The Arctic Council was established on September 19th, 1996 in Ottawa, Canada and 

succeeded the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy. It is a high-level 

intergovernmental forum that provides a mechanism to address the common concerns and 

challenges faced by the Arctic governments and the people of the Arctic. 

The members of the Council are Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, the 

Russian Federation, Sweden, and the United States of America. The Association of 

Indigenous Minorities of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation, 

the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, the Saami Council, the Aleutian International 

Association, Arctic Athabaskan Council and Gwich'in Council International are 

Permanent Participants in the Council. There is provision for non-arctic states, intergovernmental and inter-parliamentary organizations and non-governmental organizations 

to become involved as observers. 

The main activities of the Council focus on the protection of the Arctic environment and 

sustainable development as a means of improving the economic, social and cultural wellbeing of the north. 

PAME is the Arctic Council Working Group on Protection of the Arctic Marine 

Environment. The primary goal is to prevent, control and remediate marine pollution 

from land and sea-based activities. 

Cover Photo: Concrete Island Drilling Structure (CIDS) in the Beaufort Sea, Alaska. 
ARCTIC COUNCIL 

PROTECTION OF THE ARCTIC MARINE ENVIRONMENT 

WORKING GROUP 

ARCTIC OFFSHORE OIL & GAS GUIDELINES 

October 10, 2002
Table of Contents 

ARCTIC OFFSHORE OIL & GAS GUIDELINES 

PREAMBLE 6 

1. INTRODUCTION 7 

1.1 Background 7 

1.2 Goals 8 

1.3 General Principles 10

1.4 Existing Impacts and Future Threats 11

1.5 Potential Impacts of Oil and Gas Activities on Environment and Society 11

1.6 Institutional Strengthening in the Regional Context 12

1.7 Periodic Review 13

 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.1 Purpose 16

2.2 Technique and Process 17

2.3 Preliminary Environment Impact Assessment (PEIA) 18

2.4 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 19

2.5 Consultations and Hearings 18 

2.6 Decision/Implementation/Project monitoring/Modification 20

3. ARCTIC COMMUNITIES, INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, SUSTAINABILITY, AND 

CONSERVATION OF FLORA AND FAUNA

3.1 Living Resources 20 

3.2 Cultural Values 21

3.3 Other Human Activity 21

3.4 Arctic States should: 21

4. SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 22 

5. MONITORING 26 

5.1 Aims and Objectives 26

5.2 Monitoring Targets 27

5.3 Monitoring methods 28

5.4 Monitoring Standards and Practices 29

5.5 Compliance Monitoring and Review 30

6. OPERATING PRACTICES 30 

6.1 Waste Management 30

6.2 Health, Safety and Environmental Supervision 34

6.3 Design and Operations 35

6.4 Human Health and Safety 37

6.5 Transportation of supplies and transportation infrastructure 39

6.6 Training 40

7. EMERGENCIES 41 

7.1 Preparedness 41 

7.2 Response 42

8. DECOMMISSIONING AND SITE CLEARANCE 45 

9. ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS 46 

 10. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 50

ANNEX A: DEFINITION OF THE ARCTIC 72 

ANNEX B: CRITERIA FOR THE OSPAR DEFINITION OF BEST PRACTICES 74 

ANNEX C: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FLOWCHART 76 

ANNEX D: OFFSHORE ACTIVITIES & POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 77 
 ANNEX E: ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ANALYSIS FLOW DIAGRAM 79

ANNEX F: ELEMENTS OF SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES 80 

 ANNEX G: EXAMPLE OF GENERALIZED MONITORING PLAN 82

*TRANSSHIPMENT OF OIL WILL BE ADDRESSED BY PAME IN ITS WORK ON ARCTIC SHIPPING. 
Preamble

The Ministers of the Arctic States, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Russia, Sweden, 

Norway an the United States of America, originally adopted the Guidelines at the Fourth 

Ministerial Conference on the Protection of the Arctic Environment, 11-12 June, 1997 in 

Alta, Norway by declaring: “We receive with appreciation...the “Arctic Offshore Oil and 

Gas Guidelines” developed under AEPS, and agree that these Guidelines be applied”. 

The 2nd Ministerial Meeting of the Arctic council 9-10 October 2002 in Inari, Finland 

recognized the updated version of these Guidelines by the following statement: "We... 

endorse the updated Offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines and encourage the concerned 

stakeholders to apply them." 

The endorsement of these Guidelines recognizes a uniform understanding of the 

minimum actions needed to protect the Arctic marine environment from unwanted 

environmental effects caused by offshore oil and gas activities. The Ministers, however, 

acknowledge that further steps can be taken nationally as a part of the environmental and 

natural resource management policies of the Arctic States. 

The users of these Guidelines will find that all stages of offshore oil and gas activity are 

included. The Introduction sets forth the background for the Guidelines and important 

general concerns. The chapters that follow set forth the specific operational steps which 

should be followed when planning for Arctic offshore oil and gas activities. 
1. Introduction 

1.1 Background 

The Guidelines were originally written in response to the Report of the Third Ministerial 

Conference on the Protection of the Arctic Environment (Inuvik, Canada, March 20-21, 

1996) which expressed concern regarding the potential impacts related to future 

increases in offshore petroleum activity in the Arctic. The Report requested PAME: 

...(to develop) “guidelines for offshore petroleum activities in the Arctic, in particular 

guidelines for timely and effective measures for protection of the Arctic environment. In 

this regard, the Ministers welcomed the initiative of the United States to conduct a 

government designated expert meeting to develop such guidelines, in cooperation, as 

appropriate, with other AEPS Working Groups” (Paragraph 2.3.5(ii)). 

In addition, the Inuvik Report requests AMAP to “...review the feasibility of developing 

sub-regional cooperative oil- related monitoring and assessment activities, as 

appropriate.” (Paragraph 2.1.2.1). 

Finally, the Report requests EPPR to “...continue their work on contributing to 

development of preventative, mitigating and response measures for oil and gas accidental 

releases in the Arctic” (Paragraph 2.4.5). 

Although PAME had the overall responsibility for developing the 1997 guidelines, they 

were the result of a group effort and reflect coordination within the Arctic Council 

working groups that the ministers emphasized in the 1996 Inuvik Report. 

The 1997 Guidelines stated in Section 1.7 Periodic Review, “These Guidelines should 

undergo periodic review and amendment, as necessary, to take into consideration 

experiences in the management and control of offshore oil and gas operations. The 

Guidelines must remain current if they are to support timely and effective measure for 

protection of the Arctic environment. An Experts Meeting should be held after the third 

anniversary of the adoption of the Guidelines to review and update them.” 

With establishment of the Arctic Council on September 19th, 1996 in Ottawa, Canada, 

and the Arctic Councils adoption of the existing four Working Groups of the AEPS in 

Alta, Norway in June 1997, and with the subsequent addition of the Sustainable 

Development Working Group, has strengthened the incentive of PAME and its members 

to continue to cooperate in and pursue support for efforts to protect the Arctic marine 

environment—such as providing an updated and improved Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas 

Guidelines. 

 

The current updated and improved guidelines were completed by PAME under the Arctic 

Council but represent the combined efforts of PAME, EPPR, AMAP, CAFF and attempts 

to incorporate the principles of sustainable development. This review and update was 

greatly assisted by the involvement and comments received from representatives of 
Arctic, regional and other governments, non-governmental organizations, industry, 

indigenous people, and the scientific community to provide agreed guidelines for 

offshore oil and gas activities in the Arctic. 

It is acknowledged that a number of legal instruments related to offshore oil and gas 

activities exist, e.g. United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea; the International 

Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78) and the London 

Convention 1972. It is assumed that Arctic petroleum activities will be conducted in 

compliance with applicable international law. 

1.2 Goals 

Purpose of the Guidelines

These Guidelines are intended to be of use to the Arctic nations central and regional 

authorities at all stages during planning, exploration and development of offshore oil and 

gas activities. They should be used to secure common policy and practices. The target 

group for the Guidelines is thus primarily the national authorities, but the Guidelines may 

also be of help to the industry when planning for oil and gas activities and to the public in 

understanding environmental concerns and practices of Arctic offshore oil and gas 

activities. While recognizing the non-binding nature of these Guidelines, they are 

intended to encourage the highest standards currently available. They are not intended to 

prevent States from setting stricter standards, where appropriate. 

Policy development should take into account the domestic situation with respect to 

political, economic, legal, and administrative conditions, as well as technical competence. 

Consideration should be given to macro-economic effects, regional effects, and potential 

environmental impacts. Such consideration should result in a staged opening plan, and 

ensure protection of areas of special environmental concern. While these guidelines do 

not address socio-economic aspects in any detail, nor do they set standards for assessment 

of potential socio-economic effects of offshore oil and gas activities, these are 

nonetheless important to consider and integrate into the planning and conduct of 

exploration and development. 

The Guidelines are intended to define a set of recommended practices for consideration 

by those responsible for regulation of offshore oil and gas activities (including 

transportation and related onshore activities being an integrated part of the offshore 

activity) in the Arctic (see Figure 1 and Annex A). It is hoped that regulators will 

identify the key issues related to protection of human health and safety and protection of 

the environment, while at the same time remaining sufficiently general to permit 

alternative regulatory approaches. It should be recognized that the eight Arctic nations 

have different systems with different emphasis on the division of responsibility between 

the operator and the regulator. This document attempts to present alternative approaches 

or general guidance where there may be a difference in approach. The goal is to assist 

regulators in developing a set of standards, which are applied and enforced consistently 

for all offshore Arctic oil and gas operators. Sensible regulation will vary to some degree 

based upon local circumstances. Thus, it is expected that, based on the outcome of 

environmental impact assessment procedures, regulators will establish policies such that 

offshore oil and gas activities are conducted so as to provide for human health and safety 

and protection of the environment. 

Goals for Environmental Protection during Oil and Gas Activities in the Arctic Area 

Offshore oil and gas activities in the Arctic should be planned and conducted so as to 

avoid: 

• adverse effects on climate and weather patterns; 

• significant adverse effects on air and water quality; 

• significant changes in the atmospheric, terrestrial (including aquatic), glacial or 

marine environments in the Arctic; 

• detrimental changes in the distribution, abundance or productivity of species or 

populations of species; 

• further jeopardy to endangered or threatened species or populations of such species; 

• degradation of, or substantial risk to, areas of biological, cultural, scientific, historic, 

aesthetic or wilderness significance; and

• adverse effects on livelihoods, societies, cultures and traditional lifestyles for northern 

and indigenous peoples.

1.3 General Principles 

Arctic offshore oil and gas activities should be based on the following principles: 

Principle of the Precautionary Approach 

In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied 

by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible 

damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing costeffective measures to prevent environmental degradation. 

Polluter Pays Principle 

National authorities should endeavor to promote the internationalization of environmental 

costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the 

polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with due regard to the public 

interest and without distorting international trade and investment. 
Sustainable Development 

In permitting offshore oil and gas activities Arctic governments should be mindful of 

their commitment to sustainable development, including, inter alia: 

• protection of biological diversity; 

• the duty not to transfer, directly or indirectly, damage or hazards from one area of the 

marine environment to another or transform one type of pollution into another; 

• promotion of the use of best available technology/techniques and best environmental 

practices (See some examples in Annex B); 

• the duty to cooperate on a regional basis for protection and preservation of the marine 

environment, taking into account characteristic regional features; and 

• the need to maintain hydrocarbon production rates in keeping with sound 

conservation practices as a means of minimizing environmental impacts. 

1.4 Existing Impacts and Future Threats 

When considering near-shore oil and gas activities, interaction between existing 

contaminants and expected discharges should be assessed. Threats to marine Arctic areas 

from activities within Arctic countries at present mainly affect coastal areas. Impacts on 

offshore areas are mainly due to long-range transport by wind and sea currents, but also 

include sediment transport in sea ice. 

The coastal areas of the Arctic may be contaminated by direct runoff from industry or 

mining, through river discharges, from dumping and from nuclear tests. Hot spots have 

been identified by AMAP, but few of these are relevant in the context of these guidelines. 

Based on the results of the AMAP assessment persistent organic pollutants seem to be the 

main present threat to the Arctic environment. In addition, there seems to be some 

uncertainty concerning mercury that should be more closely monitored. Artificial 

radionuclides seem to pose only a nominal threat to the environment. 

Based on AMAP results the most prominent future threats to the Arctic marine 

environment are persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and petroleum exploitation and 

transport. 

1.5 Potential Impacts of Oil and Gas Activities on Environment and Society 

Natural environment 

Offshore oil and gas activities entail considerable inputs of gases to the air from power 

generation, flaring, well testing, leakage of volatile petroleum components, supply 

activities and shuttle transportation. Air emissions may have effects on the climate. They 
may cause acidification on nearby land and contribute to emissions of any number of 

hazardous substances. Discharges of drill cuttings with associated oil and chemicals may 

have effects on sea floor flora and fauna and reduce both their abundance and diversity. 

Discharges of produced water and chemicals to the water column appear to have acute 

effects on marine life only in the immediate vicinity of the installations. However, recent 

laboratory experiments on cod (Meier, et. al, 2002) suggest that small amounts of 

alkylphenols, found in produced water, had sub-lethal effects on the fish that might lead 

to disruption of the endocrine system in exposed animals. 

Human environment 

Oil and gas activities may have pronounced positive effects on a nation’s employment 

and economy. They also have socio-economic effects, both negative and positive, on 

local communities and indigenous people. Where oil leasing revenues and/or oil industryrelated employment opportunities go primarily to local communities, they can make a 

substantial difference in living standards and the community’s ability to provide essential 

services. Exploration and development activities may affect traditional lifestyles of 

indigenous people. 

1.6 Institutional Strengthening in the Regional Context 

Management of Arctic oil and gas activities and their effects on the Arctic offshore and 

near shore areas requires participation of governments, the public and operators. 

Institutional mechanisms or capabilities are required at the local, national and regional 

levels to implement these Guidelines to: 

• ensure the openness, transparency and consistent application of regulatory regimes; 

• ensure that government agencies, local communities and non-governmental 

organizations are able to participate in their roles in environmental management; 

• ensure that scientific and traditional knowledge are available to the processes and are 

effectively used; and 

• facilitate regional activities and mechanisms that best suit the regional physical, 

biological and socioeconomic environments, and potential regional impacts. 

To ensure that the above needs are addressed, Arctic States should: 

• review their own needs, and regional needs, for institutional strengthening and 

capacity-building in these areas, and identify priority needs with schedules for 

addressing them; and 

• cooperate in and facilitate bilateral and multilateral initiatives to address the needs, in 

concert with the public and with oil and gas industry operators. 
1.7 Periodic Review 

These Guidelines should undergo periodic review and amendment, as necessary, to take 

into consideration experiences in the management and control of offshore oil and gas 

operations. The Guidelines must remain current if they are to support timely and 

effective measure for protection of the Arctic environment. On the occasion of the third 

anniversary of their adoption, as prescribed in the 1997 edition, PAME under the Arctic 

Council reviewed and updated the Guidelines, resulting in the current document. On the 

third anniversary of the publication of the second edition, the guidelines should undergo 

another review and update. 

1. Offshore Arctic oil and gas operations may result in a variety of related onshore 

activities and/or impacts. Individual governments should determine the extent to 

which these Guidelines apply when evaluating these activities. 

2. Neither PAME nor the full Arctic Council has established a single geographic 

definition of the Arctic. This is left for Arctic states to determine. For the 

purposes of these Guidelines, the definition of the Arctic is contained in Annex A.

Back to Table of Contents

2. Environmental Impact Assessment 

Environmental impact assessment procedures should be used to determine the impacts of 

offshore oil and gas exploration, development, transportation and infrastructure. Arctic 

countries use a variety of methods and approaches. Assessments may have a broad scope 

or be project specific. The responsibility for conducting the environmental impact 

assessments (EIA) or preliminary impact assessments (PEIA) varies from country to 

country. In some countries the State assumes the responsibility for the PEIA and the 

operator is responsible for the EIA for specific projects or activities. In other countries 

all environmental assessments are conducted by the State (See Annex C). 

Several approaches may be used for environmental assessments with a broad scope. 

Examples of these approaches follow: 

- Regional assessments for oil and gas activities. 

- Ecosystem based approach 

- Integrated oceans and coastal management, 

- Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 

- Regional cumulative impact assessment and studies 

- Land use or spatial planning 
The EIA Process for Norwegian Offshore Oil and Gas Activities 

The Norwegian Petroleum Act requires an EIA to be carried out before any new area is opened 

for petroleum activities. This EIA is administered by the Ministry of Oil and Energy and is in its 

latest versions similar to a Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment. At present plans for a 

SEA of the Barents Sea is on hearing. As the whole of the Barents Sea is considered 

environmentally sensitive, a condition for further petroleum activities in this area is that there 

shall be no discharges of produced water or waste from drilling and that all other discharges 

should be minimized. When finished, and after a substantial hearing process, the EIA/SEA has 

to be approved by the National Assembly which also decides on which parts of the area to be 

opened and the condition for activities in the opened parts. 

 When licenses have been awarded and oil and/or gas resources have been found the 

operating company has to carry out a new EIA for the field in question as part of their plans for 

development and production. Operating companies furthermore cooperate to carry out regional 

EIAs. Regional EIAs are based on the exploration and production history of the region, but also 

include a certain number of fictive fields as a basis for prognoses of expected development and 

discharges. Regional EIAs have at present been developed for regions in the North and 

Norwegian Seas. 

All EIAs/SEAs in the Norwegian sector have a stepwise development similar to the ones shown 

in the flowchart in Annex C. 

The Norwegian Ministry of Environment is at present putting great emphasis on developing 

management plans for the sea areas. The plans are made to avoid conflict between different 

users of the sea (fisheries and oil and gas development, for example) and to ascertain 

sustainable development and protection of sensitive resources. As a basis for the management 

plans SEAs are developed for all sectors having activities in the area, primarily fisheries, oil and 

gas activities and transportation. The first management plan will be developed for the Barents 

Sea which is considered particularly environmentally sensitive. 

The EIA Process for U.S. Offshore Oil and Gas Activities

United States law requires an EIA process for major actions that are proposed, approved, 

regulated, or funded by federal agencies. In the United States this process is called an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Federal regulations implementing this law require that the 

EIS be integrated early with the planning for proposed activities. For offshore oil and gas plans or 

activities, the Minerals Management Service (MMS) initiates the EIS process early in the planning 

for proposed five-year oil and gas leasing programs, proposed lease sales, and requests from 

industry to approve oil and gas plans or permits. The MMS assumes full responsibility for funding 

and conducting the EIS. 

The EIS for the proposed Five-Year OCS Oil and Gas Program analyzes alternative leasing 

configurations in all regions of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. This EIS is broader in scope and has 

less detailed analysis than subsequent EISs that are prepared for lease sales in particular regions. 

An EIS may also be prepared that provides a site-specific analysis for an individual development 

proposal. The scope, level of detail, and issues of concern for each EIS are tailored to the actual 

proposal. The programmatic EIS examines issues broadly, while a development plan EIS focuses on 

more immediate, geographically focused concerns. In all cases, the EIS analysis addresses only 

those issues that have a bearing on the decision at hand. For example, only the Five-Year Program 

EIS discusses alternative energy sources, while only a development plan EIS would analyze 

alternative pipeline routes within a particular area. 
The EIA Process for Greenland Offshore Oil and Gas Activities 

Opening of new areas for exploration 

In Greenland areas are opened for oil exploration without an EIA. Exploration activities 

Prior to all major exploration activities (seismic-surveys and exploratory drillings) an EIA shall be 

carried out and approved in conjunction with the approval of each of the individual activities by the 

Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP), according to the Act on Mineral Resources in Greenland. 

The prepared EIA is usually in a preliminary form, as the activities are temporal, and the EIA is 

prepared in close cooperation with the BMP. 

Exploitation activities 

Prior to the initiation of a production phase an elaborate EIA covering all activities (development, 

production, storage, transportation, abandonment) shall be prepared and subsequently approved by 

the BMP. 

The approval process 

Prior to the approval of an EIA, the BMP will consult, among others, its environmental advisers in the 

NERI (the National Environmental Research Institute, Roskilde, Denmark). 

Contact the BMP 

For further information on telephone number +299 346800/telefax +299 324302 or search for 

information at our homepage on www.bmp.gl. On our homepage the Act on Mineral Resources in 

Greenland and the Standard Application and Requirements Concerning Offshore Seismic Operations 

in West Greenland, among other documents, can be found. Further information about NERI’s can be 

found on www.dmu.dk. 

EIA System in Finland 

The Act on Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure came into force 1 September 1994. A 

new Act on EIA came into effect in 1999. The aim of the legislation is to further the assessment of 

environmental impacts and public participation in planning and decision-making. In the EIA 

procedure environmental consideration is integrated into the existing planning and permit 

procedures. In the EIA Decree there is a detailed list of different project types requiring EIA. The 

list is based on the lists in the EIA Directive (85/337/EEC as amended by )//11/EC) and the UN 

ECE Convention on EIA in a Transboundary Context (1991). In the Finnish EIA procedure the 

developer investigates the environmental impacts and prepares an assessment programme that 

contains information on the project and how the assessment will be carried out. On the basis of 

further studies and opinions given on the assessment programme, the developer prepares an 

assessment report where information on the project and of its various alternatives is presented, 

together with a comprehensive evaluation of their environmental impacts. The report will be 

appended to the decision-making material. The authorities are not allowed to make any decision 

on a permit procedure or a plan until the assessment procedure has been concluded. Coordination of the assessment procedure and related duties rests with a coordinating authority, the 

Regional Environmental Centres and with the Ministry of Trade and Industry in projects involving 

nuclear power plants as referred to in the Nuclear Energy Act (990/87). The citizens and 

authorities in the affected area will take part in the procedure and express their comments first on 

the assessments programme (scoping) and later on the assessment report itself. The act also 

includes provisions on assessing the environmental impact of projects whose effects extend into 

the territory of another state. The EIA procedure can also be applied in individual cases to a 

project not included in the list or to the modifications of a completed project that will be probably 
have significant adverse environmental impact. The decision to apply the assessment procedure 

in the cases is made by the Ministry of the Environment. in the case of nuclear power projects, 

the Ministry of Trade and Industry makes the decision. The main tasks in the near future relate to 

promoting the effectiveness of EIA and the integration of Strategic Environmental Assessment 

(SEA) in the preparation of policies, plans and programmes. The new Environmental Protection 

Act and the new Land Use and Building Act have adopted features from EIA. 

Many of these approaches address common elements. They assess environmental impacts 

on the ecosystem and social and economic effects. They include a long-term focus that 

addresses both effects and planning. They include a discussion on cumulative effects of 

oil and gas activities with the effects of other activities. They address competing interests. 

Assessments may be either comprehensive or strategic. 

This chapter should be read in concert with the AEPS Guidelines for Environmental 

Impact Assessment (EIA) in the Arctic.

 

Assessments should consider alternative development options and any impacts that 

alternative activities may have, including cumulative impacts of other existing and known 

planned activities. 

PEIAs and EIAs should consider, in particular, the following effects (for example 

contamination, habitat disturbance and alteration) on: 

• human communities including indigenous ways of life; 

• cultural heritage; 

• socio-economic systems; 

• other human activities (e.g., tourism, scientific research, fishing, and shipping); 

• overall landscape (e.g., fragmentation); 

• subsistence lifestyles (e.g. harvest practices and availability of food supply); 

• oil spill preparedness and response in sea ice conditions; 

• permafrost and transition zones; 

• climate; 

• sustainability of renewable resources; 

• flora and fauna including marine mammals; 

• air, water and sediment quality; 

• ports and shore reception facilities; 

• ice dynamics; and 

• the interaction among any of the above. 

(See the table showing an overview of offshore activities and potential environmental 

effects in Annex D.) 

2.1 Purpose 
Environmental impact assessment aims at protecting the Arctic environment, its flora and 

fauna, abiotic components, and human health, security and well being from deleterious 

effects. It does this by improving understanding of the possible effects of human 

activities. A main purpose of the environmental impact assessment process is to integrate 

environmental considerations in the overall planning from the beginning. 

2.2 Technique and Process 

The EIA process 

The EIA process is a series of interactive steps, including feedback mechanisms and 

quality assurance procedures. Some of the main features are: 

Organization: A single organization should be given responsibility for coordination of 

the EIA process, including arrangements for logistical and financial support. A first task 

of this group should be to define the boundaries of the assessment area and reach 

agreement on the timetable to be followed. 

Scope: The scope of the assessment should be comprehensive. However, it may be 

decided that initial assessments should give priority to environmental sectors considered 

to be most at risk from the planned activities. In the context of offshore petroleum 

activities this may for instance be particularly sensitive nesting or feeding habitats for 

seabirds, or spawning grounds for commercially important fish species, etc. 

Data Quality Assurance: A system of quality assurance for data and their collection 

should be in place. 

Timetable: It is essential that the EIA process is performed according to a realistic time 

table agreed upon at an early stage of the process. The time frame will vary depending on 

the extent and type of assessment to be carried out. 

Sources of Information: Data for EIA purposes may be gathered from existing sources 

(scientific literature, databases, registers, traditional knowledge, etc.) and necessary 

additional information may be obtained through baseline investigations or monitoring 

programs. 

Risk Assessment and Environmental Risk Analysis: 

The reason for a risk assessment or analysis is to determine if an action has an acceptable 

level of risk. Both regulators and industry use the information gathered through an EIA 

and risk analysis to make decisions on whether a proposed activity or development 

should go forward as planned, to institute mitigating measures to reduce risk, or to chose 

another alternative action. 

Prior to carrying out an environmental risk analysis, risk criteria should be defined. The 

risk criteria should be documented and the regulator and/or operator should update the 
criteria during the course of operations as appropriate and necessary for enhancing the 

safety level and as an effort to achieve the objectives defined for the activities. Risk or 

acceptance criteria must at a minimum incorporate national and international laws and 

standards. They also should incorporate the precautionary principle. 

The environmental risk analysis should be initiated as soon as practical to allow time if 

needed for public consultation. The analysis should be valid for the period of the year the 

operations will be carried out. If there is uncertainty of the timing of operations, the 

analysis should be valid for a longer period. 

Risk associated with offshore oil and gas activities has two main elements--the risk that 

an event might happen, such as an oil spill, and the risk that something will be impacted, 

such as ecologically sensitive areas. A risk assessment should be carried out in order to 

estimate the risk (or probability) of an acute oil spill or other event. An environmental 

risk analysis should be conducted to identify impact sensitivities from an acute spill or 

event. As well as, spills that result from routine operations, including approved discharge 

of drilling fluids or cuttings. The analysis of each affected environmental resource should 

clearly distinguish between the risk of oil spills or other accident and impact severity. 

The risk of contact in an acute spill does not influence the impact severity. Probabilities 

related to acute oil spills should be estimated or modeled based on geological studies on 

resource estimates and distribution, development scenarios, site-specific and regional 

considerations, exploration and production plans, and historical data. 

The analysis also should identify the need for risk reducing and contingency measures. 

Requirements stipulated by or in law or regulations, including requirements for risk 

reducing measures and the operator’s safety objectives, should form the basis for defining 

an acceptable level of risk. 

A flow-chart depicting an environmental risk analysis scheme is represented in Annex E.

2.3 Preliminary Environment Impact Assessment (PEIA) 

A Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment (or similar process) is a screening level 

review that should contain sufficient detail to permit assessment of whether a proposed 

activity may have a significant impact and should include: 

• a description of the proposed activity, including its purpose, location, duration, and 

intensity; 

• consideration of alternatives to the proposed activity and any impacts that the activity 

and its alternatives may have, including consideration of cumulative impacts in the 

light of other existing and known planned activities; and 

• a determination whether significant impacts, that would require further assessment, 

are likely to occur. 
2.4 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 

An Environmental Impact Assessment should be based on the best available information 

and include: 

• a description of the proposed activity, including its purpose, location, duration, and 

intensity. This includes the physical characteristics of the proposed activity and its 

land use requirements during construction and operation phases. It should state the 

main characteristics of the development process proposed, including type and 

quantity of materials to be used; 

• the estimated type and quantity of expected residues and emission (including air, 

water, soil, vibration, light, heat and radiation pollution); 

• an environmental risk analysis of impacts including sensitivity mapping, and risk 

assessment of oil spills including trajectory modeling; 

• the forecasting methods used to assess effects on the environment and any limitations 

on models due to lack of data, in undertaking the assessment; 

• based on the above, an identification of the area of impact; 

• a description of the reference/initial state of the area where the activity is to take 

place; 

• the likely significant effects, direct or indirect and an evaluation of their spatial and 

temporal scales; 

• the likelihood of transboundary impacts; 

• potential socio-economic effects and the effects on traditional lifestyles of indigenous 

people; 

• a description of the measures proposed to avoid, reduce or rectify identified potential 

significant adverse effects, taking into consideration the slow recovery and 

regenerative capacity of the Arctic; 

• other development options, and where authorities prepare the analysis, this may 

include the alternative of no action. This discussion should include an evaluation of 

the different alternatives and the reasons for choosing the selected activity; and 

• a summary in non-technical language, assisted with figures and diagrams, of the 

information specified above. If need be, other means of displaying this information, 

based on cultural heritage of the local and indigenous residents should be prepared. 
2.5 Consultations and Hearings 

Consultation is an effective dialogue between and amongst regulators, potential operators 

and stakeholders. In general, consultation should commence at the planning stage and 

continue throughout the lifetime of a project. It ensures transparent interaction and 

minimises potential risks for all parties. Consultation also provides a mechanism to resolve 

disagreements and provide appeal rights to all parties. Consultation is generally thought of 

in terms of public hearings, but it can also work effectively through informal discussions, 

focus group and key interviews and questionnaires. There is no single, standard approach to 

consultation, however some guiding principles promote effective consultation. These 

include: 

❏ Effective consultation is two-way; 

❏ Identifying and building relationships with potential consultees can take considerable 

time; 

❏ Consultation programmes are integral to project planning and decisions making; 

❏ There are limits to the consultation process; 

❏ Consultation should be open and transparent 

Collection and review of information from publicly available sources and stakeholders is 

important and continuous through the life of a project. Such information, including vital 

traditional knowledge can enhance the understanding of the project on all sides, including its 

social setting, the stakeholder community and the issue and values that are important to those 

stakeholders. 

2.6 Decision/Implementation/Project monitoring/Modification 

There should be a description of monitoring programs to determine effects, assess the 

effectiveness of mitigation measures and provide any early warning of adverse effects. 

The programs should be designed with flexibility so they can be modified to respond to 

unforeseen effects. These programs should be elaborated in a manner consistent with 

Chapter 5 (Monitoring). They should also provide for the possibility of modification of 

an activity, where warranted. 

Back to Table of Contents

3. Arctic Communities, Indigenous Peoples, Sustainability and 

Conservation of Flora and Fauna 

Offshore oil and gas activities should be conducted so as to protect and minimize adverse 

impacts on living resources and the ecosystems on which they depend; to minimize 

adverse impacts on the traditional ways of life, resource uses and cultural values of Arctic 

indigenous communities; and to coordinate with other human activities in the region. 

3.1 Living Resources 
Necessary measures should be taken to ensure that Arctic flora and fauna and the 

ecosystems on which they depend are protected during all phases of offshore oil and gas 

activities. Special attention - particularly with regard to intrusive activities - is required 

for species (e.g. fish, birds, whales, seals, polar bears, and other marine mammals), which 

are resources for human use, particularly by indigenous people, and for special habitats 

(such as ice-edge zones, coastal lagoons and barrier islands, wetlands, estuaries, bays, 

and river deltas). Onshore features that should be considered for protection and/or 

avoidance during offshore exploration and production activities include areas used 

significantly by waterfowl (such as high-density nesting, brood-rearing, molting and 

staging areas), caribou (such as major calving and insect relief areas), and by musk oxen. 

Consistent with the interests of human safety and well-being, a primary governing policy 

in the Arctic should be the conservation of resources for sustainable use. 

3.2 Cultural Values 

In planning and executing offshore oil and gas operations, necessary measures should be 

taken, in consultation with neighboring indigenous communities, to recognize and 

accommodate the cultural heritage, values, practices, rights and resource use of 

indigenous residents. Arctic States, in cooperation with the oil and gas industry, should 

address the economic, social, health and educational needs based on equal partnership 

with indigenous people. All phases of oil and gas activity should avoid historic or 

prehistoric resources including archeological and sacred sites, historic shipwrecks and 

other potentially important cultural sites. 

3.3 Other Human Activity 

Offshore oil and gas activities should be conducted in coordination with other human 

activities in the region, such as tourism, fishing, shipping, and scientific research. 

3.4 Arctic States should: 

• Incorporate local and traditional knowledge into the decision-making process 

including the initial siting studies and disposition of resource use rights. For example, 

ethnological expert studies are being used in Russia in which scientific and local 

knowledge are combined; 

• Ensure meaningful participation of indigenous people and other residents in the 

decision making process; 

• Urge and, where appropriate, require industry to integrate cultural and environmental 

protection considerations into planning, design, construction and operational phases 

of oil and gas activities; 

• Improve cross-cultural communication methods to ensure full and meaningful 

participation of indigenous residents including procedures to incorporate local 

knowledge; 
• Identify and prohibit or restrict oil and gas activities in ecologically and culturally 

sensitive areas; and 

• For use in planning and decisions, identify species, which are resources for human 

use and their ecological requirements, and identify patterns of their use as resources. 

Back to Table of Contents

4. Safety and Environmental Management 

Two basic regulatory approaches are available for dealing with the safety and 

environmental aspects of offshore Arctic oil and gas operations. They are: (A) a 

performance-based system and (B) a prescriptive approach. 

 (A) In the performance based approach, the regulator sets specific quantifiable goals 

but does not specify how the operator must meet these goals. This system allows the 

operator the flexibility to specify how they intend to comply with a regulatory body’s 

mandate that operations be conducted safely and in an environmentally sound manner. 

There are a variety of approaches available to the operator to meet the intent of this 

alternative, including the use of technical standards, company guidelines, “safety case” 

initiatives, or combinations of the above. 

 (B) The prescriptive approach to regulation is based on a series of specific regulatory 

requirements, which typically represent minimal expectations on behalf of the regulatory 

body. This approach can be complemented by a performance-based program. Under the 

prescriptive system, a regulatory body normally develops requirements addressing all 

phases of offshore operations. The requirements are typically developed from a series of 

existing standards, practices, guidelines, and procedures. Compliance with these 

requirements are normally evaluated by a regulatory body through review and evaluation 

of a series of plans, permits, and related documents and through a system of field based 

inspections and evaluations. 

Either regulatory approach, performance or prescriptive, can be modified to form a 

‘hybrid” system of regulation, composed of appropriate elements from both regimes. 

Such a system of regulation may represent a viable alternative for a regulatory body to 

consider adopting due to the systems’ ease of operation and flexibility. 

Today, there has been significant interest by both the offshore oil and gas industry and 

the various regulatory bodies to adopt, when applicable, appropriate international 

standards as a component of a regulatory system (performance, prescriptive, or hybrid). 

Use of these international standards addresses the fact that more often than not, regulators 

are regulating a global industry and there is value in using global standards wherever 

practical. 

In either approach, before oil and gas activities are approved, regulatory bodies should 

require the operator to demonstrate financial capacity to carry out all aspects of the 
operation, including responding to environmental emergencies and decommissioning of 

facilities. More specifically, a financial estimate of the worst-case environmental 

emergency scenario should be developed and the operator should provide evidence of 

financial capability to undertake remediation measures and to compensate persons who 

may suffer losses as a result of the activity. 

There are many similarities between the two systems of regulation. An important 

management tool to assist the operator in meeting the regulatory objectives of either 

system, eliminating unsafe behavior, and achieving continual improvement in safety and 

pollution prevention practices is defining and communicating a culture focus on safety 

and environmental performance to the workforce and ensuring that they are fully 

motivated to implement it through a management system. This philosophy can also be 

applied to a hybrid regulatory program. See Annex F.

4.1 Management Systems 

Proper planning to address the environmental sensitivities of a project and to ensure 

safety of the work force is essential. Whether required by the regulator or conducted 

voluntarily within industry, environmental and safety planning should be contained in a 

formal management system. Often referred to as EMS (Environmental Management 

System), HSEMS (Health and Safety and Health Environmental Management System) or 

SEMP (Safety and Environmental Management Program) these systems focus attention 

on the influences that human error and poor organization have on accidents. Certification 

of management systems have been developed by the International Organization for 

Standardization (ISO 14000 series) and the American Petroleum Institute (Recommended 

Practice 75) as well as in Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) and UNEP/OGP publications. 

These systems all have as a common and central feature a cyclic process involving 

sequential consideration of: 

❏ Policy and strategic objectives; 

❏ Organization, resources and documentation; 

❏ Evaluation and risk management; 

❏ Planning; 

❏ Implementation and monitoring; and 

❏ Auditing and Review 

Each step of the cyclic process requires leadership and commitment by the implementing 

body and the principal aim of the system is to deliver continual environmental, safety and 

health performance. This is assessed by periodic audit or review of a management 

system' s performance to ensure that necessary components are in place and that they are 

effective. 

The key elements of a management system can be described as follows: 
4.1.1 Policy and Strategic Objectives 

The operator's management should define and document its safety and environmental 

policies and strategic objectives and ensure that these: 

❏ Have equal importance with the operator's other policies and objectives; 

❏ Are implemented and maintained at all organizational levels; 

❏ Are publicly available; 

❏ Commit the operator to meet or exceed all relevant regulatory and legislative 

requirements; 

❏ Commit the operator to reduce the risks and hazards to health, safety and the 

environment of its activities, products and services; 

❏ Provide for the setting of safety and environmental objectives that commit the 

operator to continuous efforts to improve performance. 

The operator should also take steps to ensure that all contractors engaged in operations 

are also able to meet the requirements of the parent operator management system and 

applicable laws and regulations. 

A more detailed and specific list of possible objectives is set out in Annex F.

4.1.2 Organization, Resources and Documentation 

Successful management of safety and environmental matters is a line responsibility, 

requiring the active participation of all levels of management and supervision. This 

should be reflected in the organizational structure and allocation of resources. The 

operator should define, document and communicate - with the aid of organizational 

diagrams where appropriate - the roles, responsibilities, authorities, accountabilities and 

interrelations necessary to implement the HSEMS and meet regulatory responsibilities. 

The operator should also stress and encourage individual and collective responsibility for 

safety and environmental performance to all employees. It should ensure that personnel 

are properly trained, competent, and have necessary authority and resources to perform 

their duties effectively. 

4.1.3 Evaluation and risk management 

The operator should maintain and implement procedures to identify systematically the 

hazards and effects, which may affect or arise from project inception through to 

abandonment and disposal. Procedures should be maintained to evaluate (assess) risk 

and effects from identified hazards against screening criteria, taking into account 

probabilities of occurrence and severity of consequences for: 

❏ People; 

❏ Environment; and 

❏ Assets. 

The operator should maintain procedures to select, evaluate and implement measures to 
reduce risks and effects throughout the project. Risk reduction measures should include 

both those to prevent incidents (i.e. reducing the probability of occurrence) and to 

mitigate chronic and acute effects (i.e. reducing the consequences). In all cases, risks 

should be reduced to a level deemed as low as reasonably practicable, reflecting amongst 

other factors, local conditions and circumstances, the balance of costs and benefits and 

the current state of scientific and technical knowledge. 

4.1.4 Planning 

The operator should maintain, within its overall work program, plans for achieving 

environmental objectives and performance criteria. These plans should include: 

❏ A clear description of the objectives; 

❏ Designation of responsibility for setting and achieving objectives and performance 

criteria at each relevant function and level of the organisation; 

❏ The means by which they are to be achieved; 

❏ Time scales for implementation; 

❏ Programs for motivating and encouraging personnel towards a suitable HSE culture; 

❏ Mechanisms to provide feedback to personnel on environmental performance; 

❏ Processes to recognise good individual and team environmental performance; and 

❏ Mechanisms for evaluation and follow-up. 

The operator should develop, document and maintain and review plans and procedures 

for responding to emergencies. These plans and procedures should reflect site-specific 

characteristics. In order to assess effectiveness of response plans, the operator should 

maintain procedures to test emergency plans by scenario drills and other suitable means 

at appropriate intervals. Plans should be revised and up-dated as necessary in the light of 

experience gained. 

4.1.5 Implementation and Monitoring 

Activities and tasks should be conducted according to procedures and work instructions 

developed at the planning stage and modified during the design phase. Management 

should ensure the continuing adequacy of the safety and environmental performance of 

the operator through monitoring activities. 

The objective of monitoring programs will vary, depending on the activity and operations 

in progress, but will include some or all of the following elements to; 

❏ Check the overall effectiveness of the design and operational procedures in protecting 

the environment; 

❏ Comply with regulations, standards, planning consents and compliance programmes; 

❏ Identify sudden or long-term environmental trends or changes; 

❏ Measure physical disturbance and subsequent recovery following rehabilitation; 

❏ Study impact and recovery following accidents and incidents 

❏ Confirm that environmental protection equipment and procedures are effective 
❏ Compare actual impacts with those predicted in the Environmental Assessment; 

❏ Maintain a system of records of compliance with environmental policy, operational 

requirements and planned results; and 

❏ Provide for internal and external reporting of performance to authorities and 

stakeholders. 

4.2 Auditing and Reviewing 

Environmental auditing is a systematic, periodic, and objective review by regulated 

entities to evaluate facility operations and practices. Auditing provides a means to 

document environmental, organizational, management, and equipment performance in 

order to meet environmental requirements and to serve as a quality assurance check. 

Audits are the fundamental verification tool to ensure that environmental management 

procedures are being rigorously enforced. Audits are often conducted internally, but 

periodic reviews involving independent, external auditors are highly suggested. 

Environmental audits should be encouraged by the highest levels of management and 

conducted as an independent function of the audited activities. An environmental audit 

does not replace or substitute for direct compliance activities such as obtaining permits, 

installing controls, monitoring compliance, reporting violations, keeping records, or 

conducting independent inspections. 

• procedures should be maintained for audits to: 

• determine whether environmental management system elements and activities 

conform to planned arrangements and are implemented effectively; 

• examine line management systems and procedures, field operations, monitoring 

practices, and data to see if they fulfill the company’s environmental policy, 

objectives, and performance criteria; 

• check the accuracy of the Environmental Impact Assessment predictions and ensure 

that mitigation and monitoring recommendations are being implemented; 

• verify implementation and effectiveness of mitigating measures; 

• review incident reporting and remedy schemes; 

• identify current and potential environmental problems; 

• formulate thorough documentation, feedback, and implementation procedures; 

• determine compliance with relevant legislative and regulative requirements; and 

• identify areas for improvement, leading to progressively better environmental 

management. 

Back to Table of Contents

5. Monitoring 

5.1 Aims and Objectives 

Monitoring is an analytical tool used to assist in conserving and protecting ecological and 

socioeconomic resources and human health. The purpose of monitoring with respect to 

petroleum activities is to: 
• ensure that regulatory and licensing requirements are satisfied; 

• establish a basis for identifying environmental responses and trends; 

• assess whether the observed environmental impacts are in line with the forecasted and 

accepted environmental impacts identified in the PEIA; 

• detect the first signs of environmental changes, contamination or pollution; 

• help assess whether the operator is meeting the goals of its environmental 

management plan; 

• facilitate early detection of possible unforeseen effects; and 

• aid future decisions about where, when, how and if oil and gas activities should be 

allowed to occur. 

The design of a monitoring program should include a clear statement of the objectives of 

the program. Identification of methods utilized to assure quality control for all aspects of 

the monitoring process should be in-place early in the project’s planning phase. 

Monitoring should measure physical, chemical, biological and socio-economic conditions 

that may be impacted by the activities being conducted. Before petroleum activities 

commence, monitoring should begin with a comprehensive baseline investigation, which 

should incorporate existing information, and comprise as a minimum all monitoring sites 

and variables planned to be used in the long term monitoring program. The monitoring 

program should continue through the decommissioning and reclamation phase. 

Monitoring should be conducted so as to distinguish between impacts due to the 

monitored activities and those from other sources. Monitoring should be coordinated 

regionally so that interactions between multiple activities may be more easily detected. 

The type of monitoring conducted depends on the specific type of activity anticipated and 

the nature of the environment that could be affected. 

Prior to initiating offshore oil and gas activities, Arctic States should ensure funding is 

available within government and/or industry for monitoring. 

5.2 Monitoring Targets 

 

Priority monitoring should comprise the following areas during all phases of oil and gas 

activities to assess and minimize or mitigate adverse effects: 

• environmental accounting of emissions to air, discharges to water and sea floor and 

emissions of noise;

• physical disturbance to sea floor, pelagic biota, ice edge communities and the sea 

shore, and effects on species populations, distribution and migration routes; 

• levels of contaminants in bottom sediments and the water column; 

• levels of contaminants and effects in living marine resources, seabirds and other 

wildlife, with particular attention to vulnerable life stages and areas of critical habitat; 

• effects of petroleum activities on local human populations, subsistence access and 

harvest and other human activities; and 

• environmental effects on the integrity of the infrastructure. 
The primary emphasis of the monitoring will vary depending on the phase of the 

petroleum activity. Exploratory drilling and production activities will demand different 

monitoring emphasis. Similarly, monitoring will have different emphasis in the early 

stages of the life of a field/facility from later stages. 

Monitoring programs should be reviewed on a regular basis to determine whether the 

results they are yielding indicate a need for changes in operational practices (for example, 

as a result of failing to achieve the initial hypotheses set out in the EIA or because of 

unforeseen impacts). Programs should also be reviewed to determine whether they 

should continue, be modified or terminated. Ultimately, the length and breadth of 

monitoring programs will be determined by the scale and duration of offshore oil and gas 

activities and the immediate or longer-term impacts. 

The main emphasis of the baseline survey and/or EIA should be to make a complete 

inventory of environmental resources that may be affected by the planned petroleum 

activity and identify resources, areas or uses particularly sensitive to the various phases of 

the petroleum activities. Some resources may be more sensitive to acute oil spills, while 

others may be more sensitive to chronic discharges/emissions even at sub-lethal

concentrations. Both types may have effects on local biological communities, directly or 

indirectly through effects on the ecosystems. 

Programs for identification of biota particularly sensitive to pollution from petroleum 

activities should not only include adult stages and established communities (e.g. seabird 

feeding grounds, shoreline communities) but also early stages in the life cycle of plants 

and animals including larval stages, which are more vulnerable to oil and chemicals than 

adult stages. Therefore, not only vulnerable species should be identified prior to setting 

up a monitoring program, but particularly sensitive life stages should also be identified. 

5.3 Monitoring methods 

Monitoring of trends in levels of contaminants in sediment, water, ice/snow and biota has 

been the traditional way of monitoring impacts of pollutants on environment. This is still 

the backbone of most monitoring programs, since reliable trend data are needed both to 

document changes in the environment as the result of the activities and as a basis for the 

prediction of future changes. 

Monitoring should not only measure the level of pollutant in sediment or biota, but also 

the effects that the contaminants may have on species, ecosystems and human health. 

These effects may be monitored by recording changes in biodiversity over time or by 

measuring effects on single specimens. Such methods, including the use of biological 

indicators, could give early warning of negative changes in the environment. Methods 

for monitoring effects should be an integrated part of monitoring programs. 

The monitoring programs should not only be centered around field monitoring, but also 

include laboratory experiments and combinations of laboratory experiments and field 
studies whenever relevant. 

5.4 Monitoring Standards and Practices 

Monitoring standards and practices should be established for all phases of offshore 

petroleum activities, including offshore seismic operations and marine transportation. 

Principal monitoring activities should occur during drilling, development, production, 

decommissioning, and reclamation, as well as during transportation of oil, gas, supplies 

and personnel. 

Monitoring should have a long-term perspective showing developmental trends, and 

should form the basis for predicting what impacts to expect in the years to come. 

Monitoring surveys should be more frequent during the first years of investigation until 

the main impacts and trends are clarified and then as frequent as necessary in subsequent 

years. Environmental accounting and budgeting should be part of the monitoring system, 

showing the type and quantity of chemicals and substances that are used and discharged, 

what environmental impacts have been monitored, and what might be expected in the 

next few years. 

Monitoring should start with a baseline survey establishing pre-activity population 

structure, distribution and size; habitat status; and existing level of contamination in the 

environment and biota. This information is essential if previous introductions of the 

contaminant in question have already taken place either naturally or from human activity. 

Usually, monitoring will be the chemical measurement of the level of the contaminant in 

the air, water, ice/snow, sediments, or biological tissue. The levels found are then 

compared to applicable criteria such as baseline data or appropriate standards. The 

ultimate goal, however, must be to measure the effects of contaminants on organisms. 

Monitoring of contamination levels related to petroleum activities should take into 

account the source of the contaminant, the potential routes of transport (e.g., aqueous, 

particulate, or air borne) and the potential pathways for bioaccumulation. Besides the 

contaminant in question and the particular processes that might be involved, other 

considerations may include: wind strength and gustiness; ocean currents; relevant river 

flow; precipitation; air temperature; ocean temperature; sea ice conditions and movement; 

water depth; sea surface state; subsurface geology; and other resources affected. 

Data from environmental monitoring should be harmonized in collaboration with AMAP

and could be collected and stored in a central Arctic database repository, such as ARIA or 

ADD, where it would be available freely to all national environmental protection and 

monitoring authorities, for circumpolar environmental assessments, and for other users. 

Whenever appropriate, operators should consider local indigenous populations for 

contractual monitoring activities as well as drawing upon traditional knowledge for the 

identification of historical environmental extremes and trends. Establishment of 

cooperative relationships with resident indigenous communities for biological sample 

collection, environmental observation and monitoring, should be pursued. 
Results have shown that air emissions from the offshore installations may have an impact 

on nearby land areas and monitoring of these impacts may be included in updated 

monitoring guidelines. 

5.5 Compliance Monitoring and Review 

Results of monitoring should also be utilized by regulators in compliance audits and onsite regulatory supervision as the basis for requiring modification, postponement, or shutdown of operations or specific components of an operation and to change laws. 

Monitoring activities can be conducted in conjunction with environmental audits to 

assure the operator that the equipment and procedures associated with an operation are 

functioning within design parameters and will not lead to any significant impact on the 

environment. Authorities should use environmental audits to verify that the results of 

monitoring are used by the petroleum companies and reflected in their environmental 

strategy (see Annex G, Examples of Generalized Monitoring Plans). 

Back to Table of Contents

6. Operating Practices

6.1 Waste Management

Offshore oil and gas activities produce a variety of wastes in the form of aqueous and 

solid discharges and atmospheric emissions that need to be managed to avoid air and 

water pollution, smothering of benthic communities, and contamination of materials and 

food sources. Waste management is most effective when included in the overall planning 

from the beginning and combined with pollution prevention measures. Prevention and 

elimination of these discharges and emissions, which pose pollution threats to the Arctic 

environment, should be a targeted goal of regulatory activity. New technology makes this 

goal achievable in some situations. The appropriate waste management decision for each 

activity should also consider the feasibility of zero discharge to the marine environment 

in the area under review, whether the necessary onshore infrastructure exists, and whether 

an unacceptable transfer of pollutants from one media to another would result. If 

prevention and elimination of wastes is not possible, then application of best available 

techniques will allow for a hierarchical approach of source reduction and waste 

minimization to meet applicable regulations. 

Examples of Recommended Preventative Management Techniques

• consider zero discharge of the main waste streams (produced water and drilling 

wastes) at the planning and construction stage, in particular zero discharge of drilling 

waste and produced water; 

• reduce waste at the source by process modification, material elimination, material 

substitution, inventory control and management, improved housekeeping, and water 

recovery; 

• reuse of materials or products such as chemical containers, and oil-based or synthetic-
based drilling fluids; 

• recycle/recovery by the conversion of wastes into usable materials and/or extraction 

of energy or materials from wastes such as recycling scrap metal, recovery of 

hydrocarbons from tank bottoms and other oily sludge, burning waste oil for energy, 

and the use of produced water for enhanced recovery; 

• reduce toxicity of effluents through the careful selection of drilling fluids and 

chemical products used in separation equipment and wastewater treatment systems; 

• perform radiation surveys of equipment and sites to prevent or minimize the spread of 

Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM); and 

• where NORM-scale formation is anticipated, use scale inhibitors to minimize or 

prevent the buildup of radioactive scale in tubulars. 

Management Techniques for Drilling Wastes and Production Effluents 

Waste from Drilling Activities 

Drilling wastes in the form of residual muds and cuttings comprise the principal wastes 

generated during well drilling. Initially, a determination needs to be made on whether or 

not to prohibit discharge based on the nature/volume of the discharge and its effect on the 

environment. In certain areas, due to identification of environmentally sensitive areas 

muds and cuttings may need to be managed in a manner that will prevent discharge. In 

areas where discharge is permitted, the method of disposal should be based upon careful 

consideration of mud formulation and specific environmental conditions at the site. 

Where water-based muds are employed, additives containing oil, heavy metals, or other 

bioaccumulating substances should be avoided or removed prior to discharge. Persistent 

and toxic substances should be avoided or criteria for the maximum allowable 

concentration should be established. This is particularly true if cuttings with adhered mud 

are discharged offshore or disposed of on land. If the option of land disposal is used, 

then both the properties of the mud and the environmental conditions at the proposed 

disposal site should be carefully considered to determine acceptability of the disposal 

site. This is particularly important in the arctic where creation of a disposal site on land 

may lead to greater environmental damage. 

Environmental considerations favor the use of non oil-based muds for drilling. In 

shallow portions of a well, saltwater and saltwater with clay are often used as the primary 

drilling fluid and the cuttings and residual mud can generally be safely discharged into 

the marine environment. 

Discharge to the marine environment should be considered only where zero discharge 

technologies or reinjection are not feasible. Based upon site-specific biological, 

oceanographic and sea ice conditions, discharges should be at or near the sea floor or at a 

suitable depth in the water columns to prevent large sediment plumes that might affect 

benthic organisms, plankton productivity, or fish and marine mammal movements. These 

discharges should be considered on a case-by-case basis. 
Where the use of non-aqueous fluids is required, for example in highly deviated wells or 

in certain geological formations, operators should ensure that fluids are recycled as far as 

practicable. Disposal of cuttings contaminated with such fluids should be assessed on the 

basis of a comparative assessment of alternatives, including re-use of the material, 

injection into geological formations and discharge on to the sea bed taking into account 

possible impacts on the sea and other environmental compartments. 

Spent oil-based or synthetic-based muds can often be reconditioned and recycled. 

Injection into disposal wells or encapsulation of reserve fluid pits containing muds and 

cuttings, including those with acceptable levels of NORMs, and other pumpable wastes, 

are potential disposal techniques. Where geological conditions permit, reinjection of 

wastes into the reservoir achieves zero discharge to the marine environment of cuttings 

and drilling fluids. Management of down-hole disposal will require diligence to ensure 

that wastes do not migrate into unsealed or undesirable stratigraphic zones and that well 

integrity is maintained. Stabilized burial at approved onshore disposal sites is another 

potential alternative. 

Production Waste Discharges 

During production operations, produced water can be properly treated and discharged or 

may be reinjected in areas where marine discharge is undesirable. Treatment, work over, 

and completion fluids, which are brought to the surface in connection with production, 

may be commingled with waste waters from gas plants that are an integral part of 

production operations, unless those waters are classified as hazardous waste at the time of 

injection. In most cases they can be commingled with produced water for treatment and 

discharged within acceptable limits or reinjected.

Produced water treatment should be taken into account in the design phase and when 

significant modifications in operations are carried out. As characteristics of production 

water differ from one platform to another, there is no single system that can be applied 

successfully to all offshore platforms. Therefore, a site-specific combination of 

technologies based on the characteristics of produced water such as droplet size, stability 

of emulsion, ratio of droplets/dissolved hydrocarbons, other substances such as corrosion 

inhibitors and solids should be applied, and naturally occurring substances. 

Regulators and the industry should give consideration to the options for reduction and 

possible elimination of produced water discharged to the sea through the application of 

BAT, for example, injection, down hole separation or water shut-off. The focus should 

be on reducing the volume of discharges of produced water with the highest loads of oil 

and other substances. 

Regulatory agencies and industry should ensure that BAT and BEP are implemented on 

each platform and that BAT and BEP are regularly reviewed. In addition, regulatory 

agencies and industry should ensure that new offshore platforms or major modifications 

to existing platforms should consider design changes that minimize discharges, and 

preferably aspire to zero discharges of produced water. 
Produced sand containing elevated levels of naturally occurring radioactive material 

should be re-injected, encapsulated, or removed from the site and stored in a safe and 

environmentally sound manner that is carefully controlled and whose risks and 

circumstances have been properly evaluated. Management of these wastes will require 

diligence to ensure that radioactive wastes taken to shore are handled and disposed of in 

accordance with applicable international law and in an appropriate and approved manner. 

Radioactive materials should be transported in approved containers with proper labeling, 

which identify the substance and its special transport and handling requirements. 

Appropriate record keeping and proper notification for shippers should be maintained. 

Deck wash and chemical/fluid releases are another concern to the marine environment, 

especially where oil-based muds are in use. A facility plan should be developed to 

address these potential conditions and methods of spill control and leak minimization 

should be incorporated into facility design and maintenance procedures. These plans, 

minimization efforts and controls shall be applied to, but not limited to, material storage 

areas, loading and unloading operations, oil/water separation equipment, wastewater 

treatment, waste storage areas, and facility runoff management systems. 

All washdown waters, hydrocarbon contaminated rainwater and deck wash, and 

machinery drainage space fluids should be either processed through an oil-water 

separator prior to overboard discharge, meeting MARPOL 73/78 requirements, or 

injected where environmentally acceptable. 

Waste from Well-Testing 

Flaring can be a significant source of emissions to air. If flaring is considered 

environmentally unacceptable or if significant amounts of liquid hydrocarbons are 

produced during a test (i.e. extended well-testing operations), they may be processed. 

Solids and Domestic Wastes

Disposal of solid and domestic wastes should be done in conformity with international 

law, such as MARPOL 73/78.

Sanitary Waste

Sanitary wastes such as sewage and gray waters should be processed according to 

international or local government standards prior to discharge into the marine 

environment. Processing in an acceptable sanitary waste treatment unit will generally 

properly treat waste streams prior to discharge. 

Air Emissions

Air emissions associated with oil and gas exploration and production activities can be 

generally categorized as arising from two activities: (1) the combustion of fuels for power 
generation; and (2) emissions arising directly from the production, treatment, storage, or 

transportation of produced oil and gas. International standards for certain air emissions 

from platforms are covered by MARPOL Annex VI (73/78).

Overall emissions reductions can best be achieved through programs that emphasize 

energy efficiency and conservation in all activities, exploration (survey and exploratory 

drilling), development (construction and drilling), production, and transportation. 

Hazardous Waste Handling and Disposal 

The most effective way of protecting human health and the environment from the dangers 

posed by hazardous wastes is to ensure the reduction of their generation to a minimum in 

terms of quantity and/or hazard potential, taking into account technological and economic 

aspects. Minimizing the generation of hazardous wastes requires the implementation of 

environmentally sound low-waste technologies, recycling options, good house-keeping 

and management systems. Necessary measures should be taken to ensure that 

management of hazardous wastes is protective of human health and the Arctic 

environment. 

The availability of adequate disposal facilities should be ensured prior to allowing an 

activity to generate hazardous wastes. Hazardous wastes requiring transport to a disposal 

site should be packaged, labeled, and transported in conformity with generally accepted 

and recognized international rules and standards in the field of packaging, labeling, and 

transport. Due account should be taken of relevant internationally recognized practices. 

Transported hazardous wastes should be accompanied by a movement document from the 

point at which movement commences to the point of disposal. 

6.2 Health, Safety and Environmental Supervision 

The appropriate regulatory agencies should supervise the compliance by the responsible 

companies with applicable legislation, regulations, and/or conditions. The supervision 

should address the management system by means of audits and be supplemented as 

needed by onsite verifications by qualified personnel who are authorized to act as the lead 

agency on behalf of all applicable regulatory entities. 

The regulatory supervision should cover all stages of design, fabrication, installation, 

operations and removal of offshore installations. It should address the operating 

company’s management of design, operations, working conditions, record keeping and 

reporting, as well as procedures for ensuring compliance with permits and approved 

plans. The regulatory supervision should also encompass the company’s systems for 

pollution control and monitoring, drilling and well operations techniques, production, and 

pipeline operations. Representatives of the regulatory agencies should have enforcement 

authority to take the appropriate action in case of violations, incidents of noncompliance, 

or if the operator fails to react adequately to the occurrence of dangerous situations. 

These actions can include issuing warnings, citations, and injunctions, or ordering a shut-
in of a particular component of the operation, cessation of a specific operation, or a 

complete shut-down of the installation. 

Representatives of the regulatory agencies should have the right of access to the 

installations and to all related documentation and equipment at any time. The operating 

company shall provide for, as far as practical, the accommodation and when necessary 

the transportation of regulatory agency personnel. Supervisory activities may be carried 

out as scheduled or unscheduled visits. The frequency and extent of such activities will 

be decided by the regulatory agencies. 

The regulatory agencies should establish plans for these supervisory activities for each 

operating company. The extent and the focal points of the regulatory supervision should 

be decided upon the basis of parameters such as: regulatory requirements, the previous 

experience with the operators compliance, environmental and geologic conditions, the 

type of activity conducted by the operator, the type of technology applied, and reported 

accidents and incidents. 

6.3 Design and Operations 

Offshore oil and gas activities should make use of the best available and safest 

technologies that are determined to be economically feasible and be conducted in a 

manner to minimize impact on the environment. Operators should identify technologies 

and procedures to be employed for each step of the process from prospecting to 

exploration, development, production, platform decommissioning, and site clearance. 

Regulators should examine technologies and procedures proposed for use by operators 

and their adequacy to ensure that they are appropriate for the Arctic. 

Of primary importance is the need to ensure that wells remain under control at all times 

during drilling, well-completion, production, and well-workover operations. This 

capability must be maintained even while operating under extreme conditions. 

When planning an offshore oil and gas operation, a risk analysis may be used as a tool to 

identify potential hazards and prevent personal injuries, loss of human lives, and 

pollution of the environment. Criteria used for conducting such an analysis should be 

based on local regulatory requirements, local environmental conditions in the area of 

operation, and the planned operational activity. 

A risk analyses should: 

• address prevention of injuries, loss of human life, and pollution of the environment; 

• include risk criteria that has been defined prior to conducting the analysis and 

document the evaluations forming the basis of the acceptance criteria; 

• be used to follow the progress of activities in planning and implementation; 

• identify risk that has been assessed with reference to the acceptance criteria, form the 

basis of systematic selection of technical operational and organizational risk to be 

implemented; 
• be updated on a continuous basis and included as part of the decision making process; 

and 

• systematically follow-up implemented risk reducing measures and assumptions made 

in the analysis to ensure safety within the defined criteria. 

Technology 

Offshore platforms and other structures used for oil and gas activities in the Arctic should 

be designed, built, installed, maintained, and inspected to ensure their structural integrity 

taking into account the site-specific environmental conditions. Standards exist for the 

construction of fixed offshore platforms, including those constructed of steel and 

concrete. Standards, such as those under the International Organization for 

Standardization (ISO), are under development for offshore artificial islands including 

those constructed of sand, gravel and ice. In iceberg-prone areas, provision should be 

made for the emergency removal of removable installations. 

A blowout preventor (BOP) system should be installed consisting of several remote 

controlled closing systems and a backup accumulator-charging system. When a sub-sea 

BOP stack is to be used in an area subject to ice scour, it should be placed in an 

excavation well below the maximum depth of ice scour. The BOPs and related 

equipment should be suitable for operation in subfreezing conditions. 

A mud program should be prepared that has as its objective the maintenance of well 

control at all times. Mud temperatures should be controlled to minimize heat loss to 

permafrost zones in order to minimize thawing, which can result in serious problems 

while drilling. 

Wells should be completed with casing strings and cement of sufficient quantity and 

quality to prevent the release of fluids from any stratum either to the water column or to 

another stratum. Special attention should be paid to cement placed across permafrost 

zones. 

Prior to moving a well-completion rig, wells capable of production should either be shut 

in, both at the surface and the subsurface, or equipped with emergency shutdown 

systems. Production safety equipment capable of operating in an Arctic environment 

should be installed on all wells and production facility equipment. Wells open to 

hydrocarbon-bearing zones should be equipped with subsurface safety devices capable of 

shutting off the flow from the well in an emergency. All production facility equipment 

should be equipped with devices capable of protecting the facility and the environment 

from pollution. 

Pipelines should be installed, operated, and maintained in a manner that minimizes 

disturbance of sea floor habitat and does not unreasonably interfere with other uses of the 

sea floor in the area. Design of offshore Arctic pipelines should follow recommended 

practices such as those from Det Norske Veritas or the American Petroleum Institute and 

take into account such things as thaw settlement, near shore strudel scouring, and ice keel 
gouging. For example, in nearshore areas, pipelines should be buried below the 

maximum depth of potential damage from ice and strudel scour processes. Strengthened 

pipe, instrumented internal inspection devices, leak detection systems and techniques, 

cathodic protection, quality control, and preventive maintenance also must be considered 

in the design of Arctic pipeline systems. For multi-input pipelines, leak detection systems 

are not as sensitive for low-volume leaks. Therefore the operator/regulator may consider 

alternatives such as an alarmed metering system to provide continuous volumetric 

comparison between line inputs and onshore deliveries, or in order to detect leak rates 

below the threshold, a daily or more frequent volumetric line mass-balance comparison 

of inflows and outflows could be considered. 

Procedures 

Operators should submit a summary of the proposed project at the outset, followed by 

more detailed information prior to the initiation of each major activity, such as the 

drilling of a well. The application should describe all procedures to be employed, 

including those necessary to prevent harm to life and the marine environment. Special 

attention should be paid to operations in offshore areas underlain by permafrost. 

Safe work procedures should be developed for all phases of the proposed operations, 

including construction activities, transportation, equipment operation and maintenance, 

safety tests and drills. For example, well-control exercises should be conducted regularly 

for each crew to develop an adequate level of response proficiency to conditions 

threatening a blowout. Exercises should cover a wide range of situations. As 

appropriate, procedures should also be developed to ensure that hot work, welding, 

burning, cutting, and other operations with the potential to cause ignition of flammable 

vapors are conducted safely. Safe work procedures may also be developed for cold work 

such as use of radioactive material, trenching and excavating, and work on fire 

suppression, gas detection or emergency shutdown devices. These procedures may 

include issuance of a work permit. 

Procedures should be developed to protect personnel from the toxic effects of hydrogen 

sulfide, if it is encountered during drilling and production. 

Well abandonment, platform decommissioning, and site clearance are discussed in 

Chapter 8 (Site Clearance and Decommissioning). Operators shall incorporate into the 

design of an installation needed measures to ensure that removal of the installation can be 

accomplished without causing significant impacts on the environment. 

6.4 Human Health and Safety 

Threats to human health and safety including unsafe working conditions are factors 

contributing to accidents that could lead to environmental pollution. Possible threats or 

hazards affecting the health and safety of personnel in Arctic offshore oil and gas 

activities take many forms and comes from multiple sources. Principal sources include, 

but are not limited to, the harsh Arctic environment, the structural integrity of the 
installation, blowouts, fire and explosions, equipment failure, the transfer of personnel 

and supplies, and drilling, production, well completion, and workover operations. 

All offshore activities should be conducted in a safe and skillful manner and equipment 

maintained in a safe condition for the health and safety of all persons and the protection 

of the associated facilities. All necessary precautions should be taken to control, remove, 

or otherwise manage any potential health, safety or fire hazards. 

 

Management System and Work Procedures 

One way to manage potential risks is through the use of an appropriate management 

system. A management system or plan should address the identification of potential 

hazards, the evaluation of risks to the health and safety of personnel and procedures to 

eliminate or reduce health and safety risks (See Chapter 4.1 Management Systems). 

Management plans should: 

• identify and recognize significant health and safety risks; 

• evaluate significant health and safety risks; 

• plan and implement actions/procedures to manage risks; 

• review and test preparedness and effectiveness on a regular basis; 

• establish clear lines of communication with personnel; 

• provide training to personnel; 

• identify appropriate personnel protection equipment; and 

• communicate contents of the management plan to all personnel. 

Operators should ensure that all contractors pursue established safe working environment 

objectives. Safe working procedures should be established for all persons, including 

contractors, to ensure safe working conditions for all offshore activities. In addition work 

permits may be required for specific work activities including hot work, cutting, and 

welding (see 6.3 Design and Operations). 

Another useful tool to consider in the management or elimination of risks is through the 

use of a Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) Committee. HSE Committee meetings 

could be held to ensure that critical safety and environmental control information is 

communicated to all parties throughout offshore operations. HSE meetings would 

coordinate among the operator, contractors, and employees to ensure a mutual 

understanding of potential hazards in working environment. Meetings would allow 

employees an opportunity to express safety concerns to be addressed by the operator. 

Control of Materials 

Materials specifications, inventories, separation, confinement, and handling of toxic or 

hazardous materials that can affect human health and safety should be determined, 

documented, labeled, and communicated to appropriate person and addressed (see 6.1 

Waste Management). 
6.5 Transportation of supplies and transportation infrastructure 

Offshore transportation by air and water should be planned and carried out in a manner to 

eliminate or minimize adverse impact on the environment. The sections in these 

guidelines on management systems, monitoring programs and planning for emergencies 

should be applied, with adaptations where necessary, to transportation activities, as 

should the AEPS EIA Guidelines. Information gathering and mitigation measures 

identified at the environmental assessment stage of project planning should be fully 

utilized for minimizing the environmental impacts associated with transportation of 

supplies and people to and from offshore operations. For example, it may be necessary to 

select routes, flight altitudes and/or the time of voyages to avoid impact on wildlife or the 

harvesting of wildlife by area residents.

The planning and implementation of supply routes involves many considerations beyond 

environmental impacts. The system of transportation consists of supply bases, sea-routes 

and vessels. Procedures involved are the safe handling of cargo and safe navigation. All 

these elements must be carefully evaluated and accounted for prior to the field 

development. Transportation of supplies, infrastructure and crude oil, shall therefore be 

an integrated part of the environmental impact assessment outlined in these Guidelines. 

Where roads are required, ice roads, which create seasonal rather than permanent 

physical barriers to animal movements, may be preferable to permanent roads. 

Planning and environmental studies should be done to ensure the use of water from lakes 

or rivers to make ice roads will not significantly affect important freshwater habitat, 

including habitat for migratory birds. 

Ship-based transportation of supplies to offshore oil and gas installation are to be carried 

out under the administration of those requirements and guidelines laid down in the Safety 

of Life at Sea Convention, including in particular Chapter IX pertaining to the 

International Safety Management (ISM) Code, The International Convention on Oil 

Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation (OPRC), and the International 

Convention on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78), among others. 

The basis of the ship owners management system should include guidelines, codes and 

relevant international conventions to safeguard those additional requirements of the harsh 

environment of the Arctic such as those established by the Marine Environment 

Protection Committee (MEPC) and Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) of the 

International Maritime Organization. 

Supplies 

In maintaining the activity of an oil or gas installation in every aspect, supplies of many 

categories are involved; 

• Supplies for maintaining production; 

• Supplies for installation maintenance and safe operation; and 

• Supplies of domestic use. 
Storage, packaging and operational procedures of handling are to be as in accordance 

with general rules of safe practice and to recommendations of the product manufacturer. 

Supply base, routing and installations 

Prior to field development, it is necessary to plan infrastructure required to serve the 

needs of the installation. In addition to systems for handling the production, a system is 

also required to secure sufficient and safe supply. Beside the installation itself, the main 

elements of such infrastructure are the supply bases and sea-routes. The location of such 

bases is often decided on the basis of compromises in which the requirements for safe 

transportation must compete with other possibly conflicting alternatives. This calls for an 

even closer focusing on safe routing. An Arctic land-offshore transport routing system 

might cover more than one field and therefore must be reliable. To assure safe operations, 

sufficient care must be taken regarding both climatic and environmental seasonal 

variations. In order to account for these factors, one should evaluate the possible need for 

ice handling and management procedures (integrated in the field operational plans if 

feasible) covering the installation, and the route as well as the supply base. 

6.6 Training 

Trained operator and contract personnel are the key to safe and environmentally sound oil 

and gas activities. Appropriate training plans, programs, and practices addressing 

offshore Arctic oil and gas activities should be established and implemented for these 

personnel in accordance with their duties and job responsibilities. (Refer to Chapter 7, 

Emergencies, for information concerning response training). 

All personnel should be provided with training on basic safety and environmental issues 

and procedures specific to the offshore environment prior to assuming their duties. This 

training should provide personnel with the necessary skills and knowledge needed to 

conduct their jobs in a safe manner, provide for health and safety of all persons, and 

protect the environment. 

Training programs should provide instruction on the operation of equipment, offshore 

operating practices, offshore emergency survival and fire fighting, local or regional 

regulatory requirements. It should include Arctic cultural, social, and environmental 

concerns including marine mammal interactions as dictated by an individuals job 

responsibilities. Where appropriate, traditional knowledge should be used in training 

programs. 

Supervisory personnel should have a thorough knowledge of the operations and the 

operating procedures for which they are responsible. Individuals responsible for drilling, 

well completion, or workover operations should be properly trained in well control. 

Individuals responsible for production operations should be properly trained in 

production safety system operations. 
A person designated by the operator to be in charge of the offshore operation should have 

a thorough knowledge of the operations and the operating procedures they are responsible 

for, and training in the following areas as appropriate: 

• leadership and command ability; 

• communication skills; 

• team building; 

• crisis management; and 

• installation specific emergency training. 

Periodic refresher training should be provided to personnel as appropriate. As required, 

procedures should be developed to monitor the effectiveness of training programs. 

Back to Table of Contents

7. Emergencies 

Arctic States that are party to the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, 

Response and Cooperation (OPRC 1990) and/or the International Convention for the 

Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 1973/1978, Annex I – regulations for the 

prevention of pollution by oil), are required to ensure that operators have oil pollution 

emergency plans and that these plans are carried on board installations. 

7.1 Preparedness 

Operators should establish and maintain emergency preparedness so that the mitigation of 

an incident will be carried out without delay in a controlled, organized, and safe manner. 

Risk analyses should be carried out in order to identify the accidental events that may 

occur and the consequences of such accidental events. Hazardous situations and 

accidents should be defined for the operations in question. An analysis should be carried 

out to design the emergency preparedness requirements so as to meet the specific 

circumstances of the operation. The emergency preparedness required for the operation 

should be incorporated in the design and modification of the oil and gas installation, and 

for the selection of equipment. The performance requirements expected of both standby 

vessel and ice roads in emergencies should also be defined. This should include design 

criteria, equipment and manning requirements for standby vessels and design criteria and 

construction and maintenance requirements for roads. Emergency preparedness should 

be part of the safety and environmental program to ensure its integration into all phases 

of the operation in question. 

Preparedness relating to oil pollution should ensure that the source of any oil pollution is 

first secured, and any release is effectively contained and collected near the source of the 

discharge as quickly as possible. Particular attention should be paid to response 

contingencies in ice conditions, where oil spill response, including containment, may 

require a range of techniques depending on the condition of the ice. The preparedness 

should also address protection of public health, environmental resources including 

shorelines, ice and water interfaces, and economic and cultural resources. The health and 
safety of all persons who may be involved in an incident (e.g., local populations and their 

representatives, responders, volunteers, etc.) should be a predominant consideration, and 

should be integrated into the overall emergency preparedness regime. 

The communication within the emergency preparedness organization should ensure 

effective administration and control of all response resources when abnormal conditions 

and emergencies occur. The means of communication and their use should ensure 

unambiguous and effective transmission of information. 

A key factor in preparedness is ensuring that personnel involved in the response are 

trained and instructed in their roles and duties. 

Preparedness planning of the operator should include co-ordination with any relevant 

municipal, local, state or federal emergency response plan. 

Governments are responsible for oversight including national emergency contingency 

planning. Governments should also make appropriate arrangements that facilitate 

international coordination and cooperation. 

7.2 Response 

Refer to the EPPR Field Guide for Oil Spill Response in Arctic Waters for a practical 

introduction to oil spill response. Emergency response plans should address abnormal 

conditions and emergencies that can be anticipated during the oil and gas operation being 

carried out, including: 

• personnel injury or loss of life; 

• loss of well control, or release of flammable or toxic gas; 

• fire, explosion or other emergencies that may occur; 

• damage to the oil and gas installation; 

• loss of support craft including aircraft; 

• spills of oil or other pollutants; and 

• hazards unique to the operation including ice encroachment; uncontrolled flooding of 

the installation; loss of ballast control or stability; pipeline leaks or ruptures; vessel 

collision; and heavy weather and difficulties with support facilities such as ice roads, 

aircraft or shuttle tankers. 

Contents of Emergency Response Plans 

An emergency response plan should contain at least the following elements: 

• A Description of the Response Organization - This should clearly state its structure, 

roles, responsibilities and decision-making authorities; 

• Policies and Procedures for Responding - This should include a summary of 

equipment to combat the particular condition or emergency situation, clearly stating 

the make and type of equipment, its capacity, location, type of transport, field of 
operation and operational procedures and training for operating staff. The procedures 

should include each key person’s duties, when and how the emergency equipment is 

to be employed, and the action to be carried out. Policies should state measures for 

limiting or stopping the event in question and conditions for terminating the action. 

The procedures should be designed so as to be expedient to use for the emergency; 

• A Description of the Alarm and Communication Systems - This should include 

notification criteria, reporting procedures and policies regarding government 

notification. Primary and secondary communication facilities among operational 

components should also be identified; 

• Alert Criteria - Procedures here should list precautionary measures to secure the well 

and evacuate personnel in the event of damage from severe weather, sea, ice, erosion 

or other event; 

• On-Site First Aid - List available backup medical support, medevac facilities and 

other emergency facilities, such as emergency fueling sites. Also describe required 

survival equipment, including extreme weather survival gear, alternate 

accommodation facilities, and emergency power sources; and 

• Relief Well Arrangements - The operator should outline his immediate response to a 

well control incident or blowout. Also, the operator should demonstrate the 

availability of the necessary equipment, and support systems to be utilized. 

• Designated response operation center to coordinate response actions. 

• “Emergency response contact list” in order to identify who and how key responders 

to an emergency are to be contacted. 

Oil Spill Response Plan 

Operators should be required to have site-specific or operator-specific plans. An oil spill 

response plan addresses an oil spill volume based on relevant well data, catastrophic loss 

of a tank ship or barge, or damage to a pipeline. The Plan should be supplemented by 

resource sensitivity maps arranged sequentially by month for those areas identified by 

spill trajectories as being potentially exposed to oil pollution. The plan should also 

describe the process for its development, which should include involvement by response 

entities, both government and private, health officials, scientists, local populations that 

may be affected, wildlife experts, trustees of resources, and anyone else who may be 

affected or who may have a role in the response. Operators should allow the opportunity 

for public review and comment of the Plan. 

The oil spill response plan should include, in addition to the items described above, the 

following: 

• a brief description of the operation; 

• a description of the site, water depth, seasonal constraints, and logistical support; 

• references to all environmental support material that would be relevant to establish 

cleanup priorities; 

• details of the operator’s capability in using real time wind and current data to 

implement an oil spill trajectory model both for open sea and for ice-infested areas; 

• a map depicting sensitive areas to be protected; 
• a description of cleanup and containment strategies required for shoreline and icecovered areas 

• a description of alternative cleanup strategies such as the use of dispersants, in situ 

burning, and no response; 

• a strategy to respond to small spills from the installation, shore base or loading 

operations; 

• provisions for transport, storage, and disposal of recovered oil and oil contaminated 

materials; 

• spill response crew relief & logistics; and 

• a list or inventory of spill response equipment. 

Operators should have access to oil spill countermeasures equipment. The oil spill 

response plan should itemize equipment on-site for immediate containment purposes. 

The plan should also provide details of oil spill equipment and resources that are not onsite but will be mobilized in the event of a spill; the details should include type of 

equipment, required resources, logistics and timing of mobilizing the equipment to the 

site. 

The oil spill response plan should include the qualifications and training of personnel 

responsible for the management of oil spill responses. It should clearly define their 

authority to take actions to respond to such emergencies. 

A national preparedness and response system should be developed on the basis of 

protecting the health and safety, the environment, and the socio-economic interests of the 

nation’s citizens. 

Oil spill response plans must take the existence of ice conditions into account. Broken ice 

conditions make it difficult to respond to oil spills with conventional mechanical response 

equipment. With spills in solid and broken ice conditions, oil can be trapped in melting or 

freezing ice. However, new techniques that rely on natural containment attributes of ice 

allow conventional mechanical response equipment to be employed effectively to remove 

oil from solid and broken ice environments where, in open water conditions, it would 

normally spread widely over the ocean surface. Through ice movement and drift, oil can 

be carried a long distance from the original site of the spill. But deployment of oil 

tracking buoys in the ice can aid in maintaining the position of the oil and allow 

responders the opportunity to recover the oil once ice conditions are safe enough for 

removal activities. Where ice conditions exist, oil spill response plans must take these 

considerations into account. 

Ice Management Plan 

Where there may be pack ice, drifting icebergs or ice islands at the operational site, the 

operator should develop an ice management plan that provides for the protection of the 

installation. 
The Plan should include details regarding ice detection, ice surveillance, data collection, 

forecasting and reporting of ice encroachment, multiyear ice hazards, ice loading, and 

structural loading. If required, the Plan should also include details of ice avoidance or ice 

deflection, including forecasting oil-in-ice drift. 

The Plan should include alert criteria and alert procedures to ensure a totally effective 

mobilization of all relevant emergency preparedness resources, including procedures for 

moving the installation. Measures for danger limitation should be implemented when a 

hazardous situation occurs in order to prevent its developing into an accident situation. 

Emergency Preparedness Maintenance 

All the established technical, operational and organizational measures that make up the 

emergency preparedness of the individual activity, as well as, the actual equipment 

should be maintained in order to keep up a state of effective emergency preparedness. 

Oil spill response exercises should be carried out on a scheduled basis allowing 

responders to use actual equipment. In addition, a communication exercise in response to 

an emergency should be conducted on a scheduled basis. Exercises should be reviewed to 

ensure compliance with all requirements relating to emergency preparedness. Any 

deviation should be identified and corrected immediately; the causes of such deviation 

should be identified. In accordance with the safety and environmental program, 

emergency preparedness work should be verified and documented. 

Measures should be taken to update the established emergency preparedness based on 

continuous evaluation of experience, technological development and new knowledge. 

Back to Table of Contents

8. Decommissioning and Site Clearance

Decommissioning is an integral part of the life cycle of an offshore project. Plans for 

decommissioning should be incorporated at the design phase of a development and reviewed 

again when the facility is no longer needed for its current purpose. These plans should 

involve both technical considerations and financial provisions required to undertake the 

activity and any post-abandonment clearance and/or monitoring work. 

A decommissioning plan should be site- and condition-specific and should take into 

account sound science and field experience and balance environmental, safety, health, 

economic and technological factors as well as any constraints imposed by 

intergovernmental agreements. It is noted that those Arctic States that are Contracting 

Parties to the OSPAR Convention have agreed a binding package of measures (via 

OSPAR Decision 98/3) which generally prohibits disposal of installations at sea, but 

which allows for derogation from this prohibition in a limited number of instances. 

These include leaving in place the footings of a large steel jacket platform (with a jacket 

weight in excess of 10,000 tons) as well as a broad exemption for gravity-based concrete 
structures for which leaving in place and/or disposal at a designated site may be 

considered. 

Other Arctic States will need to take into account the provisions of the London Convention 

(1972) or when it enters into force the 1996 Protocol to that agreement where full or partial 

disposal at sea (including toppling and leaving in place) is considered. For both the 1972 

and 1996 agreements, Contracting Parties to the London Convention (1972) have adopted 

specific guidelines for disposal of platforms. 

In addition to these agreements dealing with the special case of disposal of platforms, the 

International Maritime Organization has adopted “Guidelines and standards for the removal 

of offshore installations and structures on the continental shelf and in the Exclusive 

Economic Zone” (Resolution A.672(16))” which govern safety of navigation. Amongst 

other things, the guidelines state that for structures placed on the seabed after 1998, complete 

removal should be feasible. 

Decommissioning plans should be developed in consultation with the competent 

authorities and stakeholders, including indigenous residents, fishing groups and other 

interested parties. The decommissioning plan should address the both the facilities and 

the environment. (The London Convention (1972) Waste Assessment guidance is a 

useful reference in this regard.) Abandoned wells should be plugged and sealed. 

Pipelines may be removed, or cleaned flushed and left in space either on the seabed, if 

they will not interfere with other uses of the sea, or trenched. Removal of facilities 

should consider potential impacts on the site, including noise (as from the use of 

explosives), physical disturbance of communities established during the life of the facility 

and demobilization routes. 

Site clearance and post decommissioning monitoring programs are important aspects. 

These will ensure that with the exception of facilities purposely left in place that the site 

is clear of debris and that no obstacles are left that might interfere with other uses of the 

site. Post abandonment monitoring can also be used to assess the recovery of the 

production site. Where an artificial island has been constructed as a platform for drilling 

or construction, it may be appropriate to allow natural processes to return the site to its 

former configuration. 

Back to Table of Contents

9. Abbreviations and Definitions 

Accident: A sudden, unplanned, unintentional and undesired event or series of events that 

causes physical harm to a person or damage to property, or which has negative effects on 

the environment. 

ADD: International Arctic Environmental Data Directory http://www.grida.no/add/

AEPS: Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy 
AMAP: Arctic Mapping and Assessment Program, a working group under the Arctic 

Council. http://www.amap.no/

API: American Petroleum Institute http//www.api.org

BAT: Best Available Technology/Techniques

BEP: Best Environmental Practice

BOP: Blowout Preventor--Safety system that quickly closes a well in the course drilling 

to avoid blowouts. 

CAFF: Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna-- a working group under the Arctic 

Council. http://www.caff.is/

Chemicals: A generic term for both chemical substance and/or mixture of substances (see 

definition for ‘mixture of substances’). 

Chemical Substance: A chemical element and chemical compound of several elements, 

naturally or industrially produced. 

Chemical waste: Oil/fuel residues, empty chemical and paint packaging, all kinds of 

chemical waste (solid and liquid) and all kinds of paint and solvents. 

Contamination: concentrations of naturally occurring substances enhanced by man's 

activities or the occurrence of synthetic substances in the 

environment at concentrations that do not give rise to adverse effects; 

DNV: Det Norske Veritas, Classification, Consulting and Certification Society. 

http://www.dnv.com/

EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment

EMS: Environmental Management System 

Emergency: An unplanned event which has caused injury, loss or damage or which is an 

actual or potential threat to human life, the environment or the installation and has made 

it necessary to deviate from the planned operation or suspend the use of standard 

operating procedures. 

EPPR: Emergency Preparedness, Prevention and Response a working group and program 

of the Arctic Council. http://eppr.arctic-council.org/

Hazard: A physical situation with a potential for causing human injury, damage to 

property, negative effects on the environment or a combination of these. British 

Standards BS 8800 definition--A source or a situation with a potential for harm in terms 
of human injury or ill-health, damage to property, damage to the environment, or a 

combination of these. 

Hazard Analysis: The identification of undesired events that lead to the materialisation of 

a hazard, the analysis of the mechanisms by which these undesired events could occur 

and usually the estimation of the extent, magnitude and likelihood of any harmful effects. 

Hazard Identification: (British Standards BS 8800) The process of recognising that a 

hazard exists and defining its characteristics.

HSEMS: Health, Safety, and Environmental Management System 

HSE: Health, Safety and Environment 

ISM: International Safety Management Code in Chapter IX of the Safety of Life at Sea 

Convention. http://www.imo.org/

ISO: International Organization for Standardization. http://www.iso.ch/

IMO: International Maritime Organization http://www.imo.org/

Impact: an alteration to the natural environment arising from the activity in question 

Incident: A sudden, unplanned, unintentional and undesired event or series of events 

having the potential of causing physical harm to a person or damage to property, or which 

has negative effects on the environment. British Standards BS 8800 definition—An 

unplanned event which has the potential to lead to accident. 

MARPOL: International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution. 1973, 1978. 

MARPOL-Annex I, IV, V and Annex VI. International Maritime Organization 

http://www.imo.org/

MMS: United States Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service 

http://www.mms.gov/

MSC: Maritime Safety Committee of the International Maritime Organization. 

http://www.imo.org/

MEPC: Marine Environment Protection Committee of the International Maritime 

Organization http://www.imo.org/

NORM: Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials 

OGP: International Association of Oil and Gas Producers http://www.ogp.org.uk/

OPRC: International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and 

Cooperation (1990) http://www.imo.org/
PAME: Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment http://www.pame.is/

PEIA: Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment

Performance Standard: A statement, which can be expressed in qualitative or 

quantitative terms, of the performance required of a system, item of equipment, person or 

procedure, and which is used as the basis for managing the hazard e.g. planning, 

measuring, control or audit - through the life cycle of the installation. 

Petroleum activity: is in this context used for all activities being an integrated part of oil 

and gas activities, including shuttle transportation of petroleum, supply transportation etc. 

Pollution: the introduction by man, directly or indirectly of substances or energy into the 

marine environment which results, or is likely to result in hazards to human health, harm 

to living resources and marine ecosystems, damage to amenities or interference with 

other legitimate uses of the sea. 

POP: persistent organic pollutants 

Risk: The probability that physical harm to persons will be suffered or negative effects on 

the environment or that damage to property will occur as a consequence of exposure to a 

hazard. 

Risk Analysis: (United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive, Offshore Research Issue 

134/DEC01) The estimation of risk from the basic activity “as is” 

Risk Assessment: (Lloyds Register Definition) The quantitative evaluation of the 

likelihood of undesired events and the likelihood of harm or damage being caused 

together with the value judgments made concerning the significance of the results. 

(British Standard BS 8800 Definition) The overall process of estimating the magnitude of 

risk and deciding whether or not the risk is tolerable or acceptable. (United Kingdom 

Health Safety Executive (HSE), Offshore Research Issue 134/DEC01) A review as to 

acceptability of risk based on comparison with risk standards or criteria, and the trial of 

various risk reduction measures. 

Risk Management: (United Kingdom Health Safety Executive (HSE), Offshore Research 

Issue 134/DEC01) The process of selecting appropriate risk reduction measures and 

implementing them in the on-going management of the activity.

Safety: freedom from unacceptable risks to, personal harm, damage to property, or 

environmental pollution.

Safe Job Analysis: A review of the work situation, in which the job is broken down into 

sub-activities. Possible elements of danger associated with each sub-activity are 

considered as well as how/which risk reducing measuring should be established. 
SEA: Strategic Environmental Assessment--a systematic process for evaluating the 

environmental consequences of a proposed policy, plan or program initiative in order to 

ensure they are fully included and appropriately addressed at the earliest appropriate 

stage of decision-making on par with economic and social considerations. 

 

SEMP: Safety and Environmental Management Program 

UNEP: United Nations Environmental Program 

Back to Table of Contents

10 References/Bibliography 

The following references are meant to provide the reader with the basis for each chapter 

and further reading. They are not meant to be a comprehensive bibliography and we 

encourage the reader to visit the World Wide Web address included at the end of most 

citations, so that they may check for updated or new information. 

Chapter 1 

A Description of the Socioeconomic of the North Slope Borough, 1983. ISER for 

Minerals Management Service (A19/PB 87-189338) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

A Description of the Socioeconomic of the North Slope Borough. Appendix: Transcripts 

of Selected Inupiat Interviews, 1983. ISER for Minerals Management Service (A12/PB 

85-162055) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

A Social Indicators System for OCS Impact Monitoring, 1985. Stephen R. Braund and 

Associates for Minerals Management Service (A11/PB 87-209227) (MMS 85-0079) 

(Contract No. 30179) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

An Investigation of the Sociocultural Consequences of Outer Continental Shelf V. 1, 

Development in Alaska, 1995. (MMS 95-0010) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

An Investigation of the Sociocultural Consequences of Outer Continental Shelf V. 

Development in Alaska, 1995. (MMS 95-0014) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

An Investigation of the Sociocultural Consequences of Outer Continental Shelf V. VI 

Development in Alaska, 1995. (MMS 95-0015) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Barrow: A Decade of Modernization, 1986. Chilkat Institute for Minerals Management 

Service (A19/PB 87-204673) (MMS 86-0088) (Contract No. 30227) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Beaufort Sea Baseline Studies: Interim Report, 1977. CCC/HOK, Inc. for U.S. 
Department of the Interior http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Beaufort Sea Region Petroleum Development Scenarios, 1978. Dames and Moore for 

U.S. Department of the Interior (A22/PB 283236/AS) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Beaufort Sea Region Man-Made Environment, 1978. Alaska Consultants, Inc for U.S. 

Department of the Interior (A13/PB 281634/AS) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Beaufort Sea Region Sociocultural Systems, 1978. Worl Associates for U.S. Department 

of the Interior (A13/PB 281634/AS) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Beaufort Sea Regional Natural Physical Environment, 1978. Dames and Moore Inc. for 

U.S. Department of the Interior (A03/PB 284567/AS) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Beaufort Sea Region Socioeconomic Baseline, 1978. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Co. 

for U.S. Department of the Interior (A18/PB 294339/AS) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Chukchi Sea Sociocultural Systems Baseline Analysis, 1983. Cultural Dynamics, Ltd for 

Minerals Management Service (A17/PB 85-172922) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Documentation of the Arctic Economic Impact Model for Petroleum Activities in Alaska 

(Arctic IMPAK). [with associated economic model in MS Excel on disk: Arctic IMPAK] 

Jack Faucett & Associates. (MMS 2001-003) (Contract 01-98-CT-30907) as of 7/01 

forthcoming estimated completion November, 2001http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Economic and Social Effects of the Oil Industry in Alaska 1975 to 1995, Volumes I and 

II, 1999. McDowell Group for Minerals Management Service (MMS 99-0041) (Contract 

14-35-01-97-CT-30844) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Economic and Demographic Impacts of the Beaufort Sea Petroleum Development 

Scenarios, 1978. ISER for U.S. Department of the Interior (A13/PB 285409) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Economic and Demographic Structural Change in Alaska, 1982. ISER for Minerals 

Management Service (A13/PB 83-174789) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Economic and Demographic Systems of the North Slope Borough: Beaufort Sea Lease 

Sale 97 and Chukchi Sea Lease Sale 109, V. I and II, 1986. ISER for Minerals 

Management Service (A99/PB 87-205241) (MMS 86-0019) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Effects of Renewable Harvest Disruptions on Socioeconomic and Sociocultural Systems: 

St. Lawrence Island, 1984. John Muir Institute for Minerals Management Service 

(A17/PB 87-190278), (Contract No. 29024) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Effects of Renewable Harvest Disruptions on Socioeconomic and Sociocultural Systems: 
Norton Sound, 1984. John Muir Institute for Minerals Management Service. (A16/PB 

85-173391) (Contract No. 29024) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Effects of Renewable Harvest Disruption on Socioeconomic and Sociocultural Systems: 

Chukchi Sea, 1985. John Muir Institute for Minerals Management Service (A99/PB 

87-199428) (Contract No. 29024) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/ 

Historic Indicators of Alaska Native Culture Change, 1978. Cultural Dynamics, Ltd. for 

U.S. Department of the Interior (A08/PB 294180/AS) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Hormonal Effects of C4-C7 Alkyphenols on cod (Gadus morphua), 2002. Sonnich Meier, 

Andersen, E. T., Hasselberg, L., Kjesbu, O.S., Klugsøyr, J., and Svardal, A., Report to 

the Norwegian Oil Industry Association, Norwegian Institute of Marine Research.68 pp. 

http://www.imr.no/

 

Man-Made Environmental Impacts of the Beaufort Sea Petroleum Development 

Scenarios, 1978. Alaska Consultants, Inc. for U.S. Department of the Interior (A10/PB 

294314) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Migration and Oil Industry Employment of North Slope Alaska Natives, 1993. ISER for 

Minerals Management Service. (PB94-122843) (MMS 92-0061) (Contract No. 14-12-

0001-30311) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Monitoring Oil Exploration Activities in the Beaufort Sea, 1985. Kevin Waring 

Associates for Minerals Management Service (A12/PB 87-207197) (MMS 84-0060) 

(Contract No. 30030) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Natural Physical Environmental Impact of the Beaufort Sea Petroleum Development 

Scenarios, 1978. Dames and Moore for U.S. Department of the Interior (A06/PB 

224571) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

North Slope Subsistence Study--Barrow 1988, 1989. Stephen R. Braund and Associates 

for Minerals Management Service (A10/PB91-105429/AS) (MMS 89-0077) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

North Slope Subsistence Study--Wainwright 1988, 1989. Stephen R. Braund and 

Associates for Minerals Management Service (A07/PB91-105437) (MMS 89-0078) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Northern Institutional Profiles Analysis--Chukchi Sea, 1990 Impact Assessment, Inc. for 

Minerals Management Service (A99/PB91-105510/AS) (MMS 90-0022) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Northern Institutional Profiles Analysis--Beaufort Sea, 1990. Impact Assessment, Inc. for 

Minerals Management Service (A99/PB91-105403) (MMS 90-0023) (Contract No. 14-

12-0001-30414) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/
Norton Sound/Yukon Delta Sociocultural Systems Baseline Analysis, 1981. Alaska 

Department of Fish and Game for U.S. Department of the Interior (A13/PB 83-176396). 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Oil & gas exploration and production in arctic offshore regions: Guidelines 

for environmental protection (2002), International Association of Oil and 

Gas Producers, Report No. 2.84/329, 56 pages. http://www.ogp.org.uk/

Proceedings of a Workshop: Review of Outer Continental Shelf Economic and 

Demographic Impact Modeling for Rural Alaska, 1985. Lawrence Johnson and 

Associates. (A07/PB 87-204699/AS) (MMS 85-0080) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Prudhoe Bay Case Study, 1978. CCC/HOK, Inc. for U.S. Department of the Interior 

(A06/PB 281544/AS) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Public Hearings--20 Years of Testimony Related to Proposed Activities on the Arctic 

Continental Shelf and Related Areas from 1975 to 2001, Minerals Management Service. 

2002. http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Regional and Village Corporation Employment Profiles. Kevin Waring Associates, 

1989. (A04/PB 90-164419/AS) (MMS 89-0084) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Ref. Manual and GIS Overlays, Oil Industry and Other Human Activity (1970-1995) 

Beaufort Sea, Minerals Management Service, Alaska Region Environmental Studies 

Program, 1999. http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Review of Cumulative Impact Assessment Literature and North Slope Borough, 1985. 

Development Projects. Maynard and Partch, (A21/PB 87-190286/AS) (MMS 85-0014) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Sociocultural Consequences of Alaska OCS Activities: Data Analysis and Integration, 

Minerals Management Service, Alaska Region Environmental Studies Program 2000-

ongoing. http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Sociocultural Systems Impacts of the Beaufort Sea Petroleum Development Scenarios, 

1978. Worl Associates for U.S. Department of the Interior (A06/PB291919) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Social Indicators for OCS Impact Monitoring Vol. I, 1983. Louis Berger and Associates, 

Inc. for Minerals Management Service (A15/PB 85-162048) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Social Indicators for OCS Impact Monitoring: Technical Appendices, Vol. II, 1983. 

Louis Berger and Associates, Inc. for Minerals Management Service (A06/PB 

85-175735) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 
Social Indicators Study of Alaskan Coastal Villages, 1992. I. Key Informant Summaries, 

Volume 1 Schedule A, Regions, (North Slope, NANA, Calista, Aleutian-Pribilof). 

Human Relations Area Files Inc. (PB93-138485) (MMS 92-0031) (Contract No. 14-12-

0001-30300) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Social Indicators Monitoring Study Peer Review Workshop, 1997. MBC Applied 

Environmental Sciences for Minerals Management Service (PB97-123400) (Contract No. 

14-35 0001-30570) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Statewide Impacts of OCS Petroleum Facilities Development in Alaska, 1979. University 

of Alaska Anchorage, Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER). (A06/PB 

80-108707) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Subsistence Resource Harvest Patterns: Nuiqsut, 1990. Impact Assessment, Inc. (PB91-

121145/AS) (MMS 90-0038) (Contract No. 14-35-0001-60146) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Subsistence Resource Harvest Patterns: Kaktovik, 1990. Impact Assessment, Inc. (PB91-

121228) MMS 90-0039) (Contract No. 14-35-0001-60146) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Summary of Socioeconomic Impacts of the Beaufort Sea Petroleum Development 

Scenarios, 1978. James Lindsay and Associates for U.S. Department of the Interior 

(A06/PB294315) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Synthesis/Book of Information on the Socioeconomic Effects of Oil & Gas Industry 

Activity, on Alaska OCS, Minerals Management Service, Alaska Region Environmental 

Studies Program 1999 http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Transportation Impact of the Beaufort Sea Petroleum Development Scenarios, 1978 

Dennis Dooley and Associates for U.S. Department of the Interior (A08/PB 291917) 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Update of Oil Industry Labor Factors for Alaska Manpower Model Subsistence 

Economies and North Slope Oil Development Minerals Management Service, Alaska 

Region Environmental Studies Program /Coastal Marine Institute University of Alaska, 

1999-ongoing. http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Western Alaska Local Socioeconomic Systems Analysis, 1981. Alaska Consultants, Inc. 

for U.S. Department of the Interior (A16/PB 83-176354) http://www.mms.gov/alaska/. 

Back to Table of Contents

Chapter 2 

Environmental Risk Analysis for Arctic Activities, 1999. EPPR--The Emergency 

Prevention Preparedness and Response Working Group of the Arctic Council Risk 

Analysis Report No.2 http://eppr.arctic-council.org/
Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS), Environmental Impact Assessment 

EIA Guidelines, 1996. http://www.arctic-council.org/ or http://finnbarents.urova.fi/aria/

National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), the Environmental Quality 

Improvement Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), sec. 309 of the Clean 

Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7609), and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5, 1970, as amended by 

E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977). http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Principles for Impact Assessment: The Environmental and Social Dimension, August, 

1997 E&P Forum Report 2.74/265 International Association of Oil and Gas Producers 

(OGP). http://www.ogp.org.uk/

United States Code Title 43—Public Lands, Chapter 29—Submerged Lands, Subchapter 

I Sec. 1301- Sec. 1303. 43USC1301 http://www.access.gpo.gov/

United States Code Title 43—Public Lands, Chapter 29—Submerged Lands Subchapter 

III—Outer Continental Lands (OCSLA) Sec. 1331-1356 43USC1331. 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 15—Commerce and Foreign Trade, Chapter 

IX—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce Part 

922—National Marine Sanctuary Program Regulations Subpart A Sec. 922.1-922.104 

15CFR922 http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 50—Wildlife and Fisheries Department of 

Commerce Part 222—General Endangered and Threatened Marine Species, Volume 2, 

October 1, 2001. 50CFR222 http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 22—Foreign Relations Chapter I—Department 

of State Part 161—Regulations for Implementation of the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA), Volume 1, April 1, 2001. 22CFR161 http://www.access.gpo.gov/

United States Code TITLE 42—The Public Health and Welfare, Chapter 56—

Environmental Quality Improvement Sec. 4371 42USC4371. http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Back to Table of Contents

Chapter 3 

Canada, Denmark, Norway, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United 

States of America. Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears. Oslo, 1973. 

Gallagher, Thomas J. Native Participation in Land Management Panning in Alaska. 

Arctic. Vol.41(2): 91-98. 1998 

Gallagher, Thomas J. Language, Native People, and Land Management in Alaska. 

Arctic. Vol.45(2): 145-149. 1992 
Noland, Laura J. and Thomas Gallagher. Cross-Cultural Communication for Land 

Managers and Planners in Alaska. Agroborealis. Vol.21(1): 18-23 

Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. 1996. Acts, Regulations and Provisions for Petroleum 

Activities. Vol. I and II. April 1, 1996. http://npd.no/ or see updated information at 

http://npd.no/English/Produkter+og+tjenester/Regelverket/papirlost_forhold.htm

U.S. Department of the Interior. Guidelines for Oil and Gas Operations in Polar Bear 

Habitat. August 1993. 

U.S. Marine Mammal Commission. Workshop on Measures to Assess and Mitigate the 

Adverse Effects of Arctic Oil and Gas Activities on Polar Bears. December 1990. 

U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973, Public Law 93-205, 81 Stat. 884, as amended, 

codified at 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544. http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, Public Law 92-522, Stat.1027, as 

amended, codified at 16 U.S.C. 1361-1421h. http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Back to Table of Contents

Chapter 4 

American Petroleum Institute (API). 1993. Recommended Practices for Development of 

a Safety and Environmental Management Program for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) 

Operations and Facilities. API RP 75, May, 15, 1993. http//www.api.org

American Petroleum Institute (API). 1993. Recommended Practices for Design and 

Hazards Analysis for Offshore Production Facilities. API RP 14J, September 1, 1993. 

http//www.api.org

Guidelines for the Development and Application of Health, Safety and Environmental 

Management Systems, July, 1994 International Association of Oil and Gas Producers 

(OGP) (E&P Forum) Report No. 6.26/210 47 p http://www.ogp.org.uk/

International Maritime Organization (IMO). International Management Code for the 

Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention. IMO Resolution A.741(18). 

http://www.imo.org/

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Development of Safety, Health, 

and Environmental Management Program for Offshore Oil and Gas Production 

Operations and Facilities. http://www.iso.ch/

Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. 1996. Acts, Regulations and Provisions for Petroleum 

Activities, Vol. I and II. April 1, 1996. http://npd.no/ or see updated information at 

http://npd.no/English/Produkter+og+tjenester/Regelverket/papirlost_forhold.htm
The Oil Industry International Exploration and Production Forum (E&P Forum). 1994. 

Guidelines for the Development and Application of Health, Safety and Environmental 

Management System. Report 6.36/210, July, 1994. http://www.ogp.org.uk/

The Oil Industry International Exploration and Production Forum (E&P Forum) and The 

World Conservation Union. Guidelines for Environmental Protection; Petroleum 

Exploration and Production in the Arctic and Subarctic Onshore Regions. Report 

No.255/184. 1993. http://www.iucn.org/ or http://www.ogp.org.uk/ 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. OPPE-FRL-3046-6, Environmental Auditing 

Policy Statement. 1986. http://www.epa.gov/

Back to Table of Contents

Chapter 5 

Alaska Annual Studies Plan, Final, FY 2002-2003. Minerals Management Service Alaska 

Outer Continental Shelf Region, 2001. http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Carney, R.S. 1987. A Review of Study Designs for the Detection of Long-term 

Environmental Effects of Offshore Petroleum Activities. In: Long-term Environmental 

Effects of Offshore Oil and Gas Development. D.F. Boesch and N.N. Rabalais Eds. 

Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York. P. 651-696. 

Green, R.H. 1979. Sampling Design and Statistical Methods for Environmental 

Biologists. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 

U.S. Arctic Research Commission. 1989. Improvements to the Scientific Content of the 

Environmental Impact Statement Process. Issue 4. Findings and Recommendations of the 

U.S. Arctic Research Commission. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1990. Monitoring Guidance for the National 

Estuary. EPA 503/8-91-002. http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. National Research Council. 1990. Managing Troubled Waters; The Role of Marine 

Environmental Monitoring. National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 

Back to Table of Contents

Chapter 6 

6.1 Waste Management 

Aromatics in Produced Water; Occurrence, Fate and Effects, and Treatments, January 

2002. International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) Report 1.20/324

http://www.ogp.org.uk/
Physical and Biological Effects of Processed Oily Drill Cuttings, April 1996 

E&P Forum Report 2.61/202, 120 p. International Association of Oil and Gas Producers 

(OGP) http://www.ogp.org.uk/

Monitoring oil in produced water discharged into the sea: a review of current & emerging 

technologies, January, 1999 E&P Forum Report 2.78/285, International Association of 

Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) http://www.ogp.org.uk/

Technologies for Handling Produced Water in the Offshore Environment, September, 

1996. E&P Forum Report 2.71/247 International Association of Oil and Gas Producers 

(OGP) http://www.ogp.org.uk/

Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and 

their Disposal. 1989. http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/

Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration. Disposal of Drilling Muds. Petroleum 

Production and Conservation Act, Canadian Oil and Gas Drilling Regulations, Section 

137. 

Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other 

Matter. 1972, 197, 1980 and 1989. London, Mexico City, Moscow, and Washington D.C. 

http://www.londonconvention.org/

Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic 

(OSPAR) 1992. http://www.ospar.org/

Interstate Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. 1994. IOGCC Environmental 

Guidelines for State Oil & Gas Regulatory Programs. May 1994. 

http://www.iogcc.oklaosf.state.ok.us/

International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution. 1973, 1978. MARPOLAnnex I, IV, V and draft Annex VI. http://www.imo.org/

Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. 1996. Acts, Regulations, and Provisions for Petroleum 

Activities. 1996. Vol. I and II. April 1, 1996. http://npd.no/ or see updated information at 

http://npd.no/English/Produkter+og+tjenester/Regelverket/papirlost_forhold.htm

PARCOM: Decisions and Recommendations Concerning Emissions from Offshore 

Installations: 

 PARCOM: Decision 92/2—Marine Discharge of Oil-based Muds 

 PARCOM: Guidelines for Monitoring Methods in the Vicinity of Platforms 

 PARCOM Decision 1996: Harmonized Control System for Offshore Chemicals 

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40-- Protection of the Environment Chapter I—

Environmental Protection Agency (continued) Part 125—Criteria and Standards for the 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Subpart A--Criteria and Standards for 
Imposing Technology-Based Treatment Requirements Under Sections 301(b) and 402 of 

the Act, Volume 18, July 1, 2001. 40CFR125 http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also 

http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40-- Protection of the Environment Chapter I—

Environmental Protection Agency (continued) Part 228—Criteria for the Management of 

Disposal Sites for Ocean Dumping, Volume 21, July 1, 2001. 40CFR228

http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40-- Protection of the Environment Chapter I—

Environmental Protection Agency (continued) Part 112—Oil Pollution Prevention, 

Volume 18, July 1, 2001. 40CFR112 http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also 

http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40-- Protection of the Environment Chapter I—

Environmental Protection Agency (continued) Part 261—Identification and Listing of 

Hazardous Waste, Volume 22, July 1, 2001. 40CFR261 http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also 

http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Volume 18, Revised July 1, 2001. 40CFR112 

Pages 16-96-- Protection of the Environment Chapter I—Environmental Protection 

Agency http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Volume 18, Revised July 1, 2001. 

40CFR112.21 Pages 35-96-- Protection of the Environment Chapter I—Environmental 

Protection Agency (continued) Part 112—Oil Pollution Prevention 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Volume 9, Revised July 1, 2001. 40CFR63 

Pages 5-694-- Protection of the Environment Chapter I—Environmental Protection 

Agency Part 63—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source 

Categories http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Volume 19, Revised July 1, 2001. 40CFR147 

Pages 721-819—Protection of the Environment Chapter I—Environmental Protection 

Agency (continued) Part 147—State Underground Injection Control Programs, Subpart 

C--Alaska http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. 1997. Protection of the Environment. 40 CFR 

Chapter I, Subchapter N, Part 435. National Archives and Records Administration. 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/

United States Code of Federal Regulations. Title 33, part 154 and 126: Facilities 

Transferring Oil or Hazardous Material in Bulk, and Handling of Explosive or other 

Hazardous Cargoes within or Continuous to Waterfront Facilities, September 1990. 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/
United States Code 40 CFR 435 subpart A Best Control Technology/Best Performance 

Technology/Best Available Technology http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also 

http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 1996. Notice to Lessees 

No. 96-03, Guidelines for the Offshore Storage and Sub-seabed Disposal of Wastes 

Resulting form the Development and Production of Oil and Gas on the Outer Continental 

Shelf. May 1996 http://www.mms.gov/

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. Development Document for Effluent 

Limitations Guidelines and New Source Performance Standards for the Offshore 

Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category. EPA 821-R-93-003. 

January 1993. http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Development Document for Effluent 

Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Coastal Subcategory of the Oil and Gas 

Extraction Point Source Category. EPA 821-R-96-023. October 1996 

http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. Guidance Manual for Developing Best 

Management Practices (BMP). EPA 833-B-93-004. October 1993. http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. Final Arctic National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for Offshore Oil and Gas Operations on the Outer 

Continental Shelf and State Waters of Alaska: Arctic NPDES General Permit (No. 

AKG284200). Federal Register, Volume 60, No. 100, pp. 27508-27523. May 24, 1995. 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/

United States Code 33 §§ 2701 et seq. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Back to Table of Contents

6.2 Health, Safety and Environment Supervision 

American Petroleum Institute/American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Society 

Professional Petroleum Engineers. Quality Assurance and Certification of Safety and 

Pollution Prevention Equipment Used in Oil and Gas Operations. http//www.api.org

American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Practices for Respiratory Protection. 

Z88.2. http://www.ansi.org

American Petroleum Institute. Recommended Practice Standard: Procedure for Field 

Testing Drilling Fluids. API RP 13b. http//www.api.org

API. Recommended Practices Standard: Analysis, Design, Installation and Testing of 

Basic Surface Safety Systems for Offshore Productions Platforms. API RP 14c. 

http//www.api.org
API. Recommended Practice Standard: Analysis, Design, Installation of Electrical 

Systems for Offshore Production Platforms. API RP 14f. http//www.api.org

API. Recommended Practice Standard: Fire Prevention and Control on Open Type 

Offshore Production Platform API RP 14g. http//www.api.org

API. Recommended Practice Standard: Qualification Programs for Offshore Production 

Personnel Who Work with Anti-Pollution Safety Devices. API RP T2 http//www.api.org

Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration. Petroleum Production and Conservation Act: 

Canadian Oil and Gas Drilling Regulations. Section 92. 

Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. 1996. Acts, Regulations, and Provisions for Petroleum 

Activities. Vol. I. and II. April 1, 1996 http://npd.no/ or see updated information at 

http://npd.no/English/Produkter+og+tjenester/Regelverket/papirlost_forhold.htm

U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 1995. National Potential 

Incident of Noncompliance (PINC) List and Guidelines. March, 1995. 

http://www.mms.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. 1994. Exploration, Development and Production Plan. 

Title 30, Part 250. http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. 1994. Conduct of Operations. Title 30, Part 282. 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Back to Table of Contents

6.3 Design and Operations 

Alaska Arctic Pipelines Workshop, Proceedings, 2000. Minerals Management Services 

(MMS) Technology Assessment and Research (TAR) program. Captain Cook Hotel -- 

Anchorage, Alaska, November 8-9, 1999 by the C-CORE, Newfoundland, AGRA Earth 

& Environmental, Colt Engineering, and Tri Ocean, Alberta http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

American Concrete Institute (ACI), 1984. Guide for the Design and Construction of 

Fixed Offshore Concrete Structure, ACI Standard 357-R-84 http://www.aci-int.org/

American National Standards Institute/American Society of Mechanical Engineers 

(ANSI/ASME), 1996. Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings. ANSI/ASME B16.5. 

http://www.ansi.org

American National Standards Institute/American Society of Mechanical Engineers 

(ANSI/ASME), 1995. Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems. ANSI/ASME 

B31.8 http://www.ansi.org

American Petroleum Institute (API), 1996. Specification for Wellhead and Christmas 
Tree Equipment, Seventeenth Edition. API Spec 6A, February 1, 1996. 

http//www.api.org

American Petroleum Institute (API), 1994. Specification for Pipeline Valves (Gate, Plug 

Ball, and Check Valves), Twenty-first Edition. API Spec 6D, March 31, 1994. 

http//www.api.org

American Petroleum Institute (API), 1991. Recommended Practice for Planning, 

Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms Working Stress Design, 

Nineteenth Edition. API RP 2A, August 1, 1991. http//www.api.org

American Petroleum Institute (API), 1995. Planning, Designing and Constructing 

Structures and Pipelines for Arctic Conditions. API RP 2N, December 1, 1995 

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, October 1, 1995. 49 CFR, Subtitle B, Subchapter D, 

Pipeline Safety, Part 192 and 195, National Archives and Records Administration. 

http//www.api.org

An Engineering Assessment of Double Wall Versus Single Wall Designs for Offshore 

Pipelines in an Arctic Environment—Ryan Phillips, Memorial University of 

Newfoundland, C-CORE Inc. for Minerals Management Service, Technology 

Assessment and Research Program June 2001 http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects. 

Det Norske Veritas: Offshore Standards Submarine Pipelines DNV OS-F101, 2000, 

amended October 2001. http://www.dnv.com/

Developing an Industry-Wide Best-Practice for the Assessment of Spans in Existing 

Submarine Pipelines--BOMEL Limited, for Minerals Management Service, Technology 

Assessment and Research Program June 2001. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects.. 

Ice Scour & Arctic Marine Pipeline Workshop April 7-10, 2000 

Proceedings--Memorial University of Newfoundland C-CORE, for Minerals 

Management Service, Technology Assessment and Research Program, November 22, 

2000. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects. 

Independent Evaluation of Liberty Pipeline System, Design Alternatives, 2000. Stress 

Engineering Services, Inc. for Minerals Management Service, Alaska Region. 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Independent Risk Evaluation for the Liberty Pipelines, 2000. Comfort, G, A. Dinovitzer, 

and R. Lazor, Fleet Technology Limited, for Minerals Management Service, Alaska 

Region. http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

International Workshop on the Performance of Offshore Concrete Structures in the Arctic 

Environment, Proceedings, Gaithersburg, Maryland, March 1 - 2, 1983 

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects
Liberty Development and Production Plan—Final Environmental Impact Statement, 

2002. Minerals Management Service, OCS EIS/EA MMS 2002-019 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Pipeline System Alternatives, Liberty Development Project—Conceptual Engineering, 

1999. INTEC No. H-0851.02, for British Petroleum Exploration Alaska. 

http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

Scour and Arctic Marine Pipeline Workshop, Proceedings, Hokkaido, Japan, 

January 1998, Minerals Management Service. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

Standards Council of Canada, 1993. Sea Operations, Standard S475-93. 

http://www.scc.ca/

Standards Council of Canada, 1992. General Requirements, Design Criteria, the 

Environment, and Loads, Standard CAN/CSA-S471-92. http://www.scc.ca/

Standards Council of Canada, 1992. Commentary to CSA Standard CAN/CSA-S471-92, 

General Requirements, Design Criteria, the Environment, and Loads, Special Publication 

S471.1-1992. http://www.scc.ca/

Standards Council of Canada, 2002. Commentary on CSA Standard Z662-99, Oil and 

Gas Pipeline Systems, Special Publication Z662.1-01. http://www.scc.ca/

Standards Council of Canada, 1999. Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems, Standard Z662-99. 

http://www.scc.ca/

Standards Council of Canada, 1992. General Requirements, Design Criteria, the 

Environment, and Loads, Standard CAN/CSA-S471-92. http://www.scc.ca/

TC 67/SC 7/WG 8 Arctic offshore structures, British Standards Institution 

http://www.bsi-global.com

The Code for the Construction and Equipment of Mobile Offshore Drilling Units, IMO 

Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) resolution A.649 (16), 1989, amended May 1991, 

and May 1994. http://www.imo.org/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 30, Volume 2, Revised July 1, 2001, 30CFR282, 

Pages 516-538. Mineral Resources Chapter II—Minerals Management Service, 

Department of the Interior Part 282—Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf for 

Minerals other than Oil, Gas, and Sulphur http://www.mms.gov/ or 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 30, Volume 2, Revised July 1, 2001. 30CFR250 

Pages 291-314. Mineral Resources Chapter II—Minerals Management Service, 

Department of the Interior Part 250-- Oil, Gas, and Sulphur Operations in the Outer 
Continental Shelf http://www.mms.gov/ or http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 30, Volume 2, Revised July 1, 2001. 30CFR251 

Pages 415-427. Mineral Resources Chapter II—Minerals Management Service, 

Department of the Interior Part 251—Geological and Geophysical (G&G) Explorations 

of the Outer Continental Shelf http://www.mms.gov/ or http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. July1, 1994. 30 CFR Chapter II, Subchapter B, 

Offshore, National Archives and Records Administration. http://www.access.gpo.gov/

U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Management Service, Federal Register Notice, 

October 22, 1982. Final Outer Continental Shelf Orders Governing Oil and Gas Lease 

Operations on the Alaska Outer Continental Shelf, Volume 47, No. 205. 

http://www.mms.gov/

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1983. Engineering and Design - "Dredging and Dredged 

Material Disposal," 25 March 1983 Engineer Manual 1110-2-5025. 

http://www.wes.army.mil/el/dots/ 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. Engineering and Design - "Dredged Material 

Beneficial Uses," 30 June 1987 Engineer Manual 1110-2-5026. 

http://www.wes.army.mil/el/dots/ 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. Engineering and Design - "Confined Disposal of 

Dredged Material," 30 September 1987 Engineer Manual 1110-2-5027. 

http://www.wes.army.mil/el/dots/ 

Back to Table of Contents

6.4 Human Health and Safety 

American Petroleum Institute (API). 1993. Recommended Practices for Development of 

a Safety and Environmental Management Program for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) 

Operations and Facilities. API RP 75, May, 15, 1993. http//www.api.org

Canadian Standards Association (CSA). 1991. Canada. 

SCC (Canada) Standards Council of Canada http://www.scc.ca/

International Labour Organisation. 1993. Safety and Related Issues Pertaining to Work 

on Offshore Petroleum Installations. International Labour Office, Geneva. 

Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. 1996. Acts, Regulations, and Provisions for Petroleum 

Activities. Vol. I and II. April 1, 1996. http://npd.no/ or see updated information at 

http://npd.no/English/Produkter+og+tjenester/Regelverket/papirlost_forhold.htm

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. 30 CFR Chapter II, Subchapter B, Offshore, 250.20 

Safe and Workmanlike Operations. National Archives and Records Administration. 
http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Back to Table of Contents

6.5 Transportation of Supplies and Infrastructure 

The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), International 

Maritime Organization, 1974 http://www.imo.org/

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships (MARPOL 73/78) 

International Maritime Organization, http://www.imo.org/

The International Safety Management (ISM) Code, International Maritime Organization, 

1994. http://www.imo.org/ 

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 33, Volume 2, Revised July 1, 2001. 33CFR155 

Pages 367-433—Navigation and Navigable Waters Chapter I—Coast Guard, Department 

of Transportation (continued) Part 155—Oil or Hazardous Material Pollution Prevention 

and Regulations for Vessels http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Back to Table of Contents

6.6 Training 

American Petroleum Institute (API), 1993. Recommended Practices for Development of 

a Safety and Environmental Management Program for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) 

Operations and Facilities, First Edition. API RP 75, May 15, 1993. http//www.api.org

Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration, 1984. Drilling for Oil and Gas on Canada 

Lands, Guidelines and Procedures, April, 1984. 

Environmental management in oil and gas exploration and production - an overview of 

issues and management approaches (1997). International Association of Oil and Gas 

Producers and the United Nations Environment Programme, Industry and Environment 

Office, 68 pages. http://www.ogp.org.uk/

Guidelines for the Development and Application of Health, Safety and Environmental 

Management Systems (1994). International Association of Oil and Gas Producers, 

Report No. 6.36/210, 45 pages. http://www.ogp.org.uk/

International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC), 1995. WellCAP IADC Well 

Control Accreditation Program. FORM WCT-1, June, 1995. http://www.iadc.org/

International Well Control Forum (IWCF), 1995. Well Control Certification Standards, 

June, 1995 

Norwegian Petroleum Directorate, 1996. Acts, Regulations, and Provisions for 

Petroleum Activities, Vol. I and II, April 1, 1996. http://npd.no/ or see updated 

information at 

http://npd.no/English/Produkter+og+tjenester/Regelverket/papirlost_forhold.htm
The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping 

for Seafarers, International Maritime Organization, 1978, as amended in 1995 (STCW) 

http://www.imo.org/

U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Management Service, Federal Register Notice, 

February 5, 1997. Training of Lessee and Contractor Employees Engaged in Oil and Gas 

and Sulphur Operations on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), Volume 62, No.24. 

http://www.mms.gov/

U.S. Department of Transportation, October 1, 1995. 49 CFR, Subtitle B, Subchapter D, 

Pipeline Safety, Part 195, Transportation of Hazardous Liquids by Pipeline, National 

Archives Records Administration. http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Back to Table of Contents

Chapter 7 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 

Marine Spill Response and Restoration web site: 

http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/index.html

"International Workshop: Fire and Blast Considerations in the Future Design of Offshore 

Facilities" Houston, Texas, USA, June 11- 14, 2002 

http://www.fireandblast2002.com/proceedings.asp

Oil and Other Hazardous Substances Pollution Control—Title 18 Alaska Administrative 

Code 75 75.005--75.990. Amended October 28, 2000. 

http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/title18/title18.htm

A.B. Jensen, Hans V., and Laurie Solsberg, Mechanical Oil Recovery in Ice-Infested 

Waters MORICE Phase 4, SINTEF Applied Chemistry, Trondheim, Norway, September 

18, 2000. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Spill Prevention and Response 

Division. Oil Discharge Prevention and Contingency Plan Application and Review 

Guidelines. Juneau: Department of Environmental Conservation, 1994. 

http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Spill Prevention and Response; 

United States Coast Guard, Seventeenth Coast Guard District; and United States 

Environmental Protection Agency, Region X, Alaska Operations Office. The Alaska 

Federal/State Preparedness Plan for Response to Oil & Hazardous Substance 

Discharge/Releases (Unified Plan – Volume I) . Ft. Richardson, AK: Department of 

Environmental Conservation, May, 1994. 

http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/ or http://www.uscg.mil/d17/ or 
A Field Guide to Oil Spill Response in Arctic Waters, Emergency Preparedness, 

prevention and Response Working Group, 1998 http://arctic-council.org/fldguide/

Alaska Statutes, Annotated (Michie 1996), sec. 26.23.071-26.23.077, 46.03.010-

46.04.900, and 46.08.008-46.09.900. 

American Petroleum Institute (API). Recommended Practices for Development of Safety 

and Environmental Management Program for Outer Continental Shelf Operations and 

Facilities, API Recommended Practice 75, 1st ed. Washington, D.C.: American 

Petroleum Institute, 1993. http//www.api.org

Bowen, S. J., Evaluation of the LIC Lori Ice Cleaner, Alaska Clean Seas, April 1991.

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

Buist, I., McCourt, J., Mullin, J., Glover, N., Hutton, C., McHale, J., "Mid-Scale Tests of 

In Situ Burning in a New Wave Tank at Prudhoe Bay, AK. MMS TAR, 1997 Project 288

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects 

Detection and Tracking of Oil Under Ice, Final MMS TAR Project 348, DF Dickins 

Associates Ltd., October 6, 2000. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

Evaluation of Cleanup Capabilities for Large Blowout Spills in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea 

During Periods of Broken Ice, submitted by SL Ross Environmental Research, D.F. 

Dickins and Associates, and Vaudrey and Associates, June 1998. 

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

Evaluation of the Foxtail Skimmer in Broken Ice, Counterspill Research Inc., for the 

Task Force on Oil Spill Preparedness, Technical Report Number 92-01, January 1992. 

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

“International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation, 

1990.” In Multilaterals Project. Medford, MA: Tufts University. Fletcher School of 

Law and Diplomacy, c1997 [Internet database; URL: 

http://fletcher.tufts.edu/multi/marine.html. Also http://www.imo.org/

International Maritime Organization (IMO). Guidelines on Sensitivity Mapping for Oil 

Spill Response. London: IMO, 1995. http://www.imo.org/

International Maritime Organization (IMO). MARPOL 73/78: Consolidated Edition: 

Articles, Protocols, Annexes, Unified Interpretations of the International Convention for 

the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 

relating thereto. London: IMO, 1992. http://www.imo.org/

International Maritime Organization (IMO). “Section 2. Contingency Planning.” 

In Manual on Oil Pollution. London: IMO, 1995. http://www.imo.org/
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 14000 Draft International 

Standards: Environmental Management Systems and Environmental Auditing. West 

Conshohocken, PA: ASTM, Administrator. U.S. Technical Advisory Group to ISO, 1995 

http://www.iso.ch/

International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14004: Environmental Management 

Systems – General Guidelines on Principles, Systems and Supporting Techniques, 1st ed. 

Geneva, Switzerland: ISO, 1996. http://www.iso.ch/

International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) and the 

Oil Industry International and Production Forum (E&P Forum). Oil and Gas 

Exploration and Production in Arctic and Subarctic Onshore Regions. Gland, 

Switzerland: IUCN, 1993. http://www.iucn.org/ or http://www.ogp.org.uk/ 

International Workshop on Alaska Arctic Offshore Oil Spill Response Technology, 

Anchorage, Alaska, November 29, - December 1, 1988 Proceedings, National Institute of 

Standards and Technology Special Publication 762, April 1989 http://www.mms.gov/ 

Latour, J., Lori. Ice Cleaner Trials and Equipment Evaluation, Canadian Coast Guard, 

January 1991. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

Proceedings of the International Oil and Ice Workshop, November 22, 2000 Alaska Clean 

Seas for Minerals Management Service http://www.mms.gov/

“Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (1991).” In Multilaterals 

Project. Medford, MA: Tufts University. Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, c1997. 

 http://fletcher.tufts.edu/multi/marine.html. 

Sergy, Gary, Guenette, Chantal, and Owens, Edward H., In-situ Treatment of Oiled 

Sediment Shorelines Programme: 1996 Svalbard Shoreline Field Trials, December 31, 

1996. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

Solsberg, L. B., McGrath, M., Mechanical Recovery of Oil in Ice, Proceedings of the 

Fifteenth Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Program Technical Seminar, Edmonton, Alberta, 

Canada, pp. 427-437, June 10-12, 1992. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

The International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation 

(OPRC), International Maritime Organization, 1990, 1995. http://www.imo.org/

The Program for Mechanical Oil Recovery in Ice-Infested Waters MORICE Phase III, 

MMS TAR Project 310, SINTEF Applied Chemistry February 15, 1999. 

http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

The Svalbard Experimental Oilspill Field Trials in Proceedings of the Twenty-First 

Arctic Marine Oilspill Program Technical Seminar, Environment Canada, Ottawa 

Ontario, pp 873-889, 1998. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects
The Use of Ice Booms for the Recovery of Oil Spills from Ice Infested Waters; Fleet 

Technology Ltd., MMS TAR Project 353 (in press) http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

Tsang, G., Vanderkooy, N., Development of a Novel Ice Oil Boom For Flowing Waters, 

Proceedings of the 1979 Oil Spill Conference, American Petroleum Institute, 

Washington, D.C., 1979. http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects

United States. Arctic Research Commission. Research Needed to Respond to Oil Spills 

in Ice-Infested Waters, Issue No. 8. Washington, D.C., May 1992 

United States. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA). Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines, NOAA 

Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 92. Jacqueline Michel, Joanne Halls, Scott Zengel 

and Jeffrey A. Dahlin. Seattle, WA, 1995. http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/

United States. Department of the Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service. Region 7-Alaska. 

Oil and Hazardous Substances Spill Contingency Plan [draft]. Anchorage, AK, July 

1996. 

United States. Department of the Interior. Minerals Management Service (MMS). 

Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Orders Governing Oil and Gas Lease Operations. 

Reston, VA: MMS, 1982 http://www.mms.gov/

United States. Department of Transportation. Coast Guard. Development of Hazardous 

Substances Response Planning Criteria within Area Contingency Plans, 

COMDTNOTE 16471 [draft undated memorandum]. Washington, DC. 

http://www.uscg.mil/

United States. Department of Transportation. Coast Guard. Office of Marine Safety, 

Security and Environmental Protection. Appendix to the National Contingency Plan

[pocket edition]. Washington, DC, 1995. http://www.uscg.mil/

United States. National Archives and Records Administration. Office of the Federal 

Register. Code of Federal Regulations: Title 33. Navigation and Navigable Waters,

parts 151-159. Washington, 1996. http://www.access.gpo.gov/

United States. National Archives and Records Administration. Office of the Federal 

Register. Code Federal Regulations: Title 49. Transportation, part 130-180. Washington, 

1996. http://www.access.gpo.gov/ also http://www.uscg.mil/

Wartsila Marine Arctic Transportation `Ice Cleaner` Project, Wartsila Marine Arctic 

Transportation, Helsinki, Finland, November, 1988 (Proprietary Report). 

Back to Table of Contents
Chapter 8 

Allan, R., 1986. Platform Removal: Evaluating the Technology. Offshore. Res. No.62.2. 

Committee on Techniques for Removing Fixed Offshore Structures, Marine Board 

Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, U.S. National Research Council, 

Washington, D.C. 1996. An Assessment of Technologies for Removing Offshore 

Structures. 

Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other 

Matter. December 29, 1972, London. http://www.londonconvention.org/

Farrow, R. Scott, 1990. Managing the Outer Continental Shelf Lands: Oceans of 

Controversy, Taylor and Francis,. New York, Bristol, PA., Washington DC, London. 

Goertner, John, F., 1981. Fish-Kill Ranges for Oil Well Severance Explosions. Naval 

Surface Weapons Center, NSWC TR 81-149. 

Holiday, D.V. and W.C. Cummings, and B.J. Lee. 1984. Acoustic and Vibration 

Measurements Related to Possible Disturbances of Ringed Seal (Phoca hispida). Rep. T84-06-001, Tracor Applied Science, San Diego, California for NOAA/OCSEAP, Juneau, 

Alaska. http://www.mms.gov/alaska/

International Maritime Organization, May 4, 1988. Guidelines and Standards for the 

Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures in the Outer Continental Shelf and in 

the Exclusive Economic Zone, Ref. T2/1.06. http://www.imo.org/

International Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Exploration and Production Industry. 1996. A 

discussion Paper: Decommissioning Offshore Oil & Gas Installations. Finding the Right 

Balance. London. (E&P Forum) http://www.ogp.org.uk/

Minerals Management Service/California State Lands Commission, 1984. Abandonment 

and Removal Offshore Oil and gas Facilities: Education and Information Transfer. 

http://www.mms.gov/

Minerals Management Service / LSU sponsored Workshop. April 15-17, 1996 New 

Orleans. An International Workshop on Offshore Lease Abandonment and Platform 

Disposal: Technology, Regulation, and Environmental Effect. http://www.mms.gov/

Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. 1996. Acts, Regulations and Provisions for Petroleum 

Activities. Vol. I and II April 1, 1996. http://npd.no/ or see updated information at 

http://npd.no/English/Produkter+og+tjenester/Regelverket/papirlost_forhold.htm

Offshore Structures Technology, Research and Development, July 1997. Exploration and 

Production Forum (OGP). http://www.ogp.org.uk/
Removal of Offshore Installations: A Compilation of International Rules, Guidelines and 

Standards, June, 1993. International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP)

http://www.ogp.org.uk/

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. 30 CFR Chapter II, Subchapter B, 250.143, Platform 

removal and locations clearance. http://www.access.gpo.gov/

Back to Table of Contents
ANNEX A 

Definition of the Arctic 

Canada 

Canada has defined its Arctic area to include the drainage area of the Yukon Territory, all 

lands north of 60 degrees North latitude and the coastal zone area of Hudson Bay and 

James Bay. 

Denmark 

The Arctic area within the Kingdom of Denmark is the Faroe Islands and Greenland, 

which is the world’s largest island on which stands 9% of the World’s ice cap.

Finland 

In Finland the Arctic Area is defined as the territory north from the Polar Circle. 

Iceland 

Iceland has defined the whole of Iceland to be within the Arctic area. 

Norway

Norway has no legal/formal definition of its Arctic areas, but for the purposes of these 

Guidelines, Norwegian Sea areas north of 65 degrees North form the Arctic. 

Sweden 

Sweden does not have any formal delimitation of the Arctic but has, for the purpose of 

AEPS, accepted the Arctic Circle as the southern delimitation of the Arctic area. 

Russian Federation

In accordance with the draft Law of the Russian Federation “On Zoning of North 

Russia”, the Arctic areas of North Russia include: 

All lands and islands of the Arctic Ocean and its seas; 

Within the Murmansk region: Pechenga district (coastal areas of the Barents Sea 

including populated centers located on Sredniy and Rybachiy Peninsulas, as well 

as Liynakhamareye populated center, and the town-type settlement of Pechenga) 

Kolsk district (territories administered by the Tyuman and Ura-Guba rural 

government bodies), Lovozersk district (territory under the Sosnovsk rural 

government body), territory administered by the Severomorsk municipal 
government, and closed administrative-territorial entities of Zaozersk, Skalistiy, 

Snezhnogorsk, Ostrovnoy, and the city of Polyarniy with populated centers 

administratively Attached to it; 

Nenets autonomous national area – all territory; 

Within the Komi Republic – city of Vorkuta, within areas managed by it; 

Within the Yamal-Nenets autonomous national area; Priural, Tazov, and Yamal 

District, and territories and administered by the Salekhard and Labytnang 

Municipal governments; 

Taimyr (Dolgan-Nenets autonomous area) – all territory; 

Within the Krasnoyarsk territory – areas administered by the Norilsk municipal 

government; 

Within Sakha Republic (former Yakutia): Allaikhov, Anabar, Bulun, 

Nizhnekolym, Olenek and Ust-Yan district: 

Chuckchi autonomous national area – all territory; 

Within the Koryak autonomous area -- Olutor district. 

United States of America

All United States territory north of the Arctic Circle and all United States territory north 

and west of the boundary of formed by the Porcupine, Yukon and Kuskokwim Rivers; all 

contiguous seas, including the Arctic Ocean and the Beaufort, Bering and Chukchi Seas; 

and the Aleutian chain. 

Back to Table of Contents
ANNEX B 

Criteria for the Definition of Practices and Techniques mentioned in Paragraph 3(b)(i) of 

Article 2 of the OSPAR Convention 

BEST AVAILABLE TECHNIQUES (BAT)

1. The use of the best available techniques shall emphasise the use of non-waste 

technology, if available. 

2. The term "best available techniques" means the latest stage of development (state 

of the art) of processes, of facilities or of methods of operation which indicate the 

practical suitability of a particular measure for limiting discharges, emissions and 

waste. In determining whether a set of processes, facilities and methods of 

operation constitute the best available techniques in general or individual cases, 

special consideration shall be given to: 

(a) comparable processes, facilities or methods of operation which have 

recently been successfully tried out; 

(b) technological advances and changes in scientific knowledge and 

understanding; 

(c) the economic feasibility of such techniques; 

(d) time limits for installation in both new and existing plants; 

(e) the nature and volume of the discharges and emissions concerned. 

3. It therefore follows that what is "best available techniques" for a particular process 

will change with time in the light of technological advances, economic and social 

factors, as well as changes in scientific knowledge and understanding. 

4. If the reduction of discharges and emissions resulting from the use of best available 

techniques does not lead to environmentally acceptable results, additional measures 

have to be applied. 

5. "Techniques" include both the technology used and the way in which the 

installation is designed, built, maintained, operated and dismantled. 

BEST ENVIRONMENTAL PRACTICE (BEP)

6. The term "best environmental practice" means the application of the most 

appropriate combination of environmental control measures and strategies. In 

making a selection for individual cases, at least the following graduated range of 

measures should be considered: 

(a) the provision of information and education to the public and to users about 

the environmental consequences of choice of particular activities and 

choice of products, their use and ultimate disposal; 

(b) the development and application of codes of good environmental practice 

which covers all aspect of the activity in the product's life; 

(c) the mandatory application of labels informing users of environmental risks 

related to a product, its use and ultimate disposal; 

(d) saving resources, including energy; 

(e) making collection and disposal systems available to the public; 

(f) avoiding the use of hazardous substances or products and the generation of 

hazardous waste; 
(g) recycling, recovery and re-use; 

(h) the application of economic instruments to activities, products or groups 

of products; 

(i) establishing a system of licensing, involving a range of restrictions or a 

ban. 

7. In determining what combination of measures constitute best environmental 

practice, in general or individual cases, particular consideration should be given to: 

(a) the environmental hazard of the product and its production, use and 

ultimate disposal; 

(b) the substitution by less polluting activities or substances; 

(c) the scale of use; 

(d) the potential environmental benefit or penalty of substitute materials or 

activities; 

(e) advances and changes in scientific knowledge and understanding; 

(f) time limits for implementation; 

(g) social and economic implications. 

8. It therefore follows that best environmental practice for a particular source will 

change with time in the light of technological advances, economic and social 

factors, as well as changes in scientific knowledge and understanding. 

9. If the reduction of inputs resulting from the use of best environmental practice does 

not lead to environmentally acceptable results, additional measures have to be 

applied and best environmental practice redefined. 

Back to Table of Contents
ANNEX C 

Environmental Assessm nt Flowchart e

Phase Procedure Activity Responsible

Opening of new area 

for petroleum activities

PEIA

⇓

hearing 

⇓

EIA

⇓

hearing 

⇓

opening 

Environmental survey 

Impact assessment 

Regulations 

Authorities 

Exploration EIA 

in Particularly Sensitive 

Areas 

Risk assessment 

Contingency planning 

and emergency 

response 

Seismic 

Drilling 

Operator/Authorities 

Development EIA

⇓

Permission for 

discharge 

⇓

Baseline survey

Risk assessment 

Contingency planning 

and emergency 

response 

Construction activities 

Transportation 

Drilling 

Operator/Authorities 

Production

Monitoring

Risk assessment 

Contingency planning 

and emergency 

response 

Drilling 

Discharges to water 

 

Air emissions 

Transportation 

Operator/Authorities/ 

Third Party 

Decommissioning PEIA/EIA 

Monitoring

Operator/Authorities 

Back to Table of Contents
ANNEX D 

Overview of offshore activities and potential environmental effects 

Activity Possible Causes Potential environmental effects 

Evaluation

Seismic activity Noise Effects on fish1, sea birds and marine mammals such as 

avoidance behavior. 

Exploration

Rig emplacement 

Drilling 

Dredging, filling, 

anchoring, and/or rig 

set-down. 

Discharges of drill 

cuttings, drill fluids, 

excess cement, 

platform drainage, 

household 

discharges and 

emissions of exhaust 

gases. 

Discharges from 

supply vessels, 

helicopter 

transportation etc. 

Risk of blowouts. 

Seabed disturbance. 

Predominantly local effects on living resources. 

Potential effects on living resources such as birds and 

marine mammals, as well as susceptible areas of the 

coastal zone. 

Development and 

production

Facility and 

pipeline 

installation 

Potentially more 

dredging, filling and 

anchoring. 

Extended risk of 

blowouts and oil 

spills. 

Long and short-term seabed disturbances. 

As under exploration, but more extensive in both the 

water column and air. 

 

 

1 Recent, large scale laboratory experiments on cod (Meier, et. al, 2002) have shown that alkylphenols of a 

similar type to those found in produced water have hormone disrupting effects. The alkyphenols affected 

the size of the gonads, made male fish more feminine and delayed the spawning time with several weeks, 

even at low concentrations. If these results may be transferred to natural conditions, produced water 

discharges may have considerable effects on stocks of cod and other fish. 
Drilling 

Production 

Discharges of 

produced water. 

Emissions of gases. 

Spills, discharges 

and emissions 

connected to 

transportation 

(tankers, supply 

vessels, pipelines 

etc.). 

Potential effects on the reproduction of fish and 

possible contribution to climate effects, acidifying 

effects, etc. 

 Additional risks of effects on the marine environment 

and atmosphere. 

Decommissioning 

and reclamation

Removal of 

installations 

Leaving artificial 

islands or partial 

installations inplace 

Cutting piles 

containing oil and 

chemicals, dredging, 

air emissions, noise, 

etc. 

Exposed Biophilic 

substrate or surfaces. 

 

Seabed disturbance, possible effects on fish, sea birds 

and marine mammals. 

Development of habitat for fish, mammals and/or birds.

Back to Table of Contents
ANNEX E 

Environmental Risk Analysis Flow Diagram 

Design/operation 

All relevant data 

Define area of 

influence and most 

sensitive population 

Hazard identification 

Frequency analyses 

Frequencies for different 

quantities of oil spill. 

Consequence 

analyses 

Calculation of 

environmental risk. 

Risk Acceptable? 

OK 

Documentation 

YES

NO 

CHANGE 

DESIGN

ENVIRONMENTAL 

RISK ANALYSIS

Definition of Risk 

criteria 
ANNEX F 

Detailed elements that may be incorporated in to company safety and environmental 

policies and objectives 

❏ Competent personnel are used during planning and implementation of the separate 

phases, including design, fabrication and installation and operation 

❏ The operator's personnel and those of any Contractors are provided with necessary 

training 

❏ Lines of responsibility, authority and communication are clearly defined and 

understood; 

❏ Risk evaluation should be a part of the project management strategy in order to 

establish and maintain an acceptable level of health Safety and Environmental 

protection for the personnel and the environment; 

❏ No activity should be performed unless and acceptable level of HSE protection can be 

maintained; 

❏ Management of discharges should be achieved through the application of Best 

Available [Techniques/Technology] 

❏ Experiences from arctic operations should be integrated into specifications, functional 

requirements, standards and procedures; 

❏ Safety evaluations should be undertaken both prior to start-up and in subsequent 

phases of the operation; 

❏ Administrative systems are established for the control of all documentation in all 

phases of the operation; 

❏ Purchase documents and specifications should contain Quality Assurance 

requirements; 

❏ Contractor's Quality Assurance systems should be evaluated and assessed and be the 

subject of regular audits; 

❏ The quality of supplied and materials should be documented; 

❏ Quality Assurance and Quality Control during operations should function effectively 

and corrective action should be taken when quality control indications deviation from 

specification; 

❏ Operational programmes should be prepared and compiled with relevant regulations 

and their functional capability should be subject to verification; 

❏ Specifications for repairs should be established and specifications provide sufficient 

basis and requirements for their execution; 

❏ Temporary equipment may be installed and operated in a secure way and in 

accordance with established specifications; 

❏ Modifications should not reduce the degree of safety originally specified; 

❏ An emergency preparedness system should be established and maintained so hat 

necessary measures can be activated effectively and authorities involved notified; 

❏ Administrative decisions made be the supervisory personnel are communicated 

effectively to the personnel and contractors; 

❏ There should be continuous control and monitoring of all aspects of the working 

environment with regard to health safety and environmental risks and that necessary 

actions are implemented 
❏ There should be continuous control and monitoring of the danger of pollution of the 

external environment and that personnel at all times will perform their tasks in such a 

way that pollution is avoided ; 

❏ Both operator and contractor personnel should be made aware of the potential danger 

of accidents and inherent health and pollution aspects and they are given necessary 

information, training and exercises. 

Back to Table of Contents
ANNEX G 

Example of a Generalized Monitoring Plan 

Region Installation Phase Type of 

investigation 

Part of 

environment 

Elements to be 

included 

Frequency

Installation 1 planning for 

development 

baseline Seabottom 

/water column 

/shoreline etc 

inventory of 

biota/ecosystems, levels 

of all relevant 

contaminants, 

identification of 

particularly 

sensitive 

resources 

once, before 

activities are 

started 

development monitoring Seabottom and 

other as relevant 

physical 

disturbance, 

biota, 

contaminants 

every year and 

as frequent as 

necessary, 

depending on 

the type of 

activity 

production monitoring Seabottom 

Water column 

Seashore and 

other as relevant 

relevant 

contaminants in 

environment and 

biota, effects on 

biota 

as relevant 

every year first 

3 years, 

thereafter every 

3 years 

every 3 years 

and /or 

periodically as 

necessary 

Region I decommissioning monitoring Seabottom and 

water column, as 

relevant 

levels of 

contaminants 

and effects on 

biota, as relevant 

during 

operations and 

once at 

reclamation 

phase 

Installation 2

Installation 3 

Region II Inst. 1 

Inst. 2 

Etc 

Region III Inst. 1 

Etc

Etc National shelves should be divided into regions where monitoring of the individual installations is 

coordinated. Regional monitoring of the water column is coordinated for the entire shelf of each country. 

Back to Table of Contents