scholarly journals Development of the Inland Estimated Recovery System Potential (ERSP) Calculator

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Balsley ◽  
Gabrielle G. McGrath ◽  
Jill Rowe ◽  
Dagmar Schmidt Etkin ◽  
John Joeckel
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Model ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
The United States ◽  
Project Team ◽  
Encounter Rate ◽  
Recovery Planning ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Recovery Capacity ◽  
Recovery System ◽  
Mechanical Recovery

ABSTRACT Mechanical oil spill recovery response planning currently depends on an equation contained in regulations which assigns an oil removal capability value to an individual oil skimmer. The Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC) calculator, the current planning standard oil spill recovery planning calculation method, depends solely on a prescribed percentage of the skimmer's nameplate capacity. EDRC came under heavy scrutiny as an inadequate means for vessel and facility plan holders to calculate their oil spill equipment needs in the wake of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon incident. EDRC's calculation omitted factors such as the encounter rate and onboard storage of skimmers. These limitations led the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) to develop a new calculator called the Estimated Recovery System Potential (ERSP) calculator in collaboration with the United States Coast Guard (USCG). ERSP is an oil encounter rate-based calculator that evaluates mechanical recovery equipment as a complete “system” as opposed to focusing on an individual component such as the skimmer capacity or an intake pump. This calculator incorporated the previously neglected factors such as decreasing oil thickness over time, swath width of skimmers, speed of the skimmers relative to the oil spill, oil/water separability, pump rate, onboard fluid storage, and transition time. Although ERSP appears to significantly improve mechanical recovery planning for offshore and nearshore skimming operations, USCG recognized that it may not be applicable for the inland operating environments where large numbers of oil spills occur. The USCG Research and Development Center (RDC) initiated a project to conduct research into oil spill response planning factors for the inland operational environment. RDC and RPS Group (Project Team) interviewed numerous governmental, industry, and Oil Spill Removal Organization (OSRO) subject matter experts to gain a broad perspective on this tool, what factors were critical to include, and how best to implement the tool. These interviews and further research led to the creation of the Inland ERSP Calculator conceptual model. Employing a system-based approach, the conceptual model provides the relationship between these factors and the ways in which they contribute into the calculator's estimation of oil spill recovery capacity. The Project Team presents this Inland ERSP Calculator conceptual model as consideration for regulatory implementation as a planning tool. It may improve planning capabilities for oil spill events in inland environments.

Integrated Vessel Response Plan Format

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 (1) ◽  
pp. 635-638
Author(s):  
William C. Rogers ◽  
Jean R. Cameron
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
West Coast ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Vessel Response ◽  
Response Plan ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT Oil shipping companies operating on the West Coast of the United States are subject to international, federal, and state oil spill prevention and response planning regulations. Many companies wrote separate plans for each jurisdiction with the result that tank vessels carried several different plans on board and parent companies faced an administrative burden in keeping plans current. In June 1996, oil shipping company representatives proposed that the States/British Columbia Oil Spill Task Force work with them to develop a format incorporating West Coast states' and U.S. Coast Guard contingency planning requirements. A workgroup comprised of representatives of the Task Force, industry, and the U.S. Coast Guard, working cooperatively, eventually proposed a voluntary integrated plan format based on the key elements of the U.S. Coast Guard Vessel Response Plan. This format allowed correlation with state planning requirements as well as with the Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP) required by international regulations. The U.S. Coast Guard, the Canadian Ministry of Transport, and all West Coast states have subsequently documented their agreement to accept vessel plans in this format, to coordinate review as needed, and to allow references to public documents such as Area Plans.

OPA 90 Effectiveness: Past, Present, and Future

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Tannahill ◽  
Alexis Steen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Panel Discussion ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
The United States ◽  
Control Programs ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Fuel Storage

ABSTRACT Since its inception, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90) was intended to greatly improve the ability to respond to large spills in the United States and has been the subject of frequent discussion and debate within the United States and elsewhere. Its provisions created new regulatory programs, expanded existing requirements, and established a variety of competency requirements for those entities and personnel involved in the production, transport, handling, or storage of petroleum within the United States. Tens upon tens of articles have been published in prior Proceedings of the International Oil Spill Conference (IOSC) and in many other venues about legislative intent, subsequent regulatory programs and their implementation, interagency negotiations, industry compliance successes or difficulties, training issues, etc. OPA 90 has also had an impact on U.S. policies internationally and in U.S. participation in international spill conventions/treaties. In recognition of a decade's passage since its enactment, IOSC sponsors commissioned a review and analysis of the effectiveness of OPA 90 and the interrelationship of OPA 90 with other oil spill laws and rules in the world. Another important purpose was to identify issues for the related panel discussion of this topic at the 2001 IOSC. This review was conducted using a questionnaire to acquire input from a broad range of individuals with OPA 90 expertise and experience. An informal survey of 57 questions in four sections was prepared and distributed to 22 participants. These participants were selected to represent a core of knowledge about OPA 90 and its history of implementation. Findings from the survey are presented to foster discussion and debate, educate members of the spill response community, assist with resolution of outstanding issues, and help focus on future issues that will need attention. The rate of response to the survey questions was high and enabled a broad review of the effectiveness of some of the various OPA 90 requirements. Questions were in either multiple-choice or essay format. Commonalties, differences, and issues were identified from all responses and used to evaluate OPA 90. From the commonalties and differences in the responses, selected OPA 90 requirements were classified as effective or ineffective. Based on an analysis of multiple-choice and essay answers, respondents generally agreed that OPA 90 was moderately effective (across all covered provisions). Closer examination of the four survey sections, however, indicated distinct concerns and benefits derived from implementation of OPA 90. In addition, where OPA 90 provisions were judged effective, caveats sometimes followed. Despite the effective rating of many OPA 90 prevention provisions, prevention still needs more attention based on the opinions of the survey respondents. Some respondents felt more attention and resources often are given to preparing to respond to a spill than to preventing spills, even though preventing a spill is considered preferable. Further, some believed that spill prevention would be enhanced if vessels with large, onboard bunker fuel storage also were subject to prevention requirements similar to OPA 90 requirements for vessels carrying petroleum as cargo. Survey feedback indicated that better Area Contingency Plans (ACPs) could result in significant improvements in response preparedness. ACPs need to be improved in many geographic areas. ACPs should be more response-oriented and less like a reference document, and be made more readily available and useable. Many respondents viewed these items as the foundation for any major improvements in response planning. In the United States, spill response using a multiparty management system, which is inclusive of broad stakeholder groups, differs from systems in other countries. Most felt that response activities can impact restoration activities greatly, but the legal structure does not support a seamless and efficient coordination of response and restoration. Coordination between response and restoration needs to be improved to avoid response delays and promote better/faster resource restoration. The biggest concern expressed by survey respondents regarding restoration dealt with management of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) process. Damage assessments and restoration management need to be streamlined, partly because too many interested parties make decision making inefficient. Some felt that public review of restoration plans led to better results; others felt public review delayed timely restoration activities. While international cooperation has increased over the last decade, respondents felt there was room for further improvement. In particular, sharing personnel and resources better, joining inspection and control programs, and drafting international restoration guidelines were some of the improvement activities mentioned. Findings from this survey have provided insights on what actions are needed to further improve spill prevention, preparedness, response, and restoration. Now is the time to renew this effort and improve performance to a higher plane globally. 2001 IOSC sponsors and Issue Paper Subcommittee desire the response community's commitment and solicit its involvement toward this goal.

Addressing the Uncertainty and Requirements for Oil Spill Response Consultations

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 1881-1898 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradford Benggio ◽  
Debra Scholz ◽  
Dave Anderson ◽  
Joseph Dillon ◽  
Greg Masson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Native American ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Consultation Process ◽  
Planning Stage ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT In the United States (U.S.), oil spill response planning, preparedness, and response requirements are dictated primarily by the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, a regulation that implements the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the Clean Water Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. At the planning stage, these regulations require the development of national, regional, and local response capabilities and promote overall coordination among responders. During a spill, these capabilities are utilized by the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) to analyze whether response actions are likely to impact protected resources. The consultation process required under Federal statutes, charges the FOSC to consult with Federal, state, Tribal entities, and other Federal agencies to determine potential effects of response actions during an incident and to develop strategies to avoid, minimize, and mitigate those effects (40 CFR § 300.135(j); § 300.305(e); and § 300.322(a), 1994). Consultations should continue until response operations are concluded and may continue after operations are complete. Four key regulatory mandates that require an FOSC to initiate consultation during a response include:Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended requires consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on federally listed species and designated critical habitats;Magnuson-Stevens Act requires consultation with NMFS on any action that may affect Essential Fish Habitats;National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended requires Federal agencies to consult with states, federally recognized tribes, and other stakeholders on potential impacts to historic and cultural resources; andTribal Consultations under Executive Order 13175 – Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments when federally recognized Indian Tribes and their interests are affected by a response. Consultation is also required under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act when Native American burial sites, human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or items of cultural patrimony are identified on Federal or Tribal lands during a response and no pre-consultation plan of action has been developed.1 Consultation requirements are not universally understood, leading to uncertainty and inconsistencies across the response community and Trustees regarding when to initiate and how to conduct the consultations. This paper discusses the Federal consultation requirements and identifies areas of possible uncertainties in the consultation process throughout the pre-spill planning, response, and post-response phases of an incident. This paper will suggest resolutions and recommendations to further enhance the consultation process by the Federal spill response decision-makers and planning bodies.

scholarly journals The National Oil Spill Response and Renewable Energy Test Facility

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 (1) ◽  
pp. abs104
Author(s):  
Dave DeVitis ◽  
William Schmidt ◽  
Jane Delgado ◽  
Mike Crickard ◽  
Steve Potter
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Recovery Rate ◽  
Cold Water ◽  
The United States ◽  
Test Method ◽  
Test Facility ◽  
Actual Performance ◽  
Recovery Capacity ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT The American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) subcommittee on skimmers recently adopted a standard methodology for measuring I skimmer performance, F 2709 - Standard Test Method for Determining Nameplate Recovery Rate of Stationary Oil Skimmer Systems. Current industry practice allows manufacturers to label skimmers with a nameplate capacity based solely on the skimmer's offload pump capability without regard to the recovery rate as a system. Additionally there is no consideration given to the degradation in recovery performance when pumping fluids with viscosities higher than water. Typically the manufacturer's claimed value is unrealistic when estimating the oil recovery rate (ORR) of a skimming system. Integrating actual performance data into the planning and regulation process is prudent from all perspectives. In the absence of third party data, the United States Coast Guard (USCG) will de-rate a manufacturer's claimed nameplate capacity by 80% or more when calculating the Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC). The USCG uses EDRC as a key component in rating and regulating the oil spill response capability of responsible parties and oil spill response organizations (OSROs). The ASTM's new skimmer protocol has been used recently at Ohmsett to evaluate four oleophilic skimmers as potential alternatives to the skimmers currently used in Alaska's Prince William Sound (PWS) oil spill response plan. The selected skimmer has undergone a number of modifications with improvements quantified over four additional tests series. This paper focuses on the most recent test of this skimmer, conducted in cold-water conditions using both fresh and weathered Alaska North Slope (ANS) crude oil. During the latest testing, two newly introduced tests were performed: a 24-hour endurance test and a qualitative recovery test in the presence of seaweed.

COMPARING SWEDISH OIL SPILL PREPAREDNESS TO REGIONAL COUNTRIES USING THE RETOS™ EVALUATION TOOL

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-36
Author(s):  
Jonas Pålsson ◽  
Lawrence Hildebrand ◽  
Olof Lindén
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Baltic Sea ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Full Range ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Baltic Sea ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
The Baltic

ABSTRACT 2017-253 Few standardised frameworks are designed to assess the full range of oil spill preparedness activities, from plan development, implementation, equipment, training, exercises, and response sustainability. This paper analyses the international practice of oil spill preparedness measures and compares them to Swedish practice. Friedman’s test and Dunn’s post-test have been used to compare the RETOS™ evaluation scores of Finland, Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Denmark, and Norway to Sweden. The United States is examined as an external reference. The RETOS™ programme is an Excel tool developed for the International Oil Spill Conference 2008. It is a guide for industry and governments to assess their level of oil spill response, planning, and preparedness management in relation to established criteria, and is intended for international best management practices. Swedish oil spill preparedness is shown to be comparable to the Baltic Sea regional practice. The Swedish RETOS™ evaluation score is 69%, compared to the average 73.1% of the examined countries. A statistical difference exists between Sweden and both Norway and the United States. Swedish oil spill preparedness is comparable to the Baltic Sea Region countries despite: not having a National Contingency Plan, not using the Tiered Preparedness and Response concept, nor having adopted an Incident Management System. This suggests that these concepts are not essential for a functioning preparedness regime, although Sweden instead has a system serving the same function. However, it also questions what effect implementing these concepts would have on Swedish preparedness.

Coping With Technological Disasters: Helping Communities Help Themselves

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 713-717
Author(s):  
Lisa Ka' aihue
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Mental Health Professionals ◽  
The United States ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
Technological Disaster ◽  
Technological Disasters ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Major Disaster ◽  
Contingency Plans

ABSTRACT Major technological disasters, such as oil spills, create many situations that are addressed in typical government and industry contingency plans—for example, how to boom a beach, clean a bird, or lighter a tanker. What is not addressed in contingency plans is how to mitigate the social and psychological impacts of such a disaster on residents of affected communities. Technological disasters have been shown to produce what have come to be known as “corrosive communities” characterized by unusually high levels of tension, conflict, ongoing litigation, and chronic psychological stress. Having experienced a major oil spill firsthand, the members of the Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council (PWS RCAC) initiated a project to fill this large gap in oil spill response planning. In addition to drawing on personal experience, PWS RCAC consulted experts in the fields of socioeconomic and technological disaster research to help in the development of a guidebook titled Coping with Technological Disasters. The guidebook was released in 1999 and contains information to help communities and individuals understand what a technological disaster is, how it differs from a natural disaster, and what to expect during and in the years following the disaster. Information, resources, and proven programs are presented in the guidebook for use by local governments, civic groups, mental health organizations, individuals, or just about anyone responding to a major disaster. Since its release, the guidebook has been requested by communities, state and federal agencies, organizations, and companies throughout Alaska, the United States, and internationally. Community leaders, mental health professionals, and emergency responders have praised the guidebook as an excellent reference and resource. By sharing what the communities of the Exxon Valdez oil spill region have learned, PWS RCAC believes that this guidebook will enhance already existing contingency plans, not only for spill response, but for other emergencies as well.

scholarly journals Improving Response Planning by Using Numerical Models to Test Geographic Response Plans

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle G. McGrath ◽  
Tatyana Yanishevsky
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Environmental Conditions ◽  
Numerical Models ◽  
The United States ◽  
Computerized Testing ◽  
Environmental Response ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Response Options ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Cost Constraints

ABSTRACT 40 CFR §300.210 outlines the requirements for each Area Committee to develop an Area Contingency Plan (ACP) for its designated area. These requirements include a list of equipment and personnel available to ensure an effective and immediate removal of a discharge. Many Area Committees take this direction to the next step and develop Geographic Response Plans (GRP) or Geographic Response Strategies (GRS) for inclusion in the ACP. These plans provide pre-identified deployment strategies for how to coordinate an effective response and protect sensitive sites in the event of an oil spill. GRPs are typically developed by Area Committee representatives behind the doors of a meeting room. While these experienced members know their regions very well and offer a wealth of knowledge in oil spill response tactics, the developed GRPs are typically not field-tested due to the cost constraints of deploying equipment. Even if an Area Committee is able to sponsor a field deployment, the equipment is only being tested against one set of environmental conditions. In addition, typical ACPs contain hundreds of GRPs. It is not possible to deploy equipment to test all of those plans. Numerical models can be used to electronically test GRPs under all possible environmental conditions. These models run quickly, allowing multiple iterations of environmental scenarios, in a short amount of time. By providing the capability to implement response options within the model, users can simulate a variety of combinations of countermeasures, including surface and subsea dispersants, in-situ burning, skimming, and booming. Analyzing the model outputs can allow Area Committee members to adjust the response plans to maximize effectiveness of the GRPs. The September 2018 update of the U.S. Coast Guard's Marine Environmental Response Manual supports the use of computer simulations for validating these plans. By developing a comprehensive computerized testing process of GRPs, the Area Committees can ensure that the coasts of the United States are protected from the devastation of an oil spill.

INTEGRATED RESPONSE PLANNING FOR OILED WILDLIFE

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 973-976
Author(s):  
Barbara Callahan
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Management Team ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Trained Personnel ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Response Plan

ABSTRACT Expanding oil development and global transportation of oil has greatly increased the potential for impact on wildlife. This paper will focus on key elements for developing a wildlife response plan as an integral part of an overall spill response plan and will delineate how a well planned and organized wildlife response can be cost effective, can substantially increase the likelihood of saving animals, and can increase regional response capacity. A Wildlife Response Plan as an integral component of an overall spill plan includes professional oiled wildlife responders; current and effective oiled wildlife protocols; knowledge and understanding of standard oil spill response plans, wildlife risk assessments, background information on both the geographic area the plan covers and baseline data on wildlife in the area; and promotes a clear strategy with realistic goals for wildlife response. Just as with an overall spill response plan, a wildlife plan must incorporate safety as an overarching theme and have an action plan including notification systems and action cards showing an overview of each positions responsibilities and decision-making keys. The incorporation of the wildlife response team under the Incident Management (whether an Incident Command System is being used or some other management structure) is critical to the success of any wildlife response because it increases information and resources available to the wildlife group and provides for increased communications between the management team and the wildlife group. In addition, pre-planning for an animal event allows for equipment and other resource procurement prior to spill time. Having a plan that calls for activation and integration of a professional, trained and experienced animal care team into response objectives and activities provides for the care of impacted animals and allows for the most efficient and effective response without the duplication of effort and wasted resources. A professional animal management team with experience in triage and emergency management can make time critical decisions which will allow for the best care for the most animals, thus limiting net wildlife impacts from a spill. Once a wildlife response plan is developed, training to the plan and participating in regular exercises is critical to the success of the plan, just as with all other areas of spill response specialization. Pre-planning for oiled wildlife response - including the use of knowledgeable and trained professionals - greatly increases the likelihood of success of this increasingly visible aspect of oil spill response. Outside of the United States and a few other countries, oiled wildlife has historically not been included as part of spill response for many reasons. Some of those reasons include financial constraints, lack of experienced and trained personnel, and relative unlikelihood of success. In the past, with little pre-planning, few resources for oiled wildlife response, and no clear mandate to respond, oiled wildlife have ended up being at the mercy of well-meaning but often misguided attempts by volunteers and others to treat them. Too often, these efforts have resulted in failure and, ultimately, merely prolonged the suffering of the impacted animals. As with any part of spill response operations, wildlife response can only be successful when properly planned for and resourced. In recent years, it has become evident that with strong preplanning, trained personnel, equipment and other resources, oiled wildlife response can be successful, cost effective, and can pave the way for saving world populations of threatened or endangered animals. Today, there are excellent examples of oiled wildlife response plans which are integral components of overall oil spill plans and include wildlife risk assessments, management structures, access to trained personnel and equipment stockpiles, as well as familiarity with current and effective protocols for treating animals. These plans are dynamic and integrated into the safety and work culture of the plan holders and allow for on-going training of personnel to the plan. Additionally, a strong wildlife response plan will provide for pro-active and immediate action with regard to oiled wildlife which results in greatly increased overall spill response success.

scholarly journals New Risk-Based Framework for Oil Spill Response Planning Requirements – Ports and Oil Terminals – A Brazilian Study Case

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Cochrane Esteves ◽  
Anna Carolina Pereira ◽  
Rodrigo Zapelini Possobon ◽  
Gustavo Xavier
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Resource Sharing ◽  
Rio De Janeiro ◽  
Task Force ◽  
International Association ◽  
The United States ◽  
Worst Case ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Response Capability

Abstract In 2000, Brazil experienced its most relevant oil spill accident until today: 1.3 thousand cubic meters (c.m.) of crude oil were leaked from a pipeline to the waters of Guanabara Bay, in Rio de Janeiro. Therefore, in 2001 the Government implemented a federal legislation requiring oil spill response plans (OSRP) which was strongly inspired in the United States requirement for ports and terminals. In 2016, an interdisciplinary task force was initiated to improve this legislation. Thus, a new risk-based framework was developed in order to better engage some of the environmental and social-economical complexities of Brazil as adequate inputs for the oil spill response planning process. This methodology was expanded from the guidelines published by International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (IOGP). First, the concept of sensitive receptors were introduced to describe any valuable element that can be harmed by the spill. These were selected from environmental sensitivities, protection areas, wildlife occurrence, human occupation, tourism and fisheries, among others. These criticalities were categorized in five classes using an oil slick forecast modelling results for different spill volumes such as the minimum time to reach these receptors and oiling probability. After this, they were associated with certain spill volumes, resulting in three possible requirement levels. Consequently, the minimum response capability demand for the facility is calculated, as well as tactical and logistics plans. This new approach not only optimizes the allocation of first response equipment at the highest risk spots, but also regulates the sharing of these capabilities when there is a concentration of these facilities. In this paper, this methodology was applied to a major oil terminal located in a high sensitivity area at Ilha Grande Bay, in Rio de Janeiro. The worst-case scenario was around 6.923 c.m., which allowed the identification of 116 vulnerable receptors. Of these, 02 were identified as having high criticality and, therefore, were prioritized for response planning. The minimum nominal response capability was estimated as being equal to 4.760 m3/day for full deployment condition after the initial 60 hours. This value is about 25% higher than that predicted in facility's existing OSRP. However, with the application of resource sharing rules, the amount of equipment staged on site is equal to only 1298 m3/d, allowing a significant optimization due to logistics processes after the initial 24h.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document