Offshore Petroleum & Greenhouse Gas Environment Regulation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Offshore Petroleum & Greenhouse Gas Environment Regulation

Cameron Grebe David Christensen Katherine Ross Environment Division, NOPSEMA

Presentation to Kangaroo Island Community 14 October 2014

Agenda

Introduction, NOPSEMA

• verview

Cameron Grebe

General Manager Environment

Environmental assessment and compliance

David Christensen

Environment Specialist

Consultation and consideration of issues

Katherine Ross

Environment Specialist

Questions

Purpose

• Background and role of NOPSEMA
• Clarify offshore petroleum environmental

approval processes and how NOPSEMA secures compliance

• Provide context to NOPSEMA decision making
• n environment plans such as Bight Petroleum

Lightning 3D Marine Seismic Survey

• Explain consultation process and overview of

how issues are considered

• Provide contacts for further information

3

Background - NOPSEMA

• NOPSA established in 2005 for OHS
• Montara Commission of Inquiry

and Australian Government response

• Environmental management

function established 1 January 2012

• EPBC Act endorsement from

28 February 2014 to become single national offshore petroleum regulator

4

Jurisdiction for environment

5

Jurisdiction

6

Commonwealth waters (OPGGS Act) State jurisdictions (powers may be conferred under (2) to NOPSEMA)

1

2 3 4

Independent statutory authority

7

Legislated functions

8

Compliance

Monitor and Enforce Investigate

Improvement

Promote Advise

Governance

Co-operate Report

Oil and gas life cycle

9

Overview: Stages of petroleum exploration & development

10

Environment Plan required Example timeline from title award if petroleum discovered Exploration (& appraisal if discovery) Development End of Life * New development without EPBC Act decision Offshore Project Proposal required*

About seismic surveys

11

Seismic survey general layout

Source: Geoscience Australia, Australian Government Source: Geoscience Australia, Australian Government

Seismic cross section

Context: Lightning 3D marine seismic survey

12 Date

Source: Environment Plan Summary for Lightning 3D MSS

Context: BP Ceduna 2012 marine seismic survey

13

Source: Environment Plan Summary for BP Ceduna 3D MSS

Key legislation

• OPGGS Act and Environment Regulations
• Objectives of Environment Regulations

– Principles of ecologically sustainable development – Impacts and risks are ALARP and to an acceptable level

• Amendments to Regulations 1 January 2012 and

28 February 2014

– Strengthen regulations – Informed consultation enhanced (not informed consent) – Enabled EPBC Strategic Assessment Program endorsement (including addition of OPP)

• Other OPGGS Act amendments to strengthen

environmental compliance/enforcement

14

Overview: NOPSEMA environmental decision-making

• Independent, professional
• Must be reasonably satisfied of all impacts &

risks managed to acceptable and ALARP levels

• Substantial internal expertise, team based
• Seek external advice where necessary
• Request for further information and/or provide
• pportunity to modify and re-submit
• Subject to merits and judicial review

15

Questions on NOPSEMA and its role?

Next: NOPSEMA compliance activities – assessments and inspections of petroleum activities

Environmental approval process

17

Environment Division

General Manager Environment Assessment and Inspection – Seismic and Production Operations Assessment and Inspection – Drilling and Development Operations Spill Risk Environmental Effects

Environment Manager (x1) Environment Specialists (x 7) Environment Manager (x1) Environment Specialists (x 6) Environment Manager (x1) Environment Specialists (x 5) Environment Manager (x1) Environment Specialists (x 5)

Acceptance criteria for an environment plan

NOPSEMA must accept an environment plan if reasonably satisfied that the environment plan:

• is appropriate for the nature and scale of the activity;
• environmental impacts and risks will be acceptable and

reduced to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP);

• has appropriate performance standards (ie conditions)
• includes an appropriate implementation strategy and

monitoring, recording and reporting arrangements;

• demonstrates that the titleholder has carried out the

consultation required by Division 2.2A

• ……etc. Refer to Regulation 10A of the Environment Regulations

19

Environment plan process

20

Risk managemebnt process (AS/NZS ISO 31000) Environmental management system (AS/NZS ISO 14001)

Snap shot: What environmental impacts and risk?

The environment has been defined in the Environment Regulations to include:

• Ecosystems & their parts including people and

communities

• Natural and physical resources
• Qualities, characteristics of locations, places and areas
• Heritage value of places

…and the social, economic and cultural features of these matters.

NOPSEMA assessment policy

Assessment policy principles

• All information contained in submissions provided

for assessment will be treated as confidential, but information may be disclosed where compelled or authorised by law

• Each assessment will be fair and technically

competent

• There will be consistency of methodology between

different assessments

• The detail of assessment will be proportional the

level of risk

22

NOPSEMA assessment process

Assessment methodology

• Two part assessment of the plan against

requirements of the Environment Regulations

– General and topic assessment, with the topic based on components of the activity that pose the greatest level of environmental impact or risk

• Assessment tools include the provision of

further written information, or request for modification to an environment plan

• Environment plan submission details and

summary published on NOPSEMA’s website

23

Merit-based decision making

Principles of good decision making:

• Within power – a decision must be made within legal authority and the

decision-maker must apply the correct tests and follow any required procedures

• Relevant – a decision must encompass the statutory criteria and other

matters to which is should properly have reference

• Well-founded – a decision is well-founded if it has a proper basis in the

assessment of evidence

• Fair – a decision should be impartial and should provide parties whose

interests are affected with sufficient opportunity to give their views and have them considered

• Logical and clear – Well explained and one that a hypothetical

“reasonable decision-maker” would be able to reach

24

Securing compliance

• Assessment process ensures:

– All environment plans contain clear information on environmental performance standards (ie controls) and measurement criteria – That controls are measureable and time based, not vague commitments

• Titleholders have to monitor own performance,

demonstrate compliance and report back

• NOPSEMA monitors and enforces compliance

through inspection powers, incident investigation and compliance enforcement tools

25

Control measures as a result of consultation – case study 1

Managing impacts and risks to Whales to an ALARP and acceptable level Environmental performance outcome Environmental performance standard Measurement criteria seismic vessel will move to less sensitive area to continue operations if whales are encountered scout is 5-10 km ahead of seismic vessel with a dedicated MMO MMO records and ships log power/shut down when whales detected 2 qualified PAM

• perators, 24hrs
• perations (+MMOs)

PAM records, ships log

26

Outcomes comparison – case study 2

27

EPBC Act Referral Conditions EP control measures Restricted seismic ops to avoid peak whale times Seismic ops timed to minimise impacts to multiple species Statement 2.1 for whale interactions Statement 2.1 for whale and

• ther marine mammal species

Additional MMOs Additional MMOs Restricted night/low visibility

• perations

Aerial surveys to detect upwelling and whale aggregations Restricted ops when whales feeding Use of PAM 24hrs to detect certain cetacean species Records taken of pinniped and

• ther marine species

Controls for fishing interactions

Questions on assessment and compliance activities by NOPSEMA?

Next: consultation requirements under the Environment Regulations

Consultation in the environment plan process

REVIEW THE LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS & GUIDANCE CONSIDER FEEDBACK ASSESS MERITS CONTROL MEASURES PROVIDE FINAL RESPONSES EVALUATE THE RISKS AND IDENTIFY POTENTIAL CONTROLS IDENTIFY RISKS, STAKEHOLDERS & STAKEHOLDER ISSUES SUBMIT EP TO NOPSEMA FOR ASSESS- MENT

PLANNING STEPS Planning: consultation with ‘relevant persons’ on impacts relating to functions, activities or interests via sufficient info and time

Titleholder

Assessment

• f submission

NOPSEMA

COMMENCE ACTIVITY IMPLEMENT CONTROLS & SYSTEMS

Implementation:

• ngoing consultation

Enforce complaince Environment Plan Summary

Specific consultation requirements – planning stages

• In the course of preparing an environment plan,

a titleholder must consult with ‘relevant persons’

– Government agencies – Persons or organisations who functions, interests of activities may be affected by the activities to be carried

• ut under the EP

30

Specific consultation requirements – planning stages (cont)

• Relevant persons must be given sufficient

information to allow them to make an informed assessment of the possible consequences of the activity on their functions/interests/activities

• Must also be allowed a reasonable period

31

Specific consultation requirements – planning stages (cont)

• The EP must contain a report on all consultations

between the titleholder and relevant persons:

– Summary of response – Assessment of merits of any objections or claims – Statement of the titleholder’s response – Copies of full text of relevant persons’ response.

32

Consultation – case study

• Bight Petroleum Lightning Survey – main issues

raised (ecological):

– Impacts of seismic noise to protected species – Survey timing in relation to upwelling and listed species movements – Use of PAM and other control measures – Uncertainty of impacts to fish and larvae/eggs – Potential impacts of oil spills

33

Consultation – Case study (cont)

• Bight Petroleum Lightning Survey – main issues

raised (socio-economic):

– Shipping risks – Fisheries interactions (especially Southern Bluefin cage towing) – Potential impacts on tourism and species which tourism depends on – Adequacy of information provided – Adequacy of consultation – Attitude of titleholder to consultation.

34

Consultation – Titleholder’s role

• Information included in the EP:

– Method of consultation – Relevant persons list – Summaries of responses – Objections/claims raised and assessment of merits – Full text copies – EPBC referral submissions and comments.

35

Consultation – NOPSEMA’s role

• Third party correspondence - what happens?
• Types of concerns raised with NOPSEMA:

– Persons not being contacted in preparation of the new EP – Persons stating that insufficient information had been provided (including requests to see full EP) – Concern that consultation was not being undertaken in a model fashion – Concern that objections/claims would not be satisfactorily addressed.

36

Post-assessment

• Ongoing consultation by titleholder
• NOPSEMA compliance monitoring and enforcement
• Publication on NOPSEMA website:

– Environment plan profile information published on submission including titleholder contact information – Environment plan summary published after acceptance – If refused or withdrawn, website entry

• Notifications

– to State/NT agencies – Commencement/completion

• f activities

– Reportable incidents notified

www.nopsema.gov.au

More information:

website: www.nopsema.gov.au Email: information@nopsema.gov.au Incident notification/complaint: 24 hours - (08) 6461 7090 Email: investigations@nopsema.gov.au