Ep seminar presentation version 2 morgan mar 2013

Ωracle Risk Consultants

ΩEnvironmental Plans

Unravelling Complexity and Approaches to Acceptance

Dr. Andrew MorganMarch 2013 – Version 2


Unravelling complexity• Ice-breaker: Watch the video clip and consider the

implications managing environmental effects has for marine resource development and how to communicate to stakeholders that existing or potential impacts are As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dITp14tK3qA


Content• Presentation outline

- Overview: the approach to submissions to the regulator under the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (OPGGS) Act 2006 and 2009 Regulations.

- Environmental Plan (EP) preparation and assessment: the regulations against which EP’s are assessed.

- Requirement for consultation: in particular the inclusion of Oil Spill Contingency Plans (OSCP’s).

- Referrals: the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process for matters of national significance.

- Performance standards and objectives: measuring and monitoring (eg SMART – specific, measureable, achievable, relevant and time-based).

- Implementation strategies: how environmental performance is measured over an activity life cycle, checking and review.


- Regulatory reform: The Environmental Protection Act 1986 and Environmental Protection Biodiversity and Conservation Act 1999.

- EP content: key components of an EP and it’s preparation.

- Assurance and compliance: in particular, risk assessment and monitoring.

- Approaches to submission and acceptance: the safety case approach.

- Key references:• NOPSEMA Guidance Note: Environmental Plan Content

Requirements. N4700-GN1074. Rev 1. Jan 2013.• Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage

(Environment ) Regulations 2009.• AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009. Risk Management – Principles and

Guidelines.• AS/NZS ISO 14001:2004. Environmental Management

Systems – Requirements with Guidance for Use.


• Aims- Understand the connectivity between aspects of

Environmental Plans- To highlight the difficulty between compiling EP content

and its alignment with assessment- To provide solutions for improvement of EP preparation

and submission to facilitate timely acceptance as an ‘in force’ plan.


1. Introduction


1.1. Need• Oracle Risk Consultants (ORC) is responding to client need

by developing best practice in Environmental Plan (EP) preparation and assessment for submission to the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA) and the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP).

• ORC is responding to operator feedback on issues related to acceptance of ‘inforce’ EP’s by NOPSEMA.

• ORC is responding to regulator requirements for assessment and acceptance of EP’s.

• ORC is leveraging its safety case approach for offshore activities in achieving EP acceptance and compliance for its clients.


1.2. Overview• Acceptance of EP’s can be held up by the inability of

NOPSEMA to make a decision.• Requirements for assessment follow the relevant

section of the regulations but do not seek to prescribe the approach to be taken in preparing the EP.

• A NOPSEMA workshop was conducted to obtain stakeholder feedback on improved guidance criteria for EP preparation and submission.

• The EP guidance note format provides a more structured approach in meeting submission requirements for assessment by NOPSEMA.


• Examples of EP formats may be provided by NOPSEMA where it may benefit preparation and submission.

• NOPSEMA is not a ‘relevant person’ for the purposes of consultation but will conduct operator liaison meetings.

• Unlike the 2009 Safety Regulations, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (OPGGS) Act 2006 and 2009 Environment Regulations do not prescribe requirements for environmental management.

• Alignment between NOPSEMA and the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) 2012 Environment Regulations under relevant Acts has been achieved.

• Is the operator any better off in understanding the requirements for content and structuring of EP’s for assessment and acceptance.


1.3. Types of construction and operational activities


2. Environmental Plans


2.1. Content of an EP (NOPSEMA)• Activity description;

• Description of the environment;

• Impacts, risks and their evaluation;

• Performance objectives and standards;

• Most show an implementation strategy (including monitoring, reporting, audit and review), along with emissions reporting (NGER Act 2007), and an Oil Spill Contingency Plan (OSCP; MARPOL);

• The content of an EP has to comply with other State and Commonwealth Acts and Regulations relating to the activity (eg Environmental Protection Act 1986, Environmental Protection, Biodiversity, and Conservation Act 1999);

• Also must contain all consultation (Division 2.2A), capacity to report reportable incidents, and an operators corporate Environmental Policy; and

• Included is notifying the Minister before commencement of drilling or seismic surveys, and reporting annually to regulator.


2.2. Assessment of an EP• Requirements for contents of a NOPSEMA

Environmental Plan are similar to DMP.• Requirements of an EP do not clearly define

alignment of structure and content against NOPSEMA regulatory assessment criteria (purely non-prescriptive regulations).

• Assessment against regulations pertains to key components of submission requirements.

• The regulations an EP is assessed against can make decisions on acceptance by the regulator difficult if the submission is not systematic and succinct.


• Key assessment criteria is under division 2.2 and 2.3 of the 2009 regulations (environment) for the OPGGSA 2006 and includes:- Reg. 13(3) and (3A) – impacts, risks and evaluation,

including emergency conditions;- Reg. 13(4) – performance objectives standards and

measurement that address legislative controls;- Reg. 14(6) – provide for monitoring, audit and management

of no conformance and review of environmental performance of the implementation strategy;

- Reg. 14(7) – provide for record keeping of emissions and discharges – air, marine, seabed and sub seabed; and

- Reg. 14(8) – Oil Spill Contingency Plan (OSCP) in implementation strategy and its maintenance.


2.3. Requirement for Consultation• Consultation under Regulation 16(b) requires the operator to

include within an EP:- A summary of response made by a relevant person;- An assessment of merits of any objection or claim about

the adverse impact of each activity to which the EP relates;

- A statement of the operator’s response or proposed claim, if any, to each objection or claim; and

- A copy of the full text of any response by a relevant person.

• Under Regulation 11A the operator has to provide sufficient information and a reasonable period to carry out this consultation.


2.3.1. Stakeholders


• Regulation 14(8) requires that an EP implementation strategy contain an OSCP as part of the EP acceptance process. It must demonstrate that:- Modifications of an OSCP trigger a revision of the related

EP if a change in environmental risk or introduction of a new risk occurs; and

- The operator has completed the necessary consultation with relevant authorities, response organisations and other stakeholders.


2.3.2. Referrals

• Under State/NT jurisdiction a referral to the Minister must be made for an activity with environmental impacts and/or a matter of national significance.

• The requirement comes under of the Environmental Protection, Biodiversity and Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999.

• The Minister determines whether:- the activity is a controlled action subject to the EPBC

Act;- not a controlled action if action is in accordance with a

specified manner; and- not a controlled action and approval not required if

action taken in accordance with referral.


• An assessment can be made from:- information in a referral;- an accredited assessment;- information identified by the minister as being necessary;- an environmental impact statement (EIS) (compiled from

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) under part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), consultation); or

- by public enquiry.


• For an EIA the EIS is assessed against:- What the proponent wants to do, what impacts there will be and how the

proponent plans to manage impacts of the project; and

- A proposal is subject to the processes and procedures of an EIS as set

out in section 46B of the Development Act 1993;

• An EIS details expected environmental, social and economic effects

of a development.

• It has to provide for alternatives and a forum for public consultation.

• Environmental aspects have to be considered in parallel to social

economic, technical, and other factors.

• Consideration must be given to the EPA as the Minister must refer

the EIS to the EPA if the prescribed activity is of environmental

significance.


2.3.3. Activities and sensitive areas


2.3.4. Regulatory reform

• The Department of Environment and Conservation, which administers the Environmental Protection, Biodiversity and Conservation Act (EPBC) 1999, is reviewing regulations:- A draft set of standards has been released by the

Australian Federal Government designed to streamline environmental assessment and approval agreements with the states and territories.

- If agreement can be reached a single environmental assessment and approval process for major projects will result.

- The approvals process for major projects needs simplifying while keeping stringent environmental standards.

- The draft standards ensure matters of national environmental significance are protected, and that Australia continues to comply with its international environmental obligations.


• Requirements for the EPA to assess a proposed activity under the Environmental Protection Act 1986.- Needed if the proposed activity that despite ALARP

measures will have a significant environmental impact requiring Environmental Offsets

- Considered as part of the EIA process in a proposal in conjunction with an EIS prepared for referral

- Approvals and operating is required under Part V of the Act

- Development of offsets as part of the EIA process was led by the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DPM)

- The Act was amended to incorporate such requirements as components of submissions


2.4. Key Components Essential to Acceptance of an ‘Inforce Plan’

• EP - most show an implementation strategy that includes monitoring, reporting, audit and review, along with emissions reporting, and an OSCP; and

• EIS - how the proponent plans to manage impacts of the project (if referred).


2.4.1. Inclusion of OSCP Content

• An OSCP is an operational document for an emergency situation, requiring that the responsibilities of key personnel, response actions and reporting requirements be made clear;

• Relevant environmental, meteorological, oceanographic and oil characteristic information will be used for on-site decision making, and so should be accessible;

• Response strategies should be clear;• The plan should be subject to regular training simulation and

real-time exercises, review and updates; and• Where relevant information or procedures exist in other

company documents such as emergency response plans, these documents should be clearly referenced.


• Preparation of an OSCP should contain:- Response priorities (including health and safety, habitat

and cultural resources, flora and fauna, commercial resources, amenities);

- Objectives of the OSCP;- Initial actions (including assessment, notification and

escalation, mobilisation, incident action plan development);

- Response termination arrangements;- Recovery arrangements;- Provision for (Regulation 14(6));

• Testing• Maintenance• Review

- Arrangements for reporting to the regulator (Regulation 15); and

- Demonstrate compliance (Regulation 7) with the EP.


2.4.2. Sources


2.4.3. Impacts - offshore


2.4.4. Impacts - onshore


2.5. Assurance and compliance• Responding to new or increased environmental impacts or

risks (Regulations 8, 17, 18 and 19):- Operator must not carry out activities if there is a new

environmental impact or risk identified;- A significant increase in impact or risk;- Review of an EP means the OSCP should also be

evaluated; and- Reduced response capability, and an increase in spill

consequence may result from increased impact or risk.• Environmental Risk Assessment (Regulation 13(4)):

- Define the objectives and set standards against which performance by the operator in protecting the environment is to be measured (monitoring);

- Include measurement criteria for determining whether objectives and standards are met; and

- Conduct Environmental Risk Assessment Workshops in this regard.


2.5.1. Environmental Risk Assessment Workshops (ENVID’s)• Facilitation of Environmental Risk Assessment Workshops using PHA

Pro 8 Risk Assessment Software.- Programme in operator risk matrix;- Set up spreadsheet;- Identify hazards and their cause and consequence;- Determine avoidance, mitigation and management strategies, risk rank; and- Provide recommendations for action close-out and prepare report.


2.5.2. Methodology

• A brainstorming method in conjunction with a ‘What if?’ analysis is used to systematically identify the hazards and associated causes, impacts or consequences and controls.

• The activities are described by the respective responsible persons and then systematically assessed for potential hazards and accident events.

• Hazards identified and lessons learnt from similar programs/campaigns are also used to support the ‘What if?’ discussions.

• Consequence rating is the maximum credible severity of the event; and

• Likelihood rating is the likelihood of the event occurring with the consequence severity that has been selected.


2.5.3. Example Risk Matrix

Frequency of Occurrence

Rare (1)

Unlikely (2)

Credible (3)

Likely (4)

Frequent (5)

Event occurrence is remote and/or never heard of in the E&P industry

Event occurrence is possible but rare in the E&P industry

Event has occurred in the Australian industry (APPEA)

Event often occurs in the Australian industry (APPEA)

Events are frequent in the Company (PTTEP AA)

Consequence

Severity People Production/

Property Environmental Effect Reputation

Catastrophic (E)

Multiple fatalities

Loss >50M AUD

Tier 3 (>1,000 tonnes)

International assistance

International TV and papers

Major (D)

Single fatality

Multiple LTIs with disabilities

Loss 10M–50M AUD

Tier 2 (10–1,000 tonnes)

Regional assistance

National TV and papers

Serious (C)

Single LTI

Multiple ADI

Loss 1M–10M AUD

Tier 1 (up to 10 tonnes)

Any spill >80L

Localised effect

Local TV

Local written media

Moderate (B)

MTC

Single ADI

Loss 50K–1M AUD

Any spill <80L

Minor effect

Local media interest

Minor (A)

No or minor injury with first aid

Loss <50K AUD, insignificant

Spill contained on board

No effect

No reaction

HIGH RISK PTTEP AA CEO approval

required to continue

MEDIUM RISK Risk reduction measures

required to achieve ALARP

LOW RISK

Broadly acceptable


2.5.4. Monitoring

• One of the recommendations of the Montara Commission of Inquiry in the wake of the PTTEP AA Montara blowout in 2009 included putting in place operational and scientific monitoring programs (OSMPs) that could be rapidly implemented in the event of a hydrocarbon spill. Such monitoring should include:- addressing deficiencies around the lack of baseline data;

and- delayed implementation of the environmental monitoring

program for the Montara accident.


• Use of Before, After, Control, Impact (BACI) designs for environmental monitoring in the event of a hydrocarbon spill and ongoing recovery monitoring requires good planning.

• Use of real time integrated environmental monitoring systems can also assist in this regard.

• Compliance with OPGGS Environment Regulations 2009 and also EPBC Act 1999 approval conditions for an offshore activity could be met with a single monitoring document.

• NOPSEMA is consulting with the Department of Sustainability Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC) with the aim of minimising the regulatory burden on operators and government in this regard.


• Statoil (Norway) has awarded Kongsberg Oil & Gas Technologies a contract worth NOK 150 million over three years to develop the world’s first integrated environmental monitoring system (EM) for oil and gas activities.


Invasive species


2.5.5. Operational and scientific environmental monitoring


3. Conclusion


3.1. Key Components of an EP Assessed by NOPSEMA under the 2009 Regulations

Assurance:

• Identification of environmental risks and impacts of the activity; and

• Assessment of identified environmental risks and impacts.

Compliance:

• Environmental performance objectives, standards and measurement criteria;

• Implementation strategy; and

• Reporting arrangements.


3.2. Assessment Recap• Key assessment criteria is under division 2.2 and 2.3

of the 2009 regulations (environment) for the OPGGSA 2006 and includes:- Reg. 13(3) and (3A) – impacts, risks and evaluation,

including emergency conditions;- Reg. 13(4) – performance objectives, standards and

measurement that address legislative controls;- Reg. 14(6) – provide for monitoring, audit and

management of no conformance and review of environmental performance of the implementation strategy;

- Reg. 14(7) – provide for record keeping of emissions and discharges – air, marine, seabed and sub seabed; and

- Reg. 14(8) – Oil Spill Contingency Plan (OSCP) in implementation strategy and its maintenance.


3.3. Approaches to Submission, Assessment and Acceptance of an ‘Inforce’ EP

• A safety case format that includes:- Adaptation of EP content to:

• Scope of validation: Regulation 14(6) including corporate environmental policy, environmental legislation and requirements and referrals to other agencies, and provide for monitoring, audit and management of non conformance and review of environmental performance of the implementation strategy;

• Facility description: description of activity and receiving environment;


• Safety management systems: Regulation 13(4) and 14(7) and (8) including performance objectives, standards and measurement criteria and implementation strategy and maintenance, record keeping, and OSCP; and

• Formal Safety Assessment: Regulation 13(3) and (3A) identification of environmental risks and impacts of the activity and assessment of identified environmental risks and impacts, including OSCP modelling and EIA (also used for EIS and referral if needed).


- Incorporating (within scope of validation):• Emissions reporting (National Greenhouse and

Energy Reporting Act 2007);• An EIA approach to EIS submissions and referrals

(how the impact of the activity is proposed to be managed); and

• Reference to consultation documentation


End

Ep seminar presentation version 2 morgan mar 2013

Documents

Transcript of Ep seminar presentation version 2 morgan mar 2013