# Exxon Valdez



## gordy (Apr 18, 2008)

Watched this last night, good do***entary.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00jhgjw/Oil_Spill_The_Exxon_Valdez_Disaster/


----------



## andysk (Jun 16, 2005)

Local fisherman got shafted though by the appeal court reducing their compensation from $5mn to about $0.5mn
Big business rules, eh ?


----------



## gordy (Apr 18, 2008)

andysk said:


> Local fisherman got shafted though by the appeal court reducing their compensation from $5mn to about $0.5mn
> Big business rules, eh ?


The figures I saw were £5bn which was overuled by the supreme court and reduced to £500m, resulting in all fisherman getting £12,000 each.
A most shameful episode in US history. Doesn't show democracy working for the good of the people. I agree, big business rules.


----------



## Coastie (Aug 24, 2005)

After 20 years it equates to less than a grand a year, disgusting.


----------



## trucker (Oct 6, 2008)

*exxon*

yes and at the meeting the head of exxon promising them the earth.then later on being inter viewed after his retirement,couldn,t give a stuff about them.(MAD)post 3 it was dollars not pounds.


----------



## John Cassels (Sep 29, 2005)

But let´s not forget that Captain Hazelwood got off with sweeping the 
streets of Alaska for 100 hours.

According to the do***entary . the mistakes made would shame even
the lowest first trip apprentice.


----------



## trucker (Oct 6, 2008)

*shame*

believe when he left the bridge [captain] the iron mike was still on.thought before leaving port ,officer of the watch [responsible officer ,should have done bridge checks]steering on hand,etc.as to confirm ship was ready for sea.esso soon changed the company colours after that,and made sure all their ships went dry.that certainly solved the problem.


----------



## Bill Davies (Sep 5, 2007)

Hazelwood was an accident waiting to happen. He was an alcoholic, Exxon knew and and sent him on various rehab. Unfortunately, like all alcoholics he was good at covering his tracks until his luck ran out.


----------



## Pat Kennedy (Apr 14, 2007)

It may well be the case that Exxon, knowing of Captain Hazelwood's drinking problem, were prevented from sacking him by employment laws. 
This is certainly the case here in the UK.
One of my gas maintenance contractors, recently discovered that one of their employees, a corgi registered gas engineer had been turning up at jobs in an inebriated condition. On having him in to the office for a disciplinary, it was discovered that he was an alcoholic, and they had to offer him counselling. 
I cant imagine a much more dangerous combination than a gas central heating boiler and a drunken engineer, so I insisted that this bloke be taken off my contract.
As far as I am aware, he still works for them, but has to be accompanied at all times by another engineer. A ridiculous and very unsatisfactory situation for all concerned.

regards, 
Pat
PS, I am now going out for a few pints.


----------



## Cutsplice (May 23, 2008)

I met a 2nd mate from the" Sea River Mediteranean" ex "Exxon Valdez" still owned and operated by Exxon. This guy claimed to have been onboard the "Valdez" when she grounded, he claimed that the master certainly was not under the influence when the vessel grounded.
The master Hazelwood was at the time on the largest and newest vessel of Exxon,s so their Kremlin must have considered him to be one of their high flyers of the day, (me thinks).

I was on a shiphandling course in Marchwood S,ton about 3 yrs post "Exxon Valdez" also there were two Americans from Mobil who told me that Mobil had hired Captain Hazelwood to instruct their seagoing guys on how not to ground a vessel. I cannot vouch that that was true, but they certainly seemed sincere when telling me, they said it was not unusual for one oil company to do things like that, as it was a fart in the face of the other.
If that was the situation I expect Exxon got their own back on Mobil as they merged some years ago as Exxon claimed, but really it was a takeover, 60/40 I understand.


----------



## cboots (Aug 16, 2004)

Didn't see the doco but I do recall the incident quite well and a lot of things did not add up in my view. One very much being the speed with which Exxon moved to dump the blame on their master. This flies in the face of normal practice in these sorts of instances where the costs and fines arising from the pollution are likely to wind up as the largest cost - after all, sacking your master is tantamount to an admission of liability. I would certainly agree with all the comments regarding Exxon as a company, they certainly represent rapacious, multi-national capitalism at its very finest. The saddest thing about the whole affair is that massive and ongoing damage was done to the local environment, local small businesses were effectively wiped out, yet Exxon strode ever onwards - and they didn't even learn a lesson from it all. Except, I suppose, that if you've got the billions of bucks, you do what the hell you like.
CBoots


----------



## Bill Davies (Sep 5, 2007)

Exxon are no different than any other owner. Sure Capt Hazelwood was a 'high flyer' for a time but he did have the problem I have mentioned above and Exxon , rightly or wrongly, supported him and tried to get him through his problems but, unfortunately this happened and they were quick to distance themselves from him. That's life!


----------



## doyll (Mar 9, 2007)

Thanks! Will have to download and watch it.

Keep in mind many of the fishermen and others also received individual damage settlements amounting to something like 1 billion. The $500 million was only for punitive damages.

Didn't see the do***entary, but know a little about the cleanup. The containment of initial spill was delayed because it took days to get equipment into the area. 

Many of the fishermen contracted their boats to the cleanup for ridiculous amounts, then got new boats because their hulls were fouled by oil. 

There was no limit to budget.. anything cleanup wanted they ordered or hired. Things like a turboprop Dehavilland Beaver on standby with pilot 24/7, all kinds of boats for moving crews and officials, etc. Some of the chemicals used in cleanup were so strong they would kill and dissolve animals downwind. My brother was manager of half of the cleanup area.


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

Doyll, thank you for your interesting account and it is good to hear things from an informed but neutral and reasonably unbiased point of view. 
(Thumb) 
Mark


----------



## George.GM (Feb 8, 2006)

Does anyone know what happened to the 3rd Mate who, according to the do***entry, was the OOW at the time.


----------



## chadburn (Jun 2, 2008)

The 3rd Mate immediatly blamed the Helmsman for the incident according to the Helmsman in the Do***entry as shown, the auto-pilot had not been turned off to allow for the course change apparently.


----------



## jasons (Mar 28, 2009)

just watched that do***entary, and that made my blood boil! well almost anyway, how the hell did exxon get away so lightly!?!?

my heart goes out to those people in prince william sound...


----------



## Bill Davies (Sep 5, 2007)

Don't believe everything you hear and see on TV.
I have read in various publications that they did OK. Maybe not as well as they would have liked, but there you are. I would have liked to have won on the Lottery last night but instead I received £10 for my troubles.


----------



## gordy (Apr 18, 2008)

Some interesting reading here,
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008912109_exxonherring24m.html


----------



## Coastie (Aug 24, 2005)

jasons said:


> *just watched that do***entary, and that made my blood boil! *well almost anyway, how the hell did exxon get away so lightly!?!?
> 
> my heart goes out to those people in prince william sound...


Aye! One rule for us, another for them!!


----------



## cboots (Aug 16, 2004)

I claim to have no inside knowledge of any of this stuff but instincts and general experience tells me to be very suspicious of tales regarding the locals all making a fortune out of the affair. They just sound too anecdotal to me and the sort of thing that invariably gets to do the rounds in these sorts of cases. Of more concern to me is the apparent lack of concern amongst fellow posters as to the massive damage to environment and wildlife. 
CBoots


----------



## trucker (Oct 6, 2008)

*pilot*

just re-reading the incident on the web.it seems as soon as he dropped the pilot ,the captain must have put the iron mike on straight away.instead of keeping it on hand steering untill clearing the sound.then left the course alteration to the 3rd. mate.also the watches had just changed[midnight].so where was the 2nd mate 12-4.in hindsight though i suppose everyone becomes judgemental.not that it would have made any diffrence if the 2nd mate had been on the bridge.as she went aground at 00.04.


----------



## JXBURNS (Apr 10, 2009)

> I met a 2nd mate from the" Sea River Mediteranean" ex "Exxon Valdez" *still owned and operated by Exxon*.


This is no longer true. The vessel was sold over a year ago to the Chinese for conversion to a bulk carrier having an unblemished record since the Valdez incident.

John


----------



## Cutsplice (May 23, 2008)

John, the point I was making when stating that the "Sea River Mediterraen" was owned and operated by American Exxon was to point out that at the time that was the situation. After the Valdez incident Exxon changed their shipping operations and named it "Sea River" changed the names of their vessels to Sea River *****. The Ex "Exxon Valdez" was renamed and banned from operating in US waters, she called at Fawley a few yrs later under her new name and company. But she mainly operated in the far East, whether Exxon still operate under the "Sea River" company I cannot say. The Esso British Flag operations became Petroleum Shipping Ltd the International Marine Transport, Their last British flagged vessel "Petro Fife" finished a few years ago, other shipping operations under European flags ceased some years earlier. This was also the situation with their Flipino manned vessels and the Argentinian shipping operations.


----------



## Klaatu83 (Jan 22, 2009)

At the time the Exxon Valdez went aground I was on the Sealand Quality, which was fitted with the identical type of Sperry helm. It had a large, square button to switch from "Gyro" to hand steering. We had already been warned to keep a close eye on it, because if you didn't push the button just right the helm might not switch over, and steering control would remain in "gyro". I believe that was exactly what happened on the Exxon Valdez. The mate ordered a course change, the A.B. thought he had switched over to hand steering and really handn't, he put the wheel over and nothing happened, and neither of them caught it in time.


----------



## NoR (Mar 24, 2008)

If you wreck a perfectly serviceable vessel in good weather, then you take what's coming.
I'm afraid I have no sympathy for Capt Hazlewood, any more than I have for the Masters of the sea Empress, or the Herald. I reserve my sympathy for the victims of these incidents.


----------



## Ian6 (Feb 1, 2006)

More Valdez than Exxon Valdez, my wife and I visited Valdez in 1998 when on a cruise in the late 'Universe Explorer' (Once Moore-Mac's "Brasil"). 15 years before the Exxon Valdez disaster the town was largely wiped out by an earthquake and resulting tsunami. The funds to rebuild were there, but sadly the preferred materials were breeze block and corrugated iron. Of all the ports on the Alaska coast Valdez is the unluckiest, most recently rebuilt and the ugliest.
We must be grateful that Sir Christopher Wren was denied those materials or St Paul's Cathedral might look quite different now.
Ian


----------



## JXBURNS (Apr 10, 2009)

> John, the point I was making when stating that the "Sea River Mediterraen" was owned and operated by American Exxon was to point out that at the time that was the situation. After the Valdez incident Exxon changed their shipping operations and named it "Sea River" changed the names of their vessels to Sea River *****. The Ex "Exxon Valdez" was renamed and banned from operating in US waters, she called at Fawley a few yrs later under her new name and company. But she mainly operated in the far East, whether Exxon still operate under the "Sea River" company I cannot say. The Esso British Flag operations became Petroleum Shipping Ltd the International Marine Transport, Their last British flagged vessel "Petro Fife" finished a few years ago, other shipping operations under European flags ceased some years earlier. This was also the situation with their Flipino manned vessels and the Argentinian shipping operations.


Just to clarify a bit more. As Cutsplice says, Seariver took over the US flagged vessels owned by Exxon at the time after the Valdez incident. International Marine Transportation Ltd (IMT) was born out of the merger of Petroleum Shipping (ex Esso UK operations and with just one vessel at the time - the PETRO FIFE) and Mobil Shipping Company Limited (who ran Mobil's international fleet of about 30 vessels) in 2000. Both Seariver and IMT stll operate looking after their respective sphere of operations but now not just limited to operating vessels (not that many left). From a merged company point of view the last British flagged vessel was the MATCO CLYDE scrapped in January 2004 with the PETRO FIFE in October 2003.

Rgds John


----------

