OPRC Level 3 Spill Response Objectives and Policy Issues

OPRC Level 3 2

3 Outline Management Objectives Policy Issues

OPRC Level Management Objectives - Outline Performance targets: –Operations at sea –Shoreline clean-up –Waste management Who assesses performance? Management issues Response objectives: how clean is “clean”?

OPRC Level 3 5 Objectives and Performance Targets Operations at sea Shoreline Clean-up Waste Management

OPRC Level 3 6 Operations at Sea

OPRC Level 3 7 Operations at Sea Effectiveness of mechanical recovery vs. use of dispersants Is there a “correct” option? Is performance of equipment acceptable? Is there sufficient equipment? When to seek external assistance

OPRC Level 3 8 Shoreline Clean-up

OPRC Level 3 9 Shoreline Clean-up Experience of past spills as a measure of what can be expected Determining the need for clean-up – and to what extent Setting priorities Selecting appropriate techniques Setting and monitoring targets Safe working conditions Termination criteria

OPRC Level 3 10

OPRC Level 3 11 How clean is “clean”? Diminishing returns Termination criteria Cleanup objectives have been met

OPRC Level 3 12 Clean-up Objectives Restore environment to a pristine level? Restore environment to its pre-spill use? Leave it alone?

OPRC Level 3 13 Waste Management

OPRC Level 3 14 Waste Management Is waste segregation effective? Are there sufficient means of transport? Are “clean” wastes being re-used? Are there adequate facilities for “dirty” wastes? Are there regulatory controls over waste disposal?

OPRC Level 3 15 Who assesses performance? Management Team ? OSC ? Team Leaders (at sea / on shore) ?

OPRC Level 3 16

OPRC Level 3 17 Management Issues Division of responsibilities of Management Team & OSC Clearly defined? Strategy vs. tactical

OPRC Level Policy Issues - Outline Fishing bans Bathing bans Public health issues Net Environmental Benefit Analysis (NEBA)

OPRC Level 3 19 Fishing Bans

OPRC Level 3 20 Market confidence

OPRC Level 3 21 Fishing Bans Protection of human health? Avoiding contamination of fishing boats? Is a ban justifiable? Compensation for loss of earnings Who decides? Shellfish or free-swimming fish? Criteria for lifting bans

OPRC Level 3 22 Bathing Bans

OPRC Level 3 23 Bathing Bans Restrictions on public’s freedom of movement Interference with clean-up response Need to liaise with other authorities? Public health hazards Who decides? Criteria for lifting bans

OPRC Level 3 24 Public Health

OPRC Level 3 25 Public Health Issues What is acceptable level of risk? –Risks of explosion –Inhalation of fumes –Skin disorders Contaminated fish – bans? Aquaculture products – bans? Compensation for personal injury Who decides?

OPRC Level 3 26 CHOOSING SPILL RESPONSE OPTIONS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE Net Environmental Benefit Analysis (NEBA)

OPRC Level 3 27 What is NEBA? What NEBA is: –Balancing the advantages & disadvantages of different response options with the aim of minimising the overall impact on environmental and economic resources and reducing the time for recovery of affected resources by achieving an acceptable standard of clean-up. –Common-sense What NEBA is not: –Not new –Not complicated –Not a means of calculating the net environmental benefit (i.e. not quantitative) –Not a ‘Cost-Benefit’ Analysis

OPRC Level 3 28 NEBA in practice Evaluation of the options includes: p Reference to previous information on the area (contingency plans) p Reference to relevant oil spill case histories and experiments p Consideration of the shoreline sensitivity p Consideration of ecological resources p Consideration of economic resources All parties must accept that some compromise may be necessary

OPRC Level 3 29 Use of Chemical Dispersants Lessons Learnt

OPRC Level 3 30 Use of Chemical Dispersants Lessons Learnt Experience has shown that dispersants can work very well. ‘SEA EMPRESS’, UK 1996 Dispersants reduced shoreline impact by an estimated 17,000 tonnes of crude oil. Previous experience has also shown the limitations of dispersants M.V. EVOIKOS, Singapore, 1997 Dispersants were ineffective on heavy fuel oil

M.V. ‘AMORGOS’, Taiwan, 14th January 2001

OPRC Level 3 32 M.V. ‘AMORGOS’ Taiwan, 14th January 2001 Consideration of the use of dispersants Advantages –Dispersants could remove a significant amount of oil from the water surface –Relatively fresh oil and warm temperatures –Strong currents and at least 20m depth meant that the dilution potential of the dispersed oil was high Disadvantages –Fisheries –Coral –Close to the shoreline. –No dispersant spraying equipment NEBA - Dispersants proposed as a contingency measure

OPRC Level 3 33 Rocky Shorelines Lessons Learnt Rapid removal of heavy concentrations of oil prevents re-mobilisation M.V. ‘NAKHODKA’ Japan, 1997 Aggressive shoreline cleaning such as hot water flushing can delay recovery of productive shorelines M.V. ‘EXXON VALDEZ’, USA, 1989

OPRC Level 3 34 M.V. ‘AMORGOS’ Taiwan, 14th January 2001 Shoreline clean-up - NEBA Phase I clean-up: Heavy concentrations of oil removed manually Phase II clean-up: clean-up options were limited High pressure, hot water cleaning restricted to splash zone & upper inter- tidal area Joint inspection to agree termination of clean-up

OPRC Level 3 35 Vegetation was removed to gain access to heavy deposits of mobile oil

OPRC Level 3 36 M.V. ‘BALTIC CARRIER’, Denmark, 2001 Approximately 2,000 birds oiled / killed. 10,000’s more at risk

OPRC Level 3 37

OPRC Level 3 38 Sand Beaches Lessons Learnt Careful manual clean-up minimises damage and reduces the volume of waste M.V. ‘SAN JORGE’, Uruguay, 1997 Removal of moderately contaminated substrate can lead to erosion and generate large quantities of waste M.V. ‘AL DURIYAH’ Egypt, 1983

OPRC Level 3 39 How Clean is Clean? Lessons Learnt Clean-up should be terminated when there is no longer any environmental or economic benefit. Removal of oiled seaweed will cause greater environmental damage than the oil alone. M.V. KATJA, France, 1997 The cost-effectiveness of the clean- up should be balanced against the anticipated Benefit. M.V. SEA EMPRESS, UK 1996

OPRC Level 3 40 Waste Disposal Consideration of NEBA Mixed waste limits disposal options and increases waste disposal costs. M.V. ‘ERIKA’, France, 1999 Filtration and segregation of waste enabled most of the oil to be re-processed. M.V. ‘AMORGOS’, Taiwan, 2001