THE IMPORTANCE OF GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY CO-OPERATIONIN OIL SPILL CLEAN-UP RESPONSE
Rear Admiral MICHAEL L.

STACEYINTRODUCTION
My background of 38 years service in the Royal Navy followed by 9 years as a
United Kingdom Government Civil Servant within the Department of Trade andTransport and the last 6 years as an independent international oil spill response
consultant has, I believe, provided me with a useful range of experience toapply to the problems of oil spill response, and in particular to the absoluteimportance of Government and Industry Co-operation.
In any operation I have conducted, whether it be a naval battle at sea or a fighton the beaches against spilled oil, the greatest single factor for success has
been the human factor, wherein mutual trust, co-operation and a common
understanding of the problem are imperative. To achieve this I have always
tried to reduce complex problems down to basic fundamentals, and to apply tothem fundamental principles for their solution. In my Navy these principles are
known as the "Principles of War" and I shall refer to them later. Those relevant
to our considerations related to oil spill response can be defined as follows:(a)Know your Enemy - understand in full the details of your problem
and be ready to use this knowledge to your advantage. Beware overestimating effects.

(b)

Economy of Effort - the need to conduct operations with minimum of
resource - and at reasonable expense - and to limit side effects,
especially on the surrounding environment.

(c)Concentration - the ability quickly to bring maximum appropriate
resources to bear on the problem.

(d)Mutual Support - the provision of assistance from those withappropriate experience and resource either on the basis of formal pre arranged agreement or resulting from friendly neighbourliness.

ROLES OF GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY
In very general forms I define the roles of the two parties of our consideration ie.
Government and Industry as follows:

(a) Government

The role of Government is basically to ensure that thecountry is run in accordance with the wishes of its
electorate, to enact legislation to protect its society fromundesirable behaviour, exploitation and personal risk anddanger, and to ensure a prosperous way of life. In
Environmental terms Government is the conscience of thecountry and is responsible for ensuring minimum risk anddamage to the environment. It is my personal opinion
that Government should not become over-involved in thetechnical detail of the oil industry, but rather than theyshould rely on the industry itself for such advice andexpertise. Also, they should strive to minimise thebarriers and the bureaucracy which so often mitigatesagainst free discussion and timely decision-taking,elements which is so important in oil spill emergency
response.

(b) Industry

Industry's task is to develop, manage and market theirproduct in a way which is commercially effective andeconomically competitive. They have need to comply
with all relevant International and National regulations
which they generally supplement with their own guidelines
to ensure high standards and minimum risk to equipment
and to people as well as to the environment. The Oil
Industry has a high public perception which it is properly
keen preserve.

PHILOSOPHY OF OIL SPILL RESPONSIBILITY
The starting point on defining responsibility is that prevention is better - andfrequently cheaper - than cure. The establishment of improved standards ofship construction, safe navigation, qualifications of personnel and safe
operations of hazardous cargoes are generally the business of Governments
and in international terms appropriate standards are normally establishedthrough the United Nations Maritime Agency - The International Maritime
Organisation (IMO). This organisation has made great progress in maritime
safety and accident preparedness, but the hard fact is that many accidents
remain the result of human failing and thus we face the inevitability that,
however far the threshold of accident is lowered by preventative measures,
accidents will continue to happen. The IMO, with Government delegations
from over 147 maritime countries, has increasingly provided opportunity for theindustry to be represented in its sub-committees or through observer status ofindustry-related associations. I believe this to be very important and I hope itwill continue and increase.
To the question of where lies the responsibility for the damage andenvironmental pollution from spillages of oil we find a variety of scenarios andsolutions. However, the fundamental responsibility has to be that he whopollutes is responsible for cleaning up his own spillage or for arranging andpaying for somebody to do it on his behalf.
In order to achieve the necessary speedy responses of either dispersant
application or mechanical recovery equipment deployment, the United Kingdom(UK) Government - and many other Governments - recognise that it isimpracticable for an oil tanker owner or insurer operating on a world-wide basis
being able to ensure the rapid deployment of clean-up resources to one of theirstricken vessels on the high seas which may threaten an other nations
environmental assets in parts of the world where no Company/Industry
resources are available. Accordingly those Governments themselves provide
first response capabilities using either Government or contract resources andsubsequently seek financial reimbursement.
Such a commitment byGovernment is facilitated when the country is a member of the Civil Liability andInternational Oil Pollution Compensation Fund Conventions thereby ensuring astrict liability of reimbursement of reasonable clean-up costs arising fromspillages of persistent cargo oils from tankers of any flag as a result of any
accident other than acts of God or war.
We shall hear later of the arrangements within the United States of America whoare not party to this Conventions of Compensation and have a new and recently
established system of response under The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) 90.

RESPONSE POSTURES
I hope by now it is becoming clear that a trusting and sharing relationshipbetween Government and Industry is essential to success, so perhaps now weshould look in more detail at currently defined Tiers of Response Capability
which provide the framework of such co-operation. They are:(a) Tier One(b) Tier Two(c) Tier ThreeThis is the response immediately available in terms ofequipment and personnel to respond to a spillage arisingfrom an equipment malfunction or failure of personnel. At
Terminals and Ports it is provided by Industry and only at sea,
as described previously, might it be provided by Government.
In off-shore operations it is provided by the Industry.
This response is applicable to larger spills to which Industry
would respond bringing to bear all equipment in the vicinity
together with the support of any contractors or co-operatives.
This is the response to a major spillage of international
proportion.
Industry would respond to the full, using
Industry-inspired stock-piled resources, and Governments
would invoke established Regional and Mutual AssistanceAgreements. Government would probably take charge ofthe overall response.

EQUIPMENT RESOURCES
Before identifying specific equipment resources it is useful to identify what I
define as the hidden resources of Government of which Legislative Powers,
Parliamentary Access, Intergovernmental and International Agreements,
Communications, access to media and national responsibility for care andprotection of the environment are but a few. It is frequently not realised howimportant and inter-related these elements can be to a successful response andhow clearly they need to be understood by the Industry and other participants.
Equipment resources maintained by government vary from country to country.
Some countries, similar to the UK, maintain a considerable and substantial
immediate at sea response capability and other specialised equipment suitable
to their especial circumstances.
Frequently, however, the main equipment availability is found from Industry.
Any single oil company activity ie. platform, pipe-line, terminal, refinery orloading buoy is required to provide an on-site Tier One response capability andany major oil company operation within a country will have other reserve
equipment which can be brought forward to meet larger requirements.
Similarly they are likely to have established mutual assistance arrangementswith other oil companies in the region in order to increase their resource
response capability. On a wider scale major oil companies will belong tointernational co-operatives such as Oil Spill Response Ltd, Southampton,England, East Asia Response Ltd., Singapore and Clean Caribbean Cooperative in Florida, USA. These co-operatives can quickly deploy very large
amounts of equipment by air, and sometimes - and most desirably - also provide
by operating personnel.
These large deployable resources provide an immense capability, but it isimportant to recognise that experience frequently shows that in a successful
operation it is the preparation and the contingency planning within the National
Plan of the country concerned, whereby arrangements are made for theeffective integration of reinforcements, which ensures success just as much, ormore, than the equipment provision itself. This aspect of national contingency
planning is particularly important and covers a very wide spectrum including
customs clearance, immigration, equipment compatibility, housing feeding,
medical and law and order. These plans can only be effectively developed if
both Government and Industry are involved in their preparation.

MUTUAL INVOLVEMENT
I am quite clear in all my experience that in the oil pollution business we are allfighting a common enemy and we cannot afford to be other than united andsupportive amongst ourselves. The problem, when it occurs, is difficult
enough without adding self-inflicted aggravation, and I just refuse to accept any"we/they" -hostility between Industry and Government. Accordingly I always
encourage both parties to encourage and involve fully all related agencies including the environmental lobbies and the media. My observation is that
Industry has developed to the stage where companies do co-operate well witheach other - without detriment to their natural and proper-commercial
competitiveness, and governments are improving: but some could still dobetter. Outside these national arrangements I find encouraging developmentin Government/Industry involvement in Regional and International mutual
assistance agreements and I welcome Industry's enthusiasm for their various
response stockpiles.
Many of these developments have recently beenformalised in the IMO Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness Response andCo-operation (OPRC) due to come into force in May this year, and to which I
refer later.

OIL COMPANY ASSOCIATIONS
These are a variety of well established Oil Industry International Forums which
provide the focus and concentration for establishing Industry/Government
strategy and in respect of oil spill these are centralised in the Oil Spill Working
Group of The International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation
Association (IPIECA).
IPIECA has special responsibilities for global
environment issues related to the petroleum industry. It was founded in 1979
following the establishment of the United Nations Environmental Programme(UNEP) to which it provides the principal input from the oil industry.
The Oil Spill Working Group has a broad membership covering all key activities
in the industry with additional representation from The Oil Companies Marine
International Forum (OCIMF), The Oil Industry International Exploration andProduction Forum (E and P Forum) and the International Tanker Owners
Pollution Federation (ITOPF).
Indeed it is IPIECA, who have recently co-operated closely with the IMO against
the background of the OPRC Convention, and have recently completed a seriesof seven seminars around the world (The last being in Hong Kong lastNovember) specifically to encourage and develop Government/Industry
relationships in the important area of contingency planning.

OIL POLLUTION PREPAREDNESS RESPONSE AND CO-OPERATIONCONVENTIONThe OPRC Convention, which comes into force in May this year, embodies agreat deal of what has already been discussed. Its primary purpose is toensure that nations have an effective plan to respond promptly an effectively tooil pollution incidents and that ships flying their flag shall have, on board, andeffective contingency plan and an established international incident reporting
system. None the less important are instructions to encourage international
response co-operation, and joint technical and research and development
programmers.
Reference to Government/Industry Co-operation is specifically emphasized in
the preamble to the Convention with the words "the importance of effective
preparation for combatting oil pollution incidents and the important role which
the oil and shipping industries have in this regard".

UNITED KINGDOM EXPERIENCE
To illustrate these principles of co-operation it might be useful to run through theorganisation within the United Kingdom during my time in charge of the Marine
Pollution Control Unit - and which remains very mach the same to the presenttime. I do this very clearly understanding that the way we do things in mycountry is not necessarily the way they should be done here - but in my firm
belief that the principles apply to all of us and in this respect it can be useful tolearn from the experience of others.
When I arrived in 1979, with instructions to develop a UK Government response
capability, I established a small multi-discipline unit of 15 people which operated
within Government with full responsibility for establishing and maintaining
national resources and for taking charge of national oil spill response
operations. Throughout I had a permanent high level advisor from the Industry
who spent one full day a week whit me and accompanied me at all times during
operations. This appointment was for two years and was rotated through themajor oil companies in turn, thereby providing me with continuous access tospecialist Industry expertise in my planning as well as a more useful key tounlock any door during a spill response. This advisor was undoubtedly one of
the more valuable members of my staff who ensured my constant awareness ofwhat was going on in the Industry and provided the essential link between ourtwo parties. I was further encouraged that the Industry saw this as aprestigious appointment which was highly sought after.
For at sea response the United Kingdom provided a substantial capability, forreasons previously explained, based on chemical dispersant application byaircraft and surface vessels complemented by a limited mechanical recoverycapability. All this was planned in full consultation with the Industry to ensure
there were no unnecessary duplications or deficiencies in the overall nationalcapability. As an example, one particularly interesting area was identified - theavailability of cargo transfer equipment within commercial salvage companies
for the very important task of emergency lightening of a damaged tanker. Itwas found that the salvage companies - who operate anywhere in the world frequently were unable to make this equipment available in the UK as quickly aswas required. Accordingly the government provided two caches of suitableequipment, held at short notice for deployment, in full consultation and with theagreement of the Salvage Association; who are rightly very sensitive to any
such change of balance in their highly competitive business.
When oil reaches inshore waters and comes ashore - as inevitably it sofrequently does - its clean-up in the UK is the responsibility of the Local CoastalAuthorities. Here, within each of the counties - or coastal states - the local

Government has responsibility for clean-up and in large spills is re-inforced bycentral Government who also provide specialist equipment. Additionally ineach county - or group of counties - any major oil company in the area will plan
and work closely with the Local Authority and will identify an official as thenominated Industry Co-ordinator with responsibility to ensure this liaison iseffective. In beach cleaning operations arising from large spills the central
government assumes the co-ordinating operational role in a Joint Operations
Centre usually established on the coast and operated by the Local Authority
and the related oil company. This system is frequently used and works verywell.
In addition to these permanently established relationships a regular meeting isheld annually, chaired by Government, and to which representatives of all
involved organisations and related agencies are invited including Oil
Companies, Off-shore operators, Coastguards, Port and Local Authorities,
Media and Environmental Agencies. Over forty people used to come for a day,in which Government explained its policy - and its problems, Industry updated
their current operations and others had opportunity to listen or to participate. I
believe time spent on these exchanges; which allow all to feel they are part ofthe decision-making process: - including potential trouble-makers - isimmensely worthwhile and greatly facilitates the conduct of operations when
there is an incident.
Northern Europe provides a very high intensity of tanker traffic and associatedterminals and refineries, complemented by a large Off-shore operation in theNorth Sea. Thus the risk of accident is high and since the occasional verylarge marine oil spill and the majority of related Tier Three response demandresources far in excess of what any single company or Government cansensibly hold at readiness, the philosophy of mutual support - or friendly
neighbourliness - has to be the order of the day. In Northern Europe nine
nations are joined in the Bonn Agreement to assist each other "to their best
endeavour" whilst more specific agreements exist in the "Manchplan" in theEnglish Channel and in the "Norbritplan" in the North Sea.
Finally exercises.
No Government or Industry Plan or any Association
relationship is effective without being exercised honestly and without restraint:
so that lessons can be learnt and plans improved. In the UK we exercise a lot
at all levels and always together. It has to be emphasised again that successlies not solely in the amount of equipment which collectively can be brought tobear but the willingness of people, as prepared and expressed in Contingency
Plans, to work together.
And with people in Government and Industry
constantly on the move and changing jobs this is something which has to bedriven hard and kept going.

CONCLUSIONSIn conclusion, I do not intend to go over the many points made in my paper, but
it does deserve to be repeated that the preservation of our marine environment
has to be very high on anybody's agenda. Whilst small oil spills arising fromoperational accidents can generally be contained and successfully cleaned up
with only small environmental effect it is the inevitability of the occasional verylarge oil spill from laden tanker a platform blow-out which produces the top lineof response requirement.
To provide resources - held on stand-by - for such an eventuality has to be far
beyond what is sensible or economically reasonable for any single Government
or Oil Company, so the sensible solution must lie in an organisation ofInternational Mutual Assistance between countries and states within which
Governments and Industry can work closely together and share theircommitment to emergency response with the overall purpose of doing their best
to win the war against oil pollution and to preserve the maritime environment for
the future within sensible limits of effort and cost.

February 1995