An ARPEL Tool toAssist the International Oil Spill Community in Bridging Response Planningand Readiness Gaps
Miguel Moyano , ARPELPAJ Oil Spill Symposium 2016
“Maintaining Future Effective Preparedness against Oil Spills”

Tokyo, JAPAN - January 28-29, 2016

Slide 1:On behalf of the Regional Association of Oil, Gas and Biofuels Sector Companies inLatin America –ARPEL- I want to hereby express my humble gratitude to thePetroleum Association of Japan and the Japanese Ministry of Economy Trade for theinvitation to this important Symposium, allowing us to share with this distinguishedaudience a tool developed by ARPEL for the use and benefit of all the international oilspill community.
Arigató!
Slide 2:•

My presentation will include a succinct description of what is ARPEL, for those
who do not know us•

Next, a very short story of how RETOS appeared in the international scene.
RETOS is the acronym of “Readiness Evaluation Tool for Oil Spills”•Then, I will use some slides to describe what is RETOS and basic definitions
utilized•

To –then- show, through an example, the functionalities of this tool•

And finish with some remarks

Slide3:•ARPEL is a 50-year-old association of oil and gas companies and institutions in
Latin America and the Caribbean aimed at:•

promoting integration, growth, operational excellence and effective
socio-environmental performance of the regional industry, and•ensuring the sector maximizes its contribution to sustainable energy
development in the region.

ARPEL’s Mission is accomplished through synergies and cooperation with•

relevant stakeholders, andits members represent over 90% of the upstream and downstream activities in•

the region.
Slide 4:
ARPEL Member Companies include national and international operating companies aswell as providers of technology, goods and services for the whole value chain and with avested interest in the sustainable energy development of the Latin America andCaribbean region.
Slide5:
To accomplish its Mission more efficiently, ARPEL promotes cooperation, reciprocal
assistance and joint action with other sector associations and institutions, regional andinternational governmental and non-governmental organizations, aligned withARPEL’s purpose. The Association often establishes agreements with them for the joint
development of regional studies and/or for the implementation of programs and services,as a way to complement its strengths and capabilities, with the aim of providing greater
value-added to its membership.
This approach allowed ARPEL to obtain excellent results and outcomes in developing
the tool I’m about to present, and in which institutions such as CLICK IPIECA, Clean
Caribbean Cooperative (now Oil Spill Response), the Regional Marine Pollution
Emergency Information and Training Centre for the Wider Caribbean and the Central
American Maritime Commission, played an important role
Slide6:
There have been few attempts in the oil spill response community to preparecomprehensive guides for assessment of response capability. Most guidance has focusedon the content of oil spill response plans and, in places around the world, somegovernments and companies have developed internal guidelines to assess oil spill
response plans and readiness. In 2007, organizers of the 2008 International Oil Spill
Conference agreed to support development of general guidance to assess oil spill
response readiness. As part of that development, a broad suite of planning andreadiness assessment elements was prepared to encourage improved response capacity.
That initial work set a framework to aid development and maintenance of responsemanagement systems to improve oil spill response readiness, documented in the 2008

International Oil Spill Conference Guideline. CLICKSubsequent feedback received from the international community recommended
transforming the 2008 International Oil Spill Conference Guideline into a moreuser-friendly management tool, hence leading to the “ARPEL Oil Spill Response
Planning and Readiness Assessment Manual” (the “Manual”) and its accompanying
assessment tool, the Readiness Evaluation Tool for Oil Spills (RETOS™). The firstversion of RETOS was developed in 2011 and a second –upgraded- version was launchedin 2014, which is the version I’m going to be talking about in this Symposium
Slide7:The ARPEL “Readiness Evaluation Tool for Oil Spills (RETOS™)” and its accompanying
Manual were developed to assist governments and companies to assess the level of oil
spill response planning and readiness management and to identify gaps, informationneeds and areas for improvement and –ultimately- provide guidance to efficiently
bridge the gaps identified
This is done in relation to pre-established criteria commonly agreed between industryand government. Oil Spill Response assessment criteria are the foundation for aconsistent approach to gauge the level of oil spill response planning and readiness andto assist in identifying areas for improvement.
Slide8:RETOS and the accompanying Manual aim to provide a general guideline to petroleum
sector operators and governments, so that they may assess their own programs and/orapply the best practices to ensure the continuous improvement of their oil spill
contingency management preparedness. These best practices derive from a variety ofsources as indicated in the slide. It is worth noting that the 2008 International Oil SpillConference Guideline mentioned earlier has a preferential reference in the Manual.
CLICK
The guidelines and practices in the ARPEL Manual and RETOS are suggested and notmandatory. The Manual does not reflect the legal requirements of specific jurisdictions.
Thus, governments and companies must be aware of any requirements applicable totheir respective jurisdictions.
Slide9:•The criteria provided for assessment are oriented toward oil (hydrocarbon) spills

and do not include hazardous or noxious substances, per se, although many
aspects of spill readiness are equally applicable.
The oil spill response planning and readiness assessment also is directed at any•

number of possible spill scenarios, including different spill sources such astankers, pipelines, platforms or land facilities and receiving environments (forexample: land, inland waterways, offshore, etc.).
Slide10:
1. Four key concepts utilized while using RETOS to assess oil spill response
programs are: Criteria, Categories, Programs and Assessment Levels
2. Detailed assessment criteria are the individual base concepts that are evaluatedand form the core of the oil spill response management assessment matrices
included in the RETOS tool.
3. Categories are general headings aspects of oil spill response planning andreadiness. The ten categories in this Manual and RETOS match those developedand explained in the 2008 International Oil Spill Conference Guideline and are
the ones appearing in the green box.
4.

The criteria are tailor-made to assess oil spill response Programs of sevendifferent Scopes that we shall see in the next slide

5.

For each Program to be assessed, the user can select three different assessment
levels. The criteria progress from what may be considered fundamental aspectsof oil spill response management capability (Level A) to very complete and/or
best international practice (Level C). Assessment levels do not correspond totiers in the oil spill response planning sense. Rather, an Assessment Level
indicates the maturity of that program, so that a Facility (which typicallyprepares for a Tier 1 response) may be quite well prepared and very capable ofmounting a quick and very effective response to a Tier 1 spill. In such a case theAssessment Level C (the highest) would reflect its maturity but for a Tier 1 spill
response. Alternatively, a Tier 3 program, such as would be expected at anational level, may be in the early stages of development and implementation, in
which case the assessment would be performed at a Level A.

Slide11:The seven Scopes considered in the Manual and RETOS represent oil spill response
programs from two perspectives: Government and Industry. The Scopes used are:•Government or Industry :•Facility – (terminal, plant, refinery) - The facilities encompassed in thisscope are geographically fixed and local in extent•

Facility/Asset Operation (e.g. pipelines, vessels, fleet) – The operations
encompassed in this scope have a broader geographic footprint, typicallyas a result of oil transportation. A key feature of this scope is the broader
potential spill source along established operational routes.

These Scopes can be used by either governmental institutions orcompanies because oil spill response readiness for a facility or operation
is essentially the same regardless of owner/operator•

Government•

Port/City/Local – The operations encompassed in this scope are local inextent and associated with cities, ports, and other geographically limited
but collective facilities.

•Area (such as a Region, Province or State) – This is typically utilized forgovernments that have defined requirements or needs for planning at
sub-national levels, usually defined by administrative or geo-politicalboundaries•National (and Multi-National) – A key feature of this scope is the broad
geographic coverage of plans and setting the policies and requirements
for more detailed planning and readiness. National readiness for many
countries represents its autonomous capability to deal with multiple
worst-case situations•Industry•Country or Business Line (for example, production) – Industry
operations conducted solely within one country or operations of a single
business line with wide-spread assets may have an oil spill response
program that integrates their response capabilities across multiple
facilities or operational areas. Assessment programs should be adapted
to address operations either within a single country or multiple countries,
as appropriate, for company management.

•Corporate – A key feature of this scope is how a company or corporation
sets the model for more detailed readiness programs. Likewise, thisscope integrates oil spill response readiness across business lines andpossible country lines. The policies, expectations, and models forresponse readiness and emergency management are focal aspects ofCorporate oil spill response programs.

Slide12:
We shall see the functionalities of RETOS by making a virtual gap analysis of the oilspill response program of a facility (for example, a refinery). We’ll start with Level A
Slide13:
To make the explanation of the use of RETOS easier within the allocated time I have forthis presentation, I will show the screens in order of appearance as if we were all
making the assessment of the oil spill response program for a Facility in Level A.
I selected Level A CLICK because it is the one you should all start to ensure you have –at least- the basic level of oil spill response planning and readiness. If you pass theminimum required, you can continue with Level B and –hopefully- Level C.
Slide14:
Here is the upper part of the Excel Tab that will appear when you start making theLevel A assessment of a Facility.
On the left, each row correspond to a criterion. The criteria are grouped in the ten
categories I mentioned earlier in a previous slide with some of the definitions. In thisslide we can only see the first 3 categories (A: Legislation, Regulation and Agreements /B: Oil Spill Contingency Planning and C: Response Coordination).

The othercategories will appear as you scroll down in the RETOS Excel file (as we shall see later)
Some rows are yellow shaded. These correspond to Critical Criteria and only appear on
Level A. One dictionary definition of critical is “having a decisive or crucial importancein the success, failure, or existence of something”. At the basic Level A (exclusively), anoil spill preparedness program must address select minimum criteria to be considered
complete. These critical criteria were identified and agreed by experienced spill
response professionals. The rationale of their criticality is highlighted in pop-ups andtheir importance in the gap analysis will be shown later CLICK
The evaluator starts assessing the oil spill response program of the Facility checking
criterion by criterion. There are three options in RETOS, by which evaluators canspecify an indicator for each criterion. CLICK

The three assessment indicators are:

Missing – no information, inadequate information, and/or lack of confirmation found fora criterion
Partial – information, documentation, or other confirmation reveals some aspects areaddressed, yet is either incomplete or does not fully satisfy a criterion
Complete – information, documentation, or other confirmation reveals aspects are fully

addressed such that there is reliable evidence a criterion has been met.
If the evaluator decides that a criterion is missing or partially complete, the tool will
request that a comment be made in the cells on the right. These comments are vital toidentify what gaps must be filled after the evaluation is over CLICK
Slide15:
The evaluation goes on and on until the last Category(J – Sustainability andImprovement) - A space has been left (blue cells) for institution specific criteria to beincluded.
The Overall Program qualitative conclusion is a score based on the quantitative ratingsgiven to each INDICATOR and by which the following terms correspond to a percent
complete for a specific Program and Level. ARPEL has set a high performance
expectation for scoring spill response preparedness and readiness. If the quantitative
result of the indicators is less than 90%, the Program is In Development. One can only
say that the Level has been achieved if it is more than, or equal to, 90%. Only then it issuggested that you move to higher Levels of Assessment such as B and C.
However, if the assessment results in at least one critical criterion evaluated as partialor missing, although the global assessment is over 90%, the qualitative conclusion isthat the level is “in development”. This is the case for this example CLICK
It is worth mentioning that institution specific criteria do not take part of thecalculation.
RETOS is now ready to provide its outputs: the Global Performance Analysis and theGlobal Improvement Program CLICK
Slide16:
The Global Performance Analysis presents in a single page a summary information of
the gap analysis:•On the left, the table indicates:•

the percentage obtained for each of the ten categories (right column).

•

those categories that have at least one critical criterion either missingor partial are highlighted in yellow (this is the case for the categories of
Oil spill contingency planning, Response coordination and Operationalresponse)•the overall result, the number of questions completed over the total
number of questions (in this case, questions mean criteria), and•the percent of institution specific criteria accomplishedOn the right hand side, a spider-web diagram displays in a more•visually-friendly format, the gaps in each of the ten categories
Slide17:
The Global Performance Analysis is an upper executive approach to knowing where thegaps are.
The Global Improvement Program (which is the second output of the gap analysis using
RETOS), gets into the details. From left to right, the table describes:
the priority for action resulting from the criteria that were either missing or•partially complete during the evaluation, starting with missing critical criteria,
followed by partially complete critical criteria and then ordered by categories
from A to J
the second column describe the criteria (missing or partial) and is the same of•what you have in the Excel file•

the third column includes the comments made by the evaluator during the gap
analysis when he or she marked that the criterion was either partial or missing.
This column is the backbone of the “work to be done” to bridge the gapsidentified and demonstrates the importance of having an experienced evaluatorusing the RETOS tool.

•

the fourth, fifth and sixth column can be completed by the evaluator and by theofficer in charge of the oil spill response program allocating responsibilities,
identifying resources and defining a logical schedule to complete the missing or
partial criteria•

the last column makes reference to specific chapters of the 2008 International
Oil Spill Conference Guideline, where professionals can find some best practices
that assist them to fill the gaps identified

The value added by RETOS by placing all the gaps and actions required to fill each gap
in a single document like this is that a more efficient action plan can be devised byidentifying synergies among the different activities that need to be done and that could
otherwise not be seen.
Slide18:
In short:
The Manual provides the background for oil spill response management assessment andexplains the terms used, the approach to the assessment process, the concept for a
Global Improvement Program and over 150 referencesCLICKand the Tool (RETOS) is the Excel application intended as a checklist-type approach fora specific Program and Level of evaluation.
CLICKThe Manual, the seven different RETOS tables (one for each Scope and each tablecontaining the corresponding checklists for Levels A, B and C) plus the 2008
International Oil Spill Conference Guideline can be downloaded for free from ARPEL
web siteI will now show the real Excel files from which I took the example I used to explain thefunctionalities, the operation and the outputs of a gap analysis made by using RETOS
in a Facility for Level A (HYPERLINK)
Slide19:
As far as we are aware, RETOS is being used by governments and companies indifferent parts of the world, as shown in the slide. The dissemination has been done
through the collaboration and support of the organizations and programs described:
ARPEL with a focus on South America, COCATRAM (Central American Maritime
Transport Commission), REMPEITC-Carib (Regional Marine Pollution Emergency
Information and Training Center for the Wider Caribbean), the US Coast Guard, The
IMO/IPIECA Global Initiative in West and Central Africa (GI-WACAF), South East Asia
(GI-SEA) and China as well as the Oil Spill Preparedness Regional Initiative forCaspian, Black Sea and Central Eurasia (OSPRI)
By early 2015, RETOS had been presented and/or used in more than 50 countries. The
tool had been used to evaluate over 60 oil spill response programs. Most programs
evaluated consisted of industry fixed facilities (installations) or wider operations (suchas pipelines) and national oil spill contingency plans.
Results of most of the assessments conducted (nearly all Level A) showed that oil spill
response programs typically achieved a 60-70% completion.
RETOS Manual and tables can be downloaded in Spanish and English. However, given
the universality of the use of RETOS, ARPEL is looking for the possibility to translate it
into French, Portuguese and Russian. Other languages will be considered depending onthe demand.
Slide20•The development of RETOS was a truly international and multi-institutional
joint government/industry effort. Institutions involved included: ARPEL,

IPIECA, Clean Caribbean Cooperative, Oil Spill Response Limited, the Regional
Marine Pollution Emergency Information and Training Centre for the Wider
Caribbean, the Central American Maritime Commission, the InternationalMaritime Organization, the International Tanker Owners Pollution Federationand several individual companies CLICK•

Experience has shown that the basics of oil spill response management is not thenorm and RETOS wants to ensure that everyone complies with the fundamental
aspects of oil spill response management capability (Level A) by including
critical criteria conveying the message that those criteria have to be there “yesor yes” CLICK•RETOS has criteria which are tailor-made for seven different types of Programs.
It is NOT a “one-size-fits-all” type of evaluation CLICK•The results of the assessment are shown by category so the owner of the oil spillresponse Program can easily see where the gaps are –and how big- and CLICK•The Global Improvement Program sets the basis for a logical plan to implement
the actions required to fill the gaps identified CLICK•Furthermore, the Manual has over 150 references on best international
practices on oil spill planning and response that can be found in the Internet.
These references are vital in the implementation of the plan to improve the oilspill response Program CLICK

ARPEL provides training courses on RETOS through qualified professionals. Thecourses are delivered to oil spill professionals from different institutions (for example,from different companies and/or from governmental institutions) or can be tailor-madeto train professionals directly involved in an oil spill response program andsimultaneously make the gap analysis of the oil spill response program under study
CLICK
Slide21:NA