Section 3.18: Contingency Planning. TERMPOL Surveys and Studies

Transcription

1 TERMPOL Surveys and Studies ENBRIDGE NORTHERN GATEWAY PROJECT FINAL - REV. 0 Prepared for: Northern Gateway Pipelines Inc. January 20, 2010

2

3 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Introduction Vessel Plans for Tankers Vessel Plans for Escort Tugs Terminal Plans Response Area and Spill Response Capability Response Strategies Financial Responsibility for a Spill Response Response to Marine Spills Ship Owner Liability Compensation International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund The International Supplementary Fund Project Documents Study Training and Exercises Vessel Contingency Plan Integration of Northern Gateway Plans with Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) Procedures and Other Plans Study Ship-Oriented Contingency Planning Study Terminal-Oriented Contingency Planning Study Terminal-Ship Communications Planning Study Response and Compensation Planning Conclusion Appendix A Appendix B General Oil Spill Response Plan (GOSRP) Typical Table of Contents... A-1 Generic Example of Marine and Terminal Oil Spill Contingency or Response Plans Table of Contents... B-1 January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page i

4 Table of Contents Table of Contents (continued) Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Typical Table of Contents of a Ship-Oriented Contingency Plan (SOPEP)... C-1 Terminal Oil Pollution and Emergency Plan (OPEP) / Oil Pollution Prevention Plan (OPPP) - Draft Outline of Table of Contents... D-1 Technical Data Report: Oil Spill Response Planning for the Confined Channel Assessment Area (CCAA) - Draft Outline of Table of Contents... E-1 Technical Data Report: Oil Spill Response Planning for the Open Water outside the CCAA, within Canadian Jurisdiction - Draft Outline of Table of Contents... F-1 List of Tables Table 1-1 Typical Sequence of Initial Response Actions Table 3-1 Topics to be included in the Ship-Oriented Contingency Plan Table 4-1 Aspects of the Terminal-Oriented Contingency Plan of Interest to Transport Canada Table 5-1 Aspects of the Terminal Ship Communication Protocol Table 6-1 Summary of Preferred Treatment Tactics for Sand Beaches for Different Oil Types and for Surface and Subsurface Oiling Conditions List of Figures Figure 1-1 Figure 1-2 Figure 1-3 Relationship between Enbridge Corporate Plans and the Northern Gateway Project General Oil Spill Response Plan (GOSRP) Relationship between the Northern Gateway Project GOSRP and Other Project Plans Relationship between the Project Oil Spill Contingency Plans for Marine and Terminal operations Figure 2-1 Course of Action for ships in the Event of a Spill Page ii Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

5 Section 1: Introduction 1 Introduction Contingency plans are prepared to ensure that a response capability is in place to address abnormal events. Prevention of accidents and injuries is of primary importance to Northern Gateway, whose policy is to operate in a manner designed to prevent incidents and, if an incident were to occur, to implement measures to prevent escalation of the incident. The objective of this study is to provide the framework of the detailed contingency planning associated with the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project (the Project), in accordance with the TERMPOL Code, TP473E 2001, and Study In the TERMPOL code Sections , and , Transport Canada has identified abnormal events of interest that should be addressed within the vessel and terminal contingency plans. This study identifies how these abnormal events will be addressed within those plans. The prevention of a possible oil spill is one of the highest priorities for Northern Gateway. In the event of an oil spill, including third-party accidents Northern Gateway and the designated Response Organization will provide the first response capability. Northern Gateway and the designated Response Organization will prepare a complete set of contingency plans for the prevention of and response to an oil spill. These plans will cover all aspects of the Project and potentially affected areas, including the pipeline and the Kitimat Terminal. They will also cover project-related vessel traffic in Canadian waters. The cornerstone of the contingency planning process is the General Oil Spill Response Plan (GOSRP), which will be developed to describe measures that would be implemented prior to or following an oil spill on land, at the terminal or along the marine transportation routes. The preliminary outline of the intended GOSRP is presented in Appendix A. The GOSRP covers any oil spill with actual or potential consequences to Project personnel, the environment, property or the public at large. The GOSRP includes an outline of the organization, which would be established (in cooperation with government and other agencies) to manage the oil spill response. The emphasis throughout the GOSRP is on practical actions to enhance the effectiveness of the response and mitigation of effects. Key features of the intended GOSRP are that it: provides a vision statement for the Project regarding oil spill response concepts and strategies provides an umbrella document that covers all aspects of an oil spill response, including potentially affected areas on the land, in rivers, near coasts, in the CCAA and in open water (within Canadian jurisdiction) describes the relationship (framework) that ties all of the various Northern Gateway documents (plans and reports) into a single cohesive program. describes how the Northern Gateway's plans relate to external documents, such as the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) Pacific Response Plan, BC Ministry of Environment s Marine Oil Spill Response Plan, potential Geographic Response Plans (GRPs), and the Joint Contingency Plan (JCP) Canada-US- Dixon Entrance (JCP-CANUSDIX) Annex provides information and data to the Spill Management Team for the decision process and is a management tool. January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 1-1

6 Section 1: Introduction The GOSRP and the contingency plans for the Project will be part of the Enbridge corporate Emergency Response Plan (ERP) (Figure 1-1). The overall framework for the oil spill contingency plans within the GOSRP is shown in Figure 2-1. Specific elements of the Marine Area Oil Spill Response Plans (OSRPs) and the Kitimat Terminal Area OSRPs are identified in Figure 3-1. Emergency response at the corporate level of Enbridge is handled within the Health and Safety Management System through the Emergency Response Plan (ERP). The ERP is independent, though related to, the Crisis Management Plan (CMP) (Figure 1-1). Part 1 of the Corporate Operating and Maintenance Procedures contains all of the emergency response practices and procedures that are common throughout the company s operations, including: pre-emergency preparedness; the spill management system; the notification process; and containment, recovery and cleanup procedures. Part II provides region- and project-specific information for the Northern Gateway project related to oil spills and is titled the General Oil Spill Response Plan (GOSRP). Figure 1-1 Relationship between Enbridge Corporate Plans and the Northern Gateway Project General Oil Spill Response Plan (GOSRP) Figure 1-2 Relationship between the Northern Gateway Project GOSRP and Other Project Plans Page 1-2 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

7 Section 1: Introduction GOSRP CCG - Pacific Plan JCP - CANUSDIX BCMoE Marine OSRP BC GRPs RO Area Plan Marine Area Terminal Area Marine OSRP Vessel CP Tug SOPEP Terminal OSRP TDRs Vessel SOPEP OPPP OPEP TOM GOSRP General Oil Spill Response Plan SOPEP Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan CCG Canadian Coast Guard CP Contingency Plan BCMoE British Columbia Ministry of Environment TDR Technical Data Report GRP Geographic Response Plan OPPP Oil Pollution Prevention Plan OSRP Oil Spill Response Plan OPEP Oil Pollution Emergency Plan RO Response Organization JCP Joint Contingency Plan CANUSDIX Canada-US-Dixon Entrance TOM Terminal Operations Manual OPEP Figure 1-3 Oil Pollution Emergency Plan Relationship between the Project Oil Spill Contingency Plans for Marine and Terminal operations As a key element of the overall contingency and response planning process, Northern Gateway intends to develop a Marine OSRP and a Kitimat Terminal OSRP that will contain all required sub-plans and supporting technical reports. The Marine OSRP is similar in concept to the GOSRP but will be more technical. The Marine OSRP will be a required component of all vessel contingency plans and the SOPEPs required for each tanker and for Project support tugs greater than 300 gross tonnes. January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 1-3

8 Section 1: Introduction The Terminal OSRP will include the Terminal / Trans-shipment Site Operations Manual (TOM), the Oil Pollution Prevention Plan (OPPP) and the Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (OPEP). Other terminal plans, (but not oil spill related) would be cross referenced in the Terminal OSRP. These plans would address topics such as pipeline operational emergencies, fire, explosion, forest fire, earthquake, power failure, security incidents, and other non-spill emergencies. Another element of the overall planning process is the response plan owned by the Response Organization (RO), which will be engaged directly and individually by each of the visiting tankers and by the Kitimat Terminal management team (contracted services to comply with their large spill requirements under Canada Shipping Act, 2001). The RO geographic response plan for this area will complement and be used by the Marine OSRP (Figure 1-3). The Marine OSRP demonstrates the intent of the Project to provide leadership in the development of response concepts and strategies in the CCAA and in open water (within Canadian jurisdiction) in which project-related shipping will occur. This proactive role involves a requirement that the RO will participate in the development of, and comply with the Marine OSRP. The underlying concept of contingency planning is to ensure that all required plans and supporting strategy or technical documents (such as the Technical Data Reports) are part of a coordinated and integrated preparedness and response process. In particular, Figure 1-3 demonstrates how the various key internal and external plans relate to each other under the General Oil Spill Response Plan (GOSRP). A generic preliminary outline of the intended Marine Area and Terminal Area OSRPs is presented in Appendix B. Response to an oil spill in the marine environment involves the coordination of independent agencies and groups with well defined roles and responsibilities that are described in the various OSRPs. The GOSRP integrates these various documents to provide the framework for a successful cooperative and coordinated response strategy. Table 1 lists some, but not all, of the key actions that might take place following a spill into marine waters. Some of the actions may be a single, one-off event, such as a notification, whereas other activities initiate a series of actions, some of which are concurrent and depend on other ongoing activities. Table 1-1 Typical Sequence of Initial Response Actions 1. On-site supervisor (terminal spill) or vessel captain (on water) assumes role of the initial On- Scene Commander (OSC). 2. OSC notifies appropriate federal CCG, Provincial, Northern Gateway and RO contacts. 3. OSC initiates the first response actions prescribed in the OSRP. 4. OSC scales the problem and determines the most probable Tier response level (based on a Company philosophy of over responding rather than and under responding). Reports this assessment to ENPG contact(s). TIER 1 RESPONSE LEVEL FIRST RESPONSE 5. On-site resources deployed to contain, recover and cleanup under the direction of the OSC and staff. 6. OSC informs the CCG Federal Monitoring Officer (FMO) of actions taken and intended actions. Page 1-4 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

9 Section 1: Introduction 7. OSC establishes a first response Command Post (CP) location. 8. Northern Gateway regional management mobilizes the Spill Management Team (SMT) to the level (i.e., depth of personnel) necessary to take over command and management of the response. 9. SMT conducts assessment. TIER 2 and TIER 3 RESPONSE LEVEL FIRST 24 HOURS 10. SMT recommends to the OSC which resources are appropriate to cascade to the response area. 11. SMT recommends response objectives, strategies, and priorities to the OSC. 12. OSC informs CCG FMO of intended actions. 13. If appropriate, initial response OSC hands over to replacement OSC: CCG and Province are notified of that handover. 14. SMT establishes a Finance Section to provide funds, receive claims and document all costs and claims. 15. If necessary, SMT establishes a new CP. 16. Company participates in a Joint Information Center with the Province and issues press release(s) on the incident and the response. One of the keys to the successful implementation of a spill response is to ensure that actions are agreed to and coordinated between the parties involved. To a large degree the roles and responsibilities of the major players (i.e., BC Ministry of Environment, Regional Environmental Emergencies Team, and Canadian Coast Guard) are defined by regulations. In the event of a spill from the marine terminal or pipeline into the marine environment Northern Gateway would initiate, manage and implement the response operation. The Responsible Party (RP) for a spill from a vessel in transit to or from the Northern Gateway marine terminal or from an escort or berthing tug is the vessel owner. The first response would be implemented by the vessel captain as the initial On-Scene Commander (OSC). The vessel captain would, at some point in time as identified in the Marine OSRP, hand over to the Northern Gateway OSC or to an OSC designated by Northern Gateway even if Northern Gateway is not the RP. The Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) is the lead federal agency for all ship-source oil spills or pollution incidents in waters under Canadian jurisdiction. When the RP has been identified and is willing and able to respond, the CCG will advise the RP of its responsibilities and, once satisfied with the RP s intentions and plans, will assume the role of Federal Monitoring Officer (FMO) on behalf of the Crown. The BC Ministry of Environment (BCMoE) monitors on behalf of the Province, participates in the response and coordinates local involvement. Environment Canada (EC) provides scientific and technical support and coordinates environmental input to the response as chair of the Regional Environmental Emergencies Team (REET). Contingency plans provide the framework for the response organization and the decision process. Technical Data Reports (TDRs) have been prepared for the Project to provide data and information on resources at risk in the project area, as well as environmental and operating conditions, and are the basis for development of mitigation strategies to minimize the extent of the oiled area and to protect known vulnerable resources at risk. These mitigation strategies become an integral component of the OSRP. January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 1-5

10 Section 1: Introduction The intent is that the oil spill response capability for the Project will be designed to significantly exceed CSA requirements for a Primary Area of Response (PAR) as outlined in Termpol 3.15 Section 7, thereby ensuring a local Tier 1 through 3 capabilities for the Terminal. The current designed response capability is based on the requirement that the Marine OSRP will be a component of all tanker contingency plans and the SOPEPs required for each of the Project support tugs of 300 gross tonnes or more (Figure 1-3). 1.1 Vessel Plans for Tankers All ships carrying oil in bulk are required by MARPOL to have a contingency plan. This plan is often referred to as to as a Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP). The SOPEP describes procedures to be followed in the event of an oil spill. A SOPEP is based on the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Guidelines for the Development of Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plans. Each inbound vessel would be required to have a contingency plan that would include the Marine OSRP. This vessel contingency plan (CP) would include the SOPEP as well as pre-planned response procedures for other emergencies 1. Given that marine shipping is not expected to be operational until at least 2015, a detailed Marine OSRP has not yet been prepared. A preliminary outline table of contents for the plan is presented in Appendix B. Some of the topics to be included in this ship contingency plan are discussed in Section 3. Northern Gateway will ensure that adequate material is provided to each of the tanker operating companies to support their contingency planning. The Marine OSRP will incorporate, either in content or through reference, much of the supporting field work and studies that have already been conducted, that are in progress or that are planned as part of the preparation of numerous Technical Data Reports (see Section 6). The OSRP would be source of relevant Canadian and United States information to supplement their existing contingency plans and SOPEP (For example shoreline sensitivities). Visiting tanker operators will also be provided with emergency planning information that addresses terminal-related incidents that could occur when a tanker is berthed at the Kitimat Terminal. The Northern Gateway information will be made available to the tanker operating companies well in advance of their first visit and at an orientation meeting upon arrival at the Kitimat Terminal before any cargo loading or discharge. 1.2 Vessel Plans for Escort Tugs In parallel with the requirements for vessel CPs, the Project will require that each tethered, escort or harbour support tug of 300 gross tonnes or greater have a SOPEP. The support tugs will not be required to have their own Marine OSRP because all response operations in which they might be involved would be covered under the umbrella of either the vessel OSRP or the RO OSRP, both of which will be required to contain the Marine OSRP. The preliminary outline of the intended SOPEP is presented in Appendix C. 1 Ships above 150 gross tonnes certified to carry noxious liquid substances in bulk are required by the IMO to carry an additional emergency plan, called the Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plan for noxious liquid substances. This plan can be combined with the SOPEP to form the Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plan (SMPEP). Page 1-6 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

11 Section 1: Introduction 1.3 Terminal Plans Comprehensive emergency procedures manual for the Kitimat Terminal, including the Terminal OSRP (Figure 1-3) will be completed and submitted to Transport Canada and the National Energy Board (NEB) at least six months before the Kitimat Terminal begins handling bulk oil. The Terminal OSRP will include an Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (OPEP) and an Oil Pollution Prevention Plan (OPPP). These plans will be directly linked to the RO OSRP, the tanker CPs and the support tug SOPEPs under the Marine OSRP. The OPEP will describe emergency response actions available to mitigate the effects of an oil spill from the Kitimat Terminal on the marine environment. The OPPP will describe measures that will prevent pollution during tanker transfers. These plans must be finalized for formal submission in the year before oil handling begins. The OPEP will be used by the terminal management and spill response staff. The OPPP will include operational procedures that must be practiced by both terminal and tanker personnel. For example, annual pressure testing of the terminal s tanker loading arms will likely be required under new OPPP rules (expected in 2010 from Transport Canada). At this stage in the planning process, Northern Gateway is considering the option to combine the OPEP and OPPP into one volume. A preliminary outline for the intended Terminal OSRP (OPEP and OPPP) is provided in Appendix D. Northern Gateway will comply with applicable legislation, regulations and standards. Appendix D and TERMPOL Study 3.19 demonstrate Northern Gateway s understanding of the Canada Shipping Act, and associated Response Organizations and Oil Handling Facilities Regulations (SOR ). 1.4 Response Area and Spill Response Capability The OPEP will cover the geographic area that could be affected by a spill from the Kitimat Terminal. The RO engaged by the Kitimat Terminal (to meet its 10,000-tonne response obligation) is required to have a response plan that addresses the areas beyond the Kitimat Terminal, specifically in the CCAA and in open water (within Canadian jurisdiction) and which will include the Project s Marine OSRP. The RO s plan is submitted to Transport Canada every three years as part of its certification process or when there is significant change of circumstances. Northern Gateway is committed to oil spill response that exceeds the requirements of the CSA. Details of the plan, response times, and equipment are outlined in Termpol 3.15 Section 7. To improve response time to a tanker incident, Northern Gateway will develop additional response capabilities in addition to the RO capabilities. The present concept is to place these additional capabilities onboard the tanker escort tugs and, at selected shore-side locations along the marine transportation routes in the CCAA. These additional capabilities will be documented in an addendum to the Kitimat Terminal OSRP and in the Marine OSRP. January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 1-7

12 Section 1: Introduction Based on oil volume handled, the Kitimat Terminal will be a Designated Port under the CSA. When this change in status occurs, the government-certified RO created or selected by Northern Gateway will be required to meet resident equipment requirements (inside the Kitimat Terminal port boundary) as well as more stringent response time planning standards. The RO must describe how it is prepared to respond to the presence of project-related shipping, including the Kitimat Terminal and new tanker operations within the RO s declared geographic area of response. Northern Gateway will provide information to the RO in order that they may complete their response planning. 1.5 Response Strategies In recent years, area committees in the US, such as the Northwest Area Committee (NWAC), comprising government agencies (federal, state and local) and other stakeholders, have compiled lists of significant sensitivities to oil spills in each marine area and subsequently developed Geographic Response Plans (GRPs) that detail oil spill countermeasures appropriate for the locations identified. Similar to these initiatives, BC Environment has developed GRPs for the Georgia Strait area and has begun the process of developing a GRP for the Kitimat area. It is Northern Gateway s intention to support and participate in this process, which will involve the local community. The marine transportation routes in the CCAA to be used by project-related tankers are expected to become areas of interest for identifying sensitivities and developing GRP strategies to deal with those sensitivities. In July 2007, Transport Canada released its Places of Refuge Contingency Plan (PORCP) to comply with IMO Resolution A.949 (23) Guidelines for Places of Refuge for Ships in Need of Assistance. This new Canadian initiative will require information to be gathered on potential places of refuge (PPOR) in advance of any incident involving a ship requesting a place of refuge. PPORs will be developed for the marine transportation routes. The PORCP includes guidance for collecting such information. It is Northern Gateway s intention to support and participate in this process. The GRPs that will be developed for BC s marine areas will also be relevant to the PPOR and the PORCP process. Developing these support information materials will involve each level of government, local area committees and the spill response community. To support the eventual RO and government response planning activities along the project-related marine transportation routes, Northern Gateway will prepare a Marine OSRP based on information contained in two sets of background documents: one Technical Data Report (TDR) will cover the Confined Channel Assessment Area (CCAA) between Kitimat, Camaaño Sound and Browning Entrance and a second TDR will cover portions of the open water area outside the CCAA but within Canadian jurisdiction. For the CCAA, the following documents will be prepared: a description of the weather, sea state, tidal and ocean current environment to characterize the operating environment for ship and tanker emergency response and for oil spill response activities Page 1-8 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

13 Section 1: Introduction a description of the oil spill sensitivities to include: shoreline sensitivity maps other maps of resources that may be at risk in the event of a spill: man-made (e.g., marinas, log dumps, jetties wharfs), fisheries, wildlife, biological, heritage and cultural resources a report on the properties of the oils and condensate that will be carried by the project-related tankers and handled by the Kitimat Terminal mass balances and narratives describing the movement over time for hypothetical oil spill examples at a number of locations along the project-related marine transportation routes presentation of countermeasures that would be used during the initial response (first 24-hours to 36- hours) after each hypothetical release forecasted (item above) a general discussion of the oil spill response countermeasures available that should be considered by tanker operators and the RO in response to a spill. The document will also include a discussion of the logistics support needed to mount and sustain a response operation in these remote areas as well as the effects of shoreline response choices on the volume of waste materials generated Similar documents will be produced for the open water outside the CCAA but within Canadian jurisdiction, but at a more general level. These documents should assist the process of identifying sensitivities and developing response strategies that will appear in the BC GRPs described earlier. The GRPs will be included in the Marine OSRP and the RO geographic area response plan. It is assumed that federal and provincial government agencies will play a lead role in the development of GRPs and PPORs. 1.6 Financial Responsibility for a Spill Response The response to a marine oil spill would follow established regulations and procedures and costs would be reimbursed following established claims procedures. Under Canadian law and international convention, the RP for a spill from a vessel in transit to or from the marine terminal or from an escort or berthing tug is the vessel owner. The first response would be initiated, managed and implemented by the vessel captain who would notify and mobilize a certified RO under the direction of Northern Gateway as prescribed in the Project Marine OSRP. The first response unit will be an escort tug, which will be designed and classed for this purpose. The RP makes funds available, as necessary, for costs of the response and claims. For vessels, these are claimed through their insurance carrier, a Protection and Indemnity (P&I) Club which is part of a larger non-profit mutual insurance system for marine transportation activities, including oil spills. Spill response financing and compensation amounts are provided below in Sections and 1.7. Agencies, authorities or private companies that participate in the response may have to bear the initial cost of their involvement or make arrangements with the RP or its insurer to cover those costs. Costs associated with the response and damage or other claims are charged to the RP. These initial response costs can be supported, in some cases, by the Canadian Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund (SOPF) but later would be charged to the RP. January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 1-9

14 Section 1: Introduction Response to Marine Spills Response Organizations (RO s), certified by the federal government, respond to marine oil spills. RO s have plans, resources, training and equipment in place to effectively implement marine oil spill response operations. Oil handling facilities in Canada and marine vessels of prescribed class that transit Canadian waters must have agreements in place with certified RO s and an oil spill emergency plan. Oil handling facilities and marine vessels pay an annual fee to RO s to ensure a level of preparedness to respond to an oil spill in the event that one occurs Ship Owner Liability Liability for marine oil spills in Canada is based on Canada s adoption of international conventions, which have been implemented through federal legislation. Canada is a party to the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage ( CLC ). In Canada, the Marine Liability Act, S.C. 2001, c. 6 ( MLA ) meets the requirements set out in the CLC. Under the CLC and MLA, ship owners are strictly liable for damage from oil spills. The MLA and CLC set limits on the liability of a ship owner, depending on the gross tonnage of the ship. Liability and compensation for marine oil spills is stated in Special Drawing Rights (SDR). The value of the SDR in Canadian dollars changes each day. Ships greater than 140,000 tonnes are liable for up to 89.8 million SDR ($152.2 million Canadian on October 1, 2009) 2. To ensure the ship owner is able to cover its liability costs, the ship owner must establish a fund in the amount of its maximum liability. Ship owners are required to carry insurance, which is ordinarily provided by international P&I Clubs, who provide coverage to ship owners against third party liabilities relating to the use and operation of ships. 1.7 Compensation In addition to ship owner liability, Canada has a tiered system of compensation for damage from oil spills not covered by a ship owner or its insurer. This system includes international funds available through Canada s participation in various international conventions and a national fund set up under the MLA International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund Under the first tier, compensation for oil spills is provided under the International Convention on the Establishment of the International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage (1971) as amended by the 1976 and 1992 protocols ( IOPC ). The fund established under this convention ( IOPC Fund ) provides compensation for pollution damage from oil spills in the following situations: where the damage exceeds the limit of the ship owner s liability under the CLC (in Canada the MLA) where the ship owner is exempt from liability under the CLC (MLA) because the damage was caused by one of the events listed in Section where the ship owner is financially incapable of meeting his obligations in full under the applicable CLC, and the insurance is insufficient to pay valid compensation claims 2 On October 1, 2009 one SDR was equivalent to $ Canadian. Page 1-10 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

15 Section 1: Introduction The IOPC provides coverage such that the maximum compensation from the IOPC fund and the ship owner or its insurer is 203 million SDR ($345 million Canadian) Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund The second tier in the system is the national fund, which in Canada is the Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund ( SOPF ), established under the MLA. The maximum liability of the SOPF for one incident is $100 million, adjusted annually ($154.4 million during the fiscal year commencing April 1, 2009). The total compensation available from the SOPF, IOPC Fund and the ship owner as of October 1, 2009 was $499.3 million. The SOPF may be considered a fund of last resort because when all reasonable steps have been taken to recover payment of compensation from the owner of the ship and the IOPC and have been unsuccessful then compensation will be paid from the SOPF. It is also a fund of first resort because a person, other than a RO, may make a claim directly to the SOPF. If the SOPF pays the claim, the SOPF may then attempt to recover funds from the IOPC or the ship owner The International Supplementary Fund Canada recently amended the MLA to give effect to a third tier of compensation, the International Oil Pollution Compensation Supplementary Fund ( 2003 Supplementary Fund ). The amendments to the MLA will come into effect as soon as Canada ratifies the Supplementary Fund Convention. The 2003 Supplementary Fund makes additional compensation available so that the total amount payable for any one incident for pollution damage in Canada will be 750 million SDR ($1,274 million Canadian on October 1, 2009) including the amount payable from the ship owner or insurer and under the IOPC and SOPF. The Supplementary Fund is administered the same way as the IOPC Fund. 1.8 Project Documents The marine environmental protection program developed by Northern Gateway to anticipate, prevent, mitigate and manage oil spills will be used to develop the Marine OSRP (Appendix B) and will include, but not be limited to, the following documents: NORTHERN GATEWAY DOCUMENTS Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (OPEP) TDR and Oil Pollution Prevention Plan (OPPP) TDR for the Kitimat Terminal (combined document) (Appendix D) Oil Spill Response Planning for the Confined Channel Assessment Area TDR (Appendix E) Oil Spill Response Planning for Open Water TDR (Appendix F) Operations Manual for Oil Spill Response Equipment on Tanker Escort Vessels (and equipment at other than the Kitimat Terminal). Such a manual would be a supplement or addendum to the OPEP. This manual will be needed for training escort tug crews prior to commencing tanker escort operations. January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 1-11

16 Section 1: Introduction OIL SPILL RESPONSE ORGANIZATION (RO) DOCUMENTS RO response plan (for all BC coastal waters) RO geographic area response plan TANKER OPERATING COMPANIES DOCUMENTS Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP), which will be held by those companies operating tankers that will visit the Kitimat Terminal SUPPORT TUG OPERATING COMPANY DOCUMENTS Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP), which will be held by those companies operating escort tugs and berthing tugs for the Kitimat Terminal Page 1-12 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

17 Section 2: Study Study TERMPOL notes the importance of (i) regular exercising, (ii) plan outlines for ships in transit and alongside the terminal, and (iii) integration with CCG procedures. Each of these topics is addressed in this section. 2.1 Training and Exercises The effectiveness and success of any contingency plan depends to a large degree on regular exercising by personnel to better understand roles and responsibilities and the process of integration both by the Northern Gateway spill management team and with responsible agencies and stakeholders. Each oil spill response plan will list training and exercise requirements, including: personnel requiring training minimum training levels training and exercise frequencies requirements for management and operational staff integrated training and exercises with CCG, BC, ROs, and community representatives tabletop and deployment exercises 2.2 Vessel Contingency Plan To satisfy one of the requirements of study a preliminary outline of a ship-oriented contingency plan is presented (Appendix C). In general, the ship-oriented contingency plan will be structured in the following format (per International Maritime Organization [IMO] Guidelines for SOPEP). Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Introduction Preamble Reporting Requirements Shipboard Response Procedures For Tanker Incidents away from a Terminal For Tankers at Berth at a Terminal Spill Response Guidance Vessel Damage, Stability and Stress Assessments Vessel Lightering Procedures Damaged Vessel Towing National and Local coordination January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 2-1

18 Section 2: Study Section 6 Section 7 Mandatory Appendices Non-Mandatory Appendices To further expand on the above preliminary outline, Figure 1-4 outlines the course of action that shipboard personnel should follow in responding to an oil pollution emergency, based on the Guidelines published by the IMO (2002). In order to ensure that best practices are followed and that the initial actions are consistent with first response objectives and strategies, Northern Gateway will require that vessels include the Marine OSRP in the vessel contingency plan (Figure 1-3). Page 2-2 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

19 Section 2: Study SHIP ACTIONS IN THE EVENT OF A DISCHARGE OF OIL (probable or actual) ASSESSMENT OF THE NATURE OF THE INCIDENT ACTIONS REQUESTED Alert crew members Identify and monitor spill source Personnel protection Spill assessment Vapour monitoring Evacuation REPORTING By master and/or designated crew member When to report All probable and actual spills How to report By quickest means to coastal radio station or designated ship movement reporting station or rescue co-ordination centre (at sea) By quickest available means to local authorities Whom to contact Nearest coastal State Harbour and terminal operators (in port) Shipowner s manager, P&I insurer / correspondent Head charterer, cargo owner Refer to contact lists What to report Initial report (res. A.851(20)) Follow-up reports Characteristics of oil spilled Cargo / Ballast / Bunker dispositions Weather and sea conditions Slick movement Assistance required Salvage Lightening capacity mechanical equipment External response team Chemical dispersant / degreasant ACTION TO CONTROL DISCHARGE Measures to minimize the escape of oil and threat to the marine environment Navigational measures Alter course / position and/or speed Change of list and/or trim Anchoring Setting aground Initiate towage Assess safe haven requirements Weather / Tide / Swell forecasting Slick monitoring Record of events and communications taken Seamanship measures Safety assessment and precaution Advice on priority countermeasures / preventive measures Damage stability and stress considerations Ballasting / Deballasting Internal cargo transfer operations Emergency ship-to-ship transfers of cargo and/or bunker Set up shipboard response for: Leak sealing Firefighting Handling of shipboard response equipment (if available) etc. STEPS TO INITIATE EXTERNAL RESPONSE Refer to coastal port State listings for local assistance Refer to ship interest contact list External clean-up resources required Continued monitoring of activities Figure 2-1 Course of Action for ships in the Event of a Spill January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 2-3

20 Section 2: Study Integration of Northern Gateway Plans with Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) Procedures and Other Plans The plans developed by Northern Gateway are an integral part of the overall spill contingency and response planning process. These form an integrated internal process and are linked directly with Coast Guard and Marine Safety Emergency Operations Procedures and with other regional plans, such as the BC Ministry of Environment Marine Oil Spill Response Plan, the JCP and the CANUSDIX (Canada-US Dixon Entrance) Annex, as well as with the RO s geographic area response plan (Figure 1-3). This integration is an essential component of spill management and is addressed in the GOSRP. The roles and responsibilities of the Corporate Crisis Management Team and the Project Spill Management Team will be clearly defined in the GOSRP in relation to both the federal and provincial response. Specific details regarding notification, reporting and other critical communications actions are a required part of the individual vessel SOPEPs and the Terminal OPPP and OPEP. Page 2-4 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

21 Section 3: Study Ship-Oriented Contingency Planning 3 Study Ship-Oriented Contingency Planning Transport Canada has identified several topics to include within the ship-oriented contingency plans. Table 3-1 is designed to respond to TERMPOL study , by addressing those topics that should be dealt with in the ship-oriented contingency plan for a vessel en route to, from, or at the terminal, which in turn is a part of the Marine OSRP (Figure 1-3). These topics form only a small component of a complete contingency plan and a comprehensive preliminary outline of the intended ship-oriented plan for a tanker vessel carrying oil or condensate related to the Project is provided in Appendix C. Separate SOPEP outlines will be prepared for the escort tugs as well as the tankers. Table 3-1 Topics to be included in the Ship-Oriented Contingency Plan TERMPOL Topic of Interest to Transport Canada Incidents involving the release of cargoes Fire and explosions Operations monitoring systems Terminal ship communications Inspection, testing and preventative maintenance procedures Cargo handling precautions applicable to the ship Comments Sections on such incidents will be included for the tanker in transit as well as for the tanker at berth Sections on such incidents will be included for the tanker in transit as well as for the tanker at berth Terminal Regulations will address terminal and tanker systems for monitoring oil transfer operations. If either monitoring system fails the discharge / loading would be stopped in a coordinated manner with clear communications by radio between terminal control room and the tanker s oil transfer supervisor Communications protocol and discussion of radio equipment will be included as an appendix to the Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plans (SOPEP) Will be included in the Terminal Regulations. Any maintenance work will require pre-authorization from the Terminal Manager. No maintenance will be allowed that will prevent a tanker from leaving the berth. For emergency situations, these precautions will be included in the detailed emergency response checklists under each applicable casualty situation January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 3-1

22 Section 3: Study Ship-Oriented Contingency Planning TERMPOL Topic of Interest to Transport Canada Neutralizing electrical hazards Detection and alarm systems at the ship s berth Emergency responses to incidents involving the uncontrolled release of cargo(es) at or near the ship s berth or transhipment site during cargo transfer operations Countermeasures which ameliorate, contain or neutralize the harmful effects of cargo released into the marine environment Outline of personnel emergency equipment proposed for berth area and the evacuation procedure for personnel Comments For a tanker-in-transit incident, this topic will be included in the emergency response checklists as part of eliminating ignition sources after a release incident occurs For a tanker at berth, procedures for electrical isolation or dissipation of static electricity will be addressed in the Terminal Regulations as part of tanker berthing procedure and preparations prior to cargo loading or discharge Dealing with difference in electrical potential for a tanker berthed at the terminal is a prevention measure to eliminate ignition sources that may cause fire or explosion Inert gas systems will be checked and ships will be required to conform to oil tank inerting regulations to ensure that tank gases are non-explosive. The tanker s contingency plan will have an emergency response section to respond to a failure of the discharge / loading system Such an event would be part of the terminal s discharge / loading procedure Ship spills have been included in the SOPEP emergency situations when the tanker is at berth SOPEP response checklists will include access to terminal s spill response resources Cargo loading operations at the terminal will be closed loading Ships loading at the berth will be pre-boomed, and the terminal will have additional containment and recovery capabilities on site. The Response Organization (RO) certified by Transport Canada will also have a manned depot inside the Port of Kitimat at or near the Kitimat Terminal The basic assumption is that oil containment and recovery with booms and skimmers and shoreline treatment are the main countermeasures available to the tanker from the RO Dispersants and in-situ burning requires evaluation and dialogue with regulatory agencies before special permits will be issued Kitimat Terminal will be closed loading pre-boom oil loading operations and will have additional containment capability. Condensate will not be pre-boomed due to fire and explosion risk from inherently high volatility of the condensate The personnel emergency equipment on the berth will be described in the OPEP (Appendix D) as well as the Terminal Regulations document The evacuation procedures will also be in Appendix A of the SOPEP and in the Terminal Regulations Page 3-2 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010

23 Section 3: Study Ship-Oriented Contingency Planning TERMPOL Topic of Interest to Transport Canada Emergency procedures which would require the vacating of the terminal berth and the disposition of the vessel Security at the ship s berth Comments Will be included in the tanker at berth emergency situations. These are included in the Terminal Regulations that govern loading and discharge operations The International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code) will apply In transit and at anchor the tanker operator will be responsible for its own security arrangements but will have escort tug support during transits The terminal site will be fenced and gated with 24-hour security personnel on site The berths will each have an operations room manned during oil transfer operations There will be radio contact between the ship, the berth operators and the Terminal Control Room operator. Both the berth and the Control Room will be able to notify onsite security of a security breach January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 3-3

24

25 Section 4: Study Terminal-Oriented Contingency Planning 4 Study Terminal-Oriented Contingency Planning Transport Canada has identified several topics of interest within the terminal-oriented contingency plan. Table 4-1 is provided to respond to TERMPOL study by addressing the listed items of interest to Transport Canada within the terminal-oriented contingency plan. These topics form only a relatively small component of a complete contingency plan. The Terminal OSRP (Figure 1-3) and a comprehensive preliminary outline of the intended terminal-oriented plan for oil cargos are provided as Appendix D. This outline will be modified to take into account condensate cargos at the terminal in addition to the oil cargos. Table 4-1 Aspects of the Terminal-Oriented Contingency Plan of Interest to Transport Canada TERMPOL Topic of Interest to Transport Canada Fire in the engine room, compressor, deck stores or ship s accommodation spaces Releases resulting in structural damage and/or personnel injuries Equipment malfunctions Comments The Terminal Regulations may require the tanker to depart the berth and proceed to anchorage normally with support tug assistance. Depending on the situational risk factors and the level of risk, the tanker may be directed to an anchorage at the head of Kitimat Arm or to an alternate location. Personnel injuries would be the highest priority for response by trained tanker and terminal emergency response personnel once a safety assessment is conducted considering the risks to response personnel. Equipment malfunctions may or may not contribute to an emergency situation Immediate notification of Terminal Control Room and berth operator by tanker Master in clear language will be required under the Terminal Regulations. Conversely, the terminal berth operator or Control Room will notify the tanker Master immediately if any equipment malfunction using clear concise language Discharge / loading operations will be stopped until the problem is assessed A response that prevents an incident is best. The response would be situation specific and would require considering the risks of taking any particular action January 20, 2010 Final - Rev. 0 Page 4-1

26 Section 4: Study Terminal-Oriented Contingency Planning TERMPOL Topic of Interest to Transport Canada Rapidly deteriorating weather conditions and possible evacuation of the berth Grounding or collision at or near the berth Fires on dockside, pipelines in the immediate vicinity of the berth, and the tank farm and sabotage Comments During the detailed design stage, Northern Gateway will develop weather limitation criteria for cargo transfer, such as the following: loading or discharge operations cease if there is an electrical storm nearby loading or discharge operations cease if sustained wind exceed defined limits Loading arms will be disconnected in the event of sustained wind speeds above the loading arm design criteria limits. The Terminal Regulations will have weather criteria at which the tanker may be required to leave the berth. The decision whether the ship should remain at the berth or move to anchorage or to a holding area will be taken in consultation with the terminal and the ships master as a measure to prevent damage to the berths as well as to the tanker itself The tanker Master would assess the situation and respond according to his checklists for tanker grounding or tanker collision, keeping in mind the response priorities to protect people, the environment, the ship and other property. Tug assistance will be provided at the request of the Master or Pilot or as deemed necessary by the Terminal. The terminal response team of trained fire fighters would respond using a disciplined approach to deal with fire suppression and to prevent escalation of the incident. Evacuation routes would be planned in advance. Evacuation routes to a safe location both by water and by road would be planned and prepared in advance To reduce the risk to people, property and the environment, the tanker Master would be requested to cease operations, move the tanker from the berth and move to a safe anchorage or holding area Firefighting classified support tugs will be called to assist in removing the ship from the berth, or in fighting any berth or foreshore area fire Additional security resources would be activated in the event of sabotage and RCMP would be called to investigate Page 4-2 Final - Rev. 0 January 20, 2010