Kazakhstan experience in adopting NEBA within its legal framework

ABSTRACT Kazakhstan's legal framework concerning oil spill issues has been reviewed and updated during 2015–2019, driven by the adoption of good international practice. Ensuring the full response toolkit is available and options are chosen to mitigate the overall impact of an incident were critical principles. The Oil Spill Preparedness Regional Initiative (OSPRI), in conjunction with national industry (North Caspian Operating Company - NCOC and KazMunaiGaz - KMG), shared the net Environmental Benefit Analysis (NEBA) approach and later the Spill Impact Mitigation Assessment (SIMA) with key agencies and authorities as part of this effort. As the first step, workshops and seminars on NEBA were organized at local and national levels. These were facilitated by international experts and national consultants to build awareness and understanding. The second step was to embed NEBA within the legal framework. The legal system has a strong hierarchy including Codes, Laws and Orders. The National Contingency Plan (2015), approved by Order, acknowledged NEBA and gave impetus to develop additional legislation on the NEBA process. To ensure proper legal force, it was suggested to embed NEBA higher up the hierarchy, in the Subsoil Use Code (2017). Practical implementation of NEBA (during simulation exercises) and review by authorities of a draft NEBA report prepared by NCOC, revealed that the process required further clarification. It was not clear how NEBA should be presented in contingency plans, for authorities' review and approval i.e. whether it should be a separate report or incorporated within the plan. It was mooted that proposed amendments to the Environmental Code would aid clarification. In order to support a coherent process of contingency plans' approval, NEBA should be supported by a suitable and recognized implementation methodology. The SIMA methodology has been proposed as an option in Kazakhstan. Work on the Environmental Code's amendments, incorporating suitable clarifications, is expected to be completed in 2020. Based on the experience of NEBA adoption in Kazakhstan, cooperation between industry and authorities, exercises and workshops leads to positive results. The process has taken some years, as capacity building and legislative developments were required, but is reaching a successful conclusion. This will inform the choice of response options for any future incidents, to achieve least overall ecological and socio-economic impacts.

Effect of long term natural weathering on oil composition: study of the 41-years-old Amoco Cadiz and 20-years-old Erika oil spills

On 16 March 1978, the oil tanker the Amoco Cadiz, transporting 223,000 tons of crude oil and 4,000 tons of bunker fuel oil, suffered a failure of her steering mechanism and ran aground on Portsall Rocks, on the Breton coast. The entire cargo spilled out as the breakers split the vessel in two, progressively polluting 360 km of French shoreline from Brest to Saint Brieuc. This was the largest oil spill caused by a tanker grounding ever recorded in the world. The consequences of this accident were significant, and it caused the French Government to revise its oil response plan (the Polmar Plan), to acquire equipment stocks (Polmar stockpiles), to impose traffic lanes in the Channel and to create Cedre. On 12 December 1999, the tanker Erika broke up and sank off the coast of Brittany (France) leading to the spill of 20,000 tons of a heavy fuel oil. 400 km of the French Atlantic coastline were polluted. Because of the characteristics of the oil (a very heavy fuel oil with a high content of light cracking oil) and the severe weather conditions (a centennial storm with spring tides) when the oil came on shore, the Erika spill was one of the most severe accidental releases of oil along the French coastlines. All types of habitat were concerned, and pollution reached the supratidal zone affecting terrestrial vegetation and lichens. In 2019, respectively 41 years and 20 years after these major oil spills affecting the French shoreline, a sampling round was conducted at two sites recorded to present some residual traces of oil. Samples of weathered oil were collected, extracted with methylene chloride and then purified through an alumina-silica microcolumn. SARA fractionation and GC-MS analyses were performed in order to assess respectively the total degradation of the weathered oil (amount of saturates, aromatics and polar fraction) and the specific degradation of nalkanes from n-C9 to n-C40, biomarkers (such as terpanes, hopanes and steranes) and PAHs (parents and alkylated derivatives).

Impact of the Hydrophobicity of the Particles on the Formation and Behavior of Oil Particle Aggregates (OPA)

ABSTRACT Oil droplets in marine environment interact with particles to form oil particle aggregates (OPA). As it was argued that the hydrophobicity of particles impacts the formation of OPA and subsequently the entrapment of oil and the transport of OPA, this study altered the hydrophobicity of kaolinite through the addition of chitosan and the contact angle was increased from 28.8° to 57.3°. Modified kaolinite was mixed with 500 mg/L crude oil in 200 rpm for 3 hours, then bottom layer was separated and extracted. Observations of the settled OPA microscale structure and calculations of oil trapping efficiency (OTE) were accomplished. Results indicated that with higher hydrophobicity of kaolinite, oil droplets were maintained in larger sizes in OPAs. This could increase the buoyancy of formed OPAs, thus decrease the amount of settled OPAs.

Current and Proposed Efforts to Resolve HSPD-5 and NCP Authorities (NIC and PFO)

ABSTRACT During the evening of 20 April, 2010 U.S. Coast Guard District Eight Command Center watch standers received a report of an explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon (DWH), an oil rig working on the Macondo oil well approximately 42 miles Southeast of Venice, LA (OSC Report, 2011). The explosion on board the DWH and resulting fires eventually destroyed the oil rig and caused it to sink into the Gulf of Mexico. Eleven crewmembers lost their lives in the tragic events that unfolded that night, and one of the nation's largest environmental disasters would soon follow. Estimates of the oil discharged from the Macondo oil well were between 12,000 and 25,000 barrels per day, and the response involved approximately 47,000 oil spill response personnel, 6,870 vessels, approximately 4.12 million feet of boom, and 17,500 National Guard personnel, five states (OSC Report, 2011). The massive oil spill lasted 87 days and estimates suggest that more than 200 million gallons of oil was discharged into the Gulf of Mexico, which stands as the largest oil spill event in U.S. history. From these massive response operations came important lessons learned for SONS event planning, preparedness, and response, as it became apparent during DWH response operations that oil spill response governance and doctrine was not well understood across the whole-of-government. This issue was well documented in the National Incident Commander's report and several recommendations were identified to address this issue. This paper will explore the steps taken within the U.S. Coast Guard's (USCG) SONS Exercise and Training Program to promote a better understanding of oil spill response governance and doctrine among Cabinet-level senior leadership and the interagency representatives that will ultimately be involved when the next SONS event happens.

State-of-the Science of Dispersants and Dispersed Oil in Arctic Waters

ABSTRACT Chemical dispersants were employed on an unprecedented scale during the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and could be a response option should a large spill occur in Arctic waters. The use of dispersants in response to the DWH spill raised concerns regarding the need for chemical dispersants, the fate of the oil and dispersants, and their potential impacts on human health and the environment. Concerns remain that would be more evident in the Arctic, where the remoteness and harsh environmental conditions would make a response to any oil spill very difficult. An outcome of a 2013 Arctic oil spill exercise for senior federal agency leadership identified the need for an evaluation of the state-of-the-science of dispersants and dispersed oil (DDO), and a clear delineation of the associated uncertainties that remain, particularly as they apply to Arctic waters. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in partnership with the Coastal Response Research Center (CRRC), embarked on a project to seek expert review and evaluation of the state-of-the-science and the uncertainties involving DDO. The objectives of the project were to: identify the primary research/reference documents on DDO, determine what is known about the state-of-the-science regarding DDO, and determine what uncertainties, knowledge gaps or inconsistencies remain 689559 regarding DDO science. The project focused on five areas and how they might be affected by Arctic conditions: dispersant efficacy and effectiveness, physical transport and chemical behavior, degradation and fate, eco-toxicity and sub-lethal impacts, and public health and food safety. The Louisiana University Marine Consortium (LUMCON) dispersants database was used as a source of relevant literature generated prior to June 2008. The CRRC created a database that compiled relevant research thereafter. The six to ten experts on each of the panel were from academia, industry, NGOs, governmental agencies and consulting. Despite the fact that their scientific perspectives were diverse, the panelists were able to generate hundreds of statements of knowns and uncertainties about which all of the members agreed. This required detailed discussion of 1000s scientific papers. While the cutoff date for literature considered was December 31, 2015, the vast majority of the findings are still relevant and most of the uncertainties remain. As the ice in the Arctic diminishes and maritime development and activity increase, these five documents can inform discussions of the potential use of dispersants as a spill response option in both ice-free and ice infested Arctic waters.

Habitat and Resource Equivalency Analysis: 30 Years of Lessons Learned and a Look to the Future

ABSTRACT Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) is a process used to determine the amount of compensation due to the public for natural resource injuries arising from oil spills. Two models, Resource Equivalency Analysis (REA) and Habitat Equivalency Analysis (HEA), are used in essentially all OPA NRDAs to compute compensatory restoration requirements. REA is applied when members of wildlife populations are injured: usually mortality or a loss of reproduction among a species of bird, turtle, marine mammal, or fish. HEA is used when habitats are injured: usually oiling of beaches, wetlands, or sediments. The models are often implemented in a cooperative setting with input from both the Responsible Party and the Trustees. In this setting the models provide a structure for organizing negotiations and identifying the types of agreements that need to be reached before restoration can be identified and “right sized.” The models also have a technical basis in economic theory that is fully justified, but only in particular, limited circumstances. This technical basis is the only means of assuring the Trustees, RPs, and stakeholders that the NRDA process has identified an appropriate level of compensation. When the circumstances of a spill do not approximate those in which HEA and REA are defensible, creative solutions are needed to adjust the models to the circumstances of the case if they are to provide a convincing basis for scaling restoration and reaching resolution. This paper identifies the circumstances under which REA and HEA are fully defensible as well as 35 years of evolving adjustments designed to make them “work” when applied to real-world cases they do not quite fit. We also look to the future and how climate change may alter restoration scaling.

The Bow Jubail Oiled Wildlife Incident: Success Factors of an International Tiered Response on the Basis of Standards of Good Practice

In June 2018, about 218 metric tons of heavy fuel oil gushed into the harbor of Rotterdam (NL) following the rupturing of the hull of the Bow Jubail at a jetty. Due to tidal activity, the oil from the unloaded chemical tanker quickly spread out over a 30+ km waterway where many hundreds of Mute swans were moulting at the time. A citizen's initiative quickly led to the capture of over 200 swans from the water and shores, and their transport to some bird rehab centers in the immediate neighborhood. For the authorities this massive impact that overwhelmed the available resources of the permanent centers was the trigger to activate the national oiled wildlife response plan. The activation of the national plan goes hand in hand with the decision to build a large temporary facility that needs to be fully operational within 48 hours to receive the impacted live animals for treatment. The building of the such a facility, but also the staffing that is needed to care for 600 impacted swans is a challenging task and needs fast decision taking by experts who can oversee the particular needs of swans, and are able to inform logistics about equipment and materials needed. In parallel, a large number of experts must be mobilized who can lead and process the impacted animals once the temporary facility is ready for operations. For some part these resources were available in the Netherlands, but many more experts needed to be mobilized from abroad. The mobilization procedures of both EUROWA network and the GOWRS network were activated, leading to a large number of experts who indicated their availability. Meanwhile, the authorities took decisions on the authorization of the international mobilization, and when green lighted, the experts were asked to come over. This paper describes the decision making in the early days, and the way that arriving experts were deployed in the facility. The use of international guidelines for this process and the ease by which international experts could work together thanks to many years of investments into local and international preparedness will be highlighted. The rehabilitation of 522 mute swans took a full month (30 days), after which 97.5% of the animals had been successfully released.

Subsea Mechanical Dispersion (SSMD) a Possible New Option for the Oil Spill Response Toolbox?

The size distribution of oil droplets formed in subsea oil and gas blowouts is known to have a strong impact on their subsequent fate in the environment. Small droplets have low rising velocities, are more influenced by oceanographic turbulence and have larger potential for natural biodegradation. Subsea Dispersant Injection (SSDI) is an established method for achieving this goal, lowering the interfacial tension between the oil and water and significantly reducing oil droplet size. However, despite its many advantages, the use of SSDI could be limited both by logistical constraints and legislative restrictions. Adding to the toolkit a method to achieve subsea dispersion, without the use of chemicals, would therefore enhance oil spill response capability. This option is called Subsea Mechanical Dispersion (SSMD). An extensive feasibility study on SSMD has been performed and the main findings are reported in this paper. The work was initiated by BP in 2015 and later followed up by a consortium of Equinor, Total Norge, Aker BP and Lundin. The first phase explored multiple principles of generating subsea dispersions (ultrasonic, mechanical shear forces and water jetting) through both laboratory experiments and modelling. These studies clearly indicate that SSMD has an operational potential to significantly reduce oil droplet sizes from a subsea release and influence the fate and behaviour of the released oil volume. The recent work reported in this paper on operationalisation, upscaling and large-scale testing of subsea water jetting. This work is performed by SINTEF in close cooperation with Exponent (computational fluid dynamics and shear stress modelling) and Oceaneering (operationalisation and full-scale prototyping).

Using Peer-to-Peer Knowledge Transfer to Build Marine Oil Spill Preparedness Capacity and Foster Resilience Among Indigenous Communities

ABSTRACT Indigenous communities often bear disproportionate risks from marine oil spills because of their close connections to and reliance on marine ecosystems. The impacts of an oil spill on Indigenous people and communities can be far-reaching, even for incidents that might be considered “small” from the perspective of the response community. Building community capacity for oil spill preparedness and response is a critical component to creating resilience within Indigenous communities. While the fundamental elements of capacity are the same for Indigenous communities as for any other coastal community, the approach requires an understanding and respect for Traditional Knowledge, Indigenous governance structures, and existing stewardship networks. Oil spill preparedness and response traditionally follows a top-down approach within both government and industry, because marine oil spills are low frequency, high consequence, highly complex incidents where multiple organizations and jurisdictions must work together. While this reality applies regardless of whether an oil spill impacts Indigenous communities, a top-down approach can be experienced as a threat to self-governance and compromise the effectiveness of capacity-building efforts. There is a significant body of research in support of the concept that resilience to emergencies and disasters among Indigenous people must build upon existing social, cultural, and familial structures in order to be effective. This requires a fundamentally different approach that builds from the ground up with the goal of ultimately meshing with the existing preparedness and response framework. Peer-to-peer learning and knowledge transfer is an approach that has been used in support of a range of initiatives among Indigenous communities, such as human health initiatives. The same approach may provide a mechanism to empower Indigenous communities to enhance both capacity and resilience. This paper presents a case study from ongoing work to connect Indigenous communities from Canada's High Arctic and Pacific Coast in support of marine oil spill preparedness and response.