POST SPILL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING Lessons learnt from an international perspective Julke Brandt Technical Adviser Meeresumwelt- Symposium, Hamburg, 12 th 13 th June 2018
OUTLINE 1. Introduction to ITOPF 2. ITOPF s involvement in post-spill studies 3. Why conduct environmental monitoring? 4. Is environmental monitoring necessary? 5. International compensation schemes 6. What is environmental damage? 7. Challenges encountered & recommendations
ITOPF? Established in 1968 to administer TOVALOP Primarily funded by the global shipping industry (via P&I Clubs) Operates on a non-for-profit basis Based in London but provides a global service Technical team with 14 responders available 24/7, total office staff of 34 Provides objective advice on effective response to marine spills of oil & HNS & bulk products 1967 Torrey Canyon 1968 1970s 1999 2018 Celebrating 50 th Anniversary Tanker Owners Voluntary Agreement concerning Liability for Oil Pollution (TOVALOP) International Tanker Owner Pollution Federation (ITOPF) was established to administer TOVALOP ITOPF developed its technical services function and established a team of well qualified scientists ITOPF s services are formally extended to the owners of other types of ships 36 staff provide objective technical advise to Members (429 million GT) and Associates (779 million GT)
ITOPF S CORE FUNCTIONS OVERALL AIM OF ITOPF: TO PROMOTE EFFECTIVE SPILL RESPONSE SPILL RESPONSE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT & CLAIMS ANALYSIS CONTINGENCY PLANNING & ADVISORY TRAINING & EDUCATION INFORMATION SERVICES
ITOPF EXPERIENCE & EXPERTISE Experience and expertise gathered on site at more than 800 spills in 100 countries & territories
TANKER SPILLS 1970-2017 Number of spills Tonnes spilt
ITOPF s INVOLVEMENT IN POST- SPILL MONITORING & AREAS OF MOST CONCERN Since the mid-1990s ITOPF has observed an increase in the number of cases involving post-spill studies. Despite the general trend in decreasing number of large spills, post-spill studies now occur in > 40% of incidents
WHY CONDUCT POST SPILL MONITORING? Key Reasons (Kirby et al. 2014) 1. Assess potential environmental and economic impacts 2. Identify appropriate and effective methods to investigate the impacts 3. Use best methods to assess short & long term impacts 4. Efficient use of resources 5. Assess the effectiveness of spill response & clean up operations 6. Determine compensation and / or liability HOWEVER monitoring studies following spills are bound by a number of scientific/technical and financial constraints.
POST ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES NECESSARY? Establish scale of pollution extent Vulnerability and sensitivity of resources Level of concern of authorities and public Is it necessary to carry out impact studies? EA necessary? No No further actions required The answer depends on Yes Define purpose Define scale Carry out EA studies Scale of the pollution Vulnerability and sensitivity of natural resources Is damage to resources evident from results? Yes Is the timescale for natural recovery acceptable? No Yes Continue to monitor recovery Yes Is there a clear trend of recovery? Level of concern of the authorities / public No Will intervention significantly accelerate the rate and extent of recovery? No No Reasonableness decided case by case Yes Review and implement direct and indirect restoration measures Decision process for damage assessment and restoration (IMO/UNEP 2009) Are studies likely to meet their objectives? Clear link to spill & not general research
LIABILITY and COMPENSATION for ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING IMO Conventions CLC 92 IOPC Funds 2001 Bunker Convention HNS Convention National system unrelated to international regime National legislation directly transposes international convention text National legislation fully or partially transposes Convention text, may incorporate other national legislation State has not ratified Conventions, uses multiple environmental instruments to determine liability, environmental damage assessment and remediation procedures Environmental damage or impact assessment will usually be based on the liability regime in place in that particular country In ITOPF s experience, legislation in place around the world falls into above mentioned three broad categories
SCOPE FOR COMPENSATION as per INTERNATIONAL REGIME TANKER INCIDENTS NON-TANKER INCIDENTS Tier I: Civil Liability Convention 1992 Tier II: Fund Convention 1992 Tier III: Supplementary Fund Preventive Measures Property Damage Bunker Convention 2001 Economic Loss Reinstatement Measures Compensation for Environmental Damage: the aim of any reasonable measures of reinstatement should be to re-establish a biological community in which the organisms characteristic of that community at the time of the incident, are present and are functioning normally. 1) Loss of profit resulting from impairment of the environment 2) Costs of reasonable measures of reinstatement 3) Post spill monitoring studies may be supported when there is evidence of a significant environmental impact & the scale of studies should be proportional to the extent of contamination
DEFINITION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE IMO Regime OPA 90 (International) (US) ELD (EU) Loss or damage caused outside the ship by contamination resulting from the escape or discharge of oil from the ship, where such escape or discharge may occur, provided that compensation for impairment of the environment other than loss of profit from such impairment shall be limited to costs of reasonable measures of reinstatement actually undertaken or to be undertaken. Damages to natural resources (land, fish, wildlife, biota, air, water, ground water, drinking water supplies, and other resources belonging to the United States) are defined as injury to, destruction of, loss of, or loss of use of, natural resources, including the reasonable costs of assessing the damage. ED to marine waters means such damage that their environmental status is significantly adversely affected. ED to land means contamination of land by substances, preparations, organisms or micro-organisms, where damage results in a significant risk of adverse effects on human health. In the case of a protected species or natural habitat (other than damage to a site of special scientific interest) the ED must be such that it has a significant adverse effect on reaching or maintaining the favourable conservation status of the protected species or natural habitat.
ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE COMPENSATION as per different legislations IMO Regime OPA 90 ELD (International) (US) (EU) Liability Ship owner is liable Responsible Party (Owner or Operator) is liable Operator is liable Compensation Compensation for loss of profit resulting from impairment of the environment, costs of reasonable measure of reinstatement Compensation for economic losses and compensates the public for loss of goods & services of non-economic resources; including Primary restoration, compensatory restoration ELD not applicable to claims for economic loss but pure ecological damage, compensation for restoring damaged natural resources and / or services towards baseline condition Limitations Limitation based on GT of vessel and fund limits Limitation based on GT of vessel and fund limits Largely depends on implementation of LLMC. No compulsory insurance requirement
APPROACHES TO QUANTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE AROUND THE WORLD None or poorly defined Science based approach Highly prescriptive not always science based Japan no defined approach UK IMO regime Egypt, Turkey, Russia Fixed formulae based on spill volume NZ, Australia International regime with national top-up scheme South America, USA, China, Spain, Italy Contingent valuation methods, habitat equivalency analysis or others Inconsistent approaches frequently lead to an ineffective use of already limited resources In some cases lack of knowledge and scientific information can result in actual damage to the environment going undetected
CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED: What to monitor and for how long? Canada (example case) Chile (example case) Korea Assumption that presence of oil means irreversible damage to the environment Long term environmental monitoring program collecting data unrelated to the incident Lack of baseline data Long-term environmental monitoring program collecting data unrelated to the incident Academic curiosity vs. meeting spill objectives A monitoring program needs to be implemented for EVERY incident that incurs a response 1) Natural Environment (Metrological conditions, currents, tides, marine geology, oil contamination, marine ecosystem) 2) Socioeconomic environment: population, residence, industry, fisheries 3) Living environment
CHALLENGES & SOLUTIONS Lack of spill specific knowledge Identify knowledge gaps and develop protocols / guidelines Absence of baseline data Identify reference sites CHALLENGES Different definitions of environmental damage Bi / Unilateral or International agreements SOLUTIONS Exercises & drills exclude environmental regulators Encourage cooperation between relevant parties Lack of predefined study objectives Focus on relevant indicators / develop specific guidelines
REFERENCES CSIRO, 2016. Editors: Sharon Hook, Graeme Batley, Michael Holloway, Paul Irving and Andrew Ross. Oil spill monitoring handbook. IMO / UNEP, Edition 2009. IMO/UNEP guidance manual on the assessment and restoration of environmental damage following marine oil spills. ITOPF, 2018. Environmental damage: Changing perceptions and future outlook. http://www.itopf.com/knowledge-resources/documents-guides/document/environmental-damage-chaningperceptions-and-future-outlook/ Kirby, M.F., Gioia, R. and Law, R.J., 2014. The principles of effective post-spill environmental monitoring in marine environments and their application to preparedness assessment. Marine pollution bulletin, 82(1-2), pp.11-18. Kirby, M.F., Brant, J., Moore, J., Lincoln, S., (eds.) 2018. PREMIAM Pollution Response in Emergencies Marine Impact Assessment and Monitoring: Post-incident monitoring guidelines. Second Edition. Science Series Technical Report. Cefas, Lowestoft, 176 pp. https://www.cefas.co.uk/premiam
Thank you! www.itopf.com
POST ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES PRINCIPLES Principles associated with an effective monitoring programme (Kirby et al. 2014) 1. Strong scientific guidance 2. Personnel and organisations available with appropriate skills & knowledge 3. Adequate equipment 4. Sources of funding 5. Established management structure 6. Effective integration & coordination 7. Effective communications 8. Test & practice in exercises & drills