Selected European Oil Spill Policies

Chapter 5 Selected European Oil Spill Policies

INTRODUCTION authority to use whatever means are deemed most appropriate to fight the spill. Oil that In order to investigate oil spill technologies has reached the shoreline is the responsibility in use abroad and to learn how the United of local authorities. States might benefit from the oil spill experi- For fighting oil spills at sea, the offshore ences and policies of some other countries, area surrounding France has been divided OTA staff visited four countries bordering the into three maritime regions. Oil spill re- North Sea in September, 1989: France, the sponses within each region are directed by the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Nor- responsible Maritime Prefect, a senior Navy way. OTA’s trip was coordinated by the Inter- officer who is also responsible for the defense national Petroleum Industry Environmental of the area.1 The Maritime Prefect’s first pri- Conservation Association and included visits ority is to prevent maritime accidents by en- to a number of government and industry or- forcing navigation regulations. Traffic separa- ganizations in these countries. The four coun- tion lanes have been established in some tries selected represent a wide range of tech- areas, and large, ocean-going tugs are used as nologies and countermeasures policies. Below both “watch dogs” and rescue ships. In the are some of the highlights of our findings. event of a spill, the Maritime Prefect func- tions as onscene commander rather than onscene coordinator, and hence has considerably FRENCH OIL SPILL POLICY more authority than his U.S. Coast Guard counterpart. (If a similar arrangement were in The French seriously began to consider a effect in the United States, at least 4 “mari- comprehensive approach to fighting oil spills time prefects, ” possibly U.S. Coast Guard offi- in the aftermath of the Torrey Canyon cers, would be required, one each for the East, grounding off England in 1967, but French Gulf, West, and Alaskan coasts). Relatively policy evolved significantly as a consequence minor spills are handled with local equip- of France’s unfortunate experience with the ment. If a spill occurs that is larger than local Amoco Cadiz spill in 1978. This accident, in resources can handle, an offshore marine pol- which approximately 223,000 tons (68 million lution plan, POLMAR MER, is invoked, and gallons) of oil were spilled along the Brittany the Maritime Prefect can then draw on the coast, was about 6.5 times as large as the Ex- equipment and expertise of other regions, xon Valdez spill, making it the fourth largest and, if necessary, of private stocks. in history (table 5-l). Local civil authorities are responsible for Notably, the French have assigned respon- containment and cleanup when an oil spill sibility for fighting oil spills at sea to the reaches or threatens to reach land. Each of French Navy, whose responsibilities are gen- France’s 26 coastal departments (states) pre- erally the equivalent of those of both the U.S. pares its own POLMAR TERRE response Navy and U.S. Coast Guard. Although em- plan, which the prefect (governor) of each de- phasis is placed on spill prevention, once a partment can invoke in the event of a major spill has occurred the French Navy has the threat. The plans identify priority areas to be

‘G. Marchand, G. Bergot, M. Melguen, and G. Peigne, “French Know-How in the Prevention and Fight Against Accidental Oil Spills, ” 1987 Oil Spill Conference Proceedings, Apr. &9, 1987, Baltimore, MD, pp. 15-22.

39 40 . Coping With an Oiled Sea: An Analysis of Oil Spill Response Technologies

protected and specify how booms will be in- zation to be an impressive element of its oil stalled in these areas, what public and private spill cleanup plans. There is no comparable equipment is available, and where storage emphasis on defensive beach protection sites and treatment centers for recovered measures in the United States. products are located.2 Small spills are handled Stocks of equipment for fighting offshore by commune officials (mainly by fire departments) with local equipment stocks. The spills are maintained at POLMAR centers in Army may be called for major spills and used Brest, Cherbourg, and Toulon, the headquar- to clean beaches with material and equipment ters of each of the three maritime regions, and from the POLMAR stocks. Having experi- also in Le Havre, Lorient, Port de Bouc, and enced major beach pollution and having rec- Ajaccio. Purchase and maintenance of this ognized that a significant proportion of any equipment is the responsibility of the French major spill may reach the coastline no matter Ministry of Defense. Booms for the protection what measures are taken, the French have put of sensitive nearshore and onshore areas are much effort into research and development of located in eight POLMAR centers around the beach cleaning equipment and into planning country, so that no part of the coastline is fur- and training for beach cleanup. OTA found ther than 250 kilometers from a boom storage French beach cleaning technology and organi- center. Equipment for land cleaning opera-

PhoEJ cnxfit Jim Mieh

French sand washing machine.

21bid. Chapter 5–Selected European Oil Spill Policies ● 41

tions (e.g., sand washing equipment and hot water pumps) is stationed at two of these eight centers.3 The Secretary of State for the Sea is responsible for the purchase of equipment for onshore activities. Unlike the three other countries OTA visited, the French do not rely primarily on one countermeasure technique. Both mechanical equipment and dispersants are at their dis- posal, and the technique or techniques best suited to the circumstances will be employed. While recovery at sea is preferable, the Navy may use dispersants without conferring with others if the spill is seaward of environmen- Ptwfo credit Jim Midke tally sensitive areas (as a rule of thumb, where the water depth is greater than 30 meters). French Egmolap skimmers stockpiled at the POLMAR center in Brest. Egmolap skimmers were used to recover oil French mechanical cleanup equipment is in nearshore areas of Prince William Sound. not radically different from that available in the United States. Some French technology, CEDRE’s missions are spread around various including the Egmolap skimmers successfully U.S. Executive Branch agencies. CEDRE is a used in nearshore operations in Prince Wil- key element in the French oil spill counter- liam Sound, is available in the United States. measures approach. Its existence ensures that Beach cleaning technology (e.g., sand wash- at least some attention is devoted to oil spill ers) is innovative and deserves some attention issues in the sometimes long periods between for use in the United States. Also, the French major spills. have been experimenting with biodegradation accelerating agents. They supplied one of the products (Inipol eap 22) for bioremediation DUTCH OIL SPILL POLICY experiments in Prince William Sound. In the wake of the Amoco Cadiz oil spill the The Dutch rely entirely on mechanical re- French government established CEDRE, the covery for fighting spills as they have no confi- Center for Documentation, Research, and dence in the effectiveness of chemical disper- Experimentation on accidental pollution. sants. The most notable aspect of Dutch Among other things CEDRE advises authori- reliance on mechanical means is their use of ties responsible for pollution control about large dual purpose vessels. Large skimming state-of-the-art techniques, assists and ad- vessels have advantages over small skimmers vises authorities during crises, trains person- because they can simultaneously skim and nel, conducts research to improve existing store much more oil than a small vessel and methods, and tests equipment (including oc- because they can operate in heavier seas. Nev- casional testing in small, deliberate oil spills ertheless, large, dedicated spill vessels are ex- at sea). The organization has a permanent pensive to maintain and operate and slow to staff of 26 and a budget of 10 million francs respond to distant spill sites. The Dutch argue per year. There is no equivalent U.S. organiza- that a large vessel built purely for pollution tion, although counterparts of many of control purposes would be idle for the greater

%entre POLMAR de Brest, “The Fight Against Oil Pollution on the Coastline: Missions and Methods of the POLMAR Centers,” May 1987. ——.

42 . Coping With an Oiled Sea: An Analysis of Oil Spill Response Technologies

part of its life and is therefore economically The Dutch system is intended (perhaps op- difficult to justify.4 However, vessels that can timistically) to be able to cope with a 30,000 be put to use in periods between oil spills are cubic meter spill (about the size of the Exxon much more attractive. Hopper dredges are es- Valdez spill) in 3 days. Assuming that about pecially suitable for dual use purposes in the 50 percent of a spill evaporates, mechanical Netherlands: the country is small, has a sandy equipment must be able to recover 15,000 cu- coastline, and has significant dredging needs bic meters. In all, 7 units, each unit containing in important ports and waterways. These 200 meters of boom, 2 sweeping arms, a recov- dredges can be equipped with recovery equip- ery vessel, and an assistant vessel, are avail- ment and can hold sizable amounts of recov- able to meet this goal. ered oil. Dredges normally operate in areas where the risk of oil spills is high– the ap- Dual use dredges could prove useful in the proach channels to ports. Moreover, it takes United States. Although no single approach is only a few minutes for a hopper dredge to dis- likely to be the magic solution for all situ- charge its cargo and to be available for spill ations, major port areas where dredges are op- cleanup duties. erating would be primary candidates for such The Rijkswaterstaat, or State Waterways systems. As with other approaches, support- Board, is responsible for vessel pollution ing equipment and facilities must also be countermeasures at sea, along the coast, and available. The usefulness of oil skimming in the main navigable waterways in ports.5 It dredges in areas far from ports, for which sig- also conducts oil spill research. As in France, nificant time would be required to reach, is although the government takes charge in the less obvious, although in some cases dredges event of vessel spills, the polluter is liable for may be able to steam to a spill site in time to all cleanup costs. Oil companies are expected make a difference in the cleanup effort. The to fight platform spills. In the event of a large Dutch State Waterways Board suggested to tanker spill, one or more dredges may be OTA that 10 to 20 sets of sweeping arms, lo- called into cleanup action. Notably, dredges cated at key ports around the United States, are under contract to the government rather might be adequate coverage. Existing dredges than owned by it. Where the flash point of the either owned or chartered by the Army Corps spilled oil is high enough, any dredge under of Engineers could be converted to accept the contract may be used. If the flash point is be- sweeping arms. IHC estimates that costs to low 140°F, which is occasionally the case, a reconfigure dredges to accept sweeping arms dredge designed to tanker specifications (e.g., would be about $400,000 per vessel, and that the Cosmos) is used. When called, a dredge drops its spoil, proceeds to its base, is fitted the equipment itself– which could be shared with sweeping arms for oil containment and among several vessels–would cost about recovery, and sails to the spill site to begin re- $600,000 per set. At present, the Army Corps covery. The whole process generally takes of Engineers has no responsibilities for oil about four hours, although Dutch dredges are spills, so a change in the basic U.S. approach seldom further than 20 kilometers from their would be required. bases.

d~c D~& T~hno]o~ Corp., “The IHC S]icktrai] and Its Possible Application in the U. S.A.,” Prepared for U.S. Army CorPs of Engineers, Trailing Suction Hopper Workgroup Session, Atlantic City, NJ, June 14-15, 1989. s~~comwative Study Ofpo]lution Contro] Po]iq and Contingency Plans in France and in the Wnn Aflreement Member countries)” paper presented at the Nineteenth Meeting of the Bonn Agreement Working Group on Operational, Technical, and Scientific Ques- tions Concerning Counter Pollution Activities, Renesse: May 3-6, 1989, p. 22. Chapter 5–Selected European Oil Spill Policies ● 43

UNITED KINGDOM ment’s lack of faith in the effectiveness of me- OIL SPILL POLICY chanical equipment in weather conditions and sea states typical of the North Sea and other waters surrounding the United Kingdom and Responsibility for responding to offshore on the view that recent advances in disper- tanker spills in the United Kingdom is ac- sants have improved their effectiveness and cepted by the central government. The government provides the response equipment, di- made them much less toxic. According to the rects the response operation, maintains and MPCU General Information Notes, “The only updates the national contingency plan, and re- operationally proven technique for combating views developments in pollution control oil at sea in the conditions prevalent around 8 equipments This authority has been dele- the coastline is spraying with dispersants.” gated to the Marine Pollution Control Unit Only dispersants which have passed appropri- (MPCU) of the Department of Transport. The ate tests may be used. Immediately after a MPCU is assisted by the Coastguard, whose spill occurs, a determination is made as to primary role with respect to marine pollution whether dispersant use would be safe and ef- is to detect and report pollution incidents. Re- fective. The MPCU consults with the Fisher- sponse to platform spills in the North Sea is ies Department and the Nature Conservancy the responsibility of the operator. Response Council on the appropriateness of dispersant policy for these spills is set by the Department use in sensitive areas and in water less than 1 of Energy, but the MPCU provides advice and mile from shore or less than 20 meters in may help with the cleanup operations if the depth. operator’s resources prove inadequate. Pollu- tion that reaches shore is primarily the re- The MPCU currently has seven airplanes sponsibility of local authorities, but the under contract for applying dispersants. Two MPCU advises and assists as required. In a remote sensing aircraft are available to direct major coastal pollution incident (one beyond the response effort. Aircraft and dispersants the resources of a local authority) the MPCU are strategically positioned at airports around would set up a Joint Response Center and the country. During daylight, aircraft must be would then coordinate and lead the onshore ready to fly within 30 minutes of notification; response to ensure a fully integrated at-sea at night they must be ready within 2 hours. and on-shore cleanup operation.7 Stocks of Hence, the MPCU is able to start spraying dis- specialized beach cleaning equipment are held persants very soon after a spill occurs, an im- by the MPCU to supplement local resources. portant advantage since effectiveness depends Cleanup costs are initially borne by the on early application, and in most cases oil can MPCU, but where the polluter can be identi- no longer be dispersed after about 48 hours. fied, he will be required to refund the costs of The Unit also has dispersant spraying equip- the measures. ment fitted to a number of commercial tugs It is the policy of the British government to located at strategic positions around the U.K. rely on dispersants as a first line of defense for coast; a small amount of mechanical recovery oil spills; mechanical recovery plays a second- equipment to deploy in chartered vessels; a ary role. This policy is based on the govern- stock of cargo transfer equipment for lighter-

GW.H.H. McLeod, “Contro] Ofoi] Po]]ution Response Activities,” The Remote Sensing of Oil Slicks, A.E. KAX@ (cd. ) (London: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 1989), p. 115. ~partment of Transport, “MPCU General Information Notes. ” ‘Ibid. p. 10. 44 ● Coping With an Oiled Sea: An Analysis of Oil Spill Response Technologies

ing operations; and stockpiles of beach clean- pany. The full participants are Esso, British ing equipment. Petroleum, Shell, Texaco, and Mobil. These full participants can call on a maximum of 50 During OTA’s visit, two tankers collided off percent of the available equipment to respond the Humber Estuary, resulting in an oil spill to spill emergencies worldwide. Petro Canada of 800 tons. The MPCU determined that the is a lesser participant and, as such, may only oil could be dispersed, and had the spraying use equipment in proportion to its contribu- operation under way within 3.5 hours. In the tion. United States, both the decision to use dispersants and the mobilization of airplanes and The MPCU also funds a research program ships may take much longer. to develop improved techniques for predicting the behavior of spilled oil, dealing with it With available dispersant equipment, the at sea, and predicting its environmental im- MPCU maintains it can treat 5,000 tons of oil pact. This program also covers hazardous at sea in a 48-hour period. Planned upgrades chemicals. in the aircraft fleet will increase this capabil- ity to 14,000 tons. The MPCU assumes that in most coastal spills the greater part of the oil NORWEGIAN will come ashore and estimates that with the assistance of MPCU beach cleaning equip- OIL SPILL POLICY ment a local authority can clean up some 6,000 tons of oiled material from beaches Oil pollution control policy in Norway is the every 7 to 10 days. responsibility of the State Pollution Control Authority (SPCA) within the Ministry of the In the event of a very large spill, the MPCU Environment. For major pollution, the SPCA may ask for assistance from neighboring presides over the Government Action Control countries. The United Kingdom and seven Group, which also includes representatives other countries bordering the North Sea have from other government ministries, the oil in- entered the Agreement for Co-operation in dustry, and the scientific community. Respon- Dealing with Pollution of the North Sea by sibilities for actual cleanup are divided among Oil, commonly called the Bonn Agreement, to the SPCA, local authorities, and the offshore facilitate the sharing of equipment and the ex- oil companies. In general, the polluter is re- change of information about oil spill counter- sponsible for cleaning up oil spills, but if the measures. The United Kingdom also has bi- polluter is incapable of handling a spill or if lateral oil spill agreements with France (the extra help is required, the SPCA may, at its Manche Plan) and Norway (the Norbrit Plan). discretion, take over the operation.9 In this Although no formal agreement exists between sense, Norwegian oil spill policy is similar to industry and the government, the MPCU may that of the United States. In practice, the oil also ask for assistance from the oil industry’s and gas industry has prepared specifically to oil spill response base, located in South- respond to offshore platform spills, while the ampton, England. The Southampton base SPCA generally expects to respond to spills currently maintains one of the largest stocks from ships– an important difference between of oil spill equipment in the world, valued at U.S. and Norwegian approaches. about 4 million pounds. Exxon is a paying member of this cooperative, and was there- The SPCA has decreed that oil pollution fore able to use about half of the South- will be fought by mechanical means to the ex- ampton stock in the Exxon Valdez spill. The tent possible. Dispersants are used only if me- Southampton Base is a joint venture com- chanical cleanup has proved ineffective and

YI’he Norwegian State Pollution Control Authority, “Oil Pollution Control: Emergency Services in Norway,” February 1983. Chapter 5–Selected European Oil Spill Policies . 45

that make regular shuttles between shore bases and offshore platforms, and, hence, are never far from an equipment depot. These boats have a storage capacity of about 1,000 tons. Local authorities are responsible for fighting spills on and within 3 miles of the coast. Fifty-two municipal and intermunicipal contingency areas have been designated, and within each area an Oil Pollution Control Committee, with direct responsibility for the cleanup effort, has been established. Local resources are used for small spills. The costs of municipal oil spill equipment are shared equally between the central and local governments. Spills that are larger than can be handled lo- cally and/or beyond the capacity of the pol- Photo crwh Jim Mielke luter to handle are in part or totally taken over by the SPCA. The SPCA has established 12 Norwegian Transrec weir skimming system. equipment depots at strategic locations along the coast. Each depot is stocked with about $1 only with approval from the SPCA. The SPCA million (U. S.) worth of equipment, including requires that the offshore oil and gas industry heavy, medium-heavy, and light booms, one be able to recover 8,000 tons of oil per day, large and two smaller skimmers, and a supply that the equipment for doing so be able to op- of beach cleaning equipment. In addition, the erate in significant wave heights of up to 2 me- SPCA has contracted with a number of coastal ters and in currents of up to 1.5 knots, and tankers, tugs, and purse seine fishing vessels. that this equipment beat the spill site within These vessels are on call and maybe used in a 48 hours of a spill. The SPCA has also im- large spill. The purse seiners can be equipped posed requirements on refineries and large with skimmers and operate as both oil recov- terminals. These are required to be able to ery vessels and oil storage vessels. In all, mu- cope with 5,000-ton spills. nicipal, state, and private organizations have To meet offshore requirements, the eleven established a total of 17 oil spill depots along oil and gas companies that operate on the the coast containing about 60 miles of light Norwegian continental shelf have organized and heavy booms and 300 skimmers. Numer- the Norwegian Clean Seas Association for Op- ous storage and boom towing vessels are on erating Companies (NOFO). NOFO main- call. tains a total of 14 oil recovery and transfer Norway has made a strong commitment to (Transrec) systems and 8,750 meters of heavy oil spill response training. The SPCA’s Oil duty boom at 5 strategic locations along the Spill Control Center in Horten offers a series Norwegian coast. The Transrec systems have of courses and exercises in oil spill control. A been designed for operation in rough North most impressive aspect of this program is the Sea conditions and are among the largest wide range of personnel that participate: vir- skimming and transfer systems available any- tually all municipal, state, and private em- where. These systems have been designed to ployees involved in decisionmaking and/or be mounted on the large industry work boats cleanup operations in Norway receive train- 46 . Coping With an Oiled Sea: An Analysis of Oil Spill Response Technologies

GENERAL COMMENTS

There exist almost as many approaches to fighting oil spills in Europe as there are Euro- pean countries (table 5-l). The degree of reliance on mechanical cleanup methods is one area, for example, where the full range of possible approaches are exhibited: some countries rely exclusively on mechanical cleanup methods, others on both mechanical methods and dispersants, and still others almost solely on dispersants. No European country, however, relies on burning as an important part of its spill response arsenal. Some other vari- ables include the type of mechanical equipment preferred, the government agency assigned primary authority for oil spill mm Credit Ml W@3smmn!ymf response, the division of authority between local and statewide officials, the amount of oil Large offshore boom on reel, used by the Norwegian Clean for which countermeasures must be prepared Seas Association for Operating Companies (NOFO). to deal, the role of private industry in cleanup efforts, and the preferred approach to training. The goals of this program are to train per- ing, drills, and equipment testing. sonnel to know their responsibilities in an emergency spill situation and to give them the These differences are based, in part, on cir- knowledge and experience needed to meet cumstances peculiar to each country, e.g., the these responsibilities. As one notable training use of dual purpose dredges seems to make device, the Center has developed an elaborate particularly good sense in the Netherlands, “tactical exercise.” In this exercise accident given the amount of local dredging activity, as situations are simulated and trainees play the does the use of large work boats for counter- roles they would play in a real emergency situ- measures platforms in Norway, given their ation. Such roles may range from state or mu- utility in rough seas and the fact that these nicipal decisionmaker to master of a vessel to vessels regularly shuttle between the offshore a fisherman complaining of damaged gear. In platforms and shore bases. No doubt different addition to simulations, major seagoing exer- approaches are also based on the different ex- cises (which can include experimental, con- periences of each country. In European coun- trolled oil spills) are conducted yearly. A con- tries, as in the United States, progress is sequence of the emphasis on training in made, much of the time, by the pressure of Norway is that those with oil spill cleanup re- events, and revisions in contingency plans sponsibilities at all levels of government and have been made in several countries in the af- industry– an estimated 3,000 people—are termath of major pollution incidents.10 Im- well informed about the decisionmaking proc- portantly, some differences among countries ess and about the types of things that can go seem to be based on different perceptions wrong. Uncertainty about how to respond ap- about the effectiveness of a technique, about pears to have been reduced to a minimum. risk, and/or about costs v. benefits, i.e., on

IoOp. cit., fOOtnOte 5, Pa& 39. Table 5-1 -Summary of Oil Spill Response Arrangements

Central government Responsibility for clean-up departments Country primarily involved At sea On-shore Policy for clean-up at sea Clean-up resources

Belgium Ministry of Defense Navy Coastal munici- Dispersants applied from vessels Limited mainly to dispersants and Ministry of Interior palities; Civil spraying equipment. Defense Corps Denmark Ministry of National Agency National Agency for Containment and recovery Specialized vessels equipped with Environment for Environmental Environmental almost exclusively booms and skimmers. Also equipment Protection Protection; coastal although provision for limited and materials for shore clean-up in local authorities; use of dispersants district stockpiles. Civil Defense Corps France Secretary of State Maritime Prefect Coastal communes: Containment and recovery Extensive stocks of specialized equip for the Sea (Navy) Commissioner of preferred but dispersants ment and materials in regional stockpiles. Ministry of Defense the Department used in designated areas Also strike teams and aircraft for Ministry of Interior dispersant spraying. Federal Ministry of Federal Board of Coastal states Containment and recovery Specialized vessels, booms, skimmers, Republic of Transport Waterways and preferred but dispersants spraying equipment and dispersants. Germany Navigation; also used in North Sea coastal states Netherlands Ministry of Transport North Sea Coastal provincial Containment and recovery Specialized vessels, including combined and Public Works Directorate of and municipal exclusively dredgers/oil combating ships equipped State Waterways states with oil recovery equipment. Other Board vessels for deploying booms. Other equipment held by salvage and private contractors. Norway Ministry of State Pollution Coastal community Containment and recovery almost Extensive stocks of specialized equip- Environment Control and intercommunity exclusively, but will consider ment and trained response teams at 12 Authority/Maritime areas dispersants if mechanical means regional centers. Directorate are ineffective Sweden Ministry of Defense Coast Guard Municipal fire Containment and recovery Large fleet of vessels equipped for anti- Service brigades; provincial preferred although dispersant pollution work, Extensive stocks of authorities application permissible under clean-up equipment in some 30 coastal certain conditions sites. United Department of Marine Pollution Marine Pollution Aerial application of dispersants; 7 dedicated spraying aircraft, vessel- Kingdom Transport Control Unit of Control Unit of containment and recovery mounted spray gear and extensive Maritime Maritime where applicable stocks of dispersant. Also containment Directorate Directorate; coastal and recovery equipment and equipment local authorities for shore clean-up in 3 regional stockpiles.

SOURCE: J N Archer and I C white, “Organlsatton to mmbat 011 SpIllS: The Case for Coordmatlon of Government Practice, ” International Tanker Owners Pollutlon Federation, p 5 —

48 . Coping With an Oiled Sea: An Analysis of Oil Spill Response Technologies

many of the issues currently being debated in any given country– is assigned responsibility the United States. for vessel spills. It is clear that no single countermeasures Most countries accept that it would be practice will be applicable in all locales and for unrealistic to expect the same level and all types of oil spills. This is especially true in promptness of response if the polluting the United States, a large country with thou- source was a vessel at sea, especially if the sands of miles of coastline. Yet some ap- owner or operator had no presence in the proaches adopted in Europe deserve serious country whose shores were threatened. For consideration for applicable parts of the this reason, in northwest Europe the re- United States. Among these: sponsibility for combating oil pollution from tankers and other vessels is normally equip existing dredges with oil recovery accepted by governments on the under- capabilities (as in the Netherlands) in the standing that the costs of any reasonable U.S. port areas where dredges routinely measures taken will be recoverable from operate, the owner and his insurer.12 expand the use of supply vessels as plat- For these types of spills, unlike the current forms for heavy duty skimmers (as in situation in the United States, both the re- Norway) in such oil production areas as sponsibility and the authority for cleanup are the Gulf of Mexico and Southern Califor- in the hands of the central government. nia, Also, there is a distinction in most Euro- preapprove dispersants for use in non- pean countries between those responsible for sensitive areas using on-call airplanes for combating oil at sea and those responsible for delivery systems (as in the U.K.), dealing with it on the coast.13 On shore, re- expand training and contingency plan- sponsibility for implementing initial cleanup ning exercises (as in Norway). measures usually lies with local authorities, with the central government often providing Despite differences, several generalizations advice and coordination. As the actual or po- about European oil spill response policies tential impact of a spill increases, central gov- may be made. With respect to terminals, re- ernments assume more responsibility, and fineries, offshore platforms, and other fixed are able to provide equipment, logistic sup- facilities, the general rule is that the party causing the pollution should clean it up. Op- port, and technical and financial assistance. erators of these facilities are expected to have Coordination between local onshore responsi- contingency plans and to provide equipment bilities and central government offshore re- and materials in the event of a spill.11 Direct sponsibilities is usually the charge of a single government involvement in the response gen- government department or committee. Sev- erally only takes place if the polluter is unable eral European countries (e.g., France and to cope with the spill. Virtually without excep- Norway) appear to be far better equipped and/ tion, however, the central government– or organized than the United States to re- whether represented by the ministry of de- spond to spills that reach or threaten the fense, environment, transportation, etc. in coast.

I IJ.N. ~cher ~d I.C. mite, “Or~izatiOn to combat oil spills: The Case for Coordination of Government practice, ” The Interna- tional Tanker Owners Pollution Federation Ltd. ‘21bid. p. 3. ‘31bid. p. 4. Chapter 5–Selected European Oil Spill Policies .49

A wide variety of mechanical cleanup tech- throughout Europe that potentially could be nology is used in Europe. Some types of used in the event of a large spill. Also, a num- booms and skimmers in use or under develop- ber of bilateral agreements exist to facilitate ment may offer some marginal advantages to cooperation regarding oil spills occurring on equipment manufactured in the United or near the offshore boundaries. (While help- States; however, OTA found no evidence that ful, these bilateral agreements do not always European technology was dramatically better work to each country’s satisfaction, e.g., when than that available in the United States. Much one country’s policy is to use dispersants and of this technology is, in fact, marketed in the the other’s is to rely on mechanical equip- United States, and those responsible for pur- ment). chasing equipment are (or are becoming) fa- All European countries OTA visited as- miliar with it. Some European equipment was sured us that they were prepared for major oil used in the Exxon Valdez oil spill. French Eg- spills. We suspect that had we toured U.S. fa- molap skimmers used in beach cleaning were cilities before the Exxon Valdez accident, we reportedly particularly successful. would have received similar assurances, so OTA was impressed with the total amount European confidence is at least somewhat of equipment available in Europe. In the event questionable. On the whole, however, Euro- of a major spill, countries have not only their pean countries are better organized than the own local, regional, and national equipment United States, have more resources on which stocks on which to draw, but could also have to draw, and conduct more frequent training access to equipment from other nearby coun- exercises. In part this is due to activity under- tries and from the private sector. Several co- taken in response to unfortunate experiences operative agreements exist. In addition to the with their own major oil spills. As some Euro- Bonn Agreement, already discussed, the Com- peans readily admitted, no country, no matter mission of European Communities (CEC) in how well organized and equipped, would have Brussels has a task force that can provide ex- been able to cope satisfactorily with a spill the pertise to member countries that need advice. size of the Exxon Valdez spill — particularly in The CEC maintains a list of equipment such a remote location.