Government and Industry Cooperation in Practice: Azerbaijan's Experience

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 (1) ◽  
pp. abs103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anar Hassanov ◽  
Namig Gandilov ◽  
Daniel Jayson ◽  
Tariel Huseynov ◽  
Ilkin Kangarli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Major Incident ◽  
Offshore Platforms ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
The Government ◽  
Offshore Industry

ABSTRACT In recent times, Azerbaijan has seen the development of a significant modern offshore industry. The oil and shipping industries in Azerbaijan bring economic benefits but also give rise to the need for robust oil spill prevention and preparedness measures. Azerbaijan signed the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation (OPRC) in 2004 and continues to develop and refine its national system of oil spill response. This paper discusses how the Azerbaijan government and key players in the oil industry have successfully worked together to achieve alignment in prevention, protection and response to major incidents. The implementation of the OPRC Convention is the responsibility of the Ministry of Emergency Situations (MES) of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Within the national response system a national oil spill contingency plan has been developed. The main offshore developments in the Caspian since the 1990s have been led by BP, as operator of a number of Production Sharing Agreements. BP has implemented comprehensive oil spill response plans and is working in partnership with MES to integrate this planning into the national framework. The oil spill management systems adopted by BP and the government are compatible and commensurate with guidance published by the International Maritime Organization in 2011. These aligned management systems allow for an effective Joint Command and coordination of resources in the case of a major incident. The key to building effective oil spill preparedness are a willing dialogue, integrated command structure, joint training and exercising and upgrade of hardware and information systems' software. The cooperation between government and BP relating to offshore risks strengthens the national capacity to deal with spills risks other than from offshore platforms, including the anticipated increase of oil shipments across the Caspian Sea. Furthermore, these efforts have been supported by international organizations and the regional industry initiative, OSPRI, of which BP is a member. The experience of Azerbaijan provides a model demonstrating how partnership between government and industry can achieve synergy and it confirms the importance of signing and implementing the OPRC Convention.

OIL POLLUTION CONTROL AND SPILL RESPONSE CAPABILITY IN THE ROPME SEA AREA

1987 ◽  
Vol 1987 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-13
Author(s):  
P. Bernard Ryan ◽  
Derek J. S.
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
National Level ◽  
Oil Industry ◽  
Oil Refining ◽  
Exploration And Production ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
The Government ◽  
Sea Area

ABSTRACT The ROPME sea area as defined in this paper is the scene of some of the world's most intensive offshore oil exploration and production and the associated crude oil refining and tanker terminaling for oil exportation. The potential for oil pollution in the area is high, with its confined nature making it especially vulnerable to the effects of oil pollution. Awareness of this problem is well developed in the region in both government and industry, and good progress has been made in recent years toward preparing for the big oil spill which has so far not materialized, but which most experts consider inevitable at some time. Two distinct groups share the concern for oil pollution. The oil industry has well over 40 companies active in the area in some way. Many of these have a 15 year history of cooperation in oil spill response and continue to play a full role in protecting the environment from the adverse effects of oil pollution. More recently, nations bordering the area have taken an active interest in the problem and have demonstrated an impressive record of commitment and action over the past five or six years. While government and industry have maintained their separate identities, a good working relationship exists between them, and there is good information exchange and practical cooperation between the two groups, most especially at the national level. Future years should see this trend develop even further. A very impressive arsenal of oil pollution response equipment has been built up in the sea area since two major oil spill incidents in 1980. What is especially noticeable now is the proportion of this equipment that is owned and operated directly by the government agencies. This stands in marked contrast to the situation in 1980. In addition to the equipment resources available, the pool of personnel trained in oil spill response technology and methods is rapidly expanding as a result of seminars, workshops, and training courses that are being organized on a regular basis. The development of national and regional legislation to control the main sources of man-made pollution, for example, from tanker operations and offshore exploration and production, is in a very active stage and the oil industry is expected to have clear operational guidelines within the next few years.

REVIEW OF UNITED KINGDOM OIL SPILL RESPONSE TECHNIQUES AND EQUIPMENT

1983 ◽  
Vol 1983 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-19
Author(s):  
Douglas Cormack
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Problem Definition ◽  
General Nature ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Status ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Operational Aspects

ABSTRACT As a result of recent studies in the United Kingdom and elsewhere on the factors affecting oil spilled at sea, it has been possible to redefine the problems presented for oil spill response given the general nature of response techniques and their likely future development. This topic has benefited in the past two years from discussions in the Bonn Agreement Working Group on Technical Scientific and Operational Aspects of Oil Pollution. The influence of this problem definition on the choice of response equipment in the United Kingdom is discussed. The chosen equipment is described in relation to success in meeting identified requirements and likelihood of success in real operations. The status of the various approaches exemplified by individual equipment choices is presented and future developments anticipated.

HISTORICAL BUILDUP OF OIL SPILL RESPONSE CAPABILITY IN JAPAN

1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-43
Author(s):  
Sakae Shirai
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Response Force ◽  
Disaster Prevention ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Oil Boom ◽  
Oil Storage ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
The Government ◽  
Prevention Law ◽  
Response Capability

ABSTRACT With the large oil spill that occurred in 1971 as an impetus, Japan's Maritime Pollution and Disaster Prevention Law was amended in 1973 and subsequently in 1976. The amendments required owners of vessels and petroleum facilities to retain designated quantities of oil boom, sorbent, dispersant, and other items to minimize impact from spills. A large oil spill caused by a ruptured crude oil storage tank in 1974 led to the enactment of additional legislation: the Petroleum Complex Disaster Prevention Law. Under this, petroleum facilities are required to maintain designated quantities of oil boom, oil boom deploying vessels, skimming boats, and the like. These legislative measures, together with voluntary efforts, have contributed to a sound buildup of the nation's oil spill response force. However, the response capability including stockpiled materials and equipment has been designed primarily to cope with incidents in closed waters such as inland seas, bays, and ports, and hence not for a oil spill in open seas as large as that from the Exxon Valdez. As one of the measures under the 1990 International Convention for Oil Spill Preparedness, Response and Cooperation, the Government of Japan has entrusted the Petroleum Association of Japan with an oil spill response capability reinforcement project to cope with a large oil spill should one occur in Japanese waters or nearby seas. Under the scheme, during the 5 year period beginning in 1991, the Petroleum Association of Japan is scheduled to build up, using subsidies from the government, stockpiles of cleanup equipment and materials and to augment the existing response capability.

THE IPIECA OIL SPILL WORKING GROUP 20:20 VISION REFLECTIONS AND PROJECTIONS ON OUR 20TH ANNIVERSARY

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 1093-1095
Author(s):  
Bernie Bennett ◽  
Yvette Osikilo
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Petroleum Industry ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
20Th Anniversary ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT The International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) Oil Spill Working Group (OSWG) is celebrating its 20th anniversary. Its mission has been, through education, training and awareness initiatives, to enhance the state of preparedness and response to marine oil spill incidents in priority coastal locations around the world. Its programme is carried out in close cooperation with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and operates within the context of the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation (OPRC), 1990. The OSWG is made up of oil spill managers and specialists from IPIECA member companies and associations, supported by invited representatives from other organisations in the oil spill response community. It aims to ensure that the full range of industry interests is adequately reflected in its work programme. Coordination between these industry-based organisations and the IMO remains an essential ingredient in the success of the OSWG programme This paper reviews the main activities and achievements of the IPIECA OSWG over the last 20 years and attempt to illustrate and measure the impact of its work on global oil spill preparedness. We then hypothesize as to how the work of the IPIECA OSWG might develop over the next 20 years, which could serve as future strategic/planning guidance.

To Cooperate or Not? Why Working Together is Essential in the Arctic

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 1146-1165
Author(s):  
Johan Marius Ly ◽  
Rune Bergstrøm ◽  
Ole Kristian Bjerkemo ◽  
Synnøve Lunde
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Response ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Response Analysis ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Second Year

Abstract The Norwegian Arctic covers Svalbard, Bear Island, Jan Mayen and the Barents Sea. 80% of all shipping activities in the Arctic are within Norwegian territorial waters and the Exclusive Economic Zone. To reduce the risk for accidents, the Norwegian authorities have established several preventive measures. Among these are ship reporting systems, traffic separation schemes in international waters and surveillance capabilities. If an accident has occurred and an oil spill response operation must be organized - resources, equipment, vessels and manpower from Norwegian and neighboring states will be mobilized. In 2015, the Norwegian Coastal Administration finalized an environmental risk-based emergency response analysis for shipping incidents in the Svalbard, Bear Island and Jan Mayen area. This scenario-based analysis has resulted in a number of recommendations that are currently being implemented to be better prepared for oil spill response operations in the Norwegian Arctic. Further, a large national oil spill response exercise in 2016 was based on one of these scenarios involving at sea and onshore oil spill response at Svalbard. The 2016 exercise, working within the framework of the Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic between Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the USA (Arctic Council 2013), focused on a shipping incident in the Norwegian waters in the Barents Sea, close to the Russian border. Every year, as part of the Russian – Norwegian Oil Spill Response Agreement and the SAR Agreement in the Barents Sea, combined SAR and oil spill response exercises are organized. These are held every second year in Russia and every second year in Norway. There is an expected increased traffic and possible increased risk for accidents in the Arctic waters. In order to build and maintain an emergency response system to this, cooperation between states, communities, private companies and other stakeholders is essential. It is important that all actors that operate and have a role in the Arctic are prepared and able to help ensure the best possible emergency response plans. We depend on one another, this paper highlights some of the ongoing activities designed to strengthen the overall response capabilities in the Arctic.

Government Initiated Unannounced Exercises (GIUEs): Developing Response Best Practices to Improve Marine Environmental Response Preparedness

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 2879-2894
Author(s):  
Christopher Klarmann ◽  
LCDR Johna Rossetti
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Regulatory Agencies ◽  
Environmental Response ◽  
Vessel Response ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Response Plan ◽  
Marine Environmental

ABSTRACT ID: 2017-101 – GIUEs: Developing Best Practices to Improve Marine Environmental Response Preparedness The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) is authorized by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990 to conduct Government Initiated Unannounced Exercises (GIUE), a cornerstone of the oil spill exercise cycle. These exercises are instrumental for USCG Captains of the Port (COTP) to evaluate industry preparedness for oil spill response by specifically testing a facility or vessel on notification procedures, response time, and deployment of facility-owned or Oil Spill Removal Organization (OSRO) equipment. Facility Response Plan holders and Vessel Response Plan holders are subject to these exercises under federal regulations 33 C.F.R. § 154 and § 155. In 2013, the USCG restructured their GIUE policy to provide better guidance for employees. This updated policy detailed how to properly plan and conduct a GIUE as well as established expectations following both satisfactory and unsatisfactory exercises. In this paper we will examine the changes that the USCG has made regarding its policy on planning and conducting GIUEs, describe how USCG field units are implementing the new policy, including how unsatisfactory GIUEs are addressed, and examine what commonalities, are being seen in GIUE unsatisfactory results. Finally, we will discuss how plan holders, OSROs, and regulatory agencies can work together to better prepare for responding to an environmental emergency when it occurs.

scholarly journals OIL SPILL RESPONSE AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE BTC PIPELINE SYSTEM IN TURKEY

2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 1099-1103
Author(s):  
Erich R. Gundlach ◽  
Murat Cekirge ◽  
Robert Castle ◽  
Hamish Reid ◽  
Paul Sutherland
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Response Strategy ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Tier 2 ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Oil Pipeline ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Pipeline Equipment ◽  
And Storage ◽  
Spilled Oil

ABSTRACT The BTC (Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan) Project includes a 42 in (107 cm) crude oil pipeline extending west from the Caspian Sea across Azerbaijan (433 km, 260 mi), through Georgia (250 km, 150 mi), and then southward through eastern Turkey (1076 km, 645 mi) to a new marine terminal at Ceyhan on the Mediterranean Sea. In Turkey, the pipeline crosses significant mountainous terrain (>2800 m, 8,500 ft), several major rivers as well as five fault zones. The marine terminal includes 7 storage tanks and a 2.7 km (1.6 mi) jetty able to handle two 300,000-dwt tankers simultaneously. The system is designed to transport 1 million barrels per day (∼145,000 t/day). The oil spill contingency plan is designed to protect sensitive areas, catchment basins, and to prevent the migration of spilled oil. Sensitive features were determined by pre-construction surveys and risk analyses, and updated by additional fieldwork focusing on the potential movement and impacts of spilled oil. Response guidelines based on risk and logistics determined the location of equipment depots and the level of equipment necessary to recover Tier 2 spill volumes. Pipeline equipment and depots are selected to rapidly recover spilled oil and to prevent its downslope and downstream movement. The marine response strategy focuses on protection of adjacent lagoons by on-water containment at the berthing area using an oil spill response vessel (OSRV), tugboats, and other workboats, and various lengths and types of booms, skimmers and storage capabilities.

scholarly journals KenSea – development of an environmental sensitivity atlas for coastal areas of Kenya

2006 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 65-70
Author(s):  
John Tychsen ◽  
Ole Geertz-Hansen ◽  
Jesper Kofoed
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Maritime Transportation ◽  
Sensitivity Index ◽  
Environmental Sensitivity ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Kenyan Coast ◽  
The Government

The Kenya coastline extends 600 km from the border of Tanzania in the south to the border of Somalia in the north (Fig. 1). The Kenyan coast features a diverse marine environment, including estuaries, mangroves, sea grass beds and intertidal reef platforms and coral reefs, which are vital for the reproduction of marine organisms. These coastal ecosystems are regarded as some of the most valuable in Kenya but face serious threats from the ever increasing human pressure of tourism, industrial pollution, destructive fishing, mangrove logging and other unsustainable uses of marine resources. Another serious threat is the maritime transportation activities along the coast and at the ports. It is estimated that at any given time more than 50 ships operate in the major shipping lanes off the Kenyan coast, of which about nine are oil tankers with capacities ranging from 50 000 to 250 000 tonnes. Furthermore, the harbour of Mombasa serves as the major port for countries in East Africa. In recognition of the risks posed by oil pollution the government of Kenya and the commercial petroleum industry agreed to develop a National Oil Spill Response Contingency Plan (NOSRCP) with the purpose of enabling a speedy and effective response to any oil spill within the territorial waters of Kenya. An important element of this plan was the mapping of the coastal resources and the development of an environmental sensitivity atlas showing the vulnerability of the coast to marine oil spills. In 2004, the Government of Kenya approached the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in Kenya for financial support to develop an environmental sensitivity atlas. The project was approved and forwarded for funding by the Danish Consultancy Trust Fund administrated by United Nations Operational Program (UNOPS) in Copenhagen. The project was announced in Denmark, and the KenSea group headed by the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS) was awarded the contract. The project comprises four phases: (1) data compilation and development of the KenSea database, (2) development of a coastal classification for Kenya, (3) development of the sensitivity index jointly with a group of stakeholders, and (4) compilation of the KenSea environmental sensitivity atlas (Tychsen 2006).

VESSEL RESPONSE PLANS: A TILE IN THE MOSAIC OF THE NATIONAL RESPONSE SYSTEM1

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 926-926
Author(s):  
Duane Michael Smith
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
The Past ◽  
Response System ◽  
National Response ◽  
Vessel Response ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT With the implementation of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 came the requirement for vessels to develop plans for responding to oil spills from their vessels. While some companies had such plans in the past, the National Response System did not formally recognize their existence. Individual vessel response plans must now be viewed as an integral part of the National Response System. All of the parties that could be involved in an oil spill response must begin to view themselves as one tile of many that make up the mosaic known as the National Response System.

Arctic Oiled Wildlife Response: Exploring Potential and Limitations

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 1569-1582
Author(s):  
Hugo Nijkamp ◽  
Saskia Sessions ◽  
Philippe Blanc ◽  
Yannick Autret
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Arctic Region ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Migratory Species ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Efficiency And Effectiveness ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
The Arctic Region

ABSTRACT The Arctic is an extremely vulnerable area for oil pollution. Because of global warming and the resulting retreating ice, new economic shipping and Exploration & Production activities are likely to develop in the coming years and decades. Both governments (e.g. Arctic Council) and the oil industry (e.g. Arctic Response Technology Joint Industry Programme) are preparing for increased oil spill response capabilities in the Arctic region, and are looking to join forces for more efficiency and effectiveness. In connection to oil spill response planning in the Arctic both onshore and offshore, attention should be given to oiled wildlife response preparedness in this region. The Arctic is characterized by unique ecosystems and biodiversity, either marine or terrestrial, with a large proportion of migratory species. So although species diversity is assumed to be low compared to other regions, Arctic wildlife is very sensitive to the effects of oil pollution. Additionally the Arctic is a remote and extreme area for setting up a wildlife response in the framework of an oil spill response. This paper explores what the limitations of an Arctic oiled wildlife response would be (physical/logistical, health & safety, environmental monitoring, ecosystems understanding, biodiversity data, sensitivity mapping, etc.), and identifies how current gaps in response preparedness could be filled. Special emphasis is laid on investments into the capabilities of specialised responders and their equipment, including creation of a specialised Arctic Wildlife Response Strike Team.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document