Operating Team, will  at  the  request of the
On-Scene Commander function directly under him.
 Alerting Procedures (see Figure 4)
     In  the event of a major oil spill or serious threat  of
 such spill in or about the state, those who first become
 aware should immediately warn endangered persons in the
 affected area and notify the local authorities, the  Office of
 Emergency Services, and/or the nearest U.S. Coast Guard
 station.

-------
                                                                      CALIFORNIA CONTINGENCY PLAN    187
ATELY
ENDANGERED
rTTT7ENR
H

Loc*l

/ {Local, state.
I or Citizen)
                * Exceptions (Hlnor Spills)i
                  San Francisco Bay - notify
                  USCG for all spills
                  Long Beach-Los Angeles
                   Harbor-notify local Fish
                   and Game office - Phone:
                   213-1'53-77'H; AT3S t*7-
                               2253
                  (Spills from oil ncll oper-
                  ations should go to DOC as
                  primary agency)
                  San Diego Bay - notify UJCG or
                  WBCB
          Figure 4: General Alerting Procedure Chart

    If alerted first, local  authorities should immediately
notify the Office of Emergency Services, Sacramento ATSS
No.  (916) 485-6231  or 42M990 or  Public  No. (916)
445-6231  and, if the spill is in or near navigable waters, also
notify  the  nearest  U.S.  Coast  Guard  station. Local
authorities will  disseminate  additional  warnings to  the
general  public  in the  area. The  Office  of Emergency
Services, however notified, will immediately alert the State
Operating Authority or one of his predesignated alternates,
in accordance with the standard operating procedure.

Spill Classification:

Oil spills will be classified into three general levels:

MINOR:     Minimal spill (less  than 1,000 gallons) which
             has been  abated and can easily be removed
             and therefore, will not create a continuing
             problem.

             Operator  to  notify local  office  of  the
             Division of Oil and Gas immediately.* DOG
             will notify headquarters, DFG, and RWQCB
             (also SLD  if offshore)  during  the next
             regular office hours.

MODERATE: Spill,  either  abated  or  not  abated,  of
             sufficient size (1,000 to  10,000 gallons) to
             create  damage  but which  is  within  the
             capability of the operator to  handle.

             Operator  to  notify  local  DOG office
             immediately.* DOG  will immediately notify
             headquarters,  DFG (if spill  would create a
             problem for wildlife), WRCB, and  SLD, if
             offshore. (All agencies  should  supply DOG
             with name and phone number of those to
             notify in each area after office hours.)
MAJOR:     Spill of a  large  magnitude (over  10,000
             gallons)  or  of  a  continuing nature  which
             requires  contributions from the state to aid
             in the  containment and recovery of the oil
             and/or the activation of the SOT. Discharges
             that occur  in, or  endanger critical  water
             areas, or are a threat to public health shall be
             classified as major regardless of the volume.
Operator to  notify  DOG  immediately.*
DOG to immediately notify OES and SOA.
SOA will notify SOT if necessary. SOA will
maintain current  list of SOT  members and
their phone numbers.
*DOG TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
 Inglewood -  (213) 678-7274
 Santa Paula  -  (805) 525-6916
 Santa Maria  - (80S) 925-1658
 Bakersfield -  (805) 324-4515
 Taft-        (805)765-4138
 Coalinga-    (209)935-2941
 Woodland-  (209)662^683

Operations
     Regardless  of the  makeup of the organization  of the
type or location of the oil spill, certain basic operations will
need to be  carried  out.  The  employment  of any or a
combination  of the suggested measures will be undertaken
only after  technical  advice has been  sought and all
considerations of safety, feasibility, availability of material
and equipment, side effects, and  consequences have been
made.  Some of the following operations may be conducted
a step at a time, but  many will  of necessity be carried out
simultaneously.

WARNINGS AND PATROLS
     Issue warnings to  threatened areas and establish  spill
perimeter patrols. In the case of a major spill, new areas
may be  imperiled from time to time as the oil spreads or
changes course.
OPERATIONS CENTER
     The SOA  shall  select, establish, staff  and equip an
Operations  Center as  a  base  of operations  and
communications  center. Other  members of  the SOT will
furnish personnel to  augment the State as requested by the
SOA.
GATHER INFORMATION
     Continuously   gather  the maximum  information
concerning  the  spill: source  and  cause,   present  and
potential volumes and rates of  discharge,  chemical and
physical properties of the  oil, and its present and probable
directions and rates of movement.
 SECURE, CONTAIN AND ABATE SPILL
     Formulate and execute plans to secure, contain, and
 abate  the spill.

-------
 188  OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
                                         Special Forces
                                         and Projects
                            Federal. State &
                            Local Forces
                                            __Labor Groups
                                              Contractors
                          — Legal Advisor     •—Etc.
Figure 5: SOA and EPA as Co-On-Scene Commanders. (Spill on
inland waters, not under USCG jurisdiction, national contingency
plan activated.)

Securing Source:
    The more quickly and effectively the source is secured,
the less will be  the magnitude of all  other  required
operations. This may require expert technical knowledge in
one or   more  fields such  as engineering,  ship  salvage,
pipelines,   oil  well drilling or  producing, refineries,
chemistry, geology,  water quality, or demolition. It may
also require considerable  special equipment and materials,
and trained crews. Industry representatives will  normally
know where these can be  obtained. In cases where the
source cannot be immediately secured, an  alternative may
be to  transfer pollutants from a damaged enclosure to other
facilities.

Containment and Removal:
    The spilled oil generally  should be contained in the
smallest  possible  area to  reduce contamination and more
easily facilitate removal. In water areas, this will  probably
involve the use of booms or caissons, and/or absorbents; on
land this may involve the use of levees, ditches, pits, and/or
absorbents'.
    Gross quantities of the oil will need to be removed or
dispersed. On  water, this may  require skimming and/or
pumping equipment and storage vessels  (these may require
towing); dispersent,  solvent, chemicals,  absorbents,  or
biological  cultures  (these  will  all  require application
equipment.) On land, this may require pumping, scraping,
earthmoving, steaming,  or  flushing  equipment;  solvent,
chemicals, or absorbents and raking or scooping equipment.
Burning may or may not be practical or acceptable either
on water or land areas, depending on the composition and
location of the  material and local air pollution regulations.
    Special  attention  should be given  to  operations  in
critical areas such as lagoons and estuaries.
Disposal:
    The  oil and contaminated materials will require safe
disposal.  Some  liquids may be treated  and  reclaimed if
facilities  are near at hand; some may  require burial  or
subsurface  disposal  with or  without  prior  treatment.
Established disposal sites such as county or city dumps may
or may not accept contaminated material, particularly if it
is saturated or supersaturated; undersaturated material will
generally be  more acceptable. Disposal  and/or  treatment
sites can  become a severe problem. Disposal sites should be
predetermined  by  the  State Water  Resources  Control
Board. Burning may  or may not be practical or acceptable
depending on the composition and location of the material
and local air pollution regulations. On-site burial by discing
or other methods may or may not be feasible. Most disposal
methods  will  require  hauling, loading,  and  other heavy
equipment.  Care  must be taken  to avoid  polluting
underground or surface water supplies.

Geanup and Rehabilitation:
    The  final  operational  phase  will  be  cleanup and
rehabilitation of the affected area. Depending on the effects
of the spill, this  may involve  steam-cleaning,  re-soiling,
re-vegetation,  re-seeding oyster  beds,  leveling,
reconstruction  of buildings  and  engineering works,
reestablishment of kelp beds, etc.
    All the above operations will require logistic support
such  as:  provisions,  materials  and   equipment,
transportation,  loading,  unloading, storage  facilities, and
security  provisions;  communications;  personnel,  messing
and berthing facilities; semi-continuous surveillance of the
spill  and its movements  by  aircraft, vehicles and/or boats;
sampling and  analysis; equipment  maintenance; weather
and sea forecasting for spill plotting and drift prediction;
medical   services;  collection and recordation  of  data
(including  photography) on a  day-to-day  basis; legal
counsel;  and administration, record keeping,  funding and
accounting.

Volunteers (under study):

Bird Cleaning Stations (under study):

INFORMATION CENTER:
    When a pollution incident occurs and the OSC  is the
State Operating Authority, the Information Officer of the
Department of Conservation shall be notified immediately
and  will  act as Supervising Information Officer. He will
establish  and direct  an information center where he will
have easy access to the SOA and he shall take such other

-------
                                                                      CALIFORNIA CONTINGENCY PLAN     189
steps as may be appropriate to coordinate public informa-
tion related to the incident.
    The Supervising Information Officer,  on behalf of the
SOA,  may request appropriate  professional and clerical
assistance  from  the  member organizations of  the  State
Support Team and State Interagency Oil Spill Committee.
    The Supervising Information Officer will contact press
offices of federal, state, and local governments,  and other
concerned  interests, as  appropriate.  The staff of the
information center shall compile  a  factual, detailed
chronology of the disaster,  mitigative  actions taken, and
related  events  and  circumstances.  He  shall   file  daily
situation  reports to  higher authority and   interested
agencies, and disseminate evaluated information to the
news media and the general public.
    All news releases and any press contacts relating to the
incident will be made through the Supervising Information
Officer, acting on behalf of the SOA. He can be  contacted
at (916) 445-3976.
EVALUATION TEAM:

    In the judgment of the  State Operating Authority, it
may be  advisable  to  activate the Evaluation  Team.  The
purpose of the team will be to (1) evaluate the methods,
equipment, and materials used to contain and clean up the
spill and to assess damage to life, health, property, and
natural  resources and  (2) to assess  damage to fish  and
wildlife.

    The  team will  consist  of  the  Department  of
Conservation and the Department of Fish  and Game as
co-chairmen. Their primary responsibilities will be as in (1)
and (2) above respectively. Any state agency or members of
SIOSC that have the necessary expertise may be designated
members of the team for a particular spill.

DRILLS:
    The SOA shall from time to time order simulated drills.
These may be with or without prior warning.

-------
                THE  ROLE  OF  THE OIL  SPILL COOPERATIVE

                      IN   THE  OIL  PRODUCING  INDUSTRY

                                                   S. C. Mut
                                Eastern Region, North American Producing Division
                                          Atlantic Richfield Company
ABSTRACT

    When an  oil spill occurs there is one question that is
 paramount to all who have an interest in that very unhappy
 occurrence.  That question is.-"Does the spitter have the
 capability to clean up the mess quickly and effectively?"
 The answer is "Yes" if everything he needs is available to
 him.  If his  requirements are to be  readily available, it is
 necessary that the capability to respond has been developed
 before  the spill occurs. This capability can be developed
 either by the operator acting for himself alone or in a joint
 effort  with  other members  of industry in  an oil spill
 cooperative.
   Oil spill cooperatives have been patterned after associa-
 tions  formed by oil companies to  assist each  other in the
event of fires, hurricanes, and other disasters.  One of the
first active spill cooperatives was formed in Boston in 1967.
Reportedly, more than 60 such cooperatives are now active.
 These are principally, however, harbor cooperatives involv-
ing refining,  terminal, and transportation facilities. This
paper deals only with those cooperatives which involve oil
producing facilities with significant spill potential. At the
beginning of 1971, there were seven such cooperatives and
several others in various stages of formation. Their locations
range from the Gulf Coast to Alaska.

INTRODUCTION
  What is an oil spill cooperative? It is simply an organized
approach involving several operators to cooperate in various
activities regarding oil spills. The role  of the  oil spill
cooperative can  vary  from  that  of mere  lending  of
equipment among the cooperating companies  to a more
comprehensive activity involving planning, training, pur-
chase and maintenance of equipment, etc. The form of the
oil spill  cooperative may be quite  simple, as in the joint
operation, or it may be more complex, as in the non-profit
corporation. But  regardless  of organizational format, there
 are  some  aspects  of the  overall  situation  where the
 cooperative can and  should perform a leading role and
 other portions where its activities are necessarily limited.
   To  examine the role of the oil spill cooperative it  is
 necessary to keep in mind two distinct phases;preparation
 before the  spill and response in the  event of a spill. The
 cooperative's function in preparation is quite different from
 its function in response.

 The Preparatory Phase
   The preparation phase  involves (1) evaluation of the
 elements or factors of  the situation which will exist in the
 event  of a spill, (2)  identification  of  the  needs to be
 fulfilled and (3) development of the plans and mechanisms
 to meet those needs. To be adequately prepared for a spill,
 it is  necessary  that  these needs and  requirements be
 determined and that appropriate action be taken to meet
 these needs before a spill occurs. Some of the factors to be
 considered  are the physical environment, the location and
 nature of facilities with spill potential, the magnitude of
 potential spills, and the laws affecting the operation of the
 faculties. Next, with this information in hand, one  must
 decide on the  control  and  cleanup techniques to be  used,
 the materials and equipment that will be required, and the
 method of their use.  The  preparation  phase is complete
 only  when these  requirements are  met  by  identifying
 sources of supply, purchasing and stockpiling or otherwise
 providing for the necessary equipment and material, train-
 ing personnel,  and by  developing methods and plans for
 combatting spills. In this preparation phase, the oil spill
 cooperative is operating as a voluntary association with its
 objectives and  responsibilities defined by the members of
 the cooperative.

The Response Phase
  The response phase, which commences with the  spill,
involves the actual utilization of the equipment, materials,
                                                    191

-------
192   OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
expertise, personnel and plans developed or provided for
during the preparation phase  to contain and clean up the
spill.

   The  response  phase  is different  from the preparation
phase in  that  the responsibilities of the various parties
involved are not  defined by  the parties themselves, but
instead  are clearly set out in the law. In the response phase,
then, the  cooperative must  adapt  its activity  so as to
conform to this situation.

   A central consideration here is that the primary responsi-
bility for response in an oil spill situation clearly falls upon
the spilling party. Basic in the American system of law is
the concept that subject to applicable laws and to the rights
of other parties, an individual may decide upon his own
course  of  action, and in so doing be responsible  for the
results of his decisions and actions. The operations of an oil
producer are subject to a fairly elaborate and complete set
of regulations,  State or Federal, or both, but within  these
regulations he operates the facility as he determines, enjoys
the benefits of the operation,  and at the same time exposes
himself to any liabilities that may result. Thus he has the
primary responsibility for dealing with an oil spill.

   However, should the spilling  party be  unable to dis-
charge his responsibilities to clean up a spill, or should there
occur a spill of unknown origin, the responsibility passes to
the Government. The Water Quality Improvement Act of
1970, which amended the Water Pollution Control Act of
1956,  specifically places the  duty upon the  President to
clean up oil spills unless he determines the spilling party is
taking  the necessary action.  The direct responsibility for
this has been assigned to the On-Scene Commander as set
out in  the National Oil and Hazardous Materials Pollution
Contingency Plan. Even where the Federal government does
clean up the spill, in most instances the spilling party is
liable for cleanup costs subject only to a rather large dollar
limitation. These aspects of  the law must be fully  taken
into account in devising plans for response to an oil spill,
and in defining the activities of the cooperative in  the
response phase.

   With this as  background, let us  first consider  the
functions  of the cooperative in the preparation  phase.
Basically, there  are five needs or requirements which must
be provided for during the preparation phase so  that when
an  oil spill occurs it may  be  contained and cleaned up as
effectively  and  as rapidly  as  possible.  These are  the
availability of  (1) equipment and materials, (2) technical
expertise, (3) trained personnel and labor, (4) communica-
tion  facilities,  and finally  (5)   contingency  plans.  The
contingency plan must include not only  the method for
containment and cleanup  but also plans for liaison, dis-
semination of information and  direction of the  cleanup
activity.

   In  most  instances there   are   four considerations that
apply to each  of these needs or requirements. In order to
fulfill the needs one must determine first what is required
to get the job done; second, a source of supply; third, for
things which  must  be  stockpiled, how  and by whom
collection and maintenance will  be  accomplished; and
fourth, who  will actually  supervise  and carry  out  the
operation. This is rather obvious when applied to things like
spill booms, barges and tugboats, but these same considera-
tions apply in one degree or another to technical expertise,
trained personnel and labor, communications facilities and
contingency plans.

   This preparation activity  can be  and often is carried out
by   the  individual  operators,   but in  many  areas  the
cooperative offers certain advantages. It is readily apparent
that there could  be  a  substantial advantage in having the
cooperative  make the  initial surveys  and studies since  it
could have access to more information,  and could bring a
wider diversity of expertise to bear. Then, too, a significant
economic advantage  will be  obtained when joint ownership
of equipment and materials is considered. Through joint
ownership of  large expensive items of equipment and the
pooling  of less   expensive  but necessary  items,  much
wasteful  duplication will be avoided. Very often the total
amount of equipment  and materials necessary to meet the
needs  of a group of operators  in a particular area is very
little more than  that which  would be considered necessary
by any one of the individual operators for his own use.

   In  many  producing areas  the requirement  for  the
cooperative to  stockpile  and  maintain  equipment  and
materials is minimal, as there are usually available various
kinds  of oil field service contractors  with the ability to
furnish the necessary equipment, materials, manpower, and
know-how. The contractors' ability to  supply manpower in
quantity is especially  significant,  as  the operating com-
panies do not normally have sufficient personnel with the
appropriate skills, nor do the cooperatives, which normally
have only  a  small number of employees. Where such
contractors are involved in the overall  plan the cooperative
can perform a valuable service by maintaining an up-to-date
knowledge  of their capabilities, by  setting  up  stand-by
arrangements  with them, and  developing standard agree-
ments and contracts which can be activated quickly.

   So much  for  the  role of the  cooperative in the
preparation phase. While not as dramatic as the  activities
which take place in the response phase, it is important
work, and crucial to  the success of the containment and
cleanup operation.

    Throughout the preparation  phase, the cooperative has
the leading role, though  the  participating operators  are
usually heavily involved as well. In the response phase, the
situation is different. As pointed out earlier, the burden and
responsibility for containing and  cleaning up an oil spill
falls initially  on the owner or operator. In the absence  of
prompt and effective  action on his part, the responsibility
passes  to the  On-Scene  Commander.  Neither  of these
parties may  abdicate  this  responsibility, nor may it  be

-------
                                                                        THE ROLE OF THE COOPERATIVE    193
assumed by the cooperative. The job of cleaning up the spill
must  be done  by one of these parties, either directly  or
through a contractor working under that party's authority
and direction.

   One  of these parties,  then, bears the responsibility for
bringing into action the  plans, materials, equipment, con-
tractors and the like; that is,  all the arrangements made  or
set up by the cooperative during the preparation phase. The
cooperative can and will likely participate in mobilizing the
necessary  resources and  getting the operations started. It
may play  a major or a minor role at this point, depending
on the wishes of the operator or the On-Scene Commander,
but it must not act independently or in place of them. Its
actions  must be taken under the direction of one of these
parties, who then retains the overall responsibility.


SUMMARY
   In summary  then, it can readily  be seen  that  the
cooperative  may  participate fully in the preparation phase
by conducting surveys and studies of the  area of interest
and  the spill potential, and  by determining  the type and
amount  of equipment  and  material necessary and  the
manpower and technical  expertise needed. It may engage in
training programs of supervisory personnel to be utilized by
the individual  companies  in  the event of  a  spill. The
cooperative  can  best, in concerted  effort and  through
contact with the proper governmental agencies, establish
communication channels  and the method of liaison to be
utilized during  a spill emergency.  It  may establish  or
identify sources  of labor,  equipment and  materials, and
may participate  in drafting contracts or model forms. The
cooperative  may  participate in  the ownership and mainte-
nance  of  equipment  and materials. The cooperative may
also devise plans, methods,  and  techniques for coping with
spills and  provide a means of communicating to the public
or the  governmental agencies. In short, the cooperative may
and should, in  the absence of  some  overriding  reason,
maintain a role in those areas where either economies can
be  gained  or where  consensus  and/or concerted  group
action  is needed.

   In the  response to a spill,  the cooperative should not
operate as  an independent entity,  but  instead  should
function under  the direction and authority of the party
responsible  for  cleaning up the spill.  It  should make
available all  its facilities, equipment, and expertise and lend
every assistance possible in  mobilizing a swift and effective
response.

-------
                 OIL  SPILL  PREVENTION  AND  DETECTION
                 USING AN INSTRUMENTED  SUBMERSIBLE
                                              Wadsworth Owen,
                                                 VAST, Inc.
                                                    and
                                                William Leaf,
                                               Prototypes, Inc.
ABSTRACT
    Submersible inspection of underwater pipes,  storage
tanks,  and drill rigs has often been limited to visual and
television techniques.
    The advent of the small, inexpensive submersible of
limited depth capability makes it economically feasible to
propose the use of the submersible as a platform from
which  to operate commercial ultrasonic testing apparatus.
The feasibility of these methods is discussed, and mounting
configurations and operational procedures are outlined.
    Detection of seepage or breaks in pipes or containers is
also economically feasible through the use of fluorometric
techniques in conjunction  with the  small  submersible.
Rhodamine dyes are used as a tracer in conjunction with
the submersible-mounted fluorometer to locate and mark
seepage or break locations. These non-toxic dyes can be
added  in very small amounts  to the fluid in  the pipe or
containment vessel since the sensitivity of the fluorometric
detection system is on the order of one part in 1 ^ to one
part in 1(T^, depending on the type of instrument used,
the background fluorescence,  and the material used as a
carrier for the dye.
    Other applications for the use of submersible-mounted
fluorometers are:  The inspection of ocean sewer outfall
pipes,  diffusion  of materials  at depth,  bottom  current
detection, and detection of oil-filled power cable breaks.

    Underwater inspection techniques are presently used to
assay  the  integrity  of  ships,  pipelines, and  underwater
storage tanks. It is expected that these  techniques must be
expanded  to meet  the  challenge  of  Man's increasing
underwater activities. Pipeline  surveys have been success-
fully completed by submersibles 1, and divers are routinely
used for inspection tasks.
    Underwater inspection for  vessels of unusual  size is
now recognized by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS)
on an individual case basis. Each inspection must stand on
its own merit. The first ABS-approved underwater inspec-
tion was recently completed by divers of the California
Diving Company, Inc., at a reported considerable saving to
the drill rig owner. 2
    Their size and  attendant handling and operating cost
factors  make  the  larger submersibles most  suited  for
pipeline inspection in deep water.. The smaller submersibles
such  as  Nekton, Guppy, and  VAST Mk HI  types  are
economically suitable for ship, rig, and underwater storage
vessel inspection. They bridge the gap between the unassist-
ed diver and the more complex submersibles. They give the
diver greater endurance,  temperature tolerance, and pay-
load, but reduce his flexibility and dexterity.  The small
submersible must be fitted  with instruments that either
extend the diver's ability or allow him to perform tasks not
suited to the unassisted diver.
    We at VAST have been  investigating the feasibility of
using submersible-mounted ultrasonic inspection apparatus
to inspect large tankers and underwater storage vessels. We
are also examining  another technique, described in  detail
later in the paper, which uses fluorescent tracer material in
conjunction with a sensitive instrument called  a fluoro-
meter to trace seepage leaks or breaks in pipelines or in
underwater storage vessels.
    The  concept of using ultrasonic testing equipment for
the underwater inspection of supertankers evolved from a
knowledge of the practice of immersed testing of forgings
and wrought products by the manufacturing industry.3 At
first it was hoped that, following industrial practice, water
would  serve as a coupling medium, and no contact would
have to  be made with the  steel of the  ship. However,
experiments with the Krout-Kramer ultrasonic plate thick-
ness and fracture  testing apparatus performed in our
                                                    195

-------
196   OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
laboratory indicate  that  even in water physical  contact
must be made between the probe and the metal or plate to
be tested. The narrow acoustic beam  width of the  ultra-
sonic  test probe  makes micrometer  adjustment of  the
angular orientation  of  the probe  necessary  in order  to
receive  the return signal. Although  it  may  be  possible
technically to develop plate thickness apparatus which does
not  require  such  precise  angular  orientation, none is
presently  under development.  To inspect  ships with any
ultrasonic apparatus now available, it is necessary to clean
the area before making contact with the probes. Divers now
use ultrasonic  test equipment such as the Krout-Kramer
portable units  with underwater probes or their equivalent.
As  one would expect, practical experience indicates that
the coupling  between the probe and the  steel is better
underwater than in air. Thus for the present a submersible
using ultrasonic test equipment must be able to clean the
contact area, stop under  the area, and position the probe
against  the plate to  be  tested with a sufficiently precise
angular orientation to obtain a return signal.

  The attached figures indicate the method of accomplishing
this using a submersible  with a transparent dome on top.
Figure 1  shows the submersible fitted with fore  and aft
dome guards and spring-mounted fracture and plate thick-
ness probes just  forward of the  dome. (Note:  Two
transducers are usually used for the fracture test.)  A brush
mounted  on the forward dome  guard is used to clean a
small  area of  the  vessel at  the  sub  approaches with a
positive angle of attack (up bubble). As the friction of the
brush against the plates of the vessel stops the submersible,
a small area  is cleaned. Then a small amount of ballast is
blown  from  the  aft   ballast  tank  to  rotate   the
spring-mounted ultrasonic probes slowly against the bottom
of the  ship  (Figure 2).  The  readout  instrument  for  the
ultrasonic apparatus  can be used either for the fraction test
or the plate thickness test. Figure 2 shows  the submarine
stopped with the probes  resting against the plates of the
vessel.

    The  diver inside the  submersible  can  make  plate
thickness  and  fracture  tests  without returning  to  the
surface. He can illuminate and photograph areas of interest
under the ship  and use any suitable equipment necessary to
the  task. In this sense the diver has greater flexibility from
within the submersible since it can carry a variety of tools
for inspection tasks. It is also possible to take notes, make
drawings, and record vocal observations from within, which
adds to the utility of the submersible.
    Regular  inspection of pipelines, storage  vessels, and
ships  is an important tool  in the prevention  of accidental
discharge of  liquid products into the marine environment.
The detection of breaks and seepage after they occur is
another aspect of pollution control  which is  expected  to
become more important to  industry  in the  future.  The
difficulties and  potential  benefits  involved  in applying
water tracing techniques to submerged leak detection are
discussed in detail below.
    Tracing  the movements of a body of water, or other
liquid is a problem that confronts technical  men of  all
disciplines. The public health man  wants to know the
flushing rate  in sewage disposal areas. The marine biologist
is interested  in the vertical  and horizontal displacements of
the waters which transport marine  growth.  The physical
oceanographer is concerned  with the flows and mixtures
that constantly change the  nature of water bodies. And the
inspector of submerged oil containments has to discover the
sources of oil leakage.
    In the past, many techniques have been devised and
applied to these studies. For instance, there is the direct
sampling method, where synoptic measurements of chemi-
cal contents  are taken at a set of locations and are then
compared to  evaluate changes in the water system; or floats
may be placed in the  sea and then  followed  to learn the
paths of the  currents or the up-and-down movement of a
layer  of particular density. And, of course,  many other
techniques which are well-known and accepted in a specific
field wfll occur to the reader.
    One  approach to the analysis of flow and mixing is to
add dye of an unmistakable  color to the fluid system and to
trace the path taken by the stained patch as it is borne by
the stream. This Is a very old method and has been much
used to follow the course of underground water tables and
hidden  streams.  Fluorescein  dye  is usually employed
because of its characteristically intense yellow-green color.
                                                                          BREAKAWAY  VIEW
                                                                          SHOWING  READOUT
                                                                          INSTRUMENT  POSITION
                   Figure 1: Approach
                     Figure 2: Contact

-------
                                                                     ... AN INSTRUMENTED SUBMERSIBLE   197
    Obviously, if this  dye-tracing technique were to be
directly  applied  in populated areas, there would be a
well-justified public complaint, since enough dye to give a
visual indication would  certainly be objected to by a public
aroused by the hazards of polluting additives. So, these
visual  dye-tracing techniques may be employed  only in
small-scale operations  or where there  will  be sufficient
subsequent dilution to  reduce the concentrations to  less
than visible levels.

    Within the past decade, a new method of dye detection
has gained favor among  observers of fluid behavior.  Not
dependent on visual characteristics, and considerably more
sensitive than former methods, the fluorometric technique
of dye concentration measurement makes possible the use
of smaller quantities of  dye and the tracing of dilutions
smaller  than one  part  in  a billion,  several  orders of
magnitude below the  threshold of visual detection.  This
technique makes use of the fluorescent properties of certain
materials, their ability, when illuminated with a light of one
color, to emit light of another color. The most common
material for  water  tracing is rhodamine-B, an inexpensive,
non-toxic, organic dye,  very  commonly  used in tinting
lipsticks and birthday  cake  candles.  When this dye is
illuminated,  or excited,  by green light, it responds by
emitting an orange fluorescence. Petroleum products, them-
selves,  are  fluorescent,  usually  emitting  a   blue, or
blue-white, light.

    Rhodamine is particularly attractive as a tracer since
there  are  practically no natural materials found in water
which exhibit  the fluorescent  characteristics  mentioned
above. Of course there are  natural fluorescent materials
found in water, mineral, animal, and vegetable matter; but,
fortunately, almost all of these emit light at much shorter
wavelengths (in the blues and greens), and require corre-
spondingly shorter  excitation wavelengths, usually in the
ultraviolet  region.  Where  industrial sewage wastes  are
present, there is  always the possibility that they contain
fluorescent  contaminants, which will  establish  a back-
ground level  that adds  to the light from the glowing dye.
However,  preliminary   investigation of  the  water body
before the dye is  added will reveal this source of error and
make  possible a proper evaluation of it.

    The economics of rhodamine-B are particularly attrac-
tive.  The current price of this material, in thirty  percent
solution is about $2.50 per pound. A pound of the material
will tag over a million  cubic feet of water to the readily
detectable level of ten parts per billion.
    The survey made by a submersible consists of a series
of "passes"  close to the containment, or pipeline, while
observing the results of continuous sampling through the
fluorometer. If  the  tracer  material  remains visible, of
course, the instrument  is redundant; but subsequent dilu-
tions  of the fluorophore,  and its dissemination over a large
area,  eventually make it invisible; and only the fluorometer
can detect the tracer's presence.

    The fluorometer, itself, which makes part-in-a-billion
readings possible, is a  form of optical bridge with light
source, photodetector, specialized light  filters,  and pro-
vision for a through-flowing  water  sample.  Many of the
instruments used in the field today are specially adapted
laboratory apparatus;  they  remain topside while a water
sample is pumped through long tubes;  this can present
problems in under-way  inspection.  Another form of the
fluorometer is the in situ instrument which can be located
directly  in  the  water  body through the use of a towed
depressor, or  it  can  be  mounted  on  the  hull of  a
submersible. Fluorescence  data are brought to  the survey
vessel through  a small electrical cable. The in situ form is
particularly useful in field work  since its electrical power
requirements are small, and it is better able to withstand
rough handling shocks.

     It would appear, then, that adding a fluorophore tag to
the contained petroleum will greatly facilitate the detection
and location of leakage. The approach may seem simple at
first blush, but there are a few obstacles to be overcome.

    In using a submersible-mounted  fluorometer to detect
a leak, one should be able to reconnoiter at some distance
and pick up a fluorescent signal. This means that the tracer
tag, if mixed with  the petroleum in the pipeline or storage
vessel, must not be trapped in the oil and  borne to  the
surface with the escaping liquid; but it must, somehow,
leach out of the oil and dissolve in the surrounding water.
This requirement is not readily accomplished — finding a
fluorophore which readily dissolves in both oil and water —
and  we know  of  no such  material.  It is possible that a
determined chemist's search would develop such a tag.

    There is an alternate approach  to the dual solubility
problem — one particularly applicable to submerged pipe-
line inspection. A quantity of rhodamine tracer is pumped
through the system concurrent with the inspection interval.
As  the dye  emerges from  the leak, it  mixes with  the
surrounding water  and  forms a  streaming  cloud down-
stream, where it can be  detected  readily  with  the fluoro-
meter. The quantity and concentration of the dye pumped
depend on many factors  such as the  size and length of the
suspected section,  the  mixing and diffusing rates expected
in the  ambient waters,  and  the probable downstream
distance between submersible and pipeline.

    The  suggestion has been made  that  containment
failures in underwater electrical  power  cables might be
detected in a very  similar manner. Generally, these cables
are oil-filled, the oil being an excellent insulator. If a dye
could be  added  to  the   oil,  it would leak  into  the
surrounding water  in  the  event  of a cable break, thus
facilitating  fluorometric detection.  This is  a possibility
although, along with the problem of miscibility in both oil
and  water, there is the difficulty  of selecting a tag which
does not degrade the insulating effectiveness of the oil or of
the dielectric material of the cable. A thorough develop-
ment  and  proving  program  would  be  needed  before
adopting such an approach.

-------
198    OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...
    The economic potential of all methods of underwater
inspection increases as the size of ships, storage vessels, and
drill  rigs increases. This is because  the  availability and
convenience of location of drydock facilities decreases as
vessel size increases. The larger the vessel, the greater the
loss due to its out-of-service time while it is transiting to or
in drydock. Thus, if  drydock intervals could be extended
even  one year through the use of underwater inspection
techniques, the anticipated cost saving appears to be great.
The cost of bringing  the equipment to the ship will be
much less than the revenue lost while the ship is out of
service. Of course, this saving will not apply if the vessel can
be  scheduled for dry docking at  a regular port of call;
however, as the size of the vessel increases, this will become
more difficult. It is reasonably assured that the cost of an
underwater  inspection  is  less than that of a  drydock
inspection. A further saving may be accrued if the ship can
be  inspected and/or  cleaned  while moored offshore to
discharge cargo, as this eliminates  the out-of-service time.
The requirement to unload oil from an offshore mooring
will probably increase as the size  and draft of the vessels
increase.

CONCLUSIONS:

    In  summary,  we have investigated the feasibility of
underwater inspection using ultrasonic equipment  mounted
on a small submersible and found it to be a practical and
economical procedure which has potential for even greater
cost saving when an  apparatus is developed which elimi-
nates the need for direct contact. We have also studied the
feasibility of adapting water tracer techniques to under-
water leak and seepage detection and found that they have
a great potential usefulness. A submersible equipped with
an underwater  fluorometer can  now  be used to test the
integrity of a  water-filled pipeline. The major unsolved
problem  is the one of dual solubilities, and it is this to
which we are now directing our attention.
 REFERENCES
 1. Stevens, R. C., "The lock-out submersible —  a  new
 dimension for the  working diver," Equipment for the
 working diver, 1970  Symposium (February 24-25, 1970,
 Columbus, Ohio), pp  403-424, Marine Technology Society,
 Washington, D. C.
 2. "How ABS inspects and  certifies drilling rigs," Ocean
 Industry, October 1969, page 29, Gulf Publishing Company,
 Houston, Texas.
 3. Hislop, J.  D.,  "Flaw size  evaluation  in  immersed
 ultrasonic testing," Non-Destructive Testing, August 1969,
 Vol. 2, No. 3, pp 183-192, Diffe Science and Technology
 Publications, Ltd., Surrey, England.

-------
                      CAUSES  OF  OIL  SPILLS  FROM  SHIPS

                                                IN  PORT

                                              Captain W.H. Putman
                                              The Resources Agency
                                      California Department of Fish and Game
                                              Long'Beach, California
 ABSTRACT
     This is a summary of causes of oil spills from ships in
 the  ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach  during  the period-
 1962-1969. The data presented are a matter of record, and
 believed to be statistically sound. These data  should be
 helpful to the Naval and Maritime communities as well as
 those concerned with oil spill contingency plans.

 Background
     The California  Department of Fish and Game began
 investigating oil spills from merchant vessels in 1915 when
 petroleum  was added  as a prohibitive  substance to the
 State's first water pollution statute enacted in  1875. This
 criminal statute carries a minimum  punishment of $100 and
 a maximum penalty of $1000 and/or imprisonment in the
 county jail not to exceed six months.
     In  January  1962, the Commander Naval Base  Los
 Angeles (COMNAVBASE-LOSA) requested the Department
 to investigate  oil  spills from all Navy vessels in  the  two
 ports to ascertain causes of Navy oil spills. "A  report of our
 findings was sent to the Navy in October 1970. The Depart-
 ment was motivated to submit  this report because  of its
 unique position of possessing data on both merchant and
 Navy oil spills. It was utterly amazing, when one considered
 the  widely  divergent purposes for which the ships  were
 built, to find  the same dog "bit" all when it came to causes
 of oil spills.

 Procedures
     Uniformed wardens of this Department responded to
 all Navy spills as well as merchant spills. Our on-scene func-
 tions were mainly two fold: (1) To contain and remove the
oil spill. Most spills  were physically removed by sorbents
and skimming devices. Highly volatile liquids were agitated
and allowed to dissipate into the  atmosphere. The use of
dispersants or sinking agents was prohibited. (2) To gather
evidence and data pertaining to the spill.
    We  investigated 443  merchant spills and 390 Navy
spills and mopped up some 13,000 barrels of oil during the
period  1962-1969 (Tables 1  and 2). Criminal  complaints
were filed against masters  and/or ship owners of merchant
vessels when evidence supported such a course of action.
No criminal suits were initiated for Navy spills; instead, our
investigation reports were  sent to COMNAVBASE-LOSA
for military action.
Reports
    A   new  investigative  and  reporting system  was
developed during the period 1962-1969. The upper portion
of the form used in  the reporting system provides space to
detail essential  information an investigator must have to
prepare  for trial. (Collected information also has been use-
ful in settling claims in admiralty.) The new aspect for oil
spill investigations is in the center portion of the form. Here
the causes of the oil spill are related to oil movement and to
point of emanation from the vessel. These are termed evolu-
tion and source, respectively. The report has space for nar-
ration which, if used properly, should permit the reporter
to expand upon other factors  pertinent to the spill. The
general  concept of  the report  was used by the Environ-
mental Protective Agency (formerly Federal Water Quality
Administration) and Coast  Guard Headquarters in formu-
lating a national oil  spill reporting system.
Problem  Areas
    There were two major problem areas  that resulted in
oil spills in port: bilge  evolution and fuel evolutions- which
included movements of ballast.  Since these major problems
are so  unrelated and  solution  to  each calls for different
action, they are  discussed separately.
                                                     199

-------
200   OIL SPILL PREVENTION...
     Total Oil Spill Investigations from Ships in San Pedro Bay
                       1962-1969
        Year

        1962

        1963

        1964

        1965

        1966

        1967

        1968

        1969

       Total
Merchant

   37

   41

   51

   48

   52

   84

   79

   51

 443
Navy

 28

 48

 36

 23

 71

 91

 57

 36

390
Total

  65

  89

  87

  71

 123

 175

 136

  87'

 833
                       Table 1
Evolutions
Bilge Evolution
     Of 833 investigations conducted by  the Department,
bilge evolutions accounted for 249  oil spills (Navy 162 -
Merchant 87). These 249  spills represent only those related
to a known ship or source, since there were so many cases
of bilge  oil drifting throughout  the  ports in the early and
middle 1960's that it  was impossible to tally a count. Con-
sequently, the 249 spills do not accurately reflect the true
magnitude of the bilge problem. Although the frequency of
oil spills from bilge evolutions has become notably less in
the past  two years, clandestine bilge  pumping at night still
occurs.
Fuel Evolution
    Merchant  vessels  accounted for 356 spills and Navy
ships were responsible for 228 spills related to fuel evolu-
tions. Some spills were not  reported  and the sources  of
others could not be determined because of a lack of infor-
mation. Nevertheless,  we do feel these  584 incidents repre-
sent over 95% of all  the fuel evolution type oil spills. Ex-
cept in the rare instances of collision, hull leaks, or thermal
expansion of oil,  ships did not spill oil until fuel or ballast
was moved by pumps within a system (Tables 3,4, and 5).
Total Barrels of




Merchant
Oil Spilled fran Ships in
1962-1969
t-^M^
f 37% 631
f Navy Merchant
31 72 / 5370
\ /[excluding
\ / collision]
\/ S
X 	 /
Size Spill No. Spills
-1 to 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
15
20
25
30
50
60
100
150
200
300
350
1300
4500 [collision]



179
60
28
4
61
1
1
1
30
10
14
7
6
5
1
2
2
1
3
1
1
1



Total number barrels - 9870
San Pedro Bay
\
\
1
/
Navy
Size Spill
-1 to 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
15
20
25
30
40
45
50
60
65
75
100
150
200
250
300
350






No. Spills
173
66
32
16
36
2
1
1
13
3
7
5













Total nuifcer barrels - 3172
                                                                  Table 2

                                           Sources
                                               When a spill occurred,  oil escaped from some point
                                           within the ship.  These points of escapement fell into two
                                           groups. The first  group, such as vent tubes, sounding tubes,
                                           overflow lines, and tank tops, was located above the water
                                           line.  The second group of sources was found below the
                                           water line, and consisted of through-hull fittings connected
                                           to bilge pumps, stripping pumps, main cargo pumps, general
                                           service  pumps, ballast pumps, and  fuel  transfer  pumps
                                           (Tables 3,4, and  5).

                                           Causes
                                               There were a number of different sources and causes of
                                           spills from merchant  freighters and  tankships  as  well as
                                           Navy vessels (Tables 3, 4, and 5). Freighters developed 12
                                           different causes,  tankships  18, and Navy vessels 21,  with an
                                           average of two causes  per spill. There were many combina-
                                           tions, but the most prevalent was a tank that was overfilled
                                           because  it was not sounded properly and oil escaped from a
                                           vent tube or overflow line during bunkering operations.
                                           CONCLUSIONS
                                               The oily bilge and ballast problem will be with  us until
                                           facilities are made available to bring these liquids ashore for

-------
                                                              SPILLS FROM SHIPS IN PORT  201
accessing and disposal. Oil spills appear to originate from
ill types of ships regardless of their country of registry. As
i rule, we can conclude the country that has the most ships
Killing at a port will suffer, in a direct ratio, the highest
number of oil spills (Table 6).
Department investigations disclose that most ships and
their plumbing are built along a universal and classic design.
So when a spill related to fuel evolutions occurs, it does not
make any difference what flag she carries or what port she
enters, because the causes will be the same. Therefore, we
can expect these type oil spills until the Naval and Maritime
communities install self-contained overflow fuel systems
within their ships. Nearly all oil spills suffered during fuel
evolutions are directly related to personnel failure. We also
Ind the larger oil spills are usually attendant with a greater
degree of negligence.
In order to keep the "problem" of oil spills in its
iroper perspective, we feel it important to note the num-
jer and size of oil spills (Table 2).
Clean up operations of large oil spills resulting from
collisions or strandings have been adequately provided for
3y Federal and State contingency plans in California. We
relieve more research and development should be pointed
to the day by day removal of the chronic small oil spills.
FREIGHTERS
210 Spills
No. Evolutions No. Sources No. Causes
172 Bunkering 140 Vent tubes 176 Overfilled tanks
or none
5 Deballasting 13 Fuel manifolds 45 Top off at excessive
rate
2 Ballasting 6 General service pumps 33 Incorrect valve
alignment
1 Hydro test 4 Hull leaks 13 Did not consider list
or drag
2 Tank tops 9 Manifold problems
2 Fuel transfer pumps 7 Communication problems
2 Fuel hoses 4 Hull leaks
3 Valve obstructions
2 Use overflow tanks for
storage
2 Hose disconnects
1 Ruptured fuel hose
SOURCES AND CAUSES PER EVOLUTION FOR FREIGHTERS
BUNKERING - 172 Spills
Ho. Sources No. Causes
123 Vent tubes I*5 Overfilled tanks
33 Overflow lines 7* Soundings infrequent
or none
8 Fuel manifolds 42 Tol> o£f at excessive rate
4 Hull leaks 21 Incorrect valve alignment







2 Fuel hoses 11 Did not consider list or
drag
1 Fuel transfer pump 4 Hull leaks
2 Static pressure excessive
2 Use overflow tanks for
s tor age
2 Fuel hose disconnects
FUEL TRANSFER - 30 Spills
15 Vent tubes 28 Overfilled tanks
8 Fuel manifolds 9 Incorrect valve alignment
1 Tank top 3 Top off at excessive rate
1 General service pump 3 Valve obstruction
1 Fuel transfer pump 2 Did not consider list or
drag
1 No prior back suction
DEBALLASTING - 5 Spills
5 General service 5 Knowingly pump oily ballast
pumps overboard
BALLASTING - 2 Spills
2 Vent tubes 2 Overfilled tanks
2 Soundings infrequent or none
HYDRO TEST - 1 Spill
1 Fuel manifold 1 Ruptured fuel manifold
Table 3
TANK SHIPS
146 SPILLS
No. Evolutions No. Sources No. Causes
54 Load cargo 60 Tank tops 52 Overfilled tanks
40 Discharge 27 Main cargo 5L Incorrect valve
cargo pumps alignment
27 Bunkering 22 Hull leaks 34 Soundings In-
frequent or
none
9 Deballast 12 Stripping 22 Hull leaks
pumps
7 Ballast 6 Cargo hoses 5 6 ruptured cargo
hoses , 6 broken
chicksands , no
back flush prior
to deballasting
4 Fuel transfer 6 Chicksands 4 Did not con-
sider list or
drag
2 Cargo .transfer 5 Overflow 4 Top off at ex-
lines cessive rate
oily ballast
overboard
1 Light off boiler 1 Fuel transfer 3 Excessive dis-
pump charge rate
deballasting
Table 3: (cont. next col.)
Table 4: (cont. next page)

-------
202   Ol L SPILL PREVENTION ...

1 S tack 1 Conmunica t ion
problem
1 Collision 1 Ruptured riser
1 Light off
improperly
1 Thermal expan-
sion
1 Broken reach rod
1 Collision

SOURCES AND CAUSES PER EVOLUTION FOR TANK SHIPS
LOAD CARGO 48 SPILLS
No , Sources No . Causes


30 Tank tops 24 Overfilled tanks
14 Hull leaks 17 Sounding infre-
quent or none
3 Cargo hoses 15 Incorrect valve
alignments
3 Chicksands 14 Hull leaks
3 Main cargo pumps 3 Ruptured cargo hoses
1 Stripping pump 3 Broken Chicksands
1 Did not consider
list or drag
1 Thermal expansion
2 Skin valve open
DISCHARGE CARGO 34 SPILLS
9 Tank tops 24 Incorrect valve
alignment
9 Stripping pumps 8 Hull leaks
8 Main cargo pumps 3 Overfilled tanks
8 Hull leaks 3 Ruptured cargo hoses


BALLASTING 7 SPILLS
4 Main cargo pump 5 Ballasting without
prior back suction
1 Stripping pump 2 Incorrect valve
alignments
1 Fuel transpfer pump 1 Overfilled tank
1 Tank top
FUEL TRANSFER 4 SPILLS
1 Vent tubes 2 Overfilled tanks
1 Overflow lines 1 Top off at excess-
ive rate
1 Tank top 1 Soundings infre-
quent or none
1 Stripping pump 1 Incorrect valve
alignment
1 Skin valve open

CARGO TRANSFER 2 SPILLS
No . Sources No . Causes
1 Tank top 1 Overfilled tank
1 Main cargo pump 1 Soundings infre-
quent or none
1 Incorrect valve
alignment
HYDRO TEST 1 SPILL
1 Riser 1 Ruptured rise
LIGHT OFF BOILER 1 SPILL
1 Stack 1 Light off improperly
COLLISION 1 SPILL
1 Fuel storage tank 1 Collision
                                                                                                   Table 4
                           DEBALLASTING 9 SPILLS
                 Main cargo pumps    4
                 Stripping ]
Knowingly pu*p
oily ballast  over-
board

Excessive dis-
charge rate deball-
astlng

Incorrect valve
alignment


No.
78
12
6
3
2
1
1






SOURCES AND CAUSES PER EVOLUTION FOR
Bunkering - 103
Sources No .
Overflow lines 93
Vent tubes 37
Fueling hoses 33
Tank tops 19
Fuel transfer 19
pumps
Manifold 5
Rise 4
2
I
I
1
1
1
ALL NAVY SHIPS - 228 SPILLS
Spills
Causes
Overfilled tanks
Incorrect valve alignments
Sounding infrequent or
none
Top off at excessive
rate
Use overflow tanks for
storage
Did not consider list
or drag
Poorly lashed hoses
Ruptured hoses
Riser not capped
No blank flange on mani-
fold
Faulty valve
Poorly constructed tank
Cravited from shore
                      Table 4: (cent, next col.)
                                           Table 5: (cont next page)

-------
                   SPILLS FROM SHIPS IN PORT   203

ALL NAVY SHIPS - 2E8 SPILLS
No. Evolutions Ho. Sources No. Causes
103 Bunkering 159 Overflow lines 191 Over-
filled
tank
88 Fuel transfer 16 Vent tubes 83 Sound-
Ings
infre-
quent
or none
12 Load cargo 16 Tank tops 77 Incor-
rect
valve
align-
ment
6 Offload fuel 10 Fuel hoses 33 Ose over-
flow
tanks
for stor-
age
4 Discharge cargo 6 Main cargo pumps 23 Top off
at ex-
cessive
rate
4 Deballast 6 Fuel transfer 8 Did not
pump consider
list or
drag
3 Pump to shore tank 4 Hull leaks 5 Communi-
cation
problem
2 Hull leaks 3 Bilge punps 5 Poorly
lashed
fuel
hoses
2 Hydro test 3 'Sludge tanks 4 Fuel hose
rupture
2 Collision 2 Manifolds 4 Hull
leaks
1 Ballast 1 Sounding tubes 2 Blow
down
from YO
1 Transfer cargo 1 Riser 2 Leaking
manifold
1 Stripping pumps 2 Faulty
valves
2 Static
pressure
excessive
1 Ballast
without
tank
back
suction
1 Poorly
cons truc-
ted tank
(sound-
Ing
tube)
I Obstruc-
ted
sounding
tube
1 Obstruc-
ted fuel
line
1 Dis-
placed
gasoline
header
1 Gravit
shore
1 Uncapped
riser

Fuel Transfer - 88
83 Overflow lines 84
3 Vent tubes 44
1 Sounding tubes 25
1 Bilge pump 14
I Main cargo pump 4
1 Fuel transfer pump 3
1 lianifold 1
1
1
1
CARGO LOADING - 12
8 Tank tops 8
2 Loading hose 6
1 Main cargo pump 4
1
1
Off Loading Fuel -
2 Fuel transfer 4
pumps
1 Vent tubes 2
1 Overflow lines 2
1 Tank tops
1 Bilge pumps
Deballasting - 4
2 Main cargo pump 2
1 Bilge pump 2
1 Fuel transfer 1
pump
Spills
Overfilled tanks
Sounding infrequent or
none
Incorrect valve alignments
Use overflow tanks for
storage
Did not consider list or
drag
Communication problem
cessive
Hose disconnect
Displaced gas header
Faulty valve
Obstructed sounding
tube
SPILLS
Overfilled tanks
merits
Soundings infrequent
or none *
Communication problem
Leaking manifold
6 Spills
Incorrect valve align-
ments
none
Overfilled tanks
Spills
Did not consider list
or drag
Coflnunication problem
ment

Hull Leaks -
Hydrostatic Test
2 Hoses 2
Collisions -
. Ballasting -
1 Main cargo pump 1
Transfer Fuel from Cargo
1 Tank top 1
1
2 Spills
s - 2 Spills
2 Spills
1 Spill
Take ballast without
prior back suction
to Bunker Tank - 1 Spill
Overfilled tank
Misaligned valve

Table 5

-------
204  OIL SPILL PREVENTION . . .
Total Number of Merchant Oil Spills per Flag
Excluding Bilge Pumping
Freighters
Flag
u. s.
Norway
England
Liberia
Sweden
Gernan
Greek
Panana
China
Japan
Denmark
Indonesia
Israel
Taiwan
Chili
Columbia
Korea
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Okinawa
Peru
Yugoslavia

So. Spills
88
21
18
16
IS
12
8
6
5
4
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Tankships
Flag No. Spills
U. S. 75
Liberia 34
Norway 15
Panana 6
England 5
Italy 5
Finland 2
Sweden 2
Greek 1
Venezuela 1
Netherlands 1
Japan 1
Mexico 1









                                            Table 6

-------
                                 REMOVAL  OF  OIL  FROM

                                       SUNKEN  TANKERS

                                        Vincent C. Rose and Gerald C. Soltz
                                        Department of Ocean Engineering
                                            University of Rhode Island
                                             Kingston, Rhode Island
ABSTRACT
    A study was conducted on methods of eliminating the
oil threat from sunken tankers. The following possibilities
were considered: (1) destruction of the tanker and treating
the oil on  the surface, (2) treating the oil in the tanker, and
(3) salvage of the oil.  A thorough investigation of present
chemical,  biological, natural degradation, and mechanical
methods of treating oilled to the conclusion that pumping
the oil from  the tankers was the most economical and ef-
fective solution.
    The final design was limited to  ships laying in one
hundred to six hundred feet of water. It incorporates a
search operation to locate and buoy the tanker, a prelimi-
nary survey to determine the position and condition of the
ship and methods for  penetrating the tanks and pumping
the oil from  them. Necessary precautions are included to
prevent leakage of oil during the operation.
    The oil would be removed by dynamically positioning
a converted  tanker and a  diver operation boat over the
sunken ship. A ten inch rubber hose would be lowered to
the sunken ship and secured to the hull with diver-operated
stud guns. Two penetrations  would be made in  each oil
tank to  allow water in and oil out.  The hull would  be
penetrated by either a  pneumatically operated circular saw
or a large reactionless hole punch. Once the holes  were
made the oil would be pumped to the converted tanker for
transportation to a shore  based  processing plant. Final
cleanup would involve  capping the open holes and innocu-
lating each tank with oil eating bacteria.

Removal of Oil From Sunken Tankers
    A study was conducted on methods of eliminating the
oil  pollution  threat from sunken tankers  by  our graduate
level, advanced design, class during the spring of 1969.0)
Knowledge of  the latest  state of the art  was provided
through  guest lectures  by  outstanding  scientists and
engineers from industry and government. These lectures in-
cluded information on tanker design, environmental effects
of oil spills, methods of cleaning up oil spills, methods of
preventing  oil spills and  a detailed  assessment of the
on-going Santa Barbara incident.
    All possible  methods  of oil  pollution  control were
studied and related to the problem. These methods can be
grouped into three general concepts: (1) release of oil from
the tanker with surface treatment, (2) treatment of the oil
in place, and (3) salvage of the oil.
    The easiest method of removing the oil would be by
demolishing the ship. However, when the oil reached the
surface, it would still have to be treated by chemical, biolo-
gical or mechanical methods. Most chemicals were found to
be  ineffective  except under ideal  conditions. In  addition,
many chemicals are as harmful to the environment as the
oil. Biological methods are slow and  require much addi-
tional research. Mechanical methods are generally restricted
to calm waters.
    Treatment of the  oil in place would involve injecting
the necessary biological or chemical agents into each tank.
Some  methods of stirring would have to be provided to
insure  complete reaction. At the present time no chemical
or biological agents have proven successful for this applica-
tion.
    The third concept, salvage of the oil, would require a
mechanical system to bring the oil to the surface and trans-
fer it  to a container. A positive displacement pump and
flexible hose was selected as the best means of handling the
oil. A converted T-2 tanker was chosen over rubber barges
and inflatable bags as the method of storage. A large num-
ber of bags would be required to contain the  full cargo.
    Selection of the final technique was based primarily on
effectiveness, risk of containment loss and state of the
art. The  final  design was limited to  ships  laying on one
                                                      205

-------
206  REMOVAL FROM SUNKEN TANKERS ...
hundred to six hundred  feet of water. It incorporates a
search operation to locate and buoy the sunken tanker.Div-
ers would then be used to determine the position  if the
ship and the condition of each tank, a stud gun with hollow
studs would be used to make sampling holes in each tank. A
sample would be extracted from each tank using a hollow
needle attached to an evacuated flask. Once the filled tanks
were located, a penetrating device would be attached to the
proper area of the hull. A hole would be made  into the
tank. A flexible 10-inch hose would connect the device to a
pump which would remove all the oil into the storage con-
tainer. In order to keep the ship from collapsing, a second
hole would be made to allow water into the tank as the oil
is removed. After the oil is removed the device would be
removed and the hole sealed to prevent leakage of the re-
maining oil. Before  sealing the tank would be innoculated
with oil-eating bacteria to reduce the  residual oil in the
tank.

    With the exception of the hull penetration device, the
components of the design are all currently available. Al-
though a number of methods were investigated, only two
methods of penetrating the hull appear  feasible—a large
pneumatic punch and a circular saw.
                  Cutter mass                             40 Ib

                  Counter  Piston mass      .             20 Ib

                  Time for cutter to  hit hull          0.0045  sec.

                  Distance cutter moves                 9.8 in.

                  Cutter velocity                        5742.4n/

                  Distance counter  piston aoves       5*5 ^n»

                  Counter  piston velocity              719.6

                  Pressure in  chasber at contact      625.5

                  Approximate  weight                     160 Ibs
                                          Figure 1: Reactionless Punch

-------
                                                                              OIL SPILL PREVENTION ...   207
     The basic design of the punch is shown  in Figure 1.
 There are two masses, the cutter and the counter piston.
 The principle is  much  like a recoilless rifle in that both
 masses fire in opposite directions thus minimizing the barrel
 recoil. The two masses are held together by  a shear pin.
 Compressed air is used to pressurize the space between the
 two masses and thus provide the force to shear the pin. The
 system was optimized for operation in 200 feet of water.
 The complete design is shown in  Figure 2. After the flange
 has been connected to the hull, the joint  is sealed with an
 inflatable rubber gasket. When  the  system is fired, the
 punch penetrates the hull and  the  counter piston moves
 several inches  back  along  the  tube.  A  spring pulls the
. counter  piston out of the way so that the passage to the
 hose is clear. This permits the oil to be pumped out through
 the  tee  connection. After the tanker is  pumped out the
 assembly can be separated from the  flange  by using the
 exploding bolts. A cover plate can be placed over the hole
 to contain the remaining oil water mixture.
                  Figure 2: Punch Assembly

     A second smaller unit is used to permit water to re-
 place the oil. A check valve is used to prevent the oil from
 coming out of this opening.
     The  second design is an adaption of a commerically
 available  machine for tapping pressurized  water and gas
 lines. The major component of this  hull penetrating as-
 sembly, shown in Figure 3, are:
    1. A special  nipple with a gasketed flange for fastening
      to the ship's hull.
    2. A gate valve which attaches to the nipple.
    3. A Mueller Company Model  Cl 36 Drilling Machine.
      (The Mueller Company, Decatur, Illinois.)
    4. An air motor  to  power the drill.
     A check valve would have to be added to the air motor
 exhaust to prevent the chamber from filling with wwater.
     After the hole is drilled, the cutter can be removed and
 the oil  pumped out  of the tank. When all the oil has been
recovered, a "Completion Machine" can be used to insert a
plug in  the nipple. This plug will seal the tank and permit
recovery of the valve. The cost of a complete assembly is
estimated at  $4000.  The equipment required is shown in
Table I.
            Table I:  Equipment Required for
               Drilling Machine Assembly
   ITEM
MUELLER CATALOG NO.
Drilling Machine           Cl-36

Gate Valve               83953
Save-A-Valve Nipple        H-17495

Drilling Machine
   Adapter
Shell Cutter               33999
Cutter Hub               63978
Pilot Drill                64244
Completion Machine        H-17345
Air Motor                H-600
                     Modified for under-
                        water use

                     Modified with flange
                        and gasket
                     Replaced by quick
                        disconnect adapter
                     Modified for under-
                        water use
    As  originally conceived,  the  system was designed to
eliminate any future threat from the more than 100 tankers
sunk  off the North  Atlantic coast during World War II.
However, the total amount of oil remaining in these vessels
would at most be equivalent to only one super tanker. A
more practical use would be  to  pump  out sections of
modern tankers that have recently sunk. For instance, the
stern section of  the tanker that broke  up and sunk off
Puerto Rico in 1969.
     When  the stern section  of the Greek Tanker Arrow
 sunk in 100 feet of water in Chedabucto Bay, Nova Scotia,
 in February 1970, a 1.5 million gallons of bunker C fuel oil
 threat was caused. Quite independent of our project, a new
 technique was used to recover the oil by means of a drilling
 machine. The technique was similar to the design described
 above with the exception  that a steam line was added to
 heat  the oil. When the air lines froze,  the air motor was
 replaced with a  hydraulic  motor  and  the  tanker was
 successfully pumped out.
     It is suggested that these techniques should be further
 refined. A  number of penetrating devices should be built
 and stored for emergency use  at one or more central oil
 spill equipment depots. The lightweight  nature of the De-
 vice would permit easy air shipment.

 REFERENCE
     1.  VanRyzin, etl al., "Elimination of Oil Pollution
 from Sunken Tankers," Department of Ocean Engineering,
 University  of Rhode Island,  Kingston, Rhode Island, May
 1969.

-------
208   REMOVAL FROM SUNKEN TANKERS .. .
                                      Figure 3: Circular Saw Assembly

-------
                        OIL  VERSUS  OTHER  HAZARDOUS
                                           SUBSTANCES
                                              by C. Hugh Thompson
                                               Water Quality Office
                                         Environmental Protection Agency
ABSTRACT
    The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 requires
that pollution by oil and hazardous substances other than
oil be addressed by the Federal Government. By satisfying
the several provisions of the Law an overlap occurs when
dealing with establishing the difference between  oil and
hazardous substances.
    To satisfy in part the provisions of sections 11 and 12
of the Law,  regulations are to be promulgated for oil and
hazardous substances. A rationale is presented in this paper
which, when combined with the regulations, should allow
industry and government to proceed in this area without
detailed lists of materials being  required. The  rationale is
based upon  a material  being  petroleum  derived or
extractable or having defined chemical structure.
INTRODUCTION
    The passage of the Water Quality Improvement Act of
1970 on April 3, 1970 clearly emphasized the problem of
discharges of oil and hazardous substances into our nation's
waters. This emphasis was illustrated in sections 11 and 12
of the Law (Public Law 91-224). Section 11 and section 12
of the Law require  the President  to designate  "harmful
quantities of oil" and "hazardous substances" other than
ofl. Some of the  provisions of section 11 of the Law call
for:  establishing  financial  responsibility of potential  oil
dischargers;  administering sanction against oil dischargers
who fail to give  notice or willfully discharge; making oil
dischargers liable  for costs of cleanup regardless if they or
the  Federal Government implement the  cleanup.  The
provisions of section  12  of the Law  are  not  currently
defined in the detail that section 11 provisions are.  There
are  no enforcement provisions  in section  12  to  back
requests that notice be given  of discharges of hazardous
substances  nor  is  liability or  financial  responsibility
established  for  potential dischargers of  hazardous
substances.
    The large  disparity between  the economic sanctions
against dischargers  of oil versus dischargers of hazardous
substances makes it important  that  government  and
industry understand and agree upon a clear dividing line
between  oil and  hazardous  substances.  This paper  will
demonstrate a rationale that may be used for the purposes
of the Law to discriminate between  oil and hazardous
substances. Refinement of this rationale must recognize the
provisions of the Law which designate harmful quantities of
oil  and hazardous  substances. The Law lacks a  clear
definition  of what  is considered a hazardous substance. A
non-oil   material  is  not,  by  definition, a  hazardous
substance, but rather a material that may be considered as a
candidate to be designated a hazardous substance.
    Several laws have been enacted in which attempts have
been made to define oil. Some of these laws and definitions
are as follows:
      Oil Pollution Act of 1924
      "the term 'oil' means oil of any kind or in any form
      including fuel oil, oil sludge, and oil refuse";
      Oil Pollution Act of 1961
      "the term 'oil' means persistent oils, such as crude oil,
      fuel  oil, heavy diesel oil, and lubricating oil. For the
      purpose of this legislation, the oil in an oily mixture
      of less than  one hundred part of oil in one million
      parts of  mixture, shall not be deemed to foul the
      surface of the sea";
      "the term 'heavy diesel oil' means marine  diesel oil,
      other than  those distillates  of which more than 50
      percentum, by volume  distills at  a temperature not
      exceeding three hundred and forty degrees centigrade
      when tested by the American Society for the Testing
      of Materials Standard Method D.I58/53";
                                                     209

-------
210     OIL SPILL PREVENTION  . . .
     Oil Pollution Act of1961, as Amended
     . . . change  Standard  Method   D.158/53  to
     D.86/59 ...
     "the term 'oil' means crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel
     oil, and lubricating oil, and 'oily' shall be construed
     accordingly. An 'oily mixture' means a mixture with
     an oil content of one hundred parts or more in one
     million parts of mixture";
     Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966
     " 'oil' means oil of any kind or in  any form, including
     fuel oil, sludge, and oil refuse";
     International Convention Relating to Intervention on
     the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties
     (1969)
     " 'oil'  means  crude  oil,  fuel  oil,  diesel  oil  and
     lubricating oil";
     International  Convention on Civil Liability  for Oil
     Pollution Damage (1969)
     " 'oil' means any persistent oil  such  as crude  oil, fuel
     oil, heavy diesel oil, lubricating  oil  and whale oil,
     whether carried on board a  ship as cargo or in the
     bunkers of such a ship".
     Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
     " 'oil' means oil of any kind or in  any form, including
     but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil
     refuse,  and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged
     spofl".

    However, with  the exception of the Water  Quality
Improvement Act of 1970, none of the above definitions
were   developed  with  a  parallel  intent expressed  for
hazardous substances.
    Congress asked  the  President  to designate   "... as
hazardous  substances, other than ofl as defined in section
11 of  this Act (PL 91-224), such elements and compounds
which, when discharged in any quantity into or upon the
navigable waters  of  the United  States  or  adjoining
shorelines or the waters of the contiguous zone, present an
imminent and substantial danger  to the  public health or
welfare,  including,  but not limited  to, fish, shellfish,
wildlife, shorelines, and beaches ...". The apparent overlap
and breadth  of the problem poses a complicated situation.
Concern and confusion was expressed  by industry relative
to what was  the basis of decision to determine if a material
was an oil or whether it was a hazardous substance/') A
general rule based upon established technical considerations
would be preferred, but an incremental decision sequence
that demonstrates  the factors  to be  considered  may be
more appropriate.

    Technical definitions of oil may be  found in several
texts   and  handbooks. However,  these definitions were
usually developed for purposes 'other  than water quality
management  and  therefore  may  or  may  not stress
properties that are significant for oil  discharged  into or
upon the navigable waters of the United States.
     Defining authorities'^) note that any liquid of relatively
 high viscosity which has a slippery feel is likely to be called
 an oil. Oily matter is defined by the American Society for
 the Testing of  Materials (Dl340-60) as  hydrocarbons,
 hydrocarbon  derivatives,  and  all  liquid  or  unctuous
 substances that have boiling points of 90°C or above and
 are  extractable  from  water  at  pH 5.0 or  lower using
 benzene [chloroform or carbon tetrachloride] asasolvent.(^)
 The major catagories of oil are recognized^s (a) petroleum
 or  mineral or  hydrocarbon  oils  derived  from  crude
 petroleum,  (b) fatty oils which are glycerol esters derived
 from vegetable or animal fats or similar materials, and (c)
 essential oils derived from plants, usually  not esters but
 more often terpene hydrocarbons. The determination  of
 oils and grease for water quality management has  been
 suggestedin Standard Methods^) to involve extraction using
 various   solvents  such  as  petroleum  ether  or
 trichlorotrifluroethane  and  represents  dissolved  or
 emulsified  oil  or grease found in  water.  Kerosene and
 gasoline cannot be determined without modification of the
 procedure. Part 17 and part 18 of the American Society for
 the Testing of Materials Standards(^)list criteria for crude oil;
 diesel fuel oil, fuel oil; gas oils; illuminating oils, lubricants,
 mineral  oil,  plant spray  oils; rubber  extender  oils;
 transformer oils and turbine oils.
     Under the provision of the Law (PL 91-224), "oil  of
 any kind or in any form" is to be addressed. This may  be
 interpreted to mean coconut ofl, shale ofl, olive ofl, mineral
 ofl,  linseed oil,  peanut ofl,  fats,  greases,  and petroleum
 derived ofls.  Basic recommendation of  the  National
 Technical Advisory Committee note that waters, both fresh
 and salt, should be free from "floating debris, oil, scum and
 other matter."(^) The  considerations  of  sources of oil
 included/**) bilge and ballast waters from ships, oil refinery
 wastes, industrial plant wastes  such as oil, grease, and fats
 from the lubrication of machinery, reduction works, plants
 manufacturing  hydrogenated glycerides, free  fatty acids,
 and glycerine, rolling  mills, county drains,  storm-water
 overflows,  gasoline  filling  stations  and  bulk  stations".
 However, interpretation  of a harmful quantity of oil was
 based primarily  upon  the petroleum derived  oils  as
 suggested by the National Technical Advisory CommitteeC**)
 Chemical tests(7)advise that liquid fats are called oils but
 these glycerides of  animal and  vegetable origin should not
 be confused with lubricating oils, which are  hydrocarbons.
 This distinction is the basis of the problem in that Congress
 has required that  the public health or welfare be protected
 from "ofl of any kind."
     Hazardous substances may be designated under the
 provisions of section 12 to include inherently hazardous
 and other hazardous substances. This designation would be
 responsive to the  broad categories of materials that may be
 spilled into the navigable waters of the United States.
    Materials may be designated as inherently hazardous
 include toxic  metals and anions, Class A, B, C poisons
 covered  by  Department of Transportation  regulations,
economic  poisons  and  radioactive materials.  Other
hazardous substances could  include  a very braod based

-------
                                                               OIL vs OTHER HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES   211
group  of  acids, anhydrides,  oxides,  peroxides,  bases,
alkalies,  elements  and  salts,  halocarbons, alcohols,
aldehydes and ketones, esters,  ethers, aromatics, nitrogen
containing compounds,  sulfer  containing compounds,
miscellaneous compounds and hydrocarbons other than oil.
Water quality criteria indicating  the extent of imminent and
substantial danger to the public health or welfare are to be
used to assess the severity of the discharge.

The Rationale for Determination
    The  rationale  used to  distinguish  between oil and
hazardous substances must  respond to the requirements of
Congress  and  be  as  inclusive  under  the term  oil as
technically feasible. Most  oils are  complex mixtures of
elements and compounds  that are  described by  specific
gravity, melting point, viscosity, boiling point, flash point,
bromine  number, iodine number, saponification number,
cloud  and  pour  points,  trace  impurity  analysis,  and
quantity of solvent  extractable  materials, as well as others.
The chemical structure of most  oils is difficult to determine
and is   not  used  to  describe  the materials' behavior.
Elemental analysis or assay of certain chemical radicals in
an  oil may be  determined to gain further insight into the
expected physical,  chemical  or biological behavior of the
material, but the actual chemical  structure of the oil is not
defined and used.
    Figure 1 illustrates the  decision points that may be
used to discriminate between an "... oil of any kind in any
form..."  and  a  material which   may  be a hazardous
substance.  This  distinction implies  that   a  material
determined not to  be an oil  need not be a hazardous
substance. This flexibility must be provided since all non-oil
materials are not necessarily hazardous substances.
    The  rationale involved with Figure 1, which attempts
to   distinguish between  oil  and potential   hazardous
substances, requires at least three questions to be answered
for most materials.  Is the material in question derived from
a petroleum  or petroleum-like source?  If  the material  is
petroleum derived is the chemical structure defined? If the
chemical structure  is defined  for this  petroleum derived
material, then it is a possible candidate for designation as a
hazardous  substance.  If  the  chemical  structure  is  not
defined for this petroleum  derived material, then it is an oil
and can occur in any form.

                       VM  <*• nmilidate for hazanlflii'i sub.
 Is th»«aterUl
 peaoiam oenvniT
                          > • ro oil in my fbni
                            is thecheaiul
              is the »ai
              (organic selmnt)
                            structure
                                         «n oil of any kind
                                        icandicUte for haz. sub.
                            •*« candidate for hariTdmis sub.
Figure 1: Rationale for Distinguishing Between Oils and Materials
that may be Hazardous Substances
    However,  if  the  material  is  not  derived  from a
petroleum  or petroleum-like source,  then  is the  material
extractable  by  an organic  solvent  such  as  benzene,
chloroform or carbontetrachloride? If the non-petroleum
derived material is extractable by an  organic solvent, then
again the question of chemical structure being defined must
be  asked.  If the chemical structure of the extractable
non-petroleum derived material is not defined, then it is an
oil  of any kind. If  the  non-petroleum derived  material
which is extractable has a defined chemical structure it  is a
candidate for designation as a hazardous substance. The last
alternative  is that of a non-petroleum  derived  material
which is not extractable by organic solvent. This material
may  be a  candidate  for designation  as  a hazardous
substance and would include a multitude of elements and
compounds'and mixtures thereof.
    To  test  the rationale  examples  of  materials  are
provided in Table 1. A variety of materials are listed and it
may be noted that the determination is reached quickly for
a majority of materials. This distinguishing rationale may be
used  to  separate oil  from possible hazardous substances.
The actual designation of hazardous substances requires
that  the provisions  of section  12(a)(l)  of the  Law (PL
91-224)  be  considered as published  in  Code of  Federal
Regulations. This part of the Code of Federal Regulations
designates  those  materials  other  than oil which pose
imminent  and substantial  danger to  the public  health or
welfare as hazardous substances.


CONCLUSION
     This paper has demonstrated a rationale which may be
used by  government  and industry  to determine  what
materials may be considered  oils  or possible hazardous
substances under the provisions of sections 11 and  12 of
the Water  Quality Improvement Act  of  1970. Industry is
provided with regulations that define a harmful discharge of
oil (18 CFR Part 610) and what materials are designated
hazardous  substances  (18  CFR Part 618). The  rationale
developed  here should be  applicable  to a majority of the
materials  in  question that  may  be  produced, stored,
transported, used and ultimately disposed. Acceptance of
this  rationale will  allow  industry  and  government  to
proceed under the provisons of the Law without detailedlists
of materials.
REFERENCES
(1)  Abstract  of  Proceedings Hazardous  Polluting
Substances Symposium.  Department  of Transportation,
U.S.  Coast Guard,  New Orleans, Louisiana, September
14-16,1970.
(2)  Rose,  Arthur;  Rose,  Elizabeth.  The  Condensed
Chemical  Dictionary.  Seventh Edition, Van  Nostrand
Reinhold Company, New York, New York, 1966.
(3) Manual on Industrial Water and Industrial Waste Water.
Second  Edition,  American  Society  for Testing  and
Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1966.

-------
212    OIL SPILL PREVENTION . . .
 (4) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and     (6)  Water Quality Criteria.  National Technical  Advisory
 Wastewater. Thirteenth  Edition, American Public  Health     Committee,  Federal  Water  Pollution  Control
 Association, Inc., New York, New York, 1970.                Administration, Department of the Interior, 1968.
 (5) 1965 Book of ASTM Standards. Part 17, American     (7)  Brewster, R. Q., McEwen, W. E.  Organic Chemistrry.
 Society  for  Testing  and  Materials,  Philadelphia,     Third Edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New
 Pennsylvania, January 1965.                                Jersey, 1961.


                                                   Table 1:
                                   Examples of Materials to Test the Rationale
                             to Distinguish Between Oils and Possible Hazardous Substances

                                    Petroleum      Chemical     Extractable     Chemical      Oil/
         Materials                     Derived       Structure       (Solvent)     Structure     Haz. Sub.
         Crude Oil                    Yes           No            -             -           Oil
         JP-4 Fuel                     Yes           No            -             -           Oil
         Toluene                       Yes           Yes           -             -           H.S.
         Tallow                        No           -             Yes           No          Oil
         Molasses                      No           -             No            -           H.S.
         Refinery Waste                Yes           No           -             _           Oil
         Plating Waste                  No           -             No                        H.S.
         Mix - Kerosene & Benzene      Yes           No           -             -           Oil
         Corn Oil                      No           -             Yes           No          Oil
         Stearic Acid                   No           -             Yes           Yes         H.S.
         Meat Renderings               No           -             Yes           No          Oil
         Coas Dust                    Yes           No           -             -           Oil
         Cresol                        Yes           Yes          -             -           H.S.
         Whale Oil                     No           -             Yes           No          Oil
         Hexanol                      Yes           Yes          -             -            H.S.
         Lacquer  Based Paint           No           —             Yes           No          Oil
         Methyl Mercury                No           -             Yes           Yes         H.S.
         DDT                         Yes           Yes          -            -           H.S.

-------
                         NAVY  HARBOR  OIL  POLLUTION
                      ABATEMENT:   A  PROGRESS  REPORT
                                                JackE. Wilson
                                      Naval Facilities Engineering Command
 INTRODUCTION
    Naval shore establishments over the  past five  years,
 under  the leadership of  the Naval  Facilities Engineering
 Command (NavFac), in terms of dollars spent for facilities
 has a record in pollution control that tops any other single
 federal agency. However,  most all of the approximate $75
 million appropriated by Congress to the Navy for pollution
 control over this period, has gone for sewage treatment and
 air pollution control.  Since  the last Joint Conference on
 Prevention and Control of Oil Spills in December  1969, the
 Navy (again  under NavFac leadership  for  harbor oil
 pollution) has greatly intensified its program to prevent and
 control oil pollution.
    Mr. J. Stephen Dorrler, in his 1969 report,'  defined
 the  Navy harbor oil  pollution problem  as, "small but
 frequent  spills." At that time, we had very little in terms of
 a Navy-wide capability to solve the problem. Several naval
 installations  had undertaken efforts  at the local level to
 prevent and control oil spills. Several installations had barge
 skimmers utilizing a weir  skimming technique and gravity
 oil-water separation,  locally  fabricated  booms,  small
response/cleanup teams,  and  some  utilized  contractor
 cleanup  capability who  in turn  used   rather archaic
 techniques. General practice was to apply dispersing agents
or carbonized sand to remove the "fire hazard"  from the
 surface of the water.  Since  readily  available alternatives
were not at hand and  development of pollution control
technology was not  the Navy's mission, the then accepted
techniques being utilized by  non-Navy parties were  being
adapted,  used and  generally accepted, However, due to
public  pressure  arising  out  of the  national   wave of
ecological awareness, and  with Presidential, Congressional
direction, Navy leaders established the requirement that,
"Navy oil pollution will  be  abated." The goal  of "zero
pollution,"  anywhere in  the world  by mid-decade, was
proposed by a  Presidential  representative  to  a NATO
Conference in November, 1970,and this  goal has  been
amplified  throughout the  Navy  oil  pollution  control
program and accepted as a target. By Presidential Executive
Orders2'3  we are required to: "Conform to water quality
standards .. . required to use, store, and handle all materials
.  . .  including petroleum  products ... so as to avoid or
minimize the  possibilities for water and  air pollution."
"Monitor,  evaluate, and control on a continuing basis . . .
activities so as to protect and enhance  the quality of the
environment."

Prevention
     A program is now under way to prevent oil spills from
Navy ships and shore installations. The Secretary of the
Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations have ordered that
no oil will be dishcarged from ship or shore within the
territorial sea and no oil  collected in port or ashore will be
dumped anywhere at sea and prohibits the discharge  of all
waste  oil and oily  mixtures  in all  areas  except  when
operational emergencies exist.
     Several area Commanders have  strict local regulations
on ship in-port operations and disallow fueling operations
during times  of high risk for spills  (e.g., at night) and in
certain publically sensitive or ecologically delicate areas. Oil
watches  have been intensified  and  some  hardware
alterations undertaken  to  prevent or  diminish  spills.
However, Navy-wide preventive measures have not yet been
undertaken   since  standard  "fixes,"  that  apply
across-the-board to  all ships, installations and ship missions,
are  not now  available.  Ship-board alterations are made
doubly difficult since Navy ships and operating procedures
were designed in times when the environment did not enjoy
its present ranking in the list of national priorities and  some
ships in use today were designed to easily spill oil when in
certain operational modes,  and  correcting this feature is
taking considerable effort and money.
                                                     213

-------
214    OIL SPILL PREVENTION . . .
     To accelerate prevention and control, a comprehensive
 Navy-wide  study of oil pollution  of the environment by
 ship and shore facilities is now under way. Phase A, which
 identified  and quantified  the problem,  was  recently
 completed. The prime reason for  this new -study was to
 accelerate the program so the "zero pollution" target by
 mid-decade could be reached. In the study, we are looking
 for immediate corrective  measures as well as  long-range
 solutions and the  dollars  we taxpayers must produce to
 meet the national goal.
     An example of local  efforts,  which may be utilized
 Navy-wide, is the  new bilge  pumping practice  recently
 begun at the Naval Amphibious Base, Coronado, California.
 All the amphibious craft are required to pump bilges only
 at the  pierside defueling station. The station consists of a
 receipt and holding tank and a tank  truck periodically picks
 up the waste for further processing and disposal. Another
 local effort to provide immediate solutions to the problem
 was a study conducted at San Diego by a group of "salty"
 Navy  veterans with  long  experience in  shipboard  and
 fueling operations.  Some  relatively  inexpensive  onboard
 piping  and operating procedures were recommended that
 would  preclude the prime cause of spills—human errors.
     Most  naval horbors  with  a  history  of serious  oil
 pollution have an  oil pollution  contingency plan,  but a
 recent  Chief  of Naval Operations instruction  directs all
 naval installations to  prepare one. It is intended that all
 Navy contingency plans blend with non-Navy regional or
 local  contingency  plans  and   augment  the  national
 multi-agency contingency plan. Development of these plans
 is now under way.

 Containment
     The  ongoing  Navy  effort  to develop  an  effective
 containment and cleanup program  is based on the premise
 that there will be some level of accidental spills, no matter
 how well the prevention program is planned and executed.
 Oil booms are presently used by the Navy where oil spillage
 is  expected  or  occurs.  Oil  booms,  their  design,
 development,  manufacture,  sale,  use  and failure,  has
 probably seen more activity over the past  few  years than
 any other type of  oil pollution control equipment. Very
 little of this activity has been based on sound technology,
 but rather on the desire to exploit  a potential market that
 could be satisfied through the use of existing manufacturing
 processes, available  raw  products  or apparent technical
 expertise that could be adapted to meet the  urgent demand
 with minimal  capital outlay and little elapsed  time from
 initial investment to profitable  return. As is well known,
 this approach resulted in many instances in failure.
     At this time,  the Navy does  not plan to  spend  any
 money on basic boom development, since it appears from
 experience  to  date that  booms  that  are  commercially
 available  are  effective in  containing  oil  in   relatively
 quiescent  waters,  characteristic of  most  Navy  harbors.
 Instead  Navy  research and  development money will be
 invested in an  test lagoon at the  Naval Civil Engineering
 Laboratory   (NCEL),  Port  Huenemen,  California,  to
determine  the  best boom commercially available and the
boom best suited for the Navy problem. The lagoon will
be operational late in 1971.
    Ideally, we are searching for a boom that  is easily
transportable and deployable from a pier or boat, durable
in the sea environment and to the abuses of the congested
harbor  protrusions, etc., effective  in  containing  oil in
inshore waters, easily cleaned and stowed and economically
competitive with booms  being  less desirable in  one or
several of the above  features.
    A military specification for purchasing oil booms was
recently completed  by the Navy. It will be upgraded (and
hopefully will  become more restrictive) as new information
is obtained from the testing program proposed at the NCEL
test lagoon.
    Another   promising  containment  medium  is  the
monomolecular surface films being  investigated  and
developed by Dr. Garrett of the Naval Research Laboratory
and reported in the 1969 Conference.4  Dr. Garrett has
recently been conducting field tests on actual spills and the
results are encouraging. The "piston film" or "oil herder,"
as it is often called, has a place in the overall scheme and
mix of Navy oil pollution control tools, especially for quick
response, containment and oil film thickening for more
effective pickup.
    NCEL has greatly increased its Research Development,
Test and Evaluation work in  oil pollution control over the
past two years. A task that  is presently under way, which
relates  to  containment,  is  the study  of  oceanographic
factors affecting oil  spills.  Also,  an  evaluation  of oil
thickening methods to better affect pickup and prevent
spreading is under way.
    An engineering investigation of oil pollution from POL
facilities is presently being conducted for NavFac by Van
Houten  and  Associates,  architects and  engineers. This
investigation will continue into the next calendar year and
will  provide new design criteria for alteration, repair and
new  construction  of POL  facilities.  The information
obtained from Phase A of the Navy-wide study previously
mentioned will be utilized  in  this  investigation.  The
approach is to "give a completely fresh look'! at how POL
facilities are constructed  and operated  and interpret the
findings into  firm  solutions that  are keyed to  the new
environmental quality requirements. A similar engineering
investigation of pollution from airfield runoff was recently
completed  for NavFac by Howard,  Needles, Tammen and
Bergendoff  Consulting  Engineers.  This  investigation
resulted  in standardized design criteria  for handling and
treating all airfield runoff.

Harbor Cleanup
    NavFac,  which has the responsibility for  technical
expertise  in  harbor cleanup, along with  NCEL as the
principal  research  laboratory  for the   Navy's  shore
establishment,  has underway  a  rigorous  program for
developing a harbor  cleanup capability.
    Navy  policy   is  to  utilize  commercially  available
equipment  when applicable to the Navy type harbor and oil

-------
                                                           NAVY HARBOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ...    215
pollution  problem,  i.e.,  congested,  active  harbors with
nested ships, debris, open  piers, etc.; in general, confined,
busy waters with difficult to reach  nooks  and  crannies.
    The objective in developing a  Navy in-house capability
is in accordance with the recommendations of the Battelle
Study,-*    conducted  in   1969,   i.e..  "The   two  most
cost-effective systems for broad application were found to
be  mechanical recovery  of  spilled  material by  surface
suction systems, supplemented by  mechanical containment,
and  the  application  of chemical  dispersants." However,
since  dispersants are undesirable  due to ecological  harm
wrought  by  the dispersed oil  as  well  as the  dispersant,
physical removal is the method being pursued.
    Cleanup  systems, consisting  of  containment  devices
and pickup equipment  (commonly referred to as  suction
devices or  skimmers) are being  developed. The  class  of oil
spills   and environment  have  been  narrowed to four
characteristic categories as follows: 1)  minor* near-shore
spills; 2) moderate*  near-shore spills: 3) minor inner-water
spills; and 4) moderate innerwater spills.
                                                                     Figure 2: System for Moderate Near-Shore Spills
                                                                        Figure 3: System for In-Water Spill Cleanup
          Figure 1: System for Minor Near-Shore Spills
 *Minor being up to 100 gallons and a moderate spill  100 -  10.000
 gallons. At this time the Navy is not actively pursuing development
 of a capability for coping with major oil spills except for salvage
 operations as specified in the National Contingency Plan.
    Four basic cleanup system concepts, which may share
common  components,  have been  developed.  All  require
boom  with  manpower  for containment  and boats for
handling the boom. For a class 1 spill (Figure  1), a small
land-based  portable  skimmer with  pump,  piping  and
oil/water receptacle that can be transported, deployed and
operated by one or two men at the most, is desirable. The
class 2 concept (Figure 2) consists of land-based multiple
units  of small portable skimmers and auxiliary  piping and
pumping. Oil/water storage and mobility for the system to
ferry  the  collected  oil  to reclamation points  without
interrupting the ongoing  cleanup operation. Both class 1

-------
216
        OIL SPILL PREVENTION
      Figure 4: System for High-Rate In-Water Spill Pickup

and class  2 systems  would be operated from the shore or
pierside with little mobility in the water except for boom
deployment and maintenance. When the skimmer heads are
operated  in  the water  from boats,  the  power  supply.
receptacles and other support  equipment would remain on
shore.
    Class  3 and class 4 systems (Figure 3) require in-water
mobility.  Basically these systems would  merely be class I
and  class  2  systems adapted  to boats.   Also, a  large
catamaran  type skimmer (Figure  4) is under development
which may be  utilized in certain areas where spills get in
open  water  requiring faster mobility and  higher pickup
rates.  Small  portable skimmers  would still  be used in
conjunction with the catamaran skimmer for hard-to-get-at
areas not accessable to the large unit.
    Generally the movement  of Navy spills on the water
are very predictable  in most  areas and pierside pickup is
usually feasible. The Navy spill as characterized by Dorrler
 •^is  usually  small but frequent, therefore, prepositioned,
compact skimmers  with quick response and containment
capability  can  handle  most  spills.  For  larger  spills.
additional  units can be brought in from other prepositioned
locations  as  required. The idea is to  have  flexibility, best
affected by  compatible components  within  the  various
systems. Certain components that are now adequate for the
task and are  readily  available and will  always be needed are
being procured, e.g., booms, pumps, boats, storage for oil
and stowage  space for equipment, etc. Skimmers are being
procured  and used,  but better, more desirable ones will
replace these when available. Therefore, it is expected that
only skimmers, a small part  of the total system now being
procured, will be technologically obsolete  soon. Also, the
small  skimmers being purchased now are expected to have a
short  useful  life, therefore,  will  require  replacement soon
anyway. Also,  most booms  are  .considered  consumable
items to a certain degree.

    A  small  portable skimmer,  to  meet  these concept
requirements,  is now being developed by  JBF  Scientific
Corporation under a joint EPA-Navy contract. The skimmer
concept, testing and  evaluation  was developed by JBF
under previous EPA funding. Optimism  is high that the
skimmer will   operate  effectively  in the Navy  harbor
environment and as a side benefit, it can be  adopted to
collect sorbents, as well as small debris.
    The best small  portable skimmer  developed to date is
the NCEL vacuum pickup device (depicted in Figures 2 and
3).  The NCEL device costs about  one-sixth  as much as
available commerical  models,  and  has been successfully
tested and used in several Navy harbors. The system shown
in Figure  3 is a concept developed  around  a converted
LCM-6. This system was developed at the Naval Station,
San  Diego, California,  with  technical   assistance  from
NavFac and NCEL.  It utilizes a vacuum principle with the
NCEL suction  heads  and has been operational since late
1970.  Another system is being  fabricated at the Public
Works Center, Norfolk, Virginia. The mobile, self-contained
system, working with  containment boom, has proved most
effective in San Diego. A more efficient (oil-to-water ratio)
and  productive pickup head   is desirable  and  being
pursued.
    At  present, the major constraint  on harbor oil spill
cleanup is the pickup head. The test lagoon at NCEL will
provide a means to  test and evaluate,  under  controlled
conditions, commercial, as well as  Navy production models,
as they become available.
    A  sorbent application, retrieval,  regeneration  and
disposal system is another type of oil cleanup system of
interest to the Navy. Work is now under way at NCEL and
NSRDL  (Naval   Ships  Research  and  Development
Laboratory), Annapolis,  to  test and evaluate  sorbent
materials.  NCEL has  concurrently begun developing the
concept for the total sorbent system. The system would
apply,  retrieve, regenerate  (if feasible)  and  dispose  (if
required) of the sorbent material. Basically the task is to
evaluate existing equipment  that can be adapted to such a
system, undertake necessary R&D efforts to fill equipment
gaps,  design and  put  the  components  together  into a
workable system, establish the  operating scheme, and select
the appropriate sorbent(s). The ideal sorbent would be one
that  is oleophilic, hydrophobic, easily  handled,  easily
dispensed  and retrieved in open water, does not  sink,
non-toxic, can be easily regenerated and reused, and is cost
effective. A sorbent system would  not only be an effective
pickup  means, but  would  retard the  oil's spreading and
thicken the oil  film.  Bacterial degradation is another oil
spill cleanup technique under investigation at NCEL for the
Office of Naval Research. NCEL is attempting to isolate
bacteria with the most ravaneous appetite for oil. Bacteria
of  the  genus  Pseudomonas  taken from samples of beach
sand and soil in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, when
placed  in flasks  with oil apparently consume at least a
portion of the oil. The Laboratory is hoping to isolate the
responsible  bacteria  and find methods  to increase and
control the rate of oil  consumption. If effective bacteria are
isolated, then  this  research  task may be extended and
extrapolated to shoreside treatment of oily waste waters.

-------
                                                         NAVY HARBOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ...     217
Treatment and Disposal Ashore
    The recently  completed  Navy-wide  survey  which
identified  the  sources,  causes,  and  quanitites  of oil
pollution ashore, revealed that very little oil is deliberately
discharged  to  the  environment.  However, existing
equipment,  operating  procedures and housekeeping
practices are resulting in some oil pollution. The intentional, as
well  as  the unintentional plus accidental spills, will be
prevented  or  controlled and  properly treated.  This
intensified effort to control and cleanup  accidental spills
and properly treat and dispose of all generated oily wastes,
will result in more treatment and disposal facilities ashore.
    Presently  the  Navy  has  some  existing  treatment
facilities  consisting  of API  separators,  slop  oil gravity
separators,  holding ponds and  a few emulsion breaking
plants. Contaminated fuels and fuel reclamation plants with
varying  degrees of treatment efficiency also  exist. Some
new,  more effective  treatment plants,  are  now  under
construction. On Guam a waste  oil treatment and disposal
facility is being constructed. This facility will treat all waste
oil generated in the Apra  Harbor Naval Complex from ship
repair facilities,  the fuel depot, shop wastes and oily ballast
from  ships. The treatment  plant  has  the capability to
handle clean and dirty wastes  separately so reclaimable oils
can be  saved. The unreclaimed oil will  be burned  in  a
non-polluting  high  temperature  waste oil  burner. On the
waterside of the plant, stripped water will  pass through
gravity  separation, then  to  chemical  and  air  flotation
emulsion breaking with  discharge to a two stage holding
pond before discharge.
    At  Manchester,  Washington,  a comparable  plant
utilizing physical  coalescing and chemical  emulsion
breaking is  being designed. These are the  type  plants now
being built for shore treatment of wastes.  Other treatment
methods that show promise for efficient treatment at lower
cost  are being investigated.  For the oily wastes being
produced at Mayport, Florida,  treatment consisting  of  a
chemical precipitating/air  flotation package plant (with pH
adjustment  to 5.5)  is  under design. The plant is being
designed to break stable emulsions.  The  interim facility
currently  being operated  (gravity  separation  only)  is
producing a waste oil which is being sold at a profit to the
Navy.
    A system consisting of an inexpensive coalescing unit
followed by  regenerative sorbent filter   pakcs  is being
investigated for possible use at other locations. The system
has no moving parts, minimal power requirements and is
expected to require minimal operation and maintenance.

    In selecting a final treatment alternative, protection of
the  environment  is  the prime criterion,  however,
 simultaneous  production  of a  saleable  or  useable
 by-product is a highly desirable secondary objective.

    Some particular unit processes of interest, from which
 the required mix of processes for a particular waste and
 effluent requirement could be selected, are API separators,
 plate  interceptor separators, coalescers, chemical emulsion
 breaking units, sorbent filters. Some of the processes are
 operational and/or commercially  available while the others
 are being investigated or developed for Navy use.


 CONCLUSIONS
    The Navy's present oil spill cleanup bill is estimated at
 over $2 million.  Research development, test and evaluation
 investigations now underway at NavFac and NCEL is valued
 in the neighborhood of $300,000. This expenditure  could
 increase to over $1  million next year if budget proposals are
 approved. Equipment  now onboard  at naval activities, in
 the form of skimmers, boats, boom, sorbents and .auxiliary
 equipment is valued at over $1 million. The U.S. Navy has
 publically declared "war" on oil pollution. The Navy's
 program includes  ship,  aircraft  and shore  oil pollution
 abatement.
    "We  have  maintained  a   rigorous attack on  our
 problems of pollution," Navy Secretary John Chafee says.
 "We have made  a  good beginning and are in for the long
 pull." Where present technology  does not offer immediate
 solutions, the Navy has initiated in-house action.


 REFERENCES
    (1) Dorrler, J.S.,  "Limited  Oil Spills at Naval Shore
 Installations" Proceedings Joint Conference on Prevention
 and Control of Oil Spills, Dec 15-17, 1969, pp. 151-156,
 Americana  Hotel,   New   York, N.Y.
    (2) Executive Order  11507, "Prevention, Control, and
 Abatement  of Air  and  Water Pollution  at  Federal
 Facilities," Federal Register,  Vol. 35, No. 25, Feb 5,  1970.
    (3)  Executive   Order  11514, "Protection  and
 Enhancement of Environmental Qaulity." Federal Register,
 Vol. 35, No. 46, Mar 7,1970.
    (4) Garrett, W.D., "Confinement and Control of Oil
 Pollution on Water with  Monomolecular Surface  Films,"
Proceedings Joint Conference on Prevention and Control of
 Oil Spills,  Dec 15-17 1969, pp. 257-261, Americana Hotel,
 New York, N.Y.
    (5) Battelle Northwest Institute,  "Study of Equipment
 and Methods  for   Removing Oil from Harbor Waters,".
Report  No.  CR.  70.001 (AD No. 6969880) of 25 Aug
 1969.

-------
TREATING AGENTS
   Chairman: S. M. Pier
    The Pace Company

 Co-Chairman: J. R. Gould
American Petroleum Institute

-------
                     SORBENTS  FOR  OIL   SPILL  REMOVAL
                                        by Paul Schaizberg and K. V. Nagy
                                 Naval Ship Research and Development Laboratory
                                              Annapolis, Maryland
ABSTRACT
    Materials that float on water, attract and absorb oil and
can easily be removed from the water constitute one of the
most effective means for completely separating  spilled oil
from the water environment. Three classes of materials can
be  used for this  purpose  inorganic  products,  natural
organic  products and synthetic organic products. Several
examples of each of these classes are evaluated for their
potential use  as  sorbents.  Laboratory  procedures are
utilized  to determine oil  and water sorption capacity, oil
retention capacity, buoyancy with and without absorbed
oil, effect of petroleum product variation, and sorbent/oil
coherence.  Of  twenty sorbent  materials evaluated, the
polymeric foams exhibited the highest sorption  capacities
for oils.  These foams also absorb water.  While this reduces
their capacity for oil, some of the foams still retain a high
sorption capacity. On the average, much lower oil sorption
capacities were  exhibited by the inorganic and the natural
organic materials.
development. These materials have considerable variation in
composition, structure and sorptive capacity.
    While  some  data on sorbent  materials  have been
published! >2 a systematic laboratory evaluation of many
sorbents being considered for or already in use has not been
reported.  Such  information  is  needed to assist in the
selection of sorbents for a variety of uses in cleaning up oil
spills and in establishing design criteria for sorbent dispersal
and recovery systems currently being developed.

Theoretical and  Practical  Considerations

    When  sorbent materials  are distributed  during an oil
 spill they  can initially contact  oil and then water or the
 converse; in either case, some  competition  for the  solid
 surface between the  two  liquids  can be expected. For
 maximum   effectiveness,  a  sorbent material  should be
 hydrophobic and oleophilic. That is, the solid should not be
 wetted by water but should be wetted by oi.
INTRODUCTION
    Materials that float on water, attract and absorb oil and
can  easily  be  removed from the  water with  the  oil
constitute one of the most effective means for completely
separating oil from  the water environment. These floating
sorbents can be applied from ships and boats, from the air
to and around spills, as well as along the shore to intercept
an advancing slick.  In high  sea states when containment
devices cease to function, sorbents can be applied, from the
air if necessary, to be collected under calmer conditions or
after being driven to the shore by onshore winds.
    In recognition of the potential application of sorbents
for removing spilled oil from  water, a large variety of
materials is now commercially  available for this purpose.
Others are  being  made  available  after  some product
     The phenomenon of wetting and spreading of liquids
 on solids has been extensively investigated by Zisman and
 others.3 The contact angle 0 (Figure  1)  that a  drop  of
 liquid makes on a plane  solid surface is realted to three
 surface tensions in equation (1), proposed by Young.4
                                                  (1)
where     ysv is the surface tension at the solid-vapor inter-
           face
          >SLis the surface tension at the solid-liquid inter-
           face
         >Lvis the surface tension at the liquid-vapor inter-
           face
                                                       221

-------
 222   TREATING AGENTS
          VAPOR
   ///////////////////// //
                     SOLID
               Figure 1: Contact Angle of a Drop

     Thus, a liquid is non-spreading when 9 =£ 0°;and when
 the  liquid wets the solid  completely, spreading over the
 surface,  8 = 0°. Another equation, introduced by Dupre,5
 relates the reversible work of adhesion of a solid and liquid,
       the three surface tensions
              WA = ?sv + >LV 7SL         (2)
 Combing equations (1) and (2) leads to equation (3)

            WA = TLV (COS 0 + 1)          (3)

 The spreading coefficient S has been defined^ as
              S =
 Combing equations (1) and (4) leads to equation (5)

              S = 7LV (COS 0 - 1)        (5)

 Equations  (3) and  (5)  describe adhesion and spreading
 without the terms     ^sv and YSL    which are difficult to
measure; it has also been shown7 that

                S = WA-WC           (6)
 where WC is the reversible work of cohesion of the liquid.
 Relating equations (3) and (6) leads to

        S = 7LV (COS 6 + 1) - WC           (7)

    For spreading s>o and for nonspreading sS o.

    A rectilinear relation has  been established^ between
 the cosine of the contact angle  9  and the surface tension
 TLV   for each homologous series of organic liquids such as
the normal  hydrocarbons. The liquid surface  tension at
which cosine   6 = 1 for a solid is defined as   7C   , the
critical surface tension of that solid. Liquids with surface
tensions less than the  7C  of a solid will spread on that
solid.  For  example,  a  hydrocarbon  liquid such  as
hexamethyltetracosane (squaline, C3fjH62) with a surface
tension of  28 dynes/cm would  spread on polyethylene
(  7C  =31 dynes/cm)but not on polytetrafluorethylene
PTFE) (  TC  -  18 dynes/cm. Water with a surface tension
of 72 dynes/cm would not spread on  either solid. This
indicates  that forms  of polyethylene should  be good
sorbents  for oil. Many natural and synthetic organic solids
have  values  of   7C  that are larger  than  the surface
tensions of petroleum products but smaller than the surface
tension of water so that wetting and spreading of oil on
these  solids preferentially  to  water  can  be expected.
Inorganic solids that do not have  the  required value of
7c    can be modified by  various surface  treatments to
product the desired condition.
    With  some  solids sorption does not  only  involve the
contact angle the liquid makes on its surface.  If the  solid
consists  of  fine capillaries or  pores,  soprtion  of the
liquid  would also involve capillary rise,  where  the  driving
force is that of the pressure difference  across the  curved
surface of the liquid meniscus.
    The rate of entry v of a  liquid into a capillary has been
described** by  equation (8) where TJ  is  the radius of
curvature  of the capillary;^LV   and TJ     are the  surface
            V = (ryLV/4dn) COS 0
 (8)
tension and viscosity of the liquid, respectively;  d is the
depth of penetration and 0 the angle of contact between
the liquid  and the capillary wall. If  0  is 0°, for the
oil/sorbent  contact angle, cosine   Q  becomes unity and
equation (8) reduces to
             V = (ryLV)/(4dn)
(9)
    Equation (9) demonstrates that the rate of penetration
of an oil into a capillary is inverselyproportionalto the oil's
viscosity and directly proportional to the capillary radius.
Spilled petroleum products have a viscosity range of two
orders of  magnitude.  Consequently,  depending  on the
capillary diameter of sorbent materials, oil penetration rates
could be fast (seconds) as in No. 2 fuel oil or slow (hours)
as in a Bunker C oil. If 9 , = 90° for water/sorbent contact
angles, cosine   0  becomes 0 and  the penetration rate
would be 0 for water entering a capillary.
    The  foregoing has been a theoretical description of the
basic phenomena that would be operating in the process of
sorption  of oil by a sorbent in the presence of water. In the
real situation a number of other factors must be recognized
It has been shown^ that a hydrocarbon mixture spreads on
a solid by the advance of a primary film less than 1000A
thick  usually followed by a thicker secondary  film The
movement  of the secondary film  results from  a  surface
tension gradient  across the transition zone between the
primary and secondary films. This gradient is produced by
the unequal depletion by evaporation of the more volatile
constituents having a lower surface tension. Thus, volatile
constituents in spilled oil would serve to enhance spreading
of the ofl through the sorbent. However, if a spill remains
uncollected it loses the volatile constituents which have the
greatest effect on spreading. In addition, evaporative loss of
oil constituents increases the viscosity of the residue which
will decrease the spreading rate.  When  spilled  oil ceases
to flow  due to  low ambient  temperatures  its viscosity
becomes  so  high that no spreading occurs. Although the
surface tension  of water is high,  it can be  significantly
reduced by the presence of surface active materials. Thus,

-------
                                                                    SQRBENTS FOR OIL SPILL REMOVAL    223
the presence of detergents, as contaminants in water along
the coast  or due to attempts  to  disperse spilled oil,  can
seriously interfere with the effective use of sorbents since
the detergents will permit water to wet and spread on the
sorbents and thereby compete  with the oil. Surface-active
components  of spilled oil can  also  affect  the wetting
characteristics of water. Similarly,  the use of surface-active
agents  to  retard spreading of oil  on water may interfere
with the subsequent use of sorbent  materials.
    It is shown by equation (7) that the cohesive energy of
a liquid, We, opposes  spreading on a solid. In some cases,
however, cohesive energy  can operate  favorably. If the
sorbent consists  of loose  powder or  loose fibers  the
cohesive energy of the oil between the particles can serve to
produce a congealed mass which retards spreading of the oil
and facilitates removal of the oil/sorbent mixture.
    In addition to  the wetting,  spreading and capillary
phenomena  involved  in  the  sorption  process,  a  high
surface-to-solid  volume ratio  is very  important. Once a
material has the desired wetting characteristics, its sorption
capacity is proportional to the material's exposed surface
area.

Methodology
    Development  of  laboratory  methods  to  evaluate
sorbents  was influenced by the  need for the  following
information:  maximum ofl sorption capacity,  effect of
mixing  on  oil  retention  and  water  pickup,  effect of
competition between oil and  water for  the solid surface,
water sorption capacity, buoyancy retention, oil retention,
effect  of petroleum  product variation  and  oil/sorbent
coherence. To provide this information the following  two
procedures were utilized.
Procedure A
    A  weighed sample  of sorbent is submerged  in the oil
for IS minutes with frequent stirring to assure saturation. It
is then drained for 15 minutes in a wire screen basket
having 1/16 inch openings. If the material contains small
                 particles  which would be lost through this screen a finer
                 screen is used. After draining, the oil-soaked sorbent sample
                 is weighed  and placed in a one liter bottle one-half full of
                 synthetic seawater.The bottle is stoppered and shaken for
                 six hours at a closely controlled rate and amplitude which is
                 adjusted so that the oil-soaked sorbent is frequently doused
                 with water. After shaking, the consistency and buoyancy of
                 the oil/sorbent mixture is noted. The mixture is transferred
                 to the wire  screen basket, drained for  IS minutes and
                 weighed.  The water content of the mixture is determined
                 by distillation in accordance with ASTM Method D95. This
                 series of tests results in the following information for each
                 sorbent and petroleum product combination: maximum oil
                 sorption  capacity, ofl/sorbent consistency and  buoyancy
                 retention after snaking, ofl retention and  water absorption
                 after shaking.
                 Procedure B
                     A  weighed sample of sorbent is placed in a one liter
                 bottle  one-half full of  synthetic seawater. The bottle is
                 stoppered and shaken as in Procedure A but for 30 minutes.
                 The material  is transferred to the wire screen basket or the
                 finer screen  if necessary, drained  for five minutes and
                 weighed  to  determine  water pickup. The  water-soaked
                 sorbent is  then thoroughly  mixed  with  oil,  drained and
                 weighed as  in Procedure A. Water content is determined by
                 distillation  as  in  Procedure A. In a separate  test, the
                 weighed sorbent is shaken with water for six hours and its
                 water pickup and buoyancy determined. This series of tests
                 results  in the following  information for  each sorbent and
                 petroleum  product  combination: water sorption capacity,
                 buoyancy  retention, and oil  sorption capacity after prior
                 contact of sorbent with water.
                 Petroleum Products
                     Four petroleum products were used in the evaluation:
                 a No. 2 fuel oil, a light crude oil (South Louisiana), a heavy
                 crude oil (Bachaquero) and  a Bunker C  oil. Table  1 lists
                 these products along with some of their pertinent physical
                 properties.
                                              Table I: Properties of Petroleum Products
        OIL TYPE


        Specific Gravity, 77°F
        API0,   77°F
        Kinematic Viscosity, Cs,
                              77°F
 No. 2 Fuel


 0.856
33.8

 3.1
-10
        Pour Point,  F
        Surface Tension, 77°F,
                      dynes/cm            37.1
        Interfacial Tension with
           synthetic seawater, 77°F,
           dynes/cm                        36.0
        Emulsification Characteristics
           with synthetic seawater,  77°F,     3 min.
 Light Crude
    (S. La.)

 0.854
34.2

 7.8
 10

34.2
                24.9

                  65 min.
Heavy Crude
(Bachaquero)

   0.977
  13.3

   2600
   15

  38.6
                      37.8

                       2hrs.
Bunker C


   0.942
  18.9

   2800
   65

  39.9


  46.2
                                                          none
                                                          after
                                                          2 wks.

-------
224    TREATING AGENTS
SORBENTS
    Representative  samples of three classes of sorbents
were  tested:  inorganic,  natural  organic  and  synthetic
organic materials. Table 2 lists the sorbents along with some
descriptive information. Photographs of these materials are
presented in Figures 2-21.
        TABLE 2 - SORBENTS
Inorganic
Perlite, treated
Glass wool containing oleophilic additives
Vermiculite, expanded and treated
Volcanic ash, expanded and treated
Natural Organic
Corn cob, ground
Peanut hulls, ground
Redwood fiber, shredded
Sawdust, treated
Wheat straw
Wood cellulose fiber, treated
Synthetic Organic
Polyurethane foams
A. Polyether type, shredded
B. Polyester type, reticulated
C. Polyether type, 1/2 inch cubes
Urea formaldehyde foam
Polyethylene fibers
A. Wool type
B. Sheet, matted
C. Continuous element, non-woven
Polyester plastic shavings
Polystyrene powder
Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) shavings
                     Figure 2: Perlite
                   Figure 3: Vermiculite
          Figure 4: Volcanic Ash

-------
                                                 SORBENTS FOR OIL SPILL REMOVAL   225

     %•••  *
Figure 5: Corn Cob
Figure 7: Redwood Fiber
                                                    -'  ^'w;,^
                                                 a* ' -  - jJfT -




                                                 ^HjjtfSg
I'igurc 6: Peanut Hulls
                                                               Figure 8: Sawdust

-------
226    TREATING AGENTS

                   Figure 9: Wheat Straw
                                                                        Figure 11: Polyurethane Foam, Shredded
              Figure 10: Wood Cellulose Fiber
Figure 12: Polyurethane Foam, Reticulated

-------
                                                          SORBENTS FOR OIL SPILL REMOVAL   227
Figure 13: Polyurethane Foam. Cubes
Figure 15: Polyethylene Fiber, Wool
  Figure 14: Urea Formaldehyde Foam
F'igure 16: Polyethylene Fiber, Sheet

-------
228    TREATING AGENTS
      Figure 17: Polyethylene Fiber. Continuous Element
Figure 19: Polyester Plastic Shavings
         Figure 18: Polypropylene Fiber, Non-Woven
   Figure 20: Polystyrene Powder

-------
                                                               SORBENTS FOR OIL SPILL REMOVAL   229
           Figure 21: PTFE Shavings
Results
    Maximum oil  sorption capacity expressed in grams of
oil per gram of sorbent is shown in Table 3 for the twenty
materials tested with the four different oils. Precision of the
data is ±5%.  A large variation in sorption capacity among
different materials  exists. The  highest sorption capacities
are  exhibited by  the  foams and the polyethylene fiber
materials. A  decline in sorption  capacity with decreasing
viscosity of the test oils  can be  seen. Table 4 shows the
effect  of  shaking Bunker  C  oil-soaked  sorbent  with
synthetic seawater  for six hours in terms of water gained,
water/oil ratios, and oil retained. Considerable variation  in
water pickup and' water/oil  ratios is seen. Some oil-soaked
sorbents gained large amounts of water, while others gained
little. Oil retention varied among the sorbents, but 8 of the
20  sorbents  retained  more  than 90% of the  oil. Table 5
shows  the  sorbents' water sorption capacity after shaking
with seawater for 30 minutes and six hours, buoyancy after
shaking with seawater for six hours, and sorption capacity
for  Bunker C oil before and  after shaking with  water for 30
minutes. There  is little difference in most  cases  in water
sorption between  the short  and long  shaking times. All  of
the natural  organic   sorbents  (vegetable  origin)  lost
buoyancy after  shaking with seawater for six  hours, while
most of the other sorbents retained buoyancy. With the
                    Table 3:  Maximum Oil Sorption Capacity Grams Oil/Gram Sorbent
Test Oils
Test Oil viscosity at 77°F, cs
Perlite
Vermiculite
Volcanic Ash
Corn cob, ground
Peanut hulls, ground
Redwood fiber, ground
Sawdust
Wheat Straw
Wood cellulose fiber
Polyurethane foams
   A. Polyether type, shredded
   B. Polyester type, reticulated
   C. Polyether type, 1/2 in. cubes
Urea formaldehyde foam
Polyethylene fibers
   A. Wool  type
   B. Sheet, matted
   C. Continuous element, non-woven

Polypropylene fiber, non-woven

Polystyrene powder
Polyester shavings
PTFE shavings
Bunker C
2800
4.6
4.3
21.2
5.7
5.8
14.7
3.0
5.8
18.6
72.7
30.3
72.7
72.7
37.0
18.6
i 46.0
21.7
23.4
8.8
5.0
Heavy Crude
2600
4.0
3.8
18.1
5.6
4.3
11.8
3.7
6.4
17.3
74.8 q
24.5
71.7
52.4
27.8
17.6
36.7
18.1
21.7
7.4
6.0
Light Crude
7.8
3.3
3.3
7.2
4.7
•") 1
£..£
6.5
3.6
2.4
11.4
60.0
30.6
66.1
50.3
19.7
11.9
45.4
6.9
20.4
6.6
1.4
No. 2 Fuel
3.1
3.0
3.6
5.0
3.8
2.2
6.4
2.8
1.8
9.0
48.7
27.5
64.9
47.8
16.1
10.6
36.2
4.8
5.8
4.7
1.0

-------
 230
       TREATING AGENTS
                                 Table 4:  Influence of Water on Oil-Soaked Sorbent

                                          Sorption Capacity        Water        Water/Oil          Oil
                                          for Bunker  C oil          Gain          Ratio         Retention
       Perlite                                   4.9
       Vermiculite                              4.9
       Volcanic Ash                            19.5
       Corn cob, ground                         5.7
       Peanut hulls, ground                      6.0
       Redwood fiber, shredded                 14.7
       Sawdust                                 4.1
       Wheat straw                             6.0
       Wood cellulose fiber                     18.1
       Polyurethane foams
          A. Polyether type, shredded           79.0
          B. Polyester type, reticulated          31.6
          C. Polyether type, 1/2  in. cubes       72.9
       Urea formaldehyde foam                 76.2
       Polyethylene fibers
          A. Wool type                         37.0
          B. Sheet, matted                      19.3
          C. Continuous element, non-woven     49.0
       Polypropylene  fiber, non-woven          21.7
       Polystyrene powder                      24.0
       Polyester shavings                        8.4
       PTFE shavings                           4.2

notable exception  of the foams,  little reduction in oil
sorption capacity  is  seen  for  sorbents preferentially
contacted with water.


Discussion
    While the highest  oil  sorption capacities are exhibited
by the foams, these materials also absorb a large amount of
water. When preferentially and vigorously  contacted  with
water for 30 minutes some  of the foams lose significant
capacity  to  absorb  oil (Table 5). Nevertheless, two of the
foams still  show  a high  capacity for oil sorption.  The
relatively high water pickup of a number of the oil-soaked
sorbents  as  shown in Table 4 is attributed, in part, to the
formation of water-in-oil emulsions since the Bunker C oil
used  for  this  purpose showed  good  emulsion forming
characteristics (Table 1). Table 6 shows the water/oil ratios
of several oil-soaked sorbents after shaking in seawater for
six hours. The highest ratios are found for the Bunker C oil,
indicating the  formation of  water-in-oil emulsions.  The
variation in  the water/oil  ratios between sorbents suggests
different  degrees  of  sorbent involvement  in   emulsion
stabilization.
    When feasible, it is preferable to apply sorbent directly
to the oil slick and achieve  thereby preferential contact
          1.7
          0.8
         46.5
          3.6
          4.9
         15.5
         12.9
          5.0
         12.6

         80.0
          7.5
         82.0
         84.0

         25.0
          5.5
          2.5
         15.8
         78.0
         25.5
          6.2
0.35
0.18
2.38
0.62
0.82
1.05
3.14
0.83
0.70

1.01
0.24
1.04
1.10

0.68
0.28
0.06
0.73
3.25
3.04
1.48
71
82
85
96
58
78
83
98
92

66
83
89
97

65
99
98
68
90
64
67
with the ofl. When thoroughly soaked with either Bunker C
or heavy crude oil, all sorbents tested retained buoyancy
despite vigorous shaking with seawater for six hours. Based
on a number of tests, similar results are expected for the
other test oils. The  most  rigorous test  conducted for
buoyancy retention consisted of shaking the sorbent with
water  for six hours.  Loss  of buoyancy  under those
conditions is an undesirable sorbent  characteristic, since it
is not always feasible to apply sorbents directly to the oil
slick. Even if the sorbent can be applied  directly to the
slick, only partial coating by the oil can be expected under
field conditions. If subsequent contact  with water causes
loss of buoyancy, the oil on the sorbent will be sunk with
it.
    Another  property  of interest is  the oil/sorbent
consistency,  since  that  plays  a role in  the method of
retrieval. This is influenced partly by the viscosity of the oil
and partly by the nature of the sorbent. Figures 22-25 are
photographs which illustrate the influence of the oil. In
those figures  polyurethane  foam C is  seen  after being
saturated with  each of the  four test oils and shaken in
seawater for six hours. The two viscous oils have formed
distinct clumps with the sorbent and are therefore relatively
easy to remove from the water. The two less viscous oils,
however,  do  not form a coherent mass with the sorbent

-------
                                                                    SORBENTS FOR OIL SPILL REMOVAL   231
Table 5: Influence of Water on Buoyancy and Sorption Capacity
Sorption Capacity
for Water g/g
after shaking for
30 min. 6 hrs.
Perlite
Vermiculite
Volcanic ash
Corn cob. ground
Peanut hulls, ground
Redwood fiber, shredded
Sawdust
Wheat straw
Wood cellulose fiber
Polyurethane foams
A. Polyether type, shredded
B. Polyester type, reticulated
C. Polyether type, 1/2 in. cubes
Urea formaldehyde foam
A. Wool type
B. Sheet, matted
C. Continuous element,
non-woven
Polypropylene fiber, non-woven
Polystyrene powder
Polyester shavings
PTFE shavings
3.8 3.8
3.9
6.6
6.8
2.9
7.6
4.5
4.4
12.8
38.9
18.4
28.8
33.2
3.3
1.5
9.0
3.2
13.8
6.4
0.4
3.4
4.3
5.2
6.4
5.1
7.6
4.8
5.3
12.6
34.5
26.6
45.2
48.2
4.2
6.0
12.0
4.7
18.1
6.6
0.8
Buoyancy
after shaking
for 6 hrs.
floats i
sinks
floats
sinks
sinks
sinks
sinks
sinks
sinks
floats
floats
floats
floatS2
floats
floats
floats
floats
floats
floats
floats
Ratio of Sorption
Capacities for Bunker C
Oil, after/before
shaking with water
1.0
0.2
0.8
1.0
0.8
0.4
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.2
1.0
1.0
0.7
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
      ... ..

                                 ~
 Figure 22: Polyurethane Foam
  (Cubes) with No. 2 Fuel Oil
Figure 23: Polyurethane Foam
(Cubes) with Light Crude Oil
Figure 24: Polyurethane Foam
(Cubes) with Heavy Crude Oil
Figure 25: Polyurethane Foam
 (Cubes) with Bunker C Oil
which  would  make  retrieval  more  difficult.  Another
illustration of the role of viscosity  of the oil is seen in
Figures 26 and  27.  In these photographs PTFE shavings
have been soaked in  oil and then shaken in seawater for six
hours.  As has  been  pointed  out  earlier,  PTFE  is  an
                                undesirable sorbent material since it is not easily wetted by
                                oil. Nevertheless, when  treated with the viscous Bunker C
                                oil a thick clump is formed, but the light crude oil  produces
                                a loose structure with  the  PTFE shavings. When  soaked
                                with Bunker C  oil all the sorbents, except  one,  could be

-------
232    TREATING AGENTS
        Test Oils
        Polypropylene fiber
        Sawdust
        Redwood fiber
        Wood cellulose fiber
        Polyester shavings
        Polyurethane foam
  Table  6:  Water/Oil  Ratios of Oil-Soaked Sorbents

            No. 2 Fuel      Light Crude        Heavy Crude
               0.39
               0.27
               0.01
   0.11
   0.36
   0.58
   0.07
   o.:o
   0.03
0.60
0.09
0.25
0.12
0.38
0.33
Bunker C
   0.73
   3.14
   1.05
   0.70
   3.04
   1.04
         m
    Figure 26: PTFE Shavings
     with Light Crude Oil
Figure 27: PTFE Shavings
  \vith Bunker C Oil
retained  in  the wire  screen  basket having  1/16  inch
openings.  The  volcanic  ash  sorbent passed through the
screen.
    The  test  methods  used were  applied  equally  to  all
sorbents.  Consequently,  the   results  have  relative
significance at least. An important consideration is to what
extent the  results  from these tests  can  be  related to the
large  scale  application of sorbents.  Results of some large
scale  sorbent  tests have  been  reported.^ These results
showed oil-to-sorbem weight ratios for perlite (5), hay (4)
equivalent to  straw), urea  formaldehyde  foam (26) and a
polyurethane foam (46), all of which are similar to results
reported  in Table  3. Based  on  this comparison  it  seems
reasonable that  the laboratory results reported in this paper
can be applied  to  the selection of sorbents for large scale
operations. The  vigorous  shaking  of the  oil/sorbent
mixtures  and sorbents  in  seawater  for  six hours may be
considered  too  severe a test, especially when compared to
calm  conditions in sheltered areas. For  other  situations,
however,  it may not be severe enough, particularly since
sorbents,  oil-soaked or not, can  encounter exposure  to the
water lasting for days.
    Cost-effectiveness  of  the   sorbents  tests was  not
considered since this involves not only the initial cost of
materials but also the nature of the oil spill, environmental
conditions and  other factors, all of which lie beyond the
scope of this paper. One factor, in addition to high sorption
capacity,  which  can  have  a  profound  influence  on
cost-effectiveness is sorbent reusability. Some of the foams
and other sorbents appear to have reusability potential, but
this  needs to be  investigated further.  Another  factor is
on-site generation of sorbents which is a potential exhibited
by the synthetic foams. This, too, needs to be investigated.
Whatever sorbents  are used, they must function as part of a
system which brings  the material  to the spill site, disperses
and  recovers them,  reuses them if  feasible, and  finally
disposes of them.

CONCLUSIONS
    Based  on  the  sorbents   tested,  and  within  the
limitations  of  the  laboratory  procedures utilized,  the
following conclusions can be drawn:
1. Polymeric foams have the highest sorption capacities for
oils. This capacity is essentially independent of the viscosity
of the oils. Foams also absorb water readily, which reduces
their  capacity for oil  sorption. Nevertheless, two  of the
polyurethane  foams still show  the  highest oil sorption
capacity of all sorbents tested.
I. Polyethylene fiber products exhibit a good sorption and
polypropropylene capacity for oils which is unimpaired by
prior  contact  with  water.  This  is  also  shown  by  a
polystyrene powder.
3. Inorganic  sorbents  do  not  show  high oil sorption
capacities. These capacities are dependent on the viscosity
of the oils resulting  in  sharply reduced sorption for the less
viscous oils.
4.  Natural  organic  sorbents  (vegetable origin) lose
buoyancy  when  preferentially and vigorously  contacted
with  water. They do not show high sorption capacities for
oils.
5. The laboratory methods for evaluating oil sorbents are
satisfactory and the results can be  applied in the selection
of sorbents for full scale sorbent dispersal and recovery
systems.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
     This  paper represents a portion of an  investigation
sponsored by the U. S. Coast Guard, Division of Applied
Technology, Washington,  D. C. The cognizant technical
manager  is Cdr. W. E. Lehr, head, Oil Pollution Control
Branch.

-------
                                                                SORBENTS FOR OIL SPILL REMOVAL  233
   The authors  are  grateful  to Mr. Leo T. McCarthy,
Edison Water  Quality  Laboratory,  Environmental
Protection  Agency, Edison, New Jersey, for his helpful
comments  and  suggestions during  the  course  of this
investigation.
REFERENCES:
1. Struzeski, Jr.,  E.  J.  and R.  T.  Dewling,  "Chemical
Treatment of Oil Spills,"  Proceedings Joint Conference on
Prevention and Control  of Oil Spills, New York, N.Y.,
December 15-17,1969.
2. Milz,  E.  A., "An Evaluation  -  Oil  Spill Control
Equipment and Techniques"  Report on the 21st Annual
Pipeline Conference, Dallas, Texas, April 13-15,1970.
3. Zisman, W. A., "Relation of Equilibrium Contact Angle
to Liquid and Solid Constitution," in Contact Angle,
Wettability, and Adhesion, Washington, American Chemical
Society, 1964.
4. Young,  Thomas, Philosophical  Transactions  of the
Royal Society (London), Vol. 95, p. 65,1805.
5. Dupre, A.,  Theorie Mechaniqtte de la Chaleur, Paris
Gauthier-Villars, p. 369,1869.
6. Cooper, W. A. and W. A. Nuttall, Journal of Agricultural
Science, Vol. 7, p. 219, (1915).
7. Harkins, W.D., Chemical Reviews, Vol. 29, p. 408,1941.
8. Washburn,E.W./%js/cfl/'^ev/ews, Series 2, Vol. 17, p.
273,1921.
9. Bascom, W.D., R.L. Cottington, and C.R. Singleterry,
"Dynamic Surface  Phenomena  in  the  Spontaneous
Spreading of Oils on Solids," in Contact Angle, Wettability,
and  Adhesion,   Washington,  Aerican Chemical  Society,
1964.

-------
                   LABORATORY  INVESTIGATION  INTO

                    THE  SINKING  OF  OIL  SPILLS  WITH

                                PARTICULATE  SOLIDS
                                                 O. Pordes
                                        Egham Research Laboratories
                                           Shell Research Limited
                                              United Kingdom
                                                   and
                                           L. J. Schmit Jongbloed
                             KoninklijkelShell Exploratie en Produktie Laboratorium
                                              The Netherlands
ABSTRACT
  This  paper  describes  experimental laboratory  work
relevant to the sinking of floating oil spills.

  The results show that aqueous sand slurries treated with
an amine acetate salt have satisfactory sinking and retention
properties.  In  general,  aqueous sand slurries containing
cationic wetting agents of widely different water solubilities
can effect sinking provided that the concentration of the
wetting agent  is within the  range  necessary  to give
oleophilic sand surfaces. Fine powders have better retention
properties  than have sands, but are unsatisfactory sinkers
unless mechanical stirring is provided.

  To sink stable water-in-oil emulsions effectively a sinker
application rate is required which allows for the cohesive
structure of the emulsion as well as for the wetting of the
sinker by the oil phase.

  Work relevant to fears that bottom trawling fishing gear
may befouled in areas where oil slicks had been sunk shows
that under very severe experimental conditions hydrophilic
and oleophilic  fishing net twines can be fouled, but the
significance of this in relation to practical considerations is
unknown.  The feasibility of preventing carpet formation by
sunken  oil/solid masses by reducing the size of the sinking
oOjsolid droplets and delaying  or preventing their coales-
cence by spraying a dispersant  onto the oil before sinker
application is discussed.

  Standard laboratory procedures in direct support of the
Shell Sand Sink method  are detailed.

 INTRODUCTION
   For  effective  sinking of floating oil  spills, the  prime
 requirement is for a participate solid of high density. The
 sinking agent should preferably have a large specific surface
area and should be wetted by oil in the presence of water.
In order that the  oil be retained on the bottom of the sea,
to be ultimately buried by sand or silt, or biologically
degraded, it must not be displaced by water from the solid.

   An effective sinking  method may also be required to
deal  with  a wide variety of oil  types ranging from low
viscosity crude oils to stable water-in-oil emulsions.

   With these requirements  in mind the aim of this work
was to compare some particulate solids with regard to their
effectiveness as sinking agents, and to compare methods of
rendering  solid surfaces  oil wettable in the presence  of
water.O)

   As apprehension has been expressed that bottom fishing
gear may be fouled when dragged through sunken oil/sinker
mixtures^ the possibility  of fouling of different fishing
net twines was examined.
General Laboratory Evaluation of Sinker Agents

Initial Scouting
   Within hours of the  grounding of the Torrey Canyon
some  experiments on sinking floating  Kuwait  crude oil
films  were  carried out  with  sandy sinkers;  these ranged
from  untreated dry  or wet  sand to sands coated with
bituminous  cutbacks or  emulsions,  paraffin  wax  and
aqueous dispersions or solutions of cationic surface active
agents.

   Sands coated with bituminous cutbacks and emulsions
proved to be ineffective, whilst sands coated with aqueous
solutions or dispersions of cationic surface active agents, or
dry sand coated with paraffin wax offered useful possibili-
ties. Without  mechanical  stirring of  the sand slurry/oil,
                                                   235

-------
236    TREATING AGENTS
sinking was effected by  using cationic surface  agents of
widely different water solubilities provided that the concen-
tration  was  within the  critical  range necessary to  give
oleophilic sand surfaces. As shown in Table 1, the capacity
of wetting agents such as fatty  di-amines and quaternary
ammonium salts to anchor the oil at the bottom without
previous stirring of the slurry/ofl is limited, and except in
the  case  of  the sand  slurry  treated with 0.05%  cetyl
pyridinium bromide (Fixanol C) much of the oil returned
to the surface within 24 hours after sinking.

   When mechanical stirring was used  to mix the sand
slurry and the oil, long-term retention on the bottom was
achieved with water insoluble (e.g. 0.1% di-alkyl quaternary
ammonium  chloride  (Arquad  2HT-75)  and  soluble (e.g.
0.05% Fixanol C) cationic wetting agents.
   Experimental details and results are given in Appendix 1.

Comparison of Sinking and Retention Powers of
   Various Particulate Solids
   In  this next and wider  series of experiments  the
effectiveness of various particulat solids, i.e., sands and fine
powders, to sink floating oil together with their ability to
retain  the sunken oil  was examined. The particle  size
analysis,  as determined  by sieving  through BS sieves,  is
given in Table  1.
Table 1 : Particle Size Distribution
Particle size range
(mm)
-2.411 + 1.204
-1.204+0.599
-0.599 + 0.295
-0.295 + 0.152
-0.152 + 0.076
-0.076
-0.076+0.037
-0.037

Sand No. 1

0
0
3.8
67.5
26.8
1.9
—
—

Sand No. 2(l)

0
0
0
0
93.4
6.6
—
—

of Solid Sinker Materials
Siliconized sand' '
(%W)
0.5
5.0
51.0
41.5
1.5
0.5
—
—

SPFA(3)

0
0
2.0
6.8
18.0
_
20.2
53.0

Snowcal(4)

0
0
0
0
0
_
0
100
(48%< 0.003)
        *• ^Fraction passing B.S. sieve No. 100(0.152 mm) of Sand No. 1.

        ' 'Sand treated with water-based sodium methyl siliconate solution.

        * 'Pulverized fuel ash treated with methyl trichlorosilane.

        ^Treated whiting.
   The  results are tabulated in Tables 2 and 3 and show
that:-
   (a) sands treated  with sflicones  or paraffin wax have
       satisfactory  oil-sinking  properties with or without
       the provision  of mechanical  stirring. Aqueous sand
       slurries treated with an amine acetate salt (Armac T)
       behave similarly. There  is no clear pattern of effect
       of Armac T concentrations  between  0.05-0.125%
       (weight  of  dry  sand),  but in  all  cases  at least
       two-thirds  of the  oil is  retained on  the  bottom.
       More finely  graded materials,  treated whiting or
       chalk and silane treated pulverized fuel ash, require
       an impracticably long time  to sink floating oil ex-
       cept  for oils of  low viscosity. However,  these
       powders display a high degree of sinking efficiency
       if mechanical agitation is provided.

   (b)  Sunken oil  was more effectively retained  on the
       bottom by the powdery sinking agents than by the
      comparatively coarse sands. Similarly, finer fractions
      of sand display better oil retention than the coarser
      ones.

      However, irrespective of the fineness of the grading,
      the  sunken  oil/solid  masses obtained  with wax-
      coated sand  are  in  all  cases the firmest and most
      cohesive of the sunken masses.

  (c) It appears that  the  rate  of  application of sinking
      agents,  in particular fine powders,  plays a more
      important role in obtaining optimum sinking effec-
      tiveness than is sometimes suspected. It is suggested
      that fine powders should be applied at a rate not
      much  faster than that at which the particles sink
      into or are encapsulated by the oil.
       Experimental details are given in Appendix 2.

-------
                                                                                        TREATING AGENTS   237
                             Table 2: Sinking and Retention Effectiveness of Solid Sinkers


Sinker


Sand No. l/ArmacT(1>
Sand No. 2/Armac T
Sand No. I/wax 2.
Sand No. 2/wax 2.0
Snowcal
Nautex H
SPFA
Siliconized sand
Sand No. 1
Kuwait crude oil (25% topped)
% oil sunk
Sinker
Spreading

90
98
85
85
50
50
2
85
-
Spreading
and
staring
90
98
95
90
98
90
99
85
-
% oil on dish bottom
Days after
Spreading
1 7 14
90 88 66
95 90 71
85 85 74
85 80 75
98 98 98
99 98
0 98 98
85 80 56
_
Spreading and
stirring
1 7 14
90 90 69
95 95 74
90 85 70
85 85 71
96 96 96
98 98
99 99 99
80 75 42
- - -
Shell Heavy Fuel Oil B
% oil sunk
Sinker
Spreading

99
99
99
98
0
0
0
99
85
Spreading
and
stirring
99
99
99
98
99
99
99
99
-
% oil on dish bottom
Days after
Spreading
1 7 14
80 66
99 95 76
95 82
95 90 87
000
000
000
75 42
70 60 23
Spreading and
stirring
1 7 14
99 76
98 98 91
85 72
95 90 81
99 99 99
99 99 99
99 99 99
80 60
_
*•  '0.05%w Armac T on weight of dry sand.

       140/14S°F m. pt. fully refined paraffin wax on weight of dry sand.
                Table 3: Effect of Concentration of Armac T on the Sinking of Topped Kuwait Crude Oil
Sinker
Armac T
(%w of dry sand)
Appearance
1 hour after sinker application
4 hours after sinker application.
Quantitative determination of Oil sunk, %w
168 hours after sinker application.
1
^ «™^J Mr. 1
0.05
0.075 O.J
* \bout 95*& oil sunk

0.125

Oil/solid in discrete droplets on the bottom.
As after 1 hour

70
~* 	 Total coalescence of oil/solid droplets 	 »-

80 70

77
The Sinking of Floating, Stable, Water-in-Oil
   Emulsions (Chocolate Mousse)

   Some experiments were carried out to assess the ability
of Armac T treated sand slurries to sink floating water-in-oil
emulsions.  Observations made during this work suggest that
for the sinking of mousse the following criteria obtain:-

   1.  If the sand slurry is scattered evenly but rapidly  the
      mousse  will quickly sink below the surface of the
      water. However, if there has been insufficient time
      either for the  oil to wet the sand or for the sand to
      sink  into the emulsion, the sand will be washed off
      the surface of  the mousse, and the emulsion will rise
      to the surface.

   2.  If the sand is  spread unevenly  and rapidly over the
      raft of mousse, the mass will sink, turn turtle, shed
   the sand  [for the reasons given in (1)] and surface
   again.

3. It  is imperative that the solid sinker be applied at
   least slowly enough for the solid to be wetted by the
   oil at its contact area before sinking is effected. This
   slow rate of application will achieve adhesion of the
   sand to the emulsion and so resist washing off during
   subsequent sinking. There is an indication that more
   rapid wetting is obtained with the 0.1% than with the
   0.5% Armac T treated sand slurry (see  Table 4).

4. It is thought possible to sink and probably retain the
   mousse on the bottom by spraying the sinker slurry
   with sufficient force to penetrate into the  body of
   the mousse.

Experimental details are given in Appendix 3.

-------
 238    SINKING OF SPILLS WITH PARTICULATE SOLIDS
            Table 4: Effect of Concentration of Armac T and of the Time Taken to Apply Sinker on the Sinking
                           of Floating Water-in-Oil Emulsions (average water content - 78%w)
Oil
Sinker solid
Armac T %w
Time taken to apply sinker (minutes)
Estimate of emulsion floating on top (%w)
Hours after sinker application
0
1
24
168
Topped Kuwait crude oil (25% topped)
Sand No. 1
0.05
15


40
40
40
50
0.05
45


10
10
10
15
0.1
15


25
25
24
30
0.1
45


0
0
0
0
0.05
15


20
20
30
40
0.1
15


15
15
14
20
 Laboratory Work in Direct Support
    for the Shell Sand Sink Method
   Two laboratory test procedures, developed by KSEPL,
 Rijswijk, which were instrumental in establishing the Shell
 Sand Sink  Method* as a practical large scale, anti-pollution
 measure are the adhesion test and the spraying test.

 Adhesion test
   This test  is used  to  determine the  ability of wetting
 agents to render water-wet sand surfaces oleophilic. It is
 used  for  screening the  great number  of wetting agents
 available as well as for determining the optimum amount of
 a chosen surfactant under certain given conditions.

   In brief, 50 g of dry sand is mixed with sea water and
 treated with the surfactant. The slurry is then well mixed
 with 30 g  of ofl, transferred to a 250 ml flask, topped up
 with sea water and allowed to stand for 24  hours, after
 which  the  amount  of ofl floating on top is measured. The
 result is expressed  in kg ofl retained by  1 kg of dry sand.
 The test is  repeated with  different amounts of wetting
 agent, the results plotted and the optimum determined;

   It will,  of course, be appreciated that when this test
 procedure  is used  for screening wetting agents the three
 principal parameters, i.e.,  water,  sand  and oil,  are kept
 constant.

   Fuller test details are given in Appendix 4.
*The applicability of this method on the open sea was confirmed by
the KSEPL sea trial on the 8th April, 1970. The report on this trial
"The Shell Sand Sink Method" is available on request at Konin-
klijke/Shell Exploratie en Produktie Laboiatorium, Rijswijk, The
Netherlands.
Spraying test
   This test is complementary to the adhesion test and is a
small-scale, sand slurry spraying test in which materials and
concentrations found promising in the adhesion  test are
further examined.

   In brief, a 5 mm thick layer of oil is spread on sea water
in a 3.5 m long,  1.25 m  wide and  0.5 m deep  tank. A
multinozzle sprayer  travels  at constant height and speed
once over the tank.  The surfactant treated sand/sea water
(20 kg sand) mixture is sprayed at a constant angle  into the
oil layer (15 kg), and hits it with constant impact velocity.
The amount of oil  floating on the surface of the water after
at least 12  hour standing is considered as a yardstick of
performance.

   Fuller test details are given in Appendix 5.

Results
   In comparable cases, less  oil is generally retained per kg
of dry sand in the  static adhesion test than in the dynamic
spraying test. It appears also that the best performances in
the adhesion  test  are  not  necessarily top-ranking in  the
spraying test. The difference between the results of the two
test methods is almost certainly caused by:
   (a)  differences in  the mixing intensity of sand with oil,
   (b)  differences in  the oil/sand ratios used,
   (c)  differences in the water/sand ratios used and
   (d)  differences in  ambient test temperatures.

   However, more  weight is  given to the spraying test  as it
approaches practical  sea conditions more closely than the
adhesion test.

   Considering the factors affecting the retention of ofl by
sand it seems that  the optimum surfactant addition for an
average North Sea  sand (medium particle size of about 250

-------
                                                       SINKING OF SPILLS WITH PARTICULATE SOLIDS  239
micron  with  an insignificant  fraction  larger than  1000
micron) lies between 250 and 500 ppm. Finer sand, or sand
contaminated  with a little clay, requires a larger amount of
wetting agent, such as  1000 ppm, to  achieve maximum
effectiveness.

   It takes less sand to  sink heavy  and viscous oil than a
light and thin crude. Too coarse a sand  affects the oil
retention  unfavorably,   while too fine a sand is costly on
account  of higher  surfactant  requirements.  Sand with  a
minimum clay and silt content is thus the preferred sinker
aggregate. A mixing time of 10-20 seconds at high  shear
rate is sufficient to  treat the sand with surfactant. A 50/50
surfactant solution in isopropyl alcohol or glycol facilitates
handling,  and  care should be taken  to choose a surfactant
solvent system of pour point low enough to cope with the
lowest temperatures expected. From the spraying tests,  in
which variables such as wetting agent concentration, slurry
weight,  nozzle speed  and  angle, and   oil-layer thickness
could be studied, it was  seen that 95% of a 5 mm layer  of
heavy crude could  be sunk using a 1:1 weight ratio  of
sand/oil. It further appeared, that the useful application  of
the sand slurry would be limited by the viscosity of the oil,
with the lower limit being somewhere around 150 cS at sea
temperature. This is, in  practical terms, not considered  to.
be a  serious limitation, because  most lighter crude oils will
have  weathered sufficiently after a comparatively  brief
exposure  at  sea  to  come within  this  viscosity limit.
Furthermore,  recent experiments carried out  with 4-10 cS
light Nigerian  crude (carried out at the time of the salvage
operation for the "Pacific Glory" October-November 1970)
indicated that, though the viscosity of the oil is below the
value so far accepted as the critican minimum, successful
sinking  can be  achieved if the  normally  recommended
sand/oil ratio is increased from 1 to 2.
Oleophilic and Hydrophilic Fishing Net Twines
   Under the severe experimental conditions (see Appendix
6), fishing net twines,  both natural and synthetic, were
fouled  by  oil/sinker  masses.   However,  a natural and
hydrophilic one, e.g. manila twine, was less prone to fouling
than  the  synthetic  and  oleophilic polyethylene  and
polypropylene materials. No oil/sinker mass can be singled
out  as  causing  a  minimum  amount of  fouling, and  a
particular sinker cannot  therefore  be recommended (see
Table  5). It  seems  that  experimental conditions can be
created under which any twine will be contaminated by any
oil/sinker mastic. However,  it has not yet been established
that conditions at sea are as severe as those chosen for these
experiments.

   Experimental details  are given in Appendix 6.

   Table 5: The Relative Susceptibilities of Fishing Net
      Twines to Fouling by Sunker Oil/Solid Mastics*
Twine
15/12 Orange polythene
15/32 Orange polythene
360P Ulstron (polypropylene)
90P Ulstron (polypropylene)
3/1 10 Manila twine

Fouling - increase
in weight of twine
g/m
2.7
6.9
5.0
1.2
1.5
mean 3.5
%w
160
150
155
165
15
130
*The  oil/solid mastics were obtained by sinking topped Kuwait
crude  oil and fuel  all  with Armac T sand  slurry,  waxed sand,
siliconized sand, SPFA, Snowcal and Nautex H. As only very minor
differences in fouling by the different oils and solid sinkers were
obtained, average values are tabulated.
Fouling of Fishing Net Twines
   As apprehension has been expressed that bottom fishing
gear may be fouled when dragged through sunken oil/sinker
masses some laboratory  work  was also carried  out with
typical fishing-net twines.
 Cum °lo weight rcto
    100
    60
              Normdi typ
     0
     1000
            Figure  1: Sieve Analysis Silver Sand
Size and Coalescence of Oil/Sinker Droplets
   Further  to  the fears  that  fishing operations  may  be
hindered through fouling in areas where oil slicks had been
sunk one looked into possibilities of: —
   (a)  reducing the size of sinking, discrete oil/solid drop-
       lets, and

   (b) preventing carpet  formation at the bottom of the
       sea by inhibiting or delaying the coalescence of the
       sunken  droplets.

   The feasibility of this approach was indicated in that by
using  for example Armac T treated sand slurries as the
sinker, a reduction in the  size  of the  sinking  oil/solid
droplets and a delay  in  the  coalescence of the  sunken
droplets were achieved by spraying an oil-soluble surfactant
solution onto the floating oil slick before application of the
sinker (see Table 6).

   Applying the  dispersant  onto  the  floating  oil  film
immediately before the application of the sinker was found
to  be a more effective  way  of preventing or  delaying

-------
240    TREATING AGENTS
                       Table 1 A: Sinking of Floating Oil with Sand Slurries (Slurry Scattered)
Dish
No.
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
Aqueous phase
of slurry
containing (%w)
1 Duomeen C
1 Duomeen 12
1 Duomeen S
1 Arquad S-50
1 Arquad 2HT-75
0.1 Arquad S-50
0.01 Arquad S-50
Filtered water from 1 Arquad 2HT-75 dispersion
0.5 Arquad S-50- 0.5 Arquad 2HT-75
0.1 Arquad 2HT-75
1 Fixanol C
0.1 Fixanol C
0.01 Fixanol C
0.05 Fixanol C
lOOg of dry sand coated with 2 140/145°F
FRPwax*
Condition of oil
%w oil sunk immediately
after application of slurry
About 95
About 95
About 95
About 95
About 95
About 95
About 95
About 95
About 75
About 99
About 80
About 95
About 95
About 99
About 99
%w oil floating, 24 hours
after application of slurry
About 30
About 70
About 30
About 70
About 30
About 70
About 70
About 70
About 85
About 25
About 90
About 80
About 40
About 5
About 1-2
*Waxed sand was included to serve as a reference standard.

 After noting the conditions of the oil 24 hours after the application of the slurry, the oil and sand were hand mixed.
 The results are given in Table 2.
       Table 2A: Sinking of Floating Ofl with Sand Slurries (Hand mixing with a spatula of the oil and sand in the
                              dish 24 hours after the slurry application — see Table 1 A)
Dish
No.
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
6
Aqueous phase
of slurry
containing
l%w Duomeen C
l%w Duomeen 12
l%w Duomeen S
l%w Arquad S-50
l%w Arquad 2HT-75
0.1 %w Arquad S-50
0.01%w Arquad S-50
Filtered water from l%w Arquad 2HT-75 dispersion
30.5%w Arquad S-50 - 0.5% Arquad 2HT-75
0.1% Arquad 2HT-75
l%w Fixanol C
0.1%w Fixanol C
0.01%w Fixanol C
0.05%w Fixanol C
100 g of dry sand with 2%w 140/ 145° F FRP wax
Condition of oil
Immediately after mixing
%w of oil sunk
About 99
About 99
About 99
About 95
About 99
About 99
About 99
About 30
About 95
About 99
About 99
About 99
About 99
About 99
No mixing
168 hours after mixing
%w of oil floating
About 20
About 30
About 15
About 50
About 1
About 10
About 25
About 80
About 30
About 1
About 50
About 10
About 3
About 1
About 1

-------
                                                     SINKING OF SPILLS WITH PARTICULATE SOLIDS  241
Table 6: The Effect of Spraying a Dispersant Solution onto the Floating Oil Immediately Prior to the Sinker Application
Oil
Solid Sinker
ArmacT
(%w on dry sand)
Dispersant
(%w on floating oil)
Appearance
Hours after
sinker
application
2
168
Topped Kuwait Crude Oil (25% topped)
Shell Heavy Fuel Oil "B"
< ^inH Nrt 1 -f-

-i "Of t

0
About 90% of oil
sunk is discrete
droplets of 1-2
cm dia. Some
coalescence
As after 1 hour
Extensive
coalescence
5
About 75% of oil
sunk in discrete
droplets of about
1 cm dia. No
coalescence
Extensive
coalescence
Extensive
coalescence
10
About 80% of oil
sunk in discrete
droplets of
<0.5 cm dia. No.
coalescence
As after 1 hour
No coalescence
0
About 90% of oil
sunk in large,
discrete drops of
>2 cm dia. Some
coalescence
Some
coalescence
Some
coalescence
5
About 80% of oil
sunk in discrete
droplets of
< 1.0 cm dia. No.
coalescence
Some
coalescence
Some
coalescence
10
About 80% of oil
sunk in discrete
droplets of
<0.5 cm dia. No
coalescence
No coalescence
No coalescence
 coalescence  than  either applying it  directly below  he
 floating oil film or mixing it with the Armac T treated sand
 slurry.

   Experimental details are given in Appendix 7.

 REFERENCES
   1. United States of America, Patent Specification  No.
 2367384 Sept. 1942.
   2. System Study of  Oil Cleanings Procedures. Volume
 1: Analysis  of Oil  Spills  and Control  Materials. G.A.
 Gflmore, D.D. Smith, A.H. Rice, E.H. Shenton and W.H.
 Moser,  Dillingham Environmental  Company, Dillingham
 Corporation 1970.
   3. SA. Berridge, M.T. Thew and A.G. Loriston-Clarke.
 J. Inst. Petrol.
  APPENDIX 1
  Initial Scouting Tests
  Materials Used
  1. Cationic wetting agents
    1.1   Fatty di-amines
         Duomeen S
         Duomeen C
         Duomeen 12
                              2. Sand
                                 Sand No. 1
                           Buckland Sand and Silica Co.
Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.
Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.
Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.
    1.2  Quaternary ammonium salts
         Arquad S-50
         (mono alkyl quaternary ammonium
         chloride)           Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.

         Arquad 2HT-75
         (di alkyl quaternary ammonium
         chloride)           Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.
         Fixanol C
         (Technical grade of cetyl
         pyridinium bromide)                        ICI
                              3. Sea water
                                 Artificial sea water was prepared by adding the following
                              salts to distilled water: —
                                                    2.5%w NaCl
                                                    1.1 %w MgCl2
                                                    0.4%w
4. Fuel oil
   Shell heavy fuel oil "B"
   (viscosity RI at 100°F - 2100 sec)


Test Procedure
   152 mm x 76 mm Pyrex crystallizing dishes are filled
with 750  g of artificial sea water to a height of about 45
mm. 50 g  of oil is poured onto the water and allowed to
spread over the whole surface, giving an oil film of about 3
mm  thickness.  150 g of sand slurry is then scattered as
carefully and evenly as possible with a spatula over the oil
film.

   Visual estimates of the amounts of oil on the surface of
the water and  on the  bottom  of the dish  are made
immediately after application of the slurry and again after
24 hours.  Having noted  the conditions  24 hours after the
slurry application, the oil and sand are mixed with a spatula
until the maximum possible sinking of oil is obtained. The
extent and ease of mixing are  then noted. 168 hours after
mixing, the amount of oil on the surface of the water is
estimated.

   All the work was carried out in a temperature (20°C) and
humidity (65% r.h.) controlled room.

   The sand slurries were prepared by mixing 100 g of dry
sand with 50 g of artificial sea water containing a stipulated
type and amount of cationic wetting agent.

-------
        TREATING AGENTS
APPENDIX 2
Comparison of Sinking and Retention Powers
   of Various Particulate Solids
Materials Used
1. Oils
   Shell heavy fuel oil "B"
   (Viscosity R.I. at 100°F - 2,100 sec)
   Topped Kuwait crude oil
   (25% topped)
   (Viscosity R.I. at 100°F - 396 sec)

2. Sinking agents
   2.1  Sands
        Sand No.  1           Buckland Sand & Silica Co.
        Siliconized sand     Midland Silicones Ltd. Barry.

   2.2  Powders
        Nautex H
        "Craie de Champagne"      Wolon Co. Ltd. Esher
        Snowcal
        Treated whiting            Welwyn Hall Research
                                   Association, Welwyn
        Silane Treated Pulverized
        Fuel Ash (SPFA)     Midland Silicones Ltd. Barry

3. Surface active agents
   Armac T (amine acetate salt)
                            Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.

Test procedure
1. Oil sinking and retention efficiency
   152 mm x 76 mm Pyrex crystallizing dishes are filled
with artificial sea water to a depth of about 45 mm. 50 g of
oil is poured onto the water and allowed to spread over the
whole surface, giving an oil film thickness of about 3 mm.
150 g of aqueous sand slurry (100 g sand, 50 g of 0.1% wt
aqueous dispersion of Armac T) or  100 g of dry sinker is
then scattered during a period of about 15 minutes, either
as carefully and  evenly as possible with a spatula over the
calm oil film, or whilst the oil and water are being stirred
with another spatula.

   Visual estimates of the amounts  of oil floating on the
surface  are  made  immediately after  application  of the
sinker. Quantitative determinations are made after 1, 7 and
14 days.

APPENDIX 3
The Sinking of Floating, Stable,
   Water-in-Oil Emulsions
Materials used
1. Oils
   Shell Heavy Fuel Oil "B"
   (Viscosity R.I. at 100°F - 2100 sec)
   Topped Kuwait Crude Oil
   (25% topped)
   (Viscosity R.I. at 100°F - 396 sec)
2. Sinking agents
   2.1   Sand No. 1            Buckland Sand & Silica Co.
   2.2   Surface active agent
        Armac T (Amine acetate salt)
                            Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.
   2.3   Preparation of aqueous dispersion of
           surface active agent
           Armac T  is dissolved in isopropyl alcohol (1:1
        weight ratio) before  being dispersed in Egham tap
        water (Zeolite  softened - total hardness about
        3 ppm) at 0.1 %w (Armac T) concentration.

3. Sea Water
   Artificial sea water was prepared as shown in Appendix  1.
1. Preparation of water in oil emulsion (mousse)
   Using laboratory prepared sea water, water-in-oil emul-
sions were prepared with the topped Kuwait Crude Oil and
the Fuel Oil "B".

   60 g of oil was poured into a 800 ml tall form Pyrex
beaker (175 mm high and 89 mm dia.) and stirred at a fast
rate (about 12-1300 rpm) with a three bladed downdraught
paddle  stirrer  (51  mm dia.). Water was added in 20 ml
batches and stirring carried out after each addition until all
the free water was absorbed into the oil and the emulsion
looked  homogeneous  and  smooth.  This  procedure  was
repeated until  a  further water addition produced a clearly
visible peripheral ring of clean,  free water on the surface of
the emulsion during stirring/3)

   The semi-solid emulsion was then spooned out onto the
water surface  in the Pyrex test cylinder.  If the emulsion
filmed out within 24 hours it was rejected.
APPENDIX 4
Adhesion Test
Materials
a.  Sand
   Silver-sand  (particle  size  50-400  micron);  for  sieve
   analysis see Figure 1.
b.  Oil
   Topped Kuwait crude (25% topped).
c.  Water
   Natural sea water.
d.  Oil-wetting agents
   A l%w solution (suspension) is prepared. Mix the chemi-
   cal  under test  with an equal volume of  isopropyl
   alcohol or ethyleneglycol and dilute with sea water to a
   1% concentration of the oil-wetting agent.
e.  Flask
   250 ml Erlenmeyer  flask  equipped with a calibrated
   25 ml  tube  (quickfit connection).

-------
                                                    SINKING OF SPILLS WITH PARTICULATE SOLIDS    243
Test Procedure
  Weigh 50 g of the dry sand in a 400 ml beaker. Add 90
ml of sea water and mix with spatula for 1 min. Add whilst
stirring 2, 5  or  10 ml  of the  1% solution of oil-wetting
agent. Mix for 3 min with magnetic stirrer. Decant super-
natent liquid.  Mix remaining slurry with  30 g (33.3  ml)
topped Kuwait crude. Transfer mixture to the 250 ml flask,
install the calibrated tube and fill  the flask  and the  tube
with sea water to the upper calibration mark. The amount
of oil in the calibrated tube after standing for 24 hours (or
less) is determined and the amount of oil  retained on the
sand is given by 30 minus  this amount.  The results are
expressed in the form of
                  weight of oil sunk
                  weight of sand used
Remark
  Suitable samples should  be  further  tested at varying
concentrations e.g.  125,  250, 500, 1000  and 2000 ppm
agent on  dry sand.
APPENDIX 5
Spraying Test
Materials
(a)   Sand
     Siliconized sand
(b)   Oil
     Topped Kuwait crude (25% topped).
(c)   Water
     Natural sea water (North sea).

Apparatus
(a)   Size of open tank
     350x 125 x 50cm depth, surface area 4,375 m2.
(b)   Sprayer
      (i)  Consists of 12 nozzles.
     (ii)  25 cm above oil level.
     (iii)  16.7 cm/sec (0.6 km/hr) travelling speed.

Procedure
(a)   Oil layer on water
     0.5  cm thick.
(b)   Composition of slurry
     5.1  volume parts of natural sea water,  1 volume part
     of treated sand.
(c)   Treatment of sand
     In a 200 litre  drum 75 kg sand,  150 litres sea water
     and 250, 500 or 1000 ppm of surfactant (calculated
     on  100% active material) dissolved in equal amounts
     of isopropyl alcohol or glycol, are intimately mixed.

 (d)  Impact velocity
      10  m/sec.
 (e)  Angle  of impact
      10-20°
(f)   Actual amounts jetted
      Slurry:  35 litres in 21 sec.
      Sand:   5.75 litres (15.3 kg).
      Water:  29.25  litres.
(g)   Actual amount of oil
      19.7 kg.
(h)   Sand/oil ratio
      0.77.


APPENDIX 6
Fouling of Fishing Net Twines
Materials used   :
1.  Oils
   Shell Heavy Fuel Oil "B"
   (Viscosity R.I. at 100T - 2,1000 sec).
        Topped Kuwait Crude
        (25% topped)
        (Viscosity R.I. at 100T-
        396 sec).
2. Sinking agents
   2.1   Sands
        (a) Sand No. 1

        (b) Siliconized sand
            (Sand No. 2)
   2.2
     Powders
     Nautex H
                          Buckland Sand & Silica Co.
                         Midland Silicones Ltd. Barry
                                  Wolon Co. Ltd. Esher
        Silane treated pulverized fuel
        ash (SPFA)          Midland Silicones Ltd. Barry
        Snowcal
        (Treated whiting)
                               Welwyn Hall Research
                                Association, Welwyn
3. Surface active agents
   Armac T (Amine acetate salt)
                            Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.

4. Sea water
   Artificial sea water was prepared as shown in Appendix 1.
5. Netting twines
   0.015/12     Orange polythene
                Orange polythene
                Manila twine
0.015/32
3/100
360 P
                Ulstron twine
   Tarred (90P)  Ulstron twine
Bridport Gundry Ltd.
Bridport Gundry Ltd.
Bridport Gundry Ltd.
Bridport Gundry Ltd.
Bridport Gundry Ltd.
Test Procedure
1. Fouling of fishing net twines
   216 mm x 76 mm Pyrex crystallizing dishes are filled to
a depth of about 45 mm with artificial sea water. 100 g of
oil, is poured onto the surface of the water and spread to
give a film thickness of about 3 mm. 200 g of dry sinker
(300 g in the case of slurries, i.e., 200 g sand and 100 g

-------
244
TREATING AGENTS
water containing the amine  salt) is spread as evenly as
possible  whilst the  ofl and  water are being stirred by
spatula.

   If  after 24  hours the action of the sinking agent is
complete, the surface of the water is cleaned, and the
sunken mastic is considered ready for fouling tests. If the
action of the sinker is not complete after 24 hours the dish
is  rocked until most of the oil  and sinker are sunk. The
remainder of ofl and sinking agent is cleaned off the water
surface before fouling tests are begun.

   Fouling tests are carried out  with  5 lengths of twine
which have been soaked in artificial sea water for at least 24
hours. The twines are weighed  individually, after lightly
shaking off the surface water, and fitted into a 152 mm
square metal  frame, which can accommodate five lengths of
twine, tautly strung in parallel,  at 25 mm  intervals,  from
two opposite sides of the frame.

   By means  of its handle the frame, containing the twines,
is  pressed into the oil/sinker mastic. This is repeated eleven
times, turning the frame through about 30° each time, thus
turning it  full circle. In addition, to  ensure most severe
conditions, oil/sinker mastic is  spread  over and smeared
onto the twines with a spatula. The frame is then removed
from the dish and:—
   (a) allowed to drain above the dish,
   (b) washed in clean artificial sea water by immersing
       and  rotating vigorously  back  and  forth  through
       about 90°,
   (c) allowed  to drain  until free of surface water,  after
       which, the twines are removed from the frame and
       re weighed.

   The increase in weight of the twines is calculated as g/m
and as % increase in weight.

 APPENDIX 7
 Size and Coalescence of Oil/Sinker Droplets
 Materials Used
 1. Oils
    Shell Heavy Fuel Oil "B"
    (Viscosity R.I. at 100T - 2,100 sec)
                                                    Topped Kuwait Crude Oil (25% topped)
                                                    (Viscosity R.I. at 100°F - 396 sec)
                                              2.  Sinking agents
                                                  2.1 Sand
                                                      Sand No. 1
                                              3.  Surface active agents
                                                 Armac T
                                                 Dispersant
Buckland Sand and Silica Co.
 Armour Hess Chemicals Ltd.
                                                 An experimental laboratory-prepared formulation con-
                                              sisting of 30%  of  a  water insoluble  long-chain alcohol
                                              ethoxylate dissolved in a low-aromatic kerosene.

                                              4. Sea Water
                                                 Artificial sea water was prepared with Egham tap water
                                              (Zeolite softened — about 3 ppm total hardness) by adding
                                              the salts as shown in Appendix  1.
                                               INSERT APPENDIX 7
                                               Test Procedure
                                                  152 mm x 912 mm Pyrex cylinders are rilled with 13
                                               litres of artificial sea water. 50 g of oil is poured onto the
                                               water and allowed to spread over the whole surface giving
                                               an ofl film thickness of about 3 mm. 150 g of aqueous sand
                                               slurry (100  g of sand  and 50 g of aqueous Armac T
                                               dispersion)  is then scattered carefully and as evenly  as
                                               possible, during a period of 15 minutes, with a spatula over
                                               the calm ofl surface. The dispersant, where used, is applied
                                               onto the ofl film with a syringe immediately before sinker
                                               spreading is commenced. The experiments were  carried out
                                               in a constant temperature room at 20°  ± 2°C.

                                                  Observations on the size and the extent of coalescence
                                               of the sunken oil/sand droplets are made and reported 1, 2
                                               and 168 hours after the sinker application.

-------
               BURNING AGENTS  FOR OIL  SPILL  CLEANUP
                                                Arnold Freiberger
                                          Edison Water Quality Laboratory
                                         Environmental Protection Agency
                                                       and
                                                  John M. Byers
                                     Lieutenant Commander, United States Navy
ABSTRACT
  The accidental spillage of oil into surface -waters contin-
ues  to pox  a pollution  hazard as tankers and cargoes
increase in size. Burning of oU slicks offers an attractive
means of eliminating spilled oil, however, the heavier crudes
and fuel oils require the addition of burning agents to assist
in ignition and in sustaining combustion. The advantages of
burning oil slicks are set forth, and  currently available
commercial burning agents are listed. Results of laboratory
and field tests of a variety of burning agents are given, and
several incidents where burning was used in an actual oil
spiH are reported. Current and future development in this
area is described.

INTRODUCTION
  The threat of large spillages of oil will persist for as long
as oil tankers provide a major means of transport. The total
capacity of the  world's tanker fleet doubled during the
1960's. By the middle of  the 1970's as many as 5,000 oil
tankers with  a total dead-weight capacity  of about  ISO
million tons will be plying the oceans. Modern tankers are
making increased use of new and better navigational aids.
However,  tanker size is increasing; the majority  of new
construction is currently of vessels in  excess of 100,000
DWT, and plans for supertankers of half a million DWT are
being made. Thus,  while  the potential  danger of tanker
accidents may decrease, those accidents which do occur will
present a  greater pollution hazard because of the larger
cargoes.

  Oil spilled into surface waters will, if left undisturbed, be
subject to a variety of physical and chemical actions; among
The opinions and assertions contained in this paper are solely those
of the authors, and do not necessarily represent  those of the
Environmental Protection Agency or the Navy. Mention of commer-
cial product names does not imply endorsement of these products
by the U.S. Government
the former are spreading, evaporation, sinking and resurfac-
ing, and the  action of winds and currents; and among the
latter are emulsification, dissolution, oxidation, and degrad-
ation.  Undoubtedly  these  actions  cause a  good  deal of
spilled oil to be "lost". On the other hand, some of these
same actions  ultimately result in  oil spills reaching shore-
lines and  beaches where aesthetic and ecological  damage
takes place.

   There  is a need, therefore, to remove  or reduce the
hazard  of oil spilled into the water environment. Several
methods to accomplish this, currently being investigated or
developed, include the use  of skimmers,  booms, and a
variety  of. harvesting  devices and oil-water  separators, as
well as the use of dispersants, sinking agents, collecting
agents and burning agents. This paper  deals with  burning
agents;  their  description, use, and effectiveness, and their
place in the overall oil clean-up picture.

BURNING OF OIL SLICKS
   Floating oil  slicks are; difficult to burn in spite of the
fact  that  in  many instances  normally highly combustible
materials are involved. This is especially true if ignition is
attempted some time after a spill has occurred. With the
passage  of even a short time,  the more volatile, lower flash
point fractions  tend  to be  lost by evaporation to  the
atmosphere. Also, as the slick spreads it becomes thinner,
and may begin to break up and emulsify. With the volatiles
gone, ignition becomes difficult  or impossible; and with
thin  oil slicks,  the heat loss to  the water  beneath is
sufficient  to  prevent  sustained combustion.1 Reports of
some investigators indicate that floating oils on water with
thicknesses less than 3 millimeters will not burn. It has also
been reported that thin slicks of kerosene,  gas oil,  lubri-
cating oil  and fuel oil on water  will not burn at all without
a wick.   The action of winds and currents also contribute
difficulties to burning by accelerating the loss of volatiles,
                                                      245

-------
  246   TR EATING AG ENTS
by dissipating the heat needed to sustain combustion, by
breaking up the oil slick, and by promoting emulsification
of the oil and water.1

   In spite of the difficulties, and indeed the hazards which
are  obviously involved,  burning does seem to offer an
attractive  means of eliminating large amounts of spilled oil
in the  water environment. Some of the advantages of this
method are as follows:

   1. Capacity. Burning of very large quantities of spilled
     oil is possible.
   2. Speed. Once decided upon as desirable, a burn can be
     initiated  and completed within  a relatively  short
     time.
   3. Completeness. Burning offers a  method which can
     greatly reduce (90% or more) an oil spill. No further
     collection,  separation,  containment  or  handling  is
     usually required.
   4. Economy.  The  limited  requirements in equipment
     and manpower,  and the low cost of some burning
     agents, places burning among the  more economical
     methods for oil spill cleanup.
   5. Ecology.  There is no evidence, to date,  to indicate
     that burning has a harmful effect upon life in the sea,
     even  in  the area directly beneath the burn. Air
     pollution, by smoke plumes from  burning oil  could
     be minimized by improved burning methods which
     would consume most of the polluting exhausts.
   6. Toxicity. Burning may be accomplished without the
     addition of toxic or polluting materials. Most burning
     agents are either inert or non-toxic.
BURNING AGENTS
   Generally  speaking,  the  term burning  agent  may be
defined as any material which is applied to oil to promote
its combustion either by igniting or by assisting ignition or
by sustaining combustion.'>^

   Materials which ignite include such  hydro-igniters as
sodium or magnesium which react with water to produce
hydrogen and heat with explosive violence and burning; and
such auto-igniters  as the chlorates of sodium or potassium
which  react with  the carbon and hydrogen  of a fuel to
produce carbon dioxide, water and heat with semi-explosive
violence.

   Materials which assist ignition are generally  the lighter
mineral oil fractions such as gasoline  or the lighter crude
oils  such  as Louisiana Crude which have  high  vapor
pressures and low flash points, and ignite easily. Once afire
they provide sufficient heat to volatilize and ignite a heavier
crude or a Number 6.  With continued  application, such
light oils could  also act to  sustain combustion by over-
coming heat losses to the sea and maintaining the tempera-
ture of the heavier crude above its flash point.
   Materials which sustain combustion are usually wicking
agents which,  by  virtue  of their  porosity  and/or large
surface area, draw up the  oil to provide a base from which
to burn  and to furnish improved oxygen access. Examples
of  wicking  agents  include cellulated  glass  beads  and
common straw.

   Most of the burning agents which have been tested, and
which are  available  either commercially or on an experi-
mental basis, are wholly or in part wicking agents; and in
general, the terms "burning agent" and "wicking agent" are
used interchangeably.


COMMERCIAL BURNING AGENTS
  A review of the literature, and of the technical brochures
of manufacturers, indicates  that  there are currently eight
commercially or  experimentally  available burning  agents.
These are briefly described as follows:
  1.  SeaBead Nodules. Pittsburgh Corning Corporation,
      Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania.  SeaBeads  are  cellulated
      glass  beads, approximately  1/4 inch in diameter.
      (Also  available  in  1/16 inch diameter size  and in
      colors of light or dark gray.) Applied to  an oil spill
      they become oil-covered by capillary action. Ignition
      may be accomplished by an incendiary device  such as
      a blow torch. The SeaBeads act as a wick to maintain
      combustion of the oil. After  burning, the SeaBeads
      may be collected or left to break up  from abrasion.
  2.  Cab-O-SH ST-2-O. Cabot Corporation,  Boston, Massa-
      chusetts. Cab-0-Sil ST-2-O  is  a silane treated fumed
      silica. It may be applied to an oil spill in the form of
      a water slurry. The  water sinks beneath the oil and
      the silica remains floating on top. Ignition  is best
      accomplished with the aid  of a priming fuel such as
      gasoline or lighter fluid. The Cab-O-Sil ST-2-O acts as
      an  oil  diffuser  and capillary wicking agent. After
      burning, a hard sheet-like residue remains  which can
      be mechanically recovered.  •
  3. Aerosil R-972. Degussa, Inc., New York, New York.
      Aerosil R-972  is  a  silane  treated   fumed  silica.
      Although it has not been tested as a burning agent, it
      would  probably function  much  the same  as  the
      above-mentioned Cab-O-Sil.
  4. Ekoperl. Grefco, Inc., New York, New York. Ekoperl
      is a granular form of expanded perlite (silicon and
      aluminum oxides), treated with a silicone to render it
      hydrophobic. Primarily designed as an oil sorbent, its
      use as a burning agent has  been suggested, and  for
      this purpose  it  should act as a wick to maintain
      combustion of the oil. Grefco recommends applica-
      tion in air suspension  from beneath the oil slick to
      reduce dust losses in the wind.   After burning,  the
      perlite could be removed, although residuals in  the
      sea should not pose a serious hazard.
  5.  Oilex  Fire. Keltron, Inc.,   Switzerland.  Oilex Fire
      consists of Keltron's product Oilex, a  sorbent, plus a
      hydro-igniting  chemical. Keltron  reports that this

-------
                                                                                       BURNING AGENTS    247
     product has been  used  on small spills in Swiss lakes
     and  the  Adriatic  Sea.  The product  is designed  to
     ignite upon application  and then to act as  a wicking
     agent to maintain  combustion. Care must be exer-
     cised in storage and handling.
  6. Kontax.  Eduard  Michels GmbH,  Essen.  Germany.
     Kontax is a paste containing a hydro-ignitable  chemi-
     cal.  Its effectiveness was demonstrated on  a test spill
     in the North Sea where 85 kg. of Kontax successfully
     burned  10 tons of heavy Arabian crude.5 Care must
     be exercised in storage and handling.
  7. Pyraxon. Guardian Chemical Corp.. Long Island City,
     New York. Pyraxon is a  two component  system
     consisting of a liquid primer and a powder oxidant-
     catalyst. According to the manufacturer, the  readily
     ignitable primer provides the heat necessary to begin
     the  combustion of oil  and to initiate the catalytic
     cracking action of the powder which  converts the  oil
     to more readily combustible fractions. Once  begun.
     the  process is  said to be self-sustaining until the oil is
     consumed."   While both the liquid and powder are
     claimed  to  be  stable  in  storage,  care  must  be
     exercised in storage and handling.
  8. Straw.  Untreated  straw  and  hay. and chemically
     treated (hydrophobic) straw and hay. act as wicking
     agents on  oil  slicks.  The  oil is drawn up onto the
     surface of the straw where combustion is sustained
     by  increased oxygen availability.  Straw is the most
     readily  available,  as  well  as  the cheapest, burning
     agent.3 After  burning, the carbonaceous residue may
     be removed, although  it should not  pose a  serious
     hazard if left in the sea.
CASE HISTORIES: BURNING OF OIL AT SEA
  There have been a few attempts in  recent years to clean
up actual oil spills by  burning, with varying  degrees of
success.
  1. Torrey  Canyon.   The  "Torrey   Canyon",  carrying
     119.000 tons of Kuwait crude oil. ran aground on the
     Seven  Stones  rocks. Lands End.  England  on  the
     morning of March 18. 1967.7  About 30.000 tons of
     oil  were  released  into the  sea.  followed  by an
     additional  20.000 tons  lost during the next seven
     days. All of the burning of oil following this incident
     was conducted to dispose  of  oil still  in the vessel's
     tanks. Burning of oil slicks was  not carried out. and
     the  Torrey Canyon  incident is reported here  mainly
     because  of its historical significance  in  the  overall
     cleanup picture.
     The Committee of  Scientists on the  Scientific and
     Technological Aspects of the  Torrey  Canyon Disas-
     ter, which first convened  on  March 22.  1967. may
     have considered burning on the sea. but if they did,
     the  idea was rejected. The Committee later reported
     that there was no point in trying to burn weathered
     oil on the sea after most of the volatiles has been lost
     and water emulsions had been  formed.  The need for a
     burning or wicking agent, apparently unavailable at
     that  time,  was  realized  by  the  Committee  who
     suggested  that  such wicking  agents, which  would
     sustain  combustion  of  oil slicks,  merited further
     investigation.
  2. Arrow.  The "Arrow",  carrying  16,000  tons  of
     Bunker  C  oil ran  aground on Cerberus Rock, Cheda-
                                                     Q
     bucto  Bay,  Nova  Scotia  on  February 4, 1970.
     During  the next few days, burns were conducted on
     several  small scale  slicks  using SeaBeads to sustain
     combustion.  The oil  slick from the  "Arrow"  con-
     sisted mostly of an iridescent film, but with occa-
     sional  thicker  "globs" of viscous Bunker C which
     measured  up to 15 feet in diameter.  Several of these
     Bunker  C  patches were  selected for burning,  were
     coated  with SeaBeads, and ignited  with Varsol (a
     primer) and  a  marking flare.  The  results  indicated
     that  the SeaBeads showed an ability to burn slicks of
     Bunker  C oil at near freezing temperatures with 15
     knot winds.  (Figure  1)  Combustion  was not  com-
     plete; several reignitions were  necessary to achieve
     50% reduction. As combustion was  limited  to the
Figure  1: One of several patches of Bunker C which had  been
treated with SeaBeads and ignited following the grounding of the
tanker "Arrow" in Chedabucto Bay, Nova Scotia, in February 1970.

      area of SeaBead application, there was little danger of
      uncontrolled  conflagration. It  was  also noted  that
      once ignited,  the  oil patches  tended to  spread to
      thinner slicks, thus making combustion more diffi-
      cult. Effective burning, therefore, may require some
      sort of containment.
   3.  Othello. The freighter "Othello" spilled about 25,000
      gallons of heavy fuel oil following a collision with the
      tanker "Katelysia" in Tralhavet Bay near Stockholm.
      Sweden  on March 20, 1970. The passage of ships
      through the icy bay  in the days following the  spill
      tended to break-up the slick, and it was also reported
      that  a large  amount  of spilled oil  moved  under the
      three-foot-thick ice  pack.  Early  attempts  by  the
      Swedish  Coast  Guard to bum the slick by priming

-------
248
       TREATING AGENTS
     with  kerosene failed. Eventually,  combustion  was
     achieved on some of the remaining oil pools with the
     aid of Cab-O-Sil ST-2-0, and it was indicated  that
     additional pools, as well as oil released from beneath
     the ice  by the springtime thaw, would be systemati-
     cally  burned  with  Cab-O-Sil.  The Swedish Coast
     Guard has  expressed  satisfaction with  the  perfor-
     mance  of this burning  agent  and consider it an
     effective technique for controlling oil-spill pollution.
EVALUATION OF BURNING AGENTS
EPA Laboratory Tests
   Burning experiments carried out by EPA at the Edison
Water  Quality  Laboratory   were conducted in outdoor
tanks with 24 square feet of exposed surface area. A No. 6
fuel oil, floating upon water  in the tank, would not sustain
combustion at a thickness of 1/2 to 2/3 inches.
   1.  Pyraxon  liquid  and   powder (Guardian Chemical
      Company) were  applied  to the slick  and while  the
      liquid ignited, no  combustion of  the oil could  be
      sustained.
   2.  Cab-O-Sil  ST-2-0  (Cabot  Corp.)  was  generously
      applied  to  a  similar  slick and  ignited.  Sporadic
      burning of oil ensued, but  it was evident after this
      burning that appreciable oil  remained.
   3.  SeaBeads (Pittsburgh  Corning) performed well  on
      slicks of No.  6  fuel oil. (Figure 2) Slick thickness
   varied  from  1/10 to  1/4 inches. Burning was quite
   complete  in  those areas  of the  slick which were
   completely covered with the SeaBeads. Non-treated
   slick areas remained unburned. It is estimated that
   the complete coverage needed  for efficient burning
   requires about one pound of SeaBeads per 12 to  15
   square feet of oil slick.
4. Straw. A  slick comprising 2 liters of No. 6 fuel  oil
   confined  within  a six-square-foot area  was used.
   Initially, the  oil and water were cold (water tempera-
   ture: 5°C, air temperature: 5°C) and the oil confined
   itself  to  a circle measuring  about  15  inches  in
   diameter,  with  a thickness  of  about 3/4  inches.
   Approximately 80 grams of  common,  untreated
   straw  was distributed on the slick. No priming fuel
   was used,  and the straw was ignited with a gas torch.
   Within a  minute  or  two the oil  was burning vigor-
   ously.  About 80%  of the  oil  was consumed.  It
   appeared  that the oil-soaked straw  burned first  to
   form a closely knit web of filamentous carbon wicks
   (Figure 3) which then ignited the oil  and sustained
   the oil burn. (Figure 4)
Figure 2: EPA laboratory burning test indicated that SeaBeads
performed well in reducing a spill No. 6 fuel oil; however, burning
only occurred where oil was covered with nodules.
                                                            Figure 3: Straw floating upon an oil slick shortly after ignition in an
                                                            EPA laboratory test. Straw burned initially to form a filamentous
                                                            carbon wicking agent.
5.  Ekoperl. A slick comprising 2 liters of No. 6 fuel oil
   confined  within a size-square-foot area was  used.
   Initially the  oil  and water were  cold  (water  tem-
   perature:  7°C, air  temperature:  8°C)  and the oil
   confined itself to a circle measuring about 15 inches

-------
                                                                                       BURNING AGENTS   249
Figure 4: About one minute after ignition  (Figure 3), straw
performed well as a burning agent for a No. 6 fuel oil in the EPA
laboratory test.
Figure 5: Treating a spill of No. 6 fuel oil with Ekoperl resulted in
only about one-third oil reduction in this EPA laboratory test.
     in diameter with  a thickness  of  about 3/4 inches.
     Approximately  1/4 pound of Ekoperl was evenly
     distributed on the  surface of the  slick. Ignition was
     accomplished  by   tossing on  a  rag  soaked  with
     petroleum ether, and  lighted. The  oil was slow to
     ignite, but once combustion  was started there was a
     short period of vigorous burning (Figure S) followed
     by sudden extinguishment. It was estimated that only
     about one-third of the oil was consumed.

EPA Field Tests
   Field-scale oil slick burning tests were conducted by the
Edison Water Quality  Laboratory  off  the coast of New
Jersey in the summer of 1970. Preliminary evaluations of
test data from these  experiments indicate the following:
   1. Burning of free-floating or uncontained oil slicks is
     extremely difficult unless the  thickness  of oil is 2
     millimeters or greater.
   2. Adequate  automated seeding methods  for both the
     powder and nodule types burning agents are lacking.
     Spreading of the burning agents was  accomplished by
     hand.
  3. Contained South Louisiana crude oil was successfully
     burned-80% to 90% reduction-without the use of
     burning agents. Bunker C could not be ignited under
     these same conditions.
  4. Bunker  C  was  successfully  burned-80% to  90%
     reduction  when the slick was seeded with SeaBeads
     and a priming  fuel  (Figure 6). It  was observed that
      South Louisiana  crude  oil performed better  as  a
      priming agent than did gasoline or lighter fluid.
   5.  Use of magnesium type flares  and gasoline torches to
      ignite the burning-agent-treated slick proved unsuc-
      cessful. Ignition was achieved using a blow torch; care
      being taken not to push aside  the seeded oil so as to
      expose the water surface.

U.S. Navy Field Tests
   A  sea  test for  treatment  of oil spills by controlled
burning was  conducted by the  U.S.  Navy  in the North
Atlantic Ocean during May 1970. A description of these
tests,  code named  "SPILLEX",  and an evaluation of the
test results follow.

   The USS COMPTON (DD-705) arrived  at about noon on
May  19th at  the  SPILLEX test  site about 300 miles
southeast  of Boston.  The tests commenced at about 7:00
a.m. on May 20th.

   The  first  phase  of the  mission,  the testing  of the
combustibility of untreated spilled oil was completed with
repeated unsuccessful  attempts at ignition with an Army
flame  thrower.  The  second  phase, that of testing the
wicking action  of two commercial products on spilled oil
was then  attempted.  Under sea and weather conditions
varying from unfavorable to good,  ample testing of Pitts-
burgh   Corning  "SeaBeads"   and  Cabot  Corporation
"Cab-O-Sil ST-2-O" was carried out. After various failures,
two successful burns were realized, the first being of small

-------
250   TREATING AGENTS
Figure 6: EPA field burning tests with SeaBeads pointed out the
need for automated seeding methods and for containment of the oil
slick.
 size with the second producing flames and smoke of good
 proportions.

    It was  readily apparent that the two major problems
 existing were inadequate application and lack of ignition
 technique.  In the seeding operations Pittsburgh Coming
 used an air blower unit and Cabot used a hand fed hopper
 and mixing nozzle with water as the carrying vehicle. Both
 systems failed to provide proper seeding or sufficient range.
 Winds of 15 to 20 knots and rain reduced effectiveness of
 appb'cation  in  initial  tests, however,  under  improving
 conditions, both systems  still failed to produce satisfactory
 seeding of the oil slick. Hand seeding of the oil immediately
 along side  the  ship  was finally decided on, resulting in
 adequate coverage of areas approximately 4 feet wide by 30
 feet in length. The two successful burns resulted from this
 technique.

    Ignition of the seeded oil proved to be an even greater
 obstacle.  Attempts  at  ignition by  flame  thrower  and
 magnesium flares were unsuccessful even with addition of
 diesel oil and napalm as priming agents. Numerous other
 types of igniters were applied, all unsuccessfully. Ignition
 finally resulted after using gasoline and kerosene as primers
 touched off by the flame thrower. This burn lasted approx-
 imately  10  minutes and  considerable oil was consumed
 within the treated area (Figure 7).  The wicking action of
 each product was observed to be successful in the seeded oil
 on a limited  basis. Wind  and wave dispersement of the oil
 into  separated pools appeared to prevent complete burning
 of the treated slick.
                                                            Figure 7: Large scale burning tests were conducted by the U.S. Navy
                                                            in  the North Atlantic Ocean, about 300 miles  offshore, in May
                                                            1970.  SeaBeads and Cab-O-Sil ST-2-O were  successfully used  to
                                                            reduce a quantity of spilled oil.
   After one full  day  of experimentation, it was  the
consensus  of observers that further  testing would  prove
inconclusive with present equipment and ignition methods,
and the exercise was terminated. The following findings are
reported:

   1.  Bunker C oil spilled in its natural state on cold  water
      will not support combustion without a wicking agent.
   2.  The seeding methods demonstrated, and the ignition
      methods attempted, are both inadequate for normal
      at-sea conditions, wind  and wave  action  being the
      deterring factors.
   3.  Subject to satisfactory ignition methods, both  prod-
      ucts tested will provide a wicking action and support
      combustion of  cold Bunker C oil when adequate
      coverage is obtained.
   4.  The  seeded oil,  once ignited, will  be considerably
      reduced by burning. However, wind and wave action
      caused  dispersement of the seeded oil  into smaller
      pools which separated from the burning oil and thus
      did not ignite and burn. Containment of the slick by
      booming appears necessary in order to alleviate this
      problem and provide for a continuous burn.

   The development of a combustion disposal technique for
oil continues to be considered worthwhile, particularly as it
appears to work well under cold-weather conditions and has
little or no adverse effect upon  fish or the ecology of the
ocean floor.


CURRENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS
   Burning and wicking agents have been shown to be quite
successful at reducing spilled oil in surface waters. However,
one result of both the EPA  and  the U.S. Navy field tests is
an indication that existing methods for the application of

-------
                                                                                     BURNING AGENTS   251
burning agents and the ignition of the oil are inadequate.
For example, to resort to "hand seeding"  of an oil slick
during an actual spill incident would be highly undesirable,
and  might very well  preclude  burning as  an effective
method. Tests also indicate that some sort of containment
of the  oil slick is essential for complete  burning and
efficient use of burning agents. Another need in connection
with the use of burning agents is the reduction  of air
pollution during a  burn.  The thick  black smoke  which
ordinarily  rises from burning oil is due to  inefficient and
incomplete combustion.  Some  attempts to  remedy this
have  been  reported. A "floating  incinerator" has been
tested by the British Petroleum Company and a "floating
furnace" is currently  undergoing development  by  the
Pittsburgh Corning Corporation. Devices such as these, if
proved successful, could be used to contain and enclose the
area of burn, thus providing far greater control of combus-
tion,  and hopefully a much cleaner  exhaust. Used  in
conjunction with systems of anchored or moving booms to
corral and thicken the oil slick, these furnaces may serve to
greatly broaden the  applicability and feasibility of burning,
not only at sea, but at in-shore sites as well.

REFERENCES
   1.  "Oil Spill Treating Agents", Report to the American
Petroleum Institute. Battelle Memorial Institute. May 1970
   2. Nelson, W. L., "Inflammability of Oil  Films  on the
Surface of Water", Oil and Gas J., 36 No.  52, p. 148 and
150. 1938
   3. "Combatting Pollution Created by Oil Spills", Report
to the Department of Transportation, United States Coast
Guard. Arthur D. Little, Inc. June 1969.
   4. Patterson, D.A., "Oil-Spill Cleanup: A Matter of $'s
and Methods", Chen Eng., 76 No. 3, p. 50-52. 1969
   5. "Report concerning an experiment to destroy oil
slicks with the  ignition agent 'Kontax'", Rijkswaterstaat
(State  Department  of Waterways), Netherlands.  August
1969
   6. Struzeski, E. J., Jr., and R.  T. Dewling, "Chemical
Treatment of Oil Spills", Proceedings Joint Conference on
Prevention and Control of Oil Spills. New York. December
1969
   7. 'The Torrey Canyon", Report of the Committee of
Scientists on the  Scientific and Technological Aspects of
the Torrey Canyon Disaster. HMSO, London. 1967
   8. Murphy, Thomas A.,  "An  On-Scene  Report:  The
Sinking of the Tanker 'Arrow'", Edison Water  Quality
Laboratory  Report, U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.
February 1970
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
   The authors wish to express their appreciation to Rear
Admiral Joseph C. Wylie, USN,  Commandant First Naval
District, for his interest and support in this work; and to
Commander James Ford, USN, Commanding Officer USS
COMPTON (DD-705) for his invaluable assistance "under
fire" during the SPILLEX Sea Tests. The authors also wish
to thank Mr. Richard T. Dewling, Director of Research and
Development,  Edison Water  Quality  Laboratory  under
whose direction the EPA field tests were performed; and
Mr. Michael Killeen who assisted in the performance of the
EPA laboratory tests.

-------
                    ASSESSMENT  OF  OIL  SPILL  TREATING

                                 AGENT  TEST  METHODS
                                   /. R. Blacklaw, J. A. Strand and P. C. Walkup
                                           Battelle Memorial Institute
                                         Pacific Northwest Laboratories
                                             Richland, Washington
ABSTRACT
    This presentation summarizes a study of currently used
laboratory methods for evaluating oil spill treating agents.
Work was  performed under  contract  to the American
Petroleum Institute.
    Treating agents were classified as dispersants, sinking
agents, sorbents,  combustion promoters, biodegradants,
getting agents,  and beach cleaners.  The mechanisms  and
chemical reactions controlling the field application of each
type of agent were  defined.  Parameters  critical to  the
evaluation of both the effectiveness and toxicity of each
type of agent were thereby identified. Present methods of
laboratory measurement were then compiled and reviewed
for the adequacy of parameter control as well as  the
appropriateness of the variables measured.
    It was  found that no  existing standardized tests are
capable  of reproducibly and accurately  measuring  the
effectiveness or toxicity of any oil spill treating  agent.
Some tests, notably those for dispersants, are amenable to
improvement such that reliable laboratory methods  will
result through  improved  mechanical  equipment,
temperature control, exposure conditions, agitation level,
reagent standardization, and selection of test biota.
    The study concluded with a delineation of procedures,
equipment,  and  material  specifications for  laboratory
effectiveness and toxicity measurement. These are modified
versions of existing methods and it was recommended that
they be verified by an appropriate laboratory program.

INTRODUCTION
    A variety of treating agents, equipment and methods
are available for  use as countermeasures against marine
pollution from oil spillage. The organizations or individuals
responsible  for preparing  or  implementing response
plans—sometimes  in   a  crisis  environment—must choose
among these. When such a choice is among specific treating
agents, the decision should be based on the effectiveness
and probable environmental effects of the agents for the
situation at hand. In particular, information  on dosage
rates,  application methods,  stability,  reaction times,
toxicity to humans, and toxicity to indigenous marine life
is needed in order that objective decisions can be made. The
objectives of the work reported herein were to determine
whether existing laboratory tests provide  the information
required pertinent to oil spill treating agents and to develop
more  appropriate  methods  as needed.  Both standard
methods of test,  e.g. ASTM   Standards,  and methods
employed by manufacturers, research institutions, or during
the course of oil  spill cleanup activities were included.
Standard methods  of test were  found to be of value for
some  types of agent but are not addressed to measurement
of toxicity nor effectiveness for the range of treating agents
available. This discussion is confined to these two aspects of
oil spill treating agent application.
    Information on generic types, methods of application,
and physical/chemical characteristics of treating agents was
compiled from  a literature  review and  questionnaire
submitted  to  manufacturers, distributors,  and users  of
treating agents(l ,2). This led to the classification of treating
agents as follows:
Type of Agent
Dispersant

Sinking Agent


Sorbent

Combustion
   Promoter
        Function
Causes formation of oil-in-water
suspensions
Creates high density compound or agglo-
merate by chemical  or physical  action
which sinks.
Adsorbs or absorbs oil preferentially to
form a floating mass.

Provides wick or other action for en-
hanced combustion.
                                                    253

-------
254   TREATING AGENTS
Biodegradants    Oxidizes by bacterial action.
Gelling Agent     Forms semisolid oil agglomerate.
Beach Cleaner    Releases oil from sand, rock, etc.

Effectiveness Tests
    Important parameters for laboratory effectiveness test
methods are identified in Table I. The amount and type of
agitation, temperature, water composition and quality, and
oil  type  are  parameters which are significant  for the
effectiveness  evaluation  of all type of treating agents.
Laboratory effectiveness tests should provide for control of
these parameters at values which correlate with actual field
conditions.
    Variables which characterize  "effectiveness'  were
identified  as: the dosage level required,  the amount of
residue or untreated oil at the water surface after treatment
at  optimal dosage,  and the  stability  of the  agent/oil
product. Any effectiveness test method which is developed
should be objective, i.e., it should  afford a quantitative
measure of effectiveness rather than  an assessment of these
variables based on judgment or visual observation. Equally
important are  provisions  for  duplicating the sequence,
timing,  and  techniques  generally used  during  field
application of the various agents.
                       Applicable  existing  tests  were identified  for
                   dispersants, combustion promoters, beach cleaners and
                   biological  degrading  agents.  It was  recommended  that
                   effectiveness tests be based on these procedures, as follows,
                   but modified for improved control of parameters:
                                                 Most Applicable Test
                                         Solvent-Emulsifier, Oil Slick
                                         (MIL-S-22864A)
                                         Burning Test-Joint Fire Research
                                         Station (Great Britain)

                                         ASTM Designation: D2329-65T
                                         Biological Osygen Demand of
                                         Industrial Water and Industrial
                                         Waste Water
                                         A Beach Cleaning Efficiency Test
                                         for Solvent Emulsifiers and Other
                                         Detergent Materials - Institute of
                                         Petroleum (Great Britain)
                       General  test  procedures were designed for the other
                    types of treating agents.
    Agent Type
    Dispersant

    Combustion Promoter

    Biological Degrading
       Agent
     Beach Cleaner
                                                TABLE  I
        PARAMETERS OF  PROBABLE  SIGNIFICANCE TO  LABORATORY EFFECTIVENESS
                                            TEST MEHTODS
                 Level and
                  Type of
 Type of Agent  Agitation   Temperature
          Composition
              and
           Oil  Contact    Scale
                           Characteristics
                           Solid Materials
                           in Contact with
 Dispersant           XX

 Sinking Agent       X

 Sorbent              XX

 Combustion
 Promoter             XX

 Biological
 Degrading
 Agent               XX

 Gel ling Agent       XX

 Beach Cleaner       XX
XX

X

XX


XX



XX

XX

X
            Quality     Type   Time   Dimension    Oil/Agent
XX

XX

XX
XX

XX

XX
XX

XX

XX


X



XX

XX

XX
X
X

X
X

X

X
X

X

X
X

XX


X



X



XX
 XX     Parameter should be controlled at several specified values.
 X       Parameter should be controlled at one specified value.

-------
                                                                       TREATING AGENT TEST METHODS   255
    The physical and chemical reactions of each of the
various types  of agent with spilled  oil are unique. Each
agent  type  was  therefore  considered  individually  to
delineate  those  laboratory  procedures,  experimental
apparatus, and materials which best  match its use during
actual field application operations.  Results  of laboratory
tests, simply stated, should be the amount of agent required
per  unit  volume  of  oil,  the  stability  of the  oil-agent
product, and the amount of residue  or unaffected oil left
after use of an agent at optimal dosage levels.
    A  detailed discussion  of  factors  leading  to these
conclusions for the most widely  used agent, dispersants,
follows.   Principal  aspects  are:  the  identification  of
parameters which should be controlled in laboratory tests
in order to represent the expected variations in  field use,
based on information from manufacturers application data,
current spill  experience, and  published reference  works;
delineation of variables which should  be measured for
assessment of effectiveness; evaluation of existing testing
methods;  and  recommendation of  existing, modified or
wholly new testing procedures.

DISPERSANTS
    Dispersants remove floating oil from water surfaces by
the formation of dispersed oil droplets. Such agents contain
surfactants, solvents and stabilizers.  Surfactants promote
the spreading  of oil  by reducing its  surface tension  and
provide the chemical species necessary to form molecular
layers on  oil  droplets. Solvents  improve the surfactant
contact with oil .(3)
    The generation  of oil droplets requires the application
of mechanical energy. The applied shear controls the size of
droplets produced. Within  limits, the amount  of shear
required to produce given  sized  droplets  increases  with
increasing oil viscosity. In the presence of a surface active
agent, the characteristics of the dispersed droplets are then
determined by the  rates at which competing phenomena
occur—droplet  coalescence  and  the  orientation of  the
surfactant at  oil/water  interfaces  so  as  to  prevent
coalescence. If the surfactant orients quickly and is present
in sufficient quantity, coalescence of droplets will proceed
to only a  minor degree before they are stabilized by  the
natural dilution process.
    A valid laboratory dispersant test must realistically
consider  these factors  in  addition to  measuring  the
quantities  which define "effectiveness"—the amount  of
agent required relative to the amount of spilled oil (dosage
level), the completeness of oil dispersion, and the stability
of the dispersion.
Agitation and  Mixing
    The efficiency  of virtually  every dispersing  agent
benefits from  agitation and  mixing. Some  oils can be
dispersed  in water  without  the addition  of dispersants if
enough  mechanical  mixing  energy  is applied.  Most
dispersant manufacturers recommend mixing their products
with floating oil slicks by means of high pressure spraying
systems or boat propellers. Some  state  that mixing is
mandatory, particularly for dispersing heavy viscous oils(2).
    Mixing by natural phenomena occurs by the actions of
waves, winds, and currents. The forces exerted on floating
materials  by waves are theoretically normal  to the water
surface—whether  they be on  wave  crests, troughs, or
intermediate  locations-provided  the  waves  are  not
breaking.  Non-breaking  waves would  be  expected to
contribute little surface energy for mixing purposes. The
more important element, for mixing of floating materials,
would be the energy transfer from air currents (winds) to
the water surface. The mechanisms and explanation of the
transfer  of  energy  from winds  to  water  surfaces  are
complex  and poorly  understood. However,  an empirical
approach  may  be  used relating field  data  on  wave
characteristics  (height,  period, and  velocity)  to  wind
velocity and  duration. Total wave energy can be calculated
from wave characteristics. Then the rate of energy transfer
may  be  computed  as a function of wind  speed. Data
compiled  by Wiegel(4) was treated in this way.

    Mixing energy imparted  to floating  slicks by currents
would be quite limited unless surface water velocities were
great   enough to  produce  turbulence.  During  the  vast
majority of the time in offshore waters this would not be
the case.  Once  a  slick is partially dispersed beneath the
water  surface, the effects of water currents  would be to
further disperse and dilute suspended oil.

    The energy  input from spray systems may be estimated
from  typical spray  system  arrangements and  operating
conditions. Mixing  energy  levels  from  spray  vessel
propellers may  be estimated based on typical work  boat
dimensions and operating speeds.
    The data developed for  mixing energy  inputs from
winds, spray systems,  and boat propellers are summarized
in Table  II,  following.  If one takes  as an "average"
condition about a ten  knot wind  with  the application
methods  as  specified, then the total  estimated  effective
mixing energy per unit area would be  about  7.7 ft Ib/ft2.
For calm  conditions, the energy input would be about 4.1
ft Ib/ft2.  Effectiveness laboratory  testing methods should
control the mixing energy input to a similar  energy input
range  and  tests  should  be performed  at  the  two
values—representing the  normal minimum  and maximum
energy inputs.

Temperature
    Data  on the effects  of temperature variation  on oil
dispersant  efficiency  are sparse. Work  by Zitko  and
Carson(5) on the efficiency of two  dispersants on Bunker C
shows that, for one predominantly water soluble dispersant,
efficiency decreases with increasing temperature and for a
predominantly oil soluble agent efficiency  decreased with
decreasing temperature. Although  the data are difficult to
interpret  it  would appear that the  required  dosage to
disperse a fixed quantity of  Bunker C varied by up  to a
factor of  three over  the temperature range of 5 to 20°C.
Additional support  of  the  significance of  temperature
variations on dispersant agent efficiency are the statements
by some manufacturers that their dispersants have reduced
effectiveness at lower temperatures(2).

-------
  256    TREATING AGENTS
                                                  TABLE II

ESTIMATED  SURFACE ENERGY INPUT FROM VARIOUS PHENOMENA  FOR  DISPERSANTS^
Mixing  Energy by Winds

Assumptions:

  (1)  Deep water

  (2)  Energy input is charac-
       terized by average of the
       1/2 highest waves.

  (3)  At the end of one hour,
       all dispersants would be
       diffused into water and
       mixing would no  longer
       be important o
                 Mixing Energy from Spray
                	Systems	

                 Assumptions:

                  (1)  Spray system with five
                       nozzles per header.
                  (2)  Two headers

                  (3)  Flow rate of 2 gpm per
                       nozzle at 50 psi discharge
                       Pressure.

                  (4)  Speed of travel - 10
                       knots.

                  (5)  One pass covers 50 ft. of
                       width (two headers).
                              Mixing  Energy from Propeller
                             	and Wake	

                              Assumptions:

                                (1)   Application boat 25 ft.
                                     long by 10 ft. beam.

                                (2)   Two 20 ft. long spray
                                     headers.

                                (3)   Speed of 5 knots.

                                (4)   One pass covers 50 ft.
                                     width.
Wind Velocity    Mixing Energy
   (knots)          (ft Ib/ft2)
       2
       5
      10
     20
     30
     40
 0.0258
 0.426
 3.63
 30.6
100.7
264.5
Mixing Energy
  (ft Ib/ft2)

   0.212
                                                                   Mixing Energy
                                                                    (ft Ib/ft2)
3.9
      Temperature changes  could affect  the  rate  of
  interaction  between materials by altering the interfacial
  tension, adsorption rate of the surfactant and the viscosity
  of all components (agent, oil, and water). An increase in
  temperature will reduce  interfacial tension  and viscosity
  and will permit a more rapid dispersion rate.
      Other  temperature dependent effects,  theoretically
  capable  of  changing the  efficiency of dispersants include
  the possibilities that  low temperatures could cause the
  solubility of the surfactant in the petroleum diluent to
  decrease  to the point where  it precipitates. Also, high
  temperatures could cause accelerated evaporation of the
  diluent  to  the  point  where  the  surfactant precipitates.
  However, the solubilities and concentrations of surfactants
  in most commercially available dispersants would preclude
  such effects.
      In addition, the relatively  greater rate of change hi oil
  density  with respect  to  water density as temperature is
  increased may enhance  dispersed droplets movement
  upward  and concentration at or near the  surface.  Such
  "creaming" is observed in static oil-water dispersions. The
  net result would be a decreased dispersant effectiveness at
  high temperature.
      The range of temperature expected in the majority of
  spill  situations and the characteristics of most dispersant
                                     agents  suggests  that  laboratory effectiveness  tests
                                     performed at a predetermined  fixed temperature range
                                     which is representative of field application situations (say,
                                     40  to  70°F) would  adequately  treat  the temperature
                                     dependance of agent effectiveness.

                                     Water Quality Characteristics
                                         Water quality characteristics can be expected to affect
                                     the performance of oil spill treating agents both directly
                                     and indirectly. The meager information available  on the
                                     effects of water quality on the performance of dispersants
                                     shows that measurable differences in reaction time and
                                     stability of oil-agent  mixtures are attributable  to water
                                     quality changes.
                                         Oda  performed  tests using  Polycomplex  A-ll to
                                     determine the effects  of  salinity  on   emulsification
                                     efficiency. Comparison of the results showed that the best
                                     dispersion in  test samples occurred at the  higher salt
                                     concentrations/^)
                                         Sea water is a mixture in which many reactions, which
                                     are understood for fresh water, either do not occur or may
                                     be modified. As evidence of this PerkinsC?) calls attention
                                     to an apparent pH depression, which he  attributes to a
                                     micelle effect, observed when detergents were added to sea
                                     water, which did not occur in the case of fresh water.

-------
                                                                        TREATING AGENT TEST METHODS    257
    One  British  technique(S)  for  determining  the
effectiveness  of various detergents in  treating oil  spills
involved  the  measurement of interfacial tensions, since  a
reduction in  tension  is  a  requisite  to  achieving  good
dispersion characteristics. Adam(9) states that "most salts
raise the  surface tension  of water  almost linearly with
increasing   concentration,"  which  is  indicative  that
interfacial tension  of oil-agent mixtures may well be  a
function  of salinity. No references were found regarding
investigations  of this nature, although an  earlier  cited
referenced) also discusses other phenomena, such as the
reversal of oil-in-water emulsions,  that might  in  part be
attributable to changes in salt concentrations.
    The  information  available  relative to the effects of
water quality on oil-spill treating agent efficiency indicates
that some quality considerations, particularly salinity, may
be  of  concern.  Other  parameters  probably  have  a
significantly lesser effect.
    It is  concluded that  minimum  requirements  for
appropriate laboratory effectiveness tests must include both
simulated fresh and  sea waters.  Fresh  water should be
representative of the hardness of natural waters. Simulated
sea water should contain the significant ion species present
in natural sea water at appropriate  average concentrations.

Oil Type
    The  variation of  dispersant  efficiency with different
refined petroleum products and crude oils is shown by the
work of Oda  and  EngOO). Dispersants were  applied to
simulated spills of seven crude oils and three fuel oils under
otherwise identical conditions. Although no quantitative
findings  were reported, the efficiency of each  of  the  five
dispersants evaluated varied with the type of oil. Generally
the dispersants were most effective on the refined products
and least effective on high viscosity crude oils. In addition,
many manufacturers state  that their dispersant agents are
less effective  on heavy fuel oils or weathered crude oil than
on fresh crude oil or light fuel oils(2).
    Variations in the efficiency of a dispersant on different
oils are attributable to the chemical species comprising the
oil, the physical characteristics of the oil (viscosity, surface
tension,  and  density), or  the presence  of  surface  active
agents in the oils,(ll)
    It is clear that the most definitive laboratory dispersant
effectiveness  test would utilize the  material actually spilled
in the incident of concern and this material would be in the
identical condition as it exists on  the water surface. The
possibilities of evaporation, weathering, and water-in-oil
emulsification  (the infamous chocolate  mousse)  are
examples on  condition variations.  Such "tailoring" of
effectiveness   tests  is not  compatible  with  a  general
dispersant effectiveness test.  Even if this were feasible, it  is
impossible to  obtain  a representative  sample of an oil
slick-due to  the changes  occurring within  the slick with
time and the probable nonuniformity. of large slicks. The
preferred approach would  be to design the testing methods
to be compatible  with a variety  of potential oil  types.
Specified fresh and conditioned oils, which  represent the
range of physical and chemical characteristics of potential
spill  materials,  could then be  used  to  evaluate  the
effectiveness of  the  dispersant. A representative listing
would be
    • Low gravity—high viscosity refined product (such as
      Bunder C Fuel)
    • Fresh low gravity crude oil
    • Fresh high gravity crude oil
    • Weathered crude oil
    Refined light products,  such as gasoline, jet fuel, and
diesel fuels, are not of serious concern because their high
evaporation and spreading rates cause dissipation before
dispersants could be applied in most spill situations.
Scale Effects
    Dimensional  characteristics  of  oil  slicks  could
conceivably cause variance between dispersant effectiveness
in the actual spill  and laboratory situations. For example,
(a) the presence of an unlimited amount of water beneath
the slick in the field  situation promotes leaching of the
agent from a  dispersion or  allow useless diffusion of the
agent  into the  water which would  not occur in the
laboratory, (b) restraint of the oil slick in the laboratory,
due to relatively large quantities of oil in small test vessles,
could falsely  enhance the  efficiency  of  an agent  in
comparison to the field where spreading was unrestrained,
and (c) a high ratio of oil  and dispersant volumes to water
volume  in  the  laboratory might  wrongfully  favor   a
dispersant whose hydrophilic-lipophilic balance happens  to
correspond to the laboratory situation.
    These possibilities have not been investigated and the
impact  of scale  effects is not known. However, common
sense  would  suggest  that  laboratory  effectiveness  test
procedures employ large ratios of water to oil and water to
dispersant.  Furthermore, sufficient surface area  should be
provided so as to not restrain the oil slick.

Contact Time
    Many manufacturers recommend that  their  dispersant
be applied to an oil slick and agitated after a waiting period
ranging from 3 to 15 minutes(2).
    Murphy reported work in which the contact time was
varied from one to ten minutes in  tests of four nonionic
dispersants. It was found that the change in fraction of oil
dispersed over this range of contact time varied  from zero
to a factor of three 12).
    Signigicant as "contact time" may be in the laboratory,
field  environmental conditions and application methods
(pressure spray systems mounted on propeller driven boats
which are  driven  through slicks) generally cause mixing
agitation  during  or  immediately  after   dispersant
application.  Contact  times  on the  order  of minutes are
possible for only very small spills.
    In  conclusion, it is recommended that the following
parameters be  controlled during laboratory effectiveness
testing:
      Agitation and Mixing - Based on energy input due to
      natural mechanisms  and application methods. Range
      from 4 to 8 ft Ib/ft2.

-------
258    TREATING AGENTS
      Temperature  - Based on expected  sea  temperature
      extremes. Range 40 to 70°F.
      Water Quality - Based on expected spill sites. Range
      from fresh water to sea water.
      Spilled Material -  Based on range of potential spill
      products and materials. Range from Bunker C fuel oil
      and weathered crudes to fresh crude oil.
      Contact Time -  Should match field  condition as
      closely as possible with some mixing and agitation
      immediately after application of the dispersant.
      Scale Effects - Large ratios of water to oil and water
      to  dispersant volumes should be used.  Large surface
      area should be provided so as not K- restrain floating
      oil from spreading.
    These are listed as partial criteria by which to judge the
adequacy  of existing  effectiveness  laboratory tests. It
remains  to identify the  performance characteristics to be
meausred to define "effectiveness."
    Dosage requirements and completeness  of dispersion
can be ascertained by two basic laboratory approaches:
a)    Add  a standard amount of dispersing  agent  to  a
      standard  oil slick and determine the fraction of oil
      dispersed. Compute the  amount of agent required to
      disperse a unit quantity of oil.
b)    Add idspersing agent to a standard oil slick until the
      oil is completely dispersed. Compute the amount of
      agent required to disperse a unit quantity of oil.
    In  the  field  application situation, an  attempt is
normally made to estimate the amount of oil spilled and
the area  of the oil slick. Dispersants are then applied at a
rate  calculated to  disperse the oil within the constraints
imposed by regulatory authorities such as proximity to land
or  sensitive  resources and   allowable  dispersant
concentration levels. Neither of the two possible laboratory
methods outlined relates well to the field situation; method
(a) would measure the required dosage only where there is
always an  excess  of oil; method (b) would integrate the
dosage over the range of relative concentrations from  a
great  excess of oil  (at the beginning of application of the
agent) to the point where the  agent and oil are equilibrated
for  dispersion  formation.  Both methods would  tend to
overestimate  dispersant  efficiency  in comparison to  the
field situation.
    Other complications occur because dispersing capacity
is probably not  a linear  function  of dispersant  dosage
(volume  of dispersant/volume of oil). Data developed by
Zitko and  Carson(5)  indicate approximately a first order
exponential relationship between emulsifying effect  and
dispersant dosage  level  for experiments involving Corexit
7664 and XZIT dispersing Bunker C oil in salt water.
    It is  concluded that  no one  method of measuring
required  odsage rate in the laboratory is likely to correlate
well  with  field application results.  The most reasonable
alternative  is to add  the dispersing agent to the  floating
slick  in "batch"  doses  at several  levels of concentration.
One  test  would  be at  the manufacturer's  recommended
dosage rate (ranges from 1:10 to  1:1 agent volume to oil
volume),  a  second  test  at approximately  half  the
recommended ratio, and a third at a fixed dosage level (say,
5 parts oil/1 part dispersant). The average of the results, in
percent  of oil   dispersed, would  be  representative  of
performance,

    Stability  meausrement will  determine  whether
coalescence or breakdown of an oil-in-water dispersion will
occur under the conditions of the  field application. Such
dispersion must remain stable until dilution or separation of
oil  droplets  effectively  prevents  coalescence.  Natural
diffusion  effects of the droplets and perturbations such as
currents and tides would accelerate the dilution process.
    The  amount  of  dilution,  or separation of droplets,
necessary for  stability depends primarily on the nature of
the surfactant—dimensional structure (ability of dispersed
droplets  to "fend off* collisions), ionic characteristics of
hydrophilic portion of surfactant  (ability  to  form inoic
charges for electrical  repulsion between droplets), and the
ability of  the surfactant  to form densely packed surface
films of  relatively high strength. The  size of the droplets
and distribution of droplet sizes are also critical to stability
and  the natural  tendency for hydrostatic rise of the oil to
the surface (creaming).
    The   previously  cited  work  by  Zitko and Carson
provides  some insight as to the kinetics of coagulation of
emulsions of Bunker C  dispersed by use of two dispersants.
Their work shows that coagulation is most rapid during the
first hour after stopping agitation.
    It  is  concluded  that  the dearth  of information
regarding  oil droplet diffusion  in spill situations does not
permit  a  meaningful conclusion  regarding  minimum
acceptable  dispersion  coalescing times. However, if  the
dispersion  generated in  the laboratory is stable for  a few
hours,  the subject agent  would be  expected to perform
adequately in  the field.  Such a procedure involving periodic
analysis of samples from a static  dispersion  or from  a
dispersion agitated  at  levels consistent  with  natural
conditions  should be  incorporated in  effectiveness test
procedures.
    The  test  which best  meets the previously developed
criteria   is  entitled   "Solvent-Emulsifier,  Oil  Slick,
MH-S-22864A,  24  February,  1969."  Refinement and
modification of the specified equipment and procedures are
expected te result in a reliable and reproducible dispersant
effectiveness  test  method.  Additional  features  should
include:
   • Provisions  for more appropriate  forms and levels of
     agitation. The reference test provides  approximately
     600 ft Ib/ft2 of surface energy input, two orders of
     magnitude greater than levels of mixing expected in
     field applications.
   • Equipment for performance of tests over a range of
     temperatures.
   • Detailed specification  of petroleum  products and
     water quality characteristics.
Toxicity Tests
    Review of recent literature  on the TORREY CANYON
incident(13) and othersO^) reveals information  on toxic

-------
                                                                        TREATING AGENT TEST METHODS     259
effects of oil spillage and oil spill treating agents, separately
and combined. From this information and from knowledge
particular to spill materials, agent properties, water quality
and other pertinent properties, the important ecological
manifestations of an  oil spill are determined contingent
upon  the  particular  biological,  meteorological  and
hydrographic environment considered.
    The  major toxicity  test types which  are necessary to
evaluate ecological impact are thus determined. Laboratory
experiments  verify  that toxicity  is largely  restricted to
volatile  fractions;  however, there  is  evidence  of  the
long-term effect   on  certain  organisms  tested  which
manifested  itself 12  days  after  exposure  to sublethal
concentrations. 03) it is, therefore, important to include a
sublethal  or long-term  test  to  determine the effects of
persistent fractions of chemical  agents in combination with
"standard" oil spill materials. Also indicated was a need to
evaluate  the sensitivity  of  embryonic or larval stages of
invertebrates and fish, as destruction of such populations
are likely to have  severe  long-term effects  in terms of
depletion of commercial and recreational fisheries.
    Although it  is stated that use of dispersants is desired
to  aid in  the  decomposition of oil on beaches03) little
definitive  information  is  available  comparing  rates of
degradation either  in the presence or absence of treating
agents. It is quite possible that persistent  fractions of
dispersants can retard biological decomposition. Sinking of
oil deeply into the  sediments, where oxygen necessary for
aerobic processes of degradation is rapidly depleted and not
readily renewed, and where  the toxic fractions of dispersant
mixtures  are  retained in  the  absence  of  evaporative
processes  may  account for the persistence of  oil and
 dispersant mixtures observ ed on numerous beaches months
 after  the  TORREY  CANYON  disasterX13)  These
 observations justify the requirement of  a biodegradation
 toxicity  test, because  of  apparent toxic  effects  upon
 free^loating  and  interstitial degradation organisms and
 because  of  an increased  time  span associated  with  the
 persistent toxic  fractions  in the presence of suppressed
 microbial populations.
     The  process of intermittent exposures implied by the
 field  studies  of  oil  and  beach or  bottom  deposit
 interaction^13)  (mechanical wave and  wind action  in
 scouring such deposits and oil/treating  agent stability), are
 important  because  of the chronic  exposures to local
 organisms. Such exposures may have  drastic effects upon
 resettlement and recolonization of the benthic environment
 and  must therefore  be considered a necessary  toxicity
 determination.
     ObservationsO3)  of shoreline and offshore
 environments indicate a broad range in organisms affected
 by surface oil and treating agents  applied to such  slicks.
 Therefore, protection of aquatic life must reflect the effects
 of the most sensitive species present. Due  to the variation in
 possible  spill environments,  a diverse set of test organisms
 representing different  trophic  levels and  for different
 regional specie diversity must  be used to produce credible
 and quantitatively significant results.
      These and other aspects justify the following test types
 as being necessary and sufficient to evaluate biological
effects: acute toxicity, sublethal toxicity, field evaluations,
toxicity to humans, biodegradation and tainting.
    Known variables  affecting  toxicity test results were
identified; varialbes particular to oils characteristics, agent
mechanisms and properties and water quality variable were
also examined. These  were then scrutinized to determine
the sensitivity of the variables.
    Significant parameters  to toxicity tests were  chosen
and are  included  in  Table III. Oil  type (stability  and
volatility),  ionic   state  and  oil/agent properties),
temperature, dissolved oxygen  in the test  medium,  pH,
alkalinity and  hardness  of  the  test  waters,  salinity,
synergists and  test organisms were chosen. Sensitivity of
each test type with these parameters isimplied in Table III
by way of the degree  of control required for the particular
test.
    Bioassays  are  generally  alboratory attempts to
duplicate typical and  actual field conditions such that the
results obtained are indicative of a realisitc and meaningful
assessment of potential detriment to the environment. For
the most part, all that is required for bioassay is a water of
satisfactory quality for existence of test organisms, a source
of waste or chemical toxicant, and a supply of healthy test
organisms.05)     .
    Current bioassay procedures either fail to recognize the
effects  of  chemical  composition  of  the toxicant,
temperature, pH, oxygen, the presence of other pollutants,
and the relative sensitivity of organisms selected for test, or
if recognized,  provide  only  a  means  of  obtaining
comparative data using the same source of water or diluent
and neglect reporting the assessment of such  factors! 15)
Failure to report these variables results in much conflicting
data which are not easily reconciled.
     Because of  special  problems arising in testing of oil,
chemical agents, and  oil-agent mixtures, special effort was
made   to  elucidate   the  possible  effects upon  toxicity
measurement of failure to control such intrinsic factors.(0
     Evaluation  of current methods  of bioassay conclusions
 resulted in the following conclusions:
(1)   Acute Toxicity  Measurement The widely used static
       bioasay, from which most available toxicity data are
       derived, is a measure of relative toxicity and should
       not be used to determine absolute values.
(2)   Sublethal Toxicity Measurement Although the trend
       in  recent  years in  pollution  research is aimed  at
       sublethal effects rather than purely lethal conditions,
       none of the standard bioasay methods  provide this
       investigative capability. Generally, the detection of
       such effects requires testing over a long time span;
       weeks, months, or years. Tests which encompass such
       time   frames  are impractical  for  routine
       testing-"short cut" methods must be developed.
 (3)   Field Tests  No rapid, meaningful field  test exists.
       Existing tests give only an approximate toxicity. The
       major  difficulty is in defining the concentration of
       pollutant in the test water.
 (4)   Toxicity to Humans Toxicity from inhalation should
       be tested in addition to existing tests based on oral
       ingestion and eye irritation.

-------
  260    TREATING AGENTS
                                              TABLE III
       PARAMETERS  OF PROBABLE SIGNIFICANCE TO  TOXICITY TESTING METHODS
                         Agent
                        Properties
                           and                                Alkalinity
  Type of      Oil   Applications                Dissolved    and                               Test
Toxicity Test Type     Method    Temperature   Oxygen   Hardness  Salinity  Synergists Organism
Acute
Toxicity

Sublethal
Toxicity

Field Tests
xx


XX

XX
Toxicity to
Humans         XX

Biodegrad-
ability          XX
XX


XX

XX
Tainting
XX
XX

XX
XX


XX

NC


X


XX

X
XX

NC


NA


XX

X
X

NC


X


XX

X
XX


XX

XX
XX

XX
X

NC
X

X
XX


XX

XX


X


X

XX
XX    Parameter should be controlled at several specified values.
  X    Parameter should be controlled at one specified value.
NA   Not applicable.
NC   No control possible.
  (5)   Biodegradability  Biodegradation of oil and treating
       agents occurs  to an appreciable degree. T here is
       evidence to suggest that in certain situations the rate
       of degradation may be depressed by environmental
       factors and the persistent toxic fractions of both oil
       and chemical agent. Currently used test procedures
       are adequate to measure biodegradation.
  (6)   Tainting Current practice of both management and
       regulatory agencies provides  that  substances that
       produce undesirable tastes  and  off-flavors  in
       commercially important species should not be present
       in concentrations above those  known to be accepted
       by bioassay  and  taste panels. Since  this procedure is
       not  highly objective, development of a  more
       appropriate technique is indicated.
      Test procedures were recommended for each toxicity
  test type but are so lengthy and diverse in nature that they
  will not be included (See Reference  1) but will only be
  listed in reference form in Appendix  A.
      Test  development of these recommended tests  is
  suggested in order to ascertain their relevance to the oil spill
  and treating agent biological  effect. Particular deficiencies
  which are apparent and deverse experimental evaluation are
  summarized:
                                          •  Specification of test oils and water quality criteria is
                                             needed.
                                          •  Evaluations by region, of "valued" biota potentially
                                             vulnerable. (Sensitivity  checks and  choise of test
                                             psecies) is required.
                                          •  Laboratory  evaluation  of  the recommended
                                             sensitivity of controlled variables  and subsequent
                                             selection  of detailed test procedures. Of particular
                                             emphasis should be  development of sublethal test
                                             procedures on marine algae and plankton and upon
                                             embryonic and larval stages of fish and shellfish.

                                        REFERENCES
                                           1. P.C. Walkup, J.R. Blacklaw, J.A. Strand and
                                        B.C.  Martin.  "Oil Spill  Treating agents, Test
                                        Procedures:  Status  and  Recommendations,"  by
                                        Battelle-Northwest for American Petroleum Institute
                                        Committee for Oil and Water Conservation Research
                                        Report. May 1,1970.
                                           2. P.C. Walkup, J.R. Blacklaw and C.H. Henager.
                                        "Oil  Spill  Treating  Agents, A Compendium,"  by
                                        Battelle  - Northwest for  Aermican Petroleum
                                        Institute Committee for Oil and Water Conservation
                                        Research Report. May 1,1970.

-------
                                                                      TREATING AGENT TEST METHODS 261
    3. "A Status Report on the Use of Chemicals and
Other Materials  to  Treat Oil Spilled  on Water,"
Northeast Region Edison, New Jersey, Federal Water
Qaulity Administration. 1969.
    4. R.L. Wiegel.  "Oceanographical Engineering,"
Prentice-Hall, Inc.,  Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
1964.
    5. V. Zitko and  W.G. Carson.  "Bunker C  Oil
Dispersibility in  Water  by  Corexit  and Xzit  at
Different Temperatures," Manuscript Report, Series
No.  1043,  Fisheries  Research Board  of Canada,
Biological Station, St.  Andrews, N. B. October 1969.
    6. A. Oda. "Evaluation of Polycomplex A-ll as
an Oil Dispersant," Research Paper No. 2020, Ontario
(Canada) Water Resources Commission. June 1968.
    7. E.J. Perkins. "Some Properties of Detergents
in the Marine Environment," (in  press),  Chemistry
and Industry (UK). 1969.
    8.  C.E.  Carpenter,  et al.  "Laboratory
Examination of Materials for Treating the Torrey
Canyon Oil Spill," Admiralty Oil Laboratory Report
No. 5 I.January 1969.

    9. N.K. Adam.  "The Physics and Chemistry of
Surfaces,"  3rd Edition, Oxford  University Press.
1941.

    10.  A. Oda  and P.  Eng.  "A  Report on  the
Laboratory  Evaluation of Five Chimical Additives
Used  for the  Removal  of Oil  Slicks on water,"
Ontario (Canada)  Water  Resources Commission.
August 1968.

    11. G.P. Canaveri. "General Dispersant Theory,"
API-FWPCA Joint  Conference  on  Prevention  and
Control of Oil Spills. December 15-17, 1969.

    12.  T.A.  Murphy.   "Evaluation of  the
Effectiveness  of  Oil-Dispersing  Chemicals,"
API-FWPCA Joint  Conference  on  Prevention and
Control of Oil Spills. December 15-17, 1969.
    13.  J.E. Smith (Editor. "TORREY  CANYON
Pollution   and  Marine Life,"  Rept.  Plymouth
Laboratory, Marine  Biological  Association of  the
U.K., Cambridge  at the University Press, 196  pp.
 1968.
     14. W.H. Swift, et al. "REview of Santa Barbara
 Channel Oil Pollution Control Administration  and
 U.S. Coast Guard, DAST 20.  July 1969.
     15.  D.I. Mount.  "Consideration for Acceptable
 Concentrations of Pesticides for Fish Production,"
 Symposium on  Water  Quality Criteria  to Protect
 Aquatic Life,  September 1966, American Fisheries
 Society, Spec. Pub. No. 4.
Appendix: Suggested Toxicity
Test Methods
Test No.           Reference
 1       Standard Methods for the  Examination of Water
        and Waste  Water Including Bottom Sediment and
        Sludges 1965 12th Ed. APHA, Inc., New York. pp.
        457-473.
 2       U.S. Dept. of the Interior 1969. Interim Toxicity
        Procedures.  Federal Water Pollution  Control
        Administration.
 3       J.E. Smith  (Editor,  "1968  Torrey  Canyon
        Pollution  and Marine  Life." A report  by the
        Plymouth  Laboratory of  the Marine  Biological
        Association of the United Kingdom, Cambridge at
        the University Press.
 4       Ibid
 5       A.D.  Boney.  1968 Experiments  with Some
        Detergents and Certain Intertidal Algae.  In: The
        Biological  Effects  of Oil  Pollution on  Littoral
        Communities 1968 Symposium Proc. Field Studies
        Council, London, United Kingdom.
 6       J.M. Baker. 1969 The effects of Oil Polution on
        Salt-Marsh Communities. In: First Annual Rept.
        Field Studies Council, Oil Pollution Research Unit,
        Orielton Field Centre.
 7       Ibid.
 8       H.B. Tracy,  R.A.  Lee, C.E.  Woelke  and G.
        Sanborn.  1969.  A Report  on  the   Relative
        Toxicities  and Dispersing  Evaluations of Eleven
        Oil-Dispersing Products.  State  of Washington
        Water Pollution Control  Commission,  State  of
        Washington Department of Fisheries.
 9       Personal  Communication,   Enjay  Chemical
        Company, New York
10       Ibid
11       Goldacre, R.J. 1968 Effect on Detergents and Oils
        on the  Cell Membrane. In: The Biological Effects
        of Oil Pollution on  Littoral Communities. 1968
        Symposium Proc., Field Studies Council, London,
        United Kingdom.
12       Manual on Industrial Water  and Industrial Waste
        Water 1965 2nd Edition ASTM Special Tech. Pub.
         148-H Philadelphia, 809-817.
13       W.W. Umbreit,  R.H. Burris, and  J.F.  Stauffer
        Manometric  Techniques. Burgess Publishing Co.
         1959.
14       Surber, E.W., English, J.N., and G.N. McDermott.
        Tainting of  Fish  by Outboard Motor  Exhaust
        Wastes  as  Related to Gas and Oil Coksumption.
         1965 In:  Biological Problems in Water Pollution.
         1962  Seminar,  Trans.   P.H.S.  Publication
        999-WP-25 (Robert A. Taft  Sanitary Engineering
        Center, Cincinnati, Ohio).

-------
                     OIL  SPILL  DISPERSANTS - CURRENT

                       STATUS  AND  FUTURE  OUTLOOK
                                              Gerard P. Canevari
                                     Esso Research & Engineering Company
ABSTRACT
   {The use of chemical dispersants for the handling of oil
spills has had a brief but highly turbulent history. Despite
extensive laboratory data and field application experience,
their role in oil spitt cleanup is still controversial "3
    This paper reviews some  of this  past history  as
background in order to derive the pros and cons regarding
their use. Opinions vary from an  extreme of no  use
whatsoever to an acceptance of this as the  only practical
technique to combat an oil spill under rough sea conditions.
    Improvements in the formulation of dispersants during
the past several years are  reviewed. These  innovations
involve modifications to improve effectiveness, application
techniques and toxicological properties. A brief outline of
the mechanism of dispersing is presented to permit a better
understanding of these formulation modifications and the
manner in which  said  changes influence  dispersant
properties.
    The future outlook for  dispersants, based on current
and anticipated research in this field, is also discussed. This
research involves biological as well as operational aspects of
dispersants.

INTRODUCTION
    It  is not possible, in a discussion of this subject, to
separate the surface chemistry aspects, i.e., mechanism of
dispersing, relative effectiveness of various formulations,
application techniques, from  the  environmental aspects,
i.e., ecological effects of dispersing oil. Indeed, most recent
decisions regarding the advisability of using dispersants have
been  based  on  ecological  rather  than
operational/effectiveness considerations. Further, these are
state regulations that now base the amount of chemical
dispersant that can be applied on the dispersant's toxicity.
    Therefore, both the biological and operational aspects
of the extensive laboratory effort and field applications
during  the past 2-3 years are reviewed in the following
development of the subject.
   •The perspective of chemical dispersants in the general
    subject of oil spills.
   •The advantages and disadvantages of their use.
   •The relationship between dispersant effectiveness and
    toxicity.

Why Even Consider The Use of Chemical
  Dispersants?
    In  view of  the  current restrictions and  concerns
regarding the use  of chemical dispersants  (and to put the
subject  in the correct perspective  at the  outset), it is  in
order to consider the total subject of Oil Spill Handling and
Control. In  this regard, prevention of spills is always the
first consideration. The major effort in the industrial and
governmental communities has been directed  toward this
end.
    After  a spill  has occurred, containment and physical
removal is the recommended procedure. It  is, of course, the
most complete solution to the problem. If spill booms, oil
sorbing agents and associated recovery hardware were  an
effective and  viable solution under  all  field conditions
encountered, there  would be no justification  for
considering the use of a dispersing agent that permits the oil
to remain  in the environment. Unfortunately, however, the
present state of  the art restricts  the effective range  of
application  of containment  booms  to  rather  quiescent
conditions, i.e., seas not exceeding approximately two feet
or currents less than about two knots. A concise summary
by DewlingO) made in September 1970, indicated there are
at least 37 different known designs of containment booms
ranging from $5 to $45 per foot. In addition, the first few
hours after a typical spill are critical and the deployment of
booms is time consuming. It must be emphasized, however,
that there is extensive research underway to extend the
capability of these devices.
                                                     263

-------
 264   TREATING AGENTS
    Clearly  then, situations can and do arise  wherein the
spill cannot be recovered  because  of  the  above-cited
limitations. There are two courses of action now available;
in one case, the oil may be permitted to remain as an intact,
cohesive  slick on the surface of the water and possibly
reach and contaminate the shore. For the alternate case, the
oil  spill  may be treated  — with such treatment directed
toward removing the oil  from the water surface by the
formation of an oil-in-water dispersion. It can be noted that
in either  case the oil contaminant is not removed from the
marine environment. Thus, the perspective  for such treating
techniques is that of a last resort approach, i.e., attempting
to  minimize the  detrimental  effects of an undesirable
situation.

An Untreated Oil Spill Can Cause Ecological
   As Well  As Monetary Damage

  On order to evaluate under what conditions, if any, it
may be advantageous to disperse an unrecoverable spill, the
resulting  damage that might otherwise occur should first be
considered. From the hard, intensive look directed at this
subject during  the  past five years, these  debits might be
summarized  as follows:  ^^<^-

1. Shore contamination by beached oil represents biologi-
   cal as well as property damage. The damage to the inter-
   tidal region  resulting from an untreated, intact, cohesive
   layer  of oil  is visually apparent and particularly distres-
   sing.  It  encompasses  both biological and  property
   damage. The very large extent of the property damage is
   evident from the amount of the lawsuits following an oil
   spill  undertaken by tourist  interests, property owners,
   etc. In addition,  the cleanup costs for a typical, large
   spill in a valued resort area can be several million dollars.
   This is also the most publicized aspect  as can be readily
   appreciated by extensive magazine articles as typified by
   Life  Magazine 2,3 . These  publications covered  such
   spills as Santa Barbara, Tampa Bay, San Francisco Bay,
   Gulf of Mexico  in a popular style complete  with the
   appropriate  photographs  of oil stained  beaches and
   shore  property.  However, even in this non-technical
   treatment of the  subject, biological damage due to a
   physical smothering effect on some intertidal organisms,
   such as mussels,  barnacles,  crabs, etc., can be readily
   seen.
   The effects of untreated oil coming  ashore was well
   documented in a scientific manner by  Blumer  et at.4
   In September, 1969, a spill  of highly aromatic fuel oil
   from  the  barge  Florida  in  Buzzards  Bay was
   incorporated into  the  bottom sediment to at least 10
   meters of water  depth.  This illustrates very  well the
   wetting effect of untreated spilled oil and its ability to
   cling  to  shore  surfaces. In this instance,  the oil was
   physically dispersed by the  heavy  seas but retained its
   adhesive  characteristics.  It  is postulated   that the oil
   droplets  came into contact with and  wetted  the sand
   particles  that  were  temporarily  suspended  in  the
   turbulent water column. Additional spill incidents that
   have  cited  instances  of oil  incorporated  into  the
   sediment  have been  reported  by Murphy 5  . in  the
   above instances, there has been a significant kill of all
   marine  life in the area, particularly  where  a highly
   aromatic product,  such  as some  distillate  fuels
   containing cracked components, was the contaminant, as
  .distinguished from whole crude oil.
   Finally, in instances where there has been a sub-lethal
   exposure to the oil spill, the physical coating of marine
   life such as lobsters with small amounts of oil, though
   conceivably harmless, causes tainting  and commercial
   loss.
2. Marine fowl,  especially  diving birds, are particularly
   vulnerable to an oil spill. Nelson-Smith 6  has analyzed
   the cause as  mechanical damage; the oil penetrates the
   plumage that normally provides water-proofing and heat
   insulation. As an example, an oil-contaminated bird at
   an ambient temperature of +59°F is stressed to the same
   degree as a healthy bird at -4°F. McCaull 7 has cited
   some statistics, e.g., more than  25,000 birds, mostly
   guillemonts and razorbills, were killed after the Torrey
   Canyon spill.
3. Persistent tarry agglomerates are formed as the spilled
   oil weathers at sea. There is mounting concern regarding
   the presence of tar-like globules at sea. This persistent
   material is believed to represent a 10-15% residue of a
   larger volume of  cohesive crude oil.  During the voyage
   of  Thor  Heyerdahl's papyruts  boat, RA,  Bakerv*)
   reported extensive sighting of masses of the tarry lumps
   in the open sea. Other incidents have been reported by
   the International Oceanographic Foundation(9). A more
   quantitative and detailed assessment of the situation was
   documented  by Horn et alOO)  after a cruise of the
   research craft R.V. Atlantis. These  tarry agglomerates
   were present in 75% of over 700 hauls with a surface
   skimming (neuston) net in the Mediterranean Sea and
   eastern North Atlantic. The amount of tar in some areas
   was  estimated at 0.5 milliliter in volume per square
   meter of sea surface. ~\

The Mechanism of Chemical Dispersion As It
   Relates to The Treatment of Spilled Oil
         mechanism of chemical dispersion has previously
been  covered  in  some detail by  CanevariOM^) and
Poliakoff03), among others. However, in order to consider
the pros and cons for the  use of chemical dispersants, as
well as  to review recent modifications in this area, a brief
outline of the mechanism will be useful.
   LAS  depicted in Figure  la, oil spilled on the surface of
the water has a driving force  to film out, expressed as a
spreading pressure,  dynes/cm.  A relatively  pure, nonpolar
white oil exhibits a high interfacial tension with the water
phase and normally does not spread very readily; crude oils
generally  establish  lower  interfacial tension and  spread
more readily.  When a surface-active agent (surfactant) is
applied  to this system, as in  Figure  Ib, it lowers  the
interfacial tension because  of  its amphiphatic nature, i.e.,
partly oil  soluble  (lipophilic)  and  partly water soluble
(hydrophflic).  By  reducing  interfacial tension  in this

-------
                                                                                    OIL SPILL DISPERSANTS  265
manner,  the  generation of interfacial  area  upon  the
application of mixing energy is enhanced as depicted in
Figure Ic, since:

                 WK = To/w Ao/w
wherein:

          W]^     is mixing energy, ergs

          AO/W   is interfacial area, cm^
          70/w    is interfacial tension, dynes/cm

    A more subtle requirement of the surface-active agent
is the  prevention of coalescence of the  droplets once they
are formed. This is schematically shown  in Figure Id. In
essence,  the  surfactant  acts to fend and physically parry
droplet  collisions.  This same property also  reduces the
tendency of  droplets to  stick to  and  thereby wet an
immersed solid surface.
    The vital  component  of any  oil  spill  dispersant  is
therefore the  surface-active agent.  A  solvent  is  usually
added as a diluent or vehicle  for  the surfactant. It  also
reduces  viscosity  and aids in  distributing  the  surfactant
more uniformly to the oil layer J
 a) Oil Spill Spreads
                                    Water
 b) Chemical Dispersant Applied
                                        Surface Active Agent
 c) Mixing Readily Forms Droplets
      Fine0il
      Droplets
 d) Droplet Coalescence Prevented By Dispersant
                                           Droplets
       ^^  -_ - _—= VT -__- *^>  — &^^ Stabilized By
                                       ^Surface Active
                                    ——— Agent
         Figure 1 -  Mechanism of Chemical Dispersion
What Are The Incentives For Chemically
   Dispersing Oil?
   _ From the  foregoing brief discussion of the dispersing
mechanism, it  can be appreciated that the dispersant acts
solely as an agent to  enhance the formation of oil droplets.
It  does  not  "weight" the droplets in order to sink them. It
does not solubilize the oil  into the water column. It simply
promotes an oil-in-water dispersion. Therefore, in this last
resort situation, i.e.,  the oil  spill cannot be  removed from
the sea, the following benefits for chemically dispersing and
removing the  oil from the surface of the water have been
established.
1. Tlie  rate of biodegradation of the oil is increased. This is
   accomplished by  the orders of  magnitude increase  in
   interfacial   area  by  dispersion.  The  small  dispersed
   droplets are known to  be more  conducive to  bacterial
   action. Further, the dispersion/dilution of the spilled oil
   into the water column makes it  available to  a much
   larger population  of microbial orgaru'sms. ZoBellO^), jn
   a  review  and  treatment  of this  subject,  cites
   biodegradation  rates that are one  or  two orders  of
   magnitude  higher for  emulsified oil  compared  to  a
   surface film. Basically, the  hydrocarbons  will not be
   attacked at  all by the microorganisms unless  there is
   contact  of  the hydrocarbon molecules with the water
   phase. Since most hydrocarbons are only slightly soluble
   in  water,   the  utilization  of  the  microorganism  is
   dependent upon such means as dispersion.
2. Damage  to  marine fowl is avoided since oil is removed
   from the water surface. It is apparent that bird damage
   is eliminated by the  formation of  fine oil droplets that
   are dispersed in the  upper  several feet of water by the
   mixing process.
3. The fire hazard  from the  spilled oil  is  reduced by
   dispersion of the oil several feet into the water column.
   The  removal  of  this  combustible material  from  the
   water's surface  and from contact  with the atmosphere
   prevents possible  combustion of the spilled oil. This is
   perhaps the most accepted benefit accruing from the use
   of dispersants. It  has provided the motivation for many
   past instances of dispersant applications.
4. Tlie spilled oil is prevented from wetting solid surfaces
   such as beach  sand, shore property, etc.  The "fending"
   action of a properly selected surfactant in preventing the
   droplets from sticking has been cited previously.  It  is
   important,  in  this  regard,  to  emphasize  "properly
   selected" surfactants since this  property is dependent
   upon  the  generic type of  surfactant.  Therefore, this
   aspect of the  dispersant's behavior is not unanimously
   accepted.  For  example,   the  first  Report  of  the
   President's Panel on Oil SpillsO5) states:

   "The use of emulsifiers and detergents can be justified
   only if  they  are  employed well  out from the littoral
   zone and  if local currents send emulsifier-oil  mixture
   further out to the open  sea. The  use of detergents on
   beaches, littoral zones, and harbors  is more dangerous
   because  in  making oil  miscible with water, the oil will

-------
 266   TREATING AGENTS
   spread into  the  sand and  penetrate  crevices and the
   suspended  emulsion  will coat  the  body and  gills of
   marine animals  —  surfaces  which untreated  oil would
   not "wet."
    In  this  regard,  however,  the following  laboratory
experiment to evaluate this aspect will be of interest.
a.  265 cc sea  water, 95 cc beach sand, and 20 cc of Kuwait
   Crude  were  placed in a graduate.  This represents a
   vertical cross section of marine environment after a spill.
b.  The  mixture  was  agitated   to  simulate  turbulent
   intertidal conditions.
c.  The  sample was  settled to  separate  the  oil-water-sand
   phases.
d. After settling, the mixture was purged with clean sea
   water  to  simulate the return  to a  non-contaminated
   condition.
    The above experiment  was  then  repeated with the
addition of 4 cc of a chemical dispersant to the 20 cc of
Kuwait  Crude  in  step  a. The  comparative  results are
illustrated in  Figure  2 showing the graduates after settling
(before purging). The contamination/wetting of the sand by
the  untreated oil  is readily  apparent.  The sand phase
appears slightly discolored in the dispersant-oil system due
to the presence of fine oil droplets trapped in the interstices
of the sand bed. The non-wetting character  of this treated
oil  is  even  more evident in Figure  3  which depicts the
samples  after  purging with clean sea  water.  An analysis of
the  oil  content  of  the  sand  bed indicated that, in the
experiment with the untreated  oil,  11.2 cc oil (of the initial
20.0 cc) had plated out on the sand.
                   Samples Shown After Settling
                                             Fine Oil Droplets
                                             Trapped In Sand
                 Cru> Oil
                   +
                 Sea Water
                   +
                   Sand
Crude Oil & Chemical
   Dispersant
      +
    Sea Water

     Sand
Figure 2  - Comparison of Wetting Effect of Crude Oil with and
without Chemical Dispersant

5. Tire  formation of tar-like residue from  an oil spill is
   prevented.   These floating  agglomerates, as discussed
   previously, range up to 10 cm in diameter. Although the
                                    origin of these floating tar balls has been a matter of
                                    extensive speculation recently, their formation can be
                                    postulated as starting from a larger intact mass of spilled
                                    oil and weathering to a residue of only 10 to  15 percent
                                    of the  original volume.  It  is  reasonable  to assume,
                                    however, that if the oil had been chemically dispersed,
                                    in a stable  manner, into droplets  less than  1 mm in
                                    diameter,  the formation  of these  large agglomerated
                                    residues would be prevented.
                                    As an oil  mass weathers and becomes more viscous, its
                                    tendency   to  remain  intact,  rather  than  become
                                    segmented by the action of the sea, increases. Probably
                                    the formation of highly  viscous, semi-solid water-in-oil
                                    emulsions - now familiarly termed "chocolate mousse"
                                     - also  aids in keeping the  oil  as an intact mass and
                                    ultimately forming said  agglomerates. Here  again, the
                                    use of suitable surfactants in treating (dispersing) an oil
                                    spill  has been  shown  by Hellmann  etal.,16  Federal
                                    Institute for Hydrological Research of West Germany, to
                                    prevent  the formation of these undesirable, gelatinous
                                    water-in-oil   emulsions.  Dr.  Hellmann's  work  is
                                    noteworthy  in that he applied basic principles of surface
                                    behavior to  the overall problem of oil spill control and
                                    to the evaluation of various surfactants for this purpose.
                                                      Samples-Shown After Purging
                                                              Oil Contamination
                                                              Persists After
                                                              Purging
                                                                             	Note Clean Sand
                                                                               Crude Oil
                                                                                          Crude Oil 8. Chemical
                                                                                            Dispersant
Figure 3  - Comparison of Wetting Effect of Crude Oil with and
without Chemical Dispersant

The Negative Aspects of Chemical Dispersants
   Based On A Review Of Their History Of Use

    Considering  the aforementioned  specific beneficial
aspects of removing  the oil  from the water's surface by the
aid of chemical dispersants, one must now ask — what are
the negative aspects and the ecological  price for this last
resort solution? There are two  major concerns — the first
involving the toxicity of the chemical itself and the second
involving the toxic effects of the dispersed oil. In addition,
there is some sentiment that the approved use of chemical
dispersants  could  result  in their  over-use and  in laxity
toward    physical  removal  of  oil  and towards  the

-------
                                                                                 OIL SPILL DISPERSANTS  267
development  of devices for this purpose. There is also a
persistent  skepticism  regarding  the  effectiveness  of
dispersants in dispersing  an oil spill in the first place. A
review of these aspects based on the history of this area to
date, follows:
1. The  toxicity of the chemical dispersants has been  a
   major concern since their use  became significant. The
   bases for the concern were investigations such as that of
   Smith  et  al(17) published in 1968 after  the Torrey
   Canyon that revealed that the particular chemicals used
   did more biological damage in some areas — particularly
   the  intertidal zones  —  than the  oil  itself.  Dr.
   Cerame-Vivas(18))  m  investigating dispersants  used
   during  the grounding of the Ocean Eagle in Puerto Rico
   during  March, 1968, recommended  that their use  be
   discontinued because of their high level of toxicity. A
   very  extensive  literature   search conducted by
   Battelle-Northwest09) in November, 1967, cited that the
   biological  effects of  all detergents  (dispersants) are
   similar  and there was general agreement that levels of 5-
   to 10 ppm will cause death.

   In 1967-68,  the  period covered  during the  above
   publications, the chemical  formulations  available  to
   disperse spilled oil were mainly derived from degreasers
   and cleaning agents — in fact, the terms "detergent" and
   "toxic  detergents"  were  used quite  commonly. To
   permit  these agents to cut through and dissolve tar-like
   residues and clean  similar contaminants from surfaces,
   an aromatic solvent, such as heavy aromatic naphtha,
   was generally employed.  The short term acute toxicity
   of aromatic solvents  to  marine life  is  well-known.
   Blumer(20)  points out that low boiling aromatics are
   toxic to man as well as all other organisms, and that it
   was the great tragedy  of the Torrey Canyon that the
   detergents used were dissolved in low boiling aromatics.
   The toxicity of these aromatic solvent constituents were
   extensively studied by the Marine Biological Laboratory
   of the  UJC. (see Ref 17), and their acute  toxicity was
   evident, e.g., 5 ppm of kex (kerosene extract) solvent
   killed  50% of  the Elminius nauplius larvae  in  21
   minutes. Their analyses of the more common detergents
   (dispersants) used during the Torrey Canyon indicated
   that they contained some  portion of aromatics.
   In addition  to these aromatic solvents, the surfactants
   were typically selected from the class of  compounds
   formed  by  the  reaction  of hydroxy-containing
   compounds  (e.g.,  phenol or  alcohol) with ethylene
   oxide.
   A typical  surfactant might  therefore be  ethoxylated
   nonyl  phenol. The  number of ethylene oxide  groups
   added  to  the nonyl-^henol  hydrophobe may  be
   controlled to any desired extent to adjust tfie degree of
   water  solubility of  the  material.  These types of
   surfactants,  although  effective emulsifiers, were quite
   detrimental  to marine life. In fresh water experiments,
   Marchetti(21)  in   1965  indicated that  a
   nonylphenol-ethylene  oxide condensate was toxic at
   concentrations below 10 ppm.
It can thus be appreciated that either the solvent or the
surface-active agent of a dispersant formulation can be
toxic. In the case of the Torrey Canyon era, both the
aromatic solvents and the type of surface-active  agent
used  in the chemical formulations possessed high light
toxicity.
However, during the past three years there  has been
research  directed toward  producing  dispersant
formulations that would have little effect on marine life.
For  example,  water is  now  used as the solvent in
products where it  is compatible with the  particular
formulation. High boiling saturated hydrocarbons which
are  similar  to  the  types  of hydrocarbons that  occur
naturally in the marine environment,  and have a  low
order of toxicity, are now also employed as solvents in
some of the more recent dispersant recipes.
The above modification of the solvent, and  the selection
of surface-active agents from generic types that are  not
considered to be chemically toxic, have resulted in the
development of dispersant products that exhibit greatly
reduced  toxicity.  This  can  be  illustrated  by  the
investigation  of  J.  E.  PortmannC^),  Fisheries
Laboratory,  Burnham-on-Crouch,  Essex.    Table 1
illustrates this point by citing selected toxicity results to
illustrate the degree of change of the  toxic level.  For
example,  three dispersant  products used during  the
Torrey  Canyon spill and  identified as Torrey Canyon
Dispersants A, B, C, have 48 hr LCso values of 8.8, 5.8
and  6.6  ppm,  respectively.  These  concentrations
represent the amount of the specific  agent to kill 50%
of the test species (Crangon crangon) in 48 hours. The
toxicity  of  a  typical  Torrey Canyon surfactant,
ethoxylated nonyl  phenol, is shown at 89.5 ppm. By
comparison,  the toxicity  levels of  three  dispersant
products developed since the Torrey Canyon, identified
as  D,  E,  F,  are   7,500-10,000; 3,300-10,000;  and
>3,300 ppm,  respectively. These  concentrations are
orders of magnitude greater than the level applied by
conventional application in the field. Also in this regard,
the  statement  that a "completely  new family  of
dispersants  has now been  developed" was  made by
Beynon in a presentation to the Workshop on Oil Spill
Cleanup in the UJC. during October 1970(23)
Other agencies have confirmed this  finding.  Table 2
illustrates results of a  recent  study by the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada entitled, "Toxicity Tests with
Oil  Dispersants  in Connection  with Oil  Spill  at
Chedabucto Bay, N.S."(24)  Again, the large difference
in toxicity due to the  surfactant-solvent recipe can be
noted in the summary of results (Table 2). These values
represent 4 day LCso  values in fresh water to Salmon
(Salmo  salar L) and vary from 'Toxic" (1-100 ppm) to
"Practically non-toxic" (> 10,000 ppm). These do not
represent  solely isolated data  points based on limited
testing  to  highly resistant  species. Over  25 research
institutions  are known  to have conducted studies on
these lower toxicity chemicals. Testing by  Dr. Molly
Spooner(25,26)j   among  others,  has  encompassed
juvenile species, planktonic life and other very sensitive

-------
268   TREATING AGENTS
         Table 1:  Some Representative Toxicity Results Illustrate Development of Low Toxicity Products

             CHEMICAL                                    TOXICITY DATA
                                                          [48 HR. LC50, PPM,
                                                          BROWN SHRIMP
                                                          (CRANGON CRANGON)]
             NONYL PHENOL - ETHYLENE OXIDE                  89.5
             TORREY CANYON DISPERSANT 'A'                     8.8
                                         'B'                     5.8
                                         'C'                     6.6
             POST TORREY CANYON DISPERSANT D          7,500 - 10,000
                                              E          3,300 - 10,000
                                              F              3300
             Abstracted from "Toxicity of 120 Substances to Marine Organisms", J.E. Portmann (22).
                      Table 2: Summary of Toxicity Tests With 10 Oil Dispersants
              CATEGORY               TOXICITY DATA      NUMBER OF
                                       [4 DAY LCso, PPM,    DISPERSANTS
                                          SALMON
                                       (SALMO SALARL)]
              PRACTICALLY NON-TOXIC       10,000               1
              SLIGHTLY TOXIC               1,000-10,000          0
              MODERATELY TOXIC              100-1,000           1
              TOXIC           "                 1-100
              Abstracted from Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Tech. Report 201 (24).

                     Table 3: Toxicity Levels of Some Dispersants with and Without Oil
                                                               TOXICITY DATA
                                                               [96 HR TLm, PPM,
                  DISPERSANT                      FATHEAD MINNOW (PIMEPHALES PROMELAS)]
                  PRODUCT A                                    56
                           " +OIL                             14.0
                  PRODUCT B                                   14 0
                           " +OIL                             27.0
                  PRODUCT C                                   25 0
                           " +OIL                             42.0
                  PRODUCT D                                   32 0
                           " +OIL                             44.0
                  PRODUCT E                                   56.0
                           " +OIL                             75.0
                  PRODUCT F                                   3200+
                           " + OIL                             1800+
                  NOTE:
                         DISPERSANT
    Abstracted from "Biological Evaluation of Six Chemicals Used to Disperse Oil Spills", State of Michigan (29).

-------
                                                                                  OIL SPILL DISPERSANTS
                                                                                                              269
   forms of marine life. Studies such as those by Boyle(27)
   and Stander(28) have actually surveyed the lexicological
   effects at  sea  after application of these new  chemical
   dispersants to actual oil spills.

    Clearly then, the  concern  and conclusion  that  all
chemical dispersants are in themselves inherently toxic is
incorrect.   Some   of  the  most  effective
emulsifiers/dispersants available are those derived from and
found in the natural environment.

2. The toxicity of the dispersed oil itself is a more valid
   concern. The "ecological price" for the cited benefits of
   dispersing  oil   is  the  introduction  of dispersed  oil
   droplets several feet or more into the water column. The
   oil, in this physical form, is made available to other
   types  of marine  life  in  addition  to the
   hydrocarbon-oxidizing bacteria. Necton and other filter
   feeders  may now come into contact  with dispersed  oil
   droplets that they might have otherwise escaped as an
   oil film on the  surface of the water.
   There are published data on  the  acute toxicity levels of
   dispersed oil such as that from the State of Michigan(29)
   presented as Tabl e  3. This does indicate an approximate
   tolerance level of a thousand ppm or more for dispersed
   oil. It can also  be noted that the toxicity of the chemical
   is reflected in  the  toxicity levels for the dispersed oil.
   The basis for the often-heard statement, "the chemicals
   are more toxic than the oil", can be well appreciated by
   areview of these data.In considering a toxic level of 1000
   ppm or so for dispersed oil, however,  it should be noted
   that  1) it is unlikely that fish would remain  in this
   inhospitable environment  for 96  hours  and  2) the
   dispersed oil has a driving force to dilute itself.
   Probably of greater concern than the above acute effects
   is  the possibility that the finely dispersed oil droplets
   represent  a more  subtle  contaminant  and may cause
   long-range effects. No such effects have been noted as an
   aftermath of major spills such as the Torrey Canyon and
   Santa Barbara. It should also be noted that crude ofl  is a
   natural  rather  than  man-synthesized material. Wheeler
   North(3°) reported after extensive research into several
   spill  incidents, "Unlike many of the  products man
   liberates into  the environment,  crude oil is a naturally
   occurring substance. From time to time it appears  on
   the.earth's crust by natural processes of exudation."
   However, there is a need to obtain a better assessment of
   what long-range effects on marine life might exist. The
   short-term toxic  effects  are apparent in  terms  of
   mortality  at various concentrations, tainting, etc.
   Possible long-range effects, such as change in behavioral
   patterns  and accumulation  of trace  amounts  of
   persistent hydrocarbons, are both more nebulous and
   less known. Concerning the  current status of this area,
   there is an extensive research program now underway at
   the Battelle-Northwest  Laboratories to determine these
   long range effects  of spilled oil - both in the untreated
   and  chemically  dispersed  state  - on  the  marine
   environment.
   A variety of  hydrocarbons, e.g., Kuwait  Crude, So.
   Louisiana Crude, No. 2 Fuel Oil and No. 6 Fuel Oil will
   be tested and the test  species will include all valued
   organisms in the area. The ultimate fate of the ofl in the
   marine environment, as well as its persistence in marine
   life, will be studied.

The Effectiveness of Dispersants And The
   Efficiency - Toxicity Relationship
    It cannot be conclusively shown that the post Torrey
Canyon  era has  produced more effective, as well as less
toxic dispersants  since  a  single reproducible  and
representative  laboratory test procedure  for dispersant
effectiveness is   still  not  universally  accepted.  Such a
comparative test method would be most useful. A Battelle
Northwest study(31) actually lists 36 tests for this purpose.
However, there is no  theoretical basis for any relationship
between  the toxicity of the particular surfactant and its
effectiveness as an emulsifier.
    In  considering  the utility  of these "post  Torrey
Canyon" products, it may be more constructive to review
some of  the field applications of the past 1-2 years. One of
the most controlled large scale tests was conducted by the
West German Government in  the North Sea. Eleven metric
tons  of  crude oil was  used  for the controlled spill and
subsequently  dispersed  by  1030 liters  of chemical
dispersant. The results were favorable, but more important
was  the  monitoring  and evaluation of the dispersing
mechanism(32). By taking continuous dip samples during
and  after the tests,  it was  determined  that  the  actual
dispersion  achieved  consisted  of ofl  droplets of a few
millimeters in diameter.
    The  fact that droplets of this size can be maintained in
suspension in the sea is most relevant. In most proposed
criteria   for dispersant application, there is consideration
for an adjustment of toxicity levels based on effectiveness
tests. In  essence, a dispersant with a relative efficiency of
50% is supposed to require twice the amount to achieve the
degree of dispersion of an agent with a relative efficiency of
100%. Therefore, for two  products of similar chemical
toxicity,  the  more  "efficient"  dispersant  is currently
considered to be  overall less toxic because of the amount
required. However, a  subtle complicating factor is droplet
size. Since the basis for the efficiency rating of the chemical
is  the stability of the ofl-in-water dispersion, the finer the
oil droplet, the more stable the  dispersion. It has been
found during the past  year, however, that  finer droplets
have  greater immediate  acute  toxicity  to  marine  life,
particularly  in the 10 micron range. Hence, the  "ideal"
dispersant would  seem to be one that would generate the
largest sized droplet in the field consistent with removing
the  ofl  from  the water's  surface, preventing  droplet
coalescence  and enhancing biodegradation.
     There have been other published but more subjective
accounts of field applications that are relevant, such as that
in  Tarut Bay, Saudi Arabia(33). This  provides  a good
example of specific areas where it was felt advisable to use
chemical dispersants and others where it  was deemed
inadvisable.

-------
270  TREATING AGENTS
CONCLUSIONS
    In summary, the role of chemical dispersants in the
handling of spills is unsettled  and not universally agreed
upon. The obvious short-range benefits from the use of the
"post  Torrey  Canyon"  era  dispersants can  now be
appreciated from the review of developments in the field
during the past two years. The ultimate use that dispersants
might find is predicated apparently on the determination of
the more nebulous long-range effects of the dispersed oil
droplets in the water column. To date, information on the
effects of both oil and dispersants has been mainly derived
from short  term  laboratory experiments. Data on the
long-range effects are needed to fill this gap in the scientific
knowledge on this subject. Therefore,  the final resolution
of the limits  of dispersant application will be based on an
objective evaluation of data from  ongoing  biological
studies,  such  as  the  Battelle-Northwest program and
well-monitored field applications.

REFERENCES
   1. Dewling, R.T.: Statement of R.T. Dewling, Chief of
   Research  Activities,  FWQA, Edison, New Jersey,
    before the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution
    of  the Senate  Public  Works Committee, on  the
    Environmental  Impact  of Coastal Ofl  Refineries,
    Petrochemical Plants, and Ocean Transportation of Oil,
    in Machias, Maine, on September 9,1970.
 2. "The Dirty Dilemma of Oil Spills," Life Magazine, Vol.
    68, No. 8, March 6,1970.
 3. "More Oil for Our Troubled Waters," Life Magazine,
    Vol. 70, No. 4, February 5,1971.
 4.  Blumer,  M., Souza, G.,  Sass,  J.: "Hydrocarbon
    Pollution of Edible Shellfish  by an Oil Spill," Marine
    Biology 1970,5:195.
 5. Murphy, Thomas A.: "Environmental Aspects of Oil
    Pollution." Paper presented to the Session on Oil
    Pollution  Control, ASCE, Boston, Massachusetts, July
    13,1970.
 6. Nelson-Smith,  A.:  "Effects  of Ofl on  Plants  and
    Animals,"  Proc., Seminar on Water Pollution by Ofl.
    Aviemore, Scotland, May 4-8,1970.
 7. McCaull,  Julian:  "The  Black Tide," Environment,
    November 1969, Vol. 11, No. 9.
 8. Baker, Norman: "The Life and Death of the Good Ship
    RA." Sports Illustrated, April 20,1970.
 9.  "Sea  Secrets,"  International Oceanographic
    Foundation, July-August 1970. Vol. 14, No. 4, pg. 2.
10. Horn, Michael H., Teal, John M., Backus, Richard H.:
    "Petroleum  Lumps on  the  Surface of  the Sea."
    Science, Vol. 168, pg. 245-246, April 10,1970.
ll/  Canevari,  Gerard  P.: "The Role of  Chemical
    Dispersants in Ofl Cleanup."  Oil on the Sea, Plenum
    Press, pg. 29-51,1969.
12. Canevari,  Gerard P.: "General  Dispersant Theory."
    Proceedings  of  Joint  Conference on Prevention and
 j Control of Ofl Spills, API/FWQA, New York City, New
    York, December 1969.
13. Poliakoff,  M. Z., "Ofl Dispersing Chemicals," Water
    Pollution Control Research Series ORD-3, Washington,
    D.C., May 1969.
 14. ZoBell, Claude E.: 'The Occurrence, Effects and Fate
    of  Ofl Polluting  the Sea." Int. Journal Air  Water
    Pollution, pg. 173-198, Pergamon Press, 1963.
 15. First  Report of the President's Panel on Oil Spills,
    Executive Office of  the President. Office of Science
    and Technology, Washington, D.C.
 16. Hellmann, H., and Bruns, F.:  "Model Tests for  the
    Formation  of  Water in  Oil  Emulsions and  Their
    Importance in Fighting 03 Spills at Sea," Tenside, 7,
    Vol. l,pg. 11-15,1970-.
 17. Smith, J. E.: "Torrey Canyon Pollution and Marine
    Life," Cambridge University Press, 1968.
 18. Cerame-Vivas, M. J., "The Ocean Eagle Spfll," Dept. of
    Marine Science, University of Puerto Rico, 1968.
 19.  Oil  Spillage  Study,  Battelle Memorial   Institute,
    Richland, Washington, November, 1967.
 20. Blumer, Max, "The Extent of Marine Ofl Pollution,"
    Ofl on the Sea, Plenum Press, pg. 29-51,1969.
 21. Marchetti,  R.,  Critical  Review  of the Effects  of
    Synthetic Detergents  on Aquatic Life. Stud. Rev. Gen.
    Fish. Coun. Mediterr.  26,1965.
 22. Portmann, J. E., "The Toxicity of  120 Substances to
    Marine  Organisms,"  Fisheries  Laboratory,
    Burnham-on-Crouch, Essex, England, September  1970.
 23. Beynon, L. R., "Ofl Spfll Dispersants," Presentation at
    Workshop on Ofl Spfll  Cleanup,  London,  England,
    October 16,1970.
 24. Sprague,  John B., and Carson, W. G., 'Toxicity Tests
    with Ofl  Dispersants  in Connection with Ofl Spill at
    Chedabucto  Bay, N.S.," Fisheries Research Board of
    Canada, St. Andrews, N.B., 1970. (Unpub. man.)
 25. Spooner, M. F.,  and Spooner,  G. Malcolm:  "The
    Problems of Ofl  Spills  at Sea,"  Marine  Biological
    Association of the UJC., Plymouth, England,  1968.
 26.  Spooner,  M.  F.:  "Preliminary  Work on  the
    Comparative Toxicities of Some Ofl Spfll Dispersants
    and a  Few Tests with  Oils and COREXTT," Marine
    Biological Association of the UJt., Plymouth, England,
    1968.
 27. Boyle, C. L.: "Ofl Pollution of the Sea; Is the End in
    Sight?" Biological Conservation, July 1969, Vol. 4, No.
    l,pg. 319-329.
 28. Stander, G. H.: "The Esso Essen Incident." A report of
    the Division of Sea  Fisheries tabled in the  House  of
    Assembly (Rep. of So. Africa) on June 19,1968.

29. "A  Biological Evaluation of Six Chemicals Used  to
    Disperse Oil Spills," Department of Natural Resources,
    State of Michigan (1969).
30. Mitchell,  Charles  T., Anderson,  Einar  K., Jones,
    Lawrence G., North, Wheeler J.: "What  Ofl Does  to
    Ecology." Journal WPCE, Vol. 42, No. 5, Part 1, May
    1970, pg. 812-818.
 31. Battelle Northwest Laboratories, "Oil Spill Treating
    Agents -  Test Procedures", Final Report  API Project
    03-7, May 1,1970.
 32. Hellmann, H., "Combatting Ofl with Corexit 7664, A
    Large-Scale  Test in the North Sea", Hansa-706 No.  16
    1368-8,1969.
 33. Spooner,  M., "Ofl Spill in Tarut Bay, Saudi Arabia",
    Marine Pollution Bulletin, November, 1970.

-------
                    DISPERSANT  USE vs  WATER  QUALITY
                                     Richard T. Dewling, J. Stephen Dorrler and
                                                George D. Pence, Jr.
                                          Edison Water Quality Laboratory
                                         Environmental Protection Agency
ABSTRACT
   As environmentalists, we must constantly be aware of,
and recognize the potential pollution problems that might
result from an oil spill cleanup approach or system. Based
on  biodegradability and ultimate oxygen demand data
developed by the Edison Water Quality Laboratory as well
as others, it  would appear that more than knowledge of
toxicity and emulsion  efficiency should guide our decisions
regarding  the use of chemical  dispersants for oil  spill
cleanup.

DISPERSANTT USE vs WATER QUALITY
   The massive  applications of highly toxic "detergents"
during the Torrey Canyon incident unquestionably initiated
and provoked the cloud of controversy which exists today
concerning the use of these products. Statements made at
the time of this spill,  which indicated that the detergents
caused more damage^ * than the oil alone, naturally caused
the scientific community  to  focus its attention on the
toxicity  of  these  chemicals  to  marine  life.  Was  this
attention properly directed, or should it have been focused
on such factors as (a) the methods of application ;<2) (b) the
synergistic or antagonistic effect caused by mixing oil and
dispersants;(3)<4>(5X6) or more importantly (c) the toxici-
ty of emulsified  oil  itself to various forms  of marine
  It is not our intention to restate the technical literature
and discuss these points,  or take issue with the recent
documented  studies*14**15) dealing  with the biological
effects  associated with oil pollution. Rather, it is  our
objective to bring to light yet another problem-dispersant
biodegradability— with  which we must concern  ourselves
when a decision is made regarding the use of dispersants for
ofl spill cleanup. From the standpoint of water quality,
there must be concern for the rate of degradation and the
 ultimate oxygen demand of the dispersant and/or disper-
 sant-oil mixture. This potential problem, which  is para-
 mount  in  inland or coastal polluted waters, must stand
 alongside toxicity,  since it too, can  cause acute  lethal
 effects among many marine species.

 U.S. Regulations-Controlled Chemical Application
   The  United  States  regulations  regarding the  use  of
 chemicals to treat oil spills, shown in Appendix I, is not one
 of denial, but rather one of controlled application. In such
 instances as the  two Gulf of Mexico platform fires in 1970,
 chemicals were  applied* 16>(17> in order to eliminate a
 hazard to human life.  Similarly, the application of chemi-
 cals may be warranted in order to protect segments of an
 endangered  species,  or to  prevent  further environmental
 damage.

   Use under all three of these conditions is in accordance
 with  the Federal regulations, and, when applied to open
 waters,  or areas that have good mixing and circulation,
 chances  are,  if the dispersants are used discretely and
 correctly, minimal acute biological effects will likely occur.
 However,  let  us turn the situation around  and consider
 using  chemicals for handling a spill in an enclosed body of
 water, with limited  circulation, and which is moderately
 polluted—50 to  75  percent dissolved oxygen saturation.
 Assuming that the toxicity of the  dispersant being sched-
 uled for use is  relatively low (TLso> 10,000 mg/1), our
 environmental concern must now shift  to a new area—the
 potential problem of adversely affecting  the oxygen  re-
 sources of the waterway being treated.

Dispersant Biodegradability
   The  problem of biodegradability and the  ultimate
oxygen demand of dispersants has received  little attention,
except perhaps by EPA when it established the three level
                                                     271

-------
 272    TREATING AGENTS
control limiting the amount of dispersants which could be
applied during an oil spill  incident.  When  applied in
quantities, chemicals  themselves  can be a  significant pol-
lutant,  and at times,  depending  upon  the existing water
quality conditions, can lower the  dissolved oxygen level to
such a point that damage to the biological community will
occur, and potentially cause more lasting influence in the
environment than toxicity.

   Data developed by this  laboratory,  and confirmed by
others/18^  suggest that  the BODs (five day biochemical
oxygen demand) of dispersants can run as high  as 880,000
mg/1. Additional data  on the long term oxygen  demand of
various dispersants, which are shown in Tables  I & II, sug-
gest that  levels exceeding 1,000,000 parts  per  million are
attainable .(19)
TABLE 1:   Edison Water Quality Laboratory Dispersant
           (Amino-amido complex with water diluent)
           Ultimate Oxygen Demand (UOD)
Time Oxygen Utilization (mg/1 )
(Days) *Atlantic Ocean Dilution H2& "Raritan Bay Dilution H20
1
3
4
S
6
7
8
11
12
13
15
19
20
21
22
24
25
29
31
33
	
99,600
106,900
111,800
128,900
128,400
165,100
255,000
279,300
284,200
318,700
330,300
383,800
410,500
429,900
444,500
481,000
561,200
595,200
614,700
	
295,200
350,400
410,400
460,800
504,000
578,400
710,400
724,800
736,800
746,400
792,000
799,200
805,200
817,200
822,000
853,300
894,600
906,700
916,300
* Dilution waters unseeded

It is noteworthy  to point out in Table I the difference in
ultimate demands for the two dilution waters used. Raritan
Bay is somewhat  polluted in comparison to Atlantic Ocean
water; therefore,  it is felt that it has the necessary seed
organisms and nutrients to develop this  higher  demand.
Additional  data  are  naturally  needed  to confirm  this
theory.

UOD Significance
   What is the significance of such data as it relates to an
actual oil spill incident? As an illustration, let us assume
that 75,000 barrels of oil were spilled into the Delaware
River at the mouth of the Schuylkill River, and  it was
suggested that dispersant chemicals be used to clean up the
complete spill.
   Water  quality data  in  this waterway have been  well
established by previous EPA investigations, and mathemat-
ical  models  have been developed for dissolved  oxygen
loadings^20' thus the  reason for selecting the Delaware
River for this example. Figure 1 illustrates River "Sections"
for the mathematical model and shows where the "spill"
occurred.

   As illustrated in Figure 2, which also indicates the as-
sumptions for the estuary and spill, the oxygen deficit at
"day one," after chemicals have been applied, is 1.5 mg/1 at
Section 15,  located  downstream from  Philadelphia.  As-
suming 100  percent  dissolved oxygen saturation in  the
River, which is approximately 9.2 mg/1 at 20°C, this deficit
will  probably not cause adverse water quality conditions.
On the third day following the  spill  and application of
chemicals, an oxygen deficit of 3.4 mg/1 is produced. Again,
if 100  percent saturation prevails, there will probably be no
immediate acute biological stress or response; however, a
serious problem, with adverse environmental consequences,
will likely occur if the oxygen saturation of the river is 50
percent (4.6 mg/1) or lower, a  condition which we know
normally exists in this and other polluted estuaries and
rivers during many months of the year.

CONCLUSIONS
   As environmentalists, we must constantly  be aware of,
and  recognize the potential pollution problems that might
result from an oil spill cleanup approach or system. Based
on the  data  presented, it  would appear that more than
                                                           TABLE 2:  Twenty-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand< * 9>
Dispersant
A-(Petroleum solvent,
alkylaryl benzene,
non ionic)
A
A
A
A
B -(A Ikanolamides,
no diluent)
B
B
B
B
C -(Water-alcohol
diluent, non ionic)
C
C
C
C
D-(Petroleum based,
non ionic)
D
D
D
D
Oil



South Louisiana Crude Oil
Bachaquero Crude Oil
No. 2 Fuel Oil
No. 6 Fuel Oil


South Louisiana Crude Oil
Bachaquero Crude Oil
No. 2 Fuel Oil
No. 6 Fuel Oil


South Louisiana Crude Oil
Bachaquero Crude Oil
No. 2 Fuel Oil
No. 6 Fuel Oil


South Louisiana Crude Oil
Bachaquero Crude Oil
No. 2 Fuel Oil
No. 6 Fuel Oil
B.O.D. (mg/1)


783,000
480,000
117,000
880,000
150,000

850,000
521,000
87,000
830,000
190,000

450,000
378,000
255,000
797,000
298,000

1,334,000
445,000
330,000
757,000
306,000

-------
                                                                     DISPERSANT USE vs WATER QUALITY    273
                                                                                                            Assunpink
                                                                                                               Creek
     "Oil Spill'  of 75,000  bbls occurred at
     Section  15, located south of Philadelphia
     and at  mouth of Schyulkill River
                                                        DIL  SPILL   //6i9
                                                                      Timbe
                                                                      Creek
Smyrna
 Rivet
                                  Figure 1: Mathematical Model River Sections-Delaware Estuary

-------
Philadelphia
10  11   12   13
RIVER  MATH  MODEL SECTIONS
                        Chester
                       rs
Wilmington
                                                                  21   22
          23  24  25  26  27  28
29
30
                                                          Based on  the response of the Delaware River to
                                                       a  unit impulse load, which was simulated on an
                                                       analog computer,' 21) graphs  were developed for
                                                       the oxygen deficits for "days" 1,3,5,8 and 12
                                                       following  a  75,000  barrel spill at "Section  15" of
                                                       the River.  Other assumptions were:
                                                              T1.5Q of dispersant recommend  for use was
                                                              10,000  mg/l ; oil  thickness of 2mm; con-
                                                              trolling criteria for dispersant use would be
                                                              1/5  of total  volume spilled; or  630,000
                                                              gallons
                                                              UOD of dispersant =  916,000  mg/l
                                                              Freshwater inflow to  River = 3,000 cfs
                                                              Total  mixing and  diffusion throughout
                                                              depth of River	36 foot average  depth
                                                              Decay coefficient	0.2/day
                                                              Reaeration coefficient	0.2/day
                                                              Dispersion coefficient	7 sq.  mi./day
                                                             l-'igurc 2: Dispersant Use vs Water Quality
                                                                                                                     H
                                                                                                                     m
                                                                                                                     H
                                                                                                                     2
                                                                                                                     O

                                                                                                                     rn
                                                                                                                     Z
                                                                                                                     to

-------
                                                                    DISPERSANT USE vs WATER QUALITY     275
knowledge of toxicity and emulsion efficiency should guide
our decisions regarding the use of dispersant chemicals for
treating oil spills.
 Figure 3:   Warburg Respirometer  was Used at  the Edison Water
 Quality Laboratory to  Determine  Rate  of Biodegradability  and
           Ultimate Oxygen Demand of Dispersants


 APPENDIX I
 SCHEDULE OF DISPERSANTS AND OTHER
     CHEMICALS TO TREAT OIL SPILLS
 (Published as Annex X to National Contingency Plan,
     June 2, 1970)

 2001 General
   2001.1 This schedule shall apply to the navigable waters
 of  the United States and  adjoining  shorelines,  and  the
 waters of the  contiguous  zone as defined in Article 24 of
 the Convention on  the  Territorial Sea and the Contiguous
 Zone.
   2001.2 This  schedule applies to  the  regulation of any
chemical as hereinafter defined  that is  applied  to an oil
spill.
   2001.3  This schedule advocates development and utili-
 zation of mechanical and other control methods that will
 result  in  removal  of oil  from the  environment  with
 subsequent proper disposal.


   2001.4 Relationship of  the Water Quality Office, En-
 vironmental  Protection  Agency (WQO-EPA) with  other
 Federal  agencies and  State agencies in  implementing this
 schedule: in those States with more stringent laws, regula-
 tions or written policies for regulation of  chemical use,
 such state laws, regulations, or written policies shall govern.
 This schedule  will  apply in  those States that have not
 adopted such laws, regulations or written policies.
2002 Definitions
   Substances applied to an oil spill are defined as follows:

   2002.1  Collecting agents—include chemicals  or  other
agents that can gell, sorb,  congeal, herd, entrap, fix,  or
make  the  oil mass  more  rigid or viscous in  order  to
facilitate surface removal of oil.

   2002.2  Sinking  agents—are   those  chemical  or  other
agents that can physically sink  oil below the water surface.

   2002.3  Dispersing agents—are those  chemical agents or
compounds which emulsify,  disperse or solubilize oil into
the water column or act to further the  surface spreading of
oil slicks in order to facilitate  dispersal of the oil into the
water column.


2003 Collecting Agents
   Collecting  agents  are considered to be  generally  ac-
ceptable providing that these materials do not in themselves
or  in  combination  with the  oil increase  the  pollution
hazard.
2004 Sinking Agents
   Sinking  agents  may  be used  only in marine  waters
exceeding  100 meters  in  depth  where currents are not
predominantly on-shore, and only  if other control methods
are judged by WQO-EPA to be inadequate or not feasible.


2005 Authorities Controlling Use of Dispersants
   2005.1' Regional response team activated; Dispersants
may  be  used  in any place, at any time, and in quantities
designated by the  On-Scene Commander, when their use
will;

      2005.1-1 in  the  judgment  of  the On-Scene Com-
      mander, prevent  or substantially  reduce  hazard  to
      human  life or limb  or substantial hazard of fire to
      property;

      2005.1-2 in the judgment of WQO-EPA, in consulta-
      tion  with  appropriate  State  agencies, prevent  or
      reduce substantial hazard  to a major segment of the
      population(s) of vulnerable species of waterfowl; and

      2005.1-3 in the judgment of WQO-EPA, in consulta-
      tion  with appropriate State agencies,  result  in the
      least overall environmental  damage, or interference
      with designated uses.

   2005.2  Regional response team  not  activated; Provi-
sions of Section 2005.1-1  shall apply. The use  of  disper-
sants in any other situation shall be subject to this schedule
except in States  where State laws, regulations,  or written
policies that govern the prohibition, use, quantity, or type
of dispersant  are in effect. In such States, the State laws,
regulations or written policies shall be  followed during the
cleanup operation.

-------
276   TREATING AGENTS
2006 Interim Restrictions on Use of Dispersants
     for Pollution Control Purposes
   Except as noted in 2005.1, dispersants shall not be used;
   2006.1 On any distillate fuel oil;
   2006.2 on any  spill  of  oil less  than  200  barrels  in
quantity;
   2006.3 on any shoreline;
   2006.4 in any waters less  than 100 feet deep;
   2006.5 in any waters containing major populations,  or
breeding or passage areas for species of fish or marine life
which  may  be  damaged or rendered commercially less
marketable by exposure to dispersant or dispersed oil;

   2006.6 in any waters where winds and/or currents are
of such velocity and direction that dispersed oil mixtures
would  likely, in the judgment of WQO-EPA, be  carried  to
shore areas within 24 hours; or

   2006.7 in any waters where such use may affect surface
water supplies.


2007 Dispersant Use
   Dispersants may be  used  in  accordance  with this
schedule if  other  control  methods are judged  to be
inadequate or infeasible, and if:

   2007.1 Information has been provided to WQO-EPA,  in
sufficient time prior to its use for review by WQO-EPA, on
its toxicity, effectiveness and oxygen  demand determined
by the standard procedures published by WQO-EPA. (Prior
to publication by WQO-EPA of standard procedures, no
dispersant shall  be applied,  except  as noted in Section
2005.1-1 in quantities exceeding 5 ppm in the upper 3 feet
of  the  water column  during any  24-hour  period.  This
amount is equivalent to 5 gallons per acre per 24 hours.);
and

   2007.2 applied during any 24-hour period in  quantities
not  exceeding the  96  hour  TL5Q of the most sensitive
species  tested as calculated  in the top foot of  the water
column. The maximum volume of chemical  permitted,  in
gallons  per  acre per  24 hours, shall be  calculated by
multiplying the 96  hour TL5Q value of the most sensitive
species tested, in ppm, by 0.33; except that in no case, ex-
cept as noted in Section 2005.1-1, will the daily application
rate of chemical  exceed  540 gallons per acre or one-fifth of
the total  volume spilled, whichever quantity is smaller.

   2007.3 Dispersant containers are labeled  with the fol-
lowing information:
     2007.3-1 Name, brand or trademark,  if any, under
     which the chemical is sold;
     2007.3-2 name  and address of the  manufacturer,
     importer or vendor;
     2007.3-3 flash point;
     2007.3-4  freezing or pour point;
     2007.3-5 viscosity;
     2007.3-6 recommend application procedure(s), con-
     centration^), and conditions for use as regards water
     salinity, water temperature, and types and  ages of
     oils; and
     2007.3-7 date of production and shelf life.

   2007.4 Information to be supplied to WQO-EPA on the:

     2007.4-1 Chemical name and percentage  of each
     component;
     2007.4-2 concentrations  of  potentially  hazardous
     trace  materials, including, but not  necessarily being
     limited to  lead, chromium, zinc, arsenic, mercury,
     nickel, copper or chlorinated hydrocarbons;
     2007.4-3 description  of analytical  methods  used in
     determining  chemical characteristics  outlined  in
     2007.4-1,2 above;
     2007.44 methods for analyzing the chemical in fresh
     and salt water are provided to WQO-EPA, or reasons
     why such analytical methods cannot be provided;
     2007.4-5 for purposes of research and development,
     WQO-EPA  may  authorize  use of  dispersants  in
     specified amounts  and locations under  controlled
     conditions  irrespective  of  the  provisions  of  this
     schedule.
REFERENCES
   1.  Smith, J.  E., (edit) Torrey  Canyon  Pollution and
Marine Life, Cambridge University Press, N.Y.C., 1968
   2.  Anon "The Torrey Canyon", Report of the Commit-
tee of  Scientists  on  the  Scientific  and  Technological
Aspects of the Torrey Canyon Disaster.  HA!. Stat. Off.,
London, 1967
   3.  Griffith, D.G., Toxicity of Crude Oil and Detergents
to Two Species of Edible Molluscs Under Artificial Tidal
Conditions, FAO Technical Conference on Marine Pollution
and Its  Effect on Living Resources and Fishing, December
1970
   4.  Tarzwell,  C.,  Proceedings:  Industry Government
Seminar, Oil Spill Treating Agents, April 1970
   5.  Mills, Jr., E.R., The Acute Toxicity of Various Crude
Oils  and Oil Spill Removers on Two Genera of Marine
Shrimp, Louisiana State University, May 1970
   6.  Cowell, E.B., et al., Biological Effects of Oil Pollu-
tion and Oil  Cleaning Materials on Littoral Communities,
Including  Salt  Marshes,  FAO  Technical Conference on
Marine  Pollution and Its Effect  on Living Resources and
Fishing, December 1970
   7.  Blumer, M., et al., Hydrocarbon Pollution of Edible
Shellfish by  an Oil  Spill,  Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution, Ref. No. 70-1
   8.  Gutsell, J.S. (1921) Danger to Fisheries from Oil and
Tar Pollution of Waters, App. II, Rept. to  U.S. Commis-
sioner of Fisheries, Bur. Fish. Doc. 910
   9.  Gage, S.  DeM. (1924) The Control of Oil Pollution
in Rhode Island, Papers Boston Soc. Civil Eng. 11 (6) 237

-------
                                                                 DISPERSANT USE vs WATER QUALITY    277
   10. Gowanlock, J.N. (1935) Pollution by OH in Relation
to Oysters, Trans Amer Fish Soc. p. 293
   11. Anon (1955)  Oil  Pollution Studied by Service's
Seattle Biological Laboratory, Commercial Fisheries Review
17(3)35
   12. Tagatz, M.E. (1961) Reduced Oxygen Tolerance and
Toxicity of Petroleum Products to Juvenile American Shad,
Chesapeake Science, 2 (1-2) 65
   13.McKee,  J.E.,  Wolf, N.W.  (1963)  Water  Quality
Criteria, Publ.  3A, Resources Agency of California, State
Water Quality Control Board, 2d Edit., p. 229
   14. Straughan, D., Biological  and Oceanographical Sur-
vey of the Santa Barbara Channel Oil Spill  1969-1970,
Volume I, Biology & Bacteriology, Allan Hancock Founda-
tion, University of S.C., 1971
   15. Blumer, M., et  al., The West Falmouth  Oil Spill,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Ref. No. 70-44
   16. Biglane, K., EPA, WQO, Office of Oil & Hazardous
Materials. Personal Communication, 1971
   17. Ocean Industry,  Feb., March 1971
   18. Anon. A Biological Evaluation of Six Chemicals used
to Disperse Oil Spills, Department of Natural Resources,
State of Michigan, 1969
   19. Anon.  Pacific Engineering  Laboratory, Preliminary
Report on Testing  Oil Dispersant Toxicity &  Emulsion
Efficiency, EPA,  WQO,  Contract No.  14-12-879,  March
1971
   20. Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Study-Preliminary
Report and Findings F.W.P.C.A., July 1966
   21. Pence,  G., Analog Simulation Model, Delaware Estu-
ary Comprehensive Study, Unpublished.

-------
                       DEVELOPMENT OF  TOXICITY  TEST

                             PROCEDURES   FOR  MARINE

                                     PHYTOPLANKTON
                                         J.A. Strand, W.L. Templeton,
                                       J.A. Lichatowich, and C. W. Apts,
                                Aquatic Ecology Section, Ecosystems Department,
                                         Pacific Northwest Laboratory,
                                          Battelle Memorial Institute
ABSTRACT
    Recommended bioassay procedures are presented that
can be routinely applied to evaluate the relative toxicity of
oil, chemical dispersants, and oil-dispersant mixtures to 1)
naturally occurring populations of phytoplankton, and 2)
representative  marine phytoplankters grown  in  pure
culture. The methods presented, in general, represent 1)
application  of  techniques  routinely  employed  in  the
measurement  of marine primary  productivity, and  2)
application  of the Inhibitory  Toxicity Test, a tentative
method devised by the American Society for Testing and
Materials to evaluate acute toxicity of industrial wastes to
diatoms.

INTRODUCTION

    There is increasing evidence for detrimental effects to
fish (3, 15), Crustacea (2, 4, 21), molluscs (2), and other
aquatic organisms (1, 2, 13, 31) from the release of crude
or refined oils and subsequent application of oil treating
agents.  However,  few  researchers have  examined the
influence  of  these materials  on phytoplankton which
comprise basic and essential elements of almost all aquatic
food webs.

    The bioassay method  is  generally accepted as the
standard procedure to assess the acute effects of a toxicant
on a  selected organism. The bioassay, an outgrowth of
chemical assay, has traditionally employed lethality as the
measurement of effect. However, lethality or death cannot
    *The studies presented  in this paper were prepared  under
 contract for the American Petroleum Institute, Committee for Oil
 and Water Conservation.
 always be determined; and for algal cells, lethality is not
 considered a reliable end point (29).
    With  this in mind, we have searched  for alternative
 methods for evaluating the effects of oil and dispersants on
 marine phytoplankton. In this report, bioassay procedures
 are presented that can be routinely applied  to evaluate the
 relative  toxicity  of  oil, chemical dispersants,  and
 oil-dispersant  mixtures  to  1)  naturally  occurring
 populations  of phytoplankton, or 2) representative marine
 phytoplankters grown in pure culture.

 General Procedures
    The methods  presented  in this  report represent 1)
 application  of techniques  routinely  employed  in  the
 measurement  of  marine  primary productivity, and  2)
 application of the Inhibitory Toxicity Test (11), a tentative
 method devised by the American  Society for Testing and
 Materials to  evaluate  acute toxicity of industrial wastes to
 diatoms.

Oil-Dispersant Mixtures
    Emulsions of crude oil  and the  chemical dispersant
were tested in a ratio of 10 parts oil to  1  part chemical
dispersant  by volume. Concentration of oil  and dispersant
are  expressed  in parts  per  million (ppm) of  the total
product (oil  and dispersant)  in each test  solution. Test
solutions were prepared by first adding oil, then dispersant
and finally diluent water, all at desired amounts.
    Continuous mixing using a magnetic stirrer was found
 to  produce  excellent dispersions.  Oil  and  dispersant
 emulsions prepared in this way immediately disperse into
 small globules and are distributed throughout the entire test
'solution.  Emulsions  not  continuously  mixed  during
                                                    279

-------
280   TREATING AGENTS
preparation tended to coalesce into a sb'ck on the water
surface  with only a fraction of the total emulsion being
dispersed throughout the test solution.

Application of Marine Productivity Measurements
Isotopic Carbon Method
    Doty  and Oguri  (6)  and  Jitts (9)  have published
standard methods for measuring photosynthetic rates using
the  Cl4   technique.  Strickland  (26) and Ryther (18)
compared  the  Cl4  and oxygen methods for measuring
photosynthesis of marine algae and  found  the  former
50-100  times more sensitive. The Cl4 technique has been
subjected to much refinement since first introduced and
employed  by  Steemann-Mielsen  (22, 24). The theoretical
basis and underlying assumption have been reported by Van
Norman and Brown (29), Goldman  and Mason (7), Rodhe
(17), Steemann-Nielson and Hanson (23), McAllister (12),
and Ryther (19). Most  recently, the  application of this
technique for assessment of the effects of organomercurial
fungicides  on marine diatoms was reported by Harriss et al.
(8).
    In  the present studies, the Cl4 technique was used in
two experimental designs. Basically these tests were:
1. Field experiments using natural surface sea water and
natural  mixed phytoplankton communities.
2. Laboratory experiments using purified marine flagellate
cultures.

In Situ Bioassay with Natural Seed
Methods
    A small platform anchored in  a shallow estuary was
used as a permanent sampling station. Water samples were
taken at  a depth  of .5  meters with a  Kremmer water
sampler and transferred to 125 ml  glass bottles. Some of
the bottles  (dark  bottles)  were  coated  with  black
rubberized material to eliminate light. Three mis of water
were  withdrawn  from  each bottle  and  1  ml  of sea
water-dispersant  mixture was  added to  produce  the
required concentration. One ml of a 10 microcurie solution
of CJ4 labeled sodium carbonate (NaHCOs) was added to
each bottle. Three ml were  withdrawn and only two
replaced to prevent escape of Cl4 labeled water  as the
stopper was inserted. Bottles thus prepared were incubated
for 24 hours suspended from the platform at a depth of .5
meters.
     The contents of each bottle were then passed under
vacuum through a .45 micron Millipore Filter. The filter
was placed in a scintillation counting vial containing 17 ml
scintillant  cocktail. The scintillant cocktail was prepared by
dissolving  5 g PPO and 0.5 g POPOP in 1000 ml toluene,
and then  adding 30.6 ml Beckman Biosolve BBS-3. The
radioactivity was determined as counts per minute (CPM).
Quench was determined by adding a known amount of Cl4
to the vial and recounting. This allowed us to back calculate
and correct the  initial sample counts for quench due to
chemical interference or self absorbtion by the algal cells.
Once the counts per minute (CPM) for each sample were
corrected, the net CPM was derived by subtracting the dark
bottle  CPM  from  light  bottle  CPM. Photosynthesis  as
         ^ was then calculated by the equation:
           Net CPM
1
        total added CPM       Hours of incubation
        x C02 (mg per liter sea water)
        x 12x 1000 = mgC/n/m3    (5)
          44
    A 50 per cent  reduction in photosynthetic rate  as
measured  by uptake of carbon-14 relative to uptake by
controls  may be  used as a  standard  measurement  of
toxicity.

Results
    Figures  1  and 2 demonstrate the effects of a selected
oil  and  dispersant emulsion  on primary production  of
planktonic algae obtained from  the  natural environment.
The curves, from two independent tests, represent exposure
times of 8 and 15 hours respectively.
    The  slight increase in mean  productivity rate at the 1
ppm  level  as indicated  in  both   Figures  1  and  2  is
reproducible and significant at the 0.05 probability level as
determined  by  the least  significant difference  test  of
Senadacor  (20).  This  perhaps  indicates  an  initial
stimulatory  effect due  to  substances  in  the oil and
dispersant mixture. This effect is less evident at 15 hours
exposure. There  is no significant difference between
controls,  0 ppm,  and  the 10 ppm  treatments.
Photosynthesis or productivity is significantly reduced at
50,100 and 1000 ppm.
                      10     50     100    1.000

                  Holl Che* 622-KuMalt Crude Evulsion (ppm)
 Figure  1: The relationship  between oil-dispersant emulsions and
 Primary Production of Planktonic Algae from Seqium Bay. Samples
 taken eight hours after contaminating water with the emulsion. The
 range  of values  at each  concentration represent  4 replicate
 determinations.

-------
                                                                    TOXICITY TEST PROCEDURES . . .
                                                  281
    Successive  daily determinations covering a period of
nearly 3 months disclose significant variation in the baseline
rate  of primary  production; undoubtedly attributed  to
changes in environmental parameters of light, temperature
or changes in the diversity  and density  of the  plank. M
community.
or  different  days more  comparable,  tests  should  be
conducted at the same time each day.
    Water analysis should include  pH, salinity, alkalinity,
DO and temperature, salinity pH, and alkalinity are needed
to estimate  total free C02- CO2 is used to calculate the
ratio of C12 an
                        10     50     100
                       Dlspersant Concentration In pp«
 Figure  2: The relationship between Oil-Dispersant Emulsions and
 Primary Production of planktonic algae from Seqium Bay. Samples
 taken fifteen hours after contaminating water  with the emulsion.
 The  range of values  at each  concentration represent 4 replicate
 determinations.
 Discussion
     The in situ algal bioassay utilizing the C^4 technique
 represents a  rapid  sensitive way to assess the  effects of
 discharged oil and chemical treatment on phytoplankton. It
 is especially  suitable for assessing the  effect of oil in the
 open sea.  Photosynthetic rates of samples collected just
 below the surface  of  an  oil contaminated  area can be
 compared to photosynthetic rates of samples from adjacent
 uncontaminated water. The samples may be incubated in
 the  sea  or more conveniently in an ambient temperature
 water bath on shipboard.
     Patchy distribution of algal cells in the sea necessitates
 the  use  of  several  replicate  samples.  The   statistical
 sensitivity of the differences  between  control and treated
 samples  will  increase  with the  number of replicates.  A
 minimum of four light and one dark  sample is suggested.
 With careful  application, technical error introduced by the
 operator is negligible. Coefficients of variation between 11
 and 25  per  cent can  be expected as  a result  of natural
 variation or systematic error.
     Incubation  time will vary with  the   estimated
 productivity  of the  area. Eutrophic coastal regions would
 need 2-6 hours incubation whereas oliegotrophic areas in
 the open sea  may need 6-10 hours of incubation.
     Photosynthetic  rates   seem to  vary  on  a  daily
 periodicity. In order to make data from different samples
Laboratory Bioassay with Purified Seed
    Bioassay techniques  similar to the in situ experiments
utilizing  natural plankton populations were employed to
determine the  effect  of  oil-dispersant  emulsions  on
laboratory grown phytoplankters,
    Monochrysis lutheri,  for use  in  these bioassays was
mass cultured in 2 1/2 gallon carboys placed in a constant
temperature water  bath maintained at 20.0° C. Culture
medium was prepared by adding the nutrients prescribed by
Strand (25), Table I, to autoclaved sea water. Six thousand
mis of this medium in a 2  1/2 gallon carboy was seeded
with a 500 ml aliquot from a stock Monochrysis culture.
There  was  no need to  sparge the  medium  as the
Monochrysis cells  appeared to distribute  themselves
uniformly  throughout the container. Periodic cell counts
were  made with  a  hemocytometer and  as  population
growth  reached  its  peak (2 weeks),  500  mis of this
population were transferred into another six thousand mis
of fresh medium. Overhead lighting was provided by a bank
of fluorescent lamps which yielded an irradiance of 3.7 lux
at the water bath surface, and which was programmed for a
photoperiod of 1 2 hours light and 1 2 hours dark.
 Table 1: Sea Water Enrichment Mixture

 KN03                                      20.0 mg.
 K/2HP04                                    3.5 mg.
 FeCL3                                      0.097 mg.
 MnCl2                                      0.0075 mg.
 Glycerophosphate di-sodium pentahydrate      1.0 mg.
 EDTA                                       1.0 mg.

 B12                                         l-QW-
 ThiaminHCl                                 0.2 mg.
 Biotin                                       1-0/*g-
 Tris (hydroxymethel) aminomethane          30.0 mg.
 Fresh off-shore sea water                     75.0ml.
 Distilled water                              25.0 ml.


     Six, five  hundred ml aliquots of a pure culture of
 monochrysis a marine flagellate, were mixed with 5,500 mis
 fresh culture  medium in  each of six 2  1/2 gallon  carboys.
 Samples from each 500 ml culture aliquot were counted to
 ensure each carboy received an equal number of algal cells.
 The  carboy was sealed with  a rubber  stopper pierced by
 three glass rods. Two glass  rods  extended  to  near the
 bottom  of the carboy; one for  withdrawing samples; the

-------
 282   TREATING AGENTS
other for introducing air  from  a compressor  to  insure
continued mixing of oil and dispersant during  exposure.
The third, a shorter glass rod, maintained air equilibration.
These  experiments  were conducted  in  a  constant
temperature  room maintained  at  20+1°C.  Overhead
fluorescent lighting was provided as above.

    Oil-dispersant emulsions  were prepared, introduced
into the carboys  with  Eppindorf automatic pipettes and
allowed  to  mix  the Monochrysis-meAium for two hours
before sampling. Five 125  ml samples were drawn (four
light bottles, one dark) from each carboy. The samples were
inoculated  with  10 microcurie solution  Cl4 of labeled
NaHCOs and allowed to incubate at 20+1° C for  six hours.
Fifteen  minutes prior to  sampling, air  introduced  to the
carboy was shut off, allowing the dispersed oil to rise to the
surface. By  drawing algal samples from below the "slick"
we  obtained  cells that had been exposed  to oil and
dispersant,  but the sample  itself was relatively free  of oil.
This  lessened  problems such as C^ adsorbed  to  oil
particles, oil  particles  pluging the Millepore filter, arid
quench due to oil in the scintillant cocktail. The  incubated
samples were processed as previously described.
    The photosynthetic rates expressed  as  mgC/hr/m^
were  calculated using the  same formula presented in  the
previous section.

Results
    By  using  known  amounts  of rapidly growing
Monochrysis  we  hoped  to reduce  variability; and  by
increasing  the number of replicates,  obtain significant
differences in  production  over a  narrower  range  of
concentrations. The least significant difference test was run
on  the data presented  in Figure 3. All mean production
values for  algae treated with the oil-dispersant  emulsion
were  significantly  different, at  0.5 probability level, from
the controls.  There were significant  differences between
mean production values for the different treatments except
between 60 and 80 ppm, and at 100 ppm.

Discussion
    For routine  bioassay,  purified  cultures of  marine
phytoplankters  are recommended.  For prediction  of
environmental effects, cultures of indigenous algal  species
isolated from the region of concern are suggested. Since  cell
densities and  the  physiological state of the culture  can be
more effectively  controlled, the use of cultured algae will
enable  researchers  to  standardize the reporting  of  the
relative  toxicity  of various  dispersants,   oil,  and
oil-dispersant  emulsions. Algae should  be cultured at  the
temperature which the tests will be conducted. If  there is to
be  a temperature change, sufficient time should be allowed
for  the  particular  species  to  make  the  physiological
adjustments. Fresh culture medium should be used for each
series of bioassays. Once the medium  has been seeded with
an  algae culture the bioassay should be conducted shortly
afterwards  since photosynthesis decreases as the population
density increases and nutrients become limited.
    5.00
                    1)0      60      BO      100     100
                       Roll Chem 622-Kuwalt Crude Esulslon In ppm
 Figure 3:  Relationship  between  oil-Dispersant Emulsions  and
 Primary Production of Monochrysis Lutheri at 20 C. The Range of
 Values  at  each Concentration  Represent 4  Replicate
 Determinations.
 Chlorophyll-a Method
    As early as  1930, Kreps and Verbinskaya (28) used
 chlorophyll  as  a  measure  of  marine  phytoplankton
 productivity; and a field technique, using comparisons of
 acetone  extracts  against  aqueous  standards  of  nickel
 chromate was  initiated by  Harvey (28). The method of
 Creitz and Richards (28) which involves filtering the plant
 cells from 0.5  to 10 liters of water through a membrane
 filter  and adding the  filter to a 90 per cent acetone-water
 mixture to   dissolve  it  and  extract  phytoplanktonic
 pigments, has been used extensively since 1955.

 Methods
    Experiments designed  to test the effect of dispersants
 and oil-dispersant emulsions on  marine phytoplankton by
 determining  the concentration  of  chlorophyll-a  were
 conducted  in  accordance   with  procedures outlined by
 Creitz  and  Richards  (28).  Cultures  of  the  flagellate
 Monochrysis lutheri were used in this series of tests. Three
 types of experiments were conducted.

 1. Cultures  were  contaminated  with a  wide range  of
concentrations of oil-dispersant emulsions to determine the
approximate toxicity threshold.
2.  Cultures   were  exposed  to  a narrow range  of
concentrations to determine if small differences in toxicity
could be determined by this method.
3. A  series  of  tests  were performed to determine if the
toxicity of a dispersant was reduced by aeration.

    A basic procedure is common to all three types of tests.
250 ml  Erlenmeyer flasks were filled with 200 ml fresh

-------
                                                                      TOXICITY TEST PROCEDURES ...    283
culture medium as described in Table I (25). Each flask was
seeded with  a 2  ml aliquot from  a purified culture  of
Monochrysis.  The  oil-dispersant emulsion prepared  as
previously  described,  the  oil-dispersant  emulsion was
metered  into the  Erlenmeyer  flask with  an Eppindorf
automatic pipette. The Erlenmeyer flasks were capped with
cotton and incubated for 3-5 days at 20+1° C under 3.7 lux
of fluorescent illumination. Before filtering, a  two or three
ml  aliquot of a 1 M solution MgCI/j was  added to each
Erlenmeyer flask;  the  content  of  each flask was then
filtered through a .45 micron Millepore filter. The Millepore
filter was  then placed in a small vial  with  10  ml 90%
acetone. The vial was wrapped in aluminum foil and kept in
a refrigerator at 7° C for 24 hours.
     After  24 hours  the vials were centrifugal  and the
supernatant poured  into  a  10 ml  cuvette  having a path
length of 10 cm. The cuvettes were  kept in the dark until
placed in the spectrometer.
     Absorption  (synonymous with  extinction or optical
density)  was  read directly on a  Bausch   and  Lomb
"Spectronic  20"  spectrometer  at  665, 645  and 630
milli-microns. The Richards  and Thompson (16) formula
was  used  to  convert  absorption  readings  to mg/1
chlorophyll.  Per  cent transmission  can  also  be used- if
converted to absorbance by the formula:
          abosrbance = 109jQ
                                    100
                                transmission
                        10 pp»   100 w>»  t.OOO pp»  10.000 pp»

                        DlsporMnt Concentration In pp»
  Figure 4: Amount  of Chlorophyll-a Extracted From Cultures of
  Monochrysis Exposed to Dispersant. The Range of Values at each
  Concentration Represent 3 Replicate Determinations.

  However, Strickland and Parsons (27) discourage this since
  per cent  transmission  is  not  directly  related  to the
  concentration of substance being measured.
     The  first chlorophyll  experiment  employed  three
  replicates of five concentrations of dispersant. The samples
  were incubated five days.
    The second experiment was similar to the first except
an  oil-dispersant emulsion was used. The  concentrations
ranged over a narrow interval and there were four replicates
at each concentration.

    In the third experiment we initiated four separate tests.
Each consisted of five concentrations of dispersant, but in
each  test  the  dispersant  used had  been aerated for a
different length of time.

Results
    Figure 4 graphically presents the relationship between
the dispersant and the chlorophyll content of Monochrysis
cultures. The apparent toxic threshold is in the 10-100 ppm
range. Variability within  a single concentration  appears to
be negligible.

     Results — Figure 4 graphically presents the relationship
 between  the  dispersant  BP  1100 and  the  chlorophyll
 content  of Monochrysis cultures.  The  apparent toxic
 threshold  is in the 10-100 ppm range. Variability within a
 single concentration appears to be negligible.
     The results of the second type of experiment is shown
 in  Figure  5.  In  this test we  were able  to differentiate
 differences in chlorophyll-a concentration over a narrower
 range of effluent concentrations. The effect indicated in
 Figure  5  seems to  compliment the effects depicted in
 Figure  3 of the C14 experiments; that is, the apparent toxic
 threshold  being in the 10 to 100 ppm range. The two tests
 were conducted  using a  similar  concentration  range of
 oil-dispersant emulsion.
     Data  from the third experiment is presented in Table
 II. Aeration decreases toxicity. The toxic threshold seems
 to increase, i.e. the dispersant becomes less toxic the longer
 it  is aerated. Boney (1), found similar results with  aerated
 BP 1100 fractions using the green algae,  Prasinocladus
 marinus.

 Discussion
     The  concentration of  chlorophyll-a  in purified
 flagellate  cultures  is  sensitive  to contamination by
 oil-dispersant  emulsion  or   oil dispersants  alone.  The
 reduction in chlorophyll-a seems to compliment reduction
 in  photosynthesis in rapidly  growing purified  flagellate
 cultures.
     While  a reduction  in chlorophyll-a may  not  always
 represent  a similar reduction in productivity, Odum, et al.
 (14), it does represent a loss in the potential productivity of
 the system. During periods of low temperature  chlorophyll
 concentration  may  not  be   the   factor  limiting
 photosynthesis. The amount and activity rate of the cellular
 enzymes  may  limit  photosynthesis,  Jorgenson,
 Steemann-Nielsen; (1);  however,  as  environmental
 conditions change and chlorophyll becomes limiting, any
 loss  in chlorophyll  will  then be reflected  in  lowered
 productivity.
     This  bioassay can be used to determine  the  relative
 toxicity of various dispersants, dispersant-oil emulsions and

-------
 284    TREATING AGENTS
Table 2: Concentration of Extracted Chlorophyll-a in Monochrysis Cultures Exposed
to the Dispersant BP
Treatment

Control
1 ppm
10 ppm
100 ppm
1,000 ppm
10,000 ppm
Control
1 ppm
10 ppm
100 ppm
1,000 ppm
10,000 ppm
Control
1 ppm
10 ppm
100 ppm
1,000 ppm
10,000 ppm
Control
1 ppm
10 ppm
100 ppm
1,000 ppm
10,000 ppm
1 100 Which was not Aerated or was Aerated
Aeration Time

0
0
0
0
0
0
1 hour
1 hour
1 hour
1 hour
1 hour
1 hour
4 hours
4 hours
4 hours
4 hours
4 hours
4 hours
8 hours
8 hours
8 hours
8 hours
8 hours
8 hours
for 1 , 4 or 8 hours.
Chlorophyll-a
mg/1
3.61
4.24
1.43
0.922
0.445
0.0
3.68
3.81
3.84
1.83
0.539
0.00
2.27
2.59
2.76
2.40
0.00
0.012
2.44
7.10
2.76
2.44
1.66
0.038
 J   3
                        Holl Che* 622-Kintalt Crude EBulslons (pp«)
Figure  5:  Relationships Between oil-Dispersant  Emulsion and
Chlorophyll-a Concentation of Monochrysis. The Range of Values at
Each Concentration Represent 4 Replicate Determinations.
 refined or unrefined oils. Minimal amounts of equipment
 are needed. The prescribed measurement of toxicity may be
 expressed  as  a  Median  Tolerance  Limit,  TLM, or  the
 concentration of the test material that produces a 50 per
 cent reduction in extractable chlorophyll-a. Odum, et al.
 (14), have evaluated the Bausch and Lomb "Spectronic 20"
 and justify its use if extreme accuracy is not required. This
 test then represents a sensitive way of assessing the effect of
 oil dispersants and oil-dispersant emulsions on a compound
 essential  to  phytoplankton.  However, care  must   be
 exercised in  interpreting this effect in terms of primary
 production.
Inhibitory Toxicity Bioassay
    The preceding  tests used  photosynthetic rate  and
chlorophyll-a  concentration  to  assay  the  effects of
oil-dispersant  emulsions  and oil  dispersants  on
phytoplankton. Photosynthesis and chlorophyll-a, assuming
a relationship between chlorophyll-a and photosynthesis, to
have their fullest meaning should  be looked at relative to
the size of the population, since  fast growing, but small
populations, may have the same  production rate, i.e.  the
amount of biomass produced over a given period of time, as
a slow growing but large population. In this case cell counts
would serve as an adequate index of population size.

-------
                                                                    TOXICITY TEST PROCEDURES ...     285
 Methods
    For a detailed account of procedures, the reader  is
 referred to the ASTM Manual on Industrial  Water and
 Industrial Waste Water, 2nd Edition (11).
    Erlenmeyer flasks (250 ml) were filled with  200 mis
 fresh  culture medium as  prepared in Table I (25).  Each
 flask was seeded with a 2 ml aliquot from a purified culture
 of Monochrysis The oil-dispersant emulsion was prepared as
 before and metered into each test flask using an Eppindorf
 automatic pipette. The flasks were capped with cotton and
 incubated  at  20+1°  C  under 3.7  lux  of  fluorescent
 illumination.

    Cell counts  were made  for  each  concentration of
 oil-dispersant emulsion and controls. Each count consisted
 of  the mean number  of cells within  six  fields of  a
 hemocytometer. Counts were made every other day for the
 first 4 days, then each day for the last 2 days. Care was
 exercised in obtaining an even distribution of cells  over the
 counting grid.

 RESULTS AND  DISCUSSION

    Figure 6  illustrates  the results  of this  experiment.
 Except for an apparent discrepancy at 800 ppm the growth
 rates. of- Monochrysis populations were  related  to the
 concentration of oil dispersant emulsion. Again the results
 compliment the data from the Cl4 experiment Figure 3,
 and the  chlorophyll-a  experiment.  Figure  5, which
 employed similar  concentrations of the same emulsion
 constituents. Due  to the number of variables encountered,
 no  units of precision and accuracy  are  indicated.  The
 prescribed measurement of toxicity may be expressed as
 the Median Inhibitory Limit, ILm, or the concentration of
 any toxicant that produces a 50 per cent reduction in
 growth  rate. As with the previous techniques this bioassay
 can produce meaningful data  in itself,  but would be of
 greatest utility, if conducted in conjunction with Cl4 ir
 chlorophyll-a bioasays.
"h
X
3
5
 Figure 6: Population Growth Rates of Monochrysis Exposed to
 Dispersant Crude Emulsion.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
    While the field or in situ  technique described at the
outset  allows the researcher  to  study  the response  of
planktonic algae  in  a near  natural  environment,  it is
recommended  that  parallel tests under  controlled
laboratory  conditions  also  be  conducted.  The yield  of
information from both field and laboratory can then  be
integrated into a more meaningful solution to the problems
associated with release of oil.
    The  tests as described  in  this report  are of obvious
value in  forcasting the effect upon phytoplankton stocks
through usage of the varying proposed treating agents and
application  methods  presently available.  Toxicity  data
derived from such recommended techniques prior to actual
field use will provide  the basis for effective selection of
those materials or methods least toxic to aquatic life, and
for recommending or prohibiting their use. This need was
demonstrated by the misuse of dispersants following the
Torrey Canyon disaster.

SUMMARY
    Bioassay  procedures  are presented  that  can  be
routinely applied to  evaluate the relative  toxicity of oil,
chemical dispersants, and oil-dispersant mixtures to marine
phytoplankton. Toxicity data derived  from recommended
procedures prior to actual field use of dispersant chemicals
will  provide the basis for effective  selection of those
materials least detrimental to the aquatic environment.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 (1) Boney, A. D. 1970.  Toxicity Studies with an Oil^Spill
Emulsifier  and the Green Alga, Prasinocladus marinus. J.
Mar. Biol. Assn. U. K., 50:461473.
 (2) Carthy, J. D., and D. R. Arthuer, [eds.]. 1968. The
Biological Effects of Oil Pollution on Littoral Communities.
Suppl. to Vol. 2 of Field Studies. Field Studies Council,
London, Eng.    -  ;
 (3) Chadwick, H. K.  1960. Toxicity of Tricon Oil Spill
Eradicator  to Striped  Bass, Roccus  saxatilis. Calif. Fish
Game, 46, 373.
 (4) Corner,  E.  D.  S.,  A. J. Southward,  and  E.  C.
Southward.  1968.  Toxicity  of Oil-Spill   Removers
(detergents) to  Marine Life:  An  Assessment  Using the
Intertidal  Barnacle, Elminius modestus.  Jour.  Mar. Biol.
Assn. U. K., 48,29.
 (5) Doty, S. and M.  Oguri. 1959. Selected Features of
the  Isotopic  Carbon  Primary  Productivity
Technique. Rapp.  Froc.-verb, Cons. Internal. Explor. Mer.
144:47-55.
 (6) Doty,  S.  and  Oguri, M.  1957.  Evidence  of  a
Photosynthetic  Daily  Periodicity.  Limnology and
Oceanography, 2:37-40.
 (7) Goldman, R. and  Mason,  D. T.  1962.  Inorganic
Precipitation  of  Carbon  in Productivity  Experiments
Utilizing Carbon-14. Science, 136(1050): 1049-1050.

-------
286    TREATING AGENTS
  (8)  Harms, A.  C.,  D.  B.  White,  and  R.  B.
 Macfarlane.   1970. Mercury  Compounds  Reduce
 Photosynthesis by Plankton. Science  170(3959) :736-737.
  (9)  Jitts,  H.  R.  1962.  The Standardization and
 Comparison of Measurements of Primary Production by the
 Cl4 Technique. Symposium on Marine Productivity in the
 Pacific 10th Pac. Sci. Cong., Honolulu.                   §
 (10)  Jorgensen, E. G.  and E. Steemann-Nielsen. 1965-
 . Adaptation  in  Plankton Algae, p. 3746. In C.  R.
 Goldman  (ed.),  Primary  Productivity  in  Aquatic
 Environments. Mem.  Inst. Ital.  Idrobiol.,  18  Suppl.,
 University of California Press, Berkeley.
 (11)  Manual  on  Industrial  Water and Industrial Waste
 Water. 1965.  2nd  Edition  ASTM-Special  Tech.  Pub.
 148-H, Philadelphia.
 (12)  McAllister,  C. D. 1961. Observations  on  the
 Variations of  PJanktonic Photosynthesis  with Light
 Intensity, Using both the 02 and C*4 Methods. Limnology
 and Oceanography 6(4): 483-484.
 (13)  Mironov, 0. G. 1968. Hydrocarbon Pollution of the
 Sea and Its Influence on  Marine Organisms.  Helgo, wiss.
 Mecresunters,  17,335.

 (14) Odum, T., W. McConnell and W.  Abbott.  1958. The
 Chlorophyll "A"  of Communities. Pub. Int.  Mar. Soc.,
 Univ. of Texas, 5:65-69.
 (15) Portmann, J.  E.,  and Connor, P.  M.  1968. The
 Toxicity  of Several Oil-Spill Removers to Some Species of
 Fish and Shellfish. Mar. Biol., 1,322.
 (16)   Richards,  A.  and  G.  Thompson.  1952. The
 Estimation and Characterization of Plankton  Populations
 by Pigment Analysis II Spectrophotometric Method for the
 Estimation of  Plankton  Pigments. Jour.  Mar. Res.,
 11:147-155.
 (17)   Rodhe, W.  1958. The Primary  Production  in
 Lakes. Some Results and Restrictions  of the C14 Method.
 Rapp. et Proc^verb. Cons. Internal. Explor. de la Mer. Vol.
 144.
 (18) Ryther, J. H.  1954.  A Comparison of  the Oxygen
 and   C-14   Methods of Measuring  Marine
 Photosynthesis. Jour. de. Conseil, 20:25-37.
 (19) Ryther, J. H. 1954.  The  Ratio of Photosynthesis to
 Respiration  in Marine Plankton Algae  and its Effect Upon
the Measurement  of Productivity.  Deep Sea  Research,
2:134-139.
(20) Senadecor, W. and W. G. Cochran.  1967.  Statistical
Methods. Sixth Edition, Iowa State University Press, Ames,
Iowa, 539 p.
(21)  Spooner,  M.  F.  1968. Preliminary  Work  on
Comparative Toxicities of Some Oil Spill Dispersants and a
Few  Tests with Oils  and Corexit. Marine  Biological
Laboratory, Plymouth, Eng.
(22)  Steemann-Nielsen,  E. 1951. Measurement  of  the
Production  of Organic Matter in  the Sea  by  Means of
Carbon-14.  Nature, 167:684-685.
(23)   Steemann-Nielsen,  E.  and  V.   K.
Hansen.  1959.  Measurements with  the  Carbon-14
Technique of the  Respiration Rates in Natural Population
of Phytoplankton. Deep Sea Research, 5(3): 222-233.
(24) Steemann-Nielsen, E.  1952. The Use of Radioactive
Carbon  (Cl4) for Measuring Organic Production in the
Sea. Jour, du Conseil., 18:117-140.
(25)  Strand,  J.  A.,  J.  T.   Cummins and B. E.
Vaughan. 1966. Artificial Culture of Marine Sea Weeds in
Recirculation  Aquarium  Systems. Biological  Bulletin,
131(3):487-500.
(26) Strickland, J. D. H. 1960. Measuring the Production
of Marine Phytoplankton. Bull. Fish. Res. Bdg. Can.,  122,
p.172.
(27) Strickland,  J.  D. H. and T.  R. Parsons. 1968. A
Practical Handbook of Sea Water Analysis. Bull. Fish. Res.
Bd. Can., 167, p. 311.
(28) Strickland, J. D. H.  1965. Phytoplankton and Marine
Primary Production. Annual Review of Microbiology, C. E.
Clifton (ed.), Annual Reviews Inc., Palo Alto, Calif.

 (29)  U.S.  Department of the Interior.  1968.  Report of
 the Committee on  Water  Quality Criteris,  FWPCA, U.S.
 Government Printing Office.
 (30)  Van  Norman, R. W. and A. H. Brown.  1952.  The
 Relative Rates of Photosynthetic Assimilation of Isotopic
 Forms of Carbon Dioxide. Plant Physiology 27:691-709.
 (31)  Wilson, D.  P.  1968. Temporary Absorption on  a
 Substrate of an Oil-Spill Remover (detergent): Tests with
 Larvae  ofSabellaria spinulosa. Jour. Mar. Biol. Assn. U. K.,
 48,183.

-------
                       MICROBIAL  DEGRADATION  OF  A
               LOUISIANA  CRUDE  OIL  IN CLOSED  FLASKS
                        AND  UNDER  SIMULATED  FIELD

                                        CONDITIONS
                               Howard Kator, C. ff. Oppenheimer and R. J, Miget
                                       Department of Oceanography
                                          Florida State University
ABSTRACT
    Petroleum utilizing microorganisms in flasks containing
enriched seawater exhibited a clear metabolic preference
for saturated paraffins in a Louisiana crude oil. The rates of
oxidation of these compounds were directly proportional
to incubation temperature and roughly doubled with a ten
degree  increase.  A  pattern of growth consisting  of  an
initially large rate of saturated paraffin oxidation, followed
by a decrease and another increase in rate was observed.
The initially large rates were attributed to the metabolism
of n-paraffins smaller than C-18.  No  even or odd chain
length preference for n-paraffins was indicated. There was
no evidence of utilization for aromatic compounds.
    Application of a microbial culture to an oil slick under
simulated field conditions, clearly showed that microbes
could accelerate the  removal of a Louisiana crude oil from
an oil  slick  on seawater. The rates of oil removal  in
outdoor, exposed conditions, were twice as large  as the
rates of evaporative oil loss.  The microbes produced a
significant  change in oil  "stickiness".  Measurements
indicated the oil was dispersed through microbial activity.
The cells preferentially remained at the oil-water interface
during the experimental periods.
INTRODUCTION
    The work reported  in this  paper  complements  an
earlier  study1  to  evaluate the feasibility  of microbial
seeding to accelerate crude oil degradation in seawater.
    This paper is  composed of  two sections. The first
concerns  itself with  metabolic  studies  performed  to
determine which types of compounds in Louisiana crude oil
were more easily oxidized by mixed cultures of petroleum
degrading  microorganisms. The second part presents
experiments in which large tanks were used to model oil
spills and microbial seeding.

Metabolic Studies

Introduction

    Owing to the increased incidence of maritime oil spills,
our knowledge of the crude oil degrading capabilities of
microorganisms in seawater  must  be extended and
developed.
    Microbial metabolic  studies2,3  have indicated that
n-paraffins are the most labile hydrocarbons with branched
paraffins more resistant but more resistant but more easily
oxidized than  either cycloparaffins or aromatics. Our
studies have shown that  the microbial utilization of the
branched  paraffin  pristane  (2,6,10,14-tetramethylpe-
ntadecane)  in seawater, conformed to this pattern. While
the n-paraffins in crude oils were extensively degraded, the
pristane in  the Louisiana crude oil was not metabolized.
However, pristane was rapidly oxidized  when it  was the
only source of carbon and energy in seawater.
    An evaluation of the  effectiveness of microbial crude
oil  degradation  on the sea surface should consider the
relative susceptibilities and rate of utilization of the major
chemical fractions in crude  oils. Therefore,  a standard
chromatographic procedure using activated silica gel4 was
used to fractionate degraded Louisiana crude oil into four
chemical groups;  saturated paraffins (heptane  eluate),
aromatics and naphthenes  (both types of compounds elute
with carbon tetrachloride. and benzene), and  "asphaltic"
compounds  containing oxygen, nitrogen  and  sulfur
(methanol eluate).
                                                   287

-------
288
          TREATING AGENTS
Methods
    Microbially  degraded  oil  samples  were  obtained
through the following procedures.
    Selected mixed cultures (BHMO, OILRIG, SOCLA)!
were  grown on enriched  seawater (ESW, Appendix (A))
agar plates inverted over  Louisiana crude  oil.  Afther 24
hours incubation at 25°C the cells were scraped off the agar
surface and suspended in sterile ESW to an  optical density
of 0.1 (lO? to 108 cells/ml) Each suspension was used to
inoculate three of a series of four flasks. (1.0 ml/flask) each
containing 200 ml of sterile ESW. The fourth flask served as
a sterile control. One-tenth ml (71 ±2.5 mg) of Louisiana
crude oil was dispensed with a 100 microliter syringe into
all  twelve  flasks.  The flasks were sealed to minimize
evaporation and incubated at 20°C. on a rotary shaker (160
rpm). An identical  procedure was used to prepare another
series of flasks for incubation at 30°C.
    The   flasks were  removed from   incubation  at
predetermined intervals and the water phase acidified to a
pH  of 4  with  concentrated HC1. Twenty-five ml of a
benzene-ether solvent mixture (2:1, v/v) was added to each
flask.  Extraction proceeded for at least 24  hours at room
temperature.  The  organic  layer  was then washed  with
acidified distilled water. The spent water phase containing
cells was re-extracted with 25 ml of the solvent mixture and
was normally  colorless.  Both  organic   extracts  were
      combined, dried through  anyhydrous Na2S04, and the
      solvent evaporated to dryness through aspiration.
          The residual crude oil was transfered in a small volume
      of heptane (0.5 ml) to a 9 mm ID. glass column containing
      18  gm  of  activated  silica  gel. The  sample  was
      chromatographed  with  distilled  solvents  of increasing
      polarity. Eluted fractions were collected in tared aluminum
      weighing  dishes (weighed to  nearest 0.1  mg) and the
      solvents  evaporated through gentle heating at 40°C. The
      weights of the eluted fractions were then determined. These
      data are presented in Table 1.


      Observations
          The most extensive weight changes occurred in the
      heptane or saturated paraffin fraction. In contrast to the
      other fractions which  occasionally increased in weight, this
      fraction consistently showed a weight loss. The maximum
      weight  loss  obtained  (18.6 mg,  SOCLA at 30°C) was
      equivalent to 55% of the control heptane  fraction weight.
      Changes in  the  average daily  rate  of weight loss in the
      heptane  fraction are illustrated in Figure  1. These curves
      clearly show the direct dependency of the rates of weight
      loss upon incubation  temperature. The cultures incubated
      at 30°C exhibited rates of weight loss at least twice as large
      as the same cultures incubated at 20°C
                     SOCLA culture at 20°C

                     Fraction   Control     27 hrs
                                (92 hrs)
                     Heptane   32.6       32.6
                     Benzene   10.5       9.4
                     Methanol    3.4       3.1

                     SOCLA culture at 30°C

                     Heptane   33.8*      33.8
                     Benzene   10.6       8.2
                     Methanol    4.8       3.6
                     *72 hrs

                     BHMO culture at 20°C
48 hrs

31.5
 8.2
 3.0
25.0
 8.2
 4.8q
92 hrs

26.1
15.2
 8.0
 5.2
Total   % loss of
change  control
-6.5       19
-2.3       21
-0.4       11
 -18.6*
 -2.6
 -K).4
55
24
                     Fraction    Control  24 hrs   48 hrs   96 hrs   Total    % loss of
                                (96 hrs)
Heptane
CC14
Benzene
Methanol
30.3
4.6
6.1
6.7
29.0
2.9
8.2
7.4
26.4
2.7
7.9
8.0
23.4
1.9
6.5
9.9
-6.9
-2.7
+0.4
+4.8
                     BHMO culture at 30°C
Heptane
CCI4
Benzene
Methanol
30.3
3.4
7.0
5.7
26.6
2.4
8.6
8.4
26.2
2.8
8.6
9.0
23.9
1.9
6.4
7.2
-6.4
-1.5
-0.6
+1.5
                   control
                     22
                     44
                                                                          21
                                                                          44
                                                                          8
                                                                                              Table  1 (Continued)

-------
                                                                                MICROBIAL DEGRADATION
                                                                                                             289
     Table 1
                      OILRIG culture at 20°C

                      Fraction    Control  24 hrs   72 hrs  96 hrs  Total   % loss of
                                 (96 hrs)                         change  control

                                                                           31
                                                                           6
                                                                            17
                                                                           21
Heptane
CC14
Benzene
Methanol
31.9
4.4
10.8
8.2
28.9
5.2
8.5
5.9
26.9
8.8
10.4
7.3
21.8
4.1
8.9 q
6.4
-10.1
-0.3
-1.9
-1.8
                     OILRIG culture at °C
Heptane
CC14
Benzene
Methanol
31.9
3.4
9.2
6.1
24.1
4.0
7.8
5.9
21.9
5.5
9.8
6.7
18.2
2.9
8.0
8.3
-13.7
-0.5
-1.2
+2.2
                                                                           42
                                                                           14
                                                                           13
                      Table 1: Weight (in mg's) Changes in Various Chromatographic Fractions
                      from Louisiana Crude Oil Produced Trhough Microbial Degradation
    OILRIG,  BHMO,  and  to a  lesser degree  SOCLA,
exhibited  a cycle or pattern  of change in their rates of
weight loss. During the initial growth period, the cultures
displayed  their largest rates  of weight loss in the heptane
fraction. A decleration in  the rate of weight  loss then
occurred which was followed by an increase in  rate. The
BHMO culture grown at 20°C was probably repeating this
pattern  over a longer time period. SOCLA, an oil^ositive
culture  (grows and remains at the  oil-water interface 1),
characteristically grows more slowly than the other mixed
cultures. Perhaps SOCLA would have  displayed a  more
developed growth pattern  had the  incubation period been
longer.

    It  is probable that the  initially large rates of weight
loss, or saturated paraffin oxidation, were due to utilization
of  the  smaller,  more  water  soluble   paraffins. Gas
chromatograms of the heptane fractions indicated that only
n-paraffins smaller than C-18 were utilized during the early
growth  periods.  A  shift  in population  produced by
requirements to  metabolize  larger, branched and  normal
paraffins,  or by  the decreased solubility of the larger
paraffins,  may  explain  the specific  growth  patterns
observed.

    The fractions containing aromatic and naphthenic
compounds  exhibited weight  changes  which  were
interpreted to indicate insignificant microbial utilization of
aromatic  and naphthenic  compounds.   Despite  initial
decreases in the weight  of the benzene fractions, consistent
weight losses did not occur. Also, weight changes in these
fractions showed no apparent dependency upon incubation
temperature.
    UV  monitored high  speed column  chromatography
(Appendix (B)) of these aromatic containing fractions,
indicated no substantial changes in the elution patterns of
the UV absorbing  compounds following degradation. This
suggests that the observed weight changes in these fractions
may  have  been due  to: (a)  the production  of large
molecular weight esters polar enough to elute with benzene,
(b) the oxidation of the alkyl side chains of the aromatic
rings  causing  a  loss in fraction weight but not  in  UV
absorption, (c) oxidation  of naphthenic compounds. The
first suggestion is  plausible  since the  production of large
esters  from  n-paraffins is  well documented,^ and IR
internal reflectance spectroscipic analysis of degraded crude
oil indicated the  production  of  oxygenated  material
absorbing in an ester region.
    In contrast to the weight changes of the  aromatic
containing fractions, the methanol eluted material showed
appreciable weight gains. Production of polar molecules no
doubt accounts for these weight increases.
    The  preference these  petroleum degrading organisms
possess for  n-paraffins  suggests a  concept  similar  to
diauxie.5  Diauxic growth  is  the sequential utilization of
preferred substrates from a mixture.
    Additional  support  for diauxie  has been  the
observations  that  SOCLA,  BHMO, OILRIG, and other
mixed cultures grew on and dispersed pure pristane and the
benzene fraction of Louisiana crude when n-paraffins were
not present (Table 2).

-------
 290
         TREATING AGENTS
                   Culture

                   Control
                   BHMO
                   TPLA
                   NOLA
                   C-63
                   SOCLA
                   OILRIG
Louisiana crude
24hrs
0*
slight
0
0
1
slight
slight
48hrs
0
3
2
2
2
3
3
                           Benzene fraction
                           24 hrs     48 hrs
                             0
                             0
                             0
                             0
                             2
                           slight
                             3
                           0
                           3
                           3
                           3
                           4
                           4
                           4
                   *Values refer to relative turbidity, i.e., 0=no turbidity, slight = optical density
                   less than 0.05, 1 = optical density 0.05 to 0.1, 2 = optical density 0.1 to 0.5,
                   3 = optical density 0.5 to 1.0, 4 = optical density greater than 1.0

                  Table 2: Growth of a Series of Mixed Bacterial Cultures on a Louisiana Crude Oil
                  and on  the Benzene Fraction from the  Louisiana Crude Oil
    Gas  chromatographic  evaluation of  the  heptane
fractions (Figures 2  and 3) indicated microbial utilization
of the n-paraffins C-12 through C-30. No odd or even chain
length preference was evidenced and the sequence  of
utilization was inversely related to chain length. The sums
                             of the peak heights  for  each  heptane fraction (Table 3)
                             show a decrease  in  value with time. Although the sums
                             decreased  more   rapidly  at  the  higher  incubation
                             temperatures (OILRIG at 30°C),  the final percentages of
                             n-paraffins oxidized were  similar for all the cultures.
                   OILRIG
CONTROL
(96 hrs)
24 hrs
72 hrs
96 hrs
20°C
30°C
SOCLA
20°C
BHMO
9.60
9.07
CONTROL
(92 hrs)
7.29
CONTROL
(96 hrs)
inn4
9.38
8.16
27 hrs
6.92
24 hrs
S 74
7.04
3.87
48 hrs
4.88
48 hrs
3.34
3.11
92 hrs
2.84
96 hrs
441
Loss as % of
   control

     65
     65
Loss as % of
   control
     61
Loss as % of
   control
     56
                   Table 3:  Changes in the Peak Hieght Sums of the n-Paraffins C-12 to C-30
                   in Louisiana Crude Oil Following Microbial Degradation in Closed Systems.
Simulated Field Studies
Introduction
    As an  intermediate approach to  field  studies,
experiments were  performed in  large outdoor  tanks
(Appendix (C)) containing 900 liters of seawater. Several
assumptions, basic to the  concept of microbial seeding to
accelerate petroleum degradation, were  examined  using
these  tanks. One assumption  was  that  the  seeded cells
would preferentially  remain at the  ofl^water interface.
Constituents within an "open", or unenclosed, system are
                             subject  to dilution. Similarly,  dilution could produce  a
                             decrease in  cell population  at  the  oil-water  interface. It
                             follows  that the overall rate of oil degradation would then
                             be lowered. The other assumption was that significant oil
                             degradation  could be measured in  large volume outdoor
                             tanks.  It  was possible that extensive evaporation would
                             obscure oil removal produced microbiologically. Also, the
                             bacteria would be exposed  to  variations  in  sunlight
                             intensity  and fluctuations in  temperature.  Rather  than
                             attempt to control  these parameters, a rigorous approach
                             was elected and the tanks placed outdoors unprotected.

-------
                                                                                MICROBIAL DEGRADATION    291
   11
   10
                                          20* C
                          01LRIG
                           IHMO
                  Tint   ii   diys
   Figure 1: Changes in the Average Rates of Weight Loss in
           the Heptane Fraction of a Microbially Degraded
           Louisiana Crude Oil.
Methods
    The difficulties in sampling  an oil  slick should  be
obvious. Tank oil slicks were neither homogeneous nor did
the oil  lend itself to  discrete sampling. Since a statistical
approach  was  warranted, a  symmetrical grid to assign
sample locations was superimposed over the tanks.
    Surface ofl samples  were obtained with  glass slides
(9-12 samples/tank),  fiberglass  screens (6 samples/tank),
and Mason jars (5-6 samples/tank). Details of the sampling
procedures are in Appendix (D).
    The ofl removed  on glass slides was termed "sticky"
oil.  Fiberglass screens and  Mason  jars  removed more
complete  surface oil  samples consisting of both "sticky"
and  dispersed  or  "non-sticky" ofl. Laboratory  studies
demonstrated  that "stickiness",  or  the  quantity of  ofl
adhering to a  glass slide, declined  during microbial  ofl
degradation.
    In  the first  tank experiment (#1),  50  ml of  a
pre-evaporated  Louisiana crude ofl was spilled in each of
two  tanks. Pre-evaporation of the  light weight  crude oil
(vigorous  aeration at constant temperature  for 48  hrs)
reduced the concentration of the n-paraffins smaller than
C-15  and caused  a  slight  increase  in ofl  density. This
treatment was  used to decrease the  evaporative  ofl losses
encountered at air temperatures higher than 20°C.
    Each  tank  was sprayed twice with 200 ml  of a  10%
solution of (NH/4)2S04 (indicated as NU on Figures 4 and
5) giving  a final  concentration of  13 mg NH4+/1. By
comparison,  NH4+  concentrations  in Chesapeake  Bay
ranged from 0.05  to 0.1 mg NH4+/1 in the surface water
near Annapolis.6 The inoculated tank was sprayed with 200
ml  of  a  dense  suspension  of BHMO (IQl4  cells/ml)
previously grown for 24 hours in ESW  on Louisiana crude
ofl.
    In the second  experiment (#2) each tank received 100
ml of Louisiana crude ofl. A  BHMO  suspension containing
IQlO cells/ml was  used to inoculate one of the tanks after
both  had  been  sprayed with  200 ml of a 10% solution of
(NH4)2S04.
                                                                                    OILRia
                                                                                    IO*C-Loul(l«iil
                                                                                                 	 CONTROL
                                                                                                 	 72 HOURS
                                                                                                   — M HOURS
                                                                        14
                                                                            16   18      20   22   24   26
                                                                               •-ParoKiB  Mail  Uigtfc
                                                                                                           28
                                        - CONTROL
                                        - » HOURS
                                        - M HOURS
            14
                 1C    W      20   22   24    26
                    •-rWfil  Chill   lllgtk
                                                28
                                                    30
Figure 2:  Changes in the Peak Heights of the n-Paraffins C-12 to
        C-30  in  a Louisiana  Crude  Oil  Due to  Microbial
        Degradation. Incubation Temperatures are Indicated.

-------
 292  TREATING AGENTS
Observations
    Within a day after application of the BHMO culture,
the oil  in the inoculated tanks (Experiment  1 and  2)
appeared  dull and  stringy. The oU in the control tanks
remained darkly colored and tended to form aggregates. If a
glass slide was dipped into the oil in the inoculated tanks,
then washed with benzene, a white film remained attached
to the slide. No similar fflm was detected at the oil-water
interface  in  the control  tanks.  Phase  microscopic
examination of the film revealed  a  solid mass of cells
morphologically similar to the inoculum cells. Cell counts
(Appendix  (E))  obtained during the  course of the
experiments,  indicated that the  bacteria   remained
preferentially at the oil water  interface.  These data are
shown in Table 4.
    The changes in the amounts of surface oil sampled are
presented  in  Figures  4  and  5.  Variations   in  water
temperature are indicated at the sampling times.
             Microbial degration dispersed the pollutant oil so that
         "stickiness'  and  aggregation  decreased  with time. The
         decrease in "stickiness' was indicated by the smaller weights
         of oil removed by the glass slides in the inoculated tanks. A
         reduction in aggregation was shown by the generally lower
         standard deviations in the inoculated tanks.

             The  initial average  rates of  oil  removal were
         consistently larger in the inoculated tanks (Table 5). The
         rates of microbial oil removal were at least twice as large as
         the rates of evaporative oil loss. Larger rates of microbial oil
         removal, obtained in the first experiment, were probably
         due to the smaller volume of oil added and the greater cell
         density of the inoculum. Apparently, pre-evaporation was
         not effective  in  reducing  the  concentration  of low
         molecular weight paraffins  to  a level  where microbial
         growth was limited.
                                    Time after
                                  (culture application)
                                      One hour
                                  (oil-water interface)
Tank Experiment 1
     Inoculated
        tank
                                      Three days
                                  (oil-water interface)

                                                  Tank
                                    Time after
                                  culture application
                                    One hour
                                  (mid-depth

                                    One day
                                  (oil-water interface)

                                    (mid depth)

                                    Two days
                                  (oil-water interface)

                                    (mid-depth)
                                    Five days
                                  (oil-water interface)

                                    (mid-depth)
      2x 105
      cells/cm2
      2x 105
      cells/cm2

      Experiment 2
      Inoculated
        tank

      1.0 x 103
      cells/ml

      9.0 x 104
      cells/cm^
      1.0 x 103
      cells/ml

      3.7 x 104
      cells/cm^
      0.0

      3.7 x 103
      cells/cm^
      0.0
Control
  tank

  0.0

  0.0
Control
   tank

   0.0
   0.0

   0.0


   0.0

   0.0

   0.0

   0.0
                                  *see Appendix for description of most probable
                                  number technique.
                               Table 4: Numbers of Hydrocarbons Degrading Bacteria"

-------
                                                                                MICROBIAL DEGRADATION    293
    After one day, the rates of oil loss in the inoculated
tanks decreased to  values similar to the rates of loss due to
evaporation. These  results were similar to those obtained in
flasks  where  a decrease  in the rate  of saturated paraffin
oxidation  followed depletion of the labile low molecular
weight paraffins.
    The decrease in microbial rate of oil removal could not
have  been due to limiting concentrations  of NH4+.
NH4+-Nitrogen concentrations were  always above 10 mg
NH4+/1, but  competition between algae  and bacteria for
phosphorous  may  have limited further microbial growth.
Algae were frequently observed growing on the walls of the
i tanks.
                         SOCLA
                         M°C-Lou!»l«u Crud.
                                          CONTROL

                                          41 HOURS
                                          12 HOURS
                      II      2t    22    24
                 -P.raffi.   Chaii  Ltigtli
  1.00
                                        	CONTROL
                                        	M HOURS
                                        	»• HOURS
      -15	if	it  '  '  i'i  '   '  *
                ••PoroHia  Cbaii
Figure 3: Changes in the Peak Heights of the n-Paraffins C-12 to
       C-30  in  a  Louisiana  Crude  OB  Due  to Microbial
       Degradation. Incubation Temperatures are indicated.
                                                               The  average  percentages  of oil  remaining on the
                                                           seawater surface  at the termination of the experiments are
                                                           shown in Table 6.
                                                               Gas chromatographic  evaluation  of the surface  oil
                                                           samples showed that the BHMO cells remained active at the
                                                           oil-water interface during the experimental period. Only the
                                                           smaller n-paraffins (smaller than C-15) were utilized during
                                                           the final days of the experiment. The ultimate peak height
                                                           changes (Appendix (F))  are  shown  in Figure 6. The
                                                           numerical sums of the peak heights for each sample (Table
                                                           7) indicate  the relative abundance of n-paraffins (C-12 to
                                                           C-30) remaining  when the sample was obtained. Clearly,
                                                           microbial  seeding  was  responsible  for the  accelerated
                                                           removal of these pollutant n-paraffins.
                                                             Or|»lc
                                                             Cirk*i
                                                              •••
                                                               1*00

                                                              1400 -.

                                                              1200-

                                                              1000-,

                                                               100

                                                               too

                                                               400

                                                               200
                                                                         SCREENS
                                                                                                  GLASS  SLIDES
                                                                    14*
IHOCULAYIO	
•UTIIIIIITI NU
 Oil
•I I

 140
                                                                                      TIME IN DATS

                                                            Figure 4: Experiment 1. Loss of a Pre-evaporated Louisiana Crude
                                                                    Oil Due to Microbial. Seeding of an Oil Slick Under
                                                                    Simulated Field Conditions.
                                            EXPERIMENT 1
                           Sampler           Inoculated Tank
                           Slides              1.3 mg/day/cm2
                           Screens            8.5 ppmC/day/cm2

                                            EXPERIMENT 2
                           Sampler           Inoculated Tank
                           Slides              0.7 mg/day/cm2
                           Jars               4.8 ppmC/day/cm2
                                                                      Control Tank
                                                                      0.6 mg/day/cm2
                                                                      4.0 ppmC/day/cm2



                                                                      Control Tank
                                                                      0.2 mg)day/cm2
                                                                      1.2 ppmC/day/cm2
                           Table 5: Average Rates of Crude Oil Loss During the First
                           24 Hours After Inoculation

-------
  294  TREATING AGENTS

Sampler
Slides
Screens

Sampler
Slides
Jars
EXPERIMENT 1
Inoculated Tank
3.0
4.0
EXPERIMENT 2
Inoculated Tank
19.0
9.0

Control Tank
44.0
56.0

Control Tank
100.0
36.0
                             Table 6:  Average Percentages of Crude Oil Remaining on the Surface
                             at the Termination of the Experiments
          MASON JAIS
GLASS SHOES
Figure 5: Experiment  2. Loss of a Louisiana Crude Oil Due to
        Microbial Seeding of an Ofl Slick Under Simulated Field
        Conditions.
12   H   IS     II     20   22    24   26   21   30
            •-PifiHii Ckil. Uigtli
                                                                                             CONTROL     IMOCULATEOfBHMO)
                            12
                                           II
                                                 26   22   2<   2*   21   30
                                         i-PinHi. C.iii ItMtfc
                       Figure 6: Changes in the Peak Heights of n-Parafflns C-12 to C-30
                              in a Louisiana Crude Oil Due to Microbial Seeding of an
                              Oil Slick Under Simulated Field Conditions.
                                              Tank Experiment 1
                                      0 time            .       Three days
                                 Control     Inoculated   Control    Inoculated
                                 10.24      10.56        7.93          4.60

                                              Tank Experiment 2
                                      0 time     One day      Two days     Five days
                              Con    Inoc     Con    Inoc  Con    Inoc  Con    Inoc
                              11.85    12.18   10.80   10.29 9.83   9.33  8.95    4.30
                             Table 7: Changes in the Peak Height Sums of the n-Paraffins C-12
                             to C-30 in Louisiana Crude Oil Following Microbial Degradation of an
                             an Ofl Slick

-------
                                                                            MICROBIAL DEGRADATION
                                                 295
CONCLUSIONS
    Mixed microbial cultures degraded Louisiana crude oil
in both closed flasks and large seawater tanks. In simulated
field studies, the  application of a mixed microbial culture
to an  oil slick produced a measurable  decrease in  oil
"stickiness" and quantity on the water surface. The initial
rates of microbial oil removal were at least twice as large as
the rates  of evaporation. The largest rates of oil removal
occurred  during  the  initial growth periods. This  was
attributed to utilization of n-paraffms smaller than C-l 5.
    Cell  counts  indicated   thats the  seeded  cells
preferentially remained at the oil-water interface during the
entire experimental period.
    Closed  flask  studies showed a clear metabolic
preference  of the  hydrocarbon utilizing  cultures   for
saturated  paraffins.  The  rates  of oxidation of saturated
paraffins  were  directly  dependent  upon incubation
temperature. The largest  rates  of oxidation of saturated
paraffins occurred during the initial  growth periods when
n-paraffins smaller than C-l 8 were being used. The range of
n-paraffin utilization was from C-l 2 to C-30. Aromatic and
naphthenic  compounds  did not appear  to have been
metabolized.
APPENDIX
    (A)  Enriched  seawater  (ESW)  contains  1  ppt
(NH4)2SO4,10 ppm K2HP04,and 5 ppm yeast extract. The
final pH was adjusted to 8.1.
    (B)  High   pressure  or  high  speed column
chromatography (HSCC) derives its title owing to the use of
a  high  pressure pump which moves  solvent through  the
column. Increasing the rate  of solvent flow substantially
reduces the analysis period.
    A  UV  monitor was  used  with HSCC  to  detect  the
presence of aromatics eluting  from the column. Using silicic
acid (stationary phase) and  cyclohexane (mobile phase)
both  the carbon  tetrachloride  and benzene fractions
showed  characteristic aromatic  elution  patterns.  No
significant alterations of  these  patterns  due to microbial
degradation of the whole oil were observed.
    (C) Plywood  tanks (4'x4'x2') were constructed and
coated with epoxy paint. Sampling ports were located 10
cm below the water surface and at mid-depth. An overflow
tube  was provided for  flow-through  circulation  using
natural seawater. Two submersible pumps were located at
opposite  corners  of the  tanks, approximately  10-15  cm
below the water surface.  These pumps provided turbulent
movement of the upper water layers and the surface slick.
    (D) Glass slides (area = 38.8 cm  2) were treated with
Siliclad*  T. M. (a water soluble silicon solution produced
by Clay-Adams  Co.).  The  slides were then  immersed'
vertically to a constant level in the oil film. The oil adhering
was washed off with benzene  into tared aluminum weighing
dishes. The solvent was gently  evaporated and the residual
 oil weighed.
    Fiberglass screens (area = 122.8 cm2) were treated with
Siliclad. The screens were gently floated onto the oil slick,
removed, and transfered to a sterile Mason jar. The screens
were then mixed in a  blender with seawater and  tribasic
phosphate to emulsify the oil retained. Samples were then
removed for total organic carbon analysis. Duplicate screen
samples were mixed only in seawater and the hydrocarbon
degrading bacterial populations in the oil slick determined
with the dilution tube technique.
    Glass Mason jars (one pint with a sampling area = 28.3
cm^) were  used to  obtain  complete  surface oil slick
samples. Mason jar lids were  suspended by nylon  lines in
the water before adding the oil to the tanks. Samples of the
surface  slick were removed by threading one of the lines
through a 1/4  hole in the bottom of an  inverted sterile
Mason jar. The jar was immersed through the oil slick until
it  was approximately  3/4 full, the top was drawn to the
mouth  tightly  with  the nylon  line,  and the jar  was
withdrawn  from the water.  With the top firmly  held in
place the nylon line was cut and the hole stoppered.
    Water was then drained from the hole in the jar bottom
to a constant volume of 240 ml. The sample was mixed in
blender, and aliquots removed for bacterial enumeration.
The remaining sample was further emulsified in the blender
with tribasic phosphate for total organic carbon analysis.
    (E) Dilution or most probable number technique was
used for cell enumeration. Bacterial cells were   assumed to
be equally distributed in a volume of seawater. A volume of
this water was serially diluted by powers  of ten in tubes
containing  ESW overlain with  Louisiana  crude oil until
growth  no  longer occurred. The most probable number of
cells was equivalent to the dilution factor of the  tube in
which growth last occurred.
    (F) Pristane naturally occurring in the  Louisiana crude
oil was  used as an internal standard to calculate changes in
peak heights of the  n-paraffins  C-l 2 to  C-30.  Due to
evaporation in  outdoor tanks  the ratio  of  phytane to
pristane increased with time. In closed systems this ratio of
relatively resistant branched  paraffins normally remained
constant. Occasionally, the increase in the ratio was even
larger in the inoculated tanks suggesting utilization as well
as evaporation. Although these changes were not very large,
the  peak heights calculated using pristane as  a standard
would  be too small.  To compensate only for biological
utilization, the quotient of the ratios in  both tanks was
found  and  the  peak  heights  in the  inoculated tanks
corrected with this fraction.

REFERENCES
1. R. J. Miget, C. H. Oppenheimer, H. I. Kator, and P. A.
   LaRock, "Microbial Degradation of Normal Paraffin
   Hydrocarbons  in  Crude  Oils,"  Proceedings-Joint
   Conference on Prevention and Control of Oil Spills, 327,
   (1969).
2.  R. W. Stone, M.  R. Fenske,  and  A. G.  C. White,
    "Microorganisms Attacking Petroleum  and Petroleum
   Fractions," J. Bacteriology, 39,91 (1940).

-------
  296   TREATING AGENTS
3. A. C.  Van der Linden and G. J. E. Thijsse, 'The    6. J.  H. Carpenter, D. W. Pritchard, and R. C. Whaley,
   Mechanisms  of Microbial Oxidations of  Petroleum       "Observations of Eutrophication and Nutrient Cycles in
   Hydrocarbons," Adv. Enzymology, 27,469, (1965).           Some Coastal Plane Estuaries,"  In:  Eutrophication:
4. W. G.  Meinschein and  G. S. Kenny,  "Analysis of A       Causes,  Consequences,  Correctives. Proceedings of a
   Chromatographic Fraction of Organic Extracts of Soils,"       Symposium,  National Academy  of Sciences,  Wash.,
   Analytical Chem., 29,1153, (1957).                         D.C., 210, (1969).
5. C. Lamanna and M. F. Ma&ette, Basic Bacteriology, The
   Williams and Wflkins Co., 1001 p., (1965).

-------
                 TOXICITY OF  SOIL  DISPERSING  AGENTS
                        DETERMINED  IN  A  CIRCULATING
                                   AQUARIUM  SYSTEM
                                       Robert H. Engel and Marilynn J. Neat
                                        William F. Clapp Laboratories, Inc.
                                          ofBattelle Memorial Institute
                                            Duxbury, Massachusetts
ABSTRACT
    The toxicity of two non-ionic oil-dispersing agents was
determined on  a number of marine species: the edible
mussel Mytilis  edulis, winter flounder, soft shell clam,
mummichog,  Atlantic  silversides and fourth stage lobster
larvae.
    The  bioassay system used consisted  of a series of
storage reservoirs and exposure tanks with a total volume of
112 liters.  Water movement was provided by a series of
marine aquarium pumps which circulated water at a rate of 4
Kters/min. Additional  aeration  was not required for the
mummichog, mussel or fourth stage lobster larvae.
    At 20°C, TLx's  calculated from  24 to 96 hours fell
between 30 and 75 mg/1,  with no significant difference in
toxicity between the two dispersants.  A t 5°C, toxicity in
the mummichog was  significantly lower; this may  be
explained by the accompanying higher oxygen levels.
    The advantages of the circulating  aquarium system in
relation to the static and continuous-flow bioassay systems
are discussed.

Aquatic Bioassay Method
    Aquatic bioassay methods for the  evaluation of acute
toxicity have routinely been based on the use of static
systems/1)  Usually, the  fish species is introduced into a
series of  tanks containing 5  to  10 gallons of water and
various concentrations  of  the  test  chemical,  and  the
appearance  of  toxic   effects  (e.g., loss of equilibrium,
abnormal gill  movements,  death) is noted over a 96-hour
period. The  main advantage of this method is that  the
procedures are fairly simple and widely applicable in many
laboratories; hence, their general acceptance.
     On  the  other  hand,  the static bioassay system is
 recognized as having a number of inherent disadvantages.
 First,  the  renewal of dissolved oxygen takes place  only
 through surface  absorption,  and  in many cases  this
 absorption is inadequate to maintain the recommended
 minimum dissolved  oxygen levels  (5  ppm for cold-water
 fish), particularly when chemicals having a high biochemical
 oxygen demand are being studied. Oxygen depletion can be
 overcome by aeration; this must be carefully controlled and
 continuously monitored in order to avoid supersaturation.
 However, aeration introduces a second disadvantage, the
 excessive loss of any volatile components that may affect
 toxicity. Although  these materials  are volatilized  at a
 natural rate from the water  surface, aeration can greatly
 acceleiate this loss and  consequently  reduce the toxicity
 that would have been evident under natural conditions.
    A  third disadvantage affects the system  in the opposite
 direction, that of increasing toxicity. This is the constantly
 changing chemical environment brought  about by  the
 species itself, namely, increasing carbon dioxide levels as a
 result of respiration (leading to a fall in pH) and increasing
 ammonia levels as a  result of excretion. This problem is
 often met by daily renewal of the test solutions.

    It  is known  that all of these  disadvantages can be
 avoided by the use of a continuous-flow system. In  this
 system  a large reservoir of the test water and stock solutions
 of the  toxic  chemical are used to  continually renew the
water in the test container. Dissolved oxygen is maintained
at acceptable levels, aeration is not required and toxic waste
products  do not   accumulate.  Unfortunately,  these

 *Research sponsored by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
Division of Water Pollution Control, Project No. 69-6.
                                                    297

-------
  298  TREATING AGENTS
 procedures  are  somewhat unwieldy  and beyond  the
 physical capabilities of many laboratories. Consequently, in
 the  interests of procedural uniformity they are generally
 not  recommended for routine application(2). Also, when
 oil-dispersing chemicals are being tested, this system has the
 disadvantage  that  steady  addition  of  the  dispersant
 continually renews its volatile solvent  component. This
 component, which has been shown to account for most
 dispersant toxicity(3), is normally lost through evaporation
 within the first 48 hours after application,  and any species
 which can withstand this initial  exposure  will usually
 survive.  Continuous  renewal would tend  to distort  the
 results in the direction of higher toxicities. Ironically, it is
 an advantage of the static  system that solvent evaporation
 proceeds as in the natural aquatic environment.
     Between these two extremes there is  a third system,
 the  use  of which  seems to  have  received  very  little
 attention; this is the circulating aquarium system. It would
 appear that this system may offer some distinct advantages,
 particularly in  relation  to the study of  the toxicity of
 oil-dispersing  chemicals.  As  in  the case  of  the
 continuous-flow  system, dissolved oxygen  levels, aeration
 and  build-up of toxic waste products need  not concern the
 experimenter. Also, the single addition of dispersant  at the
 start of  the experiment  permits the effect of the natural
 volatilization of the solvent component  to be reflected in
 the  results. Thus, it  would seem that by studying  the
 toxicity  of  oil-dispersing chemicals  in a  circulating
 aquarium system,  one could combine  the advantages of
 both the static  and the  continuous-flow  systems  while
 avoiding the disadvantages of each.
     In this study,  a circulating aquarium system was used
 to  study  the  toxicity  of two  non-ionic oil-dispersant
 chemicals on  a  number of  marine  vertebrate and
 invertebrate  species. The  dispersants used   were (A)
 Aquaclene-100 (Metropolitan  Petroleum Petrochemicals,
 Inc., Boston, Mass.) and  (B)  CoIloid-88  (a  product of
 Colloid Chemical Co., Brockton, Mass).
     The   marine species  studied were the mummichog,
 Fundulus  heteroclitus;  Atlantic  silversides, Menidia
 menidia; winter flounder, Pseudopleumnectes americanus;
 the soft shell clam, Mya arenaria; the edible mussel,Mytilis
 edulis; and the fourth larval  stage of lobster, Homarus
 americanus. All  species, with the exception of the lobster
 larvae, were collected by the Clapp Laboratory staff from
 Duxbury Bay   and  held  in  the  laboratories' 24-hour
 continuous-flowing sea water system until use. Fourth stage
 lobster larvae were generously supplied by Mr. John Hughes
 of the Massachusetts State Lobster Hatchery on Martha's
 Vineyard.  The  larvae were brought  to  the  laboratory
 packed in ice and assays begun within 16 hours.

Circulating Aquarium System
    The bioassay tanks were constructed by 1/4" plexiglass
sealed with ethylene dichloride; the dimensions are shown
in Fig. 1. These tanks were designed to be easily converted
from a  circulating system to  a continuous-flow system.
Hence, their physical arrangement is more involved than
 necessary  for just a  circulating  aquarium  system.  The
 operating volumes of the reservoir and exposure tanks were
 76 1 (20 gal.) and 36 1 (9.5 gal.), respectively. All internal
 seams  were'sealed with a silicone rubber aquarium sealer
 manufactured by Dow Corning  Corporation,  Midland,
 Michigan. This material is inert in sea water and does not
 dry out when the tanks are not in use. The tanks were well
 cured in sea water before use.
     For the  circulating aquarium system, a series of six
 reservoir tanks and six exposure tanks was connected with
 Tygon tubing, as shown in Figs. 2 and 3. Plastic screening
 across  exit holes of the exposure tank prevented the smaller
 species from entering  the reservoir tank. Circulation was
 provided by Aquamaster aquarium pumps (Model PL, E. G.
 Danner Mfg.  Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y.), operating continuously
 during  the  assay  period  at a  pumping  rate  of  4
 liters/minute. This rate resulted in a circulation time of
 approximately 20 minutes for the entire  112 1. No filtering
 material  was  used  in the   filter box. The  bioassay
 temperature was maintained at  20°C in each system with a
 single  10" aquarium heater. During the  warmer summer
 months the laboratory was air-conditioned to below 20°C.
 A number of experiments  were carried out at 5°C  by
 placing the bioassay apparatus in a constant-environment
 room maintained at that temperature.
                       17"
                     k
          -23"-
                     Overflow tube
                       1.5" 1.0.
                     Alt other tubing
                       0.5 " I. D.
          k—11.5"-*]
Reservoir Tank
J
         -27.5"-

                                —11.5"-
                     All tubing
                      0.5" I.D.
                      Exposure Tank


            Figure 1: Dimensions of Bioassay Tanks
         Reservoir Tank
           Figure 2: Circulating Aquarium System

-------
                                                               TOXICITY OF OIL DISPERSING AGENTS .. .
                                                                                                            299
     Figure 3:  Circulating Aquarium System in Operation
    The  basic  bioassay  procedure  was  as follows:
mummichog, silversides and flounder were fasted 48 hours
prior to the experiment. Soft shell clams and mussels were
maintained in flowing sea  water and used within 48 hours.
Species  were placed  in  the exposure tanks (at least  10
specimens per concentration) and sufficient time allowed
for the circulating system  to equilibrate to 20°C. (up to 24
hours).  Because  of the natural  cannibalism of fourth  stage
lobster  larvae, it was necessary  to isolate  the individual
specimens in the exposure tank. Each larvae was therefore
placed in individual glass tubes, 2 inches in length, covered
at each end with a  small piece of plastic screening. This
procedure permitted free  movement  of the larvae,  open
circulation through glass tube and the identification of each
molt during the assay period.
    Following withdrawal of an initial water sample, the
appropriate   weights  of  dispersant were   added to  the
reservoir tanks of five of the systems, the sixth serving as
control, and the tanks maintained in this condition for 96
hours. Oxygen  levels and mortalities  were  determined for
each concentration at 24,48, 72 and 96 hours.
    Median  tolerance limits were calculated by means of
straight  line graphical  interpolation  on semi-logarithmic
coordinate paper as described in Standard Methods. In each
case,  at least two experiments were required to determine
the TLm and all data obtained were combined into a single
plot.  All  experimental  points  falling between 5% and 95%
survival were plotted except in those instances when  the
oxygen level fell below 5 ppm.
 Results and Discussion

     The experimental work in  this study was carried out
 between January and December 1970. The characteristics
 of Duxbury Bay water during this time is shown in Table 1.
 Only oxygen exhibited  a cyclical pattern,  falling  to  the
 lower limits during the summer months.
AVERAGE
RANGE
VARIATION
pH
7.71
7.45-7.98
7
ALKALINITY
(MG/I CaC03)
103.9
96.6-109.0
11
HARDNESS
(MG/I CaC03)
5,823
5,410-6,860
21
OXYGEN
(PPM)
7.70
5.06-10.50
42
                                                                                  TABLE 1
    Of  the  species studied,  the  mummichog,  the edible
mussel and fourth stage lobster larvae could be maintained,
without  aeration,  at  20°C for 96 hours at oxygen levels
above 5  ppm  (Fig. 4). Dissolved  oxygen varied from 5 to
7.8 pp. The data for  mummichog is shown in'Fig. 5.  At
20°C, dissolved oxygen varied from 5 to 8 ppm and at 5°C,
from 7 to 12 ppm. The average total weight of mummichog
was 80 mg/1,  well below the 2 g/1 recommended for the
static bioassay system. Similar data for the edible mussel
and the fourth stage lobster larvae are shown in  Figs. 6 and
7. In each, dissolved oxygen was easily maintained above 5
ppm during the 96-hour period.  In the  case of Atlantic
silversides, a  species  requiring higher  oxygen levels,
continuous aeration was used at 20°C  (Fig. 8). This was
done  in  order  to  insure  that the data on the dispersant
chemicals would be obtained  under adequately oxygenated
conditions. The results would indicate that aeration was
probably unnecessary,  oxygen  levels  averaging  above 7
ppm. With studies conducted at 5°C, no aeration was used,
and  the  system remained  fully  oxygenated. The average
total weight of silversides was  .35 g/1.
    Aeration was required for bothflounder and soft shell
clam (Figs.  9  & 10),  although the latter required only 20
minutes  a day. In the  case of the flounder, the average total
weight of the fish was 25 g/1.
    Median tolerance  limits (TLm's) of the species tested
are presented in Table 2.
    12
   10
                              2
                            Day
 Figure 4: Dissolved Oxygen Levels for Species Maintained Without
         Aeration. The Variation Shown is the Total Range.

-------
300   TREATING AGENTS
Figure 5:  Dissolved Oxygen Levels for Mummichog at 5  and 20
   12
   IO
                                I
      1123
                              Day

       Figure 6: Dissolved Oxygen Levels for Edible Mussel
Figure 8: Dissolved Oxygen Levels for Atlantic Silver sides at 5  and
         20°C.
                                                                          Figure 9:  Dissolved Oxygen Levels for Flounder


                                                                    12 i	1	1	T
 Figure  7:  Dissolved Oxygen Levels for Lobster (4th Stage Larvae)
      Figure 10: Dissolved Oxygen Levels for Soft Shell Clam

-------
                                                               TOXICITY OF OIL DISPERSING AGENTS ...   301
    The 96-hour TLm's of all  species appear to be very
similar (from 25 to 70 mg/1), and there would seem to be
no essential  difference in  toxicity  between  the  two
dispersants. Portmann and Conner (3), reporting on  the
toxicity of a dozen dispersing agents to shrimp, shore crabs
and cockles, found 48-hour TLm's to be generally below
100 mg/1. They also noted that there  appeared to be little
difference in toxicity between species, an observation borne
out by the present study.
    The  short term, 24-hour toxicity found in the case of
mummichog, silversides,  flounder   and lobster larvae
suggests  that the toxicity is due to the relatively volatile
solvent  fraction of the  oil dispersant. This  was further
indicated by placing  mummichogs in  dispersant solution
that had been circulating four days. No mortaility occurred
during 48 hours at the TLm of the mummichog. Thus, as
with most  dispersant chemicals,  toxicity appears to be due
primarily to the solvent rather than the  emulsifier.
SPECIES
MUMMICHOG
ATLANTIC .
SILVERSIDES
WINTER
FLOUNDER
SOFT.SHELL
CLAM

MEDIAN
DISPERSANT AT 24 HOURS AT
A
B
A
B
A
B
A
B
EDIBLE MUSSEL A
B
LOBSTER
(4TH STAGE)
A
B
•SUPPLEMENTAL AERATION
TEST TEMPERATURE: 20 C
FIGURES IN PARENTHESES
0 AND 100% SURVIVAL.
60
(70)
26
35
40
47
>)40
>120
>IOO
>100
54
50
PROVIDED.
ARE BASED ON FEWER
TOLERANCE
41 HOURS
50
(70)
25
32
(31)
46
71
>100
95
LIMIT. TL, (MG/1)
AT 72 HOURS
(44)
(70)
25
32
(31.
46
76
(45)
56
43
46 46
46 46
THAN 5 CONCENTRATIONS
AT 96 HOURS
(44)
(70)
25
32
(3»)
46
(50)
(45)
3)
51
46
BETWEEN
                       TABLE 1

    Both molluscan  species tested  showed  an increasing
 toxic response to the dispersants during the 96-hour assay
 period, as evidenced by the lower TLm on each successive
 day.  The  cumulative effect  for  molluscan species may
 indicate a  different  mechanism  of  toxicity,  perhaps
 involving the emulsifier.
    In the case of the lobster larvae, it was noted that glass
 tubes  containing  a  dead  larva  usually  contained  an
 accompanying molt, while very  few  molts were  found
 associated  with the surviving larvae. This would indicate
 that  lobster  larvae  are  particularly  sensitive  to these
 dispersants immediately after molting.
    The results of bioassays  conducted at  5°C  are
 summarized  in Table 3. Two opposing effects in^ toxicity
 can be expected when running experiments at 5°C versus
 20°C. First, the lower metabolic rate of the species involved
 would presumably decrease the toxicity, as assimilation of
 the toxic material would not occur as rapidly. This effect
 would tend to be offset by the slower rate of evaporation at
 the  lower  temperature, thereby  maintaining  a   higher
 concentration of the toxic component during the course of
 the  experiment.  Between   5°C  and  20°C  no essential
 difference in toxicity  was  seen  with  silversides.  The
mummichog appeared  to be much  less sensitive  to  the
dispersant at 5°C which  may have been due to the lower
metabolic rate at  that temperature.  It  would seem that
there  is  little  justification  for  incorporating  temperature
studies into a routine  toxicity  program, as the effect on
each  particular  species  would  have to  be  determined
individually. For routine screening, tests conducted at the
highest inshore summer  temperature as  recommended by
LaRoche et al  (4) should be adequate.
SPECIES
MUMMICHOG
ATLANTIC
SILVERSIDES
TEMPERATURE
5
20
5
20
MEDIAH
AT 24 HOURS AT
no
 HOUR!
200
50
23
25
LIMIT. TL_ (MG/1)
AT 72 HOURS AT
(146)
(44)
!<
25

96 HOUR!
(191)
(44)
(19
(25)
                        TABLE 3

    As  marine  zooplankton  appear to  be  extremely
sensitive to these chemicals,  (Calanus flnmarchicus  and
Acartia clausi, two  important food  species, succumbing
within  one hour at concentrations of 50 and 25  mg/1,
respectively), the toxicity of both dispersans toward marine
plankton was tested at a dispersant  concentration of 30
mg/1,  the  TLm of Atlantic silversides. This exposure was
carried out  under  static  conditions on  plankton  tow
samples   without  aeration. Microscopic  examination
revealed a population dominated by copepods and nauplii,
the latter being more numerous. Polychaete larvae were also
fairly common and there were small numbers of cladoceras
nematodes, foraminifera and phytoplankton. All organisms
were  alive  and  vigorous.  Twenty-four  hours  after  the
addition of each dispersant, 90% of the organisms were
dead or moribund. It appeared that larval polychaetes were
more resistant than other  organisms. The importance of
these species in marine food webs, the rapid appearance of
toxicity and the ease with which  marine plankton can be
handled suggest  that further consideration should be given
to including plankton grab samples in future programs of
toxicity testing.
    The circulating aquarium system used in this study was
designed to be  easily  converted  to a  continuous-flow
system, with either separate compartmentalized units or a
single  large water reservoir. The result was a design which,
at  times,  became  unwieldy  to  work  with, particularly
during cleaning. For most of the species tested, there would
seem to be little reason to increase the  size of the assay
vessel beyond the 36 liters contained in the exposure tanks.
Plastic  tanks  of this size with attached  pumps should be
adequate  for most  species except those requiring more
water  and  circulation, such as flounder. Aquarium systems
are easily maintained and do not require the larger working
areas  and  attention of continuous-flow  systems.  The
constant levels of dissolved oxygen and  the more natural
rate of dispersant volatilization suggest that this system is
particularly suitable for bioassay of oil-dispersing chemicals.
    Mention of commercial products  does  not imply
endorsement.

-------
302 TREATING AGENTS
REFERENCES                                         3.  J.  E.  Portmann and  PM. Conner.'The Toxicity  of
                                                        Several Oil-Spill Removers to Some Species of Fish and
1. "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and     Shellfish," Marine Biol. 1 322-329(1968).
Wastewater", 12th edition,  American Public Health     .  r  T oDrt. „  D  -..   „„* r M T-, ,«™n  "n-^,,c ,
     .  .      '  v, v,,  /tntc\   CAC                       4.  O. LaRoche, R. bisler and C. M. Tarzwell,  Bioassay
Association, Inc., N.Y.C. (1965), p 545.                      Procedures for Oil and Oil-dispersant Toxicity Evaluation,"
2. Ibid., p. 562.                                          J. Water Poll. Cont. Fed. 42 1982-1989 (1970).

-------
               OIL  SPILL TREATMENT  WITH  COMPOSTED
                                     DOMESTIC REFUSE
                                       Walter G. Vaux, Stephen A. Weeks,
                                              Donald J. Walukas
                                         Industrial Ecology Research
                                      Westinghouse Research Laboratories
                                        Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235
 ABSTRACT

    Floating crude oil can be absorbed and recovered with
compost made from domestic refuse. Experiments showed
that compost floats on  water without  wetting  until  it
encounters  oil,  then  absorbs  oil at  3.4 ml crude/gram
compost (19 barrels/ton).
    Oil-saturated compost forms cohesive masses which are
easily retrieved from water.  Floating  masses of  oily
compost  bum vigorously and  leave  a coke-like residue
which sinks. Oily compost can be sunk; underwater  it
breaks into small suspended particles which disperse and
degrade.
    Ocean tests off San Diego demonstrated that very thin
and  thick (1.5  mm)  films  can be treated and removed
quickly.
    This  method can  be applied to  (i) absorption and
recovery, (ii) absorption and sinking,  (Hi) absorption and
ignoring. Treated oil when left afloat is non-adhesive and
will not  stain vessels  or wildlife,  compost  will aid
decomposition of the sequestered oil which washes ashore.
Retrieved oily compost may  be burned at sea or on shore.
    Economic studies  show the use of compost to be
competitive.  Compost  is  inexpensive, continuously
available, stable, easily transported and distributed at sea.

INTRODUCTION

    The idea of treating  oil slicks with composted refuse
arose in a formal  brainstorming session.  Two researchers
had independently noticed that compost is difficult to wet,
yet it readily absorbs oil. The conclusion that  compost
might absorb floating  oil led to bench-top experiments
which showed the surprising effectiveness of compost in oil
spill treatment.
    In the lab  experiments compost sprinkled over oil
floating on water in a one-liter beaker quickly absorbed the
oil  and formed cohesive sponge-like masses. The masses
remained intact and floating after agitation. Quantitative
measurements of compost's absorption capacity for pump
oil — no crude was available then — showed a capacity of
2.8 ml oil/gram of compost or 16 barrels of oil absorbed
per ton of compost.

Compost: Character, Availability
    Cura brand compost, used in  all  of  our  tests, was
manufactured from domestic refuse  by  the International
Disposal  Corporation  of  St.  Petersburg,  Florida.  The
composting process includes magnetic, ballistic, and hand
separation of non-compostables, then grinding, composting,
drying and final grinding. Composting is aerobic and, in the
five-day reaction, temperatures rise to 170°Fwith an earthy
odor.
    The St. Petersburg plant's daily capacity is conversion
of 100 tons of refuse to 70 tons of compost.

Oil Spill Treatment Method
Absorption Experiments
    We evaluated compost along with two  other common
and somewhat similar absorbent candidates. The oil used
was a sample of African Crude supplied by  Gulf Research.
The  absorbents tested were Cura  brand  compost, fine
sawdust with some coarse shreds, and oven-dried peatmoss.
    Crude was  floated on water in 1000 ml beakers.
Absorbents were added  in slight deficiency. When the
absorbents were saturated — about 10 minutes at 20°C —
the clumps formed were removed with a wire screen.  After
allowing the excess oil to drip from the screens for five
minutes, the volume of unabsorbed oil was  measured. The
                                                    303

-------
 304   TREATING AGENTS
results of these measurements are summarized in Table 1.
     Table 1:- Results of Crude Oil Absorption Tests
                     Vol oil absorbed/mass of absorbent
                        ml/g    mean    bbl/ton
Absorbent

Compost

Sawdust

Peatmoss
                        3.7
                        3.1
                        6.5
                        8.1
                        2.5
                        3.8
3.4
7.3
3.2
19
42
18
The results show that there was no significant difference in
the capacities of compost and  peatmoss.  However, the
capacity of sawdust was double the capacity of compost or
peatmoss.
    Each absorbent took up oil to its full capacity since it
was spread directly on a continuous oil surface. Compost
and peatmoss are difficult to wet with water and float until
they encounter a patch  of floating oil. Sawdust, on the
other hand, wets immediately and sinks within five seconds.
Unless sawdust can be placed directly on a continuous film
of oil its efficacy will be limited.

Burning of Oil Soaked Compost
    Burning of spilled  oil is discouraged, particularly near
populated  shores.  The  sooty  smoke  from  possible
incomplete combustion may cause secondary  pollution in
the air. Yet we can envision situations, — say far at sea, or
when retrieval equipment is unavailable, — where  it would
be better to rid oil from the water before it dispersed too
widely.
    Oil  burning was first  tested in the laboratory in a
beaker.  The  intensity  of the  flames and  smoke quickly
ended the indoor testing.
    In a three-square-foot outdoor water trough,  1500 ml
of floating crude oil was absorbed into about 500 grams of
compost.  Ten  minutes  after compost application, the
saturated mass was ignited.
    The oil burned vigorously on  the water and generated
dense black smoke. After ten  minutes the oil combustion
stopped very suddenly. A  coke-like residue remained.  It
sank.

Biological Degradation
    A beaker of oil-soaked  compost in water has been kept
at room  temperature for several months. One  month after
the beginning of these  observations fungus invasion of the
mass was evident. The mass then  broke into small — about
10 mesh—particles which suspended in the  water. The
particles  were non-adhesive.  Subsequent aerobic  activity
was  indicated by the  odor of suspended  particles.  After
several  months  particles  were  still  in suspension  and
non-adhesive. No free oil was evident at any time.
Field Tests At San Diego
    Westinghouse Ocean Research  Laboratory  scientists
tested  the compost absorption method at  sea  on  28
October 1970. During the tests  the sea was calm with less
than  a 4 knot  wind.  Signal  Oil  Company  provided
Huntington Beach crude oil  for the test. The Cura brand
compost  was  assayed  at 14% moisture; above the  5%
normal moisture, because of heavy dew and rain before the
test. Test  slicks were overtreated because of Coast Guard
surveillance and sensitive public concern at the time.
    In an initial test one gallon of crude oil spread to a
circular film 120 feet in diameter. Average slick thickness
was 0.00014 inches. The crew  of a small boat broadcast
compost  over  the slick. Although  there was no  clump
formation, oil  was  soaked  up  wherever   it contacted
compost particles. Floating compost and  oil were collected
in a plywood vee suspended between the twin hulls of the
recovery vessel  R/V MIDWIFE. The 1/4 inch mesh at the
vee allowed oily compost to escape and only one quarter of
the oily compost was recovered.
    In a second test one gallon of crude was treated with
26.5 Ib of compost after the slick had spread to a six-foot
diameter circle. Average slick thickness was 0.06 inches. All
of the oil was covered and formed into clumps 2 to 3 inches
in diameter. As the clumps dispersed, no oil was visible.
    All floating clumps were recovered within 15 minutes.
No trace of oil or compost remained. The retrieval system
recovered  16.5 Ib of oily, wet compost. The remainder
sank.
    In a final test one gallon of crude in an 8 foot diameter
circle was treated with compost. The floating material was
sprayed  with seawater  and  sank.  Churning  the
compost-treated slick  with the  small boat's engine proved
effective in sinking all traces of oil and compost.
    Two hours and twenty minutes after the first  test, all
experiments were completed and all traces  of the  several
slicks were gone.
    The  results of  these experiments show that compost
does absorb floating oil in very thin or heavy films, and that
all  remnants of a treated slick can be sunk by spraying or
agitation.
Compost Distribution Tests
    The primary candidate for broadcasting compost at sea
is the snowblower. A machine has been tested and  it picks
up,  transports,  and  broadcasts  compost  in the  same
effective manner that it handles snow.
    The snowblower is well suited to skid mounting for use
on a boat or barge. Either bulk or bagged compost could be
blown over an oil  spill  with a  minimum of compost
handling or labor.

DISCUSSION
Other Absorbents
    Today's most prevalent   absorbent  is  straw.  San
Francisco  treated its January, 1971 spill of 800,000 gallons
with straw.

-------
                                                                         COMPOSTED DOMESTIC REFUSE   305
    The State of Maine has prepared a contingency plan for
oil spill prevention, containment, and cleanup. 1 The plan
explains that, "straw is not necessarily the best absorbent
available, but it is quite definitely the cheapest. We have
found that it is very difficult to obtain straw in the State of
Maine." The cost of baled straw, F.O.B. the farm, is close
to $10.00/ton at the minimum. Straw absorbs five times its
weight in oil.2
    Other  absorbents  include coated  talc, polyurethane
foam, perlite, and pine bark.

Cost Comparison with Existing Treatments
    Gilmore^ et. al., give cost estimates for oil spill cleanup
of  several techniques.  These  include  a  sinking material
(treated  chalk)  at  $44  per barrel, and  straw absorbent
which is recovered and buried on shore at $18/barrel.
recovered and buried on shore at  $18/barrel.
    To recover  the oil  soaked  straw  aboard ship  costs
$7.10  per barrel. This cost includes: (1) $50 per ton of
straw delivered to port, (2) $5  per hour loading cost, (3)
$60 per ton loading  cost, and  (4)  recovery  costs of oil
soaked straw at $64 per ton of applied straw. Thirty tons of
straw is assumed to absorb 1000 barrels  of oil. The cost
estimate allows for a 30% excess application which results
in a total application rate of 39 tons per 1000 barrels.
    To treat an oil spill with compost and to recover the oil
soaked compost  aboard  ship  costs $6.10 per  barrel of oil
spilled. These costs include:  (1) $30 per ton of compost
delivered to port (This  includes a credit for regular handling
costs paid by the disposal  company),(2) $1 per ton loading
costs  (by  snowblower), (3)  $18 per ton application to oil
spill (by snowblower), and (4) $29 per  ton recovery costs
(by  purse  seiner). Allowance  is  made  for  48%  excess
treatment and thus a application rate of 78 tons of compost
per 1000 barrels of oil spilled.

Various Ways of Applying  the Method
    The results of at-sea tests off San Diego suggest several
ways in which the method can be applied.
    Probably the best protection to our water and  shore
environments would be through  treatment and recovery of
oily compost. The large clumps  of oily  compost are easily
retrieved by a rigid net towed through the water.
    In the  absence of danger to shellfish beds, a second
technique  is to   absorb  and  sink. Long-term laboratory
tests have shown that oil  is not released  from compost, but
that  the   oil-compost  mixture  suspends  in  water and
degrades.  No free oil is released and the suspension particles
are not adhesive.
    A third possibility is  to absorb and  ignore, perhaps the
only possibility in an  immediate threat to beaches, resorts,
 estuaries, or populous areas. Unlike oil-soaked straw, the oil
soaked compost forms  non-staining clumps  or particles
which will not stain vessels or adhere to birds and animals.
Waves and wind  action will serve to sink the treated compost
 which will disperse.
    A  fourth possibility is to allow oily compost to wash
ashore  and  plow it into the beach sand. Under aerobic
conditions the compost will aid decomposition in much the
same way that oily bilge water is decomposed in soil along
the Gulf Coast.

Utilization of Recovered  Compost
    Much of the  proposal for using recovered compost is
conjecture  and we  can at  present list only practicable
possiblities.
    Tests have shown that  retrieved  oil-soaked compost
burns completely  and that the compost mat remaining after
recovery by squeezing burns  cleanly in air. Either could be
used as a fuel at sea or on shore.
    Recovered  oily compost  could be  disposed  of
aerobically  by incorporation into the soil. Applications of
5.00  to 1000  tons  per acre  could  degrade  without
introduction of hydrocarbons into the groundwater. Soil
would  be recoverable for farming within one year.

CONCLUSIONS
    1.  Compost,  formed  from domestic  refuse,  is
hydrophobic, and oleophilic. It  is effective  in  absorbing
floating oil.

    2. Oil  soaked  compost  floats, but  can be sunk  by
spraying or agitation.
    3. Oil  soaked  compost initially  forms into
sponge-like masses which can be  recovered from the water.
    4. Compost oil masses eventually break up  into small
particles which suspend in water. Neither the large  masses
or fine particles  will  stain  vessels or wildlife. The oily
compost degrades biologically.
    5. Compost-treated crude   oil  burns vigorously  on
water leaving a coke-like residue which sinks.
    6. Tests at sea demonstrated that spilled oil  can be
treated, then recovered or sunk quickly.
    7. A commercial snowblower is effective in compost
distribution.
    8.  Recovered  compost can  be  burned  either   as
collected or after the bulk of absorbed oil is pressed out.

REFERENCES
     1. Portland Harbor Pollution Abatement Committee,
1970.  Oil  and hazardous  materials contingency plan  for
prevention, containment and cleanup for  the State  of
Maine. 40 Commercial St., Portland, Maine, 35 p.
    2. Chemical Engineering News, 1970. Dillingham plant
attacks oil spill cleanup problem.  July 27, p. 34-36.
    3. Pattison, D.A., 1969. Oil spill cleanup: a matter of
$'s and methods. Chemical Engineering, V. 76, N. 3, Feb.
10, P.  50-52.
    4. Gilmore, George A., et. al., 1970. Systems study of
oil  spill cleanup  procedures,  Dillingham  Corporation.
American Petroleum Institute, New York.

-------
PHYSICAL REMOVAL AND CONTAINMENT
               Chairman: A. Cywin
           Environmental Protection Agency

              Co-Chairman: H. Bernard
           Environmental Protection Agency

-------
        A  STUDY OF  THE  PERFORMANCE  CHARACTERISTICS
                 OF THE  OLEOPHILIC  BELT "OIL  SCRUBBER"
                                                 J.P. Oxenham
                                          Shell Pipe Line Corporation
                                     Research and Development Laboratory
ABSTRACT
    Analyses and experimentation have indicated that the
maximum recovery rate of an oleophilic belt oil recovery
system is generally limited by the rate at which oil may be
transferred to  the belt surface and interior.  The rate of
absorption  of oil  by  an oleophilic belt increases with
increasing specific surface and permeability  of the belt
material,  increasing slick depth, decreasing oil viscosity, and
decreasing  interfacial  tension between  the oil and belt
material In operations with high viscosity oils and high belt
speeds significant quantities of oil may  be withdrawn on
the belt's outer surface. The oil scrubber's performance is
not detrimentally affected by the presence of waves, nor by
the presence of solid  materials,  emulsions,  or  "rag" in
limited quantities. The stability of the belt is a primary
concern for  operations  in  the presence of transverse
currents.

    Oil slicks may be removed from the surface of water by
several methods. The  oil  may  be burned on the water's
surface, sunk  by  the  application of a  dense oleophilic
material  of large  surface area,  or emulsified by the
application of a detergent. After each of these procedures,
oil residues remain on  the surface, bottom, or within the
water for some  time  after the  removal  operation. The
alternative is to recover and separate the oil from the water
for transport to a remote location for disposal. This may be
accomplished directly by  the use of suction or weir type
skimming devices, or,  indirectly, by first chemically or
physically modifying the slick to facilitate  its recovery. To
date, skimming devices have proven very inefficient  due to
the undesirably large amounts of water obtained  with the
oil, especially in the presence of wind and wave action. The
use of sorbent  materials has proven more desirable in terms
of the oil-to-water ratios of the recovered materials, but the
difficulties of containing and collecting sorbents once they
are dispersed upon the oil surface are considerable. The
oleophilic belt oil scrubber is intended to obtain the high
oil-to-water  ratios  of sorbents  while  eliminating the
problems of recovering vast quantities of material loosed
upon the water surface.
    The oil scrubber utilizes a continuously cycled, endless,
buoyant, oleophilic belt to  recover oil from the water's
surface. The belt is drawn over the water, across the area of
an oil slick, passed through a set of wringers to remove the
sorbed oil  from the  belt material, and returned  to the
water. An idler pulley is generally employed to extend the
belt away from the wringing and driving machinery.

    The  oil  scrubber concept is  appealing due to its
simplicity, economy,  and portability. Early investigations
indicated that, with a low power requirement, near total oil
recovery  was  possible,  and that the device  remained
effective  in moderate  currents  and  seas. Large oil volume
recovery  rates appeared possible  due to  the high
oil-to-water  ratios  obtainable.  Model tests  in the
Netherlands2  were encouraging,  as the models  operated
smoothly and remained effective in the presence of flotsam.
During these investigations, polypropylene wool was chosen
for the  inner belt material on the  merit of its oleophilic
qualities, high porosity, permeability,  buoyancy,  durable
resilience, flexibility, and high strength.
    A  three-month, integrated program of mathematical
modeling and experimentation was undertaken at Shell Pipe
Line Corporation's Research and Development Laboratory
in Houston, Texas, under sponsorship of the U.S. Coast
Guard,*to  obtain a working  knowledge  of the factors
influencing  the  oil scrubber's performance. The object of
*The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private ones of
the writer and  are not to be  construed as official 01 reflecting
the views of the Commandant or the Coast Guard at-laige.
                                                    309

-------
310   PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
this investigation was to develop an  understanding  of the
basic  phenomena  involved  in  the  system's  operation,
sufficient  to  allow the  prediction  of the  performance
characteristics of proposed oil recovery devices of this type.
    The  process of removing  oil from water surfaces  by
means of a continuous oleophilic belt consists of four basic
steps. These steps, and factors related to each, are:
0)   The transport of  oil  on the water surface to the
      proximity of the belt
        a) Spreading of the slick due to gravitational and
           surface tension forces.
        b) Influence of wind, current,  waves, and belt
           motion on movement of the slick.
        c) Use  of booms  and  surface active  chemicals in
           proximity to the belt.
        d) Lateral movement of the recovery belt.
(2)   The transfer of oil from the water surface to the belt
      surface and interior.
        a) Imbibition  of oil by the  belt while in motion.
        b) Withdrawal  of  fluids on the belt  surface upon
           removal of the belt from the water.
        c) Mixing of oil and water by the belt and effects
           due to the presence of emulsion or sludge.
        d) The   presence  of detergent  chemicals in the
           water and oil.
(3)   The transport of oil by  the belt to the wringer
        a) Influence of the relative motion of the water on
           the oil holding ability of the belt.
        b) Draining of oil through the  interior and from
           the surface of the belt when it is lifted from the
           water.
(4)   The wringing operation
        a) Pressures created within the belt  by rollers or
           other wringing devices.

        b) Traction forces of the  wringers on the belt (if
           drive is supplied  through  the wringer-rollers, as
           has been the case to date).
        c) Deterioration of belt properties with use.
The maximum flow rate obtainable with a given system will
be determined  by  the  minimum of the set  of maximum
flow  rates permitted by each  of the above  steps for that
system.


            QMAX3'4


Thus, if the QIM AY mav ^e determined for  each of these
steps, the  overall   performance  of  the system may be
predicted.
Oil Absorption by the Belt
     Fundamental to the operation of the oleophilic belt oil
scrubber,  is the absorption of oil by the belt  while  it is
floating on the water. To  demonstrate  the  influence of
various fluid and belt material properties on the imbibition
rates, the  driving force of the flow in a single capillary  may
first be considered. The condition of equilibrium for point
P in Figure la is
           °a,o cos a = (CTa,s - ao,s)
                                                    0)
          .o^s  ar>d  °o,s are tne  interfacial tensions of
air-oil, air-solid, and oil-solid respectively. Thus
           a = cos"
                        a,o
The driving force for the single capillary is then

           F = 27170,, n cos a =
                                                    (2)
                                                    (3)
Here  A0a 0  = (oa,s"°o,s)>  or tne driving force per  unit
circumference of the interfacial tensions.
    For the absorption of oil  by a section  of  porous
material, as illustrated in Figure Ib. the driving force of the
flow  becomes  the   sum  of the  driving forces  of the
interfacial  tensions  in   each  of  the  pores  over  the
cross-section area A of the material.

            F = 2 F; = Aoa n 2?r2 r;                 (4)
                A              A '

The  effective  driving  pressure  may  then  be  found by
dividing by the fluid area,
            AP  = Aa

                             2
                             A
                                      Aa.
                                                     (5)
where L is the specific surface, or pore surface area per unit

                     A I R
             Figure la - Driving Force in a Capillary

-------
                                                                           OLEOPHILIC BELT OIL SCRUBBER  311
               Porous   Medium
Figure Ib - Absorption of Oil by a Porous Oleophilic Material

volume  of the  material.  When  the  driving  pressure  is
expressed in this form, the cross-section  of the pores need
not be assumed circular.
    Equation (5) makes  no allowance for the non-parallel
walls  of the capillaries. The variation in the angle between
the pore walls and the  normal to the interfacial plane must
be  accounted  for  by  replacing  £ by  2e,  the  effective
specific surface of the material. For all materials.

           Se  < 2                                  (6)

    Equations  (5)  and (6) may be  used together with
Darcy's Law in the form3
           K =
                   Q
                 A(AP/L)
                                           (7)
where Q is the volume flow rate, ju is the fluid viscosity, A
is the cross-section area, AP is the pressure drop over the
length  L, and K  is the  permeability  of the material, to
determine the rate at which fluid is drawn into the material.
The volume flow rate per unit area is then
                ACT
                   a,o
                                                     (8)
Noting that the rate of propagation of the fluid boundary is

              dL    =5/0                            (9)
              dt
where 0 is the porosity of the material, the rate at which
the fluid  boundary progresses into  the medium may be
determined from the relation
                     Ao
                        a,o
                                                    (10)
 Thus
                    ACT
L =
                       a,o
                                                    (ID
and the volume of oil absorbed per unit area, as a function
of time, is
                                                                                    ACT
                                                              q =
                                                                                      a,o
                                                                                              2K2
                                                                                                                 (12)
                                                        In  general, a dry belt will absorb water much  more
                                                   rapidly than oil due to the water's higher driving force and
                                                   lower viscosity. Thus, when the slick depth is less than the
                                                   belt thickness (do/b
-------
  312   PHYSICAL REMOVAL. . .
Jw,o
                                    X

                                    /
                            (15)
 with Aaw 0 = (aw,s - ao,s)- If only one edge of the belt is
 exposed to oil, the relation becomes
            RI  -
                            (16)
     It should be  noted  that in developing equation (15)
 and (16), the effect of the viscosity of the water within the
 belt  was intrinsically ignored.  The  resulting  error was
 examined analytically and found to be 5% or less for Rj
 > '\5, and to improve with increasing HQ and R.

 Experimental Apparatus and Procedures
     The "oil scrubber" used in the experimental portion of
 this program is shown in Figures 3a and 3b. The wringer
 and drive assembly weighed 725 pounds, and was powered
 by a  3 hp  electric motor. The wringer consisted  of two
 6-inch diameter steel rollers, which were adjusted to a gap
 of  0.2-inch  during the  experiments.  The   belt was
           Figure 3a - Front View of Oil Scrubber

approximately three inches wide by  5/8-inch  thick, and
was composed of polypropylene  felt  with a 6.36 x 1O4
inch mean fiber  diameter, enclosed in a nylon mesh sewn
with three seams, as illustrated in Figures 4a and 4b. The
belt was run  through the wringers for 250 cycles prior to
the oil recovery experiments to eliminate the effects of belt
compression on the experimental data. A pully was utilized
to keep the 89 foot  belt extended across a 125x50x6 foot
                                                                        Figure 3b - Rear View of Oil Scrubber


                                                            wave tank during quiescent water and wave state testing.
                                                            Floating booms were used to confine the oil in proximity
                                                            to the belt. For testing the effect of currents normal to the
                                                            belt length, a section of belt was extended across the 6x6
                                                            foot  test  section  of a current tank,  in  which current
                                                            velocities of up to 8 feet/sec could be produced. Tests were
                                                            also conducted with the current running parallel to the belt.
                                                            Refined oils, whose properties are shown in Table 1, were
                                                            used for testing as the properties of refined products vary
                                                            less upon weathering than those of crude oils. Oil properties
                                                            were tested periodically during the experiments so that any
                                                            weathering effects  could  be  taken  into account  in
                                                            processing the data.
                                                                Slick depth measurements were taken before  and after
                                                            each run.  Oil-water ratios  were determined from periodic
                                                            samples of the  effluent. Flow  rates were derived  from the
                                                            time  required  to  fill  standard  containers.  Visual
                                                            observations of the behavior  of the  belt  and  machinery
                                                            were made during each run.
                                                             Table 1
                                                        Test Oil Properties
                                             Type
 Specific
Gravity at
   70dF
                                     LVI 65  Naph- 0.8935
                                            thenic
                                     Golden  Paiaf- 0.8870
                                     ShelOOWfinic
 Kinematic
Viscositv at
   70°F
 centistokes

   27

  210
         Intertidal
Surface    Tension
Tension  (Tap Water)
dyne/cm   dyne/cm
                          30.1

                          30.0
           41.0


           24.5

-------
                                                                   OLEOPHILIC BELT  OIL SCRUBBER    313
     Figure 4a - Oleophilic Belt Before Testing
                                                       Results
                                                           Equation (16)  is shown as a solid line in Figures 5, 6,
                                                       and 7, together with  data  obtained in  the experimental
                                                       program, vvjiicjj has been non-dimensionalized in terms of
                                                       R! 7, and Q. Q is a non-dimensional volume recovery rate,
                                                       defined as
                                                                  Q =
                                                                       wh V
                                                 (17)
                                                                            B
                                                       where Q is the volume flow rate and Vg is the belt velocity.
                                                       The  dimensionless soaking time was found from  the belt
                                                       velocity and length of belt on the water bv the relation
           L
           I
           \
                                                                         A°
                                                                            w.o
\ JjL
/  VB
                                                                                                          (18)
R!  was  used  for  purposes of comparison with  the  data,
after  it  was observed  that  the small area  between the
outgoing and incoming belt was relatively free of oil during
the   scrubber's  operation,  and  absorption  took  place
primarily at one edge of the belt (the outside).
    In Figures 5. 6, and 7, R is plotted against?for various
ranges of (d0/b). Broken lines have been  included in  these
figures  to  indicate the  general  trends associated  with
varying slick depth ratios. It should  be  noted that  these
values were not corrected for the effects  of wave height to
length ratio, drift velocity, or the wind  conditions under
which the data  were taken.  Data  taken  in  quiescent
conditions (h/6 = 0) areindicatedby the darkened symbols.
It is  evident  from Figure 7.  that  equation  (16)  gives a
Figure 4b - Oleophilic Belt at Conclusion of Test Program
                                                            oo
                                                              00  O2  04  O6   08  I O   12   14
                                                                                     t
                                                        Fieure  5  - R as a Function of Dimensionless Soaking Time (?) for
                                                        Ranges of d0,b from Experiments with LVI 65 Oil. Broken Lines
                                                        Indicate Trends.:  Solid Symbols Indicate Quiescent Conditions (h/£
                                                        = 0).
                                                        generally conservative  estimate o^the recovery rates for ?>
                                                        1  and (d0/b)   0.6. Values of Q observed for (do/b)<0.6
                                                        are less than theoretically predicted as the assumption that

-------
 314   PHYSICAL REMOVAL. . .
 the entire depth  of the belt  edge is  exposed to the oil
 becomes  increasingly invalid  and  the influence of end
 effects on the flow becomes significant.
  i.or
 0.9 -
 O.I
 00
                         d./b<0.7      O-
                         0.7
-------
                                                                         OLEOPHILIC BELT OIL SCRUBBER   315
slick depth to belt thickness ratio of 0.63. Similar data for
quiescent conditions are  included for comparison. In each
case, the total and oil volume recovery rates are increased
by  wave action. Further, the oil volume recovery rate  is
increased to a greater extent than the total volume recovery
rate,  resulting  in  an  improved  oil  recovery  ratio as
   i.o
   0.9


   o.e


   0.7


   0.6


R  0.5


   0.4


   0.3


   0.2


   O.I
                                                             tested at wave steepness ratios less than 0.026. The smallest
                                                             ratio tested was 0.027.
   0.0
                            O.l
-------
316   PHYSICAL REMOVAL. . .
length.  Oil recovery  ratios  increased with slick  depth as
before,  however, ratios ceased to increase at shallower slick
depths  than without  current. This was apparently due to
the increased tendency of the oil to contact the underside
of the belt at shallower slick depths due to the effects of
the current. At  high  current velocities normal to the belt
length (2 ft/sec and  greater), a significant decrease  in oil
recovery rate was  observed. This was  attributed to belt
instabilities, as  the belt  was  turned  on edge  or  drawn
beneath the surface by the flow.
    During  the  tests, it was observed that recovery rates
were  not significantly affected by the "rag" and "scum"
produced by the  weathering  of  oil.  Emulsions  were
produced by  the  wringing  operation  but  presented  no
particular problem as  they would  break spontaneously
when allowed to stand for approximately half an hour.
CE
i I0
0
o
S. 0.8
TJ
3
2 0.6\
£
o —
•o
I 0.4
o ,
u
9
tL
5 0.2
•5
o
K 0.0
0
Approximate Average
in Calm Water
/Approximate Average
/ With Waves
M I

D

A
A

OIL T d./b
A SHELL GOLDEN 0.17 0.65
A LVI OIL 0.17 0.66
• SHELL GOLDEN 0.17 1.20
E LVI OIL 0.17 1.20
1 1 1 1 1
00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
            Wave  Height to Length  Ratio  (ti/Z)
Figure 12 - Oil Recovery Rate Divided by Total Recovery Rate as a
Function of Wave Height to Length Ratio

Performance of Larger Devices
    The  dimensionless soaking time (t) and slick depth to
belt thickness ratio (do/b) provide an adequate basis for the
scaling of oil volume ratios and total volume recovery rates
 for  various oils, belt cross-section geometries, and belt
 velocities and sizes. As an example, the performance of a
 device  utilizing  a  larger  belt,  of width  20 inches and
 thickness 0.8 inch, is considered in Table 2. Such a belt, if
 constructed in the same manner and of the same material as
 that  of  the  experimental  device,  would  weigh
 approximately 0.95 pounds/foot dry and 6.06 pounds/foot
 wet. A belt length of 800 ft and a recovery ratio of R = 0.6
 were assumed in  constructing this table. It should be noted
 that, in scaling the results,  the intrinsic assumption was
 made  that  the prototype wringer-drive configuration was
 also similar to that of the experimental device.
     From the table, it  is evident  that very low volume
 recovery  ratios are realized for the case  of slicks  of 0.25
 inch depth; but, for deep slicks of the less  viscous (18
 centipoise) oil, a recovery rate of 165 bbl/hr is possible,In
 view of  the results  obtained in tests with currents and
 waves, it  would appear that the recovery rate for thin slicks
 might  be increased  by  the  presence  of  waves and/or
 currents.  A  further  increase might  be achieved by
 decreasing the gap between the rollers; however, this might
 result  in  a gradual  reduction in  porosity  and a general
 deterioration of the belt with a consequent reduction  in the
 oil capacity of the belt over a period of time.
     Analyses of the rate of transport of oil  to the belt on
the water surface, taking into consideration the effects  of
wind,  current, and  the spreading  of  a slick,  were
performed.6 For  times in excess of 50 hours after a 15,000
bbl  spill,  fluxes  greater than  those corresponding to the
maximum recovery rates  indicated in Table  2 may be
achieved by very slow lateral motion of the belt (less than
one mph).

 CONCLUSIONS
     These analyses and  experiments have  demonstrated
 that the  rate  of absorption of  oil by an  oleophilic belt
 increases  with increasing  specific surface  and permeability
 of the belt material,  increasing slick depth, decreasing oil
 viscosity, and decreasing interfacial tension between the oil
 and  belt material. In operations with high viscosity oils and
 high  belt speeds,  significant  quantities of oil may be
 withdrawn as a film on the belt's outer surface. In general,
 the oil scrubber's performance is not detrimentally affected
                                                     Table 2
                                     Predicted Characteristic Values for Prototype Oil
                                         Scrubber with Polypropylene Wool Belt
                                      20 Inches Wide, 0.8 Inches Thick, and 800 Feet
                                   Long, Operated at an Oil Recovery Ratio (R) of 0.60
Oil

VO
§
4> —
•O a>
3«
Slick
Depth
in
0.25
0.50
1.00
0.25
0.50
1.00
d0/b
0.31
0.62
1.25
0.31
9.62
1.25
A
3.20
0.20
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.008
T
Or
0.35
033
032
0.17
0.18
0.19
f
Qo
0.28
0.26
0.26
0.14
0.14
0.15
(sec)
14,150
884
88
1,489
1,048
441
VB
(ft/sec)
0.056
0.90
9.05
0.537
0.764
1.814
Qo
(gpm)
0.8
12
115
3.6
5.5
14
Qo
(bbl/hr)
1
17
165
5
8
20

-------
                                                                     OLEOPHILIC BELT OIL SCRUBBER    317
by the presence  of waves;  nor  by the presence of solid
materials,  emulsions,  or   "rag"  in  limited  quantities.
However,  the  oil  scrubber's  performance may  be
substantially reduced by the presence of detergents and
other chemicals in the oil or water which reduce the surface
tension driving forces and thus oil imbibition rates of the
belt.  The  stability  of  the  oleophilic  belt is a primary
concern  when  it is to be  operated  in  the  presence of
transverse currents.  In general, the maximum oil recovery
rate of a given system is limited by the rate  at which oil
may  be  transferred to the belt surface  and interior.
                                                     t     =  Time
                                                    T    =  Dimensionless time:    t =
                                  2Aa
Vg   = Belt velocity
w    = Width of belt

«     = Contact angle
ju     = Absolute viscosity
2    = Specific surface
a     = Interfacial tension
Aa   = Driving  force per unit circumference
     = Porosity
NOMENCLATURE

A   =  Area
b    =  Thickness of belt
do   =  Thickness of oil slick
h    =  Wave height
K   =  Permeability
L   =  Length
LB   =  Length of belt  in water
2    =  Wave length
P    =  Pressure
P    =  Effective driving pressure due to capillary
Q
   forces
=  Volume  flow rate
=  Dimensionless. volume recovery
        ~     Q
        rate: Q=

q    =  Volume absorbed per unit area
q    =  Volume flux per unit area
R    =  Volume recovery ratio, oil volume to total
        volume
R!   =  Volume recovery ratio, oil volume to total
        volume, one belt edge exposed (Eq. 16)
R2   =  Volume recovery ratio, oil volume to total
        volume, both belt edges exposed (Eq.  14)
r    =  Radius of capillary or pore
Subscripts

a     = Air
B     = Belt
e     = Effective
o     = Oil
s  =  = Solid
T     = Total
w    = Water

REFERENCES
1.  W.F. Searle, Jr., "Two Oil Spill Control Systems Tailored
to Specific Tasks", Ocean Industry,  Vol.  5, No. 7, July
1970,p.45.
2.  H. Tadema, "New Methods of Combatting Oil Slicks",
API-FWPCA Joint  Conference on Oil Spills, Proceedings,
New York City .December 15-17,1969.
3.  R.E. Collins, Flow of Fluids  Through Porous Materials,
Reinhold Publishing Corp., 1961.
4.  D.A. White and J.A. Tallmadge, "Theory of Drag Out of
Liquids on  Flat Plates", Chemical  Engineering Science,
1965, Vol. 20, pp. 33-37.
5.  A.J. Soroka and J.A. Tallmadge, "The Inertia! Theory
for Plate  Withdrawal",  Fundamental Research  in  Fluid
Mecahnics,  Part I,  American  Institute  of  Chemical
Engineers, 62nd Annual Meeting, Nov. 1970.
6.  R.A. Cochran, W.T. Jones, J.P. Oxenham, U.S.C.G. Rept.
No. 714103/A/002, "A Feasibility Study of the Use of the
Oleophilic Belt Scrubber", Shell Pipe Line Corp., Res. and
Dev. Laboratory, October 1970, Final Report.

-------
                             FREE  VORTEX  RECOVERY  OF

                                           FLOATING  OIL

                                    Eugene B. Nebeker and Sergio E. Rodriguez,
                                            Scientific A ssociates, Inc.
                                            Santa Monica, California
                                                     and
                                                Paul G. Mikolaj
                                             University of California
                                            Santa Barbara, California
ABSTRACT
    A  concept employing  a free  vortex  for use  in
recovering oil from high seas oil spills is presented.  An
experimental evaluation program has been completed which
demonstrates the feasibility of this concept as well as design
limitations.
    An oil  slick  will  migrate toward the center of the
vortex  due to  the action of the water flow induced by an
impeller.  At an appropriate speed of rotation, the oil will
submerge and accumulate within  a  central region of the
vortex. This pocket will contain a concentrated mass of oil
which  can readily  be removed by conventional pumping.
Advantages of this  technique include effective operation in
high seas and the ability to both collect and concentrate an
oil slick in a single operation.
    Tests were performed with a free vortex oil recovery
model having an impeller diameter  of one  foot.
Performance data  were obtained both  under quiescent
water conditions and also under environmental conditions
that simulated 10-foot  deep  water waves, 20-knot winds,
and 2-knot currents.
    Detailed scaling considerations based on the test data
indicate  that a prototype device, with diameter on  the
order of4-feet and larger, would be operable in all typically
occurring 10-foot seas. Depending on  its size, the prototype
will recover in excess of 100 gallons per minute of oil with
an oil-to-water ratio greater than 1.2 when operating with a
crude oil film of only 0.1 inches in thickness.

INTRODUCTION
    Procedures for dealing with an oil spill in the marine
environment may conveniently be classified into two phases
— containment and recovery. 1 Containment,  usually by
means of floating barriers or booms, is necessary to prevent
the oil from spreading into a thin slick which can cover vast
areas of the water. Since practical considerations are such
that not all of the spilled oil is likely  to be contained, the
recovery device should be capable of removing both  thin
slicks  (5*0.001 inches) as well as the  thicker slicks ( > 0.1
inches). Hence, the technical  effort on oil spill clean-up has
been directed both at the development  of techniques for
thin oil film recovery and of containment systems which
provide for  rapid  deployment.  In both  aspects  of  spill
clean-up,  a  primary  problem  is  obtaining adequate
performance  under  ambient disturbance,  i.e.,  waves,
currents,  and  winds. Most   recovery  devices  and
containment booms become  ineffective in waves more than
2 feet high.2
    The methods presently used for dealing with a floating
oil  film include direct mechanical recovery  or skimming,
recovery  with the  aid of a  floating sorbent  material, and
special techniques such as sinking, burning, and dispersion.
Of these, the mechanical  skimmers  offer a  number of
attractive  advantages.   Sorbent  materials  require
broadcasting and admixing with oil, and also pose difficult
recovery problems. The other combatant techniques often
involve  adverse  secondary  effects  to  the  marine
environment. Many mechanical skimmers utilize submerged
weirs of various types to pick off an oil-rich surface layer of
the water. Another approach involves physical contact of
the oil layer with an oleophilic rotating drum, endless belt,
disk, or similar arrangement.
    This paper presents preliminary work on the relatively
novel  concept of mechanical skimming by  means of a free
vortex which is generated  at the water's  surface.  This
approach has a fundamental advantage in that oil collection
is not directly performed by the hardware but rather by the
                                                     319

-------
  320   PHYSICAL REMOVAL
induced vortex flow which is better able to maintain its
relationship to the water surface than the hardware itself.
In  addition,  the  vortex  flow  represents  a substantial
concentration  of angular momentum  which resists
distortion by ambient disturbances. Hence, the free vortex
skimmer concept  offers a special capability for  oil  slick
recovery  under  both  quiescent  and  disturbed water
conditions.

FREE VORTEX CONCEPT
     The  free  vortex  collection  process  is shown
schematically  in  Figure  1. A rotating submerged impeller
assembly produces vortex flow in a subsurface column of
water.  The axial  flow  of water  through  the  impeller
produces an inward funneling flow in the overlying water.
Under the  action  of these flow fields, an oil slick will
migrate toward the vortex axis, submerge, and concentrate
in a central pocket. A recovery  pump  intake within this
pocket can  thus remove oil with relatively little water. A
practical free vortex skimmer involves a  relatively complex
flow field, particularly with regard to the detailed behavior
of oil entrained by the vortex and to the hardware needed
to maintain a  strong vortex flow. The following comments
indicate  in a  qualitative way,  some  of the  important
considerations in vortex skimmer performance.
     In the  rotating water  column,  both a  vertical
hydrostatic  pressure gradient, and a radial pressure gradient
are  present;  the  latter in  association  with centrifugal
acceleration. The simultaneous  existence of  these pressure
gradients under a constant-pressure free surface leads to the
well-know  depression of the  surface  over the vortex.
Submerged  oil will experience a buoyant force and a radial
force  toward  the vortex axis. For the  devices considered
here, the radial forces are preponderant in the outer vortex
region. For example, with 100 rpm water rotation at one
foot radius, the centrifugal force is three times larger than
the  bouyqnt  force. Near the vortex  axis, these forces
become  comparable and the  buoyant force  eventually
dominates. Thus, the oil pocket forms at the top and center
of the vortex column.
     Inward migration  of oil floating at  tne water surface
results from the converging radial water inflow produced by
axial flow through  the  impeller. Surface oil simply  rides
with this  inflow towards the vortex center. The rotational
flow at the  surface is not effective in collecting oil because
its  net radial  force on floating  oil is zero. Once in the
vicinity of the vortex axis, however, two new factors  come
into  play  which  tend  to  submerge  the  oil. One  is a
downturning  or   funneling  of the  radial  water inflow
toward the impeller.  The other is turbulent diffusional
transport; a large scale vortex  flow of  this type contains
considerable irregular eddying motion which tends to build
up and maintain a concentration of submerged oil droplets.
Once  oil has been  submerged,  the  centrifugal  forces
produced by the rotational flow field cause the oil droplets
to acquire  an  inward slip velocity  relative to the rotating
water. A similar but upward  slip velocity is  established by
the buoyant forces. The axial flow  field then tends to take
droplets  downward  beyond the  collection pocket and
               PUNP
                                     -—*». RECOVERED OIL
                                            SUBMERGED
                                            PROPELLER
Figure 1:  Sketch Showing the "Free Vortex Recovery of Floating
Oil." Due to the action of water flow induced by the submerged
propeller, a surface oil slick will migrate toward the center of the
swirling column of water. The oil  then becomes trapped by the
vortex'seentrifugal force field and accumulates in a pocket below the
water surface where it can be removed by pumping.

turbulent diffusion tends to distribute droplets throughout
the entire vortex region.
    Therefore, the free vortex skimmer operates by means
of  a dynamic  balance between  the  inward and  upward
forces which tend to form the vortex pocket and the flows
which tend to submerge  and distribute the oil. Because of
these factors,  the  pocket  is not uniquely defined but
represents a region of high oil concentration which declines
downwards and outward.  However,  both  theoretical
estimates and  experimental observations indicate that  the
concentration  profile  can  be  made  sufficiently sharp  to
regard it approximately as the  formation  of a  central,
oil-rich pocket.
    An  underwater  photograph  of a  vortex  pocket
obtained when  the axial and  rotational flow fields  are
properly balanced is shown in Figure 3a. In contrast, Figure
3b  shows the "bathtub" type of vortex formed when axial
flow  predominates.  This  latter mode  of  operation  is
unsuitable  for  skimming operations because oil  will be
pulled beneath the pocket and into the impeller. Since the
major and inherent advantage of the free vortex device is its
ability to concentrate and accumulate oil  in a pocket, the
axial  flow must be   suitably  balanced   by  an  induced
rotational flow.

-------
                                                                         FREE VORTEX RECOVERY
                                                   321
    The  potential recovery  efficiency  is  related to the
volume  fraction of oil in the pocket and will depend on
those factors which determine slip velocity. Among these.
the  oil  density is of paramount  importance.  Recovery
efficiency will depend on the  density contrast between oil
and  water and  will  tend to decline as the oil density-
approaches that of water. Viscosity does not appear to be an
important factor  since  the  viscosity of oil is ordinarily
sufficiently  large  that   viscosity-dependent  internal
circulation in  oil  drops  should  not  affect slip  flow
significantly. Oil droplet formation would thus be  expected
to result  primarily from dynamic forces in the turbulent
flow field rather than from viscous stresses.  As indicated
by the Weber number, the oil/water interfacial tension will
be  influential in  the process of oil  breakup and  drop
formation. However, oils will  not  vary  widely in this
property  and  a major  quantitative effect  is not to be
expected.
      Figure 2: Photograph of Model in Final Configuration
                                                                Figures 3a - 3c: Photographs of various types of vortices.
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
    A concept  feasibility study  of the free vortex to
recover oil from high seas oil spills was  performed in the
summer  of  1970^.  Following  a series  of  laboratory
experiments to establish  the magnitude  of key operating
parameters, a free vortex  oil  recovery model was designed
and constructed. The model tested is shown in Figure 2 and
consisted  of  a  1-foot diameter impeller  surrounded by a
rotating cylindrical duct with an annular disc. The impeller
was powered by a hydraulic motor which was connected to
high  pressure  lines supplied  from a tender.  The  entire
impeller assemblage, which was mounted on the center of a
triangular frame, was suspended beneath  the water surface
from three floats. The overall  size of the model, as shown in
Figure 2, can be judged  by noting that the center-to-center
distance between floats is approximately 41/2 feet.
    Testing and data collection were performed in a model
basin  capable  of providing deep  water waves. Data were
obtained both under quiescent water conditions  and  also
under  environmental  conditions  that  simulated 10-foot
seas, 20-knot winds, and  2-knot currents.
    Throughout  the  experimental  work,  the  major
performance criteria  of  interest were the  effectiveness and
efficiency. Effectiveness  is  the rate of oil recovery in gallons

-------
322   PHYSICAL REMOVAL
of oil per minute and efficiency is the volume fraction of
oil  in  the recovered oil/water mixture. Throughout this
program, only clear oil was recovered, and no water-in-oil
emulsions were detected.
  Testing Under Quiescent Conditions

     Testing was first initiated to determine the effect of oil
 film thickness on performance under quiescent  conditions.
 During these tests, the model was surrounded by a 10-foot
 diameter circular  boom. Various quantities of crude oil
 were added to the  water surface within this boom  to form
 oil film thicknesses ranging from 0.001  inch to 0.1 inch.
 The  physical properties  of the crude  oil used  in these
 experiments are shown in Table 1.
     After sufficient time was allowed for the oil to form a
 uniform layer, rotation of the  impeller  was   started.
 Approximately  1-2 second  were  required  to bring  the
 impeller up to operational speed. After this full rotational
 speed was  attained, 3-5 seconds were required to develop a
 vortex and start the inflow of the slick to the center of the
 device.  From 10  to 15 seconds more were necessary to
                    draw in enough oil  to form an oil pocket. Beyond these
                    times, insufficient oil remained within the capture radius to
                    supply  the pocket,  and  the  vortex became "oil  starved."
                    This phenomenon is  shown by the sequence of photographs
                    in Figure 4. The oil  slick in this particular run was residual
                    crude,  0.032 inches thick.  Behavior  for  other  oils  and
                    thicknesses was  similar.  A  significant  feature  of these
                    photographs is that a capture radius of approximately 1 2/3
                    feet is almost completely cleared of oil in 20 seconds after
                    startup.
                        In  taking data,  the transfer pump used to remove oil
                    from the  pocket was  started at  the time  the impeller
                    reached operational  speed  (t = 0  seconds). The  discharge
                    from the pump was directed into  a series of containers at
                    5-second  intervals.  Analysis of  the  contents  of these
                    containers  showed  that  maximum  effectiveness  and
                    efficiency  were attained 20-30 seconds after full impeller
                    speed was reached. During this interval, sufficient time had
                    passed for the oil pocket to develop, but not enough for the
                    pocket  to  be  starved  for   oil. These maximum
                    effectivenesses and  efficiencies are reported because, not
                    suffering  from  the  effects  of vortex  formation  or oil
                    starvation, they are the most meaningful data.
                                         Table 1:  Summary of Oil Properties
               Oil Type
  CPI
Gravity
     Specific
Gravity (60/60°F)
      Kinematic
Viscosity (centistokes)
 («60°F    @100°F
               Heating oil
               Diesel oil
               Crude oil
               Residual fuel
  37C
  32°
  26°

  19°
      0.840
      0.865
      0.898

      0.940
    4.8
    8.4
   39

  500
  2.8
  4.0
 12.0

160

-------
                                                                           FREE VORTEX RECOVERY.. .   323
                              Figures 4a - 4f: Surface Oil Slick Patterns During Quiescent Tests.
    These  data  for  effectiveness and efficiency  as  a
function of oil film thickness are shown in Figure 5. For
film  thicknesses  from  0.001   inch  to  0.1  inch,  the
effectiveness ranged from 0.1 to 6.6 gallons per minute, and
the efficiency varied from 0.9 to 55 percent using a total
pumping rate of 12 gallons per minute from the vortex. The
effectiveness  and efficiency increased monotonically up to
the maximum film  thickness  tested. Performance did  not
level off significantly within the range  of film thicknesses
used, indicating  that  the maximum  effectiveness and
efficiency of the free vortex  model were not approached.
Conceivably, an efficiency approaching 100 percent could
be attained at slightly greater  flim thicknesses.
    These results are believed to be very conservative for a
variety of  reasons.  Subsequent  tests  indicated that
substantial changes in performance could be  obtained  by
varying  the depth of submergence of the  recovery  pump
intake.  In addition, only a nominal recovery pumping rate
of 12 gallons per minute was used. Increasing this pumping
rate  would  improve the effectiveness while lowering the
efficiency and vice versa.
    Tests were  also made to determine the effect  of oil
properties  on the  efficiency  and  effectiveness.  These
measurements were  made  at  a  nominal film  thickness of
0.032 inch using the four oils listed in Table 1. Performance
with the heavy oil was only approximately 25 percent less
than that obtained with  the  light oils.  This decrease  in
performance  is most  likely attributable  to an  increase  in
density rather than viscosity.

Testing Under  Simulated  High Sea Conditions
    Final testing  of  the  free vortex oil recovery model
under a variety of environmental conditions was performed
in a model basin 120 feet long by 48 feet wide.* At the
time of testing, the water  depth was maintained at 13 feet.
For this depth, the maximum period of  deep water waves
that could be  simulated  was  3 seconds'. The maximum
wave  height used in the tests was approximately one foot.
    The action of waves  on the vortex  was viewed both
from  the surface and also from under  water. With the
possible exception of a slight narrowing of the vortex at the
water  surface,  the shape  and  configuration of the vortex
under  wave  action was  nearly the  same as  that  under
quiescent conditions.  However, the  vortex  moved in  an
orbital  pattern characteristic of the wave particle motions.
Figure  3c shows a photograph of  a vortex being displaced

 *The model basin used in these tests was operated by the Offshore
 Technology Corporation in Escondido, California.

-------
 324   PHYSICAL REMOVAL
 slightly due to the  action of a simple wave with a 5-inch
 wave height and a 2-second period.

     Following these qualitative observations,  a series  of
 tests was run to establish the wave regime for which stable
 vortex behavior could be expected. These tests were made
 without using oil. Various simple (sinusoidal) waves were
 generated and notation was made of the wave height and
 wave period combinations  which the  vortex  could not
 withstand indefinitely. This information is shown on Figure
 6 as the "critical line." Throughout the area above and to
 the  left  of this  critical  line,  the vortex  was stable
 indefinitely and thus represents the operable wave regime.
 The area  bounded  by the  critical  line  and  the  line
 corresponding to unstable or breaking deep water waves^
 represents  the inoperable regime. Throughout this latter
 area, simple waves eventually  destroyed the vortex. The
 point of eventual  destruction  of  the vortex was readily
 apparent by visual observation, and the data points shown
 on this critical line were very reproducible. Tests were also
 conducted to  determine the stability limits of the vortex
 under  currents. Action of a current  on the model was
 simulated by towing. A line was attached from  the model,
 through a  system of pulleys, to lead weights. The weights
 pulled  the model through the water at a constant speed
 which  was measured  by  means  of  a rotary  variable
 differential transformer attached to one of the pulleys. The
 behavior of the vortex was  observed  visually and the
 maximum  towing speed which the vortex could maintain
 without being destroyed was about 0.7 knots. The action of
 the  voitex to towing was similar  to that under wave
 conditions except that  the orbital motion associated with
 waves was not present.
     To  investigate  the effect of waves on the oil recovery
 performance of the model, diesel oil (see Table  1) was
 added to the water surface at a constant rate. The point of
 addition was about 11/2 feet upstream of the mechanical
 axis of the  model. A boom or other containment device was
 not used in order  to avoid adversely affecting the wave
 characteristics.  With the vortex formed  and the recovery
 pump running, oil would first be collected under quiescent
 conditions  for a known time interval. Waves would then be
 generated and  the  collection  process  repeated. By
 comparing  the amount of oil in the collected effluents, the
 degradation in performance could be determined.
     Two sets of wave conditions were used to study the
 effect of simulated high seas on oil recovery performance —
 one involving  a wave period scan and the other a wave
 height scan. The  location of these wave scans is shown  in
 Figure  6.  Test  results showed a  gradual decrease  in
 performance  as the  critical line  was  approached.  The
 observation was made, however, that the vortex continued
 to  collect and  contain  oil regardless of its wave induced
 displacement from the mechanical axis of rotation. Since
 the  recovery head was  in a fixed position, the displaced
 vortex could not  be effectively followed (see Figure 3c).'
 Therefore, the  observed  decrease in performance seemed to
 be more a function of recovery head position than of the
vortex's ability to collect oil while in its displaced position.
        .1
       .08

       .06
               EFFECTIVENESS (GALLONS OF OIL/MINUTE)
                1.0    2.0   3.0   4.0   5.0    5.0,
      .0010
                        20     30      10
                       PERCENT  EFFICIENCY
                                 50
60
Figrre 5: Effect  of Oil  Film Thickness  on  efficiency  and
Effectiveness
     3.0


     2.5



     2.0


       5
     0.5
STABLE VORTEX
                No.  3i-lJ  /-/
               Random
                Sea
               State
                      Region of
                      Simulated Whitecaps
                 .20       .40      .60       .80
                      WAVE HEIGHT (FEET)
             Figure 6:  Vortex Stability in Waves
                                       1.00

-------
                                                                          FREE VORTEX RECOVERY ...    325
    Experiments  were then performed to investigate the
model's behavior under simulated number 3 and number 5
random sea states, scaled to one-tenth^. The average period
and wave height of these simulated sea states are shown in
Figure 6, where the wave height is scaled to one-tenth and
the wave period to I/   10.
    Using  the  same  procedure  discussed  above, the
effectiveness and efficiency were measured before and after
the arrival of waves. The qualitative observation was  made
that  random sea  states did not affect vortex  stability as
severely as a series of simple waves close to the critical line.
In random seas, the vortex usually has a chance to recover
after a potentially destructive wave passes before being hit
by another.
    To investigate the effect of winds, a large blower was
suspended upstream of the model in such a way that the air
streamlines were almost  parallel to the water surface.  An
anemometer measured 20 knots at the model. With a fetch
of about 10 feet, a surface current of about 1 foot/second
was generated. To investigate the effect of whitecaps on the
operation of the model, the same experiment was repeated
in conjunction with  steep waves  near the  breaking wave
line, (wave height) / (wave length) = H/L = 1/7, in Figure 6.
In this manner, steep  waves were created and "blown  over"
by  the wind  to  form  whitecaps.  To  perform this
experiment, the available  range of waves was necessarily
limited to the region bounded approximately by the slender
rectangle at the bottom left corner of Figure  6. Other  waves
near the breaking wave  line would have been inside the
instability  region   of  vortex  operation.  Using the
experimental  procedures  previously  described, the
effectiveness and  efficiency  were  decreased  about  60
percent by the 20 knot wind and about 80  percent by the
wind produced whitecaps.

SCALING
Significant Variables
    In  scaling a  free vortex oil recovery device to  larger
physical sizes, the  interaction  of size with operating
parameters  such  as  film  thickness,  oil  properties,
environmental  conditions,  etc.,  must all be  considered.
However, since the major objective of this investigation has
been to develop an oil recovery device for  use under high
sea conditions, primary emphasis must be given to  the
environmental parameters. The tests conducted with  the
one-foot model indicated definite limits with regard  to
stable vortex operation in waves and currents. Therefore, in
scaring these test results to larger devices, the main problem
was  to determine the manner in which the limits of vortex
stability  were  physically  related  to  the  significant
environmental parameters.
    In Figure  6,  the  region of stable vortex operation has
been  presented on a wave height-period diagram.  Wave
height is an independent variable and therefore may be
scaled directly against  the  vortex diameter  on purely
dimensional considerations. However, selection of the wave
period rather than wavelength as the second variable is a
matter  of  choice.  These  quantities are related, and the
choice as to which one is the fundamental variable has a
large influence on scale up.
    The wave  period was selected as the significant variable
on the consideration that vortex stability is limited by the
speed  of  subsurface  orbital  water  motion  which  is
proportional to the ratio of wave height to period. In the
model tests, vortex destruction  (as shown by the critical
line of Figure 6) occurred at orbital speeds ranging from 0.5
to 0.7 knots. This speed corresponds approximately to the
towing speed  which  also resulted in  vortex destruction.
Since wave action and towing are rather distinct processes,
this correspondence in speeds may be taken as experimental
evidence  supporting  the choice  of  wave period.  Test
experience also indicated that neither  the wavelength nor
the wave steepness, which is also nearly constant along the
stability  limit   in  Figure  6, provides  a  satisfactory
explanation of vortex  destruction.
    Figure  7  shows  vortex stability limits  on a  wave
height-period diagram for vortex diameters of 1,2,4, and 8
feet.  These limits have been obtained from Figure  6 by
assuming that the curve  of critical  wave periods is a
function of (wave height) / (vortex  diameter); the  wave
height is thus  expressed as a multiple of vortex diameters.
However,  the   period  scale  corresponding  to  the
experimental  observations with  the model has  been
retained. On dimensional considerations, the wave period
must scale to rotational speed  which is the  only design
parameter  involving pure time. Hence,  retention of the
period scale implies that all vortex sizes in Figure 7 will
operate at  the same rotational speed as the one-foot model.
As will be discussed in the following section, the model
tested  was  already  near  prototype  size.  Therefore,
prototype  devices which are not  much larger than the
model may be expected to be operable at rotational speeds
near those actually utilized.
    The other environmental factors to be considered  in
scale  up are currents and wind action. Currents may be
viewed basically in terms of the relative motion of adjacent
water. The effect of such relative currents is exemplified by
towing the free vortex device through still water. In the
towing tests performed with the  one-foot model, vortex
stability was retained up to a towing  speed of 0.7 knots.
From the scaling arguments presented above, this limiting
relative  current  increases in  proportion to  prototype
diameter — again assuming that rotational speed remains
constant. Thus, for example, a 4-foot prototype size would
be stable up to about 2.8 knots  relative current. No major
or special scale effects can be foreseen as a result of wind
action since its primary effect on performance is through
induced water motion.  With the  possible exception of
"white cap" generation, the effects of wind induced waves
and currents can be treated as previously described.


Prototype Size

     The vortex  stability curves in Figure 7 establish  a
region of  operabflity to the left  and above  the limiting

-------
 326    PHYSICAL REMOVAL
 curve,  i.e., for smaller wave heights and longer periods.
 Stable  operation and oil recovery are expected for all waves
 which lie within this region. Also plotted in Figure 7 is the
 curve which defines  the region  of theoretically possible
 deep water waves, i.e., waves whose ratio  of height to
 length  is less than or equal to l/?5>6. As in the case of the
 vortex stability curves, the region lies to the left and above
 the curve. Where this possible wave region lies inside the
 stability region of the vortex, successful operation would be
 expected.
     In  attempting to establish  an approximate prototype
 size for use in high sea conditions, the demarcation given
 above  is extremely pessimistic with regard to vortex oil
 recovery utilization. Although a maximum wave steepness
 of one-seventh is well founded on analysis and has been
 verified experimentally, actual waves occurring in the open
 sea do  not approach this steepness. Myers, et  al.6 indicate
 that  real wave  profiles never  exceed a  steepness  of
 one-tenth and are commonly less than one-twentieth. These
 practical wave limit lines (H/L = 1/10 and H/L = 1/20) have
 also been included in Figure 7 to better define  the expected
 conditions of operation.
     Besides  wave steepness, consideration must also be
 given  to the maximum expected wave heights. In this
 regard, the vortex stability limits for the smaller prototype
 sizes shown in Figure 7  cannot  be accurately drawn to
 higher  wave heights because the experimental  observations
 on the  model were necessarily limited as to wave height. It
 appears, however, that the vortex stability limits tend to
 parallel the wave stability limits  at large  periods and
 heights. Kinsman? states that  about 45  percent  of the
 ocean waves are less than 4 feet high and 80 percent are less
 than 12 feet high. Thus a maximum wave height of 5-10
 feet could be considered as  a  reasonable upper limit of
 practical oil recovery operation.
    Inspection of the plots shown in Figure 7 leads to the
 following  conclusions as  to  the  expected  operability of
 various  size vortex devices in waves. A vortex recovery
 device of about 6-feet diameter (main impeller) should be
 operable in all theoretically possible waves up  to about 10
 feet in  height. A device of about 4-feet diameter would be
 operable in the most severe actually occurring waves. This
 operability is certainly indicated for waves up to 5 -feet high
 and probably extends several feet beyond. A device of only
 2-feet diameter should be operable in the more commonly
 occurring waves up to 2 or 3 feet in height. However,
 extension into the 5-10 feet wave height range of interest
 may be  questionable  as  it  implies  a  rather  long
 extrapolation of the model data used for scaling.
    In  summary,  a free vortex oil recovery device with an
 impeller diameter  on the order of 3 or 4 feet appears to be
 a  suitable  prototype  size.  This  would  represent the
 minimum  size device,  with attendant minimum power
 requirements  and  maximum maneuverability, required to
 cope  with practical wave regimes. Since  the test model
 already   had a  1-foot diameter,   extension  of the test
experience  to  the  indicated  prototype  size  appears
reasonable.
               2         H          6
                      HAVE HEIGHT (FEET)
                                                     10
     Figure 7:  Stability of Prototype Devices to Wave Action
Prototype Performance
    For any given  set  of  oil  slick  parameters  (film
thickness,  type  of oil, etc.), the rate of oil recovery is
expected to increase in proportion to the square of the
linear dimension of the prototype. A larger prototype size
generally implies  a  greater  amount  of  oil  within  the
immediate  capture radius of the vortex. The capture area
would increase with the square of the diameter, and for a
given film  thickness, so  would the gross amount  of oil
immediately accessible  to  the vortex.  Thus,  a 4-foot
prototype  would encompass 16 times as much oil as  the
1-foot model. Although the distance to be traveled by the
oil  increases in  proportion  to  diameter,  so  do  the
transporting velocities. Hence, the potential effectiveness of
a 4-foot prototype is also 16 times larger than that of the
model.
    The pumping rate used during model testing was 12
gallons  per minute,  a nominal choice with  no effort at
optimization. With this pumping rate,  a peak  effectiveness
of 6.6 gallons per minute of oil was achieved with an 0.1
inch  film   of  crude oil.  This rate  is  considered  very
conservative, for the reasons already mentioned. However,
by scaling this nominal pumping rate and very conservative
measurement  of  the  effectiveness,  a  4-foot  diameter
prototype device would have an effectiveness'of 106 gallons
of oil per minute at the stated oil film conditions.
    The effect of film thickness on the rate of oil recovery
is anticipated to be the same as that observed during model
testing. Effectiveness increased with film thickness because
thicker films provided proportionately  more oil within  the
capture radius of the vortex.  However, as heavier oils are
encountered, effectiveness would be expected to degrade in
the same manner as found in testing the 1-foot  model.
    The expected efficiency  of a  prototype  device is
related  primarily to  the nature and stability of the vortex
oil pocket. In this regard, film thickness and oil properties
would play the same role in a prototype as they did in the

-------
                                                                        FREE VORTEX RECOVERY...    327
1-foot model. Similarly, a prototype would have the same
relative stability in waves as the model despite an increased
absolute  scale of ambient  disturbances.  In contrast to
effectiveness, which is an absolute measure, efficiency is a
dimensionless criterion.  Thus no  gross  size effects  are
involved  and the efficiencies observed with the  1-foot
model may be taken over to a prototype without change.

CONCLUSIONS

    The  following  conclusions were reached  from tests
performed with the 1-foot diameter experimental model of
a free vortex oil recovery device:
1. The  free vortex ofl  recovery concept has  definitely
attractive  performance charactertistics. For  example,  the
vortex flow field developed with the 1-foot size was capable
of removing 6.6 gallons per minute of  oil from a 0.1-inch
film of crude oil.  This effectiveness  was achieved at a
12-gallon  per minute gross pumping  rate,  giving an oil
recovery efficiency of 55 percent. Neither the pumping rate
nor  the  oil intake position were  optimal choices.  A
comparable performance, within  25 percent,  was obtained
with various other oils.  Decreasing film thickness reduced
these performance levels in a reasonable padual manner.
2. The vortex flow field showed reasonable stability against
external flow disturbances. Stability  against  wave motion
was  a  function of  wave height and period for the  1-foot
model. In tests with wave heights up  to nearly 1-foot, the
model  retained  stability  over  roughly  half  of  the
theoretically possible wave spectrum. The model retained
vortex stability at towing speeds up to 0.7 knots.
3. Prototype devices with diameters on the order of 4 feet
and  larger should  make the vortex  collection concept
feasible with all waves up to IWeet high. This estimate is
based on  the reported  actual limits  of wave height and
period  under open sea  conditions. These  prototype sizes
would  be  capable  of  withstanding  relative currents or
towing speeds in excess  of 2 knots. Prototype effectiveness
would increase in proportion to the square of the diameter,
e.g., a 4-foot device would have oil removal capacity on the
order of 100 gallons  per minute  for a 0.1-inch thick  oil
slick. Efficiency for the prototype  sizes would be similar to
those for the model. Since  the  1-foot model was  already
near  prototype  dimensions, this extrapolation  of
performance appears reasonably safe.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
    A substantial portion of this study was performed  for
the U.S. Coast Guard under Contract DOT-CG-00594-A.
Assisting in the study were  A. A. Allen, G. A. Griffith, and
R. L. Rundle.

REFERENCES
 1.  W. E. Lehr, Jr., "Oil Spill Containment and Clean-Up
    Procedures," paper  given  at  the Santa  Barbara  Oil
    Symposium,  Santa Barbara, California,  December  18,
    1970.
2.  "Systems Study of Oil Spill Cleanup Procedures, Vol. I.,
    Analysis of Oil Spills and Control Materials,"  Applied
    Oceanography  Division, Dillingham  Corporation,  La
    Jolla, California, February 1970.
3.  J.  O.  Hinze,  "Fundamentals of the Hydrodynamic
    Mechanism Splitting in Dispersion Processes," A.I.Ch.E.
    Journal, 1,289(2955).
4.  P. G. Mikolaj, E. B. Nebeker, and S. E.  Rodriguez, "Free
    Vortex Recovery  of Floating  Oil," Report  No.
    714103/A/003  prepared by Scientific Associates,  Inc.
    for U. S. Coast Guard Contract DOT-CG-00594-A.
5.  R.   L. Wiegel,  "Oceanographical Engineering,"
    Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1964.
6.  J.  J.  Myers,  C.  H.  Holm,  and  R.  F.  McAllister,
    "Handbook of Ocean  and  Underwater Engineering,"
    McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1964.
7.  Kinsman, B.,  "Wind  Waves, Their  Generation  and
    Propagation on the Ocean Surface," Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
    Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1965.

-------
               CONCEPT   DEVELOPMENT  OF A  POWERED
                ROTATING  DISK  OIL  RECOVERY  SYSTEM
                                 S. T. Uyeda, R. L. Chuan, A. C. Connolly, and
                                               Philip O. Johnson
                                     Atlantic Research Systems Division
                                         Costa Mesa, California
INTRODUCTION
    A simple technique for the recovery of oil from the
water surface is by the use of rotating disks which are pre-
ferentially wet by the oil and collected from the disks with
wipers. The principal is also utilized with rotating devices.
    The potential advantages of the rotating disk technique
are:
        (1)  high recovery rate,
        (2)  recovery of thin oil slicks,
        (3)  recovery of oil with varying viscosities and
            emulsification,
        (4)  relative insensitivity to waves and current,
        (5)  minimum  tendency  to emulsify the oil,
        (6)  relatively insensitive to debris,
        (7)  oil-water sepration during pickup

    Because of these potential benefits, Atlantic Research
Corporation under the  sponsorship of the Environmental
Protection  Administration, Water Quality  Office, per-
formed a series of studies to determine the feasibility of the
disk system for the recovery of oil from the ocean surface.
    The evaluation program consisted of:
(1)   Experimental tests in the tow  tank in current and
     waves for oil types ranging from light diesel to Bun-
     ker "C" oil.
(2)   Data comparison between theoretical analysis and ex-
     perimental  data and  the  derivation   of
     non-dimensional scaling coefficients.
(3)   Preliminary sizing recommendation for a disk unit for
     the recovery of 50,000 gallons of oil per hour.
    The tow basin tests  were conducted with aluminum
disks. Aluminum was chosen over teflon, polypropylene,
polyethelene, and neoprene after extensive laboratory tests.
The  tests indicated that aluminum and polyethelene  had
the best overall pickup efficiency in the viscosity range of
diesel to Bunker "C" oils. The manufacturability, and re-
pairability  led to the choice of aluminum over polyethe-
lene.
    The rotating disk system was found to be capable of
high oil pickup with little or no water pickup. The results
of the theoretical analysis compared satisfactorily with
experiments conducted at model scales.
   - A summary  of the theoretical development and com-
parison with experimental data is presented. The recom-
mended design  for a 50,000 gallon/hour capacity system
and several concepts for utilization with booms and barriers
are illustrated.
       Figure 1:   Disk Oil Recovery Configuration
                                                  329

-------
330  PHYSICAL REMOVAL . .
Theoretical Development
    Consider a disk of radius R immersed partially to a
depth of D and a corresponding chord C, in an oil slick of
thickness d floating on water, as depicted in Figure 1. The
disk rotates at the rate GO. The oil pickup mechanism may
be depicted as shown in Figure 2. In this vertical section of
the disk is  shown  the oil boundary-layer  of thickness 6,
being pulled from the oil pool of thickness  d up the disk at
a vertical velocity of cox, where x is the horizontal distance
from the center of the disk to the point in question, as seen
in Figure 2.
     By equating the gravitational  force and the shearing
force in an element of oil, the following equation for  the
velocity distribution in the oil boundary-layer is obtained:
           Pg    2    y /           Pg
           —  y   +— lv  -ox	
           2/*        8  \ 8        $1
                                                 (1)
 in  which p is the density of the oil, and /u its viscosity
 coefficient. The  constants 6 and V5  in Equation (1) are
 determined from boundary conditions at the  "fillet" be-
 tween the horizontal oil slick and the vertical oil bound-
 ary-layer.
     By considering the balance  of the shearing force and
 the surface tension, as sketched in Figure 3, in which FM is
 the viscous force, ydx the surface tension force and h6 is
 the height of the fillet,  the boundary-layer thickness is
 determined to be:
                  fy     27-7         \   fy~
                •A/—	 + 	   I^X-V  J-tfc	
                 VP&    PS   \       s/  VPS
  which may be put into dimensionless form
    where
                                                (2)
             2Q
      v   =  —
       S     Cd
                            x+v
                                     8  6?
                                               (4)
by use of Equation (1).
    The total rate of pumping for both sides of the disk
along the chord from xg to C/2 is then:

          .C/2
                 /dQ\        /       »         (5)
                 I — I   dx =
                               I
                               I
                               V
                           '           K&  S   lj
                           &>x + v  —— o   Idx
 With a change of variables
      £ = — (ox- v )
           y          s
                                                                                                         (6)
 Equation (5) becomes dimensionless in the new variable
 in which the upper limit of integration

                              C
                                                                                                       (7)
                                                                       ' max
                 4M  /   C     A
               =	  I  o> — — v  I
                  y   V   2    s)
                                                           and
     It is noted that in the above expressions = o when cox
 =  vg.  In other words, oil boundary-layer is not formed
 along the entire chord from x = o to x = C/2. There is a
 minimum xg = vg/co at which the boundary4ayer begins to
 form.
     The velocity at the edge of the boundary-layer, vg, is
 determined by considering continuity of the average flow
 of  oij in the dick horizontally toward  the  disk and the
 vertical flow in the boundary-layer.
         8   =
 Integration of Equation (6) yields

-------
                                                                         ROTATING DISK RECOVERY SYSTEM   331
                                                (8)
                     3 ( y   8

                    3/2   3
               max
:t-
                +
                    3/2
           max
                                  max
     -4) + 5/r     + 4
max           ^ max
Equations (7) and (3) are combined to
                            max
                                 Y
                          2(i

Equations (7), (8), and (9) can be combined to yield two
parametric equations in £ max for to and Q:
                  -f     +—
                  2  max    10
    5 f      + 4 + ( f     - 4) ( f     + 1
      " max         •> max        "" max
                                               (10)
                                             3  2
                                        D
                                          3/2
                                "" max
                                               (11)
                                           - max   \

                                          ~    )
                                          	^C  I
            Disk
                                                                  DISK
                                                                          — — £ — — ----- L
                                           1
                                                                                    x
                                                                                         OIL
            Figure 3:    Boundary Conditions

    In  Figure  4 the  dimensionless  pumping  rate  Q is
plotted  against  the dimensionless rotation rate  w for var-
ious values  of  the  dimensionless  oil  slick thickness d
                                                            As far  as  the  above theory is concerned there is no
                                                        limit to the value  of Q  as  co  is increased, which would
                                                        suggest that very high pumping rates can be achieved simply
                                                        by turning the  disk at a high rate. In practice this cannot be
                                                        achieved, because  the disk becomes "starved" when the oil
                                                        in-flow rate toward the disk (which is supported  mainly by
                                                        surface-tension  controlled spread of the slick) cannot match
                                                        the removal rate of the disk. It is found experimentally that
                                                        when starvation occurs the disk picks up water as well as
                                                        oil, with the water content increasing as the disk rotation
                                                        rate  increases beyond the limit at which  starvation begins.
                                                            Figure 5 shows the comparison  between theory and
                                                        experiment,  the latter  performed  with  a single  18-inch
                                                        diameter disk immersed  in a stationary  slick of each of
                                                        three types of oil:  diesel, 40-weight motor oil, and Bunker
                                                        "C"  fuel oil. The slick thickness range is from 0.1  to 2.0
                                                        inches,  corresponding to  a  dimensionless thickness range
                                                        from 1.3 to 27.
     Figure 2:    Oil Boundary-Layer Formation on Disk
                                                                Figure 4:    Theoretical Model Results

-------
  332  PHYSICAL REMOVAL .
  Figure 5:    Comparison of Theory with Experiment - No Current
            z
 FIVE DISKS WITH VARIOUS SPACINGS
>• CURRENTS UP TO 3 KNOTS
 FLAGGED SYMBOLS = WATER CONTENT

"AM WEIGHT OIL ~
                      _  O BBNKER 'C'
                                                    Q =
                                                   a I*
                                                                          Figure 7:    Disk-Oil Relationship
                                           It is noted that quite a few of the data points (flagged
                                       points) signify pick-up with water, due to starvation  of the
                                       disk, especially  in  the cases of thin  slick. The general
                                       agreement  between  theory and experiment is,  however,
                                       satisfactory, especially in view  of  the fact that the values
                                       vary over four orders of magnitude.
                                           The simplest way  to  avoid  disk  starvation is to cause
                                       relative motion between  the disk system and  the slick so
                                       that the slick can more readily feed the disk. This has been
                                       done experimentally in a towing basin with a 5-disk system
                                       moving through oil  at speeds up to  3 knots, with two types
                                       of  oil-40-weight motor oil and  Bunker "C" fuel oil. The
                                       results are shown in Figure 6. It is seen that there are far
                                       fewer points with water pick-up  than in the stationary case.
Figure 6:    Comparison of Theory with Experiment - With Current
                                                                              Figure 8:    Disk Wiper System

-------
                                                                   ROTATING DISK RECOVERY SYSTEM
                                                                                                           333
    Further analytical efforts are under  way  to predict
water pick-up as a function of the disk rotation rate. In the
meantime,  some  assessment of the limiting rotation rate
can be made empirically from  the  experimental data in
Figure 6. It is tentatively established that a limiting w of 60
can be used for 40-weight motor oil and  100 for Bunker C
fuel ofl. The limiting c3 for diesel oil is estimated conserva-
tively at co = 1 from the data in Figure 5. Once a limiting 53
is specified, the corresponding maximum pick-up rate Q can
be found from Figure 4  for the appropriate value of the
                                                         dimensionless slick thickness d~.
                                                             The  total pumping rate that  can  be achieved  by a
                                                         system of disks depends then only on the number of disks
                                                         employed.  The  spacing between  disks  would be  large
                                                         enough  to  prevent the  oil from filling the space and re-
                                                         ducing the pumping effectiveness of the disks. The min-
                                                         imum spacing would be given by the widths of the oil layers
                                                         on the disk surfaces plus the width of the oil fillet between
                                                         these layers. From Figure 7, the width of the oil layers is
and the width of the fillet is not more than  2 y/pghmjn ~  Y i

where hm;n is the height of the fillet trough.  For y  = 18hrain


                            /Z\   (13)
or
and
               nun
                mm
                        6         (15)
 The minimum spacing would then be
                                                                                  (16)
For a deep slick,
                     max
                          =  2 (JL / y « C, which is the worst case.
With Bunker C the largest value of £ max is of the order of 200, and



                    tfarjT  k/201  -1  + 3\/§~   = 4.6 cm  =  1.8 inches   (17)
             mm

-------
334   PHYSICAL REMOVAL . . .
    Similarly the minimum spacing the thick layers of 40
weight and diesel oils are calculated to be:
     Diesel Oil     0.98 cm      or 0.38 inch
     40 weight     3.4cm       or 1.3 inch
    It is noted that these minimum spacings are independ-
ent of the size of disk.

    Some sample design calculations have  been made for a
                   full scale  system  capable of pumping 50,000 gallons per
                   hour of oil free of water. The results are shown in Table 1.
                   It is seen that to achieve a pumping rate of 50,000 gal/hr.
                   only a relatively modest system  is required.  The greatest
                   burden in such a system is imposed by a thin slick of low
                   viscosity oil; although, even there, the overall system is not
                   too massive.
          Table 1     Design Parameters for MultipDisk System with Capacity of

                       50,000 Gallons-Hours ,

                                     Disk Diameter             7 feet

                                     Disk Immersion Chord     6 feet
           Slick Thickness
           Limiting Disk Rate
           Max Pumping Rate
           Number of Disks


           Disk Spacing


           System Length
77.0
                                                   Diesel
                          40-Weight
77.0


 2.0


13.0
9.0


2.0


2.0
                           Bunker C
d
d
Oi
max
u>
~Q
^max
Q
max
(single disk)
1 mm
0.54
1.0

36.0
0.03

650.0


1 inch
13.7
60.0

20.0
30.0

5,700.0


1 inch
13.4
100.0

3-6 rpm
65.0

1,470.0 gal/hr


34.0


 2.0 inches


 6.0 feet
                                  Relative Cuttent Speed - 2 knots for all cases

-------
                                                                       ROTATING DISK RECOVERY SYSTEM     335
    A wiper  design  not  unlike  a  stationary  windshield
wiper blade on  each  face  may be used to recover  the oil
from the disks. The oil is gravity fed into a trough between
the disks and into a collector.
                                     ENDLESS BELT
                                                   SUMP
                                   DISK
           Figure 9:    Endless Belt Wiper Concept
    A second method may be to direct  the  oil from  the
wiper into a central hub where it is pumped to the storage
reservoir. This is shown in Figure 8. An Archimedes' screw
can be  used to pump  the oil in the hub to the storage
reservoirs.
   Figure 10:   General Arrangement-Oil Recovery Subsystem
    A third concept employs an endless belt to wipe and
transport  the oil  to the reservoir as shown in Figure 9. The
reservoir  would be located well above the  surface of the
water to minimize water intrusion in high sea states. One of
the major advantages of this type of wiper system is that it
tends to act as secondary separator. A portion of the water
picked up by the disks will separate from the mixture and
run off the belt. However, effectiveness of this design and
its  ability to transport large quantities of viscous oil will
have to be determined by  comprehensive functional tests.
                                      STORAGE BAG
                                                              Figure 11:   Recovery System Concept - Configuration No. 1 and
                                                                         Alternate
                                                                                                       OIL CONTAINMENT
                                                                                                       BARRIER
                                   STORAGE BAG
Figure 12:   Recovery System Concept - Configuration No. 2

-------
 336   PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
    The  oil  recovery  system can  be  supported  by a
platform that is shaped for low drag and to direct the oil to
the  disk  with minimum  of turbulence. Because the oil
recovery  effectiveness  and  efficiency  is influenced  to a
degree  by  the platform  motion,  sea  kindliness of  the
platform is desirable.
    A  candidate  concept  platform  is  the  catamaran
configuration as shown in Figure 10. The recovery disk unit
is located at the longitudinal center of gravity between the
two hulls  so that the  disks will be affected little by  the
pitching motion.  The hull is contoured into a  shape of a
converging-diverging  nozzle  with  the disks located  at  the
throat.
    Care must be taken to design the forebody  of the hull
so that is has a smooth entry into the water during pitch.
This will eliminate any violent  slamming which can disturb
the oil near and around the hull.
    The catamaran can be equipped with a portable barrier
which  can be  lowered between  the hull just aft of the
recovery unit again near the center of gravity,  creating a
containment  section between the hulls. The barrier is raised
for towing.
    A  debris guard  is provided  across the  bow of the
platform to prevent large debris from damaging the disks. It
is  expected  that  the debris would  be shallow  floating
objects which permit the oil to drain past them with little
resistance and  should not  affect  the performance of the
disks significantly.
                                          O!L CONTAINMENT
                                          BARRIER
                              TRANSFER BUOY-
                                          OII, CONTAINMENT
                                          DA Rill EH
               RECOVERY
               SUBSYSTEM
                                         TRANSFER BUOY
                                                                                  STORAGE BAG
                                                              Figure 14;   Recovery System Concept - Configuration No. 3
                                                                         Alternate
 Figure 13:   Recovery System Concept - Configuration No. 3
                                                               Catamarans typically have a high degree of transverse
                                                           stability. The transverse metacentric height is usually of the
                                                           same  order of magnitude as the longitudinal metacentric
                                                           height; and in some cases, transverse stability is greater than
                                                           longitudinal stability. In conventional size ships, this high
                                                           degree of  stability  may be excessive for human  comfort
                                                           because rolling  motions tend to be  very quick. For a small
                                                           unmanned  catamaran such as the oil  recovery vessel, this
                                                           should not be a problem.  The potential advantage of this
                                                           type of system  would be the minimum motion imparted to
                                                           the disks under high sea state conditions.
    Possible  concepts for the use of  the  disk  system in
conjunction with moored barriers are shown in Figures 11
through  14. A comparison of the  salient features, with the
advantages and disadvantages are presented  in Table 2. The
recovery system  with herding booms may also  be towed
through a spill for oil pickup.

-------
                                                              ROTATING DISK RECOVERY SYSTEM  337
      MAJOR FEATURES
     ADVANTAGES
                                                                       DISADVANTAGES
a)   HOSE CONNECT FROM RECOVERY
    UNIT TO PICK UP BUOY FOR OIL
    TRANSFER.
a)  INCREASES PICK-UP
   EFFECTIVENESS.
a)  MAKES MANEUVERING OPERA-
   TION OF RECOVERY UNIT
   CRITICAL.

b)  LOADS INTERACTION BETWEEN
   PICK UP BUOY, TRANSFER
   PIPE AND RECOVERY UNIT.
   INCREASES SURVIVABILITY
   PROBLEM.
                                          CONFIGURATION NO. 2
MAJOR FEATURES
a) RECOVERY UNIT IN LINE WITH
MOORED BARRIER. CLOSURE
BARRIER BUILT INTO RECOVERY
UNIT.
b) PICK UP BUOY SEPARATELY
MOORED ACTS AS ANEBAR
FOR BAGS AND AS SPRING
BUOY.
ADVANTAGES
a) SIMPLEST MOORING
OPERATION.
b) HIGH PICK UP RATE.
s
DISADVANTAGES
a) LOADS AND MOTION INTERACTION
b) LIMITED TO 1 KNOT CURRENT
C) BARRIER AND RECOVERY UNIT
DEPLOYED CONCURRENTLY.
d) PICK UP UNIT DIRECTIONALLY
ORIENTED.
                              Table 2a:    Comparison of System Configurations
MAJOR FEATURES
a) MOORED BARRIER

b) SELF PROPELLED RECOVERY
UNIT WITHIN BARRIER
c) STORAGE BAG EXTERIOR TO
BARRIER WITH PICK-UP BUOY
MOORED INSIDE OF BARRIER
RING.







ADVANTAGES
a) BARRIER AND RECOVERY
UNIT INDEPENDENT
SYSTEMS.
MINIMIZES LOADS AND
MOTION INTERACTIONS,
MAKES SURVIVABILITY
PROBLEM SIMPLER AND
RECOVERY PREDICTIONS
MORE ACCURATE.
b) RESPONSE TIME FOR
RECOVERY UNIT
INDEPENDENT OF
BARRIER.






DISADVANTAGES
a) RECOVERY UNIT MUST BE
PROPELLED WITH AIR JET
TO PREVENT OIL WATER
MIXING BY PROPELLER.
b) CAPACITY OF RECOVERY
UNIT LIMITED THUS REQUIRING
FREQUENT TRANSFER OF OIL
TO BUOY.
c) MOORING OF INTERNAL BUOY
REQUIRES SHIP INSIDE OF
BARRIER, UNDESIRABLE DUE
TO CLOSE QUARTERS FOR
OPERATION.
d) CANNOT RECOVER OIL WITH
25 FEET OF BARRIER.
e) LIMITED TO 1 KNOT CURRENT.
f ) RECOVERY UNIT MUST BE
MANNED.
                      Table 2b:   Comparison of System Configurations, (Configuration
                                No. 1 Alternate)

-------
338  PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
         MAJOR FEATURES
                                            ADVANTAGES
                                                                          DISADVANTAGES
  a)  RECOVERY UNITS IN TANDEM
     DISK SPACING PROGRESSIVELY
     BECOMING NARROWER IN DOWN
     STREAM RECOVERY UNITS.  DISK
     IN LAST UNIT SPACED FOR COM-
     PLETE OIL PICK UP.

  b)  PICK UP BUOY SEPARATELY
     MOORED ACTS AS AN ANCHOR
     FOR BAGS AND AS SPRING
     BUOY.

  c)  BARRIER IN HERDING ARRANGE-
     MENT.
a)  OPERATIONAL CURRENT LIMIT
    INCREASED TO 2 KNOTS OR
    GREATER.  OIL AND WATER IS
    ALLOWED TO PASS THROUGH
    THE RECOVERY UNITS AND NO
    HEAD WAVE IS ALLOWED TO
    FORM.  DISKS IN LAST RECOV-
    ERY UNIT IN SYSTEM ARE
    SPACED FOR CLEAN PICK-UP.

b)  HIGH PICK-UP RATE.
a)   COMPLICATES MOORING

b)   MOST COMPLEX LOADS AND
    MOTION INTERACTION.

c)   BARRIER AND RECOVERY
    UNIT DEPLOYED CONCUR-
    RENTLY.

d)   PICK-UP UNIT DIRECTIONALLY
    ORIENTED.
                                  CONFIGURATION NO. 3 ALTERNATE
         MAJOR FEATURES
      ADVANTAGES
    DISADVANTAGES
  a)   RECOVERY UNITS IN TANDEM
      MOORED SEPARATELY FROM
      BARRIER.
a)   BARRIER AND RECOVERY
    UNIT INDEPENDENT SYSTEMS
    MINIMIZING INTERACTIONS
    OF LOADS AND MOTIONS.

b)   DEPLOYMENT OPERATIONS
    SIMPLIFIED.

c)   RESPONSE TIME FOR
    RECOVERY UNIT INDEPEN-
    DENT OF BARRIERS.
a)   LOSS OF OIL CAN OCCUR
    BETWEEN GAP OF BARRIER
    AND HERDING BOOM IF THE
    DIRECTION OF WIND AND/OR
    CURRENT SHOULD CHANGE
    DURING THE OPERATION.
                           Table 2c:  Comparison of System Configurations, (Configuration
                                    No. 3)
CONCLUSION
 .   A disk type oil recovery system offers:
     (1)  A high pick-up rate
     (2)  Capability to pick up oil spread as thin as 1 nun
     (3)  Capability to pick up light diesel as well as Bun-
          ker •€' oil
     (4)  Relative insensitivity to waves and current
     (5)  Low tendency to disturb and emulsify the oil
          during pick-up
                    (6)  Relative insensitivity to oil condition such as
                         emulsification
                    (7)  Efficient oil-water separation
                    (8)  Relatively debris-safe
                   This study has shown that a disk  system is effective
               and practical and can be a valuable tool in the control of oil
               spills.

-------
                                    LOCKHEED  OIL  SPILL
                                      RECOVERY  DEVICE
                                                 Barrett Bnich
                                                      and
                                                 K.R. Maxwell
                                                 Ocean Systems
                                        Research and Development Division
                                       Lockheed Missiles & Space Company
ABSTRACT
    Tests and analysis of an oil spill recovery device with
various oils, under fonvard way and with waves, established
a method for estimating performance and verified fonvard
way scaling to be by the square-foot of the device diameter
and oil recovery rate by the 5/2 power.
    An 8-ft-diameter, 10-ft-long device in  sea state 4 and a
2-kt current could recover 8,600 bbls  of light oil per day
with less than  25 percent additional free water and in calm
seas, 17,200 bpd. Within containment booms, 1 to 4 in. of
oil  are required for maximum recovery. Natural emulsion
recovery is double the light oil rate. The device does not
create emulsion.
    Above 2  kts, oil recovery remains  maximum while
free-sweeping slicks over 1/2-in.  thick.  With  thinner slicks,
the rate decreases linearly down  to at least 0.01 in. Tests
established 70 percent recovery  of oil encountered on a
single pass. This can  be  increased by successive passes.
Free-sweeping in calm seas is feasible up to  5 kt.

INTRODUCTION
    The design concept described here for a high-seas oil
recovery  system  is  based  on the use   of  a Lockheed
proprietary oil recovery  device.  Much of  the  test  data
verifying the feasibility of the concept were derived from a
U.S.  Coast   Guard  sponsored  engineering evaluation
program. (DThe  opinions or assertions, however, are the
author's private  ones and should not be  construed to be
official views of the commandant  or the  Coast  Guard at
large.
    The  recovery device  picks up oil on both sides of a
number of  closely  packed vertical   discs,  which  are
nominally half immersed  in the sea. The rotation of these
discs through a layer of oil creates a viscous shear which
attaches the oil to the discs in the manner shown in Fig. 1.
     VANE CONNECTING
     ADJACENT DISCS
SCRAPER
  ROTATING DISCS
    STATIONARY HOLLOW
    SHAFT - OPEN AT TOP
 OIL FREE
 CLEAR WATER
 DISCHARGE
           Figure 1: Cross-Section Sketch of Device


    Disc rotation is fast enough to allow the oil to remain
on  the  discs until it  is removed by scrapers, but is not
sufficient to carry the  less viscous water which also  does
not readily  adhere to the oil.
    The discs are held in position by horizontal vanes
attached on  the  disc  peripheries  and supported by  end
plates on a  stationary support shaft. The vanes act to ingest
oil and  water. An overlap of the vanes traps the oil to allow
its thickness to build  up so that the discs can operate at
maximum  effectiveness  in  thin  slicks.  However, if
oversupplied. the excess oil  will  be bypassed.
    The ability  to  operate in  thin  slicks is  necessary to
perform effective recovery operations with thin layers of oil
within a containment boom and with  thin patches that have
escaped containment.
                                                      339

-------
 340  PHYSICAL REMOVAI	
     High reserve  buoyancy flotation can  provide quick
 heave response to most open sea waves, but the device must
 have some compliance to operate efficiently at immersion
 depths off of the nominal still water line to cope with short
 and steep waves.

 The Recovery Problem
     As described  by Fay(2) and Hoult(3  and 4)> after the
 first hour, an oil spill spreads at a rate independent of the
 amount  spilled and fast  enough to demand rapid  control
 measures to capture a recoverable thickness  and to prevent
 wind and current from beaching the oil.
     If containment booms cannot be used, the problem
 compounds so  that after 20 hours the spread rate reaches
 1.2 million square feet per hour, as determined by Cochran,
 et  al. (5) If sweeping is attempted at this point, in lieu of
 containment, a 100-ft swath would have to be swept at 2
 kts to  keep up with the spreading. Additional  width is
 required proportional to the square of any  further delay.
 The oil  thickness can  be considered  uniform;  hence,
 dependent on  the  amount spilled. If the spill continues in
 the presence of current and wind, further enlargement and
 elongation will occur.
     If a  containment boom  is used and there are waves
 present, the boom's effectiveness will degrade depending on
 its draft and heave compliance. In  a calm water current, a
 head wave thickening of the oil occurs at its leading edge.
 However, with  waves, there is some speculation whether a
 stable head  wave forms. According  to  the preceding
 references, and ignoring the head wave  and assuming a
 distance near the  boom of about five times its draft, d,
 where the oil is a thickness, ho; the leading  edge of the oil
 extends  a distance,  Xie, ahead of the  boom apex in a
 current, u, and  with a sea water-oil fractional density, A, ast
 follows:
                  = 5d +
                           Agh20
                          (0.72)2U2
(1)
 Likewise, the oil depth, hx, at a given distance, x, from the
 apex of the boom varies as follows:
              . (0.072)2u2(5d -x)
                                                    (2)
                                   ,  for:x   5d
 The  location  of  the leading edge  and  the  thickness
 distribution  affect  the  operation  of any oil recovery
 system. The above equations show that the contained oil
 slick  will  decrease  rapidly in size  and  thickness  with
 increasing current, and oil specific gravity. In waves, ho will
 also decrease significantly.
    There  is a  basic limitation on the  still-water oil
recovery rate which is independent of the detailed recovery
method. This limitation  depends on the  gravity-inertial
feeding of  oil from the pool to the recovery device. The
        phenomenon is analogous to open-channel critical flow and
        has been discussed  by Cross and Hoult(5). The recovery
        system must accelerate the oil in the stagnant pool toward
        itself to achieve the  desired flow rate Q. However, the limit
        to the oil velocity, V, is about
-   2gAhs
                                                           (3)
       With W as the width of the oil recovery device, the resultant
       maximum oil removal rate Qmax is:

                                  Qmax  ^Wh^2  2gA   (4)

       When the  recovery  device is  placed  inside  an  oil
       containment boom, either moored in a current or towed as
       a sweep, upstream the oil has a relative velocity. However,
       the boom causes the oil to pile up and downstream from
       the leading edge, the oil is nearly  stationary relative to the
       recovery  system. As a first approximation, it behaves like
       that in the above stagnant pool description.
           A graph of the flow limitation per  foot  of recovery
       device intake as a function of oil depth for several specific
       gravity oils in shown in Fig. 2. Likely maximum recovery
       points for  the  Lockheed device are also shown for later
       reference.
         200
                                     pOIL
                                     p WATER
                               • LIKELY MAXIMUM RECOVERY
                                 POINTS
                         246
                          OIL POOL DEPTH ~ INCHES
       Figure 2: Maximum Flow Rate Toward An Oil Recovery Device Per
       Unit Width From a Stationary Oil Pool

-------
                                                                            LOCKHEED RECOVERY DEVICE    341
    This gravity  flow does not apply if the  oil recovery
device is attached in the apex of a "U"-shaped or echeloned
boom and recovers oil at the same rate it is encountered. In
this case, Qmax is the multiple of sweeping speed, swath
width, and slick thicknesses.
    The advantages of placing the recovery device inside a
stationary boom  are: any oil bypassed through the device
can be  reprocessed;  the contained oil  acts  as a buffer
storage  for  uneven   oil encounter  rates and there  is  a
minimum  interference  with the  boom's dynamics.  The
disadvantage is that  the  recovery  device must be
maneuvered and maintained in relatively close proximity to
the boom but must avoid physical contact. Also, oil feeding
to the  removal device  is limited  to  the gravity-inertia!
mechanism to drain the stagnant pool.
    The advantages of placing  the  recovery device at the
apex  of a  sweeping boom is that the device may be
force-fed without the gravity-inertial  limit from a wide
sweep mouth.  This  might  be  advantageous with the oil
emulsifiedd  to such a high specific gravity that it has a low
feed rate from a stagnant pool. It sacrifices the advantages
of placing the device inside the boom.
    Although  sweeping free-spreading oil by the recovery
device without a boom is not very attractive, weather may
not permit  early  containment  of a spill, yet may allow
sweeping. Hence, some effectiveness under these conditions
could be  of  great  value  in reducing the impact of  a
storm-dispersed slick.

Theory of  Operation and Test Verification
    The oil and  water that flows between  adjacent discs
and into the  recovery  device  passes through  overlapping
vanes. The overlap keeps oil from escaping up to a certain
limiting input  thickness.  However, the vanes  can  also
potentially  choke  the  oil  flow  into  the  device.  The
maximum flow rate is a function of the oil viscosity and the
shape of the  restricted disc and vane formed rectangular
passage". The geometry is described in Fig. 3.

For a round circular pipe of radius, ro, the volumetric flow
rate, Q, of an oil viscosity n through the pipe is given by
                               dp
                               dx
                                                    (5)
      dx
          = pressure gradient.
As an approximation, the rectangular passage on the disc of
radius, r, rotating at cj rpm can be treated as an equivalent
pipe  with  identical cross-section.  The  velocity  in the
rectangular channel, u, is:
        where 6 = angle the vanes make with a tangent to the outer
        radius. Assuming that  the entire  rectangular passage  of
        length, 17, is filled with oil of density, p0,and that the oil
        shows to  near zero velocity after  passing through the
        channel, the pressure gradient can be approximated by
               dp =
               dx
                                         co
                                           s2fl
                                    lb
                                                            (7)
        Then, where  r'o is  an equivalent  pipe radius, Eq.  (5)
        becomes
                        = ^L  1/2  (rcocosfl)2   4
                          8
                             V
                                                   (8)
        Substitution of Eq. (8) for an 8-ft-dia. device with three
        passages formed by 2-in. disc spacing and 10-deg spacing of
        8-in.-long vanes simultaneously flowing gives
                                  27xl03
                                                            (9)
         where
              Q  = flow rate between the vanes in GPM

              v  = viscosity in Cst

        Once the oil enters the device, buoyancy causes the oil to
        rise to  the surface  and  form a pool. Unless  there is
        sufficient oil present to saturate the  device, the trapped oil
        layer builds up to a thickness, h, much greater than that of
        the slick. The layer acts as a buffer storage in waves where
        the oil ingestion rate varies.
             If sufficient oil is present, the device becomes saturated
        and  the   oil  escapes  through  the  vanes.  However,
        observations during static tests show a substantial tolerance
        between the minimum depth  that  supports  maximum
        recovery and the depth that saturates the device.
             The oil that remains inside the periphery of the device
        adheres to the disc through viscous action. The oil quantity
        that adheres to the disc can be estimated using the theory
        for the  sudden  acceleration of a  plate from rest in a
        stationary  fluid. The rotating disc replaces the moving plate
        and  the  floating  oil layer  of kinematic viscosity, v,
        represents the stationary fluid. The results from the analysis
        show that
                                                                                          r3/2
                                                           (10)
                       u = r
                              cos 6
(6)
Gravity action on the ascending disc, discussed later, limits
the recovery rate. However, Eq. (10) defines the minimum
thickness required to maintain a given recovery rate and
tests with a plain disc verified this.

As oil is removed, fresh oil flows toward the disc by gravity
action.

                    Q   Ah3/2

-------
342   PHYSICAL  REMOVAL
                                        Rectangular
                                        Passage
                Figure 3: Vane - Disc Geometry
     As the disc rotates into the  water, the oil boundary
 layer   is  acted  upon by  viscous  shear at  the  water/oil
 interface, causing a secondary flow of the water in both the
 radial  and circumferential directions. Experiments  showed
 that the flow field at the ascending disc side causes a water
 head   rise which forms  a  physical  barrier between the
 surrounding  oil and the ascending disc. Thus, the only oil
 that adheres  to  the disc is  that picked up when the disc
 descends.
                                                                             Figure 4  (Continued)
    Figure 4 shows the surface flow pattern on a 2-in. layer
of diesel oil  as the 5-ft disc descends at 10  rpm and  the
water  head rise at emergence.  Figure 5 shows the How
pattern of the oil on the disc as it approaches the wiper.


    When the disc emerges,  the oil layer attached  to  the
disc is acted upon  by gravity and centrifugal acceleration to
result  in a curved trajectory for  a particle  of oil  that is
carried to the wiper. An  approximate computation of the
oil layer thickness  can be made by applying the theory for a
plate   withdrawn   from  a  liquid.  Centrifugal  force is
neglected because  the ratio of centrifugal force to gravity is
of the order of a  tenth or less.  The vertical pattern of the
oil in Fig. 5 confirms the predicted lack of centrifugal force
effect.
        Figure 4:  Descending and Ascending Sides of Disc
                                                                       Figure 5: Flow Pattern of Oil Layer on the Disc

-------
                                                                        LOCKHEED RECOVERY DEVICE    343
    For a recovery device operating at  10 rpm and u = rco
~  100 cm/sec; and with an oil of ^ =  10  cp  and a = 40
dynes/cm Ref. (1) shows that the effects of surface tension
on  oil  recovery  rate are  negligible provided  that  the
capillary  number  is much  greater than one. In  this case,
/uuo/a = 25. Thus, viscous and gravitational forces dominate
and within the supply limit of Eq. (10) the theory applied
to  the ascending disc shows that
                                                 (12)
Q  = pl/2g.l/2w3/2r5/2.forQ