You are on page 1of 75

l

n
0
0

IXTOC-I OIL SPILL


DAMAGE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
A Cooperative Federal and State Program

n
0
0

D
0
0
[I

I
J

Revised October S, 1979

Prepared by:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
and
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6
In cooperation with the following
Federal and State agencies:
U. S. Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Fish and Wildlife Service
National Park Service
U. s. Geological Survey
State of Texas
Department of Water Resources
Bureau of Economic Geology
Parks and Wildlife Department
General Land Office
Corpus Christi State University
Texas A & I University
Texas A & M University
University of Texas

l
J
]

:1
J
0
0
J
J
J
]

a
0
0
[J

:I
J

J
J

0
D
D

CONTENTS

0
0
D

List of Tables and Figures


Acknowledgments
Executive Summary

I.
II.

Introduction
Goals, Objectives, and Benefits

III.

Technical Approach

IV.

Ongoing Monitoring

VI.

V.

VII.

D
[J

0
[I

0
rJ

0
0
D

Management Plan
Schedule
Budget Summary
Appendix I.
Appendix II.

Proposed Projects
Agency/ Personnel Participants in
Preparation of Environmental
Damage Assessment Plan

~I

0
J
0
0
0

0
D
0
0
0

a
[I

D
D

TABLES AND FIGURES

n
0
0
0
D
D
0

Figure II-1.

Objectives and General Benefits Showing


Examples of Specific Benefits Received

Figure II-2.

Benefits and Selected Users

Figure III-1.

Step-by-Step Process in Decision-Making

Figure III-2.

Information Flow of Damage Assessment


Program

Table IV-1.

Ongoing or Completed Monitoring Studies:


IXTOC I Oil Spill

Figure V-1.

Program Management Organization

Figure VI-1.

Chronology of IXTOC I Oil Spill and


Proposed Research Program

Table VII-1.

Funding Requirements in Millions of Dollars


for Program Element of Damage Assessment
Program by Years

[J
[}

0
iii

ll

1
[J

'l

J
I
0
r]

J
l
0

l
D
0
D
J
J
J

n
n
0
[f

0
0
0
0

- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS -

The contributions made to this plan by individuals and organi zations are
greatly appreciated and acknowledged. A complete list of participants
in this effort is included in Appendix 2.
Special appreciation is extended to Corpus Christi State University for
support facilities and to the IXTOC I Damage Assessment Team who actively
participated by dedicating endless days and nights to this effort.
This plan is dedicated to the one individual who worked her fingers to
the bone -- Dolly Ulna.

0
D

0
l

0
D
iv

0
0
J
D
[I
D

0
D
0
D
0

0
0
0
0
J
0
0

n
]

D
]
0

0
1

0
0
0

0
u

u
l

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this proposed cooperative federal and state program
is the assessment of damages to northwest Gulf of Mexico resources
caused by the IXTOC I oil spill. Oil has impacted the U.S. offshore
areas, barrier beaches and inlets from Brownsville to fifteen miles
north of Aransas Pass. Although the seasonal change to southerly currents
is now curtailing additional impacts, the expected shift to northerly
flow during February will again threaten the U. S. coast with oil particularly
if attempts to control the well are unsuccessful.
State and federal responsibility for assessment of damages from
pollution incidents of this type stems from legal mandates which designate
agencies as public trustees and protectors of the Nation's natural
resources. The damage assessment program coordinates the federal/
state/non-government response to the environmental and socioeconomic
impacts of the IXTOC I oil spill.
The goal of the Damage Assessment Program is to:
EVALUATE THE DAMAGE TO NORTHWEST GULF OF MEXICO
RESOURCES RESULTING FROM THE IXTOC I OIL SPILL.
To achieve the program goal, it is necessary to assess the impacts
on specific components of the ecosystem. The following five objectives
are formulated to meet the responsibilities of federal and state governments:

Assess potential impacts on human health


Assess impacts on commercial and recreational fishery resources
Assess impacts on marine mammals, birds, and endangered species
Assess socioeconomic impacts
Develop an improved management and scientific approach to
damage assessment

Successful completion of the program objectives will provide the


first comprehensive evaluation and quantification of the total impact of
a major oil spill on national resources. As such it will provide the
basis for improved policy and management actions within both government
and private sectors.
The proposed approach focuses on important resources as determined
by economic use or legal mandate which have been identified as being
important by legislative mandate or economic use. Emphasis is also
placed on habitats and food resources known to be required to maintain
these important resources. A monitoring phase has been established to
track oil distribution and quantity in water, sediments and biota, to
help establish levels of impact, and to determine the need for further
studies. Program elements will be carefully integrated to achieve a
final damage assessment product.

1
A program management plan has been designed to ensure that the
program meets its objectives. In accordance with this plan, a Program
Manager, selected from the lead agency (NOAA), will have responsibility
for the overall direction of damage assessment efforts, and will be
assisted in this task through interaction with two advisory committees,
a scientific management team, a data management team and an administrative group.
Budget requirements for the damage assessment program include
$4.2 million during the first year and $5.6 million to be distributed
over the following two years for a total of $9.8 million to be requested
in supplemental funds.

0
1

0
0
0
0

D
0

u
0

0
vi

1
1

INTRODUCTION

ll
l
D

J
0

Since 3 June 1979, a blowout on the drilling rig IXTOC I in the Bay
of Campeche has resulted in the release of approximately 3 million
barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. Attempts at drilling relief
wells or capping the well have been unsuccessful to date. No reliable
estimate of when the flow of oil from the well may be stopped is available .
The IXTOC I incident has resulted in the largest spill into the marine
environment ever documented. In comparison, the Amoco Cadiz spill,
which caused significant environmental and economic damage along the
French coast in 1978, released approximately 1.5 million barrels.
From June to September oil was carried northward by Gulf currents
and has impacted the coastal environments of Texas. A mid-September
change in prevailing winds and currents has caused the oil to remain in
Mexican waters curtailing additional U.S. impacts. In February the
currents are expected to resume their northward flow and the oil will
again threaten the U. S. coastline particularly if IXTOC I has not been
controlled.
Oil from the IXTOC I spill is affecting a large geographical area
and a multitude of local and regional interests . Potentially impacted
by the spill is a $2 billion tourist industry and a $600 million commercial fishery . In addition, several threatened and endangered species
may have been affected. Given the extent and diversity of the affected
resources, a cooperative damage assessment program which recognizes as
many interests as possible is the only practical means by which to
develop a comprehensive and accurate evaluation of total damage. Lacking
such an evaluation, it is difficult to separate fact from conjecture.
Many questions will go unanswered and future planning will be seriously
hampered.
The damage assessment plan presented here is designed to employ
state and federal multiagency capabilities under unified direction in
order to:

1.

measure oil- related injury to resources in the Northwest


Gulf coast;

2.

estimate total losses, in terms of dollars or


unquantifiable values; and

3.

improve techniques and methodologies for damage assessment


by evaluating the present program and developing a
generic model for future spills.

Results of the damage assessment, particularly the quantitative estimate


of losses , will assist resource managers in balancing the risks and
benefits of proposed actions.

I- 1

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Over the past 15 years, there have been a number of spills around
the world for which some kind of damage assessment has been attempted.
Most of these studies have been aimed at individual research questions
or at a single aspect of the fundamental damage assessment problem.
Even so, the damage assessment problem has undergone considerable constructive evolution, as the following examples illustrate .
In U. S. waters, the first major spill for which damage assessment
was attempted was the Santa Barbara well blowout in 1969. The Santa
Barbara studies focused on massive mortalities of various types of
marine fauna . In the litigation that followed, the State of California
sued the oil companies involved for damage to the state natural resources
and economy and for loss of taxes and proprietary income. A compromise
settlement was reached without a legal determination of the proper
measure of governmental damages.
A spill from the barge Florida in West Falmouth Harbor , Massachusetts,
in 1969 was the first major spill for which an integrated scientific
assesssment was attempted. The study was concerned mainly with impacts
to the benthos of Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts, and did not include any
assessment of economic damages. The data were never used to support
litigation.
A damage assessment following the NEPCO 140 barge oil spill in the
St. Lawrence River in 1976 was conducted during the 2 year period following
the discharge. Study areas were identified by an International Joint
Team which also served as a steering committee throughout the duration
of the study. This team was the by-product of efforts sanctioned in the
National Contingency Plan. Primary study objectives included assessment
of the spill impact upon indigenous biological populations, detection of
residual petroleum hydrocarbons within affected ecosystems, determination
of the extent of bioaccumulation of hydrocarbons, assessment of socioeconomic
impacts upon local communities, and synthesis of the technical findings
into a decision document for use by agencies as a management tool. The
study met its objectives and the results have been published in a final
report.
In 1976, the Argo Merchant ran aground off the coast of Massachusetts,
spilling 170.000 barrels of No. 6 fuel oil into the northwest Atlantic.
Within 2 days, a massive scientific investigation began, coordinated by
the NOAA/USCG Spilled Oil Research Team. The Argo Merchant spill studies,
although scientifically sound, were inconclusive and did not, for the
most part, quantify impacts on natural resources in the region. Nevertheless,
this scientific effort was the first step toward damage assessment
contingency planning in the United States. NOAA and EPA, in a series of
jointly sponsored workshops around the country, assembled scientific
information related to oil spills for both information exchange and the
development of a coordinated system for assessing damages. In addition,
a National Scientific Team was created to respond to major spills and
spills of special interest, with the following objectives:

l
1
1

l
l
1

]
l
1

J
I -2

n
IJ

to give scientific advice to the Federal On-Scene Coordinator


to provide a framework for damage assessment
to take advantage of the research opportunities afforded by the
spill.
Scientific support coordinators named by NOAA for the Gulf of
Mexico and Southeast Atlantic, Alaska, and the Pacific'Northwest have
been responding to spills for the last 18 months. Spillage of oil from
the barge Peck Slip off northeastern Puerto Rico in 1978 provided the
first test of the resources and planning of the scientific teams.
The outcome of a damage assessment of the ~ Colocotroni spill off
the southwestern coast of Puerto Rico in 1973 set legal precedent for
the use of scientific data to compensate for environmental damage.
District Judge Juan Torruella calculated the monetary value of the
damage by multiplying the number of organisms killed by a per-organism
replacement cost (taking the low end of a range between 6 and $4.50
from a biological supply catalog). A judgement of $6.2 million was
entered against the defendant for damage to 20 acres of mangrove swamp
habitat. Although assessment data were not sufficient to support
claims for all the associated losses, this decision established a basis
in Federal common law for assessing natural resource damage from a spill
of oil or other toxic substance.
When the super tanker Amoco Cadiz was grounded on the coast of
Brittany, France in March 1978 and subsequently broke up, it released
what was at that time the greatest single spill in maritime history,
(1.5 million barrels). The spillage and spread of oil to the beaches
and wetlands was aggravated by strong onshore winds and high tides. Two
hundred and ten miles of the Brittany coast were directly affected by
the spill.

0
D

Two distinct studies of damage from the Amoco Cadiz are being
conducted--an ecological study of oil impact and an economic investigation
(conducted by NOAA) of French losses through fisheries, tourism, and
indirect effects on the economy. Methodogical advances in economic
damage assessment from the latter investigation will be employed in the
proposed damage assessment, which integrates the contributions (and
constraints) of chemical oceanography, biology, and economics.
THE CURRENT SITUATION

r:
~l

Although progress has been made in the techniques of managing


damage assessment, a quantum jump is called for within the context of
the massive threat to resources posed by the IXTOC I spill. Due to the
distance of the spill from the study area, more lead time has been
available for planning and implementation than in past incidents. This
has made it possible to involve numerous federal and state agencies in
the planning process and to adopt an integrated approach which is aimed
toward defined objectives and which will make optimum use of program
funds. Additionally, in view of the fact that oil spill damage assessment
is still in a formative stage, the IXTOC I spill should be exploited
fully for all opportunities to develop realistic ways of quantifying
ecological damage. Loop (Louisiana offshore oil port), the first superport

r-3

in the Gulf of Mexico is scheduled for completion next year. The Texas
Deep Water Port Authority is seeking approval for construction of a
superport previously known as Seadock, off the Texas Coast. Additional
proposals for inshore deepwater port facilities at Galveston, Texas and
Any major oil spill from either of
Harbor Island, Texas remain active.
these locations could severely impact natural resources in the proposed
study area. Among the returns from the proposed program will be the
creation of a permanent program plan that can be activated quickly in
future spills, and a data base of factual information on which resource
managers can base decisions concerning similar offshore oil and gas
development.

l
1
1
l
1
1

1
0
l
J

D
1

J
J

J
I-4

n
n
n
0
0

0
D
{l

[1

II

GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND BENEFITS

The ultimate goal of the proposed damage assessment program is to


evaluate damage to the resources of the northwest Gulf of Mexico resulting
from the IXTOC I oil spill. Accomplishing the objectives of this program
will result in a number of benefits (examples of these benefits are
presented in Figure II-1).
It is these benefits that dictate the need
for the damage assessment program. ~pecifically, program objectives are
to:

Assess potential impacts on human health


Assess impacts on commercial and recreational fishing resources
Assess impacts on marine mammals, birds, and endangered species
Assess socioeconomic impacts
Develop an improved management and scientific approach to
damage assessment

The benefits that result from accomplishing each of these objectives are
presented below.
(l)

Improve Public Awareness of and Decision Making with Respect


to the Risks of Oil-Related Marine Activities

In weighing benefits and risks of a proposed activity, the


benefits are usually immediate and certain, while the risks involv e
probabilities and unexplored causal relations . Quantification of
damages, where possible, and identification of injury to nonquantifiable values will facilitate direct comparison of the risks
and benefits of a proposed oil development. This comparison will
go into the environmental impact statement required by the National
Environmental Policy Act. Decisions on proposed oil-related marine
activities, such as OCS lease sales, deep water ports, and coastal
refineries, will be improved by a comprehensive estimate of damage
from a major oil spill, based on scientifically valid and economically respectable methods. Such a damage estimate will also
assist Congress and state legislatures in making laws on oil spill
liability. Investigations of past oil spills have been of scientific
interest, but have not provided the comprehensive, quantitative
loss estimate which the proposed damage assessment will provide.
(2)

Protect Consumer Health by Assuring Quality Products

By law, state and federal agencies are mandated to ensure the


health and safety of the populations within their jurisdictions .

II-1

:I
~~

J
J
J
]

0
]

D
D
0
0
0
D

J
J
J

Beneflta
Protect
Consumer
llealth

Maintain
ConaiJIIM!r
Confidence

Support
Fishery and
Wildlife
Hanage~~~ent

Decisions

Support
Coastal
Use
Management
Decisions

Support
Regulatory
and
Legis latl ve
Processes

Prev"ent and
Provide
Mitigate
Basis for
Copensation Resource
for D1111111ges
Daaasea

lnfonnation
Transfer

Public
Awareness
of Risk
Auoclatcd
with OCS
Deve lop~~en t

Support
Mandatory
Closure of
Elllhayments
to Fishing

Assist
Judicial
Process for
llealth
Settlement
Claims

Rapid
Awareness
of Extension
Agents of
Potential
Contaminatlo

Risk to
lluMl:lnS
From or.s
Development

Ob.J ec t1 ves
Active
Assess Potential
Impacts on
Hu111an llealth

I ~~~pound
Adultered
Fishery
Productl

~iarket for
(;ulf Coaet
Fishery
Product

Assess lpacts
on Cotnnaerdal
and Recreational
Fishery Resource~
H

'i'
N

Assess Impacts
on Marine
haals, Birds,
and Endangered
Species

Adjus t
Fishing
Seasons in
lleavily
lq>scted Bays
& Estuaries

Support New
"Loss to
Zoning
Reduce
Fi&hery"
Ordinances
Data
Fishing
I' rohib it lng
Pressure
Encroachment Avallable
of Residence for Econotdc in Coastal
Lagoons
Upon Lagoons Adjuster

Reduce
Relocate
Public
Turtle Brood Pressure
Stock to
On
Unhtpacted
Impacted
Breedin&
Rookery
Sites
Areas

Support for
Reduced
Dredging of
Channels in
Impacted
Areas

"l.oss to
Beach Vis1t01
Development
Days" Data
in Noncritl- Available
cal Resource {or Economic
Areas
Adjuster
Re cr~tatlonal

Uevelnp an
laaprove .l
llana~(>,.oent

and

SctentJ.r I.e
Appro01cl1 to
Damage Assessment

r.ontinued
:rotcctton
of Consumer
liealth

Continued
ltaintenance
of Consumer
Confidence

"Loss of
Birds" Data
Available
for Economic
Adjuster

Establish
Permanent
Bird
Cleaning
Capabillty
in Key Resource Areas

Pr01a0te

Deter.ine
Effecta of
Losa of
Seafood .in
Seafood
Products

Assess
Soc ioeconomlc
Impacts

Easy l.D.
of Potential
Health
Proble111s
Related to
Future Spill

Be t ~ er
Better
}lanasecnt of tlanagetaent
Fishery and
of Coastal
Use
Wild! He
Resources

Figure 11-1.

Better
Support of A Cont l nually
Regulatory
I&Dprovtng
and
Bash of
Legislative Compel"'sation
Procetlses
for Damages

Better
Prevention lio
lll t J ga tion
of Resources
From Damages
By a Spill

Objectives and General Benefits Showing


Examples of Specific Beneflts Received

Risk to
Coowerclal &
Recreational
Fishin& Resources fro111
o<:s
Development
!IUS~

tO

Har:ine
1111tlllllals.
Link Fishery Birds &
& Wildlife
EndansereJ
Experts to
Species fr011
Solve Co111111on ocs
Problems
Dcve lopG.cn t
Rapid Awareness of Need.
Risk to
of Sport
Nonliving
Fishing
Resources
Industry
Passed to
from OCS
Fishery
Development
Association

Continua lly
Improving
Methods of
Information
Tran~<fer

A CuntJnuln&
Increase in
Awareness
Assoc iated
With OCS
D~vclopment

J
0
:J
]
]

D
D

[I

0
D

J
J
:J

The health of the general public can be threatened by oil-contaminated


foodstuffs reaching the commercial or recreational fishery markets.
Damage assessment provides a means by which potential hazards to
public health can be evaluated, and by which mitigative and preventive
measures may be taken in this and future spill incidents.
(3)

0
0

Commercial fisheries account for approximately six hundred


million dollars in the local and regional economies of the northwest
Gulf of Mexico. For a large segment of the population of this
region, this commercial resource represents the sole source of
income. Widespread knowledge that public health is potentially
endangered by the presence of contaminated fishery products in the
marketplace results in a loss of confidence in the fishery market.
Without the damage assessment program, it will be difficult to
provide factual information to the public concerning this oil
spill.
(4)

Support Fishery and Wildlife Management Decisions

Fish and wildlife populations are among the most important


natural resources. Billions of dollars per year are contributed to
local economies in the northwest Gulf region as a result of these
resources (tourism, recreation, and commercial interests). While
it may not be possible to prevent damage from the oil spill, other
measures can be taken that mitigate or reduce its impacts.
The
proposed damage assessment will facilitate future mitigation efforts.
(5)

Maintain Consumer Confidence in Seafood Products

Support Coastal Use Management Decisions

As wildlife and fisheries are one of the most important living


natural resources, so also must the coastal zone be considered one
of the most critical nonliving resources. Population centers
naturally develop along the coasts and serve as focal points for
national and international commerce. It is important that there be
a compatible mix of commercial and noncommercial uses of these
areas. Public opinion weighs heavily in decisions on how coastal
areas are used. The public has a need and right to know how events
such as oil spills affect the coastal zone, so that decisions
concerning coastal zone use can be judged from factual information.
(6)

Provide a Basis for Compensation for Damage to Living and


Non-living Resources

Losses to the public and private sectors from the oil spill
may reach many millions of dollars. The damage assessment program
will document and quantify these losses so that some form of
compensation can be made to parties who experience losses caused by
the oil spill.

J
II-3

(7)

Support Regulatory and Legislative Processes

A number of state
protect the living and
The assessment program
their participation in
taken into account and
(8)

and federal agencies are mandated by law to


nonliving resources of our coastal zones.
provides for inputs from these agencies and
a unified effort so that their interests are
the objectives of their mandates are satisfied.

Facilitate Prevention and Mitigation of Future Oil Spill Damage

With increased development of offshore oil and gas resources,


it is very likely that large oil spills will continue to occur.
Information gained in the assessment of damage by the IXTOC I spill
will improve our ability to mitigate damage from future oil spills.
(9)

[)

Information Transfer to Fishery Association, Extension Agents,


and Political Bodies

Because the fisheries are an important natural resource around


the country, this industry must be well-informed of the impacts to
fisheries created by oil spills. Disseminating this information
will enable those involved in the fishery industry to develop their
own contingency plans for similar spill incidents.
(10) Evaluation of Damage Assessment Program Design
The damage assessment program is important to a wide spectrum
of users, including numerous federal and state agencies (Figure II-2)
as well as other public and private organizations. The continuous
evaluation of the program design will allow the documentation of the validity and limitations of various types of data sets and sampling
approaches for quantifying changes in resources potentially at risk
from spilled oil.

0
0
D
0

o
0

(11) Improve Techniques of Economic Damage Estimation for Policy


and Legal Uses
Economics is the discipline that translates measured environmental
impacts into a standard unit of value useful for policy and legal
purposes. Some oil effects bearing directly on commercial activities
can be evaluated by traditional economic methods. To obtain a
comprehensive measure of oil spill damage, new economic approaches
must be developed to put a dollar value on non-market environmental
resources. NOAA is now engaged in this development process in
connection with the Amoco Cadiz spill. Economists' translational
role will involve them in feedback to the biologists to obtain the
data needed for input to economic models. The economists involved
with the IXTOC I damage assessment will also look forward to the
legal problems of proof of damages and the types of decision the
damage assessment will assist to make the product most useful.
This integration of natural science through economics to a publicly
useful product will be a major benefit of the proposed damage
assessment.

I!-4

0
0
0
0

D
0
0

S-11
:c::::: >
r.--c
c: ~ v. c.

r: ::"'

,:!'"-.

r:

:.

,..

r:.
-e

::;

,..'".,.,

.......
I

"'
a:

..=...
(l)
R)

"

It
t;

"'....
~

1:

r:

"'c..
<::
cr.
.,
It

0:

~=

Ct.

c.

R)

=
"' .,c

.,r.. E,.

r:

'a.,

~g~~
e v . v v.

:!:

~
~

!"';

:.:

: , ; % "':'
~ t:.

tr.

--.
~

r.:

~ c - <
~cc r:.~ ~,., ,..
g
e r: c:
:0

=~r
~ ~
";

"'

f ~ Ct
E ~ ;.
(1; ...

t: v.

-::-:=:cr.

=
= "":'
v.-::.

., r:

CO::!<""
f';~

u.-

t;

v. c.. ,...

e ... c
v.-

- .

<'<

r:

.......

~~
=

%S:~
:.:
:::"~ ::'

"'

t.:
:.: cr.
cr. .....

r:

(7-- ~

f t - ""':

";;
:0 <::

~'<

!'f r:"

... "'

It

::

~~E

= ==

- = .......
- . U'.
~

~
t: r:.
~

"'

....

.., =

=~~

g2
u:.

=- ::5 ,.,('.
.,
~

r:

.....

"'

"~

.I.
.,.

I
I

c::

!2

;:

<::

v.

..,
"'
1:

Municipalities
(City/Chamber of
C0111111erce)
County
Agencies

r
I

r.

;:

Local
Citizenry
Regulatory
Agencies
(Environmental
Qualitv)

f
cr.

r..:
State
Citizenry

c
fJ

EPA

BLM/USGS

FWS

NPS

[
~

if.

NOAA/NMFS

NOAA/CZ}!

C!ti:.enry
of the
United States

FDA

ComZDercial
Groups

,.
c
~
!':

:J
J
~I

J
J
J

l
l
1I

0
0
1

(12) Information Transfer to Managers of Intrinsically Valuable


Marine and Coastal Environments
Certain marine and coastal environments have an intrinsic
value arising from public opinion and legal mandates. In the
northwest Gulf, these environments include the Flower Gardens coral
reefs , Padre Island National Seashore, Aransas Wildlife Refuge and
other areas of local, state and national importance. Habitat
studies discussed in the Fisheries and Key Species sections will
provide valuable information on the kinds of damage suffered by
these environments.
(13) Produce Information Useful in Directing Efforts to Improve
Techniques for Cleanup, Prevention and Mitigation of Oil
Spills
While no studies specifically address improvement of technology
for cleanup, prevention and mitigation measures, it is anticipated
that one of the benefits of the program will be to point out the
areas where more study is needed. Specifically, more study is
needed in the identification of pathways of damage. The identification
of pathways of damage will assist the Coast Guard and the Environmental
Protection Agency, the agencies responsible for improving cleanup,
prevention and mitigation technology, in allocating their research
and development funds.

0
]

ll

0
J

!I-6

1
rl
~l
rl

]
]
]

J
]

]
]

J
J

J
J
J
]

III
TECHNICAL APPROACH

The damage resulting from the IXTOC I oil spill will ultimately be
reflected in impacts to man. Impacts may include loss of income from
decreases in fisheries, tourism, and recreation; impaired health; and
damage to non commercial wildlife such as birds and endangered species.
The purpose of this program is to assess these impacts and recognize
that a viable program must be limited to resources that are easily
identifiable. Technical measures of resource losses must be translated
into a common standard of value to be most useful to decision makers and
the public . By this means the study elements of the program can be
focused on a coherent endpoint defined by losses to human values.
Decision Making
Successful management of a damage assessment program depends upon
the development of standardized criteria to support decision making
requirements. Several important steps are included in making decisions
in the technical management. Examples of major steps in management
decisions are:

o the location and fate of oil in relation to specific resources


o necessary data sets which may be feasibly obtained in order
to meet the objectives of damage assessment
o the appropriateness and quality of proposed program studies
o the standardization and calibration of procedures, equipment
and analyses
o priorities of allocating available funds among necessary
projects
o the appropriate phasing of initiation of the accepted proposals
o the methods of data handling, and integration of information
into the final damage assessment product
Decisional responsibility will be organized according to the management
plan. Through the combined efforts of the Objective Coordinators,
Science and Program Advisory Committees, the Program and Data Management,
a standardization of criteria for decision making will be developed.
Figure II-1 summaries the stepwise decision process which will affect
the content and quality of data collected in the damage assessment
program.
Program Elements
The program elements required to achieve these objectives are
briefly defined below.
III-1

START

[I

Figure III-1.

0
1
'-'

ll

TRACE OIL FATE


TO OBJECTIVES

HUMAN HEALTH

D
[l

FISHERIES

MARINE MAMMALS,
BIRDS, ENDANGER-I------I
ED SPECIES

0
D
0

SOCIOECONOMIC

L'!PROVED DAMAGE

ASSESSMENT
APPROACH

[I

EXAMINE AVAILABLE BASELINE


DATA

Step-by-Step Process in
Decision-Making

EVALUATE BASELINE LEVELS OF

VARIATION

III-2

D
D

n
J
rJ
D

0
0

a
0
0
0

u
u
[I

Figure III-1.

1
CAN
DATA BE
COLLECTED WHICH
CAN BE EFFECTIVELY
COMPARED TO
BASELINE DATA?

YES

DESIGN DATA SETS NEEDED


(S&~LING/STATISTICS) TO
SHOW GREATER TH.A."' BASELINE
~EVELS OF VARIATION AND/OR
CAUSALITY

DETERMINE FEASIBILITY FOR


EACH DATA SET

D
D

NO

YES

DESIGN MONITORING OF
OBVIOUS EFFECTS SHOWING
ACUTE CAUSALITY

u
ANALYZE THE RETURNS
PER COST OR EFFORT

CHOOSE AND PRIORITIZE


DATA SETS

RELEASE REQUEST FOR


PROPOSALS

RECEIVE PROPOSALS

III-3

Continued

NO

ELIMI~ATE FROM
OPERATIONAL PROGRAM

l
1
I
l
J

1
0
r}

a
u

0
D
J
0
J
J
I

fl

Figure III-1.
NO

IS STUDY
APPROPRIATE
TO
OBJECTIVES?

YES

&~INE SAMPLING,
ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
AND QUALITY OF CONTROLS
FOR EACH DATA SET IN
PROPOSAL

l
I

0
0
D

YES

STANDARDISE, CALIBRATE
BASELINE AND OTHER OBJECT
STUDIES

DESIGN TRANSLATION OF DATA


PRODUCTS INTO ECONOMIC/
LEGAL TERMS AND FORMAT

D
III-4

Continued

a
0
D
D

0
0

D
D
il
il

a
D
[I

[J

J
D

1.

The Potential Impacts to Human Health

Crude oil contains many components known to be toxic to man . Acute


toxicity to humans will probably not be encountered since objectionable
taste and odor will virtually eliminate the consumption of foodstuffs
grossly contaminated with oil residues. At the same time, the L~TOC I
oil contains components that may be carcinogenic.
These carcinogenic
compounds and their metabolities may be accumulated and retained in the
edible tissue of harvested fish and shellfish and represent a pathological
threat at contamination levels which would probably not be detected by
consumers. It is not feasible to institute the extensive and long-term
human epidemiological studies which would be required to prove this kind
of health impact.
However, it is possible to address potential risks
of this spill to human health. The necessary studies would include
analyses of the fishery products being consumed, and estimates of the
risks associated with hydrocarbons and other oil constituents of metabolities
found in those products.
2.

n
]
1

Commercial and Recreational Fisheries

The primary measure of the impact of the IXTOC I spill on the


fishery resources will rely on a careful analysis of catch/effort statistics compiled by the Gulf States and the National Marine Fisheries
Service. The assessment is complicated, however, in that these catch
statistics fluctuate from year to year due to natural or other non-spill
related causes. It is essential, therefore, that the results of the
damage assessment program show a link between the oil spill and any
reductions in the fisheries populations attributed to the oil. The
establishment of this link will result from a coordinated biological and
chemical sampling program which includes observations for histopathological
and genetic aberrations. This program will provide indirect evidence
that identifies the IXTOC I oil as the cause of the fisheries impacts.
Because impacts to fisheries resources are difficult to document
using population surveys, the proposed projects will focus on organismal
studies and the investigation of food and habitat parameters which
provide essential support to the fishery populations. The organismal
studies include histopathological analyses, toxicity bioassays, and
behavioral studies.
In past spill situations, the environmental studies pursued were of
scientific interest but had no defined endpoints, did not establish
cause and effect relationships, and were not integrated with other
related work. To assure that the proposed studies attain the present
program objectives, only those environmental factors which are essential
to the growth and survival of important fish and shellfish populations
will be investigated. For example, certain habitat types within the
Gulf coast ecosystem have been identified as important to the survival
and growth of commercial fish and shellfish larvae for cover, shelter,
and food. In the Laguna Madre, these habitats include seagrass beds,
mangroves, and salt marshes; on the Gulf side of the barrier island
system, the intertidal infauna and nearshore neritic species form an
important part of the diet of some fishes. Offshore, the soft-bottom,

I I I -5

1
the hard bottom and reef communities are essential to the production of
commercial fish. While recognizing that it may not be possible to
establish exact correspondence between the number of acres of habitat
destroyed and the number of adult shrimp lost as a result of the spill,
by assessing the changes oil brings about in the availability or function
of these support factors, some indirect evidence can be presented that
provides a link between resource damage and the IXTOC I spill.
3.

Impacts to Key Species

Key species are animals that may or may not have a direct economic
or ecological importance but which have an intrinsic value established by
national policy. This category includes marine mammals, birds, and
endangered species. Assessing impacts on these species will involve
studies similar to those outlined in the previous section. Because many
of these species occupy the beaches for part if not all of their lives,
oil impacts to beach habitats will receive major emphasis in achieving
this objective. Certain organismal and chemical studies on non-endangered
species will be required to support the habitat and population survey
studies.
4.

Socioeconomic Impacts

Socioeconomic impacts can be evaluated in terms of market-valued


resources, nonmarket resources, and regional impacts . Market-valued
resources are goods and services that are commonly bought and sold , and
thus already have established dollar values. Spilled oil potentially
affects such market-valued resources as the commercial fisheries catch,
the tourist industry, fishing gear, and boats.
The economic damages to market-valued resources may be derived from
such conventional statistics as expenditures to restore or replace
damaged equipment and the loss in net revenue to the affected sectors.
Baseline data for many of the market-valued resources already exist.
The principal research effort will be directed at quantifying changes
from baseline levels of activity .
As distinguished from market-valued resources, nonmarket resources
are goods and services that are produced and consumed without any exchange
on organized markets. Spilled oil potentially affects a very wide array
of nonmarket activities and rQsources including tourism, recreation,
recreational fishing, aesthetics, endangered species, wildlife, and
human health. Measurement of the economic value of nonmarket resource
damages is difficult and must rely upon innovative and imaginative
research techniques.
Regional impacts refer to the secondary economic impacts from the
spill. Changes in the size of commercial fishery landings have secondary
impacts on fish processors, wholesalers. retailers and wages of workers in
the fishing industry, as well as on suppliers of gear and other support
to the commercial fishing sector. Similarly, reductions in tourism and
recreation will have repercussions on restaurants, regional gasoline
outlets, and a host of other suppliers to the tourist sector.

III-6

1
1
1

0
1

J
I
l
l
0
0

0
]
1

1
5.

Improved Damage Assessment Program

It is recognized that assessment of damage from oil spills is a


relatively new process with a developing matrix of scientific and management expertise. While the present program owes a great deal to past
assessment programs, much remains to be learned. Although it is designed
for the assessment of the IXTOC I spill, the present plan is intended to
develop a generic model that can be applied to future spills. The plan
and the management structure utilize inputs and participation by local,
state, and federal agencies. Under this program element, scientific and
management reviews by objective evaluators from outside the program will
be used to continuously update and improve the program plan to ensure
that data collection is state-of-the-art and scientifically sound, and
that management is efficient in meeting program objectives.
Changes made during implementation of the present program or recommended
for future damage assessments will be documented and made available to
regulatory agencies and oil-response decision makers to facilitate
improved estimation of losses from future oil spills.
Program Integration
There will be coordination of all the program elements with economists
to assure that the biological projects will produce the data needed as
inputs to the economic models to translate environmental impacts into
economic damages. Figure III-2 depicts .schematically the flow of information
from the biological program elements through the socioeconomic element
to produce a final damage assessment. This product flows from the
socioeconomic program element as dollar values are attached to the
damaged market, non-market, and regional resources.

j
1

[J

J
J

The human health studies will assess the health risk from the
consumption of hydrocarbon-contaminated fish products and direct exposure
to IXTOC I oil. Economic evaluation of these health risks uses data on
contamination of the fishery products and expert opinion on health
risks. Through techniques that sample consumer preferences, an economic
loss can be attached to the health risk to workers and the general
public.
The next program element examines impacts on commercial and recreational
fisheries. One objective is to estimate the effect of IXTOC I oil on
present and future catch/effort ratios of Gulf of Mexico commercial
fisheries. Data generated through this program element will be used as
an input to the socioeconomic studies, which will evaluate commercial
fisheries losses as one of the market commodities damaged by the spill.
Findings on commercial fisheries will assist in determination of recreational
fisheries losses.
The other biological program element focuses on non-fishery wildlife.
Such wildlife, including marine mammals, birds, and endangered species
have tangible value to society; numerous examples exist in which valuable
goods and services have been expended to view, study or preserve them .
Establishing the economic value of any injury to these species will be
extremely difficult but it is hoped that interviews with recreationists
and others impacted by the oil spill can be used to establish society's
willingness to pay to prevent such damage.

III- 7

L-

[__

L.....

c:::J

c:::J

c:!

c:..J

c:::

c=J

c:::J

ContumJnatJon
ScrtJening of
~'ishcl'lus

c:::J

c::J

c::J

----'

c:J

1----

Products

.J A:~scss I e pac t
---..to Human llualth

LltJci6JonMakJng (l.lH)

.lll'l

1-

Chemical StuoJitJs
1

I of

Body Fluids
for- l'o:troleum
unll Pcoducts

f--

[)-----.u :ioc hH!l"U(UJHI(,; s

..........

llltJo.:rcastJ In

Cat~l~l---

():)

J.lisho:r!o:s and

Decia>ion-

Ol'ganismal

""Y

Halting (l.lN)

Studi"a

Spedet1

Associated
Enviroumcnt
StudltJS

AsstJas Impact
to Fisheries
1-and Key Specie:~

lwptovcd lla111aa:;..,

1---

AIHIC s SIIICU t

ApproachtJs

m1

I""'
Uti
1

IJ.unaa:;c
A~Scb :,tucnt

tlit~UI"ol

111- 2 .

Infonaation

~tow

of LJ.ullaiS" Auli.:sStUmt PrograM

0
J

J
:J

:I

n
D

IV
ONGOING MONITORING:

D
D
0

OIL DISTRIBUTION, OIL FATE AND ACUTE BIOLOGICAL


EFFECTS

Optional development of damage assessment studies depends upon the


knowledge of oil distribution and fate. It is this informaion which
forms the foundation for decisions concerning initiation or continuation
of damage assessment studies, including other monitoring projects. Such
information also influences the complexity of these activities.
In order to meet the damage assessment objectives, a monitoring
program has been implemented to determine oil distribution, fate and
acute biological effects; the monitoring objectives parallel those of
the general damage assessment. The program represents the essential
first step to ensure that necessary information is available for effective
implementation of the damage assessment effort. In addition to determining
whether or not oil has been deposited in resources of concern, the
program is expected to result in the development of improved oil fate monitoring
techniques for future use. Complete and ongoing monitoring studies for
the IXTOC I incident are listed in Table IV-1.

0
0
0
'I

IV- 1

Table IV-1
Ongoing or Completed Monitoring Studies: IXTOC I Oil Spill

1.

2.

Collection and analysis of intertidal and bar/trough core samples


from Rio Grande to Aransas Pass.
Prespill:
July 1979
Postspill:
September 1979
J. W. Tunnell, Corpus Christi State University
Use of color infra-red photography to monitor wetland vegetation.
Prespill Overflight:
August 1979
Postspill OVerflight:
September 1979
R. Benton, Texas A & M University

3.

Collection and analysis of beach infauna samples from Rio Grande


to Port Aransas.
Prespill:
July 1979
Postspill:
August 1979, September 1979
Research Planning Institute Inc.

4.

Vulnerability index and beach profiles.


Completion:
September 30
Research Planning Institute, Inc.

5.

6.

7.

Directory of scientific personnel and bibliography of available


literature.
Completion:
December 1979
J. W. Tunnell, Corpus Christi State University
Documentation of distribution and abundance of birds in four areas:
Aransas Pass, South Padre to Mansfield Pass, Malaquite
Beach to Mansfield Pass, Mustang Island to South Padre
Island.
Ongoing.
B. Chapman, Corpus Christi State University
Monitoring of commercial fish products for oil contamination.
Ongoing.
National Marine Fisheries Service, United States Food and Drug
Administration, Texas Department of Health, and Texas Parks
and Wildlife Department.

8.

Monitoring of shellfish for hydrocarbon contamination.


Initial sampling:
September 1979
P. Parker, University of Texas

9.

Forecasting of oil movement in the western Gulf of Mexico.


Initiated:
12 June 1979
G. Galt, Hazardous Materials Response Program/NOAA

IV-2

J
0

D
0

J
0

n
0

0
D

D
D
0
0
0

D
D

Table - Continued

10.

Underwater oil search and survey (MOUSSE I).


Duration:
August 4-8, 1979
T. Amos, University of Texas

11.

Study of ~oncentration gradient of hydrocarbons along the TexasMexican C?ast (MOUSSE II).
Duration:
Mid-August 1979
University of Texas and Energy Resources Company

12.

Study of physical, chemical and biological effects of IXTOC I oil.


Cruise duration:
6-27 September 1979
D. K. Atwood, NOAA

13.

IXTOC I chemical characterization and acute biological effects


studies.
Project initiated:
July 1979
Report issued:
August 1979
P. Parker, University of Texas

D
D
]
[]

0
0
[I

[I

0
0
[]
IV-3

l
v

n
0
J

fl

0
0

0
0
0
0
D
0
D
D

MANAGEMENT PLAN
Program Management
A program management organization (Fig. V-1) has been designed to
ensure that the damage assessment program meets user needs, is comprehensive
and can command and coordinate all necessary scientific and administrative support functions.
A Program Manager having overall technical and administrative
responsibility for the program will be supplied by the lead agency , the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This person
will ensure that damage assessment activities satisfy program objectives
and are developed and implemented ~& planned.
Reporting to the Program Manager are two Advisory Committees (Program
and Scientific), the Scientific Management Team, the data management
group and the administrative group.
The Scientific Management Team will act as the executive body of
the disciplinary working groups. The Team will consist of five objective
coordinators and two support coordinators; and will be supported by a
staff which will function as a communication link among the operational
groups. The Team will be responsible for working with principal investigators
and other Team members to ensure the integration and coordination of all
scientific activities. The Team will be responsible for establishing
priorities and criteria for studies which are consistent with program
objectives.
A Program Advisory Committee will be made up of representatives of
state and federal agencies. The Committee will suggest modifications of
program objectives, coordinate intergovernmental projects and evaluate
program accomplishments.
A Scientific Advisory Committee will be comprised of scientists
familiar with the Gulf of Mexico and assessment of damages. The Committee
will assist in identifying research needs and information requirements
in addition to reviewing proposals for technical merit.
Data Management
Management of data acquired within the framework of the Damage
Assessment Program consists of establishing and monitoring schedules for
the collection, processing, validation, and archiving of data for a
given task and relating that task to other tasks within the Program.

V-1

]
]

0
[J

0
il
il
0
0
0
0
il
D
D
0
D

0
0
J

Program
Advisory
Committee

,___

0
0
D
0

Administration
Logistics
Support

Staff

D
D
0
0

Management Team

Birds, Mammals
Endangered
Species

Staff

Generic
Damage
Assessment
Approach
Staff

I
I

-Chemistry
-Qil Fate and

Transport

Principal
Investigators and
Field Teams
Figure V-1.

Socioeconomic
concerns
Staff

Staff

Support

0
J
D

Fisheries

Data
Management
Staff

Scientific
Human
Health

Scientific
Advisory
Committee

Program
Manager

Program Management Organization.

V-2

rl

J
]
[]

n
[I

0
D
[]
[}

0
D

0
L
]

n
:l

'I

D
fl

n
[]

Specific data management functions may be defined as:

1.

Establishment of criteria for information products required by


the various users.

2.

Design and implementation of standardized methods of recording


and reporting field and laboratory data.

3.

Design of data organization for timely and cost effective


access.

4.

Data reduction, validation and analysis of data for the various


program participants and potential users.

The data management system supports both short-term response and


the long-term damage assessment. The short-term response (July 1979January 1980) will be fully compatible with the data processing activity
of a central archive facility and will input information to that facility
for the long-term program.
The long-term program is designed to conduct or support data analysis,
report writing,and will provide a feedback mechanism to allow for
adjustments of field researeh programs. The program will be designed to
support quick access to the archive data via generalized inquiries. In
this way analysis of data relating to oil damage can be easily attained.

0
0
D
[I

0
0
J
_I

V- J

~l

]
~I

:1
]
]

J
J
]
]

a
]
]
]

0
J
J
:J

VI
SCHEDULE

0
0

D
D

The chronology of the IXTOC I spill and proposed damage assessment


program are shown in Figure VI-I. The spill is unique because of its
location in Campeche Bay, 500 to 600 miles from U. S. waters. This
distance creates uncertainties associated with forcasting the spatial
and temporal distribution of the oil because of complicated geographic
and seasonally generated variances in wind and current patterns. Additional
uncertainty stems from not knowing when the wild well will be brought
under control. Oil was transported into U. s. offshore and coastal
areas during August and September, 1979 by prevailing summer winds and
currents from the south. The expected autumn current reversal has
occurred and is preventing further apparent influx of IXTOC I oil into
U. S. waters. However, secondary oiling impacts may result from physical,
chemical and/or biological processes which cause redistribution of oil
already present within U. S. boundaries; the duration of such impacts is
indefinite.
Currently, the damage assessment program is in an intensive planning
phase, with the completion of the final program plan scheduled for
October 5, 1979 and a draft technical plan for mid-October. Supplemental
funding will be requested to enable implementation of the program; until
such funds become available, financial support for projects which cannot
be delayed must be obtained from individual agencies. Several immediately
needed baseline and monitoring studies have been initiated since July
1979 utilizing existing funds within various agencies . Some projects
have been completed while others are still underway. Additional immediate
study needs have been identified in Appendix 2 and will be started as
soon as agency funding can be obtained.
Program evaluation will be continuous in order to ensure that
alternative approaches to damage assessment will be examined. Formal
program review by the management staff and its advisory groups will
occur at quarterly intervals to make certain the original focus of the
program will be retained. At the conclusion of damage assessment activities~
a critical evaluation of the entire effort will be incorporated in the
final report and will serve as a guide for future spill damage assessments.

0
0

0
VI-1

J
.

[)

0
0
0
0
0
D
D

0
D
D
J
[}

L-

L-

c=J

CJ

c::J

c::J

r=J

c=J

c:::J

1979
JUN

BLOWOUT

JUL

I AUG I

SEP

I OCT I

NOV

DEC

c:::J

C::.:

c:l

c::J

1980
JAN 1-F~r MAR

c:::J

CJ

!..-...;

__J

11981 11982 11983

APR

1 MAY

CAPPING & RELIEF WELL 1


.---- ?

OILING OF

------ -I u.s. AREAS I


I NORTHERN CURRENTS
I
I

- --------- CURRENTS
SOUTHt:RN

NORTHERN CURRENTS

-1----------------

SECONDARY OILING (?)

1OILING

OF U.S. AREAS
OILING OF OTHER COASTLINES
--? --------------..--------------------------~
OF SPILLED OIL (U.S.)
t----------- ---CLEANUP
_________
. . ,. . ,. ___

<
t-1

tv

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN

(?)
----------------~~

TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

--1

I-~

INDIVIDUAL AGENCY FUNDING


1- ___ ~ __ IMMEDIATE PROJECTS

...

SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING

1------------

IMMEDIATELY NEEDED STUDIES

I
I
Figure VI-1.

STUDIES TO

\~AIT

FOR SUPPLa1ENTAL FUNDS

Chronology of IXTOC I oil spill and


proposed research program

..

_
-.,..,,

~1

J
0
D
D

0
rl
d

D
[I

D
0
D

0
J
0

0
J
J

VII

n
[]

BUDGET SUMMARY
Funding requirements for the program elements of the damage assessment
program by years is shown in Table VII-1. It is expected that approximately
$4.2 million will be needed during the first year, the remaining $5.6
million will be distributed over the following two years.
The budget estimate accounts for monitoring of spill movement,
uptake of hydrocarbons within various resources and actual damage assessment
studies for various resources. Program and data management elements are
included.

0
[]

0
0
[I

D
0
l
J
J
J

_)

VII-1

Table VII-1.

Funding requirements (in millions of dollars) for the


program elements of the Damage Assessment program by
years.

l
l
l

Program Elements

Year 1

Years 2 and 3

Total

Human Health

178

223

401

Fishery Resources

734

319

1053

Marine Mammals~ Birds


and Endangered Species

1038

1279

2317

Socioeconomic

353

277

630

Improved Approaches

167

333

500

Support function:
Chemistry

734

1166

1900

Program Management

547

1095

1642

Data Management

470

940

1410

TOTALS

4,221

5~632

9~853

I
1

1
]

D
J
J
VII-2

0
[]

D
]

J
I
D

0
0
.J

0
[}
I
._I

APPENDIX 1
PROPOSED PROJEC1S

J
~

:l
~]

0
0
0

a
D

0
il
0

u
D
0

J
J
]

L--

c:J

L....::!

c=

c::J

c::l

r---,

CJ

c::J

c::J

c:J

CJ

CJ

c:::J

c=J

POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO HUMAN HEALTH


r-- .. . - . ~ - -- - - ---

Project Title

Duration

-.

Date to be
Completed

Cost
(Thousands
- .aL.Dollal:.s)

Scope of Work

1.

Organoleptic screening of
Gulf of Mexico seafoods

1 1/2 years

1980

31

Dockside & laboratory product


quality testing of commercial
landings of selected fin and
shellfish

2.

Survey of petroleum
residues in selected
Gulf of Mexico fishery
species

3 years

1982

320

Determination of .amount and


type of hydrocarbons present
in fish and shellfish samples
maintained by NMFS

3.

Monitoring of petroleum
uptake in humans

1 year

1980

so

Monitor of oil derived compounds


in body fluids of human s exposed
to spilled IXTOC I oil at well
site

CJ

IMPACTS TO FISHERY RESOURCES


r--

- - - -- ~

Project Title

L.....:

Date to be
Completed

Duration

Cost
(Thousands

Scope of Work

af. nnllAr!Q\

1.

Effects of IXTOC I oil


on commercially important
penaeid shrimp and selected
finfish.

1 year

1980

190

Laboratory toxicity studies


(lethal and sublethal) to
determine effects on various
life stages of shrimp and
selected finfish.

2.

a)

Time series analysis


of commercial shrimp
landings data

1 year

Nov. '80

60

Impact of oil on 'catch effort


for shrimp.

b)

Time series analysis


of ground fish data

1 year

Nov. '80

65

Impact of oil on catch effort


for selected groundfish.

c)

Time series analysis


of commercial menhaden
landings

1 year

Mar. '81

18

Impact of oil on catch effort


for menhaden.

Dec. '79
Jan. '80
Feb. '80

40

Testing viability of menhaden


eggs and larvae subjected to
hydrocarbon treatments.

3.

Assessment of hydrocarbon
impact on eggs of menhaden

3 cruises

4.

Impact of IXTOC I oil on


post-larval shrimp and
larval finfish

3 years

1982

200

5.

Survey of commercial fish


and shellfish for histopathological & morphological
abnormalities

1 year

1980

90

C-.

c:::l

I.-

c::J

c::::J

c::::J

t:::l

;,__.,;

,,..._,....

c:l

Monitor changes in abundance


of post-larval shrimp and larval
finfish as they enter Texas bays.
Determine histopathological and
morphological changes and abin examined
normalities
fish and shellfish using microscopic techniques.

L..:!

....__.

:__J

--1

_.j

r --;

[_

CJ

-- -

c:J

[~

c:J

--

Project Title

6.

Effects of oil on subtidal


organisms and on infaunal
populations

7.

Monitoring oil spill


impacts--Texas estuaries

8.

Fouling community
assessment

9.

Monitoring of benthic
communities

,.

c:::J

r-,

r1

II

r-1

IMPACTS TO FISHERY RESOURCES (Continued)

I..

Date to be

Duration

Completed

Cost
(Thousands
_nf nnllArl':\

c:::J

CI

::::::!

Scope of work

1 year

1980

30

Subtidal biological samples for


baseline data and subsequent
collections for deteilllinati.on
of oil impacts.

18 months

1981

140

Infra-red coverage of the major


passes and analysis of vegetation
changes due to oiling.

3 months

1979

20

Collect organisms from platfoillls


and analyze.

3 years

1982

200

Monitor changes in benthic


communities using BUt baseline
data and Hussel Watch.

:..--.J

IMPACTS TO MARINE MAMMALS, BIRDS, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

-~-~ -

(Th~~==nds

Date to be
- - - - - -Project Title
Duration
Completed
l_______________:____________________________-1--~------------~--------------------~ .of Dollars) _
r---

Scope of Work
.....

---

1.

Pre-spill bird survey*


for South Padre Island

1 month

Completed

Baseline study locations


and sitings.

2.

Baseline inventory and*


monitoring of birds,
South Padre Island

5 months

Dec. '79

Baseline study locations,


sitings.

3.

Stranding network and


recovery of marine
mammals and turtles

2 years

1981

65

4.

a)

Oil effects on
distribution behavior
and reproductive
success of mammals
and turtles

2 years

1981

120

b)

Effects of oil on
intertidal organisms
and infauna--Mustang/
Padre Islands

1 year

1980

37

Intertidal-subtidal biological
samples for baseline data and
subsequent collections for
determination of oil impacts.

1 year

1980

10

Obtain oiled and unoiled


sargassum mats and analyze
to determine impact on important
marine turtle habitat .

5.

Sargassum community
assessment

Resuscitation, recovery,
collection of tissue samples
from dead marine mammals and
turtles.
Effects on reproduction
(nesting effort/hatching
success); population census
and trends in nesting, migratory,
and forage behavior utilizing
platforms of opportunity.

*Studies 1 and 2 have been funded .

c__:

L.....:

c::J

c:::J

c::::l

c::::l

c:::J

.._

c::::J

-.1

--

__.

-----

.. , _ j

c::J

c:::J

L,

r--1

-..

r-1

,. i

r---1

r-l

II

r-1

r-"1

:--,

IMPACTS TO MARINE MAMMALS, BIRDS, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES (Continued)

~;--------=-r-Project Title

.....

Duration

j_

Date to be
COII>pleted

Cost
(Thousands
nf nn11 .. r!':'

-flo

r--1

c:J

Scope of Work

6.

Assessment of effects of
oil on migratory waterbirds

3 years

1982

850

Assess effects of oil on reproductive success, distribution,


behavior and population levels
of migratory waterbirds along
affected shorelines.

7.

Assessment of the effects


of oil on the reproductive
success of sea turtles

3 years

1982

150

Determine how oil- affects reproduction of sea turtles, behavior


physiology and hatching success.

8.

Toxicity, histopathology
and oil fingerprinting
for birds affected by oil

3 years

1982

750

Laboratory tests of effects of


P~1EX oil on hatchability of
eggs, and on tissues, including
fingerprinting of the oil.

9.

Effect of oil on Fall and


Spring migration routes of
birds

1/2 year

1980

125

Assessment of present Fall


Spring migration movements
migratory coastal birds in
lation to the distribution
oil.

3 years

1982

30

10. Assessment of the effects


of oil on other endangered
species (Whooping crane,
bald eagle, brown pelican
and alligator).

and
of
reof

Examination of direct oiling of


individuals, ingestion through
food items (where carcases are
found), determination of the
effect of oil on essential
habitat, and the effects of
oil on reproductive success.

IMPACTS TO MARINE MAMMALS, BIRDS, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES (Continued)


-

- -

Project Title

---

Date to be
Completed

Duration

1
I
~---------------------------------~---------------~-----

Cost
(Thousands

of Dollars)

Scope of Work

- -

11. Assessment of oil on


essential habitats in
Nueces/Corpus Christi
Bays, Texas

1 year

1980

180

Assess effects of oil on


estuarine productivity.
Provide comparison with
baseline data, and possibly
identify effects of the spill
on Nueces/Corpus Christi Bays.

12. Assessment of the effect**


of oil on essential habitat
for wildlife

3 years

1982

500

Monitor distribution, productivity and hydrocarbon content of


aquatic vegetation that includes
submerged seagrasses, mangroves
and other vegetation used by
wildlife.

**Not included in budget; however, if the assumption that oil did not enter estuary system by monitoring
efforts, such a study may be deemed necessary .

---

L-

L_.

......_.:

t:::j

c:::J

"--

..__,

---1

__...;

--,

__..,J

___,J

c::J

(_

...__

c:::J

CJ

CJ

CJ

,..__

,_ .......

---=r;
I

c:::J

CJ

SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS

4Project Title

Duration

Date to be
_ Completed

Cost
(Thousands

c::J

of pall arsl

CJ

C)

c:J

Scope of Work

---------'

1.

Market goods baseline


data collection

3 months

1980

10

Collect data on finfish


and shellfish landings
in region.

2.

Nonmarket goods baseline

4 months

1980

20

Determine magnitude and


nature of recreational
activities in region.

3.

Secondary regional
baseline data collection

3 months

1980

25

Collect data on tourism


expenditures; fish processing
and other secondary activities
(stores, shops, restaurants,
etc.)

4.

Harket good impacts

2 years

1981

175

Assess damage to commercial


finfish and shellfish catch,
damage to personal (gear, boats,
etc.) and public (seawalls,
beaches, etc.) property and
other market goods.

5.

Norunarket goods impacts

2 years

1981

300

Measure impacts on willingness


to pay for recreation,
aesthetics, endangered species,
human health, etc.

6.

S~condary

2 years

1981

100

Assess impacts on tourism,


fish processing, and other
secondary activities (stores,
shops, restaurants, etc.)

regional impacts

L-

DEVELOP IMPROVED DAMAGE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM


Project Title

Date to be
Completed

Duration

Evaluation of damage
assessment program.

3 years

1982

500

2.

Local Scientific Advisory


Coordinator*

5 months

Feb. '80

18

....___

c:::J

c::

c:::J

c::::l

c::J

c:J

CJ

~...-.,..,;

Scope of

of Dollars)

1.

"-

Cost
~_j (Thousands

...,_,

Wor~

Maintain ongoing evaluation and


refining of damage assessment
program.

"'

1)

Identify local expertise

2)

Compile data 'bases

3)

Annotated bibliography
of biological studies
in region .

c:J

..__..

--

__,

_..J

...._

c:J

c.=

c::::J

c::J

CJ

c:::J

c::.J

[=::!

CJ

c:J

c:J

c=J

----1

FATE, DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSPORT OF OIL AND HYDROCARBON CHEMISTRY

I
Duration I ~~::~:~e~;-f(_T_h-~-u-:a-tn-d-s--:-~----S-c_o_p_e_o_f_W_o_r_k_____l--t
._________________
_
_,____________.__-
_
j

[ .,. .. ::~j:~~-T::e

_j,~f

Dollars)

___

1.

Identification of IXTOC I
crude: Determine chemical
parameters needed to confirm the identity of
environmental oil with
statistical validity

5 months

3/15/79

50

Chemically analyze both fresh


and weathered oil in both impacted
and unimpacted environmental
samples, establish statistically
valid identification scheme for
IXTOC I crude.

2.

Establish heirarchial
(layered) analytical
approach for chemical
analysis of damage
assessment samples

5 months

3/15/79

50

Establish a four tier analytical


scheme for chemical analysis of
damage assessment samples.

3.

Quality Assurance for


chemical analysis program

3 years

1982

150

Establish and monitor quality


control procedures for chemical
analysis of environmental samples.

4.

Fate and spatial distribution of petroleum


hydrocarbon in offshore,
near-shore environments
and at major passes.

3 years

1982

1200

Monitor and study fate of


petroleum hydrocarbon in the south
Texas marine environment.

5.

Microbial degradation and


photo-oxidation of IXTOC I
oil

1 year

1980

50

Study the microbial and photooxidation weathering processes


of IXTOC I crude oil.

6.

Distribution and movement


of IXTOC I oil in suspended
phases within the Western
Gulf of Mexico

3 years

1982

200

Measurement of suspended load


of nephelomelog and residue
analysis of IXTOC I oil in
suspended matter.

FATE, DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSPORT OF OIL AND HYDROCARBON CHEMISTRY (Continued)


r- o - .... - -

--------

Project Title

Date to be
Completed

Duration
...

7.

t..__;

Geophysical factors
affecting the transport
and fate of IXTOC I oil
in Western Gulf of Mexico

r:.__:.:

c::J

..._

"'-

3 years

"""--'

c:=:J

Cost
~
(Thousands
o..f.....DolLu:s

1982

..___.

Determination of the transport


and fate of IXTOC I oil
components within the impacted
regions and understanding the
mechanism of oil transport.

200

,_

Scope of Work

.....,_,;

-.J

---..l

_.;

- _ -_.

1
1

0
]
[l

[1

0
J

n
0
0

0
J

0
D

J
1

APPENDIX 2

AGENCY/PERSONNEL PARTICIPANTS
IN PREPARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE ASSESSMENT PLAN
(Names Taken From Registration List)

l
:l
~1

J
]
~l

]
]

]
]

0
0
0
J
J
J

J
J

0
0

I.

Federal Agencies
A.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

D
1

D
D

D
J

B.

~I

C.

Bob Anderson, Washington, D.C.


Joe Angelovic, Washington, D.C.
Michael Bancroft, Washington, D.C.
Dail Brown, Washington, D.C.
Susan Brunenmeister, Galveston, Texas
Elaine Chan, Washington, D.C.
Bud Cross, Beaufort, North Carolina
Don Ekberg, St. Petersburg, Florida
Jack Foreman, Washington, D.C.
Bob Hannah, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi
Bill Hettler, Beaufort, North Carolina
Don Ross, Beaufort, North Carolina
Harry Jitts, Australia (NOAA visitor)
Bill Lindall, St. Petersburg, Florida
Nancy Maynard, Anchorage, Alaska
Sam McKeen, Washington, D.C.
Malcolm Meaburn, Charleston, South Carolina
Norm Meade, Washington, D.C.
Robert Pavia, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi
John Robinson, Boulder, Colorado
Stan Warlen, Beaufort, North Carolina
Glade Woods, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi

Environmental Protection Agency


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

[I

0
0
0
J

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

William P. Davis, Bears Bluff, South Carolina


Bob Forrest, Dallas, Texas
John Henderson, Dallas, Texas
Richie Marple, Dallas, Texas
Julia Schwartz, Dallas, Texas

U.S. Geological Survey


1.
2.
3.

Henry Berryhill, Corpus Christi, Texas


Arnold Bouma, Corpus Christi, Texas
Richard Foote, Corpus Christi, Texas

1
D.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

E.

National Park Service


1.
2.
3.
4.

F.

Christine Schonewald, Washington, D.C.


Steve Shabica, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi
Bob Whistler, Corpus Christi, Texas
Jim Woods, Corpus Christi, Texas

Bureau of Land Management


1.

II.

Alan Fisher, Albuquerque , New Mexico


Paul Fore, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Johnny French, Corpus Christi, Texas
Wayne Kewley, Albuquerque, New Mexico
James Kirkwood, Atlanta, Georgia
Roy Perez, Corpus Christi, Texas
John Rogers, Washington, D.C.
Charlie Sanchez, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Larry Shanks, Slidell, Louisiana
Dave Smith, Slidell, Louisiana
Jack Woolstenhulme, Albuquerque , New Mexico

Ken Adams, New Orleans, Louisiana

State Agencies
A.

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

B.

1
1

l
1
J

l
l
I
1

Texas General Land Office


1.
2.
3.

C.

Dick Harrington, Corpus Christi, Texas


Tom Hef fernan, Rockport, Texas
Ed Hegen, Rockport, Texas
Jim Roberts, Austin, Texas
Roy Spears, Rockport, Texas

John Batterton, Austin, Texas


Lloyd Mullins, Aransas Pass, Texas
Meg Wilson, Austin, Texas

Texas Department of Water Resources


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Bert Bates, Deer Park, Texas


Jim Bowman, Corpus Christi, Texas
Mike Di ck, Austin , Texas
John Glasscock, Austin, Texas
John Latchford, Austin, Texas

J
J

D.

Texas Bureau of Economic Geology


1.
2.

E.

Florida Department of Environment Regulation


1.

l
F.

l
J

III.

J
J

Pat Hughes

University
A.

Corpus Christi State University, Corpus Christi, Texas


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

B.

Brian Chapman, Biology, Corpus Christi, Texas


Bart Cook, Biology, Corpus Christi, Texas
Quenton Dokken, Graduate Student, Corpus Christi, Texas
Wes Tunnell, Biology, Corpus Christi, Texas
Linda Weber, Secretary, Corpus Christi, Texas

Texas A&M University


1.

Bob Benton, Remote Sensing, College Station, Texas

2.

Sea Grant/TAMU - County Marine Extension Agents


a.
b.
c.

J
~1

Dale Beaumariage, Tallahassee, Florida


Bob Lee, Tallahassee, Florida

Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management


1.

Greg Lee, Tallahassee, Florida

Florida Department of Natural Resources


1.
2.

G.

Tom Calanan, Austin, Texas


Glenn Littleton, Austin, Texas

C.

Jeff Messinger, Rockport, Texas


Russ Miget, Corpus Christi, Texas
Jack Rickner, San Benito, Texas

Texas A&I University, Kingsville


1.

Allan H. Chaney, Biology, Kingsville, Texas

D.

University of Texas, Institute of Marine Science, Port Aransas, Texas


1.
2.
3.

E.

I. R. Deleon, New Orleans, Louisiana


George Lowler, New Orleans, Louisiana
John L. Laseter, New Orleans, Louisiana
Edward D. Overton, New Orleans, Louisiana

Rice Center, Houston, Texas


1.
2.

IV.

Rosine Hall, Houston, Texas


Charles Heimsath, Houston, Texas

Private Interests
A.

National Audubon Society


1.

B.

Bonnie Boynton, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi


Carl Jones, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi
Pete Orlin, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi
Judy Sanders, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi

l
l
]
l

J
]

Welder Wildlife Foundation


1.

D.

David Blankenship, Rockport, Texas

Computer Science Corporation


1.
2.
3.
4.

C.

University of New Orleans


1.
2.
3.
4.

F.

Warren Flint, Port Aransas, Texas


Pat Parker, Port Aransas, Texas
Nancy Rabalais, Port Aransas, Texas

Gene Blacklock, Sinton, Texas

Science Applications, Inc.


1.
2.
3.
4.

Tiger Cheng, La Jolla, California


Ken Fucik, Boulder, Colorado
Barbara Morson, Boulder, Colorado
Ivan Show, La Jolla, California

J
1

J
J

D
0

E.

1.
2.
3.

URS Company, Seattle, Washington

F.

Energy Resources Company, Cambridge, Massachusetts


1.
2.
3.

G.

H.

0
0
0
J

0
J
J
J

Henry H. Hildebrand, Corpus Christi, Texas

Cliff Curtis, Washington, D.C.

Graphics
1.

K.

South Carolina

Dan Domerachi, Columbia, South Carolina


Chuck Getter, Columbia, South Carolina
Erich Gundlach, Columbia, South Carolina
Jeff Scott, Columbia, South Carolina

Center for Law and Social Policy


1.

J.

Columbia~

Marine/Fisheries Biology Consultant


1.

I.

Paul Boehm, Cambridge, Massachusetts


Dave Feist, Cambridge, Massachusetts
John Patton, Cambridge, Massachusetts

Research Planning Institute,


1.
2.
3.
4.

Bob Dexter, Seattle, Washington


Dave Maiero, Anchorage, Alaska
Spyros Pavlou, Seattle, Washington

Paula Kolda, Corpus Christi, Texas

Independent Consultant
1.

Dolly Ulna, Parts Unknown, Texas

~I

0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
D

0
0
0
0
0

0
0
J