the other issue, and that is the availability of domestic fuel to the people in the United States.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, and those from California, the price of gas-the automobile use in California has increased but the price has gone up about 60 percent in the last eight and a half days.

The rippling effect across the Nation can be devastating economically, and we have before this Congress the opportunity to improve upon this tragic accident and yet provide the necessary fuel to this Nation, because whether we like it or not we are getting our oil from tankers.

And it can be in all of your ports, be from Iran or Iraq, or it can be on American vessels. It can be done safely. It is up to us to make sure it is done so.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having these meetings.

[The statement of Mr. Young follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DON YOUNG, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM ALASKA Mr. Chairman, I want to join with you in welcoming the witnesses before us today. Before we hear from them, however, I want to pass on a few thoughts of my

own.

It is obvious to me, as it is to everyone who has visited Prince William Sound in the past few weeks, that we are facing a tragedy. Our herring fishery has been shut down in order to ensure that fish will be available for the future. Reports are arriving that buyers will not purchase salmon coming from Prince William Sound due to fear of oil contamination. After a year where Alaskan fishermen lost millions of salmon to high seas interception, they now see their own fishing grounds despoiled. Regardless of the long term environmental consequences, our fishing industry has been damaged.

I called it a tragedy, and it is. What would be more tragic would be to use this accident to destroy our Nation's energy security. Keep in mind that we have had 8700 shipments of oil through the pipeline over a period of 12 years, with only one major accident. Alaskan oil accounts for 25% of the Nation's oil supply. When the Port of Valdez was closed for only a few days, the world oil price climbed steadily upward. This is America's oil, and we need it.

Further, don't be convinced by the hidden agendas of the preservation movement. The problem occurred in Valdez, not on the North Slope, not in ANWR. If we shut down the pipeline, rather than making it and the tankers safer, if we don't develop ANWR, you know hwere we will get our oil: from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, maybe even Iran. And you know how it will be transported: on foreign-registered tankers, with foreign crews, tankers like the ARGO MERCHANT and the AMOCO CADIZ. Ask the residents of New England's Coast if that is what they want.

For the moment, I think we have to avoid any pointing of fingers or casting of blame. The accident happened; the skipper of the vessel was legally intoxicated; Coast Guard radar did not or could not detect the vessel's movements; and questions have been raised about the speed and efficiency of cleanup. All of these issues need to be looked at by this Committee, as well as what more needs to be done to prevent similar accidents in the future. We can't do that now; the people who can answer the questions for us are busy working day and night to clean up the spill. At the appropriate time, however, I hope we can bring in those who are most involved, and get the answers we need.

In the interim, I suggest that we explore a few ideas. First, we have to reconsider the current rules on use of pilots. A few years ago, this Committee agreed that pilots should be dropped off within the Sound, rather than at Cape Hinchinbrook. This was done to correct a dangerous situation, where pilots had to be transferred in rough water. The alternative was to have a licensed officer on board each vessel who qualified as a pilot. Well, the Exxon Valdez had one, and it appears that he was drunk in his cabin. We need to look again at the pilot requirement.

Second, there should be consideration of having a cleanup vessel on station in Valdez. There is no reason to have to wait days for cleanup equipment to arrive. Third, we need to have more people assigned to the Port of Valdez who can be available for cleanup. I recognize that this will be opposed on cost grounds. Let me

suggest that it is costing this Nation a lot more to bring people in to clean up after the fact than it would be to keep them ready for an emergency.

Fourth, we need clearer lines of authority for cleanup operations. At present, we have the Coast Guard, the State, Exxon, and who knows how many others, all involved in cleanup. We need to have one person in charge who can run the show. These are just a few suggestions that I think we should explore as we proceed through the hearing process. I am sure that more will be made as we learn more about the accident.

Thank you.

Mr. TAUZIN. Thank you, Mr. Young. The Chair will now recognize Mr. Clement from Tennessee.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BOB CLEMENT, A U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE FROM TENNESSEE

Mr. CLEMENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am really pleased, like everyone, that we are having this hearing on this tragic Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound. As the casualties mount, Mr. Chairman, there remain many questions about how oil shipments are managed; about how well the oil industry is prepared to cope with accidents; and about whether the Federal Government should intervene more vigorously in cleaning up this spill and other spills.

The hearing today will begin the process of collecting the information necessary to answer these questions. But as we search for answers concerning the spill and its cleanup, I believe it is important to separate questions about safe transport on the seas from questions about safe exploration, drilling, and pumping, whether it be on land or offshore.

While future hearings should focus specifically on the latter questions, the answers we receive today regarding the Exxon Valdez oil spill should not in themselves block the exploration or the opening of other potential oil fields in Alaska, or elsewhere.

The tragedy which befell residents and wildlife on the South Coast of Alaska is immeasurable, and likely to have permanent effects, but let us not compound this tragedy by concluding, prematurely, that all oil companies operate in the same fashion as Exxon.

Let us not conclude that oil cannot be found, drilled for, or transported safely on the basis of this single incident.

The chance for a spill is always present. Congress realized this when it opened the way for the Alaskan pipeline. But Congress balanced the need for Alaskan oil against the risk of a spill and its consequences.

Let us work to again achieve a balance, learning from the Exxon Valdez spill, and implementing those changes necessary to assure that any future spills have a minimal impact on the environment and the citizens affected.

I heard Congresswoman Schneider talking about new legislation, and it very well may be time-over time-for some oil legislation pertaining to spills, that we can look upon seriously as we move forward to consider new oil exploration in the Alaskan area. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAUZIN. Thank you, Mr. Clement. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina. Mr. Coble.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD COBLE, A U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE FROM NORTH CAROLINA

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Not unlike the gentleman from New Jersey, I will be very brief in my opening remarks. But it has been said, Mr. Chairman, that most accidents are not unavoidable. That is to say that with the exercise of due care, and prudence, and caution, most accidents can be avoided, and I think that analogy certainly applies to the tragedy before this Committee today.

I am concerned about allegations regarding a delay in response time. I am sure we will hear from the witnesses today about this. I am concerned about allegations of inadequacies, and incompetence applying to many parties at the scene.

I am looking forward to hearing evidence that probably will be illuminating to that end. I think all of us share the grief with those directly affected, and I look forward to this hearing as it progresses today, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Mr. TAUZIN. Thank you, Mr. Coble. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Laughlin of Texas.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG LAUGHLIN, A U.S.

REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS

Mr. LAUGHLIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Certainly the impact of the Exxon Valdez oil spill on the ecology is devastating. I have little doubt that the evidence of this gross negligence will be with us for generations.

Specifically, I feel for the fishermen in Alaska that are fighting day and night to divert the sludge out of the pristine bays to preserve their livelihood.

Their individual efforts, no matter how futile, are to be admired. I understand their odds of winning parallel a historical battle in Texas called the Alamo.

For now, I believe that the spill must be cleaned up in the best way that modern technology can provide, and paid for by the party that is found at fault. In addition, I would like to see expeditious proceeding on H.R. 1465, introduced by the Merchant Marine Committee, to establish comprehensive oil pollution liability, and a compensation fund to replace Trans-Alaska Pipeline authorization provisions of the other three Federal funds.

In conjunction, steps must be taken to bridge the ever-widening gap between environmentalists and the oil industry.

Off the southwest corner of my district is the Aransas Pass National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge was established in 1937 to protect the vanishing wildlife off coastal Texas. Specifically, the refuge was established to save the whooping crane.

In 1941, there were only 15 of these majestic birds. Today, 134 whooping cranes freely soar the 55,000 acres and are making a tremendous comeback.

If an oil spill of half this magnitude had occurred off the Texas coast, and washed up on this refuge, there would be a good chance that now, the whooping crane would be extinct.

I should also point out that since 1937 the Phillips Petroleum Company has occupied this pristine acreage. They have worked

diligently with local community leaders, the Department of Interior, the Park Service, and every imaginable environmental group to ensure a good working relationship, and to set the example that industry can work with the environment.

To date, the only incident on the property was two barrels of oil that tipped over, and the Phillips Petroleum Company spent $4000 cleaning that up.

Let there be no mistake. This oil spill goes much farther than the Alaska coast. It translates into lost jobs for Texans and others in our oil-producing States, that have fallen prey to the decline in the domestic oil market.

In conclusion, I believe that Congress must act now, and must act swiftly to repair the visible and economic damages to the State of Alaska. Until this wound is healed, there will be little chance for further oil and gas exploration in the most sensitive areas of the world.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAUZIN. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr. Lent. Let me caution Members, again, that the Commandant will have to leave at 10:30, if you want to get in questions. I think the purpose of our hearing is to hear from the Coast Guard today, and others.

Please, if you can, limit your statements, or even if you would like to pass, the Chair would very much appreciate it. Mr. Lent.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. NORMAN F. LENT, A U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW YORK

Mr. LENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to make a very brief remark, and indicate that I think this incident is a tragic one. Most of us represent areas that have seashores, and I shudder to think had this accident occurred in Long Island Sound, rather than Prince William Sound. My heart certainly goes out to our colleague, the gentleman from Alaska, and we want to offer whatever help this Committee can give to him during this particular period.

I might also make the point, as a Member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, that we have statistics indicating that we are now 50 percent dependent on imported oil. All of this oil comes to our shores in tankers. Twenty percent of all the oil that we consume in this Nation comes from Alaska.

So it is very important that we not let this accident do anything to interrupt the continued flow of oil from the North Slope. I would also hope that this hearing might give added impetus to the passage of H.R. 1465, a bill that most all of us have introduced-referred to by the gentleman from New Jersey-the so-called Oil Spill Liability Bill. We passed a bill in the House last year. Unfortunately, the Senate did not see eye to eye with us. I hope that this tragedy could perhaps have the beneficial effect of encouraging our colleagues in the other body to report this bill out so we can put it into law. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAUZIN. Thank you, Mr. Lent. Are there any other Members wishing to incur the ire of the Chair and make an opening statement? Mrs. Lowey is recognized.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. NITA M. LOWEY, A U.S.

REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW YORK

Mrs. LowEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I am pleased that you have moved with such speed to get to the bottom of what happened when the oil tanker, Exxon Valdez, ran aground on March 24th in Prince William Sound.

I am particularly interested in exploring ways to ensure that this type of accident does nor recur. But I am having an especially difficult time understanding how Captain Joseph Hazelwood could have been in charge of piloting a 1000-foot oil tanker when his New York driver's license had been revoked three times.

In fact he has not been allowed to drive a car in New York State since last November, yet he is fully certified to pilot an oil tanker carrying 60 million gallons of crude oil. Does that make sense?

Bringing Captain Hazelwood to justice will not erase the damage that has been done to the pristine environment of Prince William Sound, but it can, and should, deter other ship pilots from committing the same infractions.

The case of the grounded Exxon Valdez opens a Pandora's box of questions about how prepared we are to deal with a major oil spill. This accident also raises serious questions about the Coast Guard's certification process for pilots of commercial vessels. I look forward to listening to the testimony during this hearing to find out what can be done to ensure that the United States never faces an oil spill of this magnitude again. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAUZIN. Thank you, Mrs. Lowey. I am pleased we did not miss that statement. We have less than an hour now with the Commandant. I want to make that point.

[The statements of Mr. Herger and Mr. Weldon follow:]

STATEMENT OF HON. WALLY HERGER, A U.S. REPRESENTATIve from CalifORNIA

Mr. Chairman, I realize that time is short, and I will confine my remarks to a few minutes.

The Valdez spill is a tragic example of the destruction that man can bring to nature. What is especially outrageous is that a little extra care on the part of the crew might have prevented the whole episode.

As we all know, oil in small quantities is relatively harmless. Indeed, several thousand barrels of oil naturally seeps out of the ocean floor in California each year, with little or no damage to marine life.

In large amounts, however, oil presents a much more serious problem. Ten million gallons spilled in Valdez. As we've seen, the wildlife and environmental resources in Alaska are being devastated by the spill.

We must do everything without our power to ensure that this type of accident does not happen again. Indeed, unless I can be convinced that all possible steps are being taken to prevent another disaster like this, I don't intend to support future development.

It is particularly important because it comes at a time when we are facing serious challenges to our energy situation. During the past several years, our domestic production of oil has leveled off, and it appears that production will actually decline at least through the turn of the century.

As a result, our imports of crude oil and gas have increased substantially. During the late 1970's we imported around 30% of our domestic consumption of oil.

Last year, this figure had risen to 40%, and in January it stood at 45%. The Department of the Interior is predicting that our oil dependence will rise to over 50% within the next 10 years.

The main problem with this situation is that with increased imports come increased foreign tanker traffic. And while we have control over our domestic tanker fleet, foreign tankers pose far greater danger to our fragile environment because

7