{"id":19725,"date":"2016-05-25T17:06:00","date_gmt":"2016-05-26T00:06:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/clearseas.org\/?p=19725"},"modified":"2024-08-27T10:45:32","modified_gmt":"2024-08-27T17:45:32","slug":"comite-dexperts-sur-la-securite-des-navires-citernes-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/clearseas.org\/fr\/insights\/comite-dexperts-sur-la-securite-des-navires-citernes-1\/","title":{"rendered":"Comit\u00e9 d\u2019experts sur la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 des navires-citernes 1"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Executive Summary<\/h2>\n\n

Clear Seas Centre for Responsible Marine Shipping \u2013 Research Digest\u00a0Highlights of A Review of Canada\u2019s Ship-Source Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime \u2013 Setting The Course for the Future.<\/p>\n\n

Clear Seas<\/a>\u00a0is an independent, not-for-profit organization that provides impartial and evidence-based research to inform the public and policy makers about marine shipping in Canada.<\/p>\n\n

Accordingly, we are providing this digest on Transport Canada\u2019s 2013 Tanker Safety Expert Panel report\u00a0A Review of Canada\u2019s Ship-Source Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime \u2013 Setting The Course for the Future<\/a>\u00a0covering areas south of the 60th parallel.\u00a0\u00a0The report is based on substantial and targeted engagement sessions with industry, government, and indigenous organizations during April and June of 2013.<\/p>\n\n

This short digest is not meant to be inclusive of all the Review\u2019s commentary and\/or recommendations, nor are the items mentioned necessarily in the same order as the original report.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Message from the Executive Director<\/u><\/strong>Since the mid-1990s Canada has had in place a Ship-source Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime that is based on a public-private partnership.As this Review notes this was the first such comprehensive examination of this regime in almost 20 years. It was necessitated by the fact that the dynamics of oil transportation and marine shipping have changed substantially over the past two decades. Factors that have changed during this time include: greater resource production, increased import and export activity, much busier ports, and the reality that the current Regime is no longer sufficiently up to date on new and alternative response options, or in modern-day effective risk planning.Although all the recommendations have, directly or indirectly, spill prevention implications, from Clear Seas\u2019 perspective, we were particularly encouraged with those dealing with\u00a0Area Response Planning, Integrated Planning, Alternative Response Techniques, and Incident Command and Contingency Planning. It is these recommendations that this digest concentrates on.<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n

Background<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

A lot of oil is transported as cargo in Canadian waters south of the 60th<\/sup>\u00a0parallel. This map shows the regional breakdown \u2013 in million tonnes \u2013 as approximate annual averages over the previous 10 years.<\/p>\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n

With such a volume being shipped it is imperative that we do everything possible to prevent spills from occurring, and that we have robust preparedness and response plans in place to respond to a spill promptly should one occur.<\/p>\n\n

When it comes to cleaning up ship source oil pollution in Canadian waters we operate under the\u00a0polluter pays principle. In general terms, that means ship and cargo owners share the financial burden of providing clean-up and other restitution compensation.<\/p>\n\n

On the public side of the equation, a number of federal agencies and departments play prominent roles. For example, Transport Canada is the department that carries out the Government\u2019s legislative and regulatory mandate, the Canadian Coast Guard oversees \u2013 or where necessary takes charge of \u2013 oil spill response, while Environment Canada[1]<\/a>\u00a0and Fisheries and Oceans Canada provide scientific, environmental and wildlife expertise.<\/p>\n\n

Canada\u2019s current Ship-source Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime (hereafter referred to as the \u201cRegime\u201d) is now out of date. The report noted its recommendations were based on a number of key assumptions and observations for improvement, specifically that: response and preparedness should be based on risks identified and most effectively mitigated\u00a0at regional levels; potential polluters should be prepared to\u00a0respond to a worst-case discharge; a critical factor in limited environmental and socio-economic damage is\u00a0response time; and\u00a0taxpayers should bear no liability\u00a0for spills in Canadian waters.<\/p>\n\n

Part of Canada\u2019s Regime requires all prescribed vessels and oil handling facilities to have an arrangement with a spill\u00a0Response Organization[2]<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>certified by Transport Canada. In most circumstances they are tasked with spill cleanup. In order to be certified, a Response Organization must develop a plan that meets a number of planning standards.<\/p>\n\n

As it is currently formulated, the Regime is based on a rigid, national structure that fails to account for the different risks that exist along our expansive coastline and within the Great Lakes, and St. Lawrence Seaway. A one-size-fits-all approach applies equally to all regions of the country, regardless of the volume of the oil being moved or the region-specific environmental sensitivities that may exist.<\/p>\n\n

This is not optimal, as risks are very likely to vary between distinct regions.<\/p>\n\n

Consequently the report recommends a risk-based\u00a0Area Response Planning[3]<\/strong><\/a><\/strong>\u00a0model that will be more flexible and responsive \u2013 one that can adapt to changes in vessel traffic and the establishment of new marine terminals as well as account for the unique differences that exist between regions.\u00a0\u00a0 In this context both national and regional risk assessment and response requirements are necessary.<\/p>\n\n

A\u00a0National Risk Assessment\u00a0would provide a pan-Canadian perspective as well as a method of assessing the relative risks between regions. It would also be a valuable tool for measuring the potential risks associated with new projects that could increase ship-source traffic or the volume of oil movements. Given that the Government had already commissioned such an assessment in 2013, the report recommended that Transport Canada put in place a review and update process, the results of which should be made public to increase awareness about the risks associated with oil spills.<\/p>\n\n

It further recommended that Transport Canada designate new Areas of Response \u2013 defined geographical areas within which certified Response Organizations operate.<\/p>\n\n

Once established, the department should perform\u00a0Regional Risk Assessments\u00a0for each Area of Response, incorporating information on navigational hazards, vessel movements, and key sensitivities. These regional assessments should establish Probable Spill Scenarios[4]<\/a>\u00a0that could be expected in each Area along with the sites where the most severe environmental and socio-economic impacts could occur in the event of a spill.<\/p>\n\n

Integrated Planning:\u00a0Comprehensive planning can be a challenge when you have multiple federal agencies with different responsibilities but similar ends. The result can be activities being performed in silos, which in turn can hinder the cohesiveness of preparedness and response effectiveness.<\/p>\n\n

To deal with such a challenge the report made a number of recommendations concerning an integrated planning process among the responsible federal agencies.<\/p>\n\n

Specifically that:<\/p>\n\n