Norwegian Oil Spill Contingency and Risk based
Governmental Contingency planning.
ByJan Nerland
Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT), Horten, Norway

1

Abstract

The intention of my presentation is to give you a broad picture of the NorwegianContingency system and how we carry out risk based contingency planning in SFT. During
the last two years a working group from the department of Control and Emergency response
has developed and tested a method which make it possible to transform very different
information and knowledge about oil pollution and oil spill recovery operations, into
detailed proposals for governmental oil response capacity along our coast.

2

Norwegian contingency today

2.1

Geography, weather & climate

The Norwegian economical zone is located between 56 and 82 degrees North and covers 2
million square kilometres. While the land area constitutes 324 220 square kilometres only,
the total beach line - fjords and islands included - is close to 57 000 kilometres, and the
population of Norway is only 4,5 million. At this northern latitude, huge variations in weather
and light conditions prevail and while some parts of the country have arctic climate, mild
winters with temperatures above freezing is common in mainland coastal areas. All this, in
combination with extensive shipping and petroleum exploration, production and transport,
represent a risk of severe environmental impact from oil and chemicals.

2.2

The Pollution Control Act

The Norwegian Pollution Control Act of 1981 chapter 6 "Acute Pollution" includes specificrequirements related to contingency in cases of acute pollution. The industry andmunicipalities have to comply with the following obligations:••••to establish and maintain a contingency organisation and a contingency plan,
to notify when acute pollution is identified,
to take immediate action to limit environmental consequences,to assist the government in case of national emergencies.

The "polluter pays" principle is also implemented into the Act.
2.3

The national contingency system

The Pollution Control Act states that the national contingency system is divided into private(industry), municipal and governmental contingency with specific areas of responsibility. In
Norway, all contingency plans and organisations are standardised and co-ordinated. Hence,
Page no. 1 of 28

in case of a major national emergency, the national contingency system will work as a single
integrated response organisation.
2.3.1 The petroleum industry
Today, Norway is the world's second largest exporter of crude oil second only to Saudi
Arabia. In the North Sea and Norwegian Sea, more than 3,2 million barrels of crude oil is
produced daily from more than 50 floating and fixed installations. The crude oil istransported from off shore installations on shuttle tankers and through pipelines to several
oil terminals on land, both in Norway and in the UK from which very large crude carriers(VLCC) embark. 10% of Norway's GNP and 36% of all export is originating from thisindustry. During the next decade, total investment in the petroleum industry in Norway isestimated to 8 billion £ Sterling.
About 2 500 tonnes of oil is discharged annually, of which 90% is produced water with anaverage oil content of 25 ppm. The remaining 10% of this annual volume originate fromabout 150 acute oil spills, most of which have a spilled volume of less than 1 m3 . The
volume of produced water is increasing, as production wells grow older. In addition morethan 150 000 tonnes of production chemicals is released annually. Such discharges require a
release permit from the Norwegian authorities.
The off shore industry has to comply with contingency requirements forwarded by the
Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT).
2.3.2 On shore industry
In addition to the general obligations laid down in the Pollution Control Act, some 80
industrial enterprises have received individual contingency requirements from the SFT.
Based on environmental risk analysis, specialised contingency is established including acontingency plan, regular training of personnel and response equipment. Typical enterprisesof this category are oil terminals, refineries and chemical factories.
In addition to the industry there are more than 300 000 underground petroleum storage tanks
in Norway, of which 1 % is believed to leak at any given time. New regulations aiming at
quality control and the prevention of such releases came into force in 1998.
2.3.3 Sea transport
Norway is one of the most rural populated countries in the world. Small communities along
the coast depend on ship as the major means of transport. Petroleum products are transportedby ships between more than 400 tank facilities from which distribution is by tank lorries. In
1998 the total amount of goods transported on internal sea- lanes in Norway was 16 million
tonnes, 3 vessels was totally lost, and 63 vessels were partially lost due to grounding [1].
The amount of spilled oil from vessels in 1999 comprised 223 m3 from 101 incidents [2].
2.3.4 Land transport
In the whole of Norway, transport on rail and road containing chemicals as well as
petroleum products is common. Each year about 40 accidents involving petroleum andchemical cargo take place, some causing environmental impact to rivers and soil. In 1998
14,5 million tonnes of petroleum products and 4,5 million tonnes of chemicals weretransported on-road [3]. The amount of spilled oil from land transport in 1999 comprised
53,3 m3 of petroleum products from 28 incidents and 4,2 m3 of chemical products from 5
incidents [2].
no. 2 of 28

2.4International agreements

Norway is a member of the Bonn Agreement, Copenhagen Agreement and otherinternational agreements concerning mutual notification and assistance in case of major
environmental emergencies. Norway has also ratified the OPRC convention.

3

Models and tools

3.1

Oil drift-, trajectory - and plume models

For almost 20 years, the Norwegian Meteorological Institute (DNMI) has delivered an oil
trajectory and drifting model service. Based on parameters such as location, oil quantity andoil type model results will be forwarded to the oil industry, the Norwegian Pollution Control
Authority or other customers within 20 minutes. This service is operational 24h a day.
A major upgrade of the model will be completed in the near future, taking into account deep
water blow out (oil plumes in the water column) as well as interaction with enhanced
weather forecast models.
3.2

Aerial and satellite surveillance

Since 1980, a dedicated oil pollution surveillance aircraft has been in daily operation in
Norway. The on-board Side Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR), IR/UV line scanner, photoand video equipment can detect and assess oil pollution at sea. The Fairchild Merlin IIIB
twin turbine propeller aircraft has all weather capabilities due to a high altitude performance(pressurised cabin) and long range. A digital image transfer system between the aircraft andthe governmental operational command centres in Horten, Bergen and Tromsø is included.
Since the early 1990s, radar images from ERS and RADARSAT has been used for early
warning and flight planning purposes. Each year the combined use of aircraft and satellites
cover more than 10 million square kilometres of sea surface detecting more than 150 oil
spills.
3.3

Oil weathering models

In Norway, a research organisation has developed an oil database containing extensive
laboratory analysis of about 60 different oil types [7]. In addition, detailed crude assay datafor 200 crude oils in Norway and abroad is included. Hence, the SFT has immediate accessto oil weathering information (dispersion rate, evaporation rate, etc., as function of time,
temperature and weather) for a wide range of crude oils. Information from such models
combined with field trials is vital to risk assessment as well as contingency planning.
3.4

Environmental Risk Analysis

According to national regulations, oil spill contingency related to oil production or
exploration must be established based on the following 3 steps: An environmental risk
analysis (ERA), a contingency analysis and the development and implementation of acontingency plan. Among the most important criteria related to ERA, environmental damage
to selected indicators (bird populations etc) lasting more than 10 years shall not occur more
frequent than 1 out of 40 000 drilling operations. National standards for ERA andcontingency analysis based on a Net Environmental Benefit Analysis (NEBA) approach has
been in use several years.
no. 3 of 28

3.5

Contingency planning tools

Recently the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority has conducted an assessment of thegovernmental contingency response capability based on environmental risk assessment. In
this work a contingency planning simulation tool was used to assess spill scenarios at
different locations.
First, environmental risk analysis (probability of oil spill & environmental impact) wasestablished for six regions. Then a number of “most probable” scenarios were defined ineach region. For each scenario a thorough description was made, including the position of
the oil spill, discharge conditions, flow rate and the total amount of oil at sea. Finally, a
response plan was established for each scenario.
For each of the six scenarios, the effectiveness of oil spill response was simulated. The
simulations provided us with the amount of oil recovered, naturally dispersed, stranded andevaporated. After several iterations, the response resources necessary to achieve the goals in
the response plan were identified given by the number mechanical oil recovery systems,
response time, the number of shoreline cleanup teams etc.
The recommended level of contingency is now being compared to the present contingency
level identifying the need for re- location of depots, more response equipment etc.

4

Training and exercises

A vital part of the preparedness is training and exercises. The types of courses and exercises
described in this chapter are those conducted by SFT to uphold the competence of thenational contingency system in Norway.
4.1

Training

The training courses are adapted to the following functions in the oil spill responseorganisations:
•
•
•
•
•

Introduction (basic) training course
Team leader course
On-scene commander level course (OSC-Sea, OSC-Coast and OSC-Land)
Management level course
Course for governmental depot task force and technical supervisors

The basic training course is designed for all personnel involved in the contingency
organisation. These courses are usually conducted by the organisation itself, preferably aftera "train-the-trainer" course.
The team leader level is given a 4-day training course. The course consists of two days oflectures and two days of practical training. During the practical training one day is solely forhands-on exercises using booms and skimmers at sea and from the shoreline.
The 3-4 day on-scene commander level (OSC) focuses on operational management andtactical use of response equipment during an operation. Each course consists of lectures aswell as practical training tailored to fit the needs of the various geographical response areas.
(i.e. at sea, coast or on land)

no. 4 of 28

The management level of an oil spill response operation is given a three-day training course
consisting of one day of lectures (theory) and two days of practical training. The latter isdivided into a table-top exercise to familiarise the participants with their duties, and a roleplaying exercise to train their abilities during a stressful incident.
On the governmental level, there are 15 depots with their own technical supervisor and a 10
men task force. The newcomers to the task force are given a four-day introduction course by
SFT in Horten, and annually the whole task force is give n appropriate training at the depot.
4.2

Exercises

In Norway, exercises conducted by SFT are adapted to the needs of the municipal and thegovernmental contingency organisations.
Within the governmental contingency there are exercises arranged over a wide area touphold the preparedness. Several large integrated exercises are arranged annually in which
personnel and resources from the private industry, the municipalities, the government andthe Coast Guard is taking part verifying that the national contingency system is operational.
On the international level a number of exercises are arranged annually based on different
international obligations such as the Bonn agreement and the Nordic Copenhagen
Agreement.

5.

Planning based on environmental Risk analysis

We started our work with the following question:“Taking into consideration the environmental risks from ships in Norwegian waters, is
SFT’s oil spill response capacity dimensioned correctly??”
There are a couple of reasons for asking this question. The main reason is that SFTs oil spill
emergency response organisation has not been changed very much since it was establishedin the late seventies. The today’s structure of SFTs oil spill emergency response organisation
has been a result of many compromises. The organisations should in a reasonable way givesame protection to all parts of the coastline and our depots should not be located too far fromairports and deep water harbours. The distance between the depots should not differ too
much.
The location of our equipment depots and the types and numbers of oil spill recovery
equipment were not decided on the basis of systematic risk assessments. But I would like tostress that there is no reason to believe that there is a great miss-match between SFT oil
recovery capacity today and the environmental risks from the oil spills SFT has to reactagainst. The point is that we do not have a precise picture of whether the location ofequipment depots and the numbers and types of equipment are optimal with regards to SFTs
responsibilities.
Today, both private companies and municipalities do their contingency planning on the basisof risk assessments. There is no reason why SFT should not do the same.

no. 5 of 28

5.1

Survey of our method

1) Use of dimensioning oil spill scenarios.
Basically, we wanted to compare SFT’s existing level of oil spill preparedness with thelevel of preparedness SFT would have to establish against a certain number of realistic,
but imaginary oil spills from ships in Norwegian waters. The idea is that these imaginary
oil spills shall be used as dimensioning oil spills which SFT’s contingency planning shallbe based on. These dimensioning oil spills will in the following be called oil spills
scenarios.
Ø They represent realistic oil spill situations, situations which SFT has the responsibility
to react against.
Ø They are supposed to threaten our most sensitive environmental areas along the coastØ They are supposed to take place when the potential for environmental damage is largest
Ø And , the level of oil spill recovery capacity which needs to be established against thedimensioning oil spills, should also be sufficient against the most common oil spills
from ships which happen in Norwegian waters.
2) Simulation of oil spill operations
We have simulated oil spill operations against the oil spill scenarios
A governmental oil spill response capacity along the coast has been proposed based on
the results from the simulated oil spill operations.
3) The need for changes
We asses the need for changes in the SFTs oil spill emergency organisation.
-number of depots–the location of the depots–types and number of equipment
5.2 Use of the method
First I will give an overview over how we use oil spill scenarios in our contingency
planning:
1) Location of the oil spill scenario by the help of oil drift model2) Selection of oil weathering properties and weather conditions
3) Requirement for effectiveness of oil spill response
4) Analysis of the oil spill response
But how many oil spill scenario do we need, where are they supposed to be located and inwhich season are they supposed to happened?
*Based on environmental and administrative criteria we divided the coastline in 6
geographic regions.
no. 6 of 28

*The regions were ranked in accordance to their relative environmental sensitivity withregards to oil spills winter and summer and the region’s relative probability for oil spills
fromships*We made the following decision: We would locate a dimensioning oil spill scenario inregions where we during a year would have the following combination of damage class andprobability: moderate/moderate, low/high, moderate/high and high/high. For each region
you will have such a combination in the summer or winter time. Based on this risk matrix
we therefore decided that an oil spill scenario should take place in each region.
*We decided that the oil spill scenarios was supposed to take place in the season when theenvironmental risk in the region is largest.
*For each region we described a realistic oil spill scenario based on ship traffic patterns andstatistical information about ships involved in accidents. Each scenario is characterised by
the type of ship involved, time of the year when the spill take place, wave- and windconditions at the time of the spill, oil type involved, discharge rates, amount of discharges.
*By means of oil drift models, we calculated the exact position of the oil spill scenario if theoil was to threaten the most environmentally sensitive areas in the regions.
*As I have already mentioned, the go vernmental level of oil spill recovery capacity shallreflect the threats or environmental risks from oil spills from ships in Norwegian waters.
*How could we calculate or figure out the response capacity which is needed to copy withthe environmental risks from oil spills from ships in each region. To solve this problem, we
defined certain environmental objectives for the simulated oil spill operations. The
environmental objectives describe what level of protection we want the oil spill operation togive.
“We have decided that the main intention of the simulated oil spill operations should be:
The sea operation
Avoid or reduce the possibility of contact between highly environmental sensitive areas andthe drifting oil.
Avoid remobilization of stranded oil
No free floating oil on the sea surface 3 weeks after the spill had occurred.

The beach cleaning operation
The most important locations of seabirds, protection areas and recreational areas are to be
sufficiently cleaned within a fixed date to avoid any harm or problems connected withnormal use of the areas.”

no. 7 of 28

5.3 Results from simulated oil spill operations
The simulation of the oil spill operations against the dimensioning oil spill scenarios was
carried out by the help of a simulation model. The model calculates the effects of applying
different types of measures against the oil spills scenarios. The model takes into account theassumed efficiency of the applied measures, the weathering of the oil andthe weather during the oil spill scenarios. The model also calculated the distribution of theoil spill between the sea surface, water column, evaporation and stranded oil.
The simulated oil spill operation was divided into three phases:
1) Collection or removal of oil from the sea surface in open waters
2) Collection of free floating oil near the beach3) Collection of oil stranded on the beach.
*To reach our environmental objectives for each simulated oil spill operation we had to
apply sufficient with resources in open sea, near shoreline and on the beach.
*To find the optimal distribution of resources between the open sea operation, the near shore
operations and the on shore operations, we first had to decide what would be a reasonable
number of oil spill response systems applied in open sea in each scenario. Here, we based
our judgement on knowledge of the existing SFTs resources supplied with supposed
available resources from private companies, municipalities and international oil spill
emergency response organisations, i.e the Swedish Coast Guard.

*The model calculates the amount of oil removed from the sea surface by applying a certain
amount of oil spill removal systems. The model also calculates the amounts of oil which has
been stranded. Based on knowledge of how much oil that has been stranded, we cancalculate the need for resources to collect the free floating oil near shore and the oil which
has been stranded.
To calculate the efficiency of the different oil spill response systems and beach cleaninggroups used in the simulatio n, we had to correlate for significant wave heights, light
conditions, operational troubles, type of shores, type of oils.

*Based on the simulations we have calculated the oil spill response capacity which isnecessary to obtain the environmental objectives set for each simulated oil spill operation.

no. 8 of 28

”Scenario Runde:Resources needed if the environmental action objectives are to beachieved”

SystemOcean going
Ocean going
Coast
Coast
Coast
4 Fjord systems
Dispersing system
Beach cleaning:
11 groups

Response time (h)
12
20
14
21
6
48
6
96

5.4 Proposal for the governmental preparedness against oil spill fromships in each region*Based on the calculated response capacity against the scenarios, we have proposed agovernmental response capacity for each region. The proposed response capacity for thewhole region is of the same magnitude as the response capacity against the dimensioning oil
spill scenario for the region. The proposed governmental response capacity (number ofsystems and their response time) in the region will consist of SFT’s oil recovery systems
supplied with available systems from private, local and international oil spill response
emergency organisations.
*In relation to the magnitude of environmental risk from ships in the region, this level of
preparedness is assumed to be acceptable. Remember that the dimensioning oil spill
scenarios represents realistic oil spill situations and that they are supposed to threaten our
most sensitive environmental areas along the coast. The oil spill response capacity whichneeds to be established against the dimensioning oil spills, should therefore also be
sufficient against the most common oil spills from ships in the regions.

no. 9 of 28

“Proposed response capacity in each region
Example: Region Nordvestlandet
Based on the scenario Runde
Systems
Ocean going
Ocean going
Coast
Coast
Coast
4 Fjord systems
Dispersing system
Beach cleaning
11 beach cleaning groups à
30 persons ~330 persons
support , ca. 100 persons
Emergency loading capacity
Airborne surveillance of theoil spill

Response time (h), sensitive
areas: Stadt –Hustavika
12
20
14
21
6
96
6

Response time(h)Rest of the area
18
30
21
32
9
96
6

96

96

96

96

48
6

48
6

The mechanical recovery systems must be able to collect different types of oil (marine diesel– heavy fuel)”
To carry out this type of analysis, you need knowledge and information about:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

probabilities for oil spill from ships in your waters
environmental sensitive areas along the coast
traffic patterns in your waters
the weathering of oils in your waters
oil drift in your waters
the efficiency of different types of response equipment
experiences from real oil spill operations
use of “oil spill models”

6. Conclusion
In this paper I have tried to give a description of how the Norwegian contingency system isorganised today, and some of the future challenges that has to be addressed by theauthorities. Furthermore the use of models and tools both for cont ingency planning is
described. Explaining how an environmental risk analysis and an oil spill contingency
assessment related to governmental oil spill preparedness have been conducted. As a result
no. 10 of 28

specific contingency needs have been identified for regions covering all Norwegian waters,
including Svalbard. A contingency level has been specified for each geographical region
based on dimensioning scenarios (oil spill from ships) and national objectives. Eachcontingency level is characterised by response time requirements as well as specificrequirements towards oil recovery systems, chemical dispersing systems, emergency
offloading systems, remote sensing and surveillance, beach cleaning capabilities and humanresources.

7. References
1. Statistics Norway, Maritime Statistics 1998, Statistics Norway, Oslo, Norway , 2000
2. SFT, State of the Environment Norway, www.mistin.dep.no, in Norwegian only.
3. Statistics Norway, Road Goods Transport 1996-1998, Statistics Norway, Oslo, Norway,
2000
4. Strøm-Kristiansen et al., 1993
5. P.S.Daling, O.M.Aamo, A.Lewis, T.Strøm-Kristiansen, Sintef/IKU Oil-Weathering
Model: Predicting oils’ properties at sea. In Proceedings of the 1997 International Oil
Spill Conference. American Petroleum Institute, Washington DC, USA, 1997
6. . T.Lorentzo, T.Therrien, B.O.Johannessen. Study of viscosity and emulsion effects onskimmer performance. In Proceedings of 18th Arctic and Marine Oil Spill TechnicalSeminar. Environment Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 1995.
7. A.B.Nordvik, K.Bitting, P.Hankins, L.Hannon, R.Urban. Full scale containment boom
at-sea testing. In Proceedings of the 1995 International Oil Spill Conference. American
Petroleum Institute, Washington DC, USA, 1995

This do not belong to the lecture.
Biography
Jan Nerland is a Master Mariner. He sailed on different ships, tankers, dry cargo andcruiseliners until he joined The Norwegian Pollution Control Authority. Where he now has
the position as Senior Adviser. He has taken part in most oil spills in Norway since the
BRAVO blow out in the North Sea in the late seventies, and has been observer and adviser
on several big spills around the world. During the Gulf War he was on a special assignment
in Saudi Arabia in connection with the large oil spill there. He has worked for IMO(theInternational Maritime Organization in London) as Adviser on Marine Pollution, responsible
for South East Asia and the Pacificno. 11 of 28