This paper examines the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska's Prince William Sound, tracing the legal proceedings against Exxon, the criminal and civil penalties assessed, and the long appellate process that followed. It then analyzes the sweeping environmental policy changes the disaster catalyzed, including the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the MARPOL treaty, the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The paper also considers the roles of government agencies, the private sector, and international media in shaping the response to — and lasting consequences of — one of the most significant environmental disasters in American history.
The paper demonstrates effective use of a single illustrative case to support a broader policy argument. Rather than cataloguing environmental regulations in the abstract, the author anchors each legislative response directly to consequences of the spill, making the causal relationship between disaster and regulation clear throughout.
The paper opens with the facts of the disaster and the scale of environmental damage, then transitions to legal accountability (criminal, civil, and punitive proceedings). It next covers immediate corporate and regulatory fallout before broadening into federal and international legislation. It closes with the roles of government agencies, private industry, and the media in shaping the long-term policy response. This funnel structure moves from specific incident to general policy impact.
Despite its assurances of complete operational safety, the Exxon Valdez tanker struck a reef in Alaska's Prince William Sound at midnight on March 24, 1989, pouring 11 million gallons of Alaska North Slope crude oil from the ruptured hull of the ship (Explore North, 1999). Within the two months following the wreck, oil had spread 470 miles to the southwest. The initial cleanup over the succeeding three years cost more than $2 billion, although no human lives were lost. Wildlife destruction was staggering, and the full impact of the disaster may never be fully known. The State of Alaska and the federal government filed both criminal and civil suits against Exxon in October 1991.
In settling the civil charges, Exxon agreed to pay the State of Alaska and the United States $900 million over a 10-year period, with the money devoted to restoration work administered by six government trustees — three federal and three state (Explore North, 1999). In settling the criminal charges, Exxon was fined $250 million: $50 million in restitution funds each falling under state control and federal authority, respectively. It shocked many Alaskans, however, when $125 million of the fine balance was forgiven on account of Exxon's cooperation in the cleanup and its upgrading of safety procedures as a preventive measure. The remaining $50 million was assigned by the courts to the Victims of Crime Act and the North American Wetlands Conservation Fund at $13 million and $12 million, respectively (Explore North, 1999).
On September 16, 1994, a federal court jury returned a $5 billion punitive damages verdict against Exxon, which the company appealed several times (Explore North, 1999). The prolonged delay worked in Exxon's favor: the company earns approximately $90,000 per hour, nearly $2 million a day, or close to $800 million a year. With delays at the appeals court, it could effectively pay the $5 billion judgment from interest earned alone. In November 2001, a panel of the 9th Circuit Court finally overturned the $5 billion decision.
The captain of the Exxon Valdez, Joseph Hazelwood, admitted to having had at least three drinks before boarding the ship prior to the incident, but he was acquitted in 1990 of the charge of operating the vessel while intoxicated (Explore North, 1999) and was convicted only of the misdemeanor of illegally discharging oil. That sentence was upheld by the Alaska Court on July 8, 1998. The Exxon Valdez, now renamed the SeaRiver Mediterranean, continues to carry oil around the world. The courts barred it from returning to Alaskan waters; Exxon appealed, but that appeal was turned down (Explore North, 1999). Exxon also attempted to merge with Mobil to form the world's largest corporation, but Senator Slade Gorton opposed the initiative on March 4, 1999, on the grounds of Exxon's non-payment of the assessed penalties (Explore North, 1999).
Directly or indirectly, tighter environmental regulations were imposed on many industries as a result of the Exxon Valdez disaster, the most significant of which was the establishment of a modern standard for tanker ships. The new model features double hulls, which prevent leaks if the outer layer is torn or punctured. Using funds from Exxon fines, large tracts of land were also added to Kenai Fjords National Park (Explore North, 1999).
In response to the disaster, the U.S. Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which placed more stringent requirements on spill prevention and assigned implementation to the U.S. Coast Guard (Earle, 1996). Transporters of oil and production facilities were required to develop and implement response plans, participate in preparedness drills, and observe safe shipping and handling procedures. The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) was also signed as a treaty to govern the release of oil, hazardous substances, and garbage into the marine environment (Earle, 1996), and to prevent pollution by oil and noxious liquids carried in bulk, packaged harmful substances, and untreated sewage.
The conservation of marine life was the focus of several statutes, including the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, which requires the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to review actions that may affect any body of water and to recommend conservation measures for fish and wildlife. These actions include establishing water quality standards, studying methods for controlling and preventing pollution and recovering useful byproducts, and collecting and distributing research findings.
You’re 61% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.