Oiled Wildlife Research Articles

Impact and Implications of an International Oiled Wildlife Response Preparedness Project

ABSTRACT 2017-133 December 2016 marked the conclusion of a two-year global oiled wildlife response preparedness project, funded by the International Association of Oil & Gas Producers/IPIECA Oil Spill Response-Joint Industry Project (IOGP/IPIECA OSR-JIP). This project brought together leading oiled wildlife response organizations from seven countries to design a preparedness and response system that would support the mobilization and integration of tier 3 (international) wildlife response resources if activated by the oil industry or other stakeholders. The project outcomes include written standards and procedures that represent a further step towards integration of oiled wildlife preparedness and response as an oil industry standard worldwide, and allow for the foundations of a global approach to be built upon good practice as defined by the international oiled wildlife response community. 2017 sees the system entering a second (beta) phase with a further funding commitment being provided by the oil industry via Oil Spill Response Limited (OSRL). Building on the introduction and overview to this project as presented at the International Oil Spill Conference in 2014 (Kelway et al., 2014), this paper will explore key outcomes and assess the project’s impact and implications, particularly in relation to the present and future role of multi-stakeholder collaboration in the advancement of global oiled wildlife response preparedness.

SENSITIVITY MAPPING FOR OIL SPILL RESPONSE: A COMPREHENSIVE FRAMEWORK TO IDENTIFY WILDLIFE AND AREAS AT RISK ALONG THE COASTLINE OF BRAZIL

2017-365 Abstract The Environmental Mapping for Emergency Response at Sea Project (Mapeamento Ambiental para a Resposta à Emergência no Mar – MAREM, in Portuguese) resulted from a collaborative agreement between the Brazilian Institute of Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels (IBP) and the Brazilian Federal Environmental Agency (IBAMA). In order to provide support for planning and management of response operations involving marine oil spills, MAREM’s first and second phases, named Shoreline Protection and Cleanup Project (Projeto de Proteção e Limpeza de Costa – PPLC), created a geo-referenced database of the entire Brazilian coastline (approximately 7,500 km) in 2013. MAREM’s third phase was the Wildlife Protection Project (Projeto de Proteção à Fauna). It started in 2015 and was developed by a consortium involving Aiuká, Witt O’Brien’s Brasil and national and international experts. The Wildlife Protection Project identified, compiled and mapped relevant information on coastal and marine wildlife at risk from oil spill incidents and associated responses along the Brazilian coastline. The Brazilian Exclusive Economic Zone was divided into 18 geographic units to facilitate the integration of marine, freshwater and terrestrial biogeographical data, regional geopolitics, and the incorporation of the zonal management of national oil production. Standardized decision trees were developed to provide an objective and consistent method for the identification of priority species and areas for protection in the event of an oil spill within each management unit. The decision trees incorporated previously identified critical habitats or natural resources meeting international conservation strategies (such as Ramsar wetlands, Important Bird Areas and the World Heritage Convention) and the Brazilian National Action Plans for Species Conservation. Species were classified by integrating two components: (a) assessing their vulnerability to oil spills using standardized criteria, and (b) their conservation status under international, national and regional conventions to generate an assessed prioritization for protection in case of oil spills, minimizing potential impacts. The Wildlife Protection Project has produced (i) a comprehensive dataset on species and habitat vulnerability in Brazil, and (ii) and a publicly-available WebGIS database of the critical information relevant to oil spill responses and response management, available at www.marem-br.com.br. These two products contain key information on the biology, distribution, seasonality and behavior of the identified vulnerable species, in conjunction with operational information on the locations, biological, geopolitical and logistic aspects of the priority areas identified. Factsheets were produced for each high-priority species and areas, compiling selected details in a readily accessible format for field teams involved in oil spill responses. The Wildlife Protection Project represents an unprecedented and unique approach for oiled wildlife planning and response in Brazil.

EXERCISE WESTWIND – A COLLABORATIVE OIL SPILL RESPONSE BY OIL & GAS OPERATORS AND AGENCIES.

Abstract On June 9th, 2015, ACME Oil Company’s rig suffered a dynamic positioned ‘run-off’. The mobile drilling unit lost its station above the wellhead and a loss of well control was experienced. “A massive environmental emergency unfolded…affecting pristine coastline and masses of wildlife”. Incident Management and Field Response Teams were activated in a multi-agency operation, bringing together 200 personnel from 16 oil and gas companies and 18 government agencies and third party providers. Source control, aerial, offshore, nearshore, shoreline and oiled wildlife response capabilities were deployed and national/international support was utilised. Jointly managed by the Australian Marine Oil Spill Centre (AMOSC), the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA), the Federal Department of Industry and Science, and the Western Australian Department of Transport -Exercise Westwind was a successful multi-faceted marine spill response, demonstrating Australia’s collective Industry/Government capacity to respond to a large, offshore loss of well control incident in a remote and isolated location. ACME Oil Company was a fictitious company formed to enable the amalgamation of Australian petroleum companies to exercise industry arrangements under one ‘banner’ during the exercise period. ACME Oil Company had its own set of credentials, company website and Oil Pollution Emergency Plan. The company also held real time memberships with a number of service providers including AMOSC, Oil Spill Response Ltd, Trendsetter Engineering International, Oceaneering Australia and addenergy. Representing an innovative approach to spill response exercising, ACME Oil Company was a valuable and critical aspect to industry and governments participation under a non-attributable banner. Additionally, it enabled safe, widespread lessons to be observed, allowed for real-time testing of arrangements and provided a safe environment for regulators, stakeholder and industry interplay. The exercise was an efficient and practical solution for Industry titleholders and their third party supporting organisations, to test shared response resources and to ensure Industry arrangements for responding to oil pollution are in accordance with the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Environment) Regulations 2009. This paper will discuss the development program behind the exercise and the experience of managing an exercise of this nature. It will highlight the successes including the creation and implementation of a fictitious company and the extensive collaboration between the industry and government personnel involved. It will also look forward – where are we 11-months later? Can the history of exercising and/or response help us improve for the future-implementation of change and continued testing is critical in furthering our oil spill response capability and capacity.Exercise Westwind – Operational Phase TwoExercise Westwind – Operational Phase Two

POST-RELEASE MONITORING OF OILED BROWN PELICANS FROM THE 2015 REFUGIO OIL SPILL

ABSTRACT A great deal of effort and resources is expended on the cleaning and rehabilitation of oiled wildlife, but the ultimate fate of these animals is often unknown. Post-release monitoring is essential for improving methodology and directing resources to those animals most likely to survive after release. The Refugio oil spill occurred in May 2015, spilling approximately 100,000 gallons of oil on the California coast near Santa Barbara. Brown pelicans were the most common avian species affected. We instrumented 12 oiled pelicans with solar-powered satellite GPS tags at the time of their release following cleaning and rehabilitation. An additional 8 control (unoiled) pelicans from a nearby area were similarly instrumented and released immediately. All birds survived for at least 12 weeks. In the first 6 months after release, distance traveled and movements were similar between rehabilitated and control pelicans. Several individuals traveled >5000 km, migrating to northern California or central Oregon in the late summer and early fall. In the spring, most birds traveled south, some as far as southern Baja California. Mortality was documented among both rehabilitated and control birds; however, the majority of birds that stopped transmitting were never found. Lack of transmission could represent mortality, tag or battery failure, or tag loss. After at least 40 weeks of tracking, 5 birds (3 rehabilitated and 2 control) were still transmitting. Based on presence in breeding colonies, none of the birds appeared to breed. These results demonstrate that brown pelicans can survive and travel long distances following oiling and rehabilitation.

An Overview of Volunteer Efforts during the Refugio Oil Spill Incident in Santa Barbara, California

Abstract # 2017-168 Historically in California volunteers have been incorporated into oiled wildlife response since the late 1990s. Prior to the Refugio Oil Spill (ROS) incident in May 2015, California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) Office of Spill Prevention and Response (OSPR) had not managed Community Volunteers for non-wildlife activities, such as oiled shoreline cleanup. In the first days of the ROS event, members of the public who were interested in volunteering became frustrated, in part due to poor communication regarding volunteer use protocols and initial lack of an established volunteer management structure. Political expectations, in a highly urbanized and environmentally conscious community, also played a role. This paper will address, in part, how the public’s reaction to the ROS created an opportunity to test the Los Angeles / Long Beach Area Contingency Plan Non-Wildlife Volunteer Plan (LA/LB ACP - NWVP)1, and highlight lessons learned from the event and resulting changes to the volunteer program that have evolved.

Is the way an oil spill response is reported in the media important for the final perception of the clean-up?

This research investigates the media coverage during the C/V Rena grounding in New Zealand (NZ), in 2011, to analyze if information reported in printed media is important for the final perception of the overall oil spill response. We took all articles available from NZ's largest circulated newspaper and the regional newspaper closest to the incident and analyzed the themes within each article; the article's tone (positive, neutral or negative); the time of the report relative to incident events and any differences between the regional and national papers. This analysis indicates that oil spills are reported and perceived as inherently negative incidents. However, along with coordinating an effective spill response, fast, factual and frequent media releases and increased effect in media liaison in areas of response with high public intrinsic value such as oiled wildlife response can significantly influence tone of media coverage and likely overall public perception.

Diving behaviour of wildlife impacted by an oil spill: A clean-up and rehabilitation success?

The value of rehabilitating oiled wildlife is an on-going global debate. On October 5, 2011, the cargo vessel C/V Rena grounded on Astrolabe Reef, New Zealand (NZ), spilling over 300 tonnes of heavy fuel oil. As part of the Rena oil spill response, 383 little blue penguins (LBP, Eudyptula minor) were captured, cleaned, rehabilitated and released back into a cleaned environment. This research investigates foraging behaviour changes due either to the oil spill or by the rehabilitation process by comparing the diving behaviour of rehabilitated (n=8) and non-rehabilitated (n=6) LBPs and with LBP populations throughout NZ. Stabile isotope analysis of feathers was also used to investigate diet. There were no foraging behaviour differences between rehabilitated and non-rehabilitated LBPs and the overall diving behaviour of these LBPs have similar, if not less energetic, foraging behaviour than other LBPs in NZ. This suggests the rehabilitation process and clean-up undertaken after the Rena appears effective and helps justify the rehabilitation of oiled wildlife across the world.

Using sea water for cleaning oil from seabird feathers

Summary During an oil spill, marine wildlife, particularly birds, are at risk of external contamination, affecting insulation, waterproofing and consequently survival. Decontamination of oiled wildlife usually involves a succession of washes and rinses with warm, freshwater and detergent. However, accessibility of large quantities of freshwater needed for cleaning oiled wildlife can be limited. To assess the efficacy of sea water as an alternative, we used 80 seabird feathers, 40 saturated with heavy fuel oil and 40 unoiled feathers as controls, then washed and rinsed them using either freshwater or sea water, or a combination of both. Cleanliness and water repellency were assessed visually, and a barbule amalgamation index (BAI) was calculated to evaluate feather microstructure. Particulate residue was assessed using scanning electron microscopy. Results indicate that for oiled feathers, a sea water wash/rinse produced clean, low BAI/unclumped feathers with minimal particulate residue. Sea water cleaning trials should now be undertaken on live birds to understand links with sea water use and waterproofing. The method described has world‐wide application for oiled wildlife response activities and could be readily modified for the cleaning of other taxa such as mammals.

Washing oiled marine birds in New Zealand—do we have a detergent that can be used?

An efficacious oiled wildlife response requires quick action to remove external contamination of birds’ plumage in order to minimise ingestion of the oil and reinstitute waterproofing and thermoregulatory abilities, with the ultimate goals of increasing likelihood of release and maximising survival. The accessibility of the preferred detergent used in washing wildlife, Dawn® (Procter & Gamble), is limited for isolated nations such as New Zealand and its continuous availability in an extended oil spill response is a concern. This study investigates eight detergents manufactured in either New Zealand or Australia that are easily accessible, and compares their effectiveness at removing oil contaminants from feathers with Dawn®. Results indicate that none of the locally manufactured detergents was as effective as Dawn®. Availability and effectiveness of detergents for oil spill response are important for New Zealand's oil spill strategy and for rehabilitation of oil-affected marine birds throughout New Zealand.

Regional oil wildlife response capability in northwest Australia—a collaborative approach by oil and gas operators and agencies

In January 2012, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Authority (NOPSEMA) took over the environmental assessment of environmental plans (EP) and oil spill contingency plans (OSCP) in Australia's Commonwealth waters. The requirement to demonstrate capability highlighted several areas of improvement to provide an effective oiled wildlife response (OWLR). An OWL working group was established by several operators with the initial agreement to engage the Australian Marine Oil Spill Centre (AMOSC) as the response agency. The working group of operators has now established an OWLR Plan that was developed in collaboration with AMOSC and the Department of Parks and Wildlife and has provided an industry and government agency coordinated approach to OWLR for the first time.

Towards a Tier 3 Infrastructure for Oiled Wildlife Response

ABSTRACT With increased international shipping, offshore oil exploration, and interest in remote regions and challenging environments, there is growing recognition within government and industry of the need to improve global oiled wildlife preparedness as part of oil spill prevention and response planning. In early 2012, an international gathering of industry, government and non-governmental stakeholders gave their support to further integrate oiled wildlife planning and to develop a Tier 3 wildlife response capacity; currently the biggest gap in wildlife preparedness. The Tier 3 system will utilise the expertise and track record of the world's leading oiled wildlife response organisations. Since 2012, discussions have continued and a process for developing and implementing a global oiled wildlife response system has been established and will be initiated in late 2014. This paper will explain the steps towards developing a multi-stakeholder global infrastructure for wildlife preparedness and share updates on the timeline and progress of the project to date.

Lessons Learnt: Oiled Wildlife Response in Asia

ABSTRACT In Asia, the concept of wildlife response is a novel idea. Unlike in Europe where there is various wildlife groups actively carrying out the conservation of wildlife, in Asia, wildlife conservation is not viewed with a high priority. Only a handful of wildlife organizations exist. Many of these have not had the opportunity to respond to an oiled wildlife incident. Due to the limited availability of regional resources in Asia to respond to wildlife impacted by oil, international assistance might be required. Since the closest available resources are located in the Oceania region, a significant delay is expected before a substantial wildlife response could be mobilized. Oil Spill Response Limited (OSRL) collaborates with Sea Alarm Foundation, a wildlife non-governmental organization, to address issues related to oiled wildlife response. OSRL has stockpiles of wildlife response equipment in Southampton, Bahrain, Fort Lauderdale and Singapore, which can be mobilised in the event of an incident. Each stockpile consists of a combination of specialised scientific and basic equipment. However as transportation requires time, it could require several days for some equipment to arrive in remote locations. In addition since Asia has a limited number of personnel who are trained to use this equipment, personnel will also have to be moved. One major concern is to manage the time of arrival of equipment and trained wildlife responders in-country, ensuring that they arrive at site together thus facilitating an effective and efficient response. This paper will highlight the lessons learnt from various responses, which comprises the element of wildlife response, that OSRL was actively involved in and how these lessons have been used to enhance oiled wildlife response capability in OSRL to better serve Asia.

Optimizing the value of near misses in wildlife response preparedness: The Kulluk Incident

ABSTRACT Mitigating the impact of an oil spill on wildlife is one of the stated priorities in nearly every oil spill. Wildlife in some way is regularly included in drills and exercises in many places around the world. While planning, training, and exercising are critical to wildlife preparedness, responders know that nothing compares to real world experience. In many spills and near miss situations, the Wildlife Branch is not activated until after there are documented wildlife impacts. Most incident management teams will only bring in professional oiled wildlife responders when oiling of wildlife has occurred or is imminent. During the December 2013 response to the Kulluk Tow Incident, a small Wildlife Branch was activated as an integral part of the Incident Command structure put in place. The Wildlife Branch proceeded to provide a detailed plan for an active response, if one was needed. Over the next week, while the rig grounded, refloated and finally towed to a place of refuge, the Wildlife Branch, working with the Environmental Unit, developed a wildlife plan that identified the resources at risk, the wildlife response options and the personnel, equipment and facilities that would be needed if oil were to be released. The Alaska Wildlife Response Center was prepared for activation, wildlife responder's availability, and travel time was documented and incident specific equipment gaps were identified and sourced. Additionally, specific incident plans were developed for hazing (bird deterrence), solid waste and wastewater that stood ready for implementation. While Alaska has a robust preparedness and exercise program, the quick decision by Shell and the Unified Command to ensure wildlife response was in place, if needed, provided a real test of the oiled wildlife response system with all the problems, challenges and changing parameters of a real event. It added real value by showing the public and trustees the importance that was placed on wildlife protection as well as by increasing integration, confidence and teamwork in the Alaskan response community.

Antarctic Wildlife and Oil - Are We Ready?

The increasing rate of vessel incidents in the Southern Ocean (including an ever-increasing number of vessels sinking) has highlighted the potential for substantial fuel spills into the Antarctic environment. The increasing number of tourist and fishing vessels, often without ice strengthened hulls, are penetrating farther into, and staying longer in, Antarctic waters, with a focus for destinations of substantial wildlife concentrations. Based on a questionnaire comprising six questions submitted to 33 national operators in the Antarctic, there is currently little preparation for an oil spill event involving wildlife. This is a recipe for a catastrophic spill event, with the potential for high numbers of oiled wildlife in a remote part of the world where there are major logistical constraints on the provision of equipment and skilled response personnel. We chronicle shipping incidents that have led to oil spills in the Southern Ocean, the existing legislation and contingency plans currently in place by national Antarctic operators, and examine their preparedness and expertise for an oiled wildlife response. It is very clear that national, fishing and tourism operators are manifestly unprepared for an oiled wildlife event in the Southern Ocean. We identify five critical constraints to any response and provide recommendations that address these constraints.

Oiled wildlife response for Antarctica: Practical and realistic solutions

ABSTRACT Through the Antarctic Treaty on Environmental Protection all of the Antarctic member nations are required to have in place contingency plans for oil spills including oiled wildlife response. The current risks for marine pollution incidents to the Antarctic environment include refuelling activities associated with Antarctic stations/bases; routine station/base activities; and shipping associated with stations/bases, tourism, commercial fishing and whaling. Between 1981 and 2011 there have been reported 33 spills or near spill incidents associated with the Antarctic marine environment. Wildlife at risk from oil spills include seabirds (flying birds and penguins), pinnipeds and cetaceans. Antarctic and polar environments both provide a number of logistical and practical complications given their climatic and geographic character. The key elements for response actions for Antarctic wildlife identified are divided amongst primary, secondary and tertiary oiled wildlife response activities. Primary activities identified include focussing containment and clean up efforts to protecting wildlife as a priority using tools such as sensitivity mapping, stochastic and real time modelling. Secondary activities specific to individual wildlife groups were identified and included specialised hazing, exclusion and pre-emptive capture mechanisms focussed to the Antarctic environment. Tertiary activities are considered with regards to the real capacity of Antarctic stations to respond, take and rehabilitate oiled wildlife given the Antarctic environment and its limitations. The paper identifies realistic mechanisms and systems considering the climatic, logistical and practical issues of the Antarctic environment. Although specific to Antarctic bases the paper outcomes can be equally applied to other polar environments.

Global Oil Spills and Oiled Wildlife Response Effort: Implications for Oil Spill Contingency Planning

ABSTRACT Over the last century there has been a significant increase in the number and size of oil spills to the marine environment due to the global proliferation of oil and gas extraction as well as the number of tankers and other maritime transport infrastructure associated with increased production. Efforts have traditionally been focussed on containment and deflection of oil rather than responding to wildlife. The present study examines total oiled wildlife effort in response to maritime spills for 286 recorded globally. Between 1910 and 1961 there was an average of 1.23 ± 0.43 incidents per year, spilling an average of 114,062 ± 352,512 tonnes of oil per year. These averages increased to 3.83 ± 2.65 events with 123,277 ± 166,735 tonnes of oil spilt per year from 1962 to 1990, and again, from 1991 to 2012 to 6.50 ± 5.17 events with 164,299 ± 290,655 tonnes of oil spilt per year. Offshore platform and tanker spills have accounted for 37% and 27% of this total, respectively. Of the 104 recorded instances where wildlife interactions occurred (40%), spill volume was not related to the total number of animals caught, oiled or pre-emptively; however, it was related to the number of carcasses collected. A lack of planning for Oiled Wildlife Response (OWR) was identified as a contributing factor exacerbating the impact of a spill on wildlife and for resourcing a response. Inadequacies within operator and government contingency planning, to prepare for and sustain a wildlife response for extended periods, can be overcome by using a mobilisation model that integrates wildlife carer networks, government regulatory agencies and operator resourcing via an independent coordinating organisation consisting of a small group of personnel highly experienced and trained in maritime operations and marine science with access to a network of persons with experience in responding to wildlife and their handling, treatment and rehabilitation.

Arctic Oiled Wildlife Response: Exploring Potential and Limitations

ABSTRACT The Arctic is an extremely vulnerable area for oil pollution. Because of global warming and the resulting retreating ice, new economic shipping and Exploration & Production activities are likely to develop in the coming years and decades. Both governments (e.g. Arctic Council) and the oil industry (e.g. Arctic Response Technology Joint Industry Programme) are preparing for increased oil spill response capabilities in the Arctic region, and are looking to join forces for more efficiency and effectiveness. In connection to oil spill response planning in the Arctic both onshore and offshore, attention should be given to oiled wildlife response preparedness in this region. The Arctic is characterized by unique ecosystems and biodiversity, either marine or terrestrial, with a large proportion of migratory species. So although species diversity is assumed to be low compared to other regions, Arctic wildlife is very sensitive to the effects of oil pollution. Additionally the Arctic is a remote and extreme area for setting up a wildlife response in the framework of an oil spill response. This paper explores what the limitations of an Arctic oiled wildlife response would be (physical/logistical, health & safety, environmental monitoring, ecosystems understanding, biodiversity data, sensitivity mapping, etc.), and identifies how current gaps in response preparedness could be filled. Special emphasis is laid on investments into the capabilities of specialised responders and their equipment, including creation of a specialised Arctic Wildlife Response Strike Team.

Mobile Treatment and Rehabilitation Enclosure (MTRE) for small pinnipeds

The North Slope of Alaska is a demanding and harsh environment. Being prepared for an oil spill involving wildlife in this region requires training, innovation, and partnerships. For the past three years animal care groups, industry oil spill response organizations, and federal agencies have been collaborating to prepare for such an event. Protocol development is an essential and initial process to accomplish response goals. In 2011, protocols were developed for the care of oiled affected phocid seals in Alaska, focusing on the need for remote, deployable operations in the arctic. While developing these protocols, authors drew from their experiences caring for pinnipeds at their facility as well as from involvement in the statewide marine mammal stranding network. As the only institution authorized to rehabilitate stranded marine mammals in Alaska, we are uniquely positioned to assist in mitigating risks associated with possible oil exposure to these animals. Finding resources to treat oiled wildlife is a challenge on the North Slope, especially for medium to long term care. With that in mind, we designed and developed a Mobile Treatment and Rehabilitation Enclosure (MTRE). This deployable enclosure and pool with a life support system meets Animal Welfare Act holding specifications for small pinnipeds including harbor seals, spotted seals, ringed seals, and ribbon seals. The enclosure is designed to be assembled by 2 to 4 individuals and ready for use within 12 hours. While it is purpose built for small pinnipeds it would also be appropriate for short term, triage care of other marine mammals such as walrus calves, polar bear cubs, and sea otters. As a test of our oiled pinniped protocols and the MTRE this system was deployed during the mutual aid drill on the North Slope in August of 2013.

Wildlife Response Management during a Federal Incident

The last days of August 2012 brought Hurricane Isaac's wind and water energy to south Louisiana impacting many parishes with destruction of property and leaving behind severe flooding, making response difficult in some locations. After search and rescue efforts ensuring safety of the people in the areas had been completed, surveys by boat and aircraft began to reveal impacts to wildlife from petroleum product of unknown origin. As in past natural disaster response activations, wildlife professionals expected oil impacted animal cases to remain minimal; however, there was confirmation from some response crews on site that there were in fact affected animals. Given that there was no named Responsible Parties, the United States Coast Guard (USCG), as the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC), took the lead in activation of the Oil Spill Response Organizations (OSROs) and the wildlife personnel to conduct recovery and rehabilitation efforts in coordination with the State of Louisiana. All costs associated with these activities were covered by the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC), which is managed by the USCG as promulgated under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90). Wildlife Response Services, Inc. (WRS) supported by Matrix New World Engineering, Inc. (Matrix), was mobilized on September 2, 2012 to set up a Wildlife Rehabilitation Center (Center) in Belle Chase, Louisiana. The Center was set up in the Bricor Trucking Warehouse and the team had the Center operational the morning of September 3, 2013and received its first animal in the afternoon of that same day. During the response the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) was responsible for oiled wildlife recovery and transport to the Center. Over the course of the response 7 live animals were cared for, most of which were cleaned and eventually released back into the wild. The Hurricane Isaac response demonstrated the leadership of the USCG in organizing oiled wildlife recovery and rehabilitation jointly with LDWF and WRS, as well as with the OSROs. This is a model for responses to future natural disasters.

Managing new expectations with Enhanced Tier I capability

ABSTRACT With the growing oil and gas sector in Australia, comes more stringent guidelines set by the regulators for the operators to demonstrate their capability in preventing another Montara or Macondo type incident. The setting up of National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA) to provide oversight of all petroleum activities in the Commonwealth waters of Australia is a milestone to raise the operating standards of the industry. Together with the urge for operators to build up their in house competence for responding to oil spill incidents and the increasing importance of mutual aid agreements within the industry to form a new operating picture in the oil and gas sector. Being one of the major oil and gas operators, Chevron Australia Business Unit (ABU) plays an active role in fulfilling the requirements set by the regulators and equipping the team with the necessary skill sets and technologies to perform the duty of care to minimise the impact and damage to the environment during an oil spill incident. An Enhanced Tier I concept is developed to provide a guidance to the Emergency Management Team to build up the in house capability as a response agency for oil spill incident. In order to engage the operators in the region, Chevron ABU has also taken up the initiative to set up industry working groups to discuss issues like dispersant application, waste management and oiled wildlife response as part of the response strategies and how they can share knowledge and resources in the event of an incident. Continuous involvement in Australian Marine Oil Spill Centre (AMOSC) core group training and active participation in meetings with NOPSEMA allows ABU to keep up to date with the evolving changes in the field of oil spill response preparedness. Through the continuous improvement on the Enhanced Tier I concept and the engagement with internal and external stakeholders, Chevron ABU aims to meet the expectations set by the regulations and maintain the highest level of preparedness and response readiness for any oil spill incident.