18Th Meeting of the Advisory Group on Environmental Safety Aspects of Shipping

18Th Meeting of the Advisory Group on Environmental Safety Aspects of Shipping

ESAS AG 18.8/19.4

18th Meeting of the Advisory Group on Environmental Safety Aspects of Shipping

November 5-6, 2009, Istanbul, Turkey

Minutes

The meeting was attended by the representatives of all Black Sea states and invited guests from EMSA, the BS MOU on PSC Secretariat, Sea Alarm, OSPRI and MEKOSEA.

Chairman: Capt. Adrian Alexe; Abbreviations: AK – Ahmet Kideys, VV – Violeta Velikova.

A1: Opening and welcome, introduction of participants, approval of the Agenda and minutes of the previous meeting. Report on the AG decisions – actions completed and pending. Cooperation with other organizations and other general information from the BSC PS.

The meeting was opened by the Chairman Mr. Adrian Alexe. Participants introduced themselves and the draft Agenda was adopted with a recommendation from RU more time to be dedicated to Pollution prevention matters during next meetings. The minutes of the 17th ESAS meeting were approved without any revision proposed. VV overviewed the performance of the group and BSC PS in relation to the 17 th ESAS meeting decisions and work plan 2008/2009. The work on the ESAS Glossary will continue with the help of GE and the BSC PS will create a list of terms, which need clear interpretation for the purposes of the annual reporting (ESAS Reporting Format terms). The BS MOU Secretary provided copies of the PSC Annual Report and reminded that in enhancing cooperation between the BSC and the BS MOU we needed to clearly specify in a formal MoU/Agreement which data/information would be exchanged, how they would be used, and to agree on exchange procedures. VV commented on the additional info/data both organizations would need to compile further in relation to the AFC and BWC, in case both Conventions come into force in all BS states. (Note: The AFC is in force only in RO and BG for the moment).

VV reported activities in enhancing cooperation with IMO, EMSA, and others, participation in different conferences, where BSC ESAS activities were reported (Ministerial Meeting/Diplomatic Conference in Sofia, Inrespill Conference in France, BSEC meetings, CASPINFO ( project workshops, Black Sea Day, etc.).

A2: Contingency response planning, exercises, response operations

  1. Status of adoption of BS RCP in RU and UA. Changes in RCP Annexes, if any.

AK informed that during the Ministerial Meeting in Sofia, April 2009, GE adopted the RCP. There is no need to sign the Plan itself, resolution in the Minutes of a BSC meeting is enough.

RU informed that all completed national procedures needed for adoption of RCP should be implemented all over again due to uncorrected text of Resolution and RCP received from BSC PS. The edited and correct text of RCP has been received from BSC PS after the Ministerial Meeting in Sofia, April 2009. Now RU is in process of carrying out of national procedures in question and the RCP will be possibly adopted by RU in 2010. For UA there is no clarity for the moment, as according to the national legislation the RCP needs to be ratified by the Parliament. In addition there is no UA national CP. It should be developed before proceeding with the ratification of the RCP.

AK reminded that the RCP was actually an Annex to the Emergency Protocol. According to the Convention, the BSC itself can adopt an Annex. UA responded that still the Commissioner needed to be authorized by the Parliament.

  1. Exercises – RODELTA (RO) and BRAVO in 2009 (RU, TU, UA) – reports, lessons learnt, ways to improve

The RO delegation presented a movie and report on the RODELTA exercise (attached to the meeting documents), carried out in August 2009, hosted by Romania. Special thanks were expressed by RO to GE and TU for helping with equipment. The lack of support from the neighboring BG and UA was recognized as one of the shortcomings of the exercise. In case of real emergency, the bordering states can faster provide support than the others, and this should be exercised as a priority in DELTAs. The need to have an on-coast response during exercises was discussed. The group agreed that the scenarios should cover the coast, in case of available financial possibilities. In any case, at-sea response should be the priority, having both elements – SAR and pollution response.

GE commented on the report and exercise itself. Main missing parts – preliminary work on UN harmonized codification system; custom and immigration procedures to be simplified. 2 days to get visa for an EU country is too long in case of emergency, when professionals from non-EU states need to be urgently involved. The same stays for RU and UA, only in GE and TU such problems with visas do not exist, but the customs formalities still need to be addressed. No booms, no skimmers are specified in custom procedures, how the latter can be addressed?

RU acted as an observer during RODELTA and expressed appreciations for the high level of organization. TU reminded that the communication during DELTAs should be in English, especially press releases. RO informed that the final report was in English and it was distributed to all participants in the exercise. TU reminded the Turkish Coast Guard to be added to the List of Participants in the “RODELTA Report”.

TU mentioned the importance of coast clean-up operations, expressing opinion that on-coast and at-sea response should be an integral part of DELTA exercises. The main question from TU was about the at-sea response – did RO need more international involvement? Mr. Alexe explained that for on-coast response equipment was available and Civil Protection people were well trained. For at-sea response training is very much needed in using the dedicated ships for oil response, for the moment there is no capacity for such ships in RO. And in RO there is no dedicated vessel, however, in TU there are many – in private companies and in Directorate General of Coastal Safety. GE proposed in Annex 4 of the RCP the information on dedicated vessels to be updated.

For 2011 GE proposed the regional DELTA to be hosted by them (instead of UA) and the delegations appreciated the proposal.

AK proposed the exact dates of the GE DELTA to be communicated as soon as possible, to start the organization with wider involvement of BSC and EMSA. UA explained that hosting of a DELTA exercise might be more feasible for them in 2013, when the responsibilities will be under the umbrella of the Ministry of Transport (they are now in process of transfer from the Ministry of Emergency Situations). In UA there is a dedicated vessel for pollution response, but it is not in operation for the moment.

RU informed about dedicated vessels engaged in the Black Sea under the Agenda item A.4, point 4.

OSPRI recognized the growing experience in the BS region, supporting the GE comments on custom and immigration procedures being in need for amendment, taking into consideration the special circumstances in emergency situations. They proposed the organization ‘Oil Spill Response Ltd’ to be kept in the loop and involved in Black Sea exercises. The relevant IMO resolution (for custom and immigration formalities, A.983(24)) to be checked. The recommendation given to have the Black Sea DELTAs not as a show but close to reality, was obviously seriously taken into consideration during RODELTA (the RO delegation explained how it was achieved – there were different parts of the scenario elaborated by experts, but it was not known in advance which part would start first and what would be the sequence for the others). Recommendation: the video of RODELTA to be posted on YouTube, not only on BSC web site for wider dissemination. OSPRI suggestion: to think about inclusion of dispersants use during exercises - not to throw out completely this option. If the weather is bad during an accident, nobody will try to recover oil.

EMSA declared its willingness to support the next BS DELTA in GE, subject to clarification on the extent of participation and approval from the COM. EMSA is waiting for an official invitation to participate in the next DELTA and upon receipt will revert with the explanation of procedures to be followed when a state is asking for support. The Invitation for the next DELTA will be sent in due time to EMSA and the BSC will also send the regional long-term plan for exercises.

Problems during RODELTA (more in detail in reference, copied from the RO report[1]):

1. The Forum on the web page of the BSC did not work. (VV explained that the web page was under reconstruction for a long period of time to have it more user-friendly).

2. Shall we have SAR and Oil response together? SAR is a national responsibility and there were difficulties to combine them during RODELTA. TU offered a patrol boat, RU – helicopter. The issue should be discussed also during the coming SAR Conference in Georgia and the outcomes will be communicated with the BSC PS.

3. The BS Guideline for exercises needs to be updated (dispersants, custom and immigration issues, close to reality, the BRAVO part, wild life, on-coast response). The BSC PS will prepare a draft for the needed amendments, and then it will be discussed with the ESAS AG, before going to the level of the BSC.

TU - There should be day 0 in exercises – for solving custom formalities.

The BRAVO exercises need serious improvement. During RODELTA and TU Bravo in October 2009 the response of states in communication has not been sufficiently good. The POLREP and other notifications should be sent by Fax and E-mail, a telephone call in addition might be helpful (to avoid the human factor – when new people appear in the MRCC and they know nothing about regional exercises - helpful will be these new people to be always informed about the DELTAs, BRAVOs and other ESAS activities of the BSC). ERAC and BSC PS E-mails to be included in the communication.

R: The RODELTA report is distributed. Comments expected till 23rd of November.

D: The BSC PS will distribute the last versions of RCP Annexes for a check and update. Later, the states themselves will report to the BSC PS immediately about changes in the Annexes, to improve the communication in the region.

GE presented the Black Sea MRCC Web page, 24 hours running service, which is in process of improvement and will soon become operational. During the SAR Conference there will be a demonstration (November 2009, Batumi). The WEB page can be used by Oil Pollution Response Officers as well (not only SAR Officers) – how this kind of communication to be arranged will be discussed during the SAR Conference.

RU submitted the report of the Black Sea BRAVO Exercise conducted on 26 Feb 2009 by MRCC Novorossiysk on behalf of the Russian Federation. RU proposed to approve the general rule for numeration of BRAVO Exercises.

The above proposals were adopted by delegations and general rule for naming exercises in the BS region will be as follows:

BS - DELTAs ––name of the state (BG, GE, RO, RU, TU, UA) – year

BS - BRAVOs –- name of the state (BG, GE, RO, RU, TU, UA) – BRAVO N(1 or 2 or 3)/year

  1. Use of dispersants - shall we have a regional approach?

Regional Guideline is still not agreed. RU proposed a small project to be initiated, where all the available guidelines to be overviewed and one of them or a compilation of several to be prepared for consideration in the region. In RU there a national policies for the use of dispersants, in BG and RO – no national policy, GE waits for the regional policy to be developed and then incorporated into the national, TU believes first the national policy should be elaborated. At the EU level the process of harmonization is also not yet successful. The common understanding is that the process of harmonization in the BS region can be initiated by having an agreement on a regional manual/guideline.

  1. Recent response operations and recovery of oil in BS states (available reports attached to the meeting documents)

The delegations reported recent response operations (in RO and TU there were none), including oil spills during bunkering. When reporting oil spills, it is necessary to report not only the amount of oil, but also the area polluted. RU reported on specific operations during night time to recover oil. Any kind of oil spill is a subject to booming; bunkering in the open sea is not allowed. RU showed in the presentations new salvage vessels, and informed that the reconstruction of the salvage and rescue fleet was carried out in the framework of the Federal Program ‘The development of transport system in the Russian Federation (2010-2015)”. First new multifunctional salvage and rescue vessel with power of 4MW as well as multifunctional diving vessel will be constructed and supplied to the Novorossiysk Salvage Department in 2010. The reconstruction of the salvage and rescue Russian fleet for the Black Sea region will be finalized in 2011. TU will report their fleet developments (new ships, and renovation of existing) during the next ESAS AG meeting.

Sea Alarm Presentation (attached to the meeting documents)

Main questions that appeared and issues discussed:

  1. How to assess the wildlife damage after an accident?
  2. BS states do not have special procedures/manuals/guidelines for wild-life response in cases of emergency.
  3. Do we need to change POLREP?
  4. How to raise awareness in the region and better organize oiled wild life response?

BG is aware of the importance of the issue, there was a proposal to extend the BG NCP, having wild life response in it, but still pending as a task (the whole plan has not been yet properly updated).

There was a proposal to include in POLREP part for the wild life response, as it is in the HELCOM area. Pending for discussion further, as RU considers the wild life response more as a national responsibility. And here also custom formalities might be a problem, in case of an emergency situation, and if equipment would be needed from abroad. In any case, a manual to be recommended and used in the Black Sea region might be helpful and useful.

If custom formalities can be simplified for oil spill response integration of international resources that should be the same for wild life response equipment.

RO proposed to spread the Sea-Alarm presentation to Ministries of Environment in the region for raising awareness and to include in DELTAs such a module. When the exercise takes place near protected areas (for instance, in UA it can be organized near the Danube Delta reserve) to have a scenario including saving of wild life would be very much relevant.

Sea Alarm expressed interest in the BS regional DELTAs and in case they are invited, they would bring their experience and advice in coordinating oiled wildlife response operations. For exercises it will be relevant if the invitation comes from the hosting country government. In case of an accident, any invitation would suit in order Sea Alarm to bring and involve international expertise/equipment/others, as in the BS states the capacity for responding to oiled wild life incidents is limited.

The delegations recommended Sea Alarm to contact NGOs in the BS region (as it has been doing recently in TU), creating national networks (within the larger EMPOWER Network) for responding to oiled wild life incidents, organizing relevant trainings, etc.

TU reported that their NCP is in its final stage of preparation. It will be accompanied by guidelines, where wild life protection will be included. Ministry of Environment and Forestry is responsible for contingency plans and TUBITAK is the contractor. TU is ready to distribute the guideline for consideration in the region.

The delegations agreed that wild life protection is underestimated in the region, though in case of accidents the level of oiled wild life response is the public face of the states success in response.

UA asked about the expertise of Sea Alarm in assessments of damage after an accident[2]. Sea Alarm works with scientists in such cases, who perform the impact assessments.

Replying to the question of RU, all states informed about the lack of special equipments for clean up oiled wildlife.

A3. Monitoring of Oil Pollution – remote sensing and in situ, Modeling[3] (Presentations and reports attached to the meeting documents)

All states reported, in written the information is provided by BG, RO and TU. In UA there is no national AIS, satellite images are not used to trace oil pollution. TU explained that ITU-CSCRS has the capacity for satellite surveillance. TU Coast Guard and Kocaeli Metropolitan Municipality perform regular aerial surveillance and UMA has land based radars. TU is the only state with properly developed aerial surveillance.

Main questions:

  1. How the satellite images are verified?
  2. And what is the legislation – does it allow imposing fines based only on satellite images?

The general state of the art – verification of satellite images is still at a low level. The legislation does not allow imposing fines based on satellite images only. But in RU the suspects are inspected if arriving to RU ports and detention is applied according to PSC MoU regulations. In all states PSC inspections are followed by lengthy legal procedures to impose fines. There are ecological inspections of ships in all states except Turkey. (What about Ukraine?)

RU submitted presentation on «Results of oil spill monitoring of Eastern Black Sea using satellite technology». During the satellite monitoring carried out in July 2008 - February 2009 fifty six radio location images have been received. Two hundred and three cases of pollution in the Black Sea have been identified on the forty two photos analysed. Illegal pollution from vessels has been determined in the liability zones of all Black Sea states. In a pilot project FSI “Novorossiysk MPA” together with the engineering-technological centre “ScanEx” developed a method for efficient radio location monitoring of vessels spillages detection and identification of vessels privy to the identified pollution (backtracking).

Top View